Christ-The One Sacrifice

There are many in Christindom today that believe that Christ is to be perpetually sacrified and that it is the Christian's duty to be a part of that by witnessing this "sacrifice of the mass" in order to sustain their faith. As we look at the book of Hebrews specially chapters 9 and 10 we get some insight into how the early church viewed the death of Christ and whether or not they believed in a perpetual sacrifice. But first lets look at what the Roman Catholic Church teaches concerning this since they are one of the chief proponents of this teaching.

The Council of Trent
Session XXII
Canon I
If anyone saith, that in the mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat: let him be anathema.

The Code of Canon Law
Canon 897
The eucharistic Sacrifice, the memorial of the death and resurrection of the Lord, in which the sacrifice of the cross IS PERPETUATED, is the summit and the source of all worship and christian life.

Did the apostlic church believe that? Lets look at the book of Hebrews. This epistle was written to show that the New Covenant is much better than the Jewish Old Covenant with its perpetual sacrifices by the high priest. Now if the New Covenant would also include a perpetual sacrifice that would be necessary for salvation we sould see a trace of this teaching in this epistle to the Hebrews of all places.

Lets take a look:

In chapter 9 verse 12 we read that Jesus "entered once into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption". Christ entered once into the holy place and has already procured this redemption. The writer goes on to compare the Old Testament perpetual sacrifice of the high priest and show that it was just a shadow of things to come. " Then he shows in verse 25 that Christ did not appear in heaven to offer himself often because if he had to do that he would have to have suffered often since the foundation of the world: "Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entered into the holy place every year with the blood of others; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world" (vss 25-26a ) . Then in verses 27-28 he again reiterates the fact of Christ having died once to put away sin.: "For as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement; so Christ was onced offered to bear the sins of many...."

Now that bring us to chapter 10 where the writer makes an interesting statement in verse 1. He tells us that the perpetual sacrifices of the Old Testament could "never make the comers perfect" This is interesting and should be carefully looked at by every catholic serious about their soul. Notice the next verse: "For then would that not ceased to be offered?". He is saying that had the OT sacrifices made the comers perfect there would have been no need to perpetually offer them.

Notice the RCC teaching again:

The Code of Canon Law
Canon 897
The eucharistic Sacrifice, the memorial of the death and resurrection of the Lord, in which the sacrifice of the cross IS PERPETUATED, is the summit and the source of all worship and christian life.

But we were just told that if those drawing near were made perfect the sacrifices would cease to be offered.

One might say here "i s anyone perfect?" After all none of are so we have to perpetually offer the sacrifice."

Well that is being consistant with your teaching but it is unbibilcal. Had that been the teaching of the NT church the writer to Hebrews would never have written this the way he did.

Lets go on:

In verse 3 he says that in the OT sacrifices there is a remebrance of sins every year. What is the difference if we change that to once a week? In fact that makes the OT better since we can go a whole year without having to remember our sin. This word remembrance is the same word Jesus used when he said "do this in remembrance of me". So you see we are not to remember our sin in the Lord's table but to remember what he already accomplished.

But lets go on and see if in fact those whom Christ represented were made perfect where there need be no more sacrifice for sin.

The writer goes on to show that the OT was no longer needed when Christ came into the world because he "taketh away the first that he may establish the second."

Now in the next verse, verse 10, he uses that word again "once". It is the word "epapax" and it means "one time never to be repeated". What makes this usage so strong is the use of the periphrastic construction of the words "are sanctified" by this once for offering of Christ. We have a pefec participle "sanctified" and a present tense form of the I am verb. Together they give us what is known as a perfect periphrastic construction expressing action with a lasting effect.

But that is not all. In verse 12 he makes an amazing statement. In verse 11 he shows how a perpetual sacrifice made by priests in the OT never took away sins therefore could never make the comers perfect (verse 1) but notice the next verse:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

May the blessed Holy Spirit open the hearts of many of my catholics friends to flee to the only hope of their sin sick soul and rest in him by faith alone for the salvation of their you never dying soul.

Please direct your comments to Mike Krall.

BACK TO MAIN MENU