Posted on 02/08/2015 12:34:39 PM PST by RnMomof7
Few Catholics think about this question. The reason is that most Catholics are not aware that the Church teaches that the Mass is an actual sacrifice. They know that the rite is called the Sacrifice of the Mass, that it is performed by a priest, that the congregation assembles before an altar, and that the consecrated bread wafers are called hosts. Nevertheless, most Catholics do not seem to realize that the Church teaches that the Mass is a real and true sacrifice, that a prime function of the Catholic priesthood is to offer sacrifice, that an altar is a place of sacrifice, and that the word host is from the Latin word hostia, meaning sacrificial victim.
When I told Anthony, a Catholic catechism teacher, that he was going to a sacrifice for sins each week, he denied it. Anthony’s sister, Teresa, had been born again several years earlier and had left the Catholic Church. She had been sharing the gospel with Anthony, and he too now was claiming to be trusting Christ alone for his salvation. He remained, however, loyal to the Catholic Church and its practices.
"Anthony, you can’t say you are trusting in Christ’s finished work on the cross and keep going to a weekly sacrifice for your sins," I told him.
"But it’s not a sacrifice," Anthony insisted.
"Look at the Eucharistic prayer," I said, handing him an open copy of the Vatican II Sunday Missal, the book containing the words recited by the priest during the Mass. "What does the priest pray after consecrating the bread and wine?"
"‘We offer to you, God of glory and majesty,’" Anthony read, "‘this holy and perfect sacrifice the bread of life and the cup of eternal salvation.’"i He then added, "I don’t remember the priest ever saying that."
"Read on," I asked.
"‘Look with favor on these offerings and accept them as once you accepted the gifts of your servant Abel, the sacrifice of Abraham, our Father in faith, and the bread and wine offered by your priest Melchizedek. Almighty God, we pray that your angel may take this sacrifice to your altar in heaven. Then, as we receive from this altar the sacred body and blood of your Son, let us be filled with every grace and blessing.’" Anthony studied the prayer for a few moments in silence, and then added, "Well, I never heard this at the Mass."
"I’m not making this up, Anthony," I told him. "Next Sunday sit near the front of the church and listen carefully to the words of the priest. You’ll see for yourself. According to your Church, in some mystical way the cross transcends time and is made present by the liturgy of the Eucharist. I know this doesn’t make a lot of sense, but Catholicism teaches that the Mass is one and the same as the sacrifice of Calvary."
The next time I saw Anthony he admitted that he had been wrong. Despite almost forty years in the Catholic Church and experience as a catechism teacher, he didn’t know that the Mass was supposedly the actual sacrifice of Christ. Neither did he realize that he was not only attending Christ’s sacrifice, but he was participating in it.
It is indeed the priest alone, who, acting in the person of Christ, consecrates the bread and wine, but the role of the faithful in the Eucharist is to recall the passion, resurrection and glorification of the Lord, to give thanks to God, and to offer the immaculate victim not only through the hands of the priest, but also together with him; and finally, by receiving the Body of the Lord, to perfect that communion with God and among themselves which should be the product of participation in the sacrifice of the Mass. —Second Vatican Council (emphasis added)ii
One must ask: What kind of worship is this? The cross was a horrific event. It was the enemies of the Lord Jesus, not His disciples, who crucified Him. Why would anyone calling himself a Christian want to participate in the continuation of the cross?
Furthermore, as the Lord died on the cross, He cried out, "It is finished!" (John 19:30). Why then does the Church want to continue His sacrifice? He died "once for all" (Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 9:26, 9:28, 10:10). How then can the Church say that each offering of the Sacrifice of the Mass appeases the wrath of God? The Lord "entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption" (Hebrews 9:12). Why then does the Church seek to continually re-present Christ in His victimhood to the Father? The Lord is not in a state of victimhood. He is the risen, glorified, crowned King of Glory.
Rome’s theologians, you can be sure, have responses to each of these questions. But don’t expect any simple or straightforward answers. While writing The Gospel According to Rome, I asked Michael, a scholarly colleague with advanced theological degrees, to critique the section of the manuscript that reviewed the Church’s rebuttal to criticism of the Mass. About to complete a doctorate in biblical Hebrew at a leading university, I was confident that, if anyone could make sense of them, it was Michael. I was expecting him to carefully analyze each response, delving into the finer points of theology. To my amazement, he simply wrote in the margin, "WHAT A BUNCH OF HOOEY!"
Michael was right. Rome’s explanation of the glaring contradictions of the Mass amount to nothing more than mystical mumbo-jumbo and high sounding nonsense.
Even more distressing is the way the Church distorts the Scriptures in an attempt to provide a biblical basis for the Mass. Take, for example, the following reference to the Mass in Pope John Paul II’s recent best-seller, Crossing the Threshold of Hope:
. . . the Church is the instrument of man’s salvation. It both contains and continually draws upon the mystery of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice. Through the shedding of His own blood, Jesus Christ constantly "enters into God’s sanctuary thus obtaining eternal redemption" (cf. Hebrews 9:12). —Pope John Paul IIiii
Here the Pope actually changes the Scriptures. Though he modifies the wording of Hebrews 9:12, he puts his new version in quotation marks and retains the reference, suggesting that it compares well to the original. Three alterations, however, have so distorted the meaning of the verse that the Pope’s new version teaches the very opposite of what the original did. Before examining how the verse has been changed and why the Pope would want to modify it, consider first the original meaning of the verse and its context.
At Mount Sinai God showed Moses a tabernacle in heaven, and instructed him to build a similar tabernacle on earth, carefully following its pattern (Exodus 25:9, 40; Acts 7:44; Hebrews 8:5). It was to be a rectangular tent with a single entryway and no windows. Inside a curtain was to divide the structure into a large outer room and a smaller inner room.
The earthly tabernacle was to serve as the focal point of Israel’s worship (Exodus 25:8; 29:42). Each day Jewish priests were to enter its outer room and perform various duties (Exodus 30:7-8; Leviticus 4:18, 24:1-9). Once a year on the Day of Atonement the Jewish high priest was to enter the inner room, presenting the blood of sin offerings to make atonement for himself and for the nation (Leviticus 16:1-34). In front of the tabernacle, God told Moses to construct a bronze altar upon which the priests were to continually offer animal sacrifices (Numbers 28-29).
Hebrews 9 reviews many of these details. There the emphasis is placed on the frequency with which the Jewish priests were to enter the tabernacle to perform their duties:
Now when these things have been thus prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle, performing the divine worship, but into the second only the high priest enters, once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. —Hebrews 9:6-7 (emphasis added)
The verses that follow contrast the continual and yearly ministry of the Jewish priests in the earthly tabernacle with the once for all ministry of the Lord Jesus in the heavenly tabernacle.
But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. —Hebrews 9:11-12 (emphasis added)
These verses speak of an event following the crucifixion when the Lord Jesus entered into the presence of God in the heavenly tabernacle. There He presented His shed blood on our behalf (Hebrews 9:24-25). Unlike the Jewish priests, however, who "are continually entering" (Hebrews 9:6) and the high priest who "enters once a year" (Hebrews 9:7), the Lord Jesus, our High Priest, entered the holy place of the heavenly tabernacle "once for all, having obtained eternal redemption" (Hebrews 9:12). Only one presentation of His blood was necessary for God accepted it as the perfect and complete satisfaction for our sins.
Now consider how Pope John Paul II has altered the meaning of Hebrews 9:12. He writes that "...Jesus Christ constantly ‘enters into God’s sanctuary thus obtaining eternal redemption’ (cf. Hebrews 9:12)."iv Three changes are apparent.
The original text of Hebrews 9:12 says that Christ "entered" God’s sanctuary. The Greek verb is in the indicative mood and the aorist tense. This portrays Christ’s entrance into the heavenly sanctuary as an event in past time, freezing the action as if taking a snapshot of it. The Pope changes the verb to the present tense, writing that Christ "enters into God’s sanctuary." This makes Christ’s entrance an event that is now occurring, viewing the action as something that is in progress.
Further distorting the meaning of the verse, the Pope introduces it with the word constantly, writing that "…Jesus Christ constantly ‘enters into God’s sanctuary’ (cf. Hebrews 9:12)."v The verse, however, says that Christ "entered the holy place once for all" (Hebrews 9:11). In Hebrews 9 it is the Jewish priests who are constantly entering into the tabernacle. This is contrasted with the Lord Jesus who entered only once.
Finally, John Paul changes the ending of the verse to teach that by constantly entering the heavenly sanctuary Jesus Christ is "‘thus obtaining eternal redemption’ (cf. Hebrews 9:12)."vi The Bible says that Christ entered the holy place once for all, "having obtained eternal redemption." The work of redemption is finished, not ongoing.
Now why would the Pope want to change the Scriptures? Why would he want his readers to think that the Bible teaches that Christ "constantly ‘enters into God’s sanctuary thus obtaining eternal redemption’" instead of what it actually teaches, that Christ "entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption"? Why? Because Rome holds that Christ must be constantly re-presented in His victimhood to God through the Mass for our salvation. With each offering of the Mass, some 120 million times a year, the Church says that "the work of our redemption is continually carried out."vii The Pope, not finding Hebrews 9:12 to his liking, simply changed it. This was not a slip of the pen, but a calculated alteration of God’s Word to make the Sacrifice of the Mass appear biblical.
Adapted from Conversations with Catholics by James G. McCarthy (Harvest House Publishers: Eugene, 1997)
Notes:
i. Liturgy of the Eucharist, First Eucharistic Prayer, The Memorial Prayer.
ii. Second Vatican Council, "Sacred Liturgy," Second Instruction on the Proper Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, no. 12.
iii. Pope John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope (New York: Knopf, 1995), p. 139.
iv. Ibid.
v. Ibid.
vi. Ibid.
vii. Second Vatican Council, "Life of Priests," no. 13. See also the Code of Canon Law, canon 904.
You are on your own, and truly own it now.
He told us to eat and drink (share life-sustainment" in remembrance of Him and His sacrifice. His sacrifice was intended so no others needed to be rendered - obviously it just wasn't good enough..........
Paul never said to do what? Search the scripture? Or consider someone accursed for teaching a different gospel?
The old adage about wrestling with pigs does come to mind.
Typical liberal reaction, starting a fight you can't hope to win and then leave the conservatives to bail you out
I notice that none of your cohorts came out of the woodwork to express objection the multiple times which you have used that, since.
And none of yours called you on it for using it the first time.
And Catholics are the non-christians /SARC
What's holding them back?
Ask them yourself, perhaps they feel it is warranted for the people I have used it on.
Two sets of rules?Thank you for agreeing with me.
Meanwhile, previous to your own reaction to CB's mention of voodoo, he was "bringing something to the discussion" regardless of whether or not yourself, or anyone else (including myself) entirely agreed with him, or not.
Which would serve to show that CB had been operating under the conditional requirements of the "or else shut up", leaving your own usage of the "or else" to be superfluous.
Agree to disagree.
Also, at that point the apostles would not have been asked to break God’s law.
Do you REALLY stand by this statement of yours? If so, then what do you do with Matthew 23:9, "And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in Heaven."
Or do you only stand on your statement with one foot for one religious practices of works, but not the other? Which one does Jesus REALLY want us to know, or was He just kidding in one case but not the other? On one hand you use it to give yourself reason to practice one thing, but on the other hand, you totally reject it. And interestingly, you need the latter to make sure the former is correct.
I really am interested in how you reconcile your statement so I can understand your line of reasoning.
That would funny (for being so backwards) if it were not so pathetic.
You really don't realize that you have been shooting holes in the tops of your own shoes?
And you are whistling past the graveyard.
Do you have a plan?
Malice aforethought?
Look what you said to the guy here;
while also generally (and often) whining about there being two sets of rules?
Do you ride a short bus when you go to school? Or perhaps better -- can you not hear yourself talk?
Previously, you had said;
Think about what that means.
If such a thing justifies yourself, on this thread, then I should get some sort of award, or even a medal.
Oh no Arthur.
Revelation 5:5 Then one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep! See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals." 6 Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, standing at the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders.
John tells us in the first chapter of Revelation.
Revelation 17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18 I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.
Take Him down off that cross Arthur. Stop with the sacrifices already. Celebrate the one who conquered death and hell who now reigns on high. The Lion of Judah who "has triumphed. The King of Kings! Jesus told John to "“Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. John saw no "re-offering" or constant submission of Christ's body and blood. That had already been done and at that time Jesus "was alive for ever and ever"!
We aren't told to offer a sacrifice of blood. We are told to offer the sacrifice of praise.
Hebrews 13:15 Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise--the fruit of lips that openly profess his name.
No need to sacrifice daily.
Hebrews 7:27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.
Catholic priests are the weak ones.
Hebrews 7:28 For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.
Join us who celebrate a risen conquering King and have our High Priest who sits "at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,"
Hebrews 8:1 Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven,
Catholics need to leave those weak priests who offer blood sacrifices daily. Stop with those daily sacrifices and give the sacrifice of praise. No more blood sacrifices but living sacrifices which are pleasing to God.
Romans 12:1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this is your true and proper worship.
I have no idea what you are whining about, feel free to have the last word which I will feel free to ignore.
Show me (except that you can’t).
If the apostles didn't teach it.
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Even what the apostles taught should be checked with scripture. How much more the Catholic Church?
Also in John 6 He said that the flesh profits nothing and the Spirit gives life and the words He spoke were spirit and life. And Paul clarifies that quite nicely in Galatians. (Pay attention this time I am getting tired of having to repeat myself.)
Gal 5:16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary the one to the other; that ye may not do the things that ye would.
Gal 5:18 But if ye are led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, parties, Gal 5:21 envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like; of which I forewarn you, even as I did forewarn you, that they who practise such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Gal 5:23 meekness, self-control; against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof.
I hate to see prots repeating the same mistake over and over again, I hope that this clarifies things for you all so you don't have to bear false witness.
Asking this question again because you failed to answer it on another thread. Please show me in the Bible where it states that the Eucharist becomes the soul and divinity of Jesus.
idolatry - calling a cracker Christ and worshipping the image. Making statues of so called saints and Mary and bowing down to them.
Sorcery = Transubstantiation.
Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
Necromancy - the practice of talking to the spirits of dead people.
Deuteronomy 18:10 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.
1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner."188
Deuteronomy 12:16 Only you shall not eat the blood ; you shall pour it out on the earth like water.
When Christ died, His blood was poured out as required by the law.
Hebrews 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
Since without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins, a bloodless sacrifice is a useless one. It is an incomplete one and cannot atone for sin.
Jesus commanded His disciples to drink the cup. Catholics claim that doing so is partaking of the literal body and blood of Himself. However, if the mass is an unbloody sacrifice, where does the blood for the cup come from?
Which body of Christ is the priest sacrificing in the mass?
The old one that walked this earth?
Or the new resurrected and glorified one?
"They [Catholics] say it’s a propitiatory sacrifice, but the Bible says without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. So not only is it unnecessary to sacrifice Christ again and again, but an unbloody sacrifice is worthless to make atonement for sin. An unbloody sacrifice is no sacrifice at all!" (By .45 Long Colt)
I did answer, perhaps you didn’t like the answer, but I did answer it. Please pay attention, The Bible is not now nor has it ever been the be all end all of revelation. That being said When Jesus says, this is My Body and Jesus is Divine, It must logically include both His Soul and Divinity.
Well...they've never taken him off the cross! They use the crucifix, keeping Jesus perpetually on the cross rather than celebrating His resurrection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.