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

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

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?

Get and read this book it will explain the whole thing very simply. The Jewish Roots of the Eucharist: Author Brant Pitre

The Re- presentation is that this is somthing happening outside of time. and that Holy Thrusday and Good Friday as well as Easter are all happening one and for all but out side of time so perpetutally.

 

[dje101]

I watched about 4 minutes of that drivel and just couldn’t take another second. Ughh … another bible-banger.

Yeah, I think I made is about 3 minutes then started reading the comments because they were more interesting than the video.

 

[pocohombre]

The video says similar things that were said by Catholic monk Radbertus in 9th C and Catholic monk Wycliffe (maybe Tyndale ?) in 13 th century. As a protestant I am surprised he did not mention my other problem with mass, that it is no longer just a Eucharist-thaksgiving,but it is also an "offering ", sacrificially to God , ala OT. "Please accept our offering ,this sacrifice ,these gifts " etc etc .These were never part of first century words at the eucharisting. God gave us the Lamb and we give Him thanks. We should not re-offer it back to Him, as if He or us, are in need of it.We are only in need of receiving and giving thanks. Big difference. The only sacrifice should be a sacrifice of praise. Again, I am not saying you do not give thanks, for the thanksgiving words are there in the Mass, but the offering words are also there of what I just stated. Big addition in my humble opinion.

 

[fhansen]

Spare 6 minutes to watch this speaker explain why the Catholic Mass is wrong…
youtube.com/watch?v=kfAIaOp1VW4
“Roman Catholic Jesuit Vatican Mass Denies the Sufficiency of Christ Jesus Sacrifice”

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

The Church teaches that the Mass is a “re-presentation” of the one sacrifice of Christ.
For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 1 Cor 11:26 The Lord’s sacrificial death is central to our faith because of what it means for man, which is also why Catholics use the crucifix rather than the bare cross.

 

[PRmerger]

As a protestant I am surprised he did not mention my other problem with mass, that it is no longer just a Eucharist-thaksgiving,but it is also an "offering ", sacrificially to God , ala OT. "Please accept our offering ,this sacrifice ,these gifts " etc etc .These were never part of first century words at the eucharisting.

Please provide a source for first century liturgy text that supports your view.

God gave us the Lamb and we give Him thanks. We should not re-offer it back to Him, as if He or us, are in need of it.We are only in need of receiving and giving thanks. Big difference. The only sacrifice should be a sacrifice of praise. Again, I am not saying you do not give thanks, for the thanksgiving words are there in the Mass, but the offering words are also there of what I just stated. Big addition in my humble opinion.

What you are proposing, poco, is un-biblical.

Scripture commands that we offer a “pure offering” from the rising of the sun to its setting.

And who is the “pure offering” except Christ himself. And where is there a sacrifice from the rising of the sun to its setting? Only in the Catholic Church, where there is a Mass being offered at every hour of the day, somewhere on the planet!

Your church, sadly, does not fulfill this mandate from the Bible.

For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.–Malachi 1:11

 

[pocohombre]

Please provide a source for first century liturgy text that supports your view.

What you are proposing, poco, is un-biblical.

Scripture commands that we offer a “pure offering” from the rising of the sun to its setting.

And who is the “pure offering” except Christ himself. And where is there a sacrifice from the rising of the sun to its setting? Only in the Catholic Church, where there is a Mass being offered at every hour of the day, somewhere on the planet!

Your church, sadly, does not fulfill this mandate from the Bible.

pure offering is a sacrifice of praise-why do you offer something back up to God that he already offered to you ?

 

[RollTide1987]

I’m presently reading a book about the history of the Catholic Church and it’s incredible how similar the Mass of today is to the Mass of the 1st century. Aside from a few subtle differences we celebrate Christ’s sacrifice much the same way we did when St. Peter and St. Paul were alive in Rome.

 

[regression]

I’m presently reading a book about the history of the Catholic Church and it’s incredible how similar the Mass of today is to the Mass of the 1st century. Aside from a few subtle differences we celebrate Christ’s sacrifice much the same way we did when St. Peter and St. Paul were alive in Rome.

What book is that?

 

[RollTide1987]

pure offering is a sacrifice of praise-why do you offer something back up to God that he already offered to you ?

Because the Bible says to? Also we have words from 1st and 2nd century church leaders telling us to do so.

 

[RollTide1987]

What book is that?

History of the Catholic Church - From the Apostolic Age to the Third Millennium by James Hitchcock.

 

[regression]

History of the Catholic Church - From the Apostolic Age to the Third Millennium by James Hitchcock.

Thanks, I have that book on my Kindle. It is in my ever growing “to read” list

 

[PRmerger]

pure offering is a sacrifice of praise-

Really? You consider our praises to God to be “pure”?

 

[pocohombre]

Really? You consider our praises to God to be “pure”?

Yes and no. The east is pretty far from the west. Christ is the only pure thing and it is He that emantes from us to the Father, especially when we are eucharisting, for scripture says He inhabits the praises of His people. I can’t think of a more pure, satifying praise offering to the Father than His children around the whole world saying, "Thank you Father for your Son and His propitiation for us-we get it, and shall never forget it, till His return. Halleluiah! "

 

[brb3]

Yes and no. The east is pretty

far from the west. Christ is the only pure thing and it is He that emantes from us to the Father, especially when we are eucharisting, for scripture says He inhabits the praises of His people. I can’t think of a more pure, satifying praise offering to the Father than His children around the whole world saying, "Thank you Father for your Son and His propitiation for us-we get it, and shall never forget it, till His return. Halleluiah! "

Poco …

We do offer ourselves & our praise to the Father at Mass AND, we acknowledge to the Father that Christ is his One Pure Sacrifice for us !!

We also bring our tithes and offerings to the Altar …these too … are returned back to the Lord & His Church …for the mission of the Church in the World.

And, at Mass …on receipt of Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, we receive grace and abiding presence of Christ …infused into every cell of our bodies. The Lord, purging us of sin, and renewing us from inside out.

We receive/celebrate Revival, of the Church Body …at every Mass…via the Written Word, Song, Prayer, Praise, and the Eucharist !!

 

[brb3]

Malachi 1:11…clearly points to the Eucharist. As we receive Christ weekly at Mass, we praise the Father, via the HS within.

This is exactly what the Father desires of us …our keeping the First Great Commandment, perfected for us & enabled by the Son, expressed by us thru HS.

 

[brb3]

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).

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.

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.

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.

porthos11…

Excellent discussion, well explained …hopefully well understood by the non-Catholic, who were taught wrong by their elders.

 

[PRmerger]

Really? You consider our praises to God to be “pure”?

Yes and no.

So I consider the “pure offering” to be Christ.

What do we do now, poco? 2 Christians read the same verse and think it means different things.

What does your paradigm say is the solution?

 

[phinsbama]

Jesus gave authority to the Church (Catholic) not churches to bind and loose. I haven’t watched the video and don’t need to. If your Catholic you understand this and the video doesn’t matter. This is what we mean by Apostolic Succession.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

 

[pocohombre]

Please provide a source for first century liturgy text that supports your view.

Only have what earliest fathers say. They don’t say about offering up a eucharist sacrifice,but silence is not proof. However , they usually say it is a thanksgiving-even with a love feast by Igantius. I repeat the Mass is still a thanksgiving,the words are there, just that I disagree with it being an offering for those words are there also ,much ala OT… Ignatius to the Ephesians says twice to give thanks at eucharist -“come together to give thanks”. He also says that “may I be the wheat of God”. In letter to Romans I think he mentions the love feast. Justin Martyr mentions the “cup (that ) He gave us, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving thanks”. God gave us the cup and we give thanks. Did he mention we are to re-offer up to Him again? The Didache4:2(?)-Daily seek out the saints, find rest in their words…and eucharistic thanksgiving .It mentions giving thanks for the cup and giving thanks for the bread." He tabernacles in our hearts"-no mention of monstrance or tabernacle on altar. Sorry I do not have better, fuller quotes and exact locations.

 

[PeaceInChrist]

Only have what earliest fathers say. They don’t say about offering up a eucharist sacrifice.

Actually, Ignatius (who became a bishop in 67AD) does speak of having one altar and sacrifice:

“Make certain, therefore, that you all observe one common Eucharist; for there is but one Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and but one cup of union with his Blood, and one single altar of sacrifice—even as there is also but one bishop, with his clergy and my own fellow servitors, the deacons. This will ensure that all your doings are in full accord with the will of God” Epistle to the Philadelphians

What, exactly, do you think they did on altars, Poco? What did the Jews do on them?

Please don’t make assertions like this. They are blatantly false, and since you’ve been presented with them before, intellectually dishonest. This is why I was getting upset with you in the other thread: you were both using absence as proof certain doctrine didn’t exist, and you were ignoring where we posted examples that completely contradicted your interpretations (an example would be Augustine and the Real Presence, I’ve never seen anyone claim he didn’t believe in it, especially when he said Christ held Himself in His hands).