Free will faculty and the Mass

[Gorgias]

the way some, especially very traditional Catholics, speak of the Mass its as if God would get angry with the world if the Mass was every day offered to Him

Two questions: do you have an example or two that you can show us? Do you have anything that explicitly says that those sorts of comments are the position of the Church?

Anyway, I don’t know if it is a good thing to offer a Mass more than once for something.

I’m not sure why it wouldn’t be a good thing. We live in the context of ‘time’. Therefore, within time – over and again – we do certain things. One of them is celebrate Mass. By the same token, you could claim that you’re not certain that it’s a good thing to participate in Mass more than once, right? But, we know that this is something that God asks of us.

It is not part of Church discipline, right?

There is no Church law that requires or forbids Catholics to offer Mass once (or more than once) for a given intention. I’m not certain what you’re asking here.

Maybe it should become part of Church law that a Mass can only directly be offered for a petition once.

Why? What good would that accomplish with the Catholic faithful?

 

[Frankenfurter]

Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient for the sins of the whole world, past, present, and future.

And there is no “new” offering. Rather, we unite ourselves to Christ’s one eternal sacrifice.

Edwin

I note that you did not answer my simple questions.

 

[Contarini]

I note that you did not answer my simple questions.

Obviously new sins have been committed. But you are implying that Christ’s sacrifice was not sufficient for them.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Its consistent with Augustinian. Why is it heretical?

Because to say that Christ’s sacrifice has not already “appeased the Father” (whatever we take that to mean) is heretical, and even blasphemous. It’s plainly contrary to Scripture. It’s exactly what Protestants have accused Catholics of doing for centuries, and what every Catholic apologist I’ve read insists Catholics are not doing

Next you’ll be saying, “only Augustinians can worship Mary as the Fourth Member of the Godhead”. . . .

The Mass adds nothing to Christ’s sacrifice. It brings us in contact with Christ’s sacrifice.

Which is why I think Padre Pio (not my favorite saint by any stretch of the imagination–in fact in some of my moods I’ve cited him as one reason I’m not Catholic, since Catholics have to accept canonizations as infallible and to my skeptical eyes the miraculous claims about him look highly dubious) was right. The Mass keeps the universe going. But it does so because of its relation to Christ’s sacrifice. It doesn’t add anything to Christ’s sacrifice.

Edwin

 

[thinkandmull]

Calvary already appeased the Father, but maybe the Mass that are said each day are Calvary as well, in line with Augustinians. I don’t see why is this not a Catholic position

 

[thinkandmull]

Two questions: do you have an example or two that you can show us? Do you have anything that explicitly says that those sorts of comments are the position of the Church?

I’m not sure why it wouldn’t be a good thing. We live in the context of ‘time’. Therefore, within time – over and again – we do certain things. One of them is celebrate Mass. By the same token, you could claim that you’re not certain that it’s a good thing to participate in Mass more than once, right? But, we know that this is something that God asks of us.

There is no Church law that requires or forbids Catholics to offer Mass once (or more than once) for a given intention. I’m not certain what you’re asking here.

Why? What good would that accomplish with the Catholic faithful?

Because offering a Mass twice for a sick person implies that the Mass is imperfect

 

[Gorgias]

Because offering a Mass twice for a sick person implies that the Mass is imperfect

Jesus was in the habit of attending synagogue services during His ministry on earth. He also, naturally, prayed the Sh’ma daily, as every observant Jew did. Does that mean that – since He prayed them more than once – Jesus’ prayers were imperfect?

 

[Contarini]

Calvary already appeased the Father, but maybe the Mass that are said each day are Calvary as well, in line with Augustinians. I don’t see why is this not a Catholic position

But they don’t add something. They are one with the one sacrifice. It’s not quantifiable.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Because offering a Mass twice for a sick person implies that the Mass is imperfect

No, it doesn’t.

You are thinking of the Mass as a kind of transactional magic–pull this lever and get this result.

It doesn’t work that way,

Edwin

 

[thinkandmull]

I am not saying it doesn’t make sense. But some Catholics, maybe many, have a wrong few of this. Many think that if they offer two Masses it is more powerful then if they offer just one for their loved one. The Church no longer sells indulgences. Maybe this two should change.

Also, many traditionalist speak of the Mass as propitiatory. Their language seems consistent with Augustinians, but not Molinism, yet the traditionalists claim this is *Catholic *thought

 

[davidv]

I am not saying it doesn’t make sense. But some Catholics, maybe many, have a wrong few of this. Many think that if they offer two Masses it is more powerful then if they offer just one for their loved one.

For us, multiple Masses are better than one. For God it matters not.

The Church no longer sells indulgences.

Never did. You might want to get the facts straight.

Maybe this two should change.

Also, many traditionalist speak of the Mass as propitiatory. Their language seems consistent with Augustinians, but not Molinism, yet the traditionalists claim this is *Catholic *thought

 

[Contarini]

I am not saying it doesn’t make sense. But some Catholics, maybe many, have a wrong few of this. Many think that if they offer two Masses it is more powerful then if they offer just one for their loved one.

Certainly thinking about the Mass in a quantifiable way is a serious error, but I’m not sure that offering multiple Masses implies this.

Also, many traditionalist speak of the Mass as propitiatory. Their language seems consistent with Augustinians, but not Molinism, yet the traditionalists claim this is *Catholic *thought

You haven’t made this case. Indeed it’s a priori unlikely, to put it mildly, since Molinists have certainly believed the Mass to be propitiatory.

You seem to think that saying “the Mass is propitiatory” implies that the Mass adds something to Calvary. That just isn’t so. And if anything, a true Augustinian would be less likely that anyone else to think it did.

If anything (though this may just be my remaining Protestant bias) Molinists would be more likely to think in these terms, because they see human action as relatively more independent of divine action than Augustinians do.

Edwin

 

[thinkandmull]

Augustinians can take stretch Calvary to include Masses further than Molinists.

Also, the Church use to sell indulgences. It was called giving alms.

Contarini, you don’t see a danger in offering several Masses for something, and yet david here says “For us, multiple Masses are better than one.” That implies imperfection in the Mass, at the very least in the eyes of non-Catholic Christians. What happened to ecumenism?

 

[davidv]

Augustinians can take stretch Calvary to include Masses further than Molinists.

Also, the Church use to sell indulgences. It was called giving alms.

Contarini, you don’t see a danger in offering several Masses for something, and yet david here says “For us, multiple Masses are better than one.” That implies imperfection in the Mass,

No it does not, it acknowledges imperfection in us.

at the very least in the eyes of non-Catholic Christians. What happened to ecumenism?

What does this have to do with the value of a Mass?

 

[Contarini]

Augustinians can take stretch Calvary to include Masses further than Molinists.

You have not explained this, except by virtue of a tortured and unconvincing argument (that on Molinist premises it would be possible for a priest to offer fewer than the necessary number of Masses to “appease the Father.”

You seem to be setting up a caricature and then worrying about it. It’s very odd.

Contarini, you don’t see a danger in offering several Masses for something, and yet david here says “For us, multiple Masses are better than one.”

Pretty much all Christians pray about things repeatedly.

That implies imperfection in the Mass, at the very least in the eyes of non-Catholic Christians.

They need to have the Catholic position explained more clearly–which you are not doing.

What happened to ecumenism?

I’m a non-Catholic Christian myself, although admittedly not a typical one (have frequently been on the edge of formal conversion, including this past year, and consider my theological stance to be basically Catholic–but basically isn’t quite the same as really!).

I am concerned about how your posts affect ecumenism. You seem to be taking some things that some traditional Catholics have said and extrapolating from them a completely untenable position, and then attacking that position. In other words, constructing a straw man.

Edwin

 

[Gorgias]

“For us, multiple Masses are better than one.” That implies imperfection in the Mass, at the very least in the eyes of non-Catholic Christians. What happened to ecumenism?

C’mon, t&m, answer my question…

Jesus prayed daily – He would have prayed the Sh’ma prayer every day. He prayed weekly at the synagogue, repeating prayers there each time. Does that imply imperfection in the prayer of Jesus?

(You already know the answer, I’m sure: “no, it doesn’t imply that Jesus’ prayers were imperfect.” Then, neither is the Mass – which we celebrate often – imperfect. No matter what you think Molinists or traditionalists say. )

There are some Christians who say that we should not pray the Lord’s Prayer verbatim, and certainly never more than once, ever. They claim that this is what Jesus meant He talked against “babbling like pagans.” In the spirit of ecumenism, then, we as Catholics have to explain charitably how we interpret Scripture, and that this is not what we understand Jesus to have meant.

 

[Frankenfurter]

Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient for the sins of the whole world, past, present, and future.

And there is no “new” offering. Rather, we unite ourselves to Christ’s one eternal sacrifice.

Edwin

Sorry, but that is wrong. We take part and add to the free will offering as well. Jesus makes our new offering Holy.

From the Legion of Mary’s description of the mass (legionofmaryd7.com/mass.htm)
*
The Offertory

The priest takes the Bread and then the Wine and offers them up to God. He adds a drop of water to the wine and this should symbolise our own offering of ourselves to God. The Holy Spirit will come down and change the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus on Calvary over 2000 years ago. And just as the drop of water becomes part of the wine we hope the Holy Spirit will make us more like or into Jesus. We can offer our whole week, all that we will do, any joys, sufferings, play, and everything we may experience during this day or week. We can offer our whole lives to God to be offered up with Jesus to God the Father. Jesus will sanctify or make Holy our offering. We can offer up all the people who will die this night or week and ask that their hearts will be converted so that they may be saved. We can offer our deceased relations and friends or all the Souls in Purgatory.*

***The Consecration

---

Consecration means to “make holy” and now at the words of the Priest the Holy Spirit comes down on the Bread and Wine and changes them into the Most Holy Body and Blood of Jesus at Calvary on Good Friday over 2000 years ago. Usuallly everyone present kneels if they can but more important is that we adore Jesus really present on the Altar. We are truly present at Calvary. What do we do? we can adore and thank Jesus, we can beg Him to have mercy on us and on the whole world. We can offer up ourselves with all our problems, sufferings, good deeds to Him and ask Him to offer them up to God the Father in atonement for our sins and those of the world and for the souls in Purgatory. This is a great time of Mercy if we know what we are doing. This is the sacrifice of Jesus the Lamb of God made present for us. With God there is no Time, He can make the past or the future present to us and in the Mass He makes Good Friday present on the Altar. We can all pray to God at any time but now at Mass we can pray with God and to God dying on the Cross for us all.

To the OP. I don’t see how anyone could make an offering of themselves as explained above, without invoking their free will? Do you?

I think this whole issue you raise is caught up in the Protestant’s need to remove all things Holy from man himself and make it ONLY about Jesus and the Bible. A denial of the relevance of the Church and its people themselves. Since Luther saw man as a ‘dung heap’, we can see why he would not want to accept that we could intimately offer ourselves to God, joined intimately and even made Holy by Jesus.

 

[Contarini]

Sorry, but that is wrong. We take part and add to the free will offering as well. Jesus makes our new offering Holy.

1. I did not see the website saying that our actions add anything to what Christ has already done.
2. Obviously the Legion of Mary is not part of the Magisterium, anyway

I am not saying that human action has no value, only that salvation is not 90% divine and 10% human, or something of that sort. It is 100% divine, and our contribution is itself only possible because God is working in us. See Fr. Bouyer’s excellent discussion of the Luther-Erasmus debate in The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism.

What makes the OP’s post particularly odd, to me, is that the view I’m expressing is, I thought, a very Augustinian one

Edwin

 

[Rohzek]

Wouldn’t one presentation appease the Father? If you are Augustinian-neo-Thomistic, you could say it was all one act of sacrifice (that is, Calvary, and all the Masses). If you are a modern Molinist you couldn’t say that because it is up to the priests’ free will, not God’s grace, which determines whether the Masses are to be said. Therefore they would say God was appeased by Good Friday alone.

So how does a Molinist explain offering a Mass, say, ten times for a person? Its hard to explain. A Protestant may simply never understand it. It makes vague sense to me.

If you are confused by what I’m saying about free will, read up on Controversies on Grace in the Old Catholic Encyclopedia

I’m not quite sure I fully understand your argument here. You insist that there is a difference between the Augustinian case and the Molinist case, but I’m not sure how you get there. So allow me to hypothesize about what your unlisted argument might be. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Augustine essentially didn’t conceive of free will as most people today do. For him, mankind was born in a fallen state and doomed to damnation. They cannot help but choose to do evil, for which they are responsible for. However, the grace of God restores the elect’s true state, and thereby their free will is restored. In other words, free will itself is a form of grace. I would call this Augustinian free will.

Now if free will itself is a form of grace, then naturally multiple masses are nothing more than the participation of the grace of God in multiple forms.

In the Molinist case, or for anyone who believes in the more common understanding of free will (a Cartesian free will), multiple masses seems to be a strange thing indeed. If Christ’s one sacrifice was enough throughout all time, then why would anyone need to participate in more than one mass at all? It would seem to mean that Christ’s sacrifice was not enough then.

Here is my answer. I must admit upfront, I am adamantly opposed to Augustine’s conception of free will and grace. I don’t see multiple masses as an issue for Molinists. There are several answers, but perhaps the best and shortest one is as davidv has already said: repetition and whatnot might just be a means to alleviate our human weakness.

Alternatively, Augustine understood participation within the grace of God led to the pursuit of more grace so as to become ever-closer to God. I don’t see how this would be any different in the Molinist case. It is almost like another way of proclaiming theosis.

If you would like a longer answer, I suggest reading the works of Saint John Cassian.

 

[thinkandmull]

I don’t see why a Catholic can’t say the numbers of Masses said in all history is, along with the firs Good Friday, a necessary part of Jesus’s redemption of us. Only an Augustinian-neo-Thomist can say that though.

Jesus’s life was an unfolding of His care of us. Are we to say that the flogging was sufficient, and therefore Jesus suffering more meant that the flogging was imperfect? No, but that is on Jesus’s side of the coin. For us, it seems to me that it is infinitely more than enough to say a one Mass an intention. I am not saying that someone cannot have a spirituality of dipping an intention into Calvary more than once. But this fosters to the idea in the Catholic community than the more Mass you offer, the more power they have. This is theological false, and is one of the reasons Protestants think we are non-Christians