Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scriptural Basis of the Mass as Sacrifice (Where is that in the Bible?)
Zenit News Agency ^ | September 26, 2006 | Father Edward McNamara

Posted on 09/26/2006 4:48:31 PM PDT by NYer

ROME, SEPT. 26, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Where are we commanded to have a sacrifice in our formal worship of God? Protestants, for the most part, worship with singing, some collective prayers and long sermons. Where in the Bible does it say that proper worship contains a sacrifice? Also a review of where in the Bible the Mass parts come from and why we include them in Mass would be useful. Again, it will come down to convincing a "sola scriptura" believer that Scripture says we must do it. Any help would be appreciated. -- J.C., Leavenworth, Kansas

A: A full answer to this question exceeds the possibilities of this column. There are, however, many worthy resources available online. Web sites such as Catholic Answers contain, among other elements, Father Mitch Pacwa's "Is the Mass a Sacrifice?"

The Old Testament contains many divine commands to perform sacrifices. All of the complex liturgical rituals described in Leviticus, for example, are ostensibly commanded by God through Moses.

Perhaps the most important sacrifices commanded by God in the Old Testament were those in which the Almighty sealed a covenant. This includes the one with Noah after the flood, the pact made with Abraham, and above all the sacrifice of the paschal lamb in Egypt, a covenant that was completed 50 days later with another sacrifice at Sinai.

It was this covenant that was renewed each year at the Passover by means of a sacrificial ritual that was a "memorial" ("zikkaron" in Hebrew). It was not a mere recalling but rather one that ritually made present and ratified and renewed the saving events that had occurred so many years before.

For Catholics, the central divine command to worship, using a sacrifice, came from the lips of Christ when he told the apostles at the Last Supper, "Do this as in memory of me."

In doing so, he specifically recalled the Jewish Passover as a memorial and applied it to himself and his upcoming sacrifice on the cross, with a totally new and definitive meaning.

In this context Our Lord's words "This is my body, which is given for you" (Luke 22:19) correspond to those of Exodus 12:27: "[This ritual] is the sacrifice of the Passover in honor of Yahweh" when he freed Israel from slavery in Egypt.

The words "For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matthew 26:28) echo those of Exodus 24:8 when Moses says: "This … is the blood of the covenant that Yahweh has made with you."

We are thus before a unique sacrifice, the memorial sacrament of Christ's paschal sacrifice. Through it he has brought salvation to all mankind and sealed a new and eternal covenant in his blood.

Although the apostles probably did not immediately grasp the full meaning of Christ's gesture in the cenacle, their reflection on his words and actions and their familiarity with the Passover as a memorial quickly led them to understand that Our Lord had commanded them to repeat the ritual that he had established.

They understood that this ritual was the definitive paschal sacrifice which made present Christ's unique sacrifice on Calvary and in doing so ratified and renewed the new and eternal covenant.

Therefore, God has commanded us to worship with a sacrifice, his own unique sacrifice.

All other forms of ritual sacrifice have fallen by the wayside as Christ's sacrifice has an infinite worth that absorbs all the values and intentions expressed in the ancient sacrifices.

The Mass is a sacrifice insofar as it is the memorial that ritually renews and makes present to us, in time, Christ's once-and-for-all sacrifice on the cross.

The personal prayers and sacrifices of Christians reach their fulfillment when they are united to Christ's sacrifice through full, devout and active participation at Mass.

As to where in the Bible the various parts of the Mass are found, the answer is less clear. In a way it is everywhere and nowhere.

Everywhere, because the entire Mass is animated by Scripture. Almost all of the prayers and texts have a scriptural background and the entire rite is developed as a fruit of Christ's command to continue his actions.

Nowhere, in the sense that we will not find explicit commands to say, "Sing the Sanctus after the preface." Rather, the ritual has developed over time as a response to the scriptural exhortation to pray, to repeat the sacrifice, etc.

In this case even a Protestant would have to accept that the details of his worship (songs, psalms and long sermons, etc.) are found in the Bible only in very general terms.


TOPICS: Activism; Apologetics; Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; General Discusssion; History; Ministry/Outreach; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: bible; catholic; liturgy; mass; protestant; sacrifice; scripture; solascriptura
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

1 posted on 09/26/2006 4:48:33 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...


2 posted on 09/26/2006 4:49:14 PM PDT by NYer ("That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah." Hillel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I quietly slipped into the basement chapel down at Marquette, Gesu. They were having a noon Mass and I had never gone to Mass before. I slipped in. I sat down in the back pew. I didn't kneel. I didn't genuflect, I wouldn't stand. I was an observer; I was there to watch. But I was surprised when 40, 50, 60, 80, or 100 ordinary folk just walked in off the street for midday Mass, ordinary folk who just came in, genuflected, knelt and prayed. Then a bell rang and they all stood up and Mass began. I had never seen it before.

The Liturgy of the Word was so rich, not only the Scripture readings. They read more Scripture, I thought, in a weekday Mass than we read in a Sunday service. But their prayers were soaked with Biblical language and phrases from Isaiah and Ezekiel. I sat there saying, "Man, stop the show, let me explain your prayers. That's Zechariah; that's Ezekiel. Wow! It's like the Bible coming to life and dancing out on the center stage and saying, "This is where I belong."

Then the Liturgy of the Eucharist began. I watched and listened as the priest pronounced the words of consecration and elevated the host. And I confess, the last drop of doubt drained away at that moment. I looked and said, "My Lord and my God." As the people began going forward to receive communion, I literally began to drool, "Lord, I want you. I want communion more fully with you. You've come into my heart. You're my personal Savior and Lord, but now I think You want to come onto my tongue and into my stomach, and into my body as well as my soul until this communion is complete."

And as soon as it began, it was over. People stuck around for a minute or two for thanksgiving and then left. And eventually, I just walked out and wondered, what have I done? But the next day I was back, and the next, and the next...

From the Scott Hahn conversion story
3 posted on 09/26/2006 5:36:25 PM PDT by Straight Vermonter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

The bread and wine used by Jesus did not turn into His body and blood .. it remained bread and wine.


4 posted on 09/26/2006 6:31:53 PM PDT by knarf (Muslims kill each other ... News wall-to-wall, 24/7 .. don't touch that dial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: knarf

oh ye of little faith! How are you with the whole resurrection thing? Is that foolish too?


5 posted on 09/26/2006 6:39:15 PM PDT by Americanchild (..and deliver us all from Islam! Amen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The Mass is a sacrifice insofar as it is the memorial that ritually renews and makes present to us, in time, Christ's once-and-for-all sacrifice on the cross.

That was an interesting non-answer - contradicts himself in one sentence.

6 posted on 09/26/2006 7:38:54 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

Is there no difference between time and eternity? Then the phrase "begotten, not made" has no meaning for you either, and we are left with the doctrine of Arius.


7 posted on 09/26/2006 7:46:15 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Americanchild
I dare say that you missed the point. Jesus was present in the flesh, so to speak, when he said this is my body, do this in remembrance of me.
The " resurrection thing" as you so obnoxiously put it ( where are you Roman Catholics rebuking your fellow churchman for this unacceptable remark as you would a Protestant) is in fact the entire point of Christianity. The empty Cross, you know? We Biblical Christians feel rather strongly about the fact that Christ is Risen, which is why you will not find crucifixes in our places of worship.
8 posted on 09/26/2006 7:50:17 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
We Catholics at Easter time celebrate three days: From the evening of the Last Supper to the morning of the Resurrection. That's a continuum. Without the cross, no resurrection. Without the blood sacrifice, no redemption. The Resurrection gives final meaning to it all, and it is the risen Jesus who is with us at the mass.
9 posted on 09/26/2006 8:08:13 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Faith-sharing bump.


10 posted on 09/26/2006 8:13:33 PM PDT by Ciexyz (Leaning on the everlasting arms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The Resurrection gives final meaning to it all, and it is the risen Jesus who is with us at the mass.

Explain something then...

1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Since the 'risen' Jesus has no blood, what is it that you are turning your wine into???

11 posted on 09/26/2006 8:15:19 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Yes, I know that. However, the emphasis in your church is on the crucifix; "Christ has Died".
We are on the " Christ has Risen", empty Cross as we wait for " Christ to come again".

As to my point: the obnoxious comment was a non-sequiter to the post regarding the last supper and the question of transubstantiation.

I am earnestly waiting for a Roman Catholic to correct the poster who sarcastically referred to " that resurrection thing". Perhaps it could be you.
12 posted on 09/26/2006 8:15:39 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Americanchild
How does that question relate to what I said.

I need faith to believe in something extra scriptural?

Jesus raised Himself, of course ... and on the evening of the passover .. the bread and wine remained bread and wine ... He said to do this in remembrance of His death ...where is Christmas then?

I'll see your out of context and raise an oblique.

13 posted on 09/26/2006 8:26:43 PM PDT by knarf (Muslims kill each other ... News wall-to-wall, 24/7 .. don't touch that dial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

John6:43-59

43"Stop grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. 45It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.'[d] Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. 46No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. 48I am the bread of life. 49Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. 50But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."

52Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

53Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. 57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever." 59He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.


14 posted on 09/26/2006 8:47:13 PM PDT by Jaded (does it really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

You mean you think that the Risen Jesus is not truly man?


15 posted on 09/26/2006 8:54:47 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

Well, in my church we regularly say after the elevation , whether approriate to the moment or not: Christ has died; Christ has risen; Christ will come again. The purpose of the corpus on the cross is to remind us of the humanity of Christ, that he suffered as a man. Crucifixes were made popular by St. Francis, a very spiritual saint who even Protestants respect for his evangelical character. They may be offended by the baroque style, which emphasizes the torture of the cross, although, paradoxically, they found Mel Gilbson's very baroque movie quite congenial. At bottom, the crucifix is only an artform.


16 posted on 09/26/2006 9:02:39 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

We Biblical Catholic Christians disagree.


17 posted on 09/26/2006 9:39:07 PM PDT by The Cuban
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

As a Protestant, I know that the crucifixion comes before redemption and the Resurrection. I wear my crucifix only on Good Friday. The empty cross is how I celebrate the rest of the year. I don't think that He will hold it against either a sincere crucifix or empty cross wearer for their choice.

For me, the most intense part of Easter begins on Thursday, a time to remember His very human struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane and His ultimate obedience, despite not only the physical pain He would have to endure but also the horrible burden of our sins on His pure soul. Then comes Friday, the day we recognize as His crucifixion day, a time of great sorrow, along with our present day hindsight in knowing that jubilation was just around the corner; Saturday is a day of anticipation and wondering how those in Paradise felt when they saw Him, after waiting for Him so long. Then comes the fulfillment of Jesus' promise of Resurrection and His victory over spiritual death for all who believe. And that wasn't even the finale--nearly two months afterwards, Jesus' other promise was fulfilled when the Holy Spirit came upon the believers gathered for Shavuot.

To me, the celebration for Easter really starts on Christmas; after all, without His unique birth, the rest would not have happened. : )

I think we (I admit I'm guilty) sometimes get too bogged down in the differences, instead of celebrating our blessed bond through Jesus.


18 posted on 09/26/2006 10:49:02 PM PDT by skr (We cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent.-- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

You wrote:

"I am earnestly waiting for a Roman Catholic to correct the poster who sarcastically referred to " that resurrection thing". Perhaps it could be you."

Why would a Catholic need to correct the poster who wrote that? Was it not a perfectly logical rejoinder? Yes, actually it was. The fact that it was sarcastic is unimportant since he was merely showing that the Protestant poster was sarcastic. After all, Christ said "body" and "blood". He didn't say "bread" and "wine" after they became His body and blood. So who was really be sarcastic here?

We don't deny the Resurrection, but you demand we apologize for sarcastically drawing someone's attention to it. You have a Protestant who denied a Christ founded sacrament, a miracle, a great gift where the Savior gives us His flesh and blood under the appearance of bread and wine and you're whining about what a Catholic said even though it in no way denied the Resurrection?

Protestants deny the Eucharist for the same reason they don't like the crucifix: they struggle with the Incarnation. Deep down many Protestants are little better than Docetians.


19 posted on 09/27/2006 4:57:11 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Cuban

With what?


20 posted on 09/27/2006 5:49:32 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: knarf
It is not a good idea to claim Jesus was a deceiver or a liar.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. 53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. 56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. 57 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, ... 61 Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it?

*Your idea is no different than the ideas of the disblieving Jews

21 posted on 09/27/2006 5:56:15 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
No, it was not a perfectly logical rejoinder( in spite of your posing and then answering your own question, a rather unimaginative way of making headway in your argument.)A logical rejoinder might have had something to do with a Biblical defense of the belief that bread and wine actually change into something else at the "sacrifice of the mass " as is the topic of the thread.
That is, however, not what poster # 6 did. He stuck out his tongue and made a face.
Sort of like you yelling " Docetist " on your way out the door.
This sort of thing is not serious evangelism and only establishes a tone that I find is a very consistent aspect of the Roman Catholic posters.
22 posted on 09/27/2006 6:00:45 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
We Biblical Christians feel rather strongly about the fact that Christ is Risen, which is why you will not find crucifixes in our places of worship

*And that is not the only righteous practice protestants abandoned in following the heresiarchs apostasy from the Orthopraxis of the true Biblical Christians.

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness

23 posted on 09/27/2006 6:01:56 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
You guys always leave out some of the verses when you quote this...

Joh 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Joh 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

43"Stop grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. 45It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.'[d] Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. 46No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. 48I am the bread of life. 49Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. 50But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."

52Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

53Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. 57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever." 59He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Doth this offend you? Joh 6:62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not

> Joh 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

Joh 6:69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

When you read the whole chapter, you couldn't possibly make the mistake that Jesus was talking about literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood...

Eternal life comes from believing, not eating...And Peter got eternal life by believing, not eating...

And you are filled with the Holy Spirit by believing, not eating...

Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

These people didn't leave because they believed Jesus was talking about cannibalism...They left because of the entire message that Jesus was the 'spiritual' bread of life...

24 posted on 09/27/2006 6:04:02 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
And, it ought be pointed out they reject the form of Worship Commanded by Jesus. Among other things, Jesus came to Teach man how to Worship God as God desires to be worshipped. God Himself, Jesus, showed and Commanded us to offer the Sacrifice of the New Covenant and to eat the New Covenant meal.

Sadly, protestant worship has nothing whatsoever to do with the New Covenant Commands. The Heresiarchs abandoned Sacrifice, they jettisoned the Eucharist, the foreswore Apostolic Succession, repudiated the Sacramental System etc etc etc.

Outside of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, which have preserved Apostolic Succession and the Eucharist, there are no other Churches. There are fine christian communites in varying levels of union with the Church Jesus established, but, they are not churches and their protestant worship services, while preserving some of the form, have abandoned the content. It was a revolution within a form. Quite radical. Quite fatal.

25 posted on 09/27/2006 6:12:12 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
You mean you think that the Risen Jesus is not truly man?

I'll repeat:

1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Doesn't matter what you or I think...What does the bible say???

What's your view on the verse???

Does Jesus (God, the third part of the Trinity) still carry around the flesh of Jesus, the man???

26 posted on 09/27/2006 6:15:57 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
It is a question of emphasis, really. A crucifix certainly can be an important symbol of the pain and suffering of Jesus, during his passion on the cross, that which made the only sufficient and final sacrifice for the sins of those who believe.
However, the fact of the resurrection comes after the crucifixion (final, once perfect and sufficient sacrifice!). The resurrection is why we know that Jesus is Lord and it made manifest that he could overcome death( unlike anyone else crucified, say the thieves on either of his sides.)
The post does not live up to its name. The reason that you see Biblical Christians here is that it claimed to give answers and then ended up with something like " where is the mass in the Bible ?, everywhere and nowhere ". I would not have posted something like this as a defense of my position.
As to your final line, I am not sure how that fits here.
Corinthians offers much to one who is seeking to understand the mind of Christ. I know that I should spend a great deal more time studying the Word. And at your mentioning of the text, I will go to first Corinthians this morning.
27 posted on 09/27/2006 6:20:34 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
I dare say that you missed the point. Jesus was present in the flesh, so to speak, when he said this is my body, do this in remembrance of me. The " resurrection thing" as you so obnoxiously put it ( where are you Roman Catholics rebuking your fellow churchman for this unacceptable remark as you would a Protestant) is in fact the entire point of Christianity. The empty Cross, you know? We Biblical Christians feel rather strongly about the fact that Christ is Risen, which is why you will not find crucifixes in our places of worship.

I'm not arguing or contradicting, just adding.
Chrisitianity is the only religion in humanity where God comes to us human beings as a suffering, dying and risen Savior. His Words and healings were miraculous but the core of Christianity is his suffering and dying for our sins and then, His resurrection.

The sacrifice IS the crucifixion and it is a daily reminder that Christianity is not just about Christmas, Scripture, healing miracles, songs, sermons and prayers....or even about the Risen Christ. He didn't simply come, preach, die and rise. His suffering and death on the Cross was atonement for all. The crucifixtion reminds us also that there was no arrogance and vainglory about His coming. It HAD to come down to the crucifixion....because that is how much we sin[ned] and that is how much God loved us.
That is why the Mass celebrates his suffering and dying with the miracle of Transubstantiation.
We are the ONLY religion, where we, as Catholics, have the unique and miraculous daily (except Good Friday) opportunity to take in the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Almighty God.
It is an awesome gift from our Heavenly Father and His Divine Son.

28 posted on 09/27/2006 6:24:12 AM PDT by starfish923 (Socrates: It's never right to do wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

He appeared to the disciples on the road to Emmaus.

He showed them the wounds in his hands and asked one of the disciples to touch them.

He fixed fish for them by the shore.

And when He comes again, will He appear in his glorious humanity or will He be like a ghost?

Our Lord did not have to inherit the kingdom. The kingdom is already his. It is we who cannot inherit the kingdom until we are united with him in glory and it is our mortal bodies that will be transformed from corruption to incorruption when we are with him in heaven.


29 posted on 09/27/2006 6:30:21 AM PDT by Running On Empty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: starfish923

I appreciate your thoughtful and sincere defense of your belief in transubstantiation.
I respect you for your tone and attitude and believe that you are sincerely convinced of your position.
You offer a good example to follow in the art of apologetics for those with whom you are in communion.


30 posted on 09/27/2006 6:38:07 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
I thought you might be saying something importan here so I had to look it up...

A heresiarch (also hæresiarch, according to the Oxford English Dictionary) is a founder or leader of a heretical doctrine or movement, as considered by those who claim to maintain an orthodox religious tradition or doctrine. For example, according to traditional Roman Catholic doctrine, King Henry VIII of England was a heresiarch, as he influenced the Archbishop of Canterbury to break away from the Catholic Church to form the Church of England. The miller Domenicio Scandella of Carlo Ginzburg's The Cheese and the Worms was also declared a heresiarch by the inquisition judges.

Orthopraxis

is a theological term for "correct practice". Most people would probably say "lifestyle". It is rooted in the belief that Christian orthodoxy will yield, as its fruit, a Christian "orthopraxy", a way of being and living that is consistent with the social justice imperatives of the Catholic faith. The numerous contradictions between the Gospel of Jesus Christ and modern conditions suggest many areas where Christ's teachings are particularly relevant.

Turns out to be just more 'ten dollar' terms put out by the Catholic Church to mean 'it's my way (your church's way) or no way'...No biggy...

31 posted on 09/27/2006 6:43:15 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty
It is we who cannot inherit the kingdom until we are united with him in glory and it is our mortal bodies that will be transformed from corruption to incorruption when we are with him in heaven.

But that didn't answer the question...Does Jesus have the earthly body and blood of Jesus the man, or does He have a heavenly body???

32 posted on 09/27/2006 6:49:01 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
You offer a good example to follow in the art of apologetics for those with whom you are in communion.

With the "art of apologetics" I am in good company, that is, in communion, with 1 billion Catholics and His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, the successor of Peter, the Rock on which Jesus built His Church.
I am grateful for the blessing to be in His Fold.

Protestants protested. That was the foundation of their being. Ahem, talk about apologists.

33 posted on 09/27/2006 6:49:11 AM PDT by starfish923 (Socrates: It's never right to do wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

Oh pulheeze. You weren't even quoting Christ. So spare me the "you guys always leave out".... at least we use complete verses.


34 posted on 09/27/2006 6:53:24 AM PDT by Jaded (does it really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: knarf
The bread and wine used by Jesus did not turn into His body and blood .. it remained bread and wine.

So he wasn't telling the truth?

35 posted on 09/27/2006 7:01:10 AM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
We Biblical Christians feel rather strongly about the fact that Christ is Risen, which is why you will not find crucifixes in our places of worship.

You'd better rebuke St. Paul, then, who said "we preach Christ crucified". It's obviously a stumbling block to you.

36 posted on 09/27/2006 7:02:11 AM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Does Jesus (God, the third part of the Trinity) still carry around the flesh of Jesus, the man???

Absolutely, and all orthodox Protestants would agree that he does. You are just restating an ancient heresy.

37 posted on 09/27/2006 7:03:29 AM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
Oh pulheeze. You weren't even quoting Christ. So spare me the "you guys always leave out".... at least we use complete verses.

I don't have a clue what you are talking about...

38 posted on 09/27/2006 7:10:11 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge
Be that as it may, the Church Jesus establishes commands the Crucifix be present at the altar during the Pluperfect Sacrifice of the New Covenant.

We Biblical Christians hear the Pillar and Ground of truth. Now, I understand y'all have diferent sources of authority. So, we will agree to disagree

39 posted on 09/27/2006 7:27:51 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

It is a biggie. Jesus established His Church (Matt 16:18,19) You reject it. And, during your Final Juddgement, you can explain to Our Lord and Saviour just why these truths are no biggies. Good luck


40 posted on 09/27/2006 7:29:51 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NYer

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html#eucharist-Ia


41 posted on 09/27/2006 7:33:44 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

http://www.salvationhistory.com/online/beginner/begcourse2_home.cfm


42 posted on 09/27/2006 7:40:23 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
This is helpful. However, many protestants mistakenly think the Bible is a recipe for Christianity. THey think it "complete"

They have to be shown where the Mass comes from. I have posted a few links - the one from St. Paul Center is the best, imo. It does take some time to read it but it is laid out very well.

All we can do is post the truth. Others have Free Will to accept or reject it.

43 posted on 09/27/2006 7:44:09 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf; Americanchild; Straight Vermonter
The bread and wine used by Jesus did not turn into His body and blood .. it remained bread and wine.

"I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." - John 6:51-56

Transubstantation and the Eucharist

44 posted on 09/27/2006 7:59:13 AM PDT by NYer ("That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah." Hillel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a84.htm


45 posted on 09/27/2006 8:30:36 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
St. Augustine

"That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, IS THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. Through that bread and wine the Lord Christ willed to commend HIS BODY AND BLOOD, WHICH HE POURED OUT FOR US UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS." (Sermons 227)

"The Lord Jesus wanted those whose eyes were held lest they should recognize him, to recognize Him in the breaking of the bread [Luke 24:16,30-35]. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, BECOMES CHRIST'S BODY." (Sermons 234:2)

"What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that THE BREAD IS THE BODY OF CHRIST AND THE CHALICE [WINE] THE BLOOD OF CHRIST." (Sermons 272)

"How this ['And he was carried in his own hands'] should be understood literally of David, we cannot discover; but we can discover how it is meant of Christ. FOR CHRIST WAS CARRIED IN HIS OWN HANDS, WHEN, REFERRING TO HIS OWN BODY, HE SAID: 'THIS IS MY BODY.' FOR HE CARRIED THAT BODY IN HIS HANDS." (Psalms 33:1:10)

"Was not Christ IMMOLATED only once in His very Person? In the Sacrament, nevertheless, He is IMMOLATED for the people not only on every Easter Solemnity but on every day; and a man would not be lying if, when asked, he were to reply that Christ is being IMMOLATED." (Letters 98:9)

"Christ is both the Priest, OFFERING Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the SACRAMENTAL SIGN of this should be the daily Sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to OFFER herself through Him." (City of God 10:20)

"By those sacrifices of the Old Law, this one Sacrifice is signified, in which there is a true remission of sins; but not only is no one forbidden to take as food the Blood of this Sacrifice, rather, all who wish to possess life are exhorted to drink thereof." (Questions on the Heptateuch 3:57)

"Nor can it be denied that the souls of the dead find relief through the piety of their friends and relatives who are still alive, when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is OFFERED for them, or when alms are given in the church." (Ench Faith, Hope, Love 29:110)

"But by the prayers of the Holy Church, and by the SALVIFIC SACRIFICE, and by the alms which are given for their spirits, there is no doubt that the dead are aided that the Lord might deal more mercifully with them than their sins would deserve. FOR THE WHOLE CHURCH OBSERVES THIS PRACTICE WHICH WAS HANDED DOWN BY THE FATHERS that it prays for those who have died in the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the Sacrifice itself; and the Sacrifice is OFFERED also in memory of them, on their behalf. If, the works of mercy are celebrated for the sake of those who are being remembered, who would hesitate to recommend them, on whose behalf prayers to God are not offered in vain? It is not at all to be doubted that such prayers are of profit to the dead; but for such of them as lived before their death in a way that makes it possible for these things to be useful to them after death." (Sermons 172:2)

"...I turn to Christ, because it is He whom I seek here; and I discover how the earth is adored without impiety, how without impiety the footstool of His feet is adored. For He received earth from earth; because flesh is from the earth, and He took flesh from the flesh of Mary. He walked here in the same flesh, AND GAVE US THE SAME FLESH TO BE EATEN UNTO SALVATION. BUT NO ONE EATS THAT FLESH UNLESS FIRST HE ADORES IT; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord's feet is adored; AND NOT ONLY DO WE NOT SIN BY ADORING, WE DO SIN BY NOT ADORING." (Psalms 98:9)

46 posted on 09/27/2006 8:35:37 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num8.htm


47 posted on 09/27/2006 8:40:04 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
FOR CHRIST WAS CARRIED IN HIS OWN HANDS, WHEN, REFERRING TO HIS OWN BODY, HE SAID: 'THIS IS MY BODY.' FOR HE CARRIED THAT BODY IN HIS HANDS." (Psalms 33:1:10)

There is nothing in Psalms 33 that remotely says anything like this...

And likewise with this:

AND GAVE US THE SAME FLESH TO BE EATEN UNTO SALVATION. BUT NO ONE EATS THAT FLESH UNLESS FIRST HE ADORES IT; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord's feet is adored; AND NOT ONLY DO WE NOT SIN BY ADORING, WE DO SIN BY NOT ADORING." (Psalms 98:9)

There is nothing whatsoever in Psalms 98 that could be construed to be close to this at all...

St. Augustine

Why someone would chose the writing of Augustine over the bible is beyond me...I certainly don't...

48 posted on 09/27/2006 9:09:47 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
When you read the whole chapter, you couldn't possibly make the mistake that Jesus was talking about literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood...

He was most certainly talking about exactly that. The Greek *screams* literal interpretation: First of all, the word used for eat here in verse 54 & 56 & 58 is trogo--this is not just plain old 'eat" (which is phago)--this is gnaw, munch, crunch, chew. Christ in verse literally says "Whoever chews my flesh and drinks my blood"...then later in verse 58 whoever chews on this bread will live forever.

Secondly, let's look at verse 55: for my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink....real food, real drink. And quite frankly, the English here is not even as strong as the Greek, which says "alethes brosis, alethes posis"--true food, true drink--and true in substance, not true in similarity or analogy.

These people didn't leave because they believed Jesus was talking about cannibalism...They left because of the entire message that Jesus was the 'spiritual' bread of life...

The text says straight out why they were grumbling...it is right there in plain Scripture..."How can this man give us his flesh to eat"? So why were they saying "this is a hard saying, who can listen to it"? Some inoffensive discourse about the bread from heaven? That makes zero sense, I'm sorry.

You are doing exactly what you accuse us of doing--and that is going against the plain sense of Scripture to defend a theological position which grew up many many years after the fact. Every Church father, St. Paul, everyone in the early centuries believed that Christ meant this text literally. The Christians were accused by the Roman pagans of cannibalism--now why would that be if they just meant all this in a bland, inoffensive "bread of Life" type way?

49 posted on 09/27/2006 9:33:33 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter
“How a Non-Catholic respectfully communes at Mass” (Presidents Bush and Clinton)

“How a Non-Catholic respectfully communes at Mass”(Bush At St Louis)

Giving to God in Mass [Liturgy of the Eucharist]

Benedict on the Liturgy

Music and Liturgy

The way the Mass should be

The New Order of the Mass takes its next step on Monday

Archbishop Burke, Bishop Rifan comment: Will classical liturgy aid reunion with Eastern Orthodox?

Why do we dress up for Mass?

Australian Bishops approve new English translation of the mass

Pope Against Pop Music In Mass

Liturgy changes for U.S. Catholics (some clarifications)

Bishops to vote on new Order of Mass in English

"Anything But 'Dew'!" (follow up on the USCCB liturgy discussions)

The Votes Are In! And the Winner Is .... (USCCB meeting on revisions to the Latin liturgy)

Liturgy translation tops (Catholic) bishops' agenda for L.A. meeting

Teach Us! [About the True Presence -- Summit of the Mass, Holy Communion]

Yes to the Mass "with the back to the people"

Cardinal Arinze's Mass Etiquette 101

The New Mass: A Return to Tradition???

50 posted on 09/27/2006 10:03:01 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson