MASS - WHEN THE PRIEST AND THE PEOPLE PURPORT TO OFFER A SPOTLESS
VICTIM TO GOD
Ordination or Holy Orders is one of the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic
Church. Only bishops have the magic power to make men bishops or priests. They
pass on the power if they are ordained properly themselves.
Just as the Church has found that many marriages are invalid – and these are the
few it was able to know about – obviously there must be invalid ordinations as
well.
The Council of Trent made it official Catholic teaching that a sacrament can
only be conferred by intending to at least do as the Church does. “If anyone
shall say that intention, the intention at least to do what the Church does, is
not required in ministers while performing and giving the sacraments then let
him be accursed” (Session VII, Canon 11). So an unbelieving bishop can validly
make new bishops as long as his intention is this: “I don’t believe this stuff
but if there is anything in it then I intend to make this man a true bishop and
give him grace.” Obviously, then ordinations done by a bishop like this should
be repeated to be on the safe side. What if because of his unbelief he can’t
intend to consecrate? What if he thinks, “What a superstition this rite is! I am
so sure there is no power in it and I can’t give any and I don't even intend
to.”
The decree would imply that unbelievers cannot give real sacraments. The Church
says they cannot give real ordination. Inconsistently, though it may recognise
their baptisms.
There is nothing the Church can do to guarantee that you are getting a real
sacrament. The Church says that it trusts in God to protect her from such
disasters as ministers giving invalid ordinations. When God lets the Church be
bothered with invalid marriages and lets it be fooled by false popes why be so
sure? The Church has admitted to excommunicating people and groups unfairly
causing grave division in the Church by its invalid excommunications. This does
even worse damage than the consecration of fake priests and fake bishops.
Suppose somebody is invalidly baptised. If that person becomes a priest or
bishop that person will not be a true priest or bishop. Church law is that the
sacraments can only be validly received by a baptised person. If a priest is
invalidly ordained he cannot become a valid bishop for it is necessary to be a
priest first. The doctrines surrounding the sacrament of ordination are so
ridiculous that one must question the sanity or normality of any man that
becomes a priest.
Transubstantiation refers to the conversion of the bread and wine at Mass into
the body and blood of Christ. This is a major and basic doctrine of the Roman
Catholic Church. The Church worships the consecrated bread and wine as Jesus
Christ who it teaches is God. The bread and wine are given the worship due to
God without qualification. It is blasphemy to worship something as God unless
you have proof that it is God as much as you do that God exists at all.
It is against the Bible for it says that anything that cannot protect itself
from desecration is not divine but is an idol, a false God. The Bible has no
time for people making excuses for adoring as God what is not God. The idolaters
of old made plenty - "O Apollo lives in the statue or somehow the statue is him
and he let the robbers break it for a purpose we are unaware of." God makes it
simple: if it is not immune to harm then it's not God and there is no excuse for
adoring it.
If you were pretending that the bread was the body of Jesus you would do what
the Catholics are doing. If they are not getting carried away by playing
charades then nobody is.
In John 6, Catholics claim to find proof that Jesus taught transubstantiation.
The word mistranslated eat is trogein, which means to crunch or to gnaw like an
animal or to tear apart with teeth. He says that whoever does this has eternal
life and he will raise him up on the last day. This is clearly symbolism so the
flesh is symbolic too. It is said he spoke that way to convey the reality of
eating his body in the form of bread. But if he used an exaggeration to convey
eating then what other exaggerations are there in the text? Maybe flesh and
blood as well? Why couldn't he simply say that God has the power to change bread
and wine into his body and blood without anything seeming to have changed?
We read 1 Corinthians 11:25 and learn that that the cup is the new covenant in
Jesus’ blood. The cup wasn’t literally the new covenant. The cup is not referred
to as blood in this account which Paul spells out in the context of correcting
abuses. So you can be sure he did not require his people to say the cup was
blood.
Why not say that you have transubstantiated your copper into gold and your gold
into copper? The doctrine violates commonsense and if the Catholics have the
right to spout nonsense like that then you have the right to say that you have
turned your keyring into Napoleon
Bread and wine which are blessed and believed to link you to the body and blood
of Christ which they represent. This is called communion. The
Catholic Church holds that the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine but
become the body and blood of Jesus. It is a sectarian rite in Catholicism for
people who are better than most Catholics are barred from it indicating that
your beliefs and religious affiliation are regarded as more important than your
kindness and decency.