# The Romish Mass - re-sacrifice or re-presentment?



## Mathetes (Feb 23, 2007)

warning: this is kinda long

The short story to this is that I've encountered Roman Catholics who argue that the Eucharist is a re-presentment of the original sacrifice of Calvary. That is, they "step into" Christ's one-time sacrifice week after week. I had always understood it to be a new sacrifice week after week that is in conflict with Hebrews 10.

==========================================================

The Long Story:

There is a secular, general topic forum that I usually post at. This week, a thread about the "Anglicans considering Rome" news story was posted. Derails happen fast and furious at this board, and so the topic swerved to how the Anglican church wouldn't accept a communion that still doesn't ordain women. Since both Roman Catholics and Protestants affirm male headship (although for very different reasons), I didn't see much need to comment. But their reasons for this involve the sacraments, I was curious to hear a Catholic say that the priest stands in the place of Christ.

This is where it started:



me said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1275042&postcount=90
> 
> ...the priesthood is another good example. Any denomination (and yes, there are protestant ones) that has a priesthood (instead of a paster/deacon/bishop or elder) signals to me that they don't understand the atonement. The whole point, as Hebrews 10 points out, of the Old Testament priesthood was to offer sacrifices on behalf of the people. It was a sign of things to come in Christ. But now that Christ has made that sacrifice, He is now our high priest, and every believer now a priest (Revelation 1:6, 1 Peter 2:9) who can access the Most Holy Place directly. Jesus broke down that barrier between the Creator and the creature. But now the Vatican wants to bring people back to a system that the author of Hebrews 10 says is only a shadow of the fulfillment.





Catholic person said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1275077&postcount=92
> 
> That's why the priest is acting in the person of Christ, not of themselves.



This is a bizarre thought. The idea that a person standing in the place of Christ sacrifices Christ on the altar. Christ is sacrificing Christ, apparently. This piqued my curiosity, so I asked:



me said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1275095&postcount=94
> 
> Which is irrelevant, because the problem with the sacrifices is that they were offered again and again, but did not provide a once-for-all remission of sins. The very fact that people had to make the sacrifices over and over again proved that the sacrifice was a lesser, inferior thing:
> 
> ...



Now this is the part where he took issue with this notion. He denied that the Mass is a re-sacrifice...I've seen this idea posted on the CARM forums too:



Catholic Guy said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1275723&postcount=104
> 
> Nayland, you're a pretty knowledgeable person from what I've read. Do you honestly believe that we're killing Jesus at every Mass? If you think we are, I'm surprised because that's something I generally hear from people who have no clue about Catholicism other than what their jackass bigoted preacher's said from the pulpit. A cursory glance into the theology of the Mass says otherwise.
> 
> If you do know, and bring it up anyway, then you're going for all emotion and no substance which is below the belt and unworthy of your capabilities.



Why actually, yes I do!

To whit:



me said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1276014&postcount=109
> 
> “And inasmuch as in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner the same Christ who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, the holy council teaches that this is truly propitiatory and has this effect, that if we, contrite and penitent, with sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence, draw nigh to God, we obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid. For, appeased by this sacrifice, the Lord grants the grace and gift of penitence and pardons even the gravest crimes and sins. For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. The fruits of that bloody sacrifice, it is well understood, are received most abundantly through this unbloody one, so far is the latter from derogating in any way from the former. Wherefore, according to the tradition of the Apostles, i is rightly offered not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions and other necessities of the faithful who are living, but also for those departed in Christ but not yet fully purified.” (“Doctrine Concerning the Sacrifice of the Mass, Council of Trent, 22nd session, Chapter 2)
> 
> ...



And he clarified his position:



Catholic Guy said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1276084&postcount=111
> 
> No, it's a participation in the sacrifice of Calvary. The sacrifice at Mass is the exact same. It's an eternal sacrifice. If you want to get down to it, all Masses, at the point of Consecration, are joined to Christ in eternity and are all co-present with Him on Calvary.
> 
> ...



Hmm, interesting!

I still didn't think he was right. My final post provided a few quotes that I think helped to strengthen my position:



me said:


> http://www.forumopolis.com/showpost.php?p=1276576&postcount=120
> 
> You can hang on to that interpretation if you like, I guess, but a) I don't think the text of Trent points in that direction and b) it's at odds with John O'Brien's book "The Faith of Millions",
> 
> ...



==========================================================

So, after *ALL THAT READING*, what do you suppose? Am I misrepresenting Roman Catholic theology? Or is this an attempt to dress up Catholic theology in a post-Reformation culture?

It's interesting to note that Dr. White commented previously on the link between the Mass and Hebrews 10:

http://aomin.org/Hebrews10.html

Neither Robert Sungenis or Dr. White (who knows RC theology better than many Catholic apologists) thought that the Mass was a "re-presentment" of a single sacrifice.


----------



## Gryphonette (Feb 23, 2007)

*For what it's worth, when I was RC I never heard of...*

...the mass as being any sort of "re-sacrifice", and certainly didn't think of it that way.

The way I used to think of it was a mental image of the cross, with a beam of grace extending back through time (because of the OT saints) and forward in time; at consecration, the priest sort of "tapped into" that grace, so the elements were then changed from bread and wine to Christ's body and blood.

Point is, though, nothing "new" happened, IYSWIM.

There is plenty to criticize about the RCC, heaven knows, but to be fair and accurate, it does _not_ teach that Christ is somehow being "re-sacrificed."


----------



## Dieter Schneider (Feb 23, 2007)

The official teaching of the Papacy was formulated especially at the 4th Lateran Council, the Council of Trent (which incidentally attacks Luther) and Vatican II. There is a difference, of course, between what Roman Catholics believe and what they are supposed to believe. 
I would urge you to read Luther's Babylonian Captivity. IT's stirring stuff, and so refreshingly politically incorrect. The info can easily be found on the internet!


----------



## Mathetes (Feb 26, 2007)

I'm not sure what the papacy would directly have to do with it. As far as Gryphonette's response is concerned, I'm not sure whether that would be due to the doctrine itself, or the fact that RC apologists in the west seem to make a conscious effort to make catholicism seem more "Protestant". For example, they will emphasize the need for divine grace in salvation (while downplaying its insufficiency). Or they'll dress up purgatory in prettier terms to avoid the imagery of a place where one's sinfulness is burned away.

It does seem to me as though the "re-participation of an eternal sacrifice" view is something of a recent invention.


----------



## Gryphonette (Feb 26, 2007)

*Doesn't really matter, though, does it?*



Mathetes said:


> It does seem to me as though the "re-participation of an eternal sacrifice" view is something of a recent invention.



If that's the way the RCC looks at it NOW, then that's how it should be engaged, rather than arguing against a view that might or might not (as an adult convert I had a_ lot_ of RC theology books, many of them fairly old, and I don't recall any re-sacrifice explanation) have been held who-knows-_how_-long-ago.

Frankly, back when I was RC had someone informed me I believed that Christ was somehow being re-crucified during the mass I'd have thought they were a couple of tamales short of a Mexican plate.


----------



## ADKing (Feb 26, 2007)

The following is from the "Catechism of the Catholic Church"...

_1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit: 


[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.189 
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." "And since 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. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."190 

1368 The Eucharist is also the sacrifice of the Church. The Church which is the Body of Christ participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she herself is offered whole and entire. She unites herself to his intercession with the Father for all men. In the Eucharist the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his Body. The lives of the faithful, their praise, sufferings, prayer, and work, are united with those of Christ and with his total offering, and so acquire a new value. Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering. 

In the catacombs the Church is often represented as a woman in prayer, arms outstretched in the praying position. Like Christ who stretched out his arms on the cross, through him, with him, and in him, she offers herself and intercedes for all men. 

1369 The whole Church is united with the offering and intercession of Christ. Since he has the ministry of Peter in the Church, the Pope is associated with every celebration of the Eucharist, wherein he is named as the sign and servant of the unity of the universal Church. The bishop of the place is always responsible for the Eucharist, even when a priest presides; the bishop's name is mentioned to signify his presidency over the particular Church, in the midst of his presbyterium and with the assistance of deacons. The community intercedes also for all ministers who, for it and with it, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice: 


Let only that Eucharist be regarded as legitimate, which is celebrated under [the presidency of] the bishop or him to whom he has entrusted it.191 
Through the ministry of priests the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is completed in union with the sacrifice of Christ the only Mediator, which in the Eucharist is offered through the priests' hands in the name of the whole Church in an unbloody and sacramental manner until the Lord himself comes.192 

1370 To the offering of Christ are united not only the members still here on earth, but also those already in the glory of heaven. In communion with and commemorating the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, the Church offers the Eucharistic sacrifice. In the Eucharist the Church is as it were at the foot of the cross with Mary, united with the offering and intercession of Christ. 

1371 The Eucharistic sacrifice is also offered for the faithful departed who "have died in Christ but are not yet wholly purified,"193 so that they may be able to enter into the light and peace of Christ: 


Put this body anywhere! Don't trouble yourselves about it! I simply ask you to remember me at the Lord's altar wherever you are.194 
Then, we pray [in the anaphora] for the holy fathers and bishops who have fallen asleep, and in general for all who have fallen asleep before us, in the belief that it is a great benefit to the souls on whose behalf the supplication is offered, while the holy and tremendous Victim is present. . . . By offering to God our supplications for those who have fallen asleep, if they have sinned, we . . . offer Christ sacrificed for the sins of all, and so render favorable, for them and for us, the God who loves man.195 

_

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm


----------



## Poimen (Feb 26, 2007)

Though obviously not a RC source quote, the Heidelberg Catechism had this to say in 1563 (in the midst of struggles about the meaning of the Lord's Supper):



> Question 80. What difference is there between the Lord's supper and the popish mass?
> 
> Answer: The Lord's supper testifies to us, that we have a full pardon of all sin by the only sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself has once accomplished on the cross; and, that we by the Holy Ghost are ingrafted into Christ, who, according to his human nature is now not on earth, but in heaven, at the right hand of God his Father, and will there be worshipped by us. _But the mass teaches, that the living and dead have not the pardon of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is also daily offered for them by the priests_; and further, that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and therefore is to be worshipped in them; so that the mass, at bottom, is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and sufferings of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry.


----------

