Re-presentation of the Sacrifice

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

Truthstalker

Guest
I’m wondering if the following is true.

In the Mass, it’s not so much that Christ is being made present again as much as we become present at the crucifixion. United with Him we are offered up, we consecrate our lives to Him and we offer them up with Him to the Father, as He did, as He is the way and the truth and the life, and so we do this in Him. We unite ourselves with His sacrifice; we pick up our cross and follow Him. Our old life is cut off, dead, and buried, as it was in baptism, and we proceed forward in Christ, alive, now His, not our own, once again dedicating ourselves to Him and Him alone. It is no longer I that liveth, but He that liveth in me.

Am I way off base? Comments?
 
In the Mass, it’s not so much that Christ is being made present again as much as we become present at the crucifixion.
Click to expand...
It’s both (a lot of Catholic teaching is “both/and” rather than “either/or”). Jesus is truly present under the appearance of bread and wine. This is very important to grasp–much more important than our being present at the cruxifixion. Also, we are not “crucifying” Christ again (as if that were even possible without committing grave sin), as some accuse us of doing, but rather we are re-presenting to the Father the one sacrifice Jesus offered for us on the cross.
 
Yeah…you’re a little off base. Not that what you said is wrong…but as Della said…there’s more to it. We Catholics are not “either/or” but often times both.

Is the mass “our sacrafice of praise and prayer” like the protestants believe? Yes. But that is certainly not the only part, and definitely not the unique or most important part.

Christ is made present substantially when the bread is consecrated. Because he is one substance, it is body, blood, soul, and divinity. But by “force of words”…it is formally, primarily, the Body. Everything else is said to come along by substantial “concomitance”: inasmuch as they all make up the same substance. But, if bread had been consecrated while Christ was in the tomb…it would have been only body and divinity.

When the wine is consecrated, that is when the sacrifice takes place. The double consecration formally sacramentally seperates Christ’s body and blood upon the altar and he is “mystically slain”. The wine is primarily his blood. It is formally, sacramentally, his Blood and everything else comes with only because of the concomitance of substance. But if consecrated while He was in the tomb would have been only blood and divinity.

Now. He is glorified and one indivisible human substance again…so obviously his body and blood are not really or substantially seperated on the altar. It is an unbloody re-presentation. BUT, they still formally tend towards seperation by the force of the double sacramental consecration and so it is an “official” seperation of his body and blood…even if not a real substantial seperation. It counts as it, however, because he really did show his willingness to die for our sake when he actually went through with it on Calvary, from which the sacrifice of the mass thus derives it’s efficacy.

It is a true sacrifice and the same as that on Calvary. It is the same Priest, the same Victim, the same Merit, and the same act (offering up His body and blood…and his whole self really…to the Father for our sake)

So it is the same sacrafice and a true sacrafice. It is not a new sacrafice…but nor is it merely a memorial, symbol, or “recall” of the old sacrifice. No, it the same sacrifice.

Not to say that we literally substantially go to Calvary or back in time. But the same sacrifice (a formal, physical, offering of Christ, by Himself, to the Father) is being offered on our altars as was offered at Calvary. So we may be said to be mystically there.
 
batteddy said:
Not to say that we literally substantially go to Calvary or back in time. But the same sacrifice (a formal, physical, offering of Christ, by Himself, to the Father) is being offered on our altars as was offered at Calvary. So we may be said to be mystically there.
Click to expand...
Very good post but I must object to this last comment. Recall that the nature of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is that it is a re-presentation and that this is only possible through the fact that Jesus was theanthropoi meaning that he was both God and Man hypostatically united. The consequence of this is that all acts of the God-Man were/are theandric which itself has a consequence of making all actions of Christ both in time and outside of time. For this reason and this reason alone we are able to access the Sacrifice of Christ for re-presentation. It is formally said that we we are able to, by the actions of the Holy Mass, that we are drawn into the abiding Pasch of Christ. Thus, mystically and truly we, while engaged in Worship, are both in time and outside of time truly participating in the same abiding action.

Further I would add to the understanding of the OP in saying that in the Mass we do say, as the other posters have noted, that this is an issue of both/and and not either/or. However, it must be noted that while this is true the emphasis is on the nature of the Sacrifice itself which has its culmination at the Consecration. Thus, the emphasis is on the liturgical aspect of worship as such instead of an emphasis on the active participation of those engaged in the act of worship in their own mystical unity with the Sacrifice of Christ. Thus we say that we come to Mass (Divine Liturgy) first to Worship and then in turn, by the over-pouring of divine generosity, we are filled in the measure that we can receive.
 
Thus, mystically and truly we, while engaged in Worship, are both in time and outside of time truly participating in the same abiding action.
Click to expand...
All I meant was that the time and place of events are accidents. And we do not, in that sense, “get transported back in time” to a certain hill, where was a certain piece of wood, surrounded by certain people.

Rather, we access the eternal priestly** act** wrought on that day…without actually returning to that day or city in the accidental sense. We experience all that is transcendent about the EVENT of the passion and death (and ressurection) of Christ without necessarily “going to” the same accidental circumstances and surroundings that this event originally took place in.

Some people apparently seem to think that the whole church disappears (and remains merely as an illusion) and that the congregation literally, though invisibly, stands on the dirt of Calvary with the crowds of Jerusalem, 2000 years ago. But only in a mystical/symbolic sense. The dirt and the day and the crowds are accidental to the priestly Act, the sacrificial Will and Merit, the Christ Event.

Rather, we “tap into” Christ’s everlasting Will to save us, the grace and merit He is worth for us, which was ratified once and for all on Calvary, by re-presenting what is essentially the same action (the formal seperation of his body and blood, offered to God by Christ, for our sake), just in an unbloody manner because his body and blood no longer substantially seperate (due to concomitance) even while they sacramentally “officially” seperate.
 
Since our Lords saving action on the Cross cannot be separated from His death on the Cross itself-----we do transcend time and place and stand at the foot of the Cross in each and every Mass.

vatican.va/edocs/ENG0821/__P3.HTM

Ecclesia de Eucharistia

CHAPTER ONE

THE MYSTERY OF FAITH
  1. “The Lord Jesus on the night he was betrayed” (1 Cor 11:23) instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of his body and his blood. The words of the Apostle Paul bring us back to the dramatic setting in which the Eucharist was born. The Eucharist is indelibly marked by the event of the Lord’s passion and death, of which it is not only a reminder but the sacramental re-presentation. It is the sacrifice of the Cross perpetuated down the ages.9 This truth is well expressed by the words with which the assembly in the Latin rite responds to the priest’s proclamation of the “Mystery of Faith”: “We announce your death, O Lord”.
The Church has received the Eucharist from Christ her Lord not as one gift – however precious – among so many others, but as the gift par excellence, for it is the gift of himself, of his person in his sacred humanity, as well as the gift of his saving work. Nor does it remain confined to the past, since “all that Christ is – all that he did and suffered for all men – participates in the divine eternity, and so transcends all times”.10
  1. This aspect of the universal charity of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is based on the words of the Saviour himself. In instituting it, he did not merely say: “This is my body”, “this is my blood”, but went on to add: “which is given for you”, “which is poured out for you” (Lk 22:19-20). Jesus did not simply state that what he was giving them to eat and drink was his body and his blood; he also expressed its sacrificial meaning and made sacramentally present his sacrifice which would soon be offered on the Cross for the salvation of all.
    “The Mass is at the same time, and inseparably, the sacrificial memorial in which the sacrifice of the Cross is perpetuated and the sacred banquet of communion with the Lord’s body and blood”.13
The Church constantly draws her life from the redeeming sacrifice; she approaches it not only through faith-filled remembrance, but also through a real contact, since this sacrifice is made present ever anew, sacramentally perpetuated, in every community which offers it at the hands of the consecrated minister. The Eucharist thus applies to men and women today the reconciliation won once for all by Christ for mankind in every age. “The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice”.14 Saint John Chrysostom put it well: “We always offer the same Lamb, not one today and another tomorrow, but always the same one. For this reason the sacrifice is always only one… Even now we offer that victim who was once offered and who will never be consumed”.15

The Mass makes present the sacrifice of the Cross; it does not add to that sacrifice nor does it multiply it.16 What is repeated is its memorial celebration, its “commemorative representation” (memorialis demonstratio),17 which makes Christ’s one, definitive redemptive sacrifice always present in time. The sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic mystery cannot therefore be understood as something separate, independent of the Cross or only indirectly referring to the sacrifice of Calvary.
 
I’m posting to let you know I’m reading this. It is not exactly light reading and I have no comments or questions presently.

Thank you for the information.
 
batteddy said:
All I meant was that the time and place of events are accidents. And we do not, in that sense, “get transported back in time” to a certain hill, where was a certain piece of wood, surrounded by certain people.

Rather, we access the eternal priestly** act** wrought on that day…without actually returning to that day or city in the accidental sense. We experience all that is transcendent about the EVENT of the passion and death (and ressurection) of Christ without necessarily “going to” the same accidental circumstances and surroundings that this event originally took place in.

Some people apparently seem to think that the whole church disappears (and remains merely as an illusion) and that the congregation literally, though invisibly, stands on the dirt of Calvary with the crowds of Jerusalem, 2000 years ago. But only in a mystical/symbolic sense. The dirt and the day and the crowds are accidental to the priestly Act, the sacrificial Will and Merit, the Christ Event.

Rather, we “tap into” Christ’s everlasting Will to save us, the grace and merit He is worth for us, which was ratified once and for all on Calvary, by re-presenting what is essentially the same action (the formal seperation of his body and blood, offered to God by Christ, for our sake), just in an unbloody manner because his body and blood no longer substantially seperate (due to concomitance) even while they sacramentally “officially” seperate.
Click to expand...
Correct. I only had issue with the way the statement was originally made. Your clarification on your statement is apprecated.
 
I’m still working on this.

One comment:

Those who think the foothills of the Himalayas are the highest mountains of all will never seek Everest. Yet the heights one scales going from the coast to the foothills are true heights. There is the both-and here, and all the in-between: all that Protestants hold dear in the church service is found here, the highest height they hope to achieve here is met, yet it is subsumed and dwarfed by what actually happens here. Yet those heights are realities that should not be disregarded, merely put into perspective.
 
Correct. I only had issue with the way the statement was originally made. Your clarification on your statement is apprecated.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome.

But I think you can see what I’m trying to say and why I’d feel a need to say it.

For example, from what I can tell based on what they said… WalkingHome might very well think that the dirt and the wood and the crowds are important, and that we literally go to Jerusalem 33 AD at every mass.

But that’s not true. We participate in the event of the cross. Truly it is not seperated in anyway from the cross, but it is now in an unbloody manner. But we don’t go back to the accidental circumstances of that event. We commune with Christ’s passion, without actually going back to the crucifixion, without killing him again, without having to be in Jerusalem at a specific time of day in a specific year.
 
batteddy said:
You’re welcome.

But I think you can see what I’m trying to say and why I’d feel a need to say it.

For example, from what I can tell based on what they said… WalkingHome might very well think that the dirt and the wood and the crowds are important, and that we literally go to Jerusalem 33 AD at every mass.

But that’s not true. We participate in the event of the cross. Truly it is not seperated in anyway from the cross, but it is now in an unbloody manner. But we don’t go back to the accidental circumstances of that event. We commune with Christ’s passion, without actually going back to the crucifixion, without killing him again, without having to be in Jerusalem at a specific time of day in a specific year.
Click to expand...
I did not state that we are killing our Lord again. We commune with our Lords saving event by uniting ourselves with his one and only sacrifice on the cross.

CCC
1363 In the sense of Sacred Scripture the memorial is not merely the recollection of past events but the proclamation of the mighty works wrought by God for men.184 In the liturgical celebration of these events, they become in a certain way present and real…

1364 In the New Testament, the memorial takes on new meaning. When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, she commemorates Christ’s Passover, and it is made present: the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the cross remains ever present.185…

1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross…
 
Truthstalker said:
I’m wondering if the following is true.

In the Mass, it’s not so much that Christ is being made present again as much as we become present at the crucifixion.

United with Him we are offered up, we consecrate our lives to Him and we offer them up with Him to the Father, as He did, as He is the way and the truth and the life, and so we do this in Him. We unite ourselves with His sacrifice; we pick up our cross and follow Him. Our old life is cut off, dead, and buried, as it was in baptism, and we proceed forward in Christ, alive, now His, not our own, once again dedicating ourselves to Him and Him alone. It is no longer I that liveth, but He that liveth in me.

Am I way off base? Comments?
Click to expand...
One of the errors of our day is the inverting of truths, to such an extent that the greater truths are lessened, driven to the back of our minds, and eventually forgotten. If you pay close attention to the deceptions of our day you will find that this is indeed what is taking place. There is an over ephmasis on a lesser truth, to the exclusion and destruction of greater truths.

Regarding you post. I think you have inadvertently replaced the essence of the Mass with the fruit of the Mass. That mistake is understandable due to the day we live in, and the deception that is all around us.

What we need to remember is that the Mass is first and foremost the sacrifice of Jesus being made present and repeated sacramentally. It is the exact same sacrifice with the exact same merit. The only difference is the manner in which it is made. This sacrifice is an act of reparation for our sins, and the means by which we receive grace.

The grace we receive at the Mass can and does help to transform us, and to accomplish that which you wrote; but that is the effect, the fruit, of the Mass, not the essense of the Mass itself.

That is the way to view it. Not that Mass is us offering ourselves up to God; but rather Jesus offering His life to God for our sins. That is what the Mass is. We can certainly offer God our lives along with the sacrifice of Jesus at Mass, but this offering of ours is in addition to the Mass, and does not affect the essence of the Mass itself. The Mass is just as meritorious if only the celebrant is present.

The following are the four intentions of the Mass, as recorded in the Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X:

Question 9: For what ends then is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass offered?

The Sacrifice of the Mass is offered to God for four ends:

1.) To honor Him properly, and hence it is called Latreutical;
2.) To thank Him for His favors, and hence it is called Eucharistical;
3.) To appease Him, make Him due satisfaction for our sins, and to help the souls in Purgatory, and hence it is called Propitiatory;
4.) To obtain all the graces necessary for us, and hence it is called Impetratory.

Question 14 explains deals with the fruit of the Mass:

14 Q: Who shares in the fruits of the Mass?

*The entire Church shares in the fruits of the Mass, but more particularly:

1 The priest and those who assist at Mass, the latter being united with the priest;
2 Those for whom the Mass is applied, both living and dead.*

The liberals have managed to shift the emphasis away from the sacrificial nature of the Mass, and to make it seem as “sacrifice” of the congregation. That is a distortion of the reality.

I would encourage you to read the section of the Mass from the Catechism of Pius X, found here cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/pius/psacr-e.htm
 
I did not state that we are killing our Lord again.
Click to expand...
No. But you insisted that we “stand at the foot of the cross” in an apparent rebuttle to my statement that “we don’t literally go back in time”

It is true that we “stand at the foot of the cross” in a way, but only in a symbolic way. Though a deeply symbolic way.

But we are not literally transported to the dusty outskirts of Jerusalem, on an April afternoon in 33 AD where a dying Jesus hangs on a piece of wood.

No. We don’t go to Christ’s sacrifice…rather, he brings his sacrifice to us. Jesus at Mass is risen, in heaven (and at our altar by way of the accidents of bread and wine), and formally seperates his body and blood but in an unbloody manner.

No wooden cross nor rocky crag makes a substantial appearence at mass, except in terms of church decorations.

What is essential to the event appears, however:
  1. Christ as Priest, willing our salvation, willing to offer himself to the Father.
  2. Christ as Victim, body and blood sacramentally formally seperated (even if no substantial seperation takes place due to concomitance)
  3. The Merit and Grace Christ won, the fruits applied to us.
  4. God the Father accepting the death of his Son as atoning.
and also…I would venture to say: Mary’s participation in the sacrifice is also present. Not her body or soul substantially, not a real presence in a way comparable to Jesus. But I think her salvific WILL is present at every mass. I think that graces definitely come to us from God, through Jesus, through Mary. It is in the flesh of Jesus in which they are wrought, but Mary’s unique participation is there by the mere fact that she wills our salvation, and the sacrifice she once uniquely mediated is being offered again, so her unique mediation must be offered again too.

Mary’s relationship to the Mass is one of the newer areas of theology, but you see Maximillian Kolbe and even Pope John Paul starting to talk about it.
 
I might point out that the “time travel” theory should probably not be used as a prime analogy of the mystery of Calvary’s re-presentation, but the Church doesn’t seem to object to our thinking of being “on Calvary”, cf. this paragraph from the Catechism:
CCC 1370:
In the Eucharist the Church is as it were at the foot of the cross with Mary, united with the offering and intercession of Christ.
Click to expand...
Many of the posts here are right; the events are made present to us in a mystical, sacramental way, but the fact that it is sacramental points to the events being made present. That means, it is not incorrect to say we “are on Calvary” when at Mass because we indeed are. How it happens is the Holy Spirit’s work, but definitely, there is a transcendence of the laws of time and space. So yes, we are there on Calvary. And at the door of the empty tomb. And on the mountain as Jesus ascends, and in a literal way (but not physical). In other words, the entire Paschal Mystery is made present.

I’d hesitate to think of “the church [building] disappears” because obviously, it doesn’t. Rather, I’d think of it as a meeting of the natural with the supernatural: the meeting of heaven and earth, where eternity intersects with the physical, allowing us to witness the eternal sacrifice now before the Father, while still remaining present in our own reality’s time and space. So I’d avoid terms like “transported”, “time warped” or other sci-fi-like terms.
 
In other words, the entire Paschal Mystery is made present.
Click to expand...
Yes, the mystery. But not the accidental circumstances.

We are on Calvary in a mystical way, and thus NOT a “literal” way…at least not how I understand “literal”. I guess I mean “substantial”. The substance of the wood of the cross, the subtance of the rock of golgotha…are not really present.
 
batteddy said:
Yes, the mystery. But not the accidental circumstances.

We are on Calvary in a mystical way, and thus NOT a “literal” way…at least not how I understand “literal”. I guess I mean “substantial”. The substance of the wood of the cross, the subtance of the rock of golgotha…are not really present.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I think the Church doesn’t intend to say that the “substance” of Calvary is there, but I don’t object to the use of the word “literal”, for the ancient concepts of anamnesis/zikkaron and do not preclude its use. I would, however, avoid the term “substantial.”

So do we stand at the foot of the Cross when at Mass? Yes, because of our anamnesis. Are we in the heavenly sanctuary? Yes, because the Sacrifice is now in eternity, the same Sacrifice we commemorate. Do we time-travel? No. It’s the Holy Spirit’s work that makes the event come to us.

A study of the Hebrew concept of zikkaron may help this understanding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top