 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
brian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Chicago South Burbs, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 746 |
| First Name: | brian | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | methodist, evangelical, anglican, catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 5th, 2007 04:28 pm |
|
One of my favoritethings about the mass is the fact that it is somehow us breaking into the worship of heaven. And though we offer it each day, it is the samer thing being offered each day. Chrsit is never resacrificed. Still I find myself confused on some levels. I hope I can state my questions well enough.
First of all, it seems confusing that we imitate the worship of heaven with the mass. But precisely how (if it is possiblew to know at all) does this worship look in heaven where there is no time? Meaning, when in heaven does this take place? is it eternally taking place? For instance, we offer the mass each day, but in heaven Christ only offers himself once and eternally comes through to the heavenly tabernacle. Therfore, when does it get offered in heaven and how? If it is only one time and we offer it each day, how are we participating in the worship of heaven if as soon as it happpens or happened in heaven it can never happen again. Is it one of those eternity vs. time distinctions? Are the angels always singing holy holy, Jesus always offering himself on our behalf etc? Is it an eternal ongoing endless wirship? but then how does it ever get offered, and then how can we keep offering it? will we see it happening in heaven or has it already eternally happened and now on earth we are just partaking on earth? Am I making sense?
Also in Hebrews it speaks of how the sacrifice of bulls and goats can never take away sins so they needed to be continually offered. whereas Christ really can cleanse us and our conscience and being a perfect sacrifice He only offers himself once. Yet if this is in contrast of neding to repeat the sacrice of blood and goats, and we believe that the Eucharist forgives our venial sins why is it that we seem to also follow this Hebrew model of needing to keep partaking in the sacrifice for forgiveness? So the sacrifice of bulls and goats did not take away the sins for a year or at all really? What did it do and why was it reoffered unless it had some efficacy? I can see how Christ's perfect sacrifice is able to take away sins, yet we also seem to think we ned to keep taking it in as long as we are alive to forgive our venial sins. So somehow only one sacrifice is needed to take away sins, but we need to partake of it regularly to have our sins forgiven. Is the distinction that it is the same perfect sacrifice only offered once each time and we are simply making it present to ourselves in the here and now? How is this different that the old covenant sacrificial system? Is it the same except that the sacrifice is one and eternal and completely effective yet the same in that we continue to make use of it? Did the other sacrifices not really forgive sins even for a period of time?
Brian
|
|
|
Br_Carlo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tyler, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 150 |
| First Name: | Br_Carlo (Vince Brach) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Presbyterian, Episcopalian, CATHOLIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 5th, 2007 08:36 pm |
|
God's peace. Brian wrote: "Did the other sacrifices not really forgive sins even for a period of time? "
In a word, no. They "covered" them, looking forward to that perfect sacrifice of Christ. As Scripture says, "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins" (Heb. 10: 4). Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1792 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 5th, 2007 10:14 pm |
|
brian wrote:One of my favorite things about the mass is the fact that it is somehow us breaking into the worship of heaven. And though we offer it each day, it is the same thing being offered each day. Christ is never resacrificed.
True, because, like Christ himself, the Mass is eternal.
It seems confusing that we imitate the worship of heaven with the mass. But precisely how (if it is possible to know at all) does this worship look in heaven where there is no time? Meaning, when in heaven does this take place? Is it eternally taking place? For instance, we offer the mass each day, but in heaven Christ only offers himself once and eternally comes through to the heavenly tabernacle. Therefore, when does it get offered in heaven and how?
It’s not a question of “when.” Since the Mass is eternal, and all things happen in eternity “now,” the easy conclusion is that the Mass is offered in heaven, not at any specific time (since there is no time in eternity), but simply “now.”
Is it one of those eternity vs. time distinctions? Are the angels always singing holy holy, Jesus always offering himself on our behalf, etc.? Is it an eternal ongoing endless worship? But then how does it ever get offered, and then how can we keep offering it?
Since there is no time in eternity, there is no “when” or duration; there is no “before,” “during” or “after.” What is done is done “now,” and it is complete “now.”
Christ really can cleanse us and our conscience, and being a perfect sacrifice He only offers himself once. Yet if this is in contrast of needing to repeat the sacrifice of blood and goats, and we believe that the Eucharist forgives our venial sins, why is it that we seem to also follow this Hebrew model of needing to keep partaking in the sacrifice for forgiveness?
We receive daily because we sin daily. The Eucharist in itself is perfect and sufficient for all time and all eternity. But we are not perfect recepticles of his grace. So it is because of our own imperfection that we need ever again the remedy for our ills.
Is the distinction that it is the same perfect sacrifice only offered once each time and we are simply making it present to ourselves in the here and now?
Correct. The sacrifice is eternal, but we live in time.
How is this different than the old covenant sacrificial system?
The sacrifice of bulls, etc., was a temporal sacrifice; Christ’s sacrifice is eternal. The sacrifice of created things is limited because created things are by nature limited; Christ’s sacrifice is without limits, because he is the infinite God.
The remainder was ably answered by Br. Carlo.
Blessings,
David
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 7th, 2007 03:21 pm |
|
I'm glad Brian brought up this subject. It's just another one of those "kinks" that I must work out in my understanding of the Catholic faith. Protestants often quote the following passage in Hebrews as a witness against the Catholic Mass. "And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, then to wait until his enemies should be made a stool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are santified. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts and write them on their minds," then he adds, "I will remember their sins and their misdeeds no more." Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin." Hebrews 10:11-18.
Protestants say that Christ has already offered Himself as a sacrifice and that sacrifice is sufficient for all time. Therefore, when we join ourselves to Him and accept His sacrifice and repent of our sins, we join ourselves to the finished work of Christ on the cross. This sacrifice doesn't need to be done repeatedly since a single offering has be made for all time, and to do so is to minimize His once and for all sacrifice on Calvary. How does a Catholic respond to this arguement?
Protestants say the law being written on our hearts and minds refers to the freedom we have in Christ, no longer having to follow the Old Covenant with its rules and regulations. Catholicism is a religion of rules and regulations. One must follow the Ten Commandments and all the other rules, (eating meat on Friday, Confession, etc.) in order to be saved. This is a works based religion. Where is the freedom in Christ? How does a Catholic respond to this arguement?
Protestants refer to verse 18, "Where there is forgiveness of these there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins" as a defense for Eternal Security and against the the Mass. They say, Christ forgave our sins, past, present and future - no offering needs to be made ever again since His offering is final and complete. And to question the completeness and efficacy of His offering is to doubt His sacrifice and your salvation. True salvation means trusting in His sacrifice and that it is complete. The Mass nullifies the finished work of Christ. It says that yes, Christ suffered and died but the only way we can receive forgiveness is to imitate and redo what He has already completed perfectly. We cannnot redo, as imperfect people, his perfect sacrifice. That is something only He could do. This is questioning Christ's abiltiy to forgive sins once and for all. How does a Catholic respond to this arguement?
I look forward to all your responses. I esp. would love to hear what David and Rick have to say. I really need some clarification on this.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
Br_Carlo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tyler, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 150 |
| First Name: | Br_Carlo (Vince Brach) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Presbyterian, Episcopalian, CATHOLIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 7th, 2007 04:13 pm |
|
God's peace. Let me add something to this, since I had to overcome these objections myself when I was on the road to Rome.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (hereafter CCC) clearly points out that the ONE sacrifice of Christ is never to be repeated, just as the Bible says and the Protestants teach. Where we differ is that the Catholic Church insists that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass are ONE AND THE SAME SACRIFICE. When we participate in the Mass, we are participating in THE VERY SAME SACRIFICE--not another sacrifice. Christ is NOT sacrificed again and again in the Mass!
As far as the assertion that Catholicism is a "works-religion" because the Church lays certain obligations on us, this is a pure smokescreen. ALL religions have requirements--otherwise, how could you tell that you are one of them? But the fact is that the authority to bind and loose, which is given to the Apostles (and of necessity, to their successors) gives the Catholic Church the AUTHORITY to enact and bind holy observances. The commands given to their followers by Protestant leaders are not binding on them, since their leaders lack apostolic authority. Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5080 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 7th, 2007 05:22 pm |
|
Darlene wrote: Catholicism is a religion of rules and regulations. One must follow the Ten Commandments and all the other rules, (eating meat on Friday, Confession, etc.) in order to be saved. This is a works based religion. Where is the freedom in Christ? How does a Catholic respond to this arguement?
Quite simply. There is no rule of the Church which condemns me. The rules and teachings are there to help me draw closer to Christ. And the ones that matter are based on scripture and the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. The others are just disciplines that can be changed at any time.
For example, I will not go to hell for eating meat on Friday. I will go to hell for failure to do penance, and the Church suggests that avoiding meat on Friday is one way to do penance. I must sacrifice, and unite my sacrifice to the cross, in order to be saved ("pick up your cross and follow me"). My former pastor used to tell us all the time that he would rather see us eating hamburgers on Friday than seafood platters. There is value in avoiding meat, but there is more value in a true sacrifice, and a south Louisiana seafood platter is no sacrifice at all!
The Church tells me a "better way" to follow my Savior, but my salvation comes not from works but from grace through faith. My works come from my salvation, not the other way around, and the "rules and regulations" of the Church are there to guide me on my path.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Br_Carlo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tyler, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 150 |
| First Name: | Br_Carlo (Vince Brach) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Presbyterian, Episcopalian, CATHOLIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 7th, 2007 07:45 pm |
|
God's peace. CajunRick said: "There is value in avoiding meat, but there is more value in a true sacrifice, and a south Louisiana seafood platter is no sacrifice at all!"
I don't know how things are in Cajunland, but here in east Texas a seafood platter pinches my wallet painfully--that, to me, is a penance!
Seriously, though, I have never eaten any kind of seafood that didn't make me feel like I was fasting an hour or two later. It just doesn't "stick to the ribs" like red meat. A whole day of seafood--kippers and eggs for breakfast, herring in sauce for lunch, and baked catfish for supper--and I'm fighting the cravings for meat all day long. This IS a penance! Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
Last edited on Thu Jun 7th, 2007 07:51 pm by Br_Carlo
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1792 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 7th, 2007 11:38 pm |
|
Darlene wrote:Protestants say that Christ has already offered Himself as a sacrifice and that sacrifice is sufficient for all time. Therefore, when we join ourselves to Him and accept His sacrifice and repent of our sins, we join ourselves to the finished work of Christ on the cross. This sacrifice doesn't need to be done repeatedly since a single offering has be made for all time, and to do so is to minimize His once and for all sacrifice on Calvary.
Catholics would agree. However, there is more to be said on the Catholic side.
Christ’s job of suffering and dying for us on earth is finished; that is why he returned to eternal heaven, where he rightfully belongs. His work of salvation is eternal, yet his job is just beginning. Somehow he has to make his sacrifice apply to us, living today, efficaciously. This requires that the finished sacrifice be made available here and now, and not be just an isolated event that took place two thousand years ago. We believe Christ provided a way for us to do that: the Mass, which is the temporal re-presentation of that same one-and-only sacrifice in our time and place. “Do this,” he said, “as a memorial of me.”
Protestants refer to [Hebrews 10,] verse 18, "Where there is forgiveness of these there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins" as a defense for Eternal Security and against the the Mass. They say, Christ forgave our sins, past, present and future — no offering needs to be made ever again since His offering is final and complete.
This line of reasoning inevitably leads to a dead end, because as one of our forum members saucily put it, “If Jesus forgave our sins, past, present and future, why do I have to behave?” In other words, if everything is already forgiven, why can’t one just do whatever he feels like doing instead of obeying a moral code?
The point is that there is more to the equation than is shown by the Protestant statement. Is is this: Christ gains forgiveness for us (present tense, not past) insofar as we respond positively to his call for obedience and uprightness. Jesus’ own words in Matthew 7:21–27:
“Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’
“Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell; and great was the fall of it.”
The Mass nullifies the finished work of Christ.
Christ’s work remains intact and eternal in the Mass, even as it brings his unique and efficacious sacrifice into the lives of the present generation. What Catholics affirm differently than Protestants is the eternity of the salvific act and the unfinished work of the living human individual — which, as can be seen above, is thoroughly biblical.
It [the Catholic Mass] says that yes, Christ suffered and died but the only way we can receive forgiveness is to imitate and redo what He has already completed perfectly. We cannnot redo, as imperfect people, his perfect sacrifice. That is something only He could do. This is questioning Christ's ability to forgive sins once and for all.
Catholics are not “redoing” but “re-presenting” and “living” what Christ bade us “do as a memorial of me.” Christ is still the one sacrificing, the one sacrificed and the one accepting and forgiving. We don’t do these things; Christ does. And he does it in and through the Mass, which is the sacrament of his body and blood, his “glorification,” as he himself calls his passion and death.
Protestants say the law being written on our hearts and minds refers to the freedom we have in Christ, no longer having to follow the Old Covenant with its rules and regulations. Catholicism is a religion of rules and regulations. One must follow the Ten Commandments and all the other rules, (eating meat on Friday, Confession, etc.) in order to be saved. This is a works based religion. Where is the freedom in Christ?
As Br. Carlo points out, all religions have rules and regulations, behavioral expectations. So where is the difference? I see this as an empty objection which in the process twists the whole idea of morality and minimum expectations to something other than what every Christian — Catholics included — seeks in his adherence to faith, hope and love: the joy and freedom of participating in the divine nature (cf. 2 Peter 1:4).
David
|
|
|
Juan
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 17th, 2006 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 247 |
| First Name: | unregister | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | unregister |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 8th, 2007 12:01 am |
|
So the sacrifice of bulls and goats did not take away the sins for a year or at all really?
The sacrifice of bulls and goats was a symbol and type of the Blood of Christ, who is the Lamb of God.
The Blood of Christ in the Holy Eucharist is a Real Presence in the guise of wine. But the blood of bulls and goats is merely a symbol of the real sacrifice to come.
But the Jews sins were forgiven by God. God doesn't lie. He says:
Leviticus 4:26 But the fat he shall burn upon it, as is wont to be done with the victims of peace offerings: and the priest shall pray for him, and for his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.
Sincerely,
Juan
|
|
|
Br_Carlo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Tyler, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 150 |
| First Name: | Br_Carlo (Vince Brach) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Presbyterian, Episcopalian, CATHOLIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 8th, 2007 08:17 am |
|
God's peace. No, Juan, God doesn't lie. But the writer of Hebrews wasn't lying either when he said that it is not possible that the blood of goats and bulls should take away (i.e., forgive, in the sense of carrying off or away; Gr. aphaireo) sins. The bloody sacrifices covered them; God, acting through the priest and looking ahead to Christ's work, forgave them.
I think it is significant that "forgive" in the the OT sense of "cover" (Heb. kephar, Gr. epikalupto) is not alluded to in the NT except when quoting something from the OT, as in Rom. 4: 7. The OT bloody sacrifices in and of themselves never forgave sins--they only anticipated the sacrifice of Christ, which really does forgive sins. "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers themelves perfect" (Heb. 10: 1). Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
|
|
|
Juan
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 17th, 2006 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 247 |
| First Name: | unregister | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | unregister |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 14th, 2007 09:24 pm |
|
God's peace.
God's peace.
No, Juan, God doesn't lie. But the writer of Hebrews wasn't lying either when he said that it is not possible that the blood of goats and bulls should take away (i.e., forgive, in the sense of carrying off or away; Gr. aphaireo) sins. The bloody sacrifices covered them; God, acting through the priest and looking ahead to Christ's work, forgave them.
Sounds as though we agree that the blood of goats and bulls can't take away sin. So, we can eliminate this part of the discussion.
And, we agree that God forgave their sins.
The rest of your argument is interesting however.
I think it is significant that "forgive" in the the OT sense of "cover" (Heb. kephar, Gr. epikalupto)
Here is what the Blue Letter Bible says on the word forgiven.
is not alluded to in the NT except when quoting something from the OT, as in Rom. 4: 7. The OT bloody sacrifices in and of themselves never forgave sins--they only anticipated the sacrifice of Christ, which really does forgive sins. "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers themelves perfect" (Heb. 10: 1). Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~
Brother,
I agree that in the OT, the word for forgiven frequently means covered:
Psalms 31
1 To David himself, understanding. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
But, are you insinuating that the "sins are covered" in the Old Testament has something of Martin Luther's connotation of "snow covered dung hill"?
If that is true, then I believe you are mistaken.
In the Old Testament, the term "sins are covered" is more akin to a father who pays for his son's debts. For example, if my own son were to incur a debt he couldn't pay, I would say, "Don't worry son, I'll cover your debt."
Now, when I cover my son's debt, his debt is gone, I owe it. And when God covers a man's sin, that sin is gone, He pays it.
But lets start at the very beginning. The Old Testament, the Law of Moses, is on a different plane than the New Covenant in the Blood of Christ. St. Paul beautifully highlights this when he says that Moses glory faded. Remember how Moses face would glow after he spoke to God? And he would have to cover his face, until that glory faded and men could again look upon his face. That was a sign that the glory of the Old Testament would fade. But the Glory of the New Testament does not fade. Because Jesus is the Glory of God Himself.
When a Jew sinned, he broke faith with the Old Covenant. When he repented he was brought back to justice with the Old Covenant. But the Old Covenant did not bridge Original Sin.
Jesus Christ bridged Original Sin when He established the Sacrament of Baptism. He actuated the graces of the New Testament, including the graces of Baptism when He died on the Cross.
Anyway, if you can follow my disjointed thinking, those are my thoughts on this matter. I'm not certain I'm correct. I do believe however, that the Old Testament use of the Hebrew word "cover" meant "forgive" in every sense that ithe Greek "take away" means "forgive" in the New Testament. Except that God waited for the New Testament era to wipe away or heal the breach of Original Sin on the Cross at Calvary.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Sincerely,
JuanLast edited on Thu Jun 14th, 2007 09:33 pm by Juan
|
|
|
Current time is 09:45 pm | |
|
|
|
|
|
