A
agangbern
Guest
Please read Post#20.
Where can I learn more about the sacrificial reality of the Mass?
- Status
po18guy
Well-known member
In the US, the Church uses both methods of describing it. What happens does not change - only the words we use to describe it. The descriptions are synonymous, and any difference is a matter of language. Since it is God that presents the sacrifice, man cannot re-present it. Man cannot make it present. Only the Lord can. Any better?
E
Extempore
Guest
In case anyone is still confused, I would highly encourage reading Yours_Truly’s two posts - they clearly and eloquently illustrate what the Church has always taught regarding the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Its sometimes easy to gloss over the longer posts on this forum, but those are definitely worth a read!
Also, I would like to emphasize the benefits of reading The Incredible Catholic Mass. There is no shame in having a good refresher course - especially for those of us who were never properly catechized in this subject.
Also, I would like to emphasize the benefits of reading The Incredible Catholic Mass. There is no shame in having a good refresher course - especially for those of us who were never properly catechized in this subject.
A
agangbern
Guest
That’s better. What basically I took exception of is the use of the word “re-presentation” in the sense of “presenting again”. In the Holy Mass, there is simply no “presenting again”. For “presenting again” implies a repetition of a past event. I know that the poster who used that word did not have in mind the concept of “repetition of a past event.” But to the innocent reader, the word “presenting again” is prone to confuse him. That is why it should not be used as regards the Holy Mass.
D
dawid
Guest
In my understanding you are quite correct, the Mass is us being present across time-space, at the events of the Last Supper culminating in the Crucifixion - we do not re-sacrifice Jesus.
H
hamburglar
Guest
Okay let me see if I have some things right:
Jesus died 2000 years ago by being crucified. However, the Sacrifice wasn’t 2000 years ago. The Sacrifice is still happening today, existing outside restraints of time.
The Sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass/Eucharist are the same, but physically different. The Sacrifice at Calvary shed blood, the Eucharist is a bloodless Sacrifice. They are the same Sacrifice, but in two different ways, similar to the flesh of the Body of Jesus when he walked the Earth 2000 years ago and His Body in the Eucharist are the same, yet appear different.
That’s what I have figured out so far. Let me know if I have this right, or if I am essentially a heretic
Also, what are we to understand about the Last Supper? Was that the same Sacrifice as the Sacrifice of the Cross? Did the bread and wine at that meal become the actual Body and Blood of our Lord just like the Eucharist at Mass?
Jesus died 2000 years ago by being crucified. However, the Sacrifice wasn’t 2000 years ago. The Sacrifice is still happening today, existing outside restraints of time.
The Sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass/Eucharist are the same, but physically different. The Sacrifice at Calvary shed blood, the Eucharist is a bloodless Sacrifice. They are the same Sacrifice, but in two different ways, similar to the flesh of the Body of Jesus when he walked the Earth 2000 years ago and His Body in the Eucharist are the same, yet appear different.
That’s what I have figured out so far. Let me know if I have this right, or if I am essentially a heretic
Also, what are we to understand about the Last Supper? Was that the same Sacrifice as the Sacrifice of the Cross? Did the bread and wine at that meal become the actual Body and Blood of our Lord just like the Eucharist at Mass?
P
puzzleannie
Guest
NO the sacrificial nature of the Mass is NOT greatly diminished in the Mass, anywhere it is validly and licitly celebrated. It is ALWAYS present and obvious and apparent to those who look for it, which is the meaning of “full, active participation”. To say otherwise is to deny the Church and her authority over Mass and the sacraments.
because the rest of your post is so excellent I can add no other comment, but this statement is dangerous, and your own second paragraph explains why, because it is peripherals–language, etc–that may enhance the subjective experience of the person assisting at Mass, but in no way to they altar the sacrificial nature of the Mass.
It is however quite true that subjectively a person might find participation in a EF or traditional Latin Mass (and even more so an Easter Rite Divine Liturgy) a highly rewarding, enlightening, educational experience which greatly enhances one’s appreciation for the solemnity and ultimate importance of what is happening on the altar. Objectively however, the sacrifice is the sacrifice and that does not change.
M
maryj
Guest
Jesus is said to be “a Priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech”. Why is he a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech? Because Melchisedech offer to God a sacrifice of bread and wine; just as our Lord is offered to God as sacrifice under the appearances of bread and wine. Through transubstantiation, what appears to be bread is no longer bread. Thus, what is offered to God is not “the fruit of the vine and work of human hands”, but Jesus Christ in the flesh.
I’m not quite sure how to state this so bear with me…
I’ve contemplated this for a long while now, We as Gods people bring up, as an offering, to the altar the bread and wine and our donations for the poor and the church. It has occurred to me that we offer up to God everything we do in our daily lives that God has provided for us. The fruit that humans have cultivated and turned into wine, the wheat that is planted and harvested and ground into flour to make the bread, the money that we make to support our families and mankind, thus thanking God for all the benefits He bestows in our lives by providing us as humans all that is needed to sustain our lives here on earth. It is only through Him that all these things are accomplished. God accepts all of these things that give glory to Him and “Makes” them Jesus Christ. For it is only Jesus that is a pure sacrifice. So what He bestows upon us is Christ himself, that which sustains us in life. So the fruit of the vine and the work of human hands is Christ himself. Am I even close here?
I’m not quite sure how to state this so bear with me…
I’ve contemplated this for a long while now, We as Gods people bring up, as an offering, to the altar the bread and wine and our donations for the poor and the church. It has occurred to me that we offer up to God everything we do in our daily lives that God has provided for us. The fruit that humans have cultivated and turned into wine, the wheat that is planted and harvested and ground into flour to make the bread, the money that we make to support our families and mankind, thus thanking God for all the benefits He bestows in our lives by providing us as humans all that is needed to sustain our lives here on earth. It is only through Him that all these things are accomplished. God accepts all of these things that give glory to Him and “Makes” them Jesus Christ. For it is only Jesus that is a pure sacrifice. So what He bestows upon us is Christ himself, that which sustains us in life. So the fruit of the vine and the work of human hands is Christ himself. Am I even close here?
Y
Yours_Truly
Guest
I can understand why you would think that since “lex orandi, lex credendi”. In other words, the new Mass could well imply this, but it is upside down.
What is offered to God is the sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary. It is the Sacrifice that satisfied the justice of God for our sins. That is what the Mass is, and it doesn’t matter if there are any faithful present for it. If the Priest is offering the Mass by himself, it is no less efficacious.
It is true that we can offer up our sacrifices etc. along with this sacrifice of Jesus at Mass, but this is not the Mass. This is just us offering up our little bit at the Mass.
To make the point sink in, keep in mind that a Mass offered by a Priest all by himself is no less efficacious as one offered with a congregation. What is pleasing to God about the Mass is not any “work of human hands”, but the sacrifice of His son for our sins.
If we have made any sacrifices during the week we can certainly offer them to God at Mass, but these are not the Mass.
Here’s the teaching again from the Catechism
The Mass is not about our offerings. It is the Sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary transcending time and space and being made present on the altar.
When thinking about our contribution at Mass, think about what John the apostle, or Mary Magdelen contributed at Calvary. It is the same thing.
Was the sacrifice at Calvary the good works that they had done? No, it was the Sacrifice of Jesus in attonement for the bad works they have done; and that is what the Mass is.
If you have done any good works, or made any sacrifices, you can certainly offer them up to God at the Mass, but any such offering on our part is not the Mass.
To understand the Mass correctly, all you have to realize is that it is the same as Calvary. It is called *The Sacrifice of the Mass *because it is the Sacrifice of Jesus for the sins of man - and that is why it has such an infinite worth.
V
Verbum_Caro
Guest
*hamburglar, ***(and folks),
Here is a related recent thread: Why is the Eucharist called a bloodless sacrifice?
One of the important points, I think, is that while the Church is very clear that the Mass is a sacrifice, and also that it is a sacrifice substantially identical with the sacrifice on Calvary (though, not necessarily the crucifixion), what the Church has not said is how exactly the Mass is a sacrifice.
There have been various theories, and it seems to be still something to which the theologians of the Church return to again and again as it is an inexhaustible mystery.
VC
Here is a related recent thread: Why is the Eucharist called a bloodless sacrifice?
One of the important points, I think, is that while the Church is very clear that the Mass is a sacrifice, and also that it is a sacrifice substantially identical with the sacrifice on Calvary (though, not necessarily the crucifixion), what the Church has not said is how exactly the Mass is a sacrifice.
There have been various theories, and it seems to be still something to which the theologians of the Church return to again and again as it is an inexhaustible mystery.
VC
V
Verbum_Caro
Guest
In reference to my point in the above post, namely that the Church has not defined precisely how (metaphysically) the Mass is a sacrifice, I’m going to (gulp!) take issue with something our own **Deacon Ed **posted above.
Any thoughts? I bring this up only because I think there is room for clarification here. I recognize, too, your knowledge, training, and experience, and hope I’m not coming across indecorously.
Thank you Deacon!
VC
Deacon Ed, as far as I am aware the Church has never said that we are present at Christ’s crucifixion. I would be indebted to you, though, if you could show me that, because it would clear up a good deal many questions. There are times when saints and theologians mention being present at the crucifixion but always it seems with the clarification “as it were” or “in a manner of speaking”. These seem to be devotional ways of speaking and not putting forth a theological or metaphysical thesis about the nature of the sacrifice.
Here’s where I see a possible problem. To say that we stand, metaphysically, at the foot of the cross (i.e. at the crucifixion) but to also say that Christ’s blood is not being shed, seems a contradiction.
Again, this seems to be one opinion of why the Mass is a sacrifice, but I don’t think it is the teaching of the Church, necessarily.
Any thoughts? I bring this up only because I think there is room for clarification here. I recognize, too, your knowledge, training, and experience, and hope I’m not coming across indecorously.
Thank you Deacon!
VC
M
maryj
Guest
I didn’t make myself clear, I’m not talking about good works. But what then is the offering for if not part of the sacrifice?
V
vtor
Guest
Jesus’ sacrifice on Calvary is his everlasting celebration of the Passover. The last supper and Calvary are his Seder, a teaching and educational device. He and what he did transcends time as does his new and everlasting covenant. But we born as children need teaching over and over with each generation. If you believe in the presence of Jesus, that he can be with more than one group of us at a time and that he was with your great grand parents and is with you now, then you have to believe that he also still hangs on the cross. As far as the mass goes he told us to “do this” how many times? All that he taught us he wants us to try to do but what he commanded us to do de demands us to do. Time is ours; how we obey his command must transcend time. So join him at the last supper and celebrate with him as God told Moses to celebrate the first covenant. Believe that his Body and Blood are present at the Mass. Do you really think he wanted it to be complicated? If your explanation cannot be understood by the simple minded than yours is far from his.
V
Verbum_Caro
Guest
I’m not sure that this follows necessarily. Another possibility is that because Christ now lives, and lived then, he was present to my grandparents and is present to me now. After all, it seems that, in his humanity, he really is in heaven and not on the cross.
I’m not sure we would have to say that he still hangs on the cross – other than in the sense that all things are visible to God. But this applies to *all *things, not just Christ on the Cross.
VC
P
Paul_Folbrecht
Guest
You are definitely typical.
I had an experience a couple years ago. After some time of being very into my faith and reading a lot about the theology of the Mass, by Scott Hahn and others, I realized, suddenly, at Mass one day, that I didn’t know exactly when the transubstantiation took place. Surely it was within the Eucharistic Prayers - but I knew, from certain readings, that previously it was very obvious to all participants exactly when the miracle took place. But, it was obviously not obvious anymore - not even to somebody who knew their faith and the Mass far better than the average participant.
I ended up being quite perplexed by this.
Then, last April, for the first time my wife & I attended a Latin Mass. In the missal, the words This is My Body are bolded and given their own line: it is obvious to anyone using the missal that this is when something very special occurs. That, and the bells (which never seem to be used at a NO anymore, not even at the chapel where Scott Hahn attended his first Masses, where I’ve also attended daily Mass dozens or hundreds of times), and the extremely long, reverent periods of holding the Host aloft, then genuflecting before It - these things make it obvious to anyone paying attention exactly when the transformation takes place (& the same with the Blood).
There there is the fact that there are far more sacrificial references in the prayers (partly because there are simply more prayers) than the Novus Ordo.
That statement is an exaggeration, but, on the other hand, it is entirely true that the architects of the new Mass sought to downplay the Sacrificial nature, *and they stated this plainly themselves. * These things have been gone over many times in this forum.
When you have the architects of the new Mass stating that they wished to make it more palatable to Protestants, and we had Protestantism starting out with Luther condemning the Mass in the strongest terms precisely because it is the making-present of Calvary (which he, in his naivety and arrogance saw as crucifying Christ again) - well, can we add two and two now?
Now, it is important to state that I firmly believe the Novus Ordo Mass to be a valid Mass - a valid making-present of the timeless Sacrifice - and I attend one typically 2-3 times/week.
It’s just that it’s true nature has been made less obvious, even when said as it was meant to be said, and especially when not - and the latter is closer to the norm.
P
Paul_Folbrecht
Guest
The sacrificial nature of the Mass is not as readily apparent in the Novus Ordo Mass as the Tridentine - even the designers of the new Mass admitted this.
I wonder how many people making such statements have ever one time attended a Tridentine Mass and prayed along completely in a standard missal. Because, for someone to have done so and still make such a statement would be amazing to me.
- Status