Sunday, July 29, 2007

Is the Mass the same as Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross, or is it a different Sacrifice?

It is the same Sacrifice. Christ offered Himself, once for all. “…[W]e are sanctified by the oblation of the Body of Jesus Christ once.” (Heb. 10:10).

To understand this, we have only to go back to the concept of oblation, renunciation, and choice. The renunciation is summarized by Christ’s death, accepted once and for all. On Calvary, this act of renunciation was made once, and it is passed.

But above all, our Lord’s Sacrifice consists in the constant desire for His Fathers will in preference to His own; and this preference remains eternally fixed in heaven. Suffering passes - the fact of having suffered remains.

It’s the same thing for us when we renounce anything. The act of self-denial is, like all acts, temporary; but the disposition of the will to deny its self for a greater good remains just so long as we do not take it back. Death fixes us forever in the dispositions which it finds us. Christ’s Sacrifice persists in heaven, because the legacy of His life made on the Cross has never been canceled. That which he gave was given for all time…. Christ’s immolation is eternal. St. John, in His vision of heaven, sees Jesus as “a lamb standing upright, yet slain (as I thought) in Sacrifice” (Apoc. 5:6) [Knox].

This is understandable. The purpose of our Lord’s Sacrifice having been to glorify God, the act whereby He glorifies Him must, of necessity, be eternal.

When the priest brings Christ down upon the altar, he renders Him present such as He is in heaven; and He is in heaven with the same loving dispositions that He had on Calvary at the moment of His death.

The Mass is, therefore, not a new Sacrifice by Christ; but the same Sacrifice actualized in the present. “We know that Christ rising again from the dead, dieth now no more.” (Rom. 6:9).

The Mass is thus the perpetual prolongation of the Sacrifice made on the cross. Consequently, every Mass is the one immolation of Christ repeated in the Act of Oblation. By the same act of the will, Jesus offers at the last supper His death in the future; on Calvary His death in the present; on heaven and on the altar His death in the past.

This special presence of Christ on the altar is peculiar to the Mass and demonstrates is grandeur.

When we celebrate the other mysteries of Christ’s life, we merely commemorate them. There is no real renewal of the mystery on the day devoted to it. At Christmas, the Church recalls to our minds the saviors birth, but this birth does not really take place - is not actualized in the present. On Ascension Thursday, our Lord does not renew His ascent into heaven. It is quite otherwise for the mass. It is no simple symbolic representation, for the same Sacrifice that Christ accomplished on the Cross is made truly present in an un-bloody manner on the altar.

(1962 Daily Roman Missal, Angelus Press)

5 comments:

jashmead said...

Brandon,

I believe that the arguement can be made that the RC church, that has so valiantly defended the doctrine of the Trinity, in practice, rejects this teaching. Christ explicitly stated that he would leave and send the Comforter. The Comforter would take over in ministry where Jesus left off. Jesus also indicated that he would not be with the disciples until they could again share the supper together in heaven. Yet, the RC church teaches Jesus is literally present in the Eucharist. He leaves heaven and displaces the Spirit's function to appear with justifying grace. This idea, in my view, is flatly inconsistent with the scriptures.

Second, the book of Hebrews explicitly outlines the qualifications for the NT priesthood. The criteria is outlined in Hebrews 7. The NT priest must immune to death, and sinless. This qualifies the NT priest to handle and present the perfect sacrifice. While I believe there are many good men within the RC priesthood, no priest can satisfy these requirements.

Hebrews 8 tells us where this sacrifice is offered. It is offered in heaven and presented to the Father. The sacrifices offered on earth are according to the old covenant. Ironic isn't it.

Finally, the book of Hebrews tells us that Jesus offered one sacrifice. This one time sacrifice on earth was presented in heaven to the Father is not repeated or represented. Interestingly, real issues arise if the flesh of Jesus is literally eaten in light of the fact that the priest of the old testament became sin bearers by eating the sacrifice and taking it into the temple. One is left to wonder how the type is fullfilled in the NT by the believer eating the literal sacrifice. Do we become our own sin-bearers?

jashmead said...

Roy Gane notes the following in his book, "Who is afraid of the judgment?": While the Messiah would accomplish everlasting results, in the short-term, He woud be "cut off" and have nothing/nobody" (Daniel 9:26)(my translation) In other words he would suffer the divinely administered judicial penalty of "cutting off" (compare, for exmaple, Leviticus 20:3); Numbers 15:30.31), which was reserved in Old Testament times for rebellious sinners for whom the sacrificial system of the sanctuary/temple made no provision for forgiveness. According to Donald Wold, who wrote his Ph.D dissertation on the biblical penalty of "cutting off," this punishment meant that the sinner's line of descendants was eventually cut off, therby denying him/her an afterlife..."

Do we experience a similar cutting off from God? Does Jesus continue to be "cut off" every Eucharistic service. It seems to me that he was sacrificed once and cut off once and now ministers in heaven and not on earth.

These factors make it unlikely that we can re-experience the sacrifice that took place on the cross. Jesus was only cut off once as our eternal substitute and only those who experience eternal death will experience the cutting off that Jesus experienced for us on the cross as our substitute.

Lee Faber said...

you might take a look at Aquinas's Summa theologiae III. q. 75. There he argues that the bread and wine are converted into Christ via transsubstatiatio. Christ remains in heaven at all times; one might even say physically present. He is only present in the eucharist in the mode of substance.

As to your other comments, A catholic priest does not offer the eucharist from himself or of his own power but instead acts in persona Christi.

Hugo said...

jashmead,

I agree with Lee: an introduction to the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation would be helpful for you. Catholics believe Christ is not locally present on earth, as you appear to infer. As for the notion that Christ cannot be with us in any other sense after His ascension, you will remember that Christ promised "I will be with you always." Clearly, the ascension did not preclude his remaining mystically with us in various ways.

Furthermore, in Catholic theology, Christ is the only Priest, being alone capable of holding the office. Nevertheless, all the faithful participate in His one priesthood to various degrees, whether angels or humans. Thus, the priesthood of my parish priest IS the sinless, undying priesthood of Christ, and not another.

Moreover, the claim that the sacrifice of Christ "is offered in heaven" is confusing. Does this mean that Christ did not fully offer His sacrifice upon the cross? Or does this mean that the "offering" of the sacrifice included much more than the slaying of the victim, but also the process of blood presentation? (In the latter case, this would mean that Christ is STILL in the process of offering His sacrifice, since Adventists believe His work of blood presentation continues in the heavenly sanctuary.) Or do you hold to some "sanctuary inauguration" model?

As regards the consummation of sacrifices, you overlook the fact that the people often consumed animals they slew in sacrifice to the Lord (Lev 7:11-21; Ex 13:1-11,27; Deut 12:26-27). Clearly, guilt transferral was not operative in these cases. You also overlook the data in 1 Cor 10:16-21 that clearly indicates the sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic meal.

Finally, in Hebraic literature, to be "cut off" means "to die." But Catholics do not believe Christ repeats (i.e., dies again) in the Eucharistic Sacrifice; the Resurrected Christ cannot die. Catholic theology is easily dismissed when misrepresented; thank you for exploring the nuances and balance of our faith.

Brandon said...

Jashmead,
I will post a longer response later, but for now I wanted to respond to two points you made. White it is true that Christ promised to send the Comforter, he also said:
(John 14:18 KJV) I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

This statement verifying that the Lord Himself will continue to come to us is right in the middle of His reassurance of the Comforter. Christ did not leave His Ministry to another, but continued His Ministry, and comes to us.

(1 Cor 11:29 KJV) For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

One of the warnings given by Paul regarding the Communion service, or Eucharist was that there were some that partook unworthily, because they did not discern the Lord’s body. What do you believe this means?