Catholics say, that the "sacrifice of the mass", is a representation of Calvary, not a re-sacrifice. But the breakdown of what is happening during the consecration, in the Catholic Encyclopedia, sounds like a separate sacrifice to me. Here is a discussion I was having with a Catholic friend of mine-
" This statement is from the Catholic encyclopedia. You might say "its not cannon" but not everything the priest and seminary teach is in the cannon, and to discover the subtle differences you have to read the encyclopedia. Written by priest and important "theologians". You need a lawyer to read it. The exposition of "the sacrifice of the mass" is Pages long. But I found that this summary sums up what they believe about it. It states-
#2 This is proven in the next statement-"the Mass will not consist in a mere relation, but will be revealed as in itself a real sacrifice;" This says that it does not just relate to calvary, but is "In Itself a real sacrifice". Direct contradiction.
#3 The term "Mystical slaying" forever changed my comfort in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.
#4. In the Eucharistic prayers said before the consecration, the priest says, "May my sacrifice and yours be acceptable to God" Again, another separate sacrifice
#5. If by cannon definition the sacrifice is the same as on Calvary except that it is unbloody, then why was I taught from preschool that it was actually the very blood of Christ, NOT a symbol?"
How can Catholics allow this to be in the Encyclopedia?
" This statement is from the Catholic encyclopedia. You might say "its not cannon" but not everything the priest and seminary teach is in the cannon, and to discover the subtle differences you have to read the encyclopedia. Written by priest and important "theologians". You need a lawyer to read it. The exposition of "the sacrifice of the mass" is Pages long. But I found that this summary sums up what they believe about it. It states-
- the twofold consecration must show not only the relative, but also the absolute moment of sacrifice, so that the Mass will not consist in a mere relation, but will be revealed as in itself a real sacrifice;
- the act of sacrifice (actio sacrifica), veiled in the double consecration, must refer directly to the sacrificialmatter — i.e. the Eucharistic Christ Himself — not to the elements of bread and wine or their unsubstantial species;
- the sacrifice of Christ must somehow result in a kenosis, not in a glorification, since this latter is at most the object of the sacrifice, not the sacrifice itself;
- since this postulated kenosis, however, can be no real, but only a mystical or sacramental one, we must appraise intelligently those moments which approximate in any degree the "mystical slaying" to a real exinanition, instead of rejecting them.
#2 This is proven in the next statement-"the Mass will not consist in a mere relation, but will be revealed as in itself a real sacrifice;" This says that it does not just relate to calvary, but is "In Itself a real sacrifice". Direct contradiction.
#3 The term "Mystical slaying" forever changed my comfort in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.
#4. In the Eucharistic prayers said before the consecration, the priest says, "May my sacrifice and yours be acceptable to God" Again, another separate sacrifice
#5. If by cannon definition the sacrifice is the same as on Calvary except that it is unbloody, then why was I taught from preschool that it was actually the very blood of Christ, NOT a symbol?"
How can Catholics allow this to be in the Encyclopedia?