Help!? This man states that the Catholic Mass is gravely wrong?

[snarflemike]

Isn’t it a form of arrogance and pride to reject the teachings of the Bible in favour of the teachings of men?

The “teachings of the Bible” ARE, 99.99%, the “teachings of men”.

BTW, WHICH bible, the one with 66 books or the one with 73 books? And how do you know?

I defy you to present me a list of “teachings of the bible” to which all “bible-believing” Christians agree. Doesn’t the never-ending disintegration of Protestantism tell you ANYthing?

 

[Diana_Catherine]

This is something that really troubles me, and although a cradle Catholic, I was well into my forties before I ever even heard that the Mass was a ‘re-presentation’ of Calvary. Like the man says, there is no need to replicate or represent that which Christ already finished?

‘For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit’ 1 Peter 3:18.

I always viewed Mass as obedience to Jesus’ instruction ‘Do this in memory of me’ which seems a very simple command and what I believe I am doing at Mass! I don’t understand why the Catholic church has to make what is so simple, into something so complicated and with no Biblical back up. I believe I receive the body and blood of Christ, but I do not see how this means He is being ‘re-presented’ on the cross. If anything, he asked us to recreate the Last Supper, not the sufferings of Good Friday, and this is** how I view Holy Communion.**
These teachings make me very uncomfortable and it is very hard to argue against those like the man in this video; Jesus said in Matthew 15:9, "But in vain they do worship me, **teaching for doctrines the commandments of men’. **
Interested to know if other people see the Mass the way I do, and also interested to hear where this doctrine of Christ being ‘re - presented’ at Calvary came from?

The best thing you could do is study some truly good Catholic apologetics on why the mass is a re-presentation of Christ and why we need to have Christ that way. There are some very good books and videos and websites and ways to understand not just what happens at mass when we attend but the history of the O.T. covenants and the sacrifices that were made then and how and why Jesus came to be our sacrifice.

Someone mentioned Jimmy Akin, he is a good apologist, also Patrick Madrid. Scott Hahn has a very good book called The Lamb’s Supper.

There are many protestant and evangelical pastors out there that preach against the Catholic church, mostly because they don’t understand it or they do and their pride keeps them from admitting they are wrong and the church is right. One thing is he a Seventh - Day Adventist and they have already been wrong about their Bible interpretations back in 1844 at the Great Disappointment when they predicted the return of Christ. I also am frequently bothered when people quote something with " … " in the middle of the quote. I always wonder what part are they skipping, so when he is only quoting part of something, right there you know he is misinterpreting.

He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a false prophet. Don’t go out there. Study the Catholic faith.

I also highlighted part of what you said because you said it was your view, not that you are not smart or don’t have good views or opinions but one reason Jesus gave us the Church is to teach us and not let us be led astray by false teachers or our own views and I also bolded the part about teaching the doctrines of men. He is a man. Those are that man’s commandments, not God’s. The Catholic church is led by God, not man. The Catholic church is led by the Holy Spirit. These are questions and issues that the church has already dealt with throughout history. God has already given us the answer, just read what the church teaches.

I know how easy it is to be led astray, I am a revert and I know that there is nothing outside the Catholic church and wouldn’t go back out there for anything.

 

[Diana_Catherine]

Doesn’t the never-ending disintegration of Protestantism tell you ANYthing?

I heard a priest say once that Protestantism is spirit. It is a spirit of rebelling and protesting and that is why there are so many different denominations because they continue to protest and rebel against sound doctrine and so yeah it is a never ending disintegration.

 

[Doxiemom]

No one, I repeat, no one, remembers the Lord’s Last Supper better than what happens during a Catholic Mass.

That is the focal point of the whole Mass, Holy Communition.

Now, plenty of sincere people may argue the point of whether it is really the body and blood or some lesser form. So be it. It is up to all the theologians out there.

never the less, Mass remains a beautiful service, a wonderful way to worship our God.

This video is just another from one more of the heresy hunters out there.

Every service that glorifies our God cannot be gravly wrong. By the nature of glorifying Him, it is right.It may be different than what you are used to, it may be noisy, the songs will sound weird, heck, there may be a band up there, people with hands raised. people quiet with hands folded and kneeling, they all are beautiful IF they are gloryfying our God.

Don’t you think God knows when He is being sent up the sweet scent of love, scents of all flavors? Well, He does and this man should know it too.

He just wants attention. Shame on him.

 

[123Strontium]

research, using key words, that are in your own post…put them into google and see what hits you get.

Looks anti-cathholic, I would leave it alone…incase you want to debate with the ones who are making the claims…

but I still recommend “you” doing some research first…

Peace…

I already know the catholic explanation for why we celebrate the eucharist, but he is putting some quite plausible arguments. I want to know what catholics have to say to his ‘specific’ points, that’s what forums are for, to ask questions.

I’m not reacting emotionally to his criticisms but intellectually.

 

[regression]

I already know the catholic explanation for why we celebrate the eucharist, but he is putting some quite plausible arguments. I want to know what catholics have to say to his ‘specific’ points, that’s what forums are for, to ask questions.

I’m not reacting emotionally to his criticisms but intellectually.

Can you list one of the arguments he makes that you want to discuss? I am unable to view the video while at work.

 

[Diana_Catherine]

Can you list one of the arguments he makes that you want to discuss? I am unable to view the video while at work.

I think I would like to know exactly what you would like to discuss also. What point exactly?

 

[Cat_Herder]

What do those of you who know about the ins and outs of Mass say in defense to/of this?

The Eucharist / Holy Communion

Prove That the Eucharist is Christ (Transubstantiation)

Why Should I Believe in the Eucharist?

Prove that Communion is not just a symbol

 

[PeaceInChrist]

Zeno, I think you are misunderstanding a bit what, exactly, the Mass is. It is the making present of Christ’s sacrifice. It is not the re-crucifixion of Jesus. We are not re-killing Him each time we say Mass. Christ did die once and for all, but the Passion transcended time itself (he died for past and future sins, remember?). His sacrifice is good for eternity. But who said He can’t offer Himself to His Father forever based on this one death?

So, while Christ’s death is finished, our journey of accepting His mercy is still going on. We NEED the grace of the Eucharist to help us in our journey. Christ, in His glorified state, offers Himself to the Father by the same sacrificial Passion that He went through. The Eucharist, then, is not killing Him again, but rather making Him present for OUR benefit. The tremendous grace that pours out from the Eucharist is absolutely necessary to the sanctification of a soul. Without it, we would have a far more difficult time with holiness after our baptism.

Christ didn’t institute the Eucharist just because He was bored. He gave us all the Sacraments for a reason, and that is to bring us to salvation and holiness through His grace. The Eucharist makes Christ present to us in physical and spiritual way. We are literally able to be one with Him and His sacrifice, without Him suffering any further (as He has already died for us). How can this possibly be a bad thing?

catholic.com/tracts/the-institution-of-the-mass

 

[coopnann]

Zeno and the original poster–

Just last night I finally ordered a book I have been wanting for a while–The Lamb’s Supper by Scott Hahn.this I have read great things about it, and on Amazon you can preview some pages. Just in the few pages I read on the sample, I learned some things I did not know. Very readable, and I am excited to receive it to read soon. Just in the little I read he was tracing the WHY of the Eucharist back to Jewish and Passover and also pulling from New Testament verses. Also, I am sure the book will explain the covenants of the Old Testament and why the celebration of the Eucharist is the way it is based on the that.

Looks to be very informative, and a great help to me in my participation of the Mass, so just thought I’d pass along the book suggestion as a help.

 

[Church_Militant]

The guy plainly doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Some of his exemplary analogies are so far removed from logic and scripture that only a very gullible person would accept them.

Do yourselves a huge favor and get a copy of Dr.Edward Sri’s book A Biblical Walk Through the Mass.

                               [d24fvsfc6m7i1u.cloudfront.net/spree/products/83/product/BIBLICAL-BOOK_300.jpg?1340714173](http://www.ascensionpress.com/shop/Scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=651)            
                               
                           
                                              **A Biblical Walk Through the Mass: Understanding What We Say and Do in the Liturgy**

by Edward Sri
As Catholics, the Mass is the center of our Faith. We celebrate it every day. We know all the responses. We know all the gestures. But do we know what it all means?

In A Biblical Walk Through the Mass, Dr. Edward Sri takes us on a unique tour of the Liturgy. Based on the revised translation of the Mass, this book explores the biblical roots of the words and gestures we experience in the Liturgy and explains their profound significance. This intriguing look at the Mass is sure to renew your faith and deepen your devotion to the Eucharist.

This book is used as the text for A Biblical Walk Through the Mass Study Program, but it may also be purchased separately at steep bulk discounts. For those not able to attend a study, this is a perfect resource for catechesis on the deep riches of the Mass.

 

[R_C]

The guy plainly doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Some of his exemplary analogies are so far removed from logic and scripture that only a very gullible person would accept them.

Do yourselves a huge favor and get a copy of Dr.Edward Sri’s book A Biblical Walk Through the Mass.

 

[123Strontium]

Can you list one of the arguments he makes that you want to discuss? I am unable to view the video while at work.

In broad terms, he says catholics are rejecting the Grace of Christ’s cross because we are re-enacting the sacrifice, he said it’s done and it doesn’t need to be repeated.

So what are we doing in mass, we believe bread turns into flesh (transubstantiation), so people on here are saying we are not re-enacting the sacrifice, yet we believe that the conversion from wine to blood happens? How can the two tally?

How do we know this conversion is actually happening at mass? How do we know that wine is blood and bread is flesh?
Jesus doing this is one thing, but do priests actually do this conversion? and how do we know?

But then some people on here say we are re-presenting, but there is a conversion happening, so what’s the difference between a sacrifice where conversion happens and re-presenting and a conversion happens, how can this be possible?

He says the sacrifice is done, and needn’t be done anymore times.

Can I just take the opportunity to say, because I am putting forward a protestant argument doesn’t mean that I am going to convert, I just wanted to know what Catholics had to say in response to it, however there is a commenter on here who said basically catholics are re-presenting the sacrifice not en-acting it. which is the kind of response I was looking for.

There are people who feel emotionally offended by me asking the question in the first place. We have to question our own religion in order to understand it, there are some commenters on here with too much sensitivity about asking things from the protestant side without giving substantive answers with references.

 

[123Strontium]

I think I would like to know exactly what you would like to discuss also. What point exactly?

So what are we doing in mass, we believe bread turns into flesh (transubstantiation), so people on here are saying we are not re-enacting the sacrifice, yet we believe that the conversion from wine to blood happens? How can the two tally?

But then some people on here say we are re-presenting, but there is a conversion happening, so what’s the difference between a sacrifice where conversion happens and re-presenting and a conversion happens, how can this be possible?

He says the sacrifice is done, and needn’t be done anymore times. The fact that we are constantly repeating it is an act of rejecting the actual sacrifice. I’m just reiterating what the video said… what does catholicism have to say about this?

How do we know this conversion is actually happening at mass? How do we know that wine is blood and bread is flesh? Jesus doing this is one thing, but do priests actually do this conversion? and how do we know?

 

[PRmerger]

In broad terms, he says catholics are rejecting the Grace of Christ’s cross because we are re-enacting the sacrifice, he said it’s done and it doesn’t need to be repeated.

Then how does he reconcile this view with Malachi 1:11?

From the rising of the sun to its setting,

my name is great among the nations;

Incense offerings are made to my name everywhere,

and a** pure offering;**

For my name is great among the nations,

says the LORD of hosts.

Is there any other “pure offering” than Christ? And where else is this “pure offering” made
“from the rising of the sun to its setting”, except in the Catholic Church? Every hour of the day, somewhere in the world, the Mass is being offered.

No other church can fulfill this mandate in the Scriptures, except the CC.

 

[PRmerger]

How do we know this conversion is actually happening at mass? How do we know that wine is blood and bread is flesh? Jesus doing this is one thing, but do priests actually do this conversion? and how do we know?

We know because we believe the Church.

And we believe the Church because Jesus established it. He who hears the Church hears Jesus.

Incidentally, if the Church got it wrong about the Mass, then how do we know that she didn’t get it wrong when she gave us the Bible? How do we know that the Gospel of Luke is really God’s Word?

Answer: because the Church told you this.

Same answer as to how we know this “conversion” is actually happening at Mass.

 

[R_C]

How do we know that wine is blood and bread is flesh? Jesus doing this is one thing, but do priests actually do this conversion? and how do we know?

Besides faith and private revelations?

Well, because throughout the centuries the Lord, before the disbelief of priests celebrating the Mass, has given signal graces in which either the host or the wine did not just transform in substance, but in the appearance as well. We term these as “Eucharistic miracles”. Scientific analysis revealed that the transformed bread always became myocardial tissue from the heart.

duchowy.pl/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/miracle2-236x160.jpg

media-cache-ec3.pinterest.com/192x/b5/02/cb/b502cb7c70070015598abf36403952d6.jpg

cristoredentor-rj.com.br/img/hostia_carne_2.jpg

 

[porthos11]

So what are we doing in mass, we believe bread turns into flesh (transubstantiation), so people on here are saying we are not re-enacting the sacrifice, yet we believe that the conversion from wine to blood happens? How can the two tally?

I’m not sure what you’re stating here but yes, the bread turns into Christ’s Body and the Wine into his Blood, and yes, we are re-presenting (re-enacting is the wrong term as it implies we are repeating the Sacrifice when we don’t).

But then some people on here say we are re-presenting, but there is a conversion happening, so what’s the difference between a sacrifice where conversion happens and re-presenting and a conversion happens, how can this be possible?

The re-presentation depends on the conversion. Note, however that the bread and wine are consecrated SEPARATELY, so that you have Christ’s Body on the altar, and his Blood on the altar. With his Body and Blood present under separate sacramental signs, his Death is made sacramentally present (because that’s what the separation of a body from its blood results in). No, he does not die again and no, he is not dead on the altar (the Church teaches that Christ is fully alive under both species), but the event of his Death is once again re-lived.

He says the sacrifice is done, and needn’t be done anymore times. The fact that we are constantly repeating it is an act of rejecting the actual sacrifice. I’m just reiterating what the video said… what does catholicism have to say about this?

That he is both right and wrong. The Sacrifice has been accomplished on Calvary and he died once for all. That’s why we cannot repeat the Sacrifice, and it would in fact be sacriligeous to do so. But we do NOT repeat the Sacrifice; we re-live it. The Sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass is the same. How is this possible? Because Scripture tells us in Hebrews 7:24 that Jesus has a priesthood that does not pass away, and Hebrews 5:6 tells us that Jesus is a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek. Well, a priest’s defining function is to offer sacrifice. No sacrifice, no priesthood. But if Christ is an eternal (not retired) priest, it must follow that there is an eternal Sacrifice. And we know there is only One Sacrifice and that is Calvary. Christ continues to make his Sacrifice present in heaven before the Father to intercede for us (“with his own blood” Heb. 9:12).

Further in Revelation, John sees the Lamb standing as if slain. Standing, and therefore alive. But as if slain, still bearing the marks of his death. Even in heaven, he as he is worshipped, he continues to make his sacrifice present.

And finally, also in Revelation, John sees an altar in heaven. An altar implies sacrifice.

So he is wrong. The Sacrifice may be once for all, and it is indeed once, and for all. All people, all time. It is eternal.

How do we know this conversion is actually happening at mass? How do we know that wine is blood and bread is flesh? Jesus doing this is one thing, but do priests actually do this conversion? and how do we know?

Simple. Because Jesus said so. He said, This is my Body. This is my Blood. And yes, the priests do this because the Lord told them to do this in memory of him.

But the trick here is in the word memory. We think of it as mental recall. But the Greek word anamnesis is used to translate the Hebrew word zikkaron, and is much more powerful as it means remembrance, but a kind of remembrance that actually brings the event being remembered into the present. The event is mysically being re-lived.

When Christ told the disciples to do this in anamnesis of him, he was giving them the power to bring his saving event into the present. This is how the Mass is the same Sacrifice of Calvary. We do not repeat it; God brings it back to us under sacramental signs.

 

[Miriam1947]

The Jews to this day re-present the Passover when the Lamb of God saved the first born. They are remembering as they were told to do and we as Catholics do the same thing.

 

[Goya]

So what are we doing in mass, we believe bread turns into flesh (transubstantiation), so people on here are saying we are not re-enacting the sacrifice, yet we believe that the conversion from wine to blood happens? How can the two tally?

But then some people on here say we are re-presenting, but there is a conversion happening, so what’s the difference between a sacrifice where conversion happens and re-presenting and a conversion happens, how can this be possible?

He says the sacrifice is done, and needn’t be done anymore times. The fact that we are constantly repeating it is an act of rejecting the actual sacrifice. I’m just reiterating what the video said… what does catholicism have to say about this?

How do we know this conversion is actually happening at mass? How do we know that wine is blood and bread is flesh? Jesus doing this is one thing, but do priests actually do this conversion? and how do we know?

I didn’t bother opening the video, because I"m sure I"ve heard it all before.

Let me simply add a bit of clarity to what some of the posters above as alluded to, as I found it very compelling, when I ‘looked under the hood’ myself. Someone above said “we believe the Church”–let me offer some context:

Saints Polycarp, Ireneaus, John Chrysostom, St. Gregory the Great, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas. Teresa of Avila, etc., vs. the Reformers.

Here is what some of Church Fathers had to say, along with links, so you can review for yourself:

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (Alt)

“The priest who imitates that which Christ did, truly takes the place of Christ, and offers there in the Church a true and perfect sacrifice to God the Father.”,

ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH (Alt)

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR (Alt)

“This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.”

“First Apology”, Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.

“God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him.”

“Dialogue with Trypho”, Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D

ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (Alt)

“I wish to add something that is plainly awe-inspiring, but do not be astonished or upset. This Sacrifice, no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul, is always the same as that which Christ gave His disciples and which priests now offer: The offering of today is in no way inferior to that which Christ offered, because it is not men who sanctify the offering of today; it is the same Christ who sanctified His own. For just as the words which God spoke are the very same as those which the priest now speaks, so too the oblation is the very same.”

Source: St. John Chrysostom, “Homilies on the Second Epistle to Timothy,” 2,4, c. 397 A.D

ST. AUGUSTINE (Alt)

“You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ.”

-“Sermons”, [227, 21]

"The fact that*** our fathers of old offered sacrifices with beasts for victims, which the present-day people of God read about but do not do, is to be understood in no way but this: that those things signified the things that we do in order to draw near to God and to recommend to our neighbor the same purpose***. A visible sacrifice, therefore, is the sacrament, that is to say, the sacred sign, of an invisible sacrifice… . Christ is both the Priest, offering Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the sacramental sign of this should be the daily sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to offer herself through Him.

Source: St. Augustine, The City of God, 10, 5; 10,20, c. 426:
therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html

and the main site:

therealpresence.org/eucharst/a.html