Sit Down First
TopicsWalk me through itMy choice

The Mass and the Lord’s Supper

Is the bread Christ’s body, and is the Mass a sacrifice?

The passage it turns on

Most certainly, I tell you, he who believes in me has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, that anyone may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down out of heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. Yes, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The Jews therefore contended with one another, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Jesus therefore said to them, “Most certainly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don’t have life in yourselves. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he who feeds on me, he will also live because of me. This is the bread which came down out of heaven—not as our fathers ate the manna, and died. He who eats this bread will live forever.”

John 6:47-58In context. Jesus in the synagogue at Capernaum, the day after feeding the five thousand, to a crowd that wants more bread: he is the living bread, his flesh is true food and his blood true drink, and whoever eats has eternal life.

Jesus says it four times, each time more bluntly, and when his hearers take him literally and are scandalised he does not soften it; he lets them go. The Greek shifts to a word for chewing. No other teaching of his cost him so many disciples. He meant eat.

The talk opens with believing (verse 47) and closes with “the flesh profits nothing” and “the words I speak are spirit” (verse 63). Eating and drinking are the picture; coming and believing are the thing. The Supper had not yet been instituted, and the Twelve who stayed had understood nothing about bread.

Press a reading to put the lamp behind the words that side leans on. The passage does not change.

What each side holds

Catholics hold that at the words of consecration the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ, whole and entire, while looking and tasting like bread and wine (transubstantiation), and that the Mass makes present the one sacrifice of the cross. Protestants are not of one mind: Lutherans hold that Christ’s body is truly present with the bread; the Reformed that he is present by the Spirit to faith; Baptists and many evangelicals that the Supper is a memorial. All Protestants deny that the Mass is a sacrifice offered by a priest.

Everyone agrees Jesus said “this is my body”. The questions are what “is” means, and what Hebrews means by “once for all”.

The points people make

“This is my body”

For I received from the Lord that which also I delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed took bread. When he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “Take, eat. This is my body, which is broken for you. Do this in memory of me.” In the same way he also took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink, in memory of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks the Lord’s cup in a way unworthy of the Lord will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy way eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he doesn’t discern the Lord’s body.

1 Corinthians 11:23-29In context. Paul to the Corinthians, correcting a Supper where the rich ate before the poor: he hands on the words of institution, ‘do this in memory of me’, and warns that eating unworthily is to be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
One more passage: John 6:60-69

Therefore many of his disciples, when they heard this, said, “This is a hard saying! Who can listen to it?” But Jesus knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? Then what if you would see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life. But there are some of you who don’t believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who didn’t believe, and who it was who would betray him. He said, “For this cause I have said to you that no one can come to me, unless it is given to him by my Father.” At this, many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Jesus said therefore to the twelve, “You don’t also want to go away, do you?” Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and know that you are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

John 6:60-69In context. The same scene, after the hard words: many disciples leave. Jesus says the Spirit gives life and ‘the flesh profits nothing’, and Peter answers for the Twelve that they will stay.

Scripture’s words can be read more than one way. Paul treats the Supper as a real sharing in Christ, and warns that eating unworthily is guilt; he also keeps calling it bread. How Christ is present can be read more than one way.

The Catholic reading

Jesus took bread and said “this is my body”, not “this represents”. Paul says to eat unworthily is to be guilty of his body and blood. Ignatius, a generation after John, and Justin, Irenaeus and Cyril after him, call the bread the flesh of Christ; no father taught a bare memorial.

“a conversion is made of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord”

Council of Trent, Session 13, chapter 4, 1551

The Protestant reading

Jesus also said “I am the door” and “I am the vine”, and at the table his body sat in front of them, unbroken. Paul still calls it bread after the blessing. The fathers also spoke of sign and figure (Augustine), and transubstantiation was defined in 1215. Lutherans take “is” literally without it; the Reformed take it as a sign that gives what it signifies.

“Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ”

Thirty-nine Articles, Article 28, 1571

Is the Mass a sacrifice?

by which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest indeed stands day by day serving and often offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins, but he, when he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God; from that time waiting until his enemies are made the footstool of his feet. For by one offering he has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. The Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying, “This is the covenant that I will make with them: ‘After those days,’ says the Lord, ‘I will put my laws on their heart, I will also write them on their mind;’” then he says, “I will remember their sins and their iniquities no more.” Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

Hebrews 10:10-18In context. The same letter: the old priests stood offering daily sacrifices that could never take away sins; Christ offered one sacrifice for all time and sat down, and ‘there is no more offering for sin’.
One more passage: Hebrews 13:10

We have an altar from which those who serve the holy tabernacle have no right to eat.

Hebrews 13:10In context. The closing exhortations of Hebrews: believers are not to be carried away by teachings about foods, for “we have an altar” that those who serve the old tabernacle may not eat from.

Scripture’s words point the other way. Hebrews says Christ “offered one sacrifice for sins forever” and sat down, unlike priests who stand “day by day serving and often offering the same sacrifices”, and that where sins are forgiven “there is no more offering for sin”. It also says “We have an altar”. The Catholic reading, that the Mass is that one sacrifice made present and not another, rests on a making-present Hebrews does not speak of; in their usual sense its words point the other way.

The Catholic reading

Not a new sacrifice but the one sacrifice of Calvary made present under the signs of bread and wine, offered through the priest; Trent says “the same victim”. Malachi 1:11 foretold a pure offering among the nations, and “do this” uses the language of offering. The early church called it a sacrifice from the second century on.

“the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross”

Council of Trent, Session 22, chapter 2, 1562

The Protestant reading

Hebrews labours the point: the old priests stood and offered daily because their sacrifices never finished the job; Christ offered once and sat down, and “there is no more offering for sin”. A sacrifice that is re-presented daily by priests is the picture Hebrews sets Christ against.

“all our sins are completely forgiven through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself accomplished on the cross once for all.”

Heidelberg Catechism, question 80, 1563

A priest who offered himself once

Many, indeed, have been made priests, because they are hindered from continuing by death. But he, because he lives forever, has his priesthood unchangeable. Therefore he is also able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, seeing that he lives forever to make intercession for them. For such a high priest was fitting for us: holy, guiltless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who doesn’t need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices daily, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. For he did this once for all, when he offered up himself. For the law appoints men as high priests who have weakness, but the word of the oath which came after the law appoints a Son forever who has been perfected.

Hebrews 7:23-28In context. The letter to the Hebrews on Jesus as high priest: the old priests were many and died; he lives for ever, so he saves completely, and he offered himself ‘once for all’.

Scripture states it. Hebrews says Christ offered himself once for all, and never calls a Christian minister a sacrificing priest. Both sides confess the first.

The Catholic reading

Christ’s priesthood is eternal (Hebrews 7:24) and he always lives to intercede. The Mass is that eternal priesthood touching time; the ordained priest acts in the person of Christ, not in his own name.

“when he uses the terms ‘sacrifice’ and ‘offering’ in these passages, he is using them to refer to bloody rather than unbloody sacrifices.”

Jimmy Akin, on Hebrews

The Protestant reading

Hebrews 7 contrasts the many priests who died with the one who lives: his priesthood is “unchangeable”, not passed on. Christians are all priests who offer praise (1 Peter 2:5, Hebrews 13:15); the New Testament never calls a church leader a sacrificing priest (hiereus), only an elder or overseer.

“Since the forgiveness is already here, there is nothing left to be done to achieve it.”

Ligonier, Tabletalk, on Hebrews 10, 2004

One bread, one body

The cup of blessing which we bless, isn’t it a sharing of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, isn’t it a sharing of the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf of bread, we, who are many, are one body; for we all partake of the one loaf of bread.

1 Corinthians 10:16-17In context. Paul to the Corinthians, warning them off idol feasts: the cup is a sharing in Christ’s blood and the bread a sharing in his body, and the one loaf makes the many one body.

Scripture is silent on it. Paul says that “because there is one loaf of bread, we, who are many, are one body”, and in the next chapter tells each to examine himself before eating. Whether the bread makes that unity or shows it is where the sides differ. Scripture is silent on who may share the table when churches are divided.

The Catholic reading

Paul says those who eat the one bread are one body: the Eucharist makes the Church. That is why Catholics do not share communion with those not in full communion; the sign would say a unity that does not yet exist.

“The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit”

Catechism of the Catholic Church 1366

The Protestant reading

Paul’s one body is all who belong to Christ, and the Supper shows it; it does not make it. Most Protestant churches welcome any baptised believer, because the table is the Lord’s, not a denomination’s.

“yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive, and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of his death”

Westminster Confession 29.7, 1646

Watch

One talk from each side, chosen for making its own case well. Each loads from YouTube only when you press play.

Bishop Robert Barron. 11 min. Bishop Robert Barron on the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and why Catholics read John 6 literally. Open on YouTube
Ligonier Ministries. 24 min. R. C. Sproul on what the Reformed tradition holds about Christ’s presence in the Supper, and why it rejects transubstantiation. Open on YouTube

Sources on this page

Every quotation above, with the page it comes from and the day it was read. Primary documents first where a side has one.