Christians/Catholics weigh in on what you think if viewing a mass is the same as participating?

Question

(eating with) those who oppose your beliefs? What do you think?
"The crucifixion of Jesus was "once and for all".
The Mass is sacrificing Jesus over and over again, which is saying that the sacrifice on the cross was not good enough.
I would not attend a mass because it is blasphemy." was Booth G's answer to whether a Protestant should attend a mass including the eucharist even if aware of the doctrinal differences and not participating?
I can't understand the Catholic views on this yet either as to why they think a Protestant couldn't give the proper respect to the supper yet we think the same of them?? And who gives a priest the duty of a "sacrificial minister" who acts "in the place of Christ" if Christ is the only mediator between God and man and why would you bow and fold your arms across your chest to another human being?

MJQ, we read the same scriptures. I'm asking about the differences of interpretation. Still looking for the answers please?

Answer 1

Wow, okay, let's try taking this one at a time.

1. Viewing Mass = Participation?
Mass is a prayer to God. It is worship, petition, adoration. A Christian attending a Mass is participating in this. But if you do not receive communion, you are not "eating with" them, you're keeping one step aloof. Viewing Mass without partaking in the Eucharist is thus partial participation.

2. Crucifixion "once and for all?"
Yes, Jesus' crucifixion was good enough, and for all time; it's not like He needs to keep getting crucified. Jesus, however, said 'Do this in memory of me.' Offering the Eucharist at Mass is a reminder to God of Jesus' sacrifice (much like the rainbow is a reminder of His covenant). Protestants teach that you must accept His sacrifice in order to be saved. This is what the Catholics are doing. They are accepting the sacrifice and offering it to God.

3. Attendance w/o Eucharistic participation?
To be honest, Mass without Eucharistic participation could easily be a Protestant service. You've got song, communal confession/repentence, Scriptural readings, homily, Petitions, sign of peace, and worship. What part of that do you disagree with? Being aware of differences doesn't mean you condone them, and to refuse to enter into worship with a fellow Christian seems to be a rejection of the unity Christ called for.

4. Respecting the Eucharist?
There is a huge difference between taking bread and wine and taking God. The reverence, the understanding, the mind-set is all wrong if you believe you're just eating bread and drinking wine and nothing more. You may respect the re-enactment of the Last Supper, but I'm sure you wouldn't treat it with the same reverence as you would to God if He appeared in front of you. I think that's the difference.

5. Sacrificial Minister?
I don't believe that anyone acts "in the place of Christ," but there have been "sacrificial ministers" since the time of Levi. Then Hebrews 7:12 indicates that this old priesthood is to be replaced with a new priesthood - a complete priesthood, not merely one man. At the Last Supper, Jesus told the Apostles to "do this in memory of me." Isn't that charging them with the Eucharistic duty? And this is transferred to priests today through apostolic succession and the laying on of hands (1 Tim. 4:14 and Col 1:25, for example).

6. Christ only mediator?
The OT has priests offering sacrifices to God. The NT has God charging the Apostles to re-enact the Last Supper (Eucharist). 1 Tim 2:5 states that Jesus is the only mediator between God and the human race, but 1 Tim 2:1 also states that we should intercede for others before God. Acts gives numerous references to the Apostles being God's instruments on Earth - performing miracles, etc. Rev 8:4 has an angel offering our prayers up to God. Perhaps Tim means, then, that Jesus is the great mediator, the one for the race in general, but that individuals can still be intercessors for others on the personal and group level.

7. Bowing and crossed arms?
And you don't bow your head to receive God's blessing (for I know what you're talking about)? It's an expression of humbleness before God. The crossed arms are not a sign of reverence, but merely an indication that one does not wish to receive communion. It is a clear and obvious indication, but any other would do just as well.

Answer 2

The Mass is not "sacrificing Jesus over and over". It is the re-presenting of the once and for all time sacrifice of Christ on the cross, keeping that once and for all time sacrifice present to His followers until the end of time, rather than allowing it to become merely an ancient historical event with no direct connection to the present. This is why our Lord, Savior and Founder, Jesus Christ, after personally celebrating the first Mass, commanded the first priests of His Church, "do THIS [what I have just done] in remembrance of Me". Does your church obey this direct command from the lips of God Himself? If not, why not? Mine does!
.

Answer 3

Cute question ... definitely an attention-getter. But you have a valid point. If someone else wants to have sex with you, or someone else wants to talk about religion with you, then it's okay; but don't force yourself on someone in either case! Hey, I think we've come up with a new concept: religious rape! .

Answer 4

Christ said "This do in rememberance of me" at the last supper, he held the first Mass. I suspect that you are just a rabble rouser and from your"Traveler" screen name a silly communist.

Answer 5

Eucharist is a sacrament:

Luke, Chapter 22:

19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Answer 6

you seem to be troubled by many things....I hope you find what your looking for before it's to late.

Answer 7

keep it simple.