The Mass and Scripture

The Light Shines in the Darkness...

This article will respond the few texts used by Roman Catholics to support the Mass. All scripture quotes are taken from the NASB (emphasis mine):

Malachi 1:11

“’For from the rising of the sun even to its setting, My name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense is going to be offered to My name, and a grain offering that is pure; for My name will be great among the nations,’ says the LORD of hosts.’”

Commentary:

This prophecy of Malachi foretells of a coming time when God’s name will be praised in all the nations of the earth. Latching onto the grain offering part, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that this prophecy is fulfilled in the Mass as a propitiatory sacrifice.

It is true that the verse says that the grain will be offered. However, this is playing off of the context from the preceding verses where God is scolding the priests in post-exile Israel because they were not performing their duties properly. All God is saying is that when His name is spread throughout the earth, the Gentiles will greatly welcome His grace and will not blaspheme His name because they will not forsake His commandments.

But let us pretend that it does refer to the actual bread in the Lord’s Supper (because it could be an allegorical fulfillment of this prophecy). What does this prove? It proves that the Eucharist is an offering of thanks and praise, not a propitiatory sacrifice. It was the majority opinion amongst the early fathers that the Eucharist was a fulfillment of Malachi 1:11 in that it was an offering of thanks and praise. Justin Martyr is representative of this interpretation:

“’And I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands; for from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is glorified among the Gentiles (He says); but ye profane it.’ Yet even now, in your love of contention, you assert that God does not accept the sacrifices of those who dwelt then in Jerusalem, and were called Israelites; but says that He is pleased with the prayers of the individuals of that nation then dispersed, and calls their prayers sacrifices. Now, that prayers and giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God, I also admit. For such alone Christians have undertaken to offer…” (emphasis mine)

-Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 117

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-48.htm#P5023_1128054

Notice that one of the earliest of the church fathers viewed the giving of thanks and praise as the only “perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God”, and therefore, it is obvious that he had no concept of the Eucharist being a propitiatory sacrifice.

[For a further refutation of the Roman Catholic interpretation of this passage, go here: http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol30/htm/iv.ii.vi.htm.]

Matthew 26:26-28

“While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them saying, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.”

Commentary:

The Roman Catholic apologist says that when Jesus says, “This is My body…this is My blood,” He meant the disciples to take it literally. However, this is just another case like John 6 where the Roman Catholic eliminates the possibility of the use of a metaphor from the outset for polemical reasons.

The Catholic apologist has a counter-argument at this point and says, “Jesus wouldn’t have spoken in metaphorical language like He did in the parables because this was a very important moment and one of the last moments that He had with His disciples before his crucifixion.” Of course, this begs the question: How do you know Jesus wouldn’t have done that? Second, in John 15, He is alone with His disciples only moments before His betrayal, and He does start speaking in metaphors (“I am the true vine…”).

Something that does point to this being a metaphor is the very next verse, verse 29: “But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.” Here, He calls what Roman Catholics tell us is His blood the “fruit of the vine” (i.e. actual wine). Therefore, it is quite clear that He is speaking metaphorically.

John 6:53-58

[I covered this in my article on John 6: An Exegesis.]

1 Corinthians 11:27

“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.”

Commentary:

The Roman Catholic apologist uses this verse to say that the elements in the Lord’s Supper are truly the body and blood of the Lord. They believe that Paul was saying that the mishandling of the consecrated host was a mortal sin.

First, to say that it was a mortal sin is eisegetical. They were dishonoring Christ’s institution which represented His atonement, and thus, they were not guilty of His blood in the same way Judas and Pontius Pilate were. In verse 32, Paul says that if they are judged as having been guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, then they will be disciplined so that they “will not be condemned along with the world” (i.e. they will suffer chastisement in this life but will still go to Heaven). Thus, this was a serious sin, but it was not a damnable one. The reason that it was a sin was because they were being gluttonous with the Lord’s Supper, not because they were mishandling some consecrated host that was actually Christ’s body.

Second, Paul says that the bread after consecration is still bread (v.26), and he said that the Corinthians were getting drunk off of the wine. Tell me: How can one get drunk off of blood? These two things point to the fact that the bread and wine are symbols of Christ’s body and blood.

Side Note: It is clear in this text that the entire church at Corinth was partaking of the cup (i.e. the wine which represents the blood of Christ). However, in Roman Catholicism, the laity is not allowed to partake of the cup. Throughout the early church, the laity drank from the cup, but in the 15^th Century, the Roman Catholic ecumenical Council of Constance forbade the laity to drink from the cup. This is another evidence that Roman Catholicism is unbiblical seeing that they “transgress the commandment for the sake of [their] tradition” (Matthew 15:3).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, some helpful audio on this topic can be found at:

http://www.straitgate.com/webster/

Some helpful online reading can be found here:

http://members.aol.com/jasonte3/rceuch.htm