THE BLASPHEMY OF THE MASS

Ex Catholics for Christ ^ | Circa 2014 | unknown

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

"Author: Unknown"

I'm not surprised that the author didn't attach his name to this steaming load.

[kinsman redeemer]

I'm guessing that the author is:

(...wait for it...)

James Battell, ETC Ministries

.

I'm basing my assertion on other details from the website and the "JGB" initials at the end of the article.

They say:
We are a father and son UK ministry reaching out to Roman Catholics and others the world over, with the true and everlasting Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

(Hat tip to Al Gore for inventing the internet-thingy.)

[rwa265]

First, #91 is not from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Second, it doesn’t say anything about those who are not under the auspices of the Catholic Church in physical form.

[Iscool]

Mass is a re-presentation of the Last Supper.

Not according to your religion...

The Catechism of the Council of Trent states the reality of the Mass being the same sacrifice as that of Calvary. It is only the form that is different, where one is a bloody sacrifice, the other is done in an unbloody way, but the sacrifice is still completely the same

Your religion says your Mass is a re-presentation of the Crucifixion, NOT the Last Supper...

[kinsman redeemer]

Your religion says your Mass is a re-presentation of the Crucifixion, NOT the Last Supper...

You are RIGHT, sir (or madam.)

[Iscool]

This really is the silliest collection of provably false, straw-ridden garbage that I’ve seen in a while... and given some of the straw men posted by anti-Catholics on this forum alone, that’s saying quite a lot.

And yet you don't prove anything...

[jobim]

I am a student of logic in discourse, so I do appreciate it. My purpose is rhetorical, hoping to get an answer why one denomination only is attacked by this poster, and why others defend this. Can you tell me why?

[jobim]

to pray that they will seek the truth of the scriptures ...and come to Christ..

Excellent point. Can you help me to understand why you choose only to disabuse Catholics of their errors, and no other denomination?

[ealgeone]

What I find puzzling is that many Catholics concede that Protestant Christians CAN be saved and are genuine Christians, while being without that core teaching of the absolute necessity of receiving the Eucharist for salvation.

Cornelius and the Samaritans would disagree with your position.

The Bible makes it clear that faith in Christ is what saves....not baptism, not the Lord's Supper or any other "work".

[ealgeone]

Any chance you could give up anti-Catholic rants, and take up golfing, or something? Forgive me, but you’re really not very good at this, even by Protestant standards.

We've seen your standards and let's just hope you're not an attorney.

[elcid1970]

I don’t live my Catholic faith based upon how much I hate other denominations (which I don’t). But the back & forth on this topic typically degenerates into several kinds of Christians telling each other why they’re going to Hell when they die.

Or maybe it’s an old ethnic WASP thing from the days when “real Americans” watched in horror as hordes of mackerel-snappers poured in from Ireland, Poland, & Italy. Catholic immigrants with Anglo-Saxon names were the worst; they looked & sounded like normal people even as they brought their Pope- and Mary-worshipping ways into the land of sola scriptura.

And all the snarky comebacks do absolutely nothing to advance dialogue.

[kinsman redeemer]

On "pronouncements" again.

When I was a young man, we passed the cup during the LITURGY of the EUCHARIST (specifically, the Communion Rite).

Then along came Louis Pasteur's discovery of germs. Eventually the Catholic Church commanded that, in spite of the fact that Christ Himself passed the cup, we could no longer drink from the cup (glass or otherwise.)

The wafer could be distributed as before (but not fumbled). Even though they were practicing only HALF of what they read, they were stopping the plague - so, it's all good.

Was the priest afraid of spreading germs and risking a low turnout at BINGO night?

Did the priest say, "I know it is His actual blood, but now it could be infected? I better wash it out good (with Holy Water) at the end of the Mass." Did he ever ask, "Can Christ's actual blood be the vector for a communicable a disease? I'd better ask the Bishop on his next visit."

[kinsman redeemer]

Can you help me to understand why you choose only to disabuse Catholics of their errors, and no other denomination?

I'm not answering for anyone else here but I haven't seen very many posts from Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, or even Secular Humanists telling me that their's is the only way to heaven.

If I DID see such a post, I would respond.

I haven't seen a Hindu Caucus, either.

[Springfield Reformer]

Where does this guy come up with this nonsense?

“However, communion is only for those of us that have already been saved from all of our past, present, and future sins; and as such we do so in gratitude for and remembrance of the terrible price that Christ paid for us in dying for our sins to save us from the wrath of God, not in order to ‘be saved’ or to ‘stay saved.’”

This simpleton concept would have us believe that declaring our belief in the risen Christ, then excuses all future behavior.

The place that "simpleton concept" comes from is Scripture, albeit distilled and paraphrased.  But not entirely, because you have added something to it which comes from neither Scripture nor evangelical belief, namely, the idea implied in your quip "excuses all future behavior," which I take to mean easy believism, the charge often raised against evangelicals when we claim that the death of Christ is both sufficient to cover all our sin and that it does in fact cover all our sin when we believe.

But this charge is not new.  From the earliest days of the preaching of God's grace, there has been a twisted response in the minds of some, who think that such all-encompassing grace might be an excuse to sin.  See here how even the apostle Paul had to set folks straight about this misconception:

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
(Romans 6:1-4)

And a misconception it is, if you think this is widely believed among Protestants/evangelicals.  Among evangelicals you will find different degrees of knowledge, true, and there are also going to be people who just want to sin, and they will take any excuse to do so.  But the typical conservative evangelical would be horrified to contemplate taking advantage of what Christ has done for them as an occasion for sin.  Just the opposite.  For us it is an occasion of love, of gratitude, of a desire to grow in that grace and become more like Christ in our thoughts and deeds and innermost being.  Like Paul says, what you suggest raises up in us a mighty "God forbid!"  It is a straw man argument. It does not represent what we believe.  If you wish to address yourself to real beliefs as opposed to imaginary ones, this is a good one to let go of. It's not who we are.  

Christ makes very clear that your “belief” is exemplified in how you live.
Having sinned again YOU must express remorse, resolve to do better, and ask for forgiveness.
Christ’s salvation for us was the opening of the door.
It is up to YOU to choose whether to walk through that door.

Exemplified, yes.  As James says, we show our faith by our works.  We agree on that.  And the life of the Christian is one of constant turning from the impulses of sin.  The prolem for most Protestants/evangelicals is that we really have a different view, I think, of the pervasiveness of the sin problem.  Having read so many of these posts over so long a time, I have come to the impression that Catholics and many others view sin as something relatively easy to avoid, as though only certain overt acts were the issue, and if those could be avoided, all would be well.  

But for the person who believes that sin is bound up in the very fabric of our nature, that we are sinners by nature throughout, 24/7, and like Paul says, not even inclined by nature to seek God, or as Jesus says, are guilty of adultery for merely thinking about it, or guilty of murder for unjustified anger, and that we have awareness that this is who we really are, just as Scripture says, the idea of occasional repentance from occasional sin is an impossibility to us.  It would never end, never be enough. Sin is potentially in our every thought, sometimes in ways we don't even recognize, as David says, our "secret sin." Even in our final moments, we might sin with some careless flight of the mind into unholy territory.

So if we have a 24/7 sin problem, we need a 24/7 solution.  Nothing less will do.

Which is how we get to the need of a miracle of new birth.  Not the sprinkling of water on the flesh, but the true washing of our heart, the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit to guide our thoughts in the right paths, in every moment, holding a virtually continuous conversation with our Lord that addresses our sins as they happen, in full openness of confession toward Him, and toward those we may have offended as well.  

But above all, we have our new life in Christ, because of the exchange of life principle. His life for our life.  Our life for His life. That's what a sacrifice is.  Judicially speaking, in confessing Christ as our Savior, we are identified with Him, and He with us. We become as innocent as if we were Him, and He became as guilty on the cross as if He was us. Exchange of life. Miracle.

That's why in John 6 we see that belief in Him results in us actually, really having, present tense, eternal life.  It is a possession of His life, the life we have consumed by faith. It is not a mere hypothetical possibility.  It changes us dramatically.  It is a miracle, and all of grace.  We don't earn any of it. If we did, as Paul says, it wouldn't be grace anymore.  

But if grace is only a game to someone, they might think it is an excuse to sin.  Like I said.  This is not a new problem, or a Protestant/evangelical problem.  This is the very old problem of how the carnal mind can't grasp what grace really is, and this is why Paul, from out the gate, has to address it by reminding people of who they are.  Not candidates for salvation on probation.  But those who are dead to sin, and walking with Christ in newness of life, if so be that we have the Spirit of Christ:

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
(Romans 8:9)

Peace,

SR

[fwdude]

I agree with you. I was just challenging Catholics on their clear official position on Protestants.

[Mark17]

Good work mom.

[Old Yeller]

The non-Catholics that will make it to heaven are the ones that have never been exposed to the Catholic Church, and through no fault of their own are not Catholic, but still live their lives according to the beatitudes. This does not include the scores of fallen away Catholics (worst kind of “protestant”), and other non-Catholics who have been exposed to the One, Truth Faith, and mock it, belittle it and deny the Eucharist. For them God has a special place reserved. I don’t think I need to describe that special place.

Oh man. You are so deceived.

[CynicalBear]

Good article, thanks for posting RnMomof7! Keep up the good work!

[Old Yeller]

Please give it a rest. Thank-you.

And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
John 8:23

Keep up the good work Rnmomof7

[knarf]

The word "eucharist" came around the middle of the 1300's and it is a ceremony, not an object

To worship the eucharist is to worship the ceremony and I'm pretty sure we're to worshop God and not the means by which we fellowship