Below is my response to an article sent to me by a Protestant friend who wanted a Catholic perspective. The article is by Rebecca Brown, from "Former Catholics for Christ" and details her objections to the Holy Eucharist. My response will be in BLUE
I have finally gotten around to putting down some of what Rebecca Brown ( who we previously discussed) thinks of the RCC. It is no reflection of mine as I have no concrete opinion on the RCC as to whether or not it is okay, but I would like some feed back when you have time. There is no rush however.
What she says; She starts by quoting the scripture Romans 6; 16-23, about having only one master. She then "applies" this to the "Jesus" the RCC worship.
Quote; " First, I want to establish from their own documentation that the doctrines defined in the council of Trent are still in force. The start of the Ecumenial movement by the Vatican II Council held after World War II has led many to believe that the doctrines of Trent are no longer in effect. Look at the following quote: Although called a Dogmatic Constitution, the most solemn form of counciliar utterance, Lumen Gentium does not actually define any new dogmas. It sets forth, with counciliar authority, the Churches present understand of her own nature. ( Documents of Vactican II, Walter M Abbott, S J editor Guild press NY 1966 p11)."
The fact that the doctrines defined at Trent are "still in force" comes as a surprise only to Ms Brown.
Lumen Gentium, then refers to the document from which I am quoting and is considered by the RCC to be the "Light of All Nations". This important document clearly states that it does not define any new doctrines or dogmas, therefore, the doctrines stated in the Council of Trent are still in force. I am quoting from the Council of Trent because this is one of the most clear and concise statements of the Catholic doctrines available.
Now let us look at how the Council of Trent defines the "Jesus" which the RCC worships.
If anyone denies that in the sacrement of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as a sign, or figure or force, let him be anathema ( canons 1)
If anyone denies that in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist the whole Christ is contained under each from and under each part of each form when seperated, let him be anathema . (Canon 3)
If anyone says that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ the only begotten Son of God, is not to be adored with the worship of latria, also outwardly manifested and is consequently neither to be venerated with a special festive solemnity, nor to be solomnly borne about in procession according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of the holy church, or is not to be set publicly before the people to adored and that the adorers therof are idolaters, let him be anathema. (Canon 6).
They are plainly stating that the wafer used in communion ( or mass) and the wine ARE Jesus and contain his whole divinity.....
For the sake of clarity, these are canons from the 13th Session of the Council of Trent, but yes.
Canon 6 states that the Catholic people are to worship and adore the wafer and bow down to it. They also bear it about in procession and everyone bows down to it and worships that wafer which is now their "Jesus"....... Not only are the Catholics making an image which is the wafer then proclaiming that image to be Jesus, but they are also bowing down and worshipping the wafer. This entire practise is forbidden by God.....any time a person worships an idol such as the Catholic wafer he/she is actually worshipping a demon or satan.
Even in the strictest definition of idolatry, this is completely untrue. We are to have no gods before Him, "The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of 'IDOLS, (of) silver and gold, the work of men's hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see.' These empty IDOLS make their worshippers empty: 'Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them.'[Ps 115:4-5, 8 ; cf. Isa 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16 ; Dan 14:1-30; Wis 13: 1-15:19] God, however, is the 'living God' [Josh 3:10; Ps 42:3] who gives life and intervenes in history." (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2112)
Furthermore, the Church also teaches that "Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.[St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II, 81, 3 ad 3.]" (CCC 2132)
Therefore, Catholics absolutely do not worship "the wafer" itself.
She goes on to say... as the Catholics carry the wafer in procession, everyone bows down as it passes..... Also a wafer is usually kept in a box called a tabernacle at the front of every Catholic church. People bow down before the box. When they do this they are worshipping the wafer.
Again, Catholics are not worshipping the wafer, the altar, the tabernacle, the crucifix, the pews, the stained glass, the carpet, the holy water font, the candles, the hymnals, organ pipes, or any other inanimate object....
As we have seen this is NOT the true Jesus....This is witchcraft.
It is hardly witchcraft. The Real Presence of Jesus is seen clearly in Scripture as well as the practices of the early Christians. It is Ms. Brown who accepts the novel, unbiblical and unhistorical notion that communion is merely symbolic, as I shall demonstrate below:
Ms. Brown denies that Jesus becomes fully present in the bread and wine, thus making the wafer an "idol". Let's see what the Bible has to say about it: At least 8 times in John chapter 6 Jesus says he is the bread of life (Jn 6:27, 32, 33, 35, 48, 50, 51, 58) and at least 7 times he tells his disciples to eat the Bread of Life (Jn 6:50, 51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58). However, when Jesus told them this, "“The Jews murmured about him..." (Jn 6:41), but Jesus makes it very clear, saying "For my flesh is TRUE FOOD, and my blood is TRUE DRINK. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him”( John 6:55-56)
“Then, many of his disciples who were listening said, ‘This saying is hard; who can accept it?’
Jesus makes no attempt to say He was speaking metaphorically, but only asks, “Does this shock you? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?” (John 6:61-62)
“As a result of this, many of His disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied Him”
Jesus again doesn’t explain that He was only speaking metaphorically, but only turns to the 12 Apostles and asks, “Do you also want to leave?” (John 6:67) In other words, Jesus makes absolutely no attempt to say that he was speaking only symbolically, and even allows his disciples to leave him because of what he said. Can you find another episode in the Bible where the followers of Jesus left him because of a doctrinal disagreement?
This belief is shared by Paul, who wrote, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor.10:16). and to emphasize the Real Presence of Christ he wrote, “Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:27). In the language of the time, being guilty of the body and blood of the Lord is to be guilty of murder. How can it be murder if the wafer is merely symbolic, as Rebecca Brown would like to believe?
As further proof that Jesus couldn't be speaking symbolically, "eat my flesh" means to cause serious physical or emotional harm: for example:
"you who hate the good and love the evil, who tear the skin from off my people, and their flesh from off their bones; who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them, and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron." - (Micah 3:2-3)
"When evil men advance against me to devour my flesh, when my enemies and my foes attack me, they will stumble and fall." (Psalm 27:2) and
"Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts the land is burned, and the people are like fuel for the fire; no man spares his brother. They snatch on the right, but are still hungry, and they devour on the left, but are not satisfied; each devours his neighbor's flesh" (Is 9:18-20)
"Pour out thy wrath upon the nations that know thee not, and upon the peoples that call not on thy name; for they have devoured Jacob; they have devoured him and consumed him, and have laid waste his habitation." (Jer 10:25)
So we see that the symbolic interpretation of John 6 doesn't make sense at all.
Note also that The Apostles continued this tradition:
“They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers” (Acts 2:42)
“Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and to breaking bread in their homes” (Acts 2:46)
“On the first day of the week when we gathered to break bread….” (Acts 20:7)
So we've seen that the Apostles accepted Jesus' teaching (Acts 2:42, 2:46, 20:7), we've seen that Paul specifically reiterates this fact to the Corinthians (1 Cor 10:16 and 1 Cor 11:27). Now you should see how Rebecca Brown's opinion is not shared by those early Christians immediately after the lifetime of Christ:
Irenaeus of Lyons
"He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, 'This is my body.' The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood. He taught the new sacrifice of the new covenant, of which Malachi, one of the twelve [minor] prophets, had signified beforehand: 'You do not do my will, says the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept a sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is my name among the gentiles, says the Lord Almighty' [Mal. 1:10-11]. By these words he makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; but that in every place sacrifice will be offered to him, and indeed, a pure one, for his name is glorified among the Gentiles" (Against Heresies 4:17:5).
Cyprian of Carthage
"If Christ Jesus, our Lord and God, is himself the high priest of God the Father; and if he offered himself as a sacrifice to the Father; and if he commanded that this be done in commemoration of himself, then certainly the priest, who imitates that which Christ did, truly functions in place of Christ" (Letters 63:14).
Cyril of Jerusalem
"Then, having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth his Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before him, that he may make the bread the Body of Christ and the wine the Blood of Christ, for whatsoever the Holy Spirit has touched is surely sanctified and changed. Then, upon the completion of the spiritual sacrifice, the bloodless worship, over that propitiatory victim we call upon God for the common peace of the churches, for the welfare of the world, for kings, for soldiers and allies, for the sick, for the afflicted; and in summary, we all pray and offer this sacrifice for all who are in need" (Catechetical Lectures 23:7-8).
So, Catholics believe that there is strong scriptural evidence for believing in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, backed up by the writings of the early Christians - a practice continued for nearly 2000 years now. Brown quotes Rom 6:16-23, with which Catholic firmly agree. Note it says "But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life." Truly, it is by the one-time sacrifice of Christ that we obtain sanctification and its end, eternal life, made possible because Christ's sacrifice transcends all time, As it says in Hebrews "Therefore, brothers, since through the blood of Jesus (the Eucharist) we have confidence of entrance into the sanctuary by the new and living way he opened for us through the veil, that is, his flesh (the Eucharist)" (Heb 3:19-20). It is in this everlasting sacrifice that Catholics participate in, in the liturgy of the Mass, and since there is strong biblical evidence that Christ is truly present, the wafer is most certainly not worshipped as an idol, but it is the true presence of Christ that is worshipped.
Rebecca Brown can accept the mind-bending idea that Jesus was both fully human and fully God, that He was born without sin to a virgin Mary, that He walked on water and performed many miracles, yet refuses to accept that it is within Jesus' power to become present in bread and wine? How contradictory is that?
In actual fact the mass is considered an actual sacrifice of Jesus each time it is celebrated. " If anyone says that in the mass a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God, or that to be offered to God is nothing else than that Christ is given for us to eat, let him be anathema." (Canon 1)
" If anyone says that the sacrifice of the mass is one only of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice cunsumated on the cross but not a propitiary one ( to gain or regain the favour of, to appease) or that it profits him only who receives, ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions and other necessities, let him be anathema". (Canon 3)
These Canons clearly show us that the mass is actually a sacrifice.
These quotes are from the 22nd Session, but she neglected Canon IV "If any one saith, that, by the sacrifice of the mass, a blasphemy is cast upon the most holy sacrifice of Christ consummated on the cross; or, that it is thereby derogated from; let him be anathema."
Is Christ sacrificed repeatedly? Absolutely not. Catholics heartily affirm that Christ died once and for all (Heb 7:27; 9:12; 10:10). The event of Christ's passion and crucifixion was a single event in history, HOWEVER, I think even Rebecca Brown would agree that the effects of Christ's crucifixion are felt today. In the very same way, Christ's sacrifice continues eternally now for us. He always is making intercession for us as the Messiah - He is not bound by the constraints of linear time and history. Therefore, it is in the Mass that the sacrifice of Christ is RE-presented. It is by no means a new sacrifice, but it is the re-presentation of Christ's one-time sacrifice in which Catholics (and Protestants) benefit from. You can't repeat something that has no end. Looking at Malachi 1:11 we see that the sacrifice of Jesus was foretold as a continuous one pure offering "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts."
In other words, it is by Christ's continuous intercession for us that we are able to obtain forgiveness for our past, present and future sins. For example, Christ died around 30 A.D., but you and I were born in the 20th Century. Since Christ died "once and for all" almost two thousand years before we were even born, does this mean we can't have forgiveness of our sins? Of course not - Christ's sacrifice transcends time and space. It is only when the Second Coming is complete that Christ's sacrifice will be over.
It is interesting that the mass as practised in RC is almost identical to the custom of a bloodless sacrifice practiced in thr Roman Empire during the time of the first formation of the Catholic church. Rev A Hislop has some interesting comments to make about this practise.."If the sun-divinity was worshipped in Egypt as the seed, or in Babylon as the corn, precisely so is the wafer adored in Rome. Bread-corn of the elect, have mercy upon us is one of the appointed prayers of the Roman Litany, adderessed tothe wafer, in the celebration of the mass.."
As I've mentioned several times before, any similarities between two groups of people doesn't even come close to proving that one descended from the other. Anyway, the "seed" or "corn" worship in Egypt and Babylon isn't like the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because it is worship of God made present in the wafer. As Paul pointed out, Christian communion is a participation in the Body and Blood of Christ as His one-time sacrifice, which is different from the pagan killing of the sacrificial victim (1 Cor 10:14-22)
Ms. Brown is taking her information from Alexander Hislop's "The Two Babylons", written in over 100 years ago. His reference to the "sun-divinity" does not take into account that the Bible itself uses sun symbolism for God (Mal 3:20-21). Hislop was by no means a reliable historian; in fact, Ralph Woodrow, who wrote a similar book based on Hislop's work called "Babylon Mystery Religion", has since then publically acknowledged that both books were poorly researched and did not reflect accurate scholarship. He even wrote a new book stating his retractions, called "The Babylon Connection?". I encourage you to read it.
And so it goes on.All this is a continual quote from her book "Prepare for War" Is she right in how she says the commununion is celebrated by the RCC. I would be interested to have a second opinion as I have no time to research all this stuff to see if it is quoted correctly
Basically, she presented correctly the writings of the Council of Trent, but then drew her own conclusions based upon her Protestant bias. Her opinions are isolated from the Bible itself, the Apostles, and early Christians. In fact, as yet another example of the fracturing of Christianity with the Reformation, Martin Luther himself believed in the Real Presence, and therefore was considered a heretic by another famous Protestant named John Calvin, who wrote:
"He has sinned . . . from ignorance and the grossest extravagance. For what absurdities he pawned upon us . . . when he said the bread is the very body! . . . a very foul error!
{Letter to Martin Bucer, Jan. 12, 1538; from John Calvin: Selections From His Writings,)
And so, Christ becomes truly present for us, the Body of Christ, such that His sacrifice is made available for all of us - in His own words, "and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." (Mt 28:20).
peace be with you
Clay