LDS and Catholic Differences

[aspirant]

So what is it that we give to God in the mass?

Jesus Christ, who offered himself to the Father once for all.

How does he offer himself through the priest?

The priest participates in the priesthood of Christ, who acts through him.

What is your evidence that happens?

The scriptural context of the act, covenantal and sacrificial language used in scripture to describe this act, the traditional testimony of the Church to the sacrificial character of the action, etc. If you’d like some books on this, I’d be happy to recommend some.

Why is it not a new self offering?

There can only be one sacrifice of the new covenant.

Why do we need that when Paul says we don’t (quoted above Hebrews 7 I think)?

Please show me a passage of scripture that says we have no need of Christ’s once-for-all self-offering to the Father.

I don’t need a priest for that I don’t think.

An interesting assertion, but one that jives with neither sacred scripture nor apostolic tradition.

 

[mfbukowski]

Please show me a passage of scripture that says we have no need of Christ’s once-for-all self-offering to the Father.

I didn’t say that we didn’t need Christ’s sacrifice, I said we do not need to repeat it.

Hebrews 7, speaking of the Melchizedek priesthood:

26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

 

[mfbukowski]

I can assure you there is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise

Ok.
Bye.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I didn’t say that we didn’t need Christ’s sacrifice, I said we do not need to repeat it.

Hebrews 7, speaking of the Melchizedek priesthood:

It’s not a repeated sacrifice. It’s sharing in the one sacrifice for all people, of all time.

 

[aspirant]

I didn’t say that we didn’t need Christ’s sacrifice, I said we do not need to repeat it.

We don’t believe it can be repeated either.

 

[mfbukowski]

If you’d like some books on this, I’d be happy to recommend some.

No, I am trying to see if you understand it and can explain it. The books don’t explain it. I have studied the theology as much as I am able to stand it quite frankly.

 

[aspirant]

The books don’t explain it.

On the contrary, many books explain that point quite well, and at lengths not really feasible in a venue like this one.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

No, I am trying to see if you understand it and can explain it. The books don’t explain it. I have studied the theology as much as I am able to stand it quite frankly.

Yes, and the sharing of the one sacrifice has been explained to you before now, has it not?

 

[mfbukowski]

Jesus Christ, who offered himself to the Father once for all…

The priest participates in the priesthood of Christ, who acts through him.

So it seems that the priest is in effect “holding up a mirror” through which the sacrifice is reflected or repeated so we feel we have more direct participation?

I can kinda see how that would be beneficial, but it seems that mass is more about the Eucharist than the crucifixion and atonement.

And this is better than simply reflecting or meditating on the atonement because…?

I am just having trouble I guess with why a priest needs to do this for us. I can understand the need for the authority of God though leadership and blessing the people, I can understand the need for priesthood authority for what you call sacraments, or even for blessing the Eucharist,-- all of that is also “Mormon”-- but the sacrifice part just eludes me. I don’t know why I need a priest to participate more fully in Jesus’ sacrifice for us.

It’s done- it doesn’t need to be repeated or reflected or played out again. And I think that is what is being said in that Hebrews 7 verse about the priesthood- I don’t know how it could be more clear.

 

[mfbukowski]

Yes, and the sharing of the one sacrifice has been explained to you before now, has it not?

Do I have to put you on ignore? I wasn’t talking to you. I want a discussion not a monologue.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Do I have to put you on ignore? I wasn’t talking to you. I want a discussion not a monologue.

Ignore is your choice. It might be better than displaying the non-charitable tone in front of those you seek to convert.

 

[aspirant]

So it seems that the priest is in effect “holding up a mirror” through which the sacrifice is reflected or repeated so we feel we have more direct participation?

We don’t believe the sacrifice can be repeated. It would be more accurate to say Christ presents the one sacrifice here and now through the actions of the priest.

it seems that mass is more about the Eucharist than the crucifixion and atonement.

I’m not sure I understand what you’re trying to say here.

And this is better than simply reflecting or meditating on the atonement because…?

We’re not merely thinking about the real thing, but participating in it.

I am just having trouble I guess with why a priest needs to do this for us.

Every person is called to serve the Body in particular ways. This is the primary purpose of the presbyter’s vocation, to make Christ’s sacrifice present to us.

It’s done- it doesn’t need to be repeated

We agree 100%. We do not believe Christ’s sacrifice is repeatable.

 

[TheosisM]

So it seems that the priest is in effect “holding up a mirror” through which the sacrifice is reflected or repeated so we feel we have more direct participation?

I can kinda see how that would be beneficial, but it seems that mass is more about the Eucharist than the crucifixion and atonement.

And this is better than simply reflecting or meditating on the atonement because…?

I am just having trouble I guess with why a priest needs to do this for us. I can understand the need for the authority of God though leadership and blessing the people, I can understand the need for priesthood authority for what you call sacraments, or even for blessing the Eucharist,-- all of that is also “Mormon”-- but the sacrifice part just eludes me. I don’t know why I need a priest to participate more fully in Jesus’ sacrifice for us.

It’s done- it doesn’t need to be repeated or reflected or played out again. And I think that is what is being said in that Hebrews 7 verse about the priesthood- I don’t know how it could be more clear.

MfBukowski, the most common way to explain it is this:

The Mass is a “re-presentation” of the sacrifice of Jesus at Calvary, and not a “re-do”. At the Mass, we are transported back in time (since we all agree that Christ’s sacrifice transcends time, or is “infinite” (in LDS literature I see frequent reference to the “infinite atonement”)) to Calvary, where Jesus is being offered. That sacrifice is therefore “re-presented”, in an “unbloody” manner, with Christ as the “victim” (as He was at Calvary, since it is believed to be the same sacrifice).

So, while Catholics agree that the Eucharist is a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, when it is said that the Mass is a “sacrifice”, or when a Catholic asks a non-Catholic/Orthodox if their priests offer sacrifice, it is in reference to the belief that the Mass is the unbloody re-presentation of Calvary.

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.” “And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory.”

 

[AMDGtoo]

Hebrews 7, speaking of the Melchizedek priesthood:

But we do not call our priests Melchizedek priests. Being without father and mother, without beginning or end, eternally offering sacrifice for the people can only refer to Jesus Christ our high priest. Our priests are priests because they offer sacrifice (that’s the definition.) Of course they do not continue to offer sacrifice according to the law. (That’s what Hebrews was speaking about–that sacrifice according to the law is no longer needed because of Jesus’ once and for all, extending throughtout history, great Sacrifice on the cross.)

What our priests do (at the command of Jesus) is to make present for all (even for those who weren’t alive in 33 A.D. when Jesus was crucified) Jesus’ great Sacrifice. (Remember that Revelations 5:6 refers to Jesus as the Lamb as it is slain, which indicates that Jesus’ Sacrifice is eternal–forever. One can’t sacrifice something again if it has never stopped to begin with.)****

 

[sablouwho]

I can kinda see how that would be beneficial, but it seems that mass is more about the Eucharist than the crucifixion and atonement.

And this is better than simply reflecting or meditating on the atonement because…?

(Hi, I hope you don’t mind my jumping in midstream here…)

I assume that there is probably an orthodox Catholic reply to your question, but that is not the answer that I will give you…

For me, I find it is “better” because I experience God more in that context than in any other. Frankly, I didn’t experience God in the Jewish context into which I was born, nor in the Protestant ones that I checked out after I came to believe in Jesus.

And, despite praying with sincere intent for a significant period of time (often on my knees, crying), despite “wanting it” to the depths of my soul, I just didn’t experience God in the LDS context.

So, for me, the Catholic thing seems to work. (I ignore the parts of it that don’t. Yeah, I know, some people aren’t going to like that–oh well, not much I can do.)

Yet I have no doubt that for you and for many other LDS, the Mormon thing is a glove fit, and for you and other members, “simply reflecting or meditating on the atonement” IS indeed better.

 

[MyzTek]

Is this addressed to me?

I have learned that one does not go to disgruntled employees when one is about to buy stock, and even if Brigham Young was a child molester, which clearly he was not, we have a little problem with that argument with pots calling kettles black etc.

You are not acquainted with the various arguments about the bible and BOM or DNA, and I feel it is useless to go into them since it appears your mind is made up.

Unfortunately, it appears no one can answer my questions about the “sacrifice” in the Mass.

Oh well, I hope this thread was productive for someone.

[sarcasm]Yeah, it’s a good thing no one except one gullible congressman listened to those “disgruntled” People’s Temple members who were spreading those rumors about mock suicide rehearsals and the leader’s supposed paranoia and control issues. People might have gotten the wrong idea. [/sarcasm]

Sorry friend, I have to disagree. Former members of a religious movement (and yes I acknowledge I even have to include lapsed Catholics in this) are a valuable and indispensable source of information for forming a complete picture.

Peace,
MyzTek

 

[sablouwho]

Sorry friend, I have to disagree. Former members of a religious movement (and yes I acknowledge I even have to include lapsed Catholics in this) are a valuable and indispensable source of information for forming a complete picture.

Indeed, such was certainly was the case for me when I checked out Christianity – I talked with some other Jews who had converted to faith in Jesus, and/or read what they wrote, and I saw what was missing in Judaism. I also read the stories of some Jews who got involved in Messianic Judaism and/or Christianity for a while, before going back to traditional Judaism. Even their stories helped me, despite the fact that I made the opposite choice of what they would have preferred.

These two things combined were quite helpful in getting me to have faith in Christ.

 

[MyzTek]

Indeed, such was certainly was the case for me when I checked out Christianity – I talked with some other Jews who had converted to faith in Jesus, and/or read what they wrote, and I saw what was missing in Judaism. I also read the stories of some Jews who got involved in Messianic Judaism and/or Christianity for a while, before going back to traditional Judaism. Even their stories helped me, despite the fact that I made the opposite choice of what they would have preferred.

These two things combined were quite helpful in getting me to have faith in Christ.

I also looked into a variety of points of view before my confirmation in 2007. If anyone at RCIA had told me “You really shouldn’t read _____,” I would have been out of there in a heartbeat. The truth can stand up to scrutiny, and will out if we stay open to it.

peace

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Actually, I have to chime in here big time. What makes you think that we do not have a 'sacrificing priesthood?" What do you mean by 'sacrifice." in this context? I’m not about to downplay the dedication of Catholic priests, who devote their lives to their calling, but what makes you think that Mormons do NOT? In fact, one of the biggest criticisms of Mormonism out there is that Mormonism is a ‘way of life,’ not simply a church we go to. It’s not that we have a specific ‘sacrificing priesthood.’ It is that we ALL live Mormonism ALL the time.

You misunderstand. I did not mean to say that LDS members did not sacrifice their time to the priesthood. What I meant was that you had nothing equivalent to the sacrifice of the mass. (Unless I am mistaken and I very well concede that I may be). No disrespect intended, really.

Dianaiad:

Oh, and yes, we do have seminaries. Four years of Seminary, (yes, that is what it is called) that every high school student is expected to attend from the time we are freshmen to the time we graduate. Those of us who do not live in Utah (and that is the vast majority of us, by the way) are expected to go to seminary classes early in the morning, before school. 5:30 AM is typical. Then, when we go to college, we are all expected to take religious classes there, as well, in an “Institute of Religion” (we call it ‘Institute’) so that by the time we graduate from college, we have taken more formal classes in religion than most people with BA’s in theology. The difference is that ALL of us are expected to do this, men and women alike.

But that is essentially bible study class, which is akin to any good Catechism program. Focusing on the LDS priesthood for a moment, what formal training in the LDS priesthood is given? Are there rubrics or liturgies to be learned?

dianaiad:

We don’t have the Mass…but we DO have church meetings, and we have the Temple ceremonies which are every inch as loaded with ceremony/symbolism as the most involved of high Masses.

But there is no sacrifice presented. Unless I am mistaken, the LDS Temple ceremonies are akin to the sacraments of baptism and confirmation, making one a full adult member in the LDS Church. But it is not a sacrifice (animal, vegetable, mineral or other). Is this incorrect? Are there sacrifices made in the LDS temples?

Peace,
Robert

 

[mfbukowski]

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.” “And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory.”

“Only the manner of offering is different?” That’s not enough to make it “different”? What precisely makes it “the same”? Ministry vs Himself, no cross, no blood, no link to the atonement by taking away sins, but the result is the real presence. Does mass take away sins? If it did I could see a better link.

I really do appreciate the effort, but I think I am hopeless on this point.

This quote says to me: “It is the same, but different”.

It is exactly the same to me as saying that the Trinity is three and one at the same time.

It is the whole “substance” vs “accidents” of scholastic philosophy all over again. AUGH!

The only difference between lead and gold are the “accidents”, but the “substance” is the same.

I mean I can totally understand it if it is symbolic or metaphorical, or the priest symbolically re-enacts the sacrifice, or something like that, but I am sure you don’t mean it that way.

All I see are contradictions.

I am sorry. Square peg round hole I guess.

Did I ever get a response on that Hebrews 7 scripture? I don’t think so. Oh I guess y’all got by by saying it was all “one sacrifice”?