From Trent to Today: The Heresy of the Sacrifice of the Mass

✝️ The Mass That Re-sacrifices Christ: Why Roman Catholicism Preaches Another Gospel

> “But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God.” — Hebrews 10:12

“It is finished.” — John 19:30

---

I. Introduction: Why Rome’s Errors Matter

In an age of ecumenical softness, it has become fashionable for Protestants to downplay the differences between Reformed Christianity and Roman Catholicism. “We agree on the essentials,” some say. “The rest is just tradition.”

But Scripture warns us that when the heart of the Gospel is compromised, no amount of outward similarity can save it. And at the heart of Rome’s system is a doctrine that strikes at the very sufficiency of Christ’s cross: the Mass.

According to the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, the Mass is not merely a remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice but the actual re-presentation and re-sacrifice of Christ upon the altar. This is not a medieval quirk, nor a misinterpretation by a few priests. It is woven into the very dogma of Rome.

---

II. The Innovation of the “Sacrifice of the Mass”

The early church, following the apostolic command, celebrated the Lord’s Supper as a covenantal meal of remembrance and proclamation (1 Cor. 11:23–26). The breaking of bread was always tied to Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice, already completed at Calvary.

But by the early Middle Ages, language shifted. The Supper began to be described less as a table of fellowship and more as a sacrificial rite. By the 9th century, the doctrine of transubstantiation (the bread and wine becoming the literal body and blood of Christ) was being articulated. It was dogmatically defined much later at the Fourth Lateran Council (1215).

The crucial move came at the Council of Trent (1545–1563), where the Mass was explicitly called a propitiatory sacrifice:

> “In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross.”

— Council of Trent, Session 22, Chapter 2

The Latin uses sacrificial language without ambiguity: “in hoc divino sacrificio, quod in Missa peragitur, idem ille Christus continetur et incruente immolatur.” (“In this divine sacrifice which is performed in the Mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner.”)

---

III. The Catechism Confirms the Dogma

This doctrine is not a relic of the 16th century. It remains the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. The modern Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) declares:

> “The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice… The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross.”

— CCC 1367

Notice: it is not presented as symbolic or memorial. It is explicitly a sacrifice — the same Christ, offered again in the Eucharist.

---

IV. Why This Is Heresy

The book of Hebrews could not be clearer:

Christ offered once for all time a single sacrifice for sins (Heb. 10:12).

By a single offering, He perfected for all time those who are being sanctified (Heb. 10:14).

Where there is forgiveness, there is no longer any offering for sin (Heb. 10:18).

The Reformed confessions rightly recognize Rome’s Mass as a denial of the sufficiency of Christ:

> “The sacrifices of Masses, in which it is commonly said that the priest offers Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, are blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits.”

— Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, Article XXXI

---

V. Other Woven Errors of Rome

The Mass is not the only woven error; it is the crown of a broader system:

Transubstantiation (1215, Lateran IV): bread and wine literally become body and blood.

Purgatory (defined at Florence 1439, affirmed at Trent): the sufficiency of Christ’s cleansing blood is denied.

Indulgences (codified at Trent, practiced before): grace sold for money, as if Christ’s merit were a treasury to be managed.

Mariology (Immaculate Conception defined 1854; Assumption defined 1950): Mary exalted to co-mediatrix, undermining Christ’s unique role as mediator (1 Tim. 2:5).

Each of these is not peripheral but woven into the fabric of dogma. Rome’s problem is not an occasional corruption — it is a systemic denial of sola Scriptura and solus Christus.

---

VI. A Call to Clarity and Courage

To name these errors is not uncharitable. It is obedience to the Word that tells us: “If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:9).

We love our Roman Catholic neighbors best when we refuse to flatter them with false unity and instead point them to the finished work of Christ, who has already said: “It is finished” (John 19:30).

Christ is not daily immolated on the altar. He reigns at the Father’s right hand, interceding for His people until all His enemies are made His footstool (Heb. 10:13).

To affirm the Mass is to deny the Gospel. To cling to Christ crucified once for all is to be truly free.

---

VII. Conclusion – The True Table of the Lord

The Lord’s Supper is not Rome’s altar of perpetual sacrifice but Christ’s covenant meal of remembrance and proclamation. Every time the bread is broken and the cup shared, we declare not an ongoing sacrifice but a finished one: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” (1 Cor. 11:26).

The difference is not small. It is the difference between “do this in remembrance of Me” and “do this to continue My sacrifice.” One proclaims the sufficiency of the cross; the other denies it.

The echo of Trent still resounds in the Catechism of Rome. But the louder echo of Scripture proclaims: “By a single offering He has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.”

✒️ The Pilgrim’s Post