Many times when defending the True Mass and attacking the Novus Ordo, I say, "The Mass is not a "community meal" as the Protestants believe, but a Sacrifice. This is why an altar facing the Lord should be used as the priest offers the Sacrifice to Him; not a table facing the congregation to eat "bread" around." The answer that I get to this: "When Christ instituted the Mass, it was the Last Supper with the disciples gathered around the table."
How do I respond to this assertion that the Mass is a community meal around a table?
Thank you.
ajpirc
I think others will answer better than I, but my response would be this:
Yes, our Lord instituted the last supper "gathered around the table", but he had not yet died on the cross for us. Remeber His words,"
For this is my blood of the new testament which shall be shed for many, ". There would be no way to "Eat his body" (and they will deny Transubstantiation here, so be prepared on defending the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist) without sacrificing the 2nd Person in God, as was done on Mt. Calvary. He thus unified the sacrifice on Calvary with the last supper. We still partake (those of us in the state of grace) in the communion of Christ, as he'd instructed. But his instructions weren't to have a community meal, but to celebrate the un-bloody sacrifice of him. The Catholic Church, and early Church fathers, understood the link between the Old Testament sacrifice, and what Jesus instructions were.
This is very short, but I hope to the point. Also- I would encourage them to investigate the way masses were said in the early centuries of the church. 1st, 2nd and 3rd centuries. Since the mostly believe that the Church was still, "The Church" in the first 3 or 4 centuries after Christ, encourage them to investigate how "Mass" was celebrated in those times. Ask them, "If the Church of Christ was still the 'Church of Christ' in the first centuries, why then do you not hold the tradition of saying mass the way they did in those times?"