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.
Now please answer my question: Do you know understand exactly what Jesus meant when He was speaking of the difference between Spirit and Flesh? I am not asking you to agree with it, I am asking if you understand it.
I'm thinking Satan loves for people to see Jesus still on that cross.
I must have missed that post. And stop “scolding” me by saying things like “Please pay attention”. I’m not subservient to you and I don’t take kindly to your attitude.
Sorry; that's not what the verse says.
Just what does it say to you then?
Agreed
Hey, Biblical Christian:
1) 1 Corinthians 11:2: “. . . keep the ordinances, as I delivered {them} to you.”
Do you keep these ordinances, delivered orally?
2) 2 Thessalonians 2:15: “. . . hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”
Do you keep ALL of these traditions, including the ones taught by word of mouth?
3) 2 Thessalonians 3:6: “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.”
Paul refers to a tradition given by him, which we must keep. Do you know what it is?
4) 1 Thessalonians 2:13: “. . . when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received {it} not {as} the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”
The word of God is something that Paul delivered orally.
5) Jude 3: “. . . ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”
How can you contend for a faith entrusted to the apostles, if Jesus left no written words?
6) Rom 6:17 But God be thanked that [though] you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.
But you would ignore this doctrine, because it isn’t written. Too bad for you.
7) 1 Cor 11:23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you
Ditto.
8) Gal 1:9ff But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
Anyone who preaches something differing from the oral apostolic preaching is accursed.
9) 2 Pet 2:21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known [it,] to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.
But never delivered to you, since you don’t receive oral teachings. Not from apostles, anyway.
10) Romans 10:15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent?
You believe preachers without authority, who were never sent.
11) 2 John 1:12 Having many things to write to you, I did not wish [to do so] with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face, that our joy may be full.
John prefers oral teaching to written.
12) Matthew 17:5 While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!”
Hear him.
13) Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.
He said hears, not “reads”. And only those sent by him, not just anybody.
14) Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures.
The apostles, not all of the baptized.
15) Matthew 13:11 And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given
Ditto.
16) Luke 8:10 he said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables, so that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.
Ditto.
17) 1 Timothy 3: 14-15 I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that, if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
The Church is the pillar and the bulwark. Not the bible.
It says what it says: that some of the faithful looked into Scripture as a check, to satisfy themselves. It does not instruct us to do the same.
Of course, what they were verifying was an oral teaching.
So you would have ignored that anyway.
Right?
Beats the heck out of empty crosses for empty religions.
Then don't ask questions in a condescending manner, suggesting that I did not answer. Respect works both ways.
But the cross IS empty. Jesus was taken off the cross, buried and then he rose from the dead! He then was resurrected into Heaven where he sits at the right hand of God. He is NOT on the cross anymore.
1 Corinthians 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
I will stick with the Bible.
Enlighten me.
What secret knowledge does “Rome” have?
What secret knowledge does “Rome” have?
You keep asking stupid questions like that. As if you personally talk to Paul or something. Now, if you are referencing the fairy tales that the Catholic Church says are "oral tradition" you need to prove that what the Catholic Church teaches as "oral tradition" is exactly what Paul was referencing. Surely you don't think all people are so stupid as to think word of mouth over 2000 years is reliable do you?
>>Anyone who preaches something differing from the oral apostolic preaching is accursed.<<
Like I said, prove that what you consider "oral teaching" is exactly what Paul was calling "oral teaching". Let's not be dim witted here. Old Joe Smith had "oral teaching" also. So did that Muhammad guy. Wouldn't it be sort of dim witted to just take someone's word? After all, we are warned about false prophets right?
>>You believe preachers without authority, who were never sent.<<
I do what now? Didn't I just show you that we are to check what anyone teaches with scripture to see if it's true? Have you not been paying attention? Surely you don't think those popes and priests have authority just because they say so do you? You just take their word for it like the Muslims and Mormons take the word of their "authorities"?
>>Hear him.<<
When you have him over to your house give me a shout will ya? I'd appreciate an invite sure as ever.
>>He said hears, not “reads”. And only those sent by him, not just anybody.<<
Well if you think that pope Francis of yours was sent by him good luck with that.
>>The apostles, not all of the baptized.<<
Who told you that lie?
Acts 15:8 God knows people's hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, for he cleansed their hearts through faith.
Was it the same people who told you the lie that only some "magicsterium could understand? Didn't you just say listen to John?
1 John 2:27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit--just as it has taught you, remain in him.
>>Matthew 13:11 And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given<<
Jesus continued and explained who the "them" were.
Matthew 13:14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.
Are you saying you are "them"? Ever hearing but never understanding"? Are you "them" whose "heart has become calloused"? I'm not.
>>The Church is the pillar and the bulwark. Not the bible.<<
He said the "ekkleisi" not the "church". The "ekklesia" are those called out of the world to be His. Are you not "called out to be His"? The "ekklesia" of Christ are all of those who have been called out to be sons of God. I would suggest you examine your beliefs to determine if you are part of some "church" or whether you are truly "called out by God". Those of us who are know that we are part of that "ekklesia" and are thus the "pillar and foundation" of truth have the guarantee of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
So you “preach Christ crucified”. I guess then you don’t preach RISEN? That happened after he was crucified and it shows that we will be risen one day and sit in Heaven with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit rather than be on the cross for eternity.
Okay just we are clear, are you saying the Bible is wrong or that Paul is a liar, because your reply does not make that clear.
You also might be reminded that we are not to create icons/idols as evidenced by:
Exodus 20:4 - Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. or
Isaiah 42:8 - I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
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.