What Is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and Why Is It the Highest Act of Catholic Worship?
Short Answer
The Holy Mass is the true and propitiatory Sacrifice of the New Testament. It is not merely a sermon, a community gathering, a memorial meal, or even simply the distribution of Holy Communion. In the Mass, the same Jesus Christ who offered Himself once in a bloody manner upon Calvary is truly offered to the Eternal Father in an unbloody, sacramental manner. The Victim is the same; the principal Priest is the same; only the manner of offering differs.
The Mass therefore does not repeat Christ's death, nor does it add anything to the infinite merits He won once for all upon the Cross. Rather, Calvary is sacramentally represented and its fruits are applied to souls. The Council of Trent defined that the Mass is a true sacrifice, truly propitiatory, offered for the living and the dead; and Pope Pius XII described it as the “chief act of divine worship” and the culmination and centre of the Christian religion.
Christ is both Priest and Victim.
The ordained Catholic priest is His minister, acting in the person of Christ.
The altar is therefore fundamentally an altar of sacrifice, even though Holy Communion, the sacred banquet in which the faithful receive the Victim who has been offered, properly follows the sacrifice.
The meal is real and sacred, but it must never be allowed to obscure what the Mass essentially is: the sacramental Sacrifice of Christ.
This distinction is indispensable for understanding Catholic worship and also provides the doctrinal standard by which any later reform of the Mass must ultimately be judged.
Why This Question Matters
To misunderstand the Mass is to misunderstand the centre of Catholic worship.
A Protestant may regard the Lord's Supper principally as a memorial meal.
A Catholic believes considerably more. At Mass there is an altar, a sacrificing priest and a Victim: Jesus Christ Himself.
This does not mean that Catholics believe Christ is crucified again. Scripture teaches plainly that Christ died once and that His bloody sacrifice upon Calvary was perfect and sufficient. Catholic doctrine fully accepts this. The question is whether Christ also instituted an unbloody sacramental sacrifice by which that one sacrifice would remain present in the Church and its fruits be applied throughout the ages.
The answer of the Catholic Church is unequivocally yes.
That is why the sacrificial nature of the Mass cannot be treated as an optional theological emphasis. It determines the meaning of priesthood, altar, consecration, Eucharistic worship and the relationship between the Last Supper and Calvary.
It also explains why Catholics traditionally speak of assisting at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, rather than merely attending a communal Eucharistic meal.
What the Catholic Church Teaches
Sacrifice Belongs to the Worship of God
Sacrifice, properly understood, is an act of religion offered to God in acknowledgement of His supreme dominion.
St Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–1274) explains in the Summa Theologiae, II-II, q.85, that external sacrifice represents the interior offering of man to God and that sacrifice, in the strict religious sense, is offered to God alone. It is therefore one of the highest external expressions of latria — the worship due to God alone.
This helps explain why the Mass occupies a unique position in Catholic worship. At Mass the Church does not merely offer human prayer, music, praise or devotion. She offers to the Father Christ Himself.
No merely human act of worship can equal the value of that offering.
Sacred Scripture
The sacrificial character of the Eucharist does not begin with medieval Catholicism.
The Old Testament foretells a universal and pure sacrifice. God declares through the prophet Malachias that, from east to west, His name will be great among the Gentiles and that “in every place there is sacrifice” and a clean oblation offered to Him. Malachias 1:11
Early Christians understood this prophecy in connection with the Eucharistic offering, as we shall see from St Justin Martyr and St Irenaeus.
At the Last Supper Christ took bread and said:
“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me.”
He likewise identified the chalice with the New Testament in His Blood. Luke 22:19–20
St Paul transmits the same institution and adds that whenever Christians eat this bread and drink this chalice they
“shew the death of the Lord, until he come.” 1 Corinthians 11:23–26
This Eucharistic action is therefore inseparably connected with Christ's sacrificial death.
St Paul also employs explicitly sacrificial categories in 1 Corinthians 10:16–21. He compares participation in the Eucharistic chalice and bread with Israel's participation in sacrifices and with pagan sacrificial worship. He contrasts the “table of the Lord” with the sacrificial tables of demons. In biblical language, therefore, a “table” is not necessarily the opposite of an altar; the context itself can be sacrificial. 1 Corinthians 10:16–21
At the same time, the Epistle to the Hebrews insists on the uniqueness of Calvary:
Christ “was offered once” for sins. Hebrews 9:24–28
Catholic doctrine holds both truths together:
one bloody redemptive sacrifice upon Calvary, and its sacramental representation and application in the Mass.
There is therefore no conflict between the Catholic Mass and Christ's once-for-all sacrifice unless the Mass is mistakenly understood as another death of Christ. It is not.
The Early Church Fathers
The testimony of the ancient Church is especially important because it shows that Christians understood the Eucharist sacrificially centuries before the medieval theological controversies.
St Justin Martyr
St Justin Martyr (c. AD 100–165), in his Dialogue with Trypho (c. AD 155–160), chapter 41, explicitly applies the prophecy of Malachias concerning the universal pure sacrifice to the Eucharist.
Justin speaks of Christians throughout the nations offering the Eucharistic bread and cup and identifies these offerings with the sacrifice foretold by Malachias. St Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 41
This is extremely early evidence. Justin is not describing the Eucharist simply as a fellowship meal detached from sacrifice.
St Irenaeus of Lyons
St Irenaeus of Lyons (c. AD 130–202), writing Against Heresies around AD 180, likewise cites Malachias and applies the prophecy of the “pure sacrifice” offered throughout the world to the Church's offering through Christ.
His discussion occurs in Against Heresies, Book IV, chapter 17, continuing into chapter 18. St Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV.17
Again, this is second-century Christianity — long before Trent and centuries before the Protestant Reformation.
St Cyprian of Carthage
The evidence becomes still more explicit with St Cyprian of Carthage (c. AD 200–258).
In his letter to Caecilius on the chalice of the Lord, written in the third century and numbered differently in various collections, Cyprian calls Christ the founder and teacher of this sacrifice. He connects Melchisedech's offering of bread and wine with Christ and states that Christ offered sacrifice to the Father and that the Christian priest truly performs Christ's office when he offers according to what Christ instituted. St Cyprian, Letter to Caecilius on the Sacrament of the Cup
Here we find together the concepts of Christ, sacrifice, priesthood, bread and wine, Eucharistic offering and the Passion.
St Augustine of Hippo
St Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430) gives an especially concise formulation in The City of God, Book X, chapter 20.
He describes Christ as simultaneously the Priest who offers and the Sacrifice offered, and states that Christ ordained a daily sacramental sign of this sacrifice in the Church. St Augustine, City of God X.20
The Fathers do not possess the same authority as a dogmatic definition of an Ecumenical Council. Nevertheless, their testimony demonstrates that sacrificial Eucharistic language is ancient and deeply rooted in Christian tradition.
The Council of Trent
The Protestant Reformation forced the Catholic Church to define the doctrine of the Mass with particular precision.
The Council of Trent (1545–1563) addressed the Sacrifice of the Mass in Session XXII, 17 September 1562.
The Mass Is a True Sacrifice
Trent teaches that at the Last Supper Christ instituted a visible sacrifice for His Church by which the bloody sacrifice of the Cross would be represented, its memory perpetuated, and its saving power applied throughout the ages.
Canon I then rejects the proposition that no true and proper sacrifice is offered in the Mass or that the offering consists merely in Christ being given to us as food.
That definition is crucial.
Holy Communion and the Sacrifice of the Mass are intimately connected, but they are not identical concepts.
The Mass Is Truly Propitiatory
Trent's second chapter teaches that in the Mass the same Christ who offered Himself bloodily on the Cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner. It then defines the Mass as truly propitiatory.
“Propitiatory” means that the sacrifice is offered in relation to sin and reconciliation with God. It is not merely an act of praise or thanksgiving.
Trent explains that God, moved by this oblation, grants grace and the gift of repentance. The sacrifice may therefore be offered for the living and also for the faithful departed who have not yet been fully purified. Canon III accordingly rejects the proposition that the Mass is merely praise, thanksgiving or a bare memorial of Calvary. Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrine and Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass
This doctrine does not mean that Mass replaces contrition, sacramental confession where required, conversion or personal cooperation with grace.
Nor does it mean Christ acquires new merits every time Mass is celebrated.
Calvary merited redemption once and perfectly. The Mass applies the fruits of that sacrifice.
One Victim and One Principal Priest
Trent provides the fundamental explanation:
the Victim is one and the same.
Christ offered Himself upon Calvary and Christ is offered in the Mass. Likewise, the principal Priest is Christ. The difference is the manner of offering.
Upon Calvary Christ suffered and shed His Blood physically.
In the Mass He does not die again. He is offered sacramentally and unbloodily.
That distinction safeguards both the uniqueness of Calvary and the reality of the Mass.
Calvary Sacramentally Represented
The word re-presentation can cause misunderstanding if it is taken to mean a theatrical reenactment or mere mental reminder. That is not Catholic doctrine.
The Mass does indeed commemorate Calvary, but it is an objective sacramental commemoration in which Christ Himself becomes present as the Victim and is offered to the Father.
The Roman Catechism, issued following the Council of Trent, explains that the Mass and the Cross are one sacrifice because the Victim is the same — Christ — while the bloody and unbloody modes of offering differ. It further teaches that the Eucharist was instituted both as sacrament and as the Church's perpetual sacrifice. Roman Catechism, The Holy Eucharist and the Sacrifice of the Mass
The distinction between sacrament and sacrifice is particularly important.
As sacrament, the Holy Eucharist remains Christ's Body and Blood even when reserved in the tabernacle or carried to the sick.
As sacrifice, the Eucharistic action involves the sacramental oblation made in the Mass.
The two realities are inseparably connected, but they are not conceptually identical.
Christ as Priest and Victim
Catholic theology cannot properly explain the Mass merely by saying, “the priest offers Jesus.” The principal Offerer is Jesus Christ Himself.
Pope Pius XII explains this with exceptional clarity in Mediator Dei (20 November 1947).
Christ is the eternal High Priest. The priest at the altar represents Him because sacramental ordination configures the minister for actions performed in Christ's person. Pius XII states that Christ remains the Priest and that the ordained minister represents His person in the sacred action.
Christ is also the Victim.
This is precisely the mystery described by St Augustine: the One who offers is also the One offered.
On Calvary Christ freely offered Himself.
At Mass that same divine Victim is sacramentally offered by the ministry of the priest.
The Ministerial Priest
This immediately explains why Catholic priesthood cannot be reduced to presiding over a congregation. The priest possesses a sacramental power derived from Holy Orders.
Trent declares that when Christ commanded the Apostles to “do this,” He constituted them priests of the New Testament and commanded them and their successors to offer His Body and Blood.
Pius XII carefully distinguishes the ordained priesthood from the participation of the faithful.
Catholics attending Mass genuinely unite themselves with Christ's sacrifice. They can offer their prayers, sufferings, works, thanksgiving and themselves in union with the Victim. But this does not mean that congregation and priest possess the same sacerdotal power.
Pius XII explicitly warns against such confusion. The unbloody immolation at the consecration is performed by the priest acting as Christ's representative. The people participate according to their proper condition but do not thereby acquire ministerial priestly power.
This distinction is doctrinally important.
The priest does not derive his power to consecrate from the congregation.
He acts through the sacramental power of Holy Orders.
Why the Mass Is Offered Upon an Altar
Sacrifice and altar naturally belong together. St Paul's discussion of Eucharistic participation in 1 Corinthians 10 deliberately invokes Israelite and pagan sacrifices before speaking of the table of the Lord. The Roman Catechism draws upon this passage in explaining the altar of Christian sacrifice.
St Thomas Aquinas likewise says that the altar represents the Cross upon which Christ was sacrificed.
An altar therefore says something doctrinally significant about what takes place there. It indicates sacrifice.
This does not mean that a table can never be associated with sacrificial worship. Scripture itself speaks of sacrificial tables. Nor should one claim that the physical altar, considered apart from the sacramental essentials, constitutes an independent requirement for the validity of consecration.
St Thomas specifically distinguishes the sacrament's validity from the Church's liturgical requirements: a priest who consecrated outside the prescribed sacred setting could consecrate validly while nevertheless acting gravely unlawfully.
Thus three questions must be kept distinct:
What does an altar signify? Sacrifice.
Does Catholic tradition fittingly require the altar for Mass? Yes.
Would an irregularity concerning the altar, by itself, prove that no Eucharistic consecration occurred? No.
This is an example of why validity, liceity and theological symbolism must not be confused.
How Is Christ “Immolated” If He Cannot Die Again?
Christ risen from the dead cannot suffer or die again. The Mass therefore contains no new physical destruction of His glorified Body.
Pius XII explains the sacramental manner of immolation in Mediator Dei. Through transubstantiation Christ's Body and Blood become truly present. Because the bread and wine are consecrated separately, the sacramental signs represent the separation of Body and Blood which occurred physically upon Calvary.
Christ is wholly present under either species by concomitance; His living Body is not actually divided from His Blood. Nevertheless, the separate sacramental signs manifest Him in the condition of a sacrificial Victim.
Pius XII therefore calls the Mass “no mere empty commemoration”, but a true sacrifice in which the High Priest offers Himself unbloodily.
St Thomas had explained the relationship centuries earlier: the Eucharistic celebration represents Christ's Passion and communicates its fruits.
There were legitimate discussions among pre–Vatican II theologians regarding the precise metaphysical explanation of how the sacrificial immolation should be analysed. Those schools of thought must not be confused with the defined doctrine itself. What is certain is that the Mass is a true sacrifice, Christ is truly offered, and the manner is sacramental and unbloody rather than another physical death.
The Four Ends of the Mass
The traditional catechetical explanation identifies four principal ends of the Mass.
Adoration or latreutic worship: supreme honour is rendered to God.
Thanksgiving: God is perfectly thanked for His gifts.
Propitiation: the sacrifice is offered concerning sin, satisfaction and reconciliation with God, and for the faithful departed.
Impetration: graces and divine assistance are sought from God.
The Catechism of St Pius X gives precisely this traditional fourfold explanation and identifies Jesus Christ as the principal Offerer, with the priest as His minister. Catechism of St Pius X, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
These four ends help explain why no ordinary private devotion, however holy, possesses the objective dignity of the Mass.
In the Mass the offering is Christ Himself.
Sacrifice or Sacred Meal?
This question presents a false choice if properly understood. The Eucharist is food.
Christ gives Himself to the faithful in Holy Communion. The reception of Communion is a true sacred banquet and an extraordinarily important part of Eucharistic worship.
But Catholic doctrine does not therefore define the Mass primarily as a communal meal.
The distinction was explicitly defended by Trent. Canon I rejects the proposition that offering Mass means nothing more than Christ being given to us to eat.
Pope Pius XII makes the relationship still clearer. He explains that the sacrificial action is not dependent upon the congregation receiving Communion. The priest's Communion belongs to the integrity of the completed sacrificial rite, while reception by the faithful, though strongly encouraged, is not necessary for the Mass to be a true sacrifice.
This has an important implication:
The congregation does not create the Eucharist by assembling, nor does the congregation's communal meal constitute the essence of the Mass.
Rather, the faithful are invited to partake sacramentally in the Victim who has been offered.
The theological order is therefore:
Sacrifice → sacramental banquet.
Not:
community meal → symbolic remembrance of sacrifice.
Both sacrifice and Communion belong to Catholic Eucharistic theology, but they do not occupy identical theological roles.
Why the Mass Is the Highest Act of Catholic Worship
We can now answer the second half of the question more fully.
The Mass is the highest act of Catholic worship because the offering is infinitely greater than any offering man could make of himself.
At prayer, we offer our words and intentions.
In penance, we offer our mortification.
In charitable works, we offer our labour and possessions.
In martyrdom, a Christian may even offer his earthly life.
But at Mass the Church offers Jesus Christ, the infinitely worthy Son of God.
Pius XII therefore calls the Eucharistic sacrifice the “culmination and center” of the Christian religion and later states explicitly:
“The Mass is the chief act of divine worship.” Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, 20 November 1947
That does not make personal prayer, the Rosary, Eucharistic adoration, the Divine Office, processions or other Catholic devotions unimportant. Rather, their proper orientation ultimately leads toward the worship of God and the sacramental life whose summit is the Sacrifice of Christ.
The Main Objection
“Hebrews Says Christ Was Sacrificed Once. Doesn't the Mass Contradict Scripture?”
This is the strongest and most important objection. The Epistle to the Hebrews repeatedly teaches that Christ's sacrifice is perfect and unrepeatable. Unlike the priests of the Old Covenant, Christ does not need to offer a succession of bloody sacrifices.
He offered Himself once.
If Catholics taught that Christ physically returned to suffering, died again at every Mass, or acquired additional merits beyond those won upon Calvary, the objection would succeed. But Catholic doctrine teaches none of these things.
Response
Trent answers the objection by distinguishing the Victim and Priest, which remain the same, from the manner of offering, which differs.
Calvary was bloody.
The Mass is unbloody.
Calvary accomplished redemption and acquired its merits.
The Mass sacramentally represents that sacrifice and applies its fruits.
Christ died once.
He does not die again.
Thus the Mass depends completely upon Calvary rather than competing with it.
Pius XII makes the same point: the daily Eucharistic sacrifice does not diminish the Cross but instead manifests its greatness and applies its saving power throughout the Church.
Hebrews therefore protects Catholic doctrine from the false idea of repeated physical sacrifices while leaving intact the sacramental manner Christ instituted for the Church to proclaim and participate in His one sacrifice until He comes.
Common Objections
“But the Last Supper Was a Meal”
Certainly. It took place within a meal and Christ commanded His disciples to eat and drink.
But the conclusion that it was therefore merely a meal does not follow.
Christ identifies His Body as being given and His Blood as poured out; St Paul places Eucharistic communion in a sacrificial framework; and the earliest Christian writers describe Eucharistic offering in sacrificial language.
A sacrificial banquet is not a contradiction. Sacrifices in biblical religion frequently culminated in eating the sacrificial victim.
The issue is therefore not whether Catholics eat and drink at the Eucharist. They do.
The issue is whether eating exhausts the meaning of the action.
Trent solemnly says that it does not.
“Isn't Calling the Mass Propitiatory an Insult to Calvary?”
No. It would insult Calvary if the Mass were regarded as an independent sacrifice that supplied something missing from the Cross. The Church teaches precisely the opposite.
The Mass possesses propitiatory efficacy because it is inseparably dependent upon the one sacrifice of Christ. The same Victim is offered sacramentally and the merits of the Cross are applied.
Trent specifically condemned the claim that the Mass derogates from the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross.
“Isn't the Whole Congregation the Celebrant?”
The faithful participate genuinely and should unite themselves spiritually with the offering. But participation must not be confused with ministerial priesthood.
Pius XII expressly distinguishes the two. Only the ordained priest performs the Eucharistic sacrificial action sacramentally in the person of Christ. The people participate through union of intention, prayer and self-offering with Christ and His minister.
This distinction protects both truths: the Mass is the worship of the whole Mystical Body, yet the sacramental priesthood is not derived from the congregation.
What We Can and Cannot Conclude
Established Catholic doctrine: The Mass is a true and proper sacrifice instituted by Christ. It is truly propitiatory. The same Christ who offered Himself upon Calvary is the Victim offered in the Mass. Christ is the principal Priest, and the ordained priest acts ministerially in His person. The Mass is not merely praise, thanksgiving, commemoration or a meal. These propositions are taught authoritatively and, in central respects, defined by the Council of Trent.
Authoritative pre–Vatican II papal teaching: Mediator Dei explains that the Eucharistic sacrifice is an unbloody immolation, that Christ remains Priest and Victim, that the faithful and ministerial priest do not offer in exactly the same manner, and that the Mass is the chief act of divine worship.
Ancient historical evidence: Second-, third- and fourth-century Christian witnesses employ sacrificial Eucharistic language. Justin, Irenaeus, Cyprian and Augustine provide especially clear examples.
Traditional theological explanation: The separate consecration of Body and Blood sacramentally represents Christ's bloody immolation upon Calvary. This explanation received major magisterial confirmation in Mediator Dei.
Disputed theological question: Catholic theologians historically discussed the precise metaphysical formulation of the formal essence of Eucharistic sacrifice. Those legitimate schools of thought do not permit denial of the defined doctrine that the Mass is a true and propitiatory sacrifice.
What cannot be concluded merely from defects of symbolism: The absence or alteration of some traditional sacrificial sign — an altar arrangement, ceremonial, prayer or gesture — does not by itself establish sacramental invalidity. The theological quality of a rite, its lawfulness and its sacramental validity are separate questions and must be demonstrated separately according to Catholic principles.
This last distinction is particularly important when later liturgical reforms are examined. One may demonstrate that a rite weakens sacrificial expression without thereby having proved that no sacrament occurs. Any claim of invalidity requires its own analysis of matter, form, minister and intention.
Conclusion
The Holy Mass is not fundamentally a religious meeting centred upon a congregation.
It is the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
The same Christ who offered Himself upon the Cross is the principal Priest and Victim of the Mass. Calvary is not repeated physically; it is sacramentally represented in an unbloody manner so that the one sacrifice of the Cross may be perpetually commemorated and its fruits applied throughout the Church.
That is why the Church has an altar.
That is why she has a sacrificing priesthood.
That is why Trent defined the Mass as truly propitiatory.
That is why Communion, although profoundly important, cannot be allowed to reduce the Mass to a sacred meal.
And that is why Pope Pius XII could describe the Mass as the chief act of divine worship.
To understand Catholic worship, therefore, one must begin at Calvary and see the altar in its light. The Catholic comes to Mass not merely to hear, sing, gather or eat, but to unite himself with the spotless Victim offered to the Father — adoring God, giving thanks, seeking mercy, imploring grace and offering his own life in union with Christ.
That doctrinal foundation must remain fixed when considering the next question:
whether later alterations to the Roman liturgy preserved, obscured or departed from this Catholic understanding of the Holy Sacrifice.
Primary Sources
Sacred Scripture
Malachias 1:11 — prophecy of the universal pure sacrifice.
Luke 22:19–20 — institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper.
1 Corinthians 10:16–21 — Eucharistic communion in explicitly sacrificial context.
1 Corinthians 11:23–29 — St Paul's account of the Eucharistic institution and proclamation of the Lord's death.
Hebrews 9:24–28 — Christ's once-for-all sacrifice.
Hebrews 10:10–14 — perfection of Christ's single bloody oblation.
Early Church Fathers
St Justin Martyr (c. AD 100–165), Dialogue with Trypho (c. AD 155–160), chapter 41. Online text
St Irenaeus of Lyons (c. AD 130–202), Against Heresies (c. AD 180), Book IV, chapters 17–18. Book IV, chapter 17
St Cyprian of Carthage (c. AD 200–258), Letter to Caecilius on the Sacrament of the Cup of the Lord, especially §§1, 4 and the later discussion of Christ and His priestly ministers. The letter numbering varies among editions. Online text
St Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430), The City of God (early fifth century), Book X, especially chapters 6 and 20. Online text
Doctors, Councils and Magisterium
St Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–1274), Summa Theologiae, II-II, q.85, especially aa.1–3, on sacrifice and divine worship. Online text
St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, q.83, a.1 and related articles, on the Eucharist as sacrifice and its relationship to Christ's Passion. Online text
Council of Trent, Session XXII, 17 September 1562, Doctrine on the Sacrifice of the Mass, chapters I–II and Canons I–IV. Complete Session XXII text
Catechism of the Council of Trent / Roman Catechism, Part II, The Sacrament of the Eucharist, especially the sections treating the Eucharist as sacrifice, its distinction from the sacrament, identity with the sacrifice of the Cross and propitiatory character. Online text
Catechism of St Pius X, section The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, especially questions 1–14. Online text
Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, 20 November 1947, especially §§66–115 and §201. Vatican text
Further Reading
Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., Reality: A Synthesis of Thomistic Thought, chapter 40, “The Sacrifice of the Mass.” This gives a more advanced Thomistic treatment of sacramental immolation and its relation to Calvary. Online text
Joseph Pohle and Arthur Preuss, treatment of the Sacrifice of the Mass, including the physical and metaphysical essence of the sacrifice and the role of priestly Communion. The Physical Essence of the Mass
Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), “Sacrifice of the Mass.” Useful for the traditional theological distinctions and the range of pre–Vatican II theological explanations concerning the essence of the sacrifice. Online article
Related Questions
What are the sacraments, and why are they important?
What Is the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist?
What Is Transubstantiation?
Why Is a Validly Ordained Priest Necessary for the Mass?
Why Does the Catholic Mass Require a Sacrificial Priesthood?
How Did the Novus Ordo Change the Traditional Roman Mass?
Does the Novus Ordo Clearly Express the Catholic Doctrine of Sacrifice?
Is the Novus Ordo Mass Valid, and Is Validity the Only Question Catholics Should Ask?