Need help regarding the Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter theotokus1911
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

theotokus1911

Guest
So I recently called out a university professor for something he said regarding what Catholic’s believe about the Mass. This professor is a Protestant, and last class he went on a Catholic Church = Bad rant. He told the entire class that Catholic’s believe they are re-sacrificing Christ on the altar at every Mass. This was upsetting, because he made it sound really bad, and most of the students likely believe it now. Any student in the class who was open to exploring Catholicism, is likely not interested after this lecture, and it is all because of a lie. I sent him an email after class because I wanted to cite the CCC. I basically told him he is flat out wrong and I cited a few paragraphs from the CCC that state the exact opposite of what he claimed in class. This was not good enough for him and he is now telling me to read the Catechism regarding Transubstantiation. I have no idea what he is expecting me to find there that proves the Church believes this. For the most part he dodged my sources, and told me if I have further questions to come see him during office hours. Part of me wants to go, the other part thinks it’s a waste of time. I guess the point of this post is to see if there are any other sources I could use to back up my claim? The CCC seems pretty clear that we believe it is one single sacrifice. What else could I do to try and show him that what he is saying is not true? And should I even bother?
 
There are lots of Catholic apologists who have addressed this, over and over. For example, here’s Jimmy Akin addressing it.


However, I think your instinct that this is a waste of time is the correct one. Your professor has his mind made up. He is unlikely to change it based on arguing with a student.

I am not sure what class this is, but for this professor to misrepresent Catholic teaching is to me biased and wrong. I would lodge a complaint with the University administration, unless of course this is some Protestant private university where they teach anti-Catholic views and misinformation all day. If this is a public university, or even a private university that’s not affiliated with a religion, then it is wrong for them to allow a professor to propagate misinformation about someone’s religion. The University might not do anything about your complaint but I would certainly put it on file.

Stuff like this is also a big reason why I stuck to taking classes about subjects such as math and science that do not involve the subjective and often wrong opinions of professors, who are not anything special but often think they are.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your reply. I will watch the video. I am actually doing engineering so I normally do stick to science and math. This is just for a humanity. It is a public university and the class is an intro to Christianity class.
 
Then you should definitely complain because if he’s introducing people to Christianity, he has the responsibility to present correct information.
It might be okay if he said that “Some Protestant Christians believe that Catholics are re-sacrificing Christ” because then he’s just giving all viewpoints, and some Protestant Christians do believe that.
But for him to say that’s what Catholics definitely do is him giving misinformation to a class.
 
Last edited:
He said it as if it were fact. I told him that he presented incorrect information to students and he got defensive saying he’s studied Theology for 7 years and he has a PhD and his Catholic friends agree with him. My problem is if he were to go ask a priest if this is what we believe the priest would say no. I cited our own Catechism and it’s not sufficient for him. He is basically teaching his opinion on what the Church believes. I didn’t know that doing a complaint was a thing, though I’d rather go the peaceful route if I can. I’ll definitely look into it
 
Thank you for your reply. I wasn’t aware that this was a thing so I’ll definitely look into maybe doing a complaint if I need to
 
Christ is re-sacrificed at Mass but not in the way most people think of when they hear the word “sacrificed.” In the Old Testament, there was a class of sacrifices called wave offerings in which what was sacrificed was not killed or harmed in any way but merely waved unharmed before the LORD. At Mass, Christ is not killed again or harmed in any way but rather he is offered unharmed as a sort of wave offering similar to how the entire tribe of Levi was offered to the LORD as a wave offering in Numbers 8. It is the fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy, “For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.” (Malachi 1:11)
 
Last edited:
Christ’s sacrifice is “re-presented” in an unbloody manner, exactly as He commanded at the last supper.

Bear in mind that the “professor” is arguing from the ego and not from the intellect. Such arguments cannot be won.
 
Last edited:
Todd_Easton said:
Christ is re-sacrificed at Mass
Click to expand...
Hmm… that doesn’t sound right. The sacrifice of Christ is re-presented (to God) at Mass, but Jesus is not “re-sacrificed”. He is truly present in the Eucharist, but He is not “re-sacrificed.”
 
Council of Trent
Session XXII
DOCTRINE ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS
CHAPTER II.
That the Sacrifice of the Mass is propitiatory both for the living and the dead.

And forasmuch as, in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross; the holy Synod teaches, that this sacrifice is truly propitiatory and that by means thereof this is effected, that we obtain mercy, and find grace in seasonable aid, if we draw nigh unto God, contrite and penitent, with a sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence. For the Lord, appeased by the oblation thereof, and granting the grace and gift of penitence, forgives even heinous crimes and sins. For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. The fruits indeed of which oblation, of that bloody one to wit, are received most plentifully through this unbloody one; so far is this (latter) from derogating in any way from that (former oblation). Wherefore, not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful who are living, but also for those who are departed in Christ, and who are not as yet fully purified, is it rightly offered, agreebly to a tradition of the apostles.
 
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that it is not distinct, it is the same sacrifice.
The Sacrifice which is offered every day in the Church is not distinct from that which Christ Himself offered, but is a commemoration thereof. ( Summa Theologica 3, q. 22, a. 3, ad 2)
Click to expand...
St John Chrysostom wrote
Next, having spoken concerning that Supper, he connects the things present with the things of that time, that even as on that very evening and reclining on that very couch and receiving from Christ himself this sacrifice, so also now might men be affected; (Homily XXVII on 1 Corinthians 11:17, 6, v. 11:25; NPNF1-12)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
irenaeuslyons said:
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that it is not distinct, it is the same sacrifice.
The Sacrifice which is offered every day in the Church is not distinct from that which Christ Himself offered, but is a commemoration thereof. ( Summa Theologica 3, q. 22, a. 3, ad 2)
Click to expand...
That’s not what your quote says. He doesn’t say “it’s the same sacrifice”; he says “it’s a commemoration [of the Sacrifice of Christ].”
Click to expand...
 
Gorgias said:
40.png
irenaeuslyons:
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that it is not distinct, it is the same sacrifice.
The Sacrifice which is offered every day in the Church is not distinct from that which Christ Himself offered, but is a commemoration thereof. ( Summa Theologica 3, q. 22, a. 3, ad 2)
Click to expand...
That’s not what your quote says. He doesn’t say “it’s the same sacrifice”; he says “it’s a commemoration [of the Sacrifice of Christ].”
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
What does it mean to be “not distinct” from something?
Click to expand...
 
Has everyone forgotten about the wonderful apologetics books written by converted Protestants?

Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic by David Currie

Evangelical is Not Enough by Thomas Howard

Crossing the Tiber by Steve Ray

Rome Sweet Home by Scott and Kimberly Hahn

My Life on the Rock: A Rebel Returns to the Catholic Faith by Jeff Cavins

Nuts and Bolts: A Practical Guide to Explaining and Defending the Catholic Faith by Tim Staples (CAF Apologist)

All of these books are fairly easy reads, although they cite plenty of scholarly works. The book by Thomas Howard is more scholarly (and beautifully written) than the others and might be most likely to appeal to a Protestant professor, as Mr. Howard is the brother of famous missionary Elisabeth Elliot, who is about as close to a “saint” as Evangelical Protestants get!

I heartily recommend these authors and their books (or CDs or whatever people listen to nowadays) to Protestants, and to Catholics who are questioning their Catholic faith.
They were and still are a great help to Protestants like me and my husband. We converted to Catholicism in 2004.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top