The Church as anti-Christ

[sthudium]

My friend pointed me to a video Heresy Of the Roman Catholic Mass Part 1 - Pastor John MacArthur.

The upshot - and which I hope someone can refute - is:

1. Even though Hebrews says that Jesus’s one sacrifice is sufficient, the Catholic Eucharist repeatedly sacrifices Christ.
2. The Council of Trent said anyone who does not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species is damned. It can be assumed that Protestants are damned. Does this, damnation, mean that Protestants cannot be saved, unless they change to accept the real presence?
3. The Eucharist is always flawed. The priest must be holy and the intentions of the recipient must be pure for a perfect Eucharist.
4. However, a flawed Eucharist has some value, and so to get the intended effect, countless Eucharists are needed for the cumulative value in order to be salved.
5. Priests repeatedly speak Jesus down from heaven into the species. This is a power greater than those of the angels and the Virgin Mary.
6. All of this is reminiscent of pagan sacrifices.

I think one response to the above is to correct the notion that the Eucharist is a sacrifice for our sins, My understanding is that it is, instead, a union with the one-time passion of Christ on the cross and which conveys grace for sanctification. It is not a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins that is repeated over and over again. Am I correct?

 

[JohnR77]

Even though Hebrews says that Jesus’s one sacrifice is sufficient, the Catholic Eucharist repeatedly sacrifices Christ.

.

Mass : One Sacrifice Eternally Offered

Hebrews 9:26-28 tells us the Jesus was offered once to take away our sins and Hebrews 10:18 tells us

“Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer offering for sin.”

So why do Catholics call the Mass a Sacrifice which they offer up each day of the week ?

The Mass is a Re-Presentation of that same One Sacrifice of Jesus to the Father, His Life, Death, and Resurrection. (His Resurrection is equally important. (Cf. Romans 4:25, 1 Corinthians 15:17) Jesus is the Eternal High Priest up in Heaven.

Paul tells us in Hebrews that in the Old Testament the Jews had to continually offer up new sacrifices because these sacrifices never really paid the full price of their sins. However, in the New Covenant we only have One Sacrifice that is offered up once for all time. We need no other offering than Jesus to the Father. He is the One Sacrifice for all time. God being the creator of Time is outside of time. The sacrifice is eternally present to him in Heaven, see Revelations 5. In the Mass thatonce for all time sacrifice is made present to us as we are invited to unite ourselves in Christ as we offer up ourselves to God the Father. That is why we have an Altar,(Cf. Hebrews 3:10.)

Christ does not suffer again in the Mass. (Cf. 1 Peter 3:18)
He only died once. That same One Sacrifice is made present to us in the Mass.

Jesus is our Eternal High Priest.

Hebrews 5:6
“ … You are a priest forever
according to the order of Melchizedek.”

And the definition of a priest is to offer sacrifice.

Hebrews 5:1
“Every high priest is … to offer (to God) gifts and sacrifices for sins.”

Hebrews 7:22-25
“ … Jesus (also) become the guarantee of an (even) better covenant. Those priests were many because they were prevented by death from remaining in office, but he, because he remains forever, has a priesthood that does not pass away. Therefore, he is always able to save those who approach God through him, since he lives forever to make intercession for them.”

And so Jesus lives forever to continually make intercession for us.

Notice that Hebrews 8 is talking about Jesus, our High Priest in Heaven.

Hebrews 8:4
“If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest …”

And the preceding verses tell us how Jesus fulfills his Priestly ministry.

Hebrews 8:2-3
“Now every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus the necessity for this one also to have something to offer.”

Notice that this passage says that Christ must “have (present tense) something to offer.” If Jesus’ offering was only a past event then it would have been in the past tense. However, it is present tense because Jesus’ sacrifice is once for all, that is, once for all time, eternally offered in heaven.

The vision of heavenly worship that John sees in Revelation …

Read more at
http://www.defendingthebride.com/sc/mass/one.html

 

[guanophore]

who supposedly usurp the power of Jesus, by supposedly placing themselves between Christ and the laity.

Jesus was sent in power and authority.

Jesus therefore said to them again, Peace be unto you: as the Father hath sent me, even so send I you. John 20;21

Most evangelicals will say this verse applies to all believers, so does that mean all believers “usurp the power of Jesus” because we are sent?

Ultimately this argument is a rejection of authority. Who is authorized to act on behalf of God?

 

[guanophore]

What is the purpose of the church?

Or perhaps even more fundamental, how is Church defined? Most evangelicals will say it is the “body of believers on earth”, which, from an apostolic perspective, is a very deficient definition. It is also a very modern definition that cannot be found anywhere before the Reformation. What we have in history, from the time of the Apostles, is a visible and authorative Church.

How can a believer “take it to the church” if the Church is not visible? How, then, can the Church be identified?

Ask if he has read any of the early Church Fathers. Some fundamentalists will say this is irrelevant, since they do not represent inspired scripture (and it is true they do not), but they are a valuable witness to history, and how the early Christians understood their faith. An example are the Epistles of Ignatius:

“I salute in the blood of Jesus Christ, who is our eternal and enduring joy, especially if [men] are in unity with the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons, who have been appointed according to the mind of Jesus Christ, whom He has established in security, after His own will, and by His Holy Spirit.” to the Philadelphians

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0108.htm

These letters were written 107 AD at the latest, only a few years later than the Gospel of John and the book of Revelation. One has to wonder, how did a disciple get so confused so quickly after the Apostles? He writes here about unity with the bishops, presbyters (priests) and deacons, and submission to their authority. Did all these people usurp the authority of Christ?

If so, then what happened to the powerful Christ we see in the book of Revelation? Why was He so weak and inept that He did not fix this problem for 1500 years?

 

[guanophore]

The Council of Trent said anyone who does not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species is damned. It can be assumed that Protestants are damned. Does this, damnation, mean that Protestants cannot be saved, unless they change to accept the real presence?

The Council of Trent is addressed to Catholics. Catholics who abandon the faith do run this risk.

“Protestants” as we know them today did not exist at that time. Everyone who “protested” was originally baptized Catholic. Modern protestants cannot fall into that kind of heresy, because they were brought up with heresies.

Of course anyone can be saved. God can save whoever He wants, however He likes. He has revealed the fullness of His Truth to us in the Catholic faith. Yet some “Catholics” will not be saved either, owing to failure to adhere to the truth. God does not condemn people because they are ignorant. People are condemned because they rebel against God.

 

[guanophore]

The Eucharist is always flawed. The priest must be holy and the intentions of the recipient must be pure for a perfect Eucharist.

This is just error. The Church does not teach this. Jesus is never flawed, and the Eucharist is His holiness, not ours. Purity and perfection are works of grace the Holy Spirit (who is not flawed) operates within us, not something we do for ourselves.

However, a flawed Eucharist has some value, and so to get the intended effect, countless Eucharists are needed for the cumulative value in order to be salved.

This is also an error. It is true that grace is present in the Sacraments, and they do have cumulative value for us, but we are saved by grace, through faith, not of works.

Priests repeatedly speak Jesus down from heaven into the species. This is a power greater than those of the angels and the Virgin Mary.

Jesus indicated that, where two or more are gathered, there He would be in their midst. So yes, we gather, and we ask Him to be present. It is not a “power greater”, it is obedience to His commands. The power to transform the species is His, not ours.

All of this is reminiscent of pagan sacrifices.

I don’t know what kind of background John MacArthur may have in practicing Pagan sacrifice, so perhaps it is reminiscent for him. For us, it is reminiscent of the Passover/Last Supper where the Eucharist was instituted.