[The Roman Catholic
Church is a false religious system which has deceived and
enslaved millions down through the years. In the name of
Christianity, it preaches another gospel-a false gospel-which
places it under God's curse. Galatians1:6-9. During the 16th
century Reformation and the four centuries which followed, the
word "Protestant" was ascribed to Bible believers who
recognized and warned about the errors and evils of the Roman
Catholic system-and separated from it. With the rise the
ecumenical movement (apostasy and unbelief) around the turn of
the century, liberal Protestant leaders began a move back to
Rome. In the last two decades many evangelicals, charismatic and
some professed fundamentalists have also joined the pilgrimage
back to Rome. Dr. Billy Graham, the world's most prominent
evangelist, and other evangelical leaders increasingly treat the
Roman Catholic Church as a part of Christianity instead of the
false religious system it is and always has been. The following
article, written over eighty years ago by a faithful servant of
God, is reprinted here with the prayer that it may be used of
the Lord to open the eyes of true believers and Roman Catholics
alike to the diabolical nature and meaning of the Mass which is
at the very heart of Catholicism.-Ed.]
THE
LORD'S SUPPER. in the
Roman Catholic Church, is called "The Mass" a word
which in itself has no significance, being merely a modification
the phrase, "Ite, missa est,"-"Go, the
assembly is dismissed," which was uttered in the early
assemblies of the church at the dismissing of the congregation,
after which those who remained partook of the emblems in the
Lord's Supper. By a strange use-or rather misuse-the words of
dismissal uttered at the end of one service became in the word
"Mass" the name for the service which followed.
But that which this word
"Mass" represents-in itself so meaningless -yet having
an overshadowing significance in Romanism, a system to which it
is distinctive and peculiar-goes far beyond any idea or
conception that can be found in the New Testament.
The Christian sees in the Lord's
Supper a memorial, a communion, a feast of thanksgiving, and
some indeed regard it as a sacrament, but in Rome it is a
"Sacrifice"!—ceremony in which the celebrant boldly
claims to offer for the living and the dead, a repetition of the
atoning sacrifice of Christ on Calvary. That this involves not
merely a difference in words, expressions and forms, but of
vital faith and practice will at once be seen. It includes the
belief that the officiating priest actually changes the elements
of bread and wine into the real body and blood of Christ, the
process by which this change is effected being called
"Transubstantiation."
This is Rome's bold and
fearless, yea uncompromising avowal, and as we look upon it, so
clearly presented, we see the very heart of Romish error.
Rome has many superstitions,
follies, misleading forms and erroneous doctrines such as
Mariolatry, purgatory, confession, saint-worship, prayers for
the dead, priestly absolution, spurious sacraments, etc., etc.,
but none of these can be compared in point of danger, to the
blasting power of the Mass.
Let this doctrine be accepted,
and there logically follows the belief that a priest can create
God! And having created Him, that he can and does offer Him as a
sacrifice for sin!
For the testing of such a claim,
there can be only one tribunal, and that is the Word of God. But
when tested here we find only, and everywhere, definite and
conclusive contradiction. If there is one thing the Word of God
does not teach, it is this. If there is one thing the Word of
God opposes, it is this.
These assertions may be easily
sustained, for—
First: The doctrine of
the Mass denies the all-sufficiency of the sacrifice of
Christ,-the Atonement,-a truth which the Bible has safeguarded
at every point, in language that cannot be misunderstood. For
example, in Hebrews 9:12 we read, "By His [Christ's] own
blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained
eternal redemption for s." If the believer's redemption is
eternal is it not in itself sufficient? Again in Hebrews 9:28,
"So Christ was once [not 'many times to be'] offered to
bear the sins of many." Again, Hebrews 10:10, "By the
which [God's] will we are sanctified through the offering of the
body of Jesus Christ once for all." Again, Hebrews
10:12,14, "But this Man [Jesus Christ] after He had offered
one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of
God....For by one offering He hath perfected forever them that
are sanctified." And all this is corroborated by the Holy
Spirit, for we read in Hebrews 10:15, "Whereof the Holy
Ghost is a witness to us." Added to these clear statements
are the conclusive words found in the 17th and 18th verses of
the tenth chapter. "And their sins and iniquities will I
remember no more. Now where remission of these is, there is no
more offering for sin." How definitely do all these
quotations harmonize with the dying testimony of our Lord,
sealed with His own precious blood, "It is finished."
The truth is also at once
brought to light by the simple question, Where is our Lord Jesus
Christ right now? Is He still a curse? Is He still forsaken as
He was when He hung on the cross as a sacrifice for sin? The
priest in his claim of sacrificing (crucifying) Christ afresh
answers, "Yes!" Surely that is what the offering again
of the body and blood of Christ means; that He is still a curse,
still forsaken of God. But the Word of God answers,
"No!" by telling us distinctly that Christ is now at
the right hand of God, Himself the High Priest making
intercession for His people. That is, the Bible tells us that
Christ is now Himself performing the very office which the
priest on earth claims to be fulfilling for those who resort to
his ministry in the Mass.
The glorious fact is, that the
presence of the High Priest in heaven there performing His
appropriate work of intercession, renders it altogether
unnecessary that there be any priest on earth, and accordingly
we find that in all the New Testament there is no such thing
known to it, for this age, as a human priest. If any were needed
we would certainly expect to find them among the apostles, but
among them, there was not one who claimed priesthood! Peter
himself never claimed to be a priest, and is never even referred
to as such! The only priesthood recognized in the New Testament
for this dispensation of grace is the spiritual priesthood of
all believers, as we find it stated in 1 Peter 2:9, "But ye
[all believers] are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an
holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the
praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into the His
marvelous light."
Continuing our argument, we find
the Word of God declaring in Hebrews 9:22, "Without
shedding of blood is no remission." So then to remit sins
by sacrifice of the Mass the priest must shed blood. But does he
shed blood when he offers the Mass? No, he eats the bread, and
drinks the wine, after claiming to transform them into the flesh
and blood of Christ. He does not even go through the form of
shedding blood. How then can he remit ? He cannot. The only way
in which sins can be remitted is by faith in the Blood of Christ
that was shed on Calvary.
We see further, that if the
priest offers Christ upon the altar as a sacrifice, the
Resurrection of Christ has not power or meaning. With Rome,
Christ is ever upon the altar (i.e., the Cross). Here is a fatal
defect, for the Word says, "If Christ be not raised, your
faith is vain, ye are yet in your sins," I Corinthians
15:17.
The Mass tells only of Christ's
death and nothing of His resurrection. But how sweet to the
heart of the Gospel believer are the words of assurance Romans
5:1, "Therefore"—since Christ "was delivered
for our offenses, and raised again for our
justification"—"Therefore being justified by faith,
we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."
Second: The second charge
against the Mass is that it misrepresents the nature of the
elements in the Lord's Supper. Against the doctrine of
Transubstantiation, or the change of the bread and wine in the
Lord's Supper into the real body and blood of Christ, some one
has well written: "The question is simply this : In John 6,
when the Savior states "Whoso eateth My flesh, and drinketh
My blood, hath eternal life, and I will up at the last day'; 'He
that eateh My flesh, and drinketh My blood, dwelleth in Me, and
I in him,' is He figuratively or literally?
"In answering this question
would take this ground: In every instance in Scripture where a
figure is intended, the words cannot be understood to be
literal. 'Except a man be born again'; 'I am the vine, ye are
the branches'; 'This rock was Christ'; and hundreds more, could
not possibly be meant to be literal. The manna was evidently
real food, as we learn in Exodus. But when Jesus says, 'I am the
bread which came down from heaven,' it could not possibly mean
that He was a loaf of bread from heaven. Was not bread used here
as a figure of Jesus sent from heaven, as seen incarnate among
men? He says, 'I am the bread of life.' This He says whilst He
was here a living Man. No change into bread, or bread into
Himself, but ‘I am the bread of life.' Then He says, 'I am the
living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this
bread, he shall live forever; and the bread that I will give is
My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.' To take
this literally, then, would be to say that Jesus was a piece of
bread which might be eaten! and that bread would become
flesh—His flesh—and be given for the life of the world.
Would it not be just as true to say that He was literally a
vine?
"As a figure of the
incarnate Jesus, bread was very striking. As we receive bread
for the nourishment of the body, so by faith we receive the
Person of Christ as the incarnate Word. But, not only so, we
must also receive Him offered on the cross for the life of the
world. 'Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His
blood, ye have no life in you.' We will look at this literally,
and what would follow? If eating the flesh and drinking the
blood means eating the wafer, or the wafer turned into, or
changed into, the body and blood of the Lord Jesus in the
Eucharist, then what would the following words mean: 'Whoso
eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath eternal life, and I
will raise him up at the last day.' Mark, these words are
absolute, without any condition whatever. ‘Whoso’ would
teach that any wicked man, unrepentant, or unbelieving, living
in sin, yet, if he only ate the Eucharist, had eternal life, and
was sure to be raised up by the Lord; and that no Christian can
believe.
"Taking these words
spiritually, everything becomes clear and no Christian need have
a shadow of difficulty indeed, this is in perfect harmony with
all Scripture. ‘Verily, verily I say unto you, He that heareth
My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting
life. John 5:24. But we must not only by faith receive Him as
the bread, but drink His blood. We must receive the solemn word
of His atoning death-the shedding of His blood, for ‘without
the shedding of blood is no remission.’ Thus, the more we
study this Scripture, the more we see the impossibility of , as
in every other figure, applying the words in a carnal, or
literal way. To put the Eucharist, then, in the place of
receiving Christ Himself, by faith, would be a fatal mistake.
Third: The third charge
against this stupendously wicked institution, is that by it Rome
has held and is holding millions of souls in bondage the end of
which is eternal despair. All the blessings of the Gospel are
withheld from those who accept the doctrine of the Mass, for it
is in complete and deadly opposition to the Gospel. Believing in
the Mass none can say, "Unto Him that loved us, and washed
us from our sins in His own blood," Revelation 1:5. The
Mass practically says that the sacrifice of Christ is of no more
value than the death of a goat under the old Dispensation. It
says the work of Christ is not finished, but must be repeated
and continued. It practically denies His resurrection and
ascension to glory, for He is kept in the place of death. If so,
He is still forsaken of God, made sin, then there no Savior who
has delivered us from the wrath to come and no salvation is
possible, and thus the Mass entirely destroys Christianity.
What a scourge the Mass becomes
in the hands of Rome to drive its votaries to obedience. Armed
with it Rome forces them to come continually to her shrines, and
to pay unceasingly for the support of her vast ritualistic
display, her temporal, material pomp and glory. And after all
the gifts and fanatical devotion of her deluded followers what
does she offer them at last? Heaven? No!—Purgatory! This
awaits them all, form Pope to the humblest devotee. Purgatory! A
place of pain and of uncertain release.
But purgatory is only one piece
of the whole system of superstition, intimidation and deception.
It is quite a logical attendant on what precedes it, for
purgatory demands more masses, and consequently a continuance
bondage on the one hand and an inflow of receipts on the other.
By contrast how beautiful,
comforting and sustaining is the Christian’s belief! For him
there are no attractions in the Mass. He realizes he is washed
from his sins in the precious blood of Christ, that he is sealed
by the Holy Spirit to the day of Redemption (the resurrection),
that his name is written in the Lambs Book of Life, and that
Heaven is his home. This is the Gospel—the glorious Gospel of
the Blessed God, and enjoying it he can triumphantly
exclaim—"Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable
Gift!" To him the Lord's Supper is indeed the Eucharist -
the feast of Thanksgiving.
|