Please turn in your Bibles at this time to the book of Leviticus. Leviticus chapter 10. Most of you are aware of the nature of our subject tonight. We are dealing with why no Christian should attend the Catholic Mass. And so the purpose is not to expound any particular portion of God's Word. We will be looking at a number of passages together. But just to set the scene, I would like to read this portion initially. And then before the Word, we will read a different part of God's Word just in preparation for in the subject matter before us. Leviticus chapter 10, let's read together from the verse number 1. And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord. Then Moses said unto Aaron, This is it that the Lord spake, saying, I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified. And Aaron held his peace. And Moses called Michiel and El-Saffan, the sons of Uzziel, the uncle of Aaron, and said unto them, Come near, carry your brethren from before the sanctuary out of the camp. So they went near and carried them in their coats out of the camp. as Moses had said. And Moses said unto Aaron, and unto Eleazar, and unto Ithamar, his sons, uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes, lest ye die. And lest wrath come upon all the people, but let your brethren, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning which the Lord hath kindled. And ye shall not go out from the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die. for the anointing oil of the Lord is upon you. And they did according to the word of Moses. Amen. We'll just end our reading there. Please turn then in your Bibles to 1 Corinthians 10. Again, we'll read a portion of God's Word here. 1 Corinthians 10. And the verse number 1. Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, To the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them. As it is written, the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted and were destroyed of serpents. Neither murmur ye, As some of them also murmured and were destroyed off the destroyer. Now all these things happened unto them foreign samples, and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore, let him that thinketh, he standeth. Take heed, lest he fall. There hath no temptation taken you, but such as is common to man. But God is faithful. He will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way of escape that ye may be able to bear it. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. Amen. Can I also read, just don't turn to it, just one verse in 1 John chapter 5. And if you think of the words of that verse 14, my dearly beloved, listen to these words. Little children, Keep yourselves from idols. Well, we trust God will bless the public reading of His Word again tonight. And let's seek His face now for help as we come to the consideration of the Word of God. Eternal God and loving Heavenly Father, we pray for help in this time of need. We pray for help to apply ourselves to these things. We would use our minds to consider the error and to consider the truth. And as we compare error with truth, may we see the loveliness and the sufficiency of our Saviour. May we see in Christ the sinner's needs. May we see them all met in Him, the One who sits down at thy right hand. We pray, O Lord, for help now. May this word be a word and season for the various people in this gathering. May you speak to each of our hearts for Christ's name. Amen. Well, as those of you who are frequently here will know, it's not my habit to react upon topical issues that arise. My normal pattern is to go through various books, various subjects in the Word of God and go through them consecutively. But there is a matter that has arisen that I do believe will have repercussions for generations to come. As most of you know, the matter that I'm speaking of is the issue of the attendance of a present Christian at the Mass, at the Mass of the Roman Catholic Church. This is not in any way meant to be a sermon of political significance. I am not a spokesman for any particular political party. But yet of course we must see that the attendance of the First Minister at this particular Mass that we're thinking about was of course a political decision. But yet the decision to make that political move really is a decision that has great spiritual significance. In terms of example, our First Minister, of course, should have known better. And in light of that, his example is of significance. But what I was thinking about, and this is important, I believe, in light of all the attention on our First Minister, there was another person attended that particular Mass and in many ways slipped under the radar. A radar that I believe in days gone by we would not have missed. That was the attendance of the Presbyterian Moderator himself. Norman Hamilton was present at that Mass and that was a significant thing for him, for in previous times, whilst I'm not conducting this particular stand, he would have said, well, I'll go in, but I won't stay for the Mass. Oh, there's no place for such a notion. But even more than that, he changed and as far as we know, was present for the entire ceremony. That, I believe, is a very, very significant thing. There's a man who has subscribed to the Westerner standards, a man in leadership of a so-called evangelical church. I say so-called far down the lines of apostasy. And so, this is a spiritual matter. It's not in any way meant to denote any lack of sympathy for what was a very wicked, wicked crime perpetrated against someone upholding the law in our land. And so I don't come in any way to say that with no sympathy for that family, that would be dreadful to think that. Our utmost sympathy goes to that family and all of their suffering and all of their loss. And yet, that tragedy has been used as a means to propagate to humanism in our day. And that is why, as a minister of the gospel, I do believe it is my duty to expose error as well as to preach truth. Your natural Inclination is to preach the truth. But there is a necessity at times to expose error. As Ephesians 5 says, And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. There comes a time when it is necessary to reprove. Again, as Paul says in another place, Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences Contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them. To avoid them they must first be marked. And therefore there is a need to publicly prove error. Preach the word. Be instant, in season, out of season. Reprove. Rebuke. Exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. You see in Acts chapter 20. You can even turn there just to see that for yourselves. In Acts chapter 20. And we see Paul's example. So very clearly seen in light of the warnings that he gave to those elders in Ephesus. Who had come to him from Ephesus. And as he taught them, he makes it very clear in verse 28. The nature of their particular responsibility. Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock. over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which ye have purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them. Paul understood the nature of the church was that there were people who from out would come in and attack the flock. But also from among their own selves, men would rise up speaking perverse things. And therefore, verse 31, he tells them to watch and remember. And what he's saying is, remember my example. Whenever error comes into the church from outside or from within, remember my example and remember my tears. Remember how I cease not to warn every one night and day with tears. My responsibility before God is for you as the flock of God here. I will give an account for my duties as a minister for your souls. And that's why I feel this sermon must be preached. Not necessarily for any further interest outside the bounds of this church. Oh, I know it will go on the internet, and I know it will be easily produced, and there may be greater benefit, but first and foremost, it is for your good. And you say, well, we don't believe in going to the Mass. Well, I know that as far as I'm aware, that is true for you who are gathering in this meeting today. And in some ways, it's an easy thing for me to come up and preach on this. I know that I'm not going to be scolded at the door. I know I have your support and backing. But yet I do realise that there are people in this congregation, and particularly younger people, for a number of years who haven't had a minister. And as I said this morning, you perhaps haven't been taught on this particular subject. And if this is an issue on this year of the 60th anniversary of our church, you can be sure whenever you are deacons and elders in the church, that the danger will be even greater. Therefore, I believe it is my responsibility to teach all of us, but particularly younger people, that you understand that what's before us is a matter of grave importance, because it seems as far as we know, that there is an uncertainty even amongst our own regarding this issue. People are not quite seeing the issues as it really is. Perhaps over the years, we've forgotten to teach in these things. They've been missed. And there is indeed, once again, the sounded trumpet of truth. Our Presbytery, some time ago, issued a statement regarding the Roman Catholic Mass and said this, In light of recent criticism, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster wishes to publicly reaffirm its opposition to the Roman Catholic service commonly termed the Mass. In this ecumenical age, the false notion is propagated that there is little difference between the Roman Catholic Mass and the simple communion service as practised by Protestants. However, there is a vast difference. The historic creeds of Protestant churches underline this difference by referring to the Mass as blasphemous, idolatry and injurious to the work of Christ. That statement was issued by the Officers of Presbytery not so long ago. You see, there is a notion that we are all worshipping the same God. That we're all worshipping the same God and therefore it doesn't really matter, you know, we didn't take the mask, but we were there because at the end of the day we're worshipping the same God. And it's for that reason that I read Leviticus chapter 10. Because the Word of God is very clear. That not only are you responsible for who you worship, but you're also responsible for how you worship. None of us are permitted to worship God with our own imaginations. We're not permitted to come to the session of the church and say, Oh, I like this and I'd like that. We worship according to the word of God. Now, I would say in this regard that I actually don't believe that the Catholic God is the same God. That's an important thing to understand, because the mass is not the only reason why we must stay away from these things. Don't think that because Whilst the Roman Catholic doctrine may agree with us on certain areas of doctrine regarding the Trinity for example. Yet the God who they preach is a God of different attributes than the God of the Bible. You see God having a belief that there is one God does not mean we worship the same God. Because you can believe in one God but yet the notions you have regarding that God are so removed from Scripture. that you're not worshipping God at all. But even if we were worshipping the same God, how we worship is vitally important in the Word of God. And that's why we must stand once again and teach the truth of Biblical worship. The source of what we're going to look at tonight, and again, just as a word of warning to some degree, there will be quotes in this message. Again, I don't normally quote at any length. by nature of the subject, you're going to have to quote some of the Catholic doctrines. And so there'll be lengthy quotes to this, and I can provide notes if you'd like to have notes of this. You can say to me at the door, and I can produce some notes. How readable they'll be, I'm not so sure, but you can have them and use them. And so if there are things that you think you're missing, just ask me and we can certainly get some notes for you if required. The source of what I'm drawing from regarding the Catholic teaching on these things are really twofold. There is the catechism of the Catholic Church. That was produced by Pope John Paul II on October 11, 1992, the 30th anniversary of what was known as the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. There was also an abridged version known as the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you like, that was a dialogue form, a question and answer format, and it was published in English in 2006. It's interesting, in that doctrine, or that particular document, Cardinal Ratzinger, of course now Pope Benedict, he said this in that particular statement. Regarding this catechism, he said this, that the Pope confirmed its fundamental purpose as a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives and prays in her daily life. And these things are available on the internet. You can go on the Vatican website and these documents are there so that we do not need to speculate as to what they believe. I don't need to come to some source and say, well, this particular Protestant theologian thinks that the Roman Catholic Church teaches this. We can take it right from their own documents. And with their own words, they can be condemned. I really have two things I'd like to draw to your attention this evening. The first one is the false doctrine that undergirds the Mass. We do need to deal with that first. There is one particular false doctrine, of course, that you'll know. And that is the doctrine that undergirds the whole teaching regarding the Mass. And having seen that, we'll then go on to consider some reasons. Very specifically, why no Christian should attend the Mass. Well, the doctrine, of course, I'm referring to this false doctrine, is the doctrine of transubstantiation. Again, listen please to what the catechism says regarding what is the meaning of transubstantiation. These are not my words. These are the words of the particular Catholic catechism that says this. Transubstantiation means the change of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the body of Christ. And of the whole substance of wine into the substance of His blood. Again, boys and girls, you can understand this. You know the word transformation. And you see the word changes. The word trans has the sense of a change. Change of form in terms of transformation. Change of substance in terms of transubstantiation. It's a false doctrine and it teaches that the bread becomes the very body of Christ and the wine becomes the very blood of Christ. I'm going to say this. This change is brought about in the Eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, listen to this, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the Eucharistic species, remain unaltered. In other words, it still tastes like bread and still tastes like wine. In 1376, that's the number of the Catechism, the Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring this, Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly His body that He was offering unto the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this Holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine, there takes place, listen to this, a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His body. This change the Holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation. Just as a word of note there, the number I gave there, 1376, is the number of the catechism, it's not the year that that was issued, just for clarification there as I read that particular quote. But what they're teaching is that there's a change, a change in the bread and a change in the wine. And it's grounded upon a literal interpretation of our Lord's words at the Lord's Supper. So please turn to Luke chapter 22. And let's examine this portion of God's Word together. Luke 22. And you'll see there the treatment that is given to us at the Lord's Supper. The institution of the Lord's Supper as we note. Luke 22 verse 19. And He took bread and gave thanks and break it and gave unto them saying this is my body. Verse 20, likewise, also the cup after supper, saying, this cup is the New Testament in my blood. You see, let's be very clear nowadays. We sometimes look upon the Catholic Church as being those that simply stand upon tradition. I was present at a debate between a Catholic theologian and a pastor in America in 1995. And that Catholic theologian, understanding the present ecumenical age, made it very clear that Catholic doctrine was based upon the Word of God. And they took the Word of God. And there were many in that meeting, and I confess, I was one of them. We were astounded at his ability to convincingly prove Catholic doctrine from the very Bible that we used. So let's be very aware that if you look at the Catholic catechism, you will see that they refer to Scripture portions. And they refer to the Word of God. And they will turn you to a portion of God's Word like this. Now, there are a number of things that must be said. I'm just going to list these things with you and I'll just leave them really for your attention. The first thing is this. The language that is used here in Luke 22 is language that is used in context of what we term figures of speech. The whole context is speaking in those terms out of birth, frankly. This cup is the New Testament in my blood. The cup, the receptacle that holds the wine is the New Testament. Nobody reads that and presumes that literally the cup is the New Covenant. Of course not. It is figurative language. The cup represents the wine, and the wine represents the blood of the covenant. The cup is not literally the wine, and the wine is not literally the covenant. The whole context is a context of figures of speech. You'll note also, secondly, that the wine, according to verse 18, remains what is termed the fruit of the vine. I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine. That is what is called the blood of Christ by the Roman Catholic Church. It's called here the very fruit of the vine. It hasn't changed. It's also worth noting out in the third place that Christ throughout His teaching used a similar figure of speech. You think of all the I am statements of the Lord. I am the Good Shepherd. No one sees that as a literal fulfillment. I am the door. I am the light of the world. They are all figures of speech pointing forward to great truths of Christian doctrine. It's also very important to understand in the fourth place that at the words of the institution of the Lord's Supper Christ is bodily present. Again I ask you to think through this with me please. Christ is here with the bread and the cup in his hand. To say that Christ is therefore also present in bread denies a very important truth of biblical doctrine. It denies Christ's true human body. You see, a question is asked in the catechism, does the breaking of the bread divide Christ? The answer comes this, the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ. He is present, whole and entire, in each of the Eucharistic species and in each of their parts. So Christ, at the institution, is said to be presently there and also in the bread and in the wine. And now we know that Christ, corporally or bodily, is in heaven. And yet He is said to be bodily in the bread and the wine. That is an attack upon Christ's true humanity. Christ has a true human body. That is required for Him to be our Saviour. If Christ's humanity is less than a true humanity, or more than a true humanity, then He is not our Saviour. The doctrine of Christ's person states very clearly that the two natures of Christ, the human and the divine, are not mingled. He is true man and true God. One person, two natures. So this so-called doctrine of transubstantiation completely pulls apart Christ's work as a saviour. He cannot be a mediator between God and man. He cannot be your mediator if he is not true man. Furthermore, we see that whenever Paul repeated the instructions of this particular institution He talks in terms of remembrance, this do in remembrance, I as a memorial. Furthermore, in the sixth place, we should note that the eating of human flesh and blood is both repulsive and unbiblical. Look over at Leviticus chapter 17, please. For the Jew, the very thought of partaking of human flesh and human blood would be repugnant to their imagination. In Leviticus 17 verse 10 it says this, And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood, I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among the people, for the life of the flesh is in the blood. And I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls. For it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the souls. And you say, well, surely this was changed in the New Covenant. Well, according to Acts 15, whenever they discussed the matters of the new institution of the Gentiles being in the church, it says very clearly in Acts 15, in the verse 29, these words, that ye abstain from meats offered to idols and from blood. And so we see that this The concept of eating flesh and drinking blood is absolutely abhorrent. In the last place we see that this change is impossible. The change that is proposed to your thinking is completely impossible. Listen again to what they say in their catechism. The outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the Eucharistic species, remain unaltered and understanding that that is going to raise questions in people's minds as I say in the expanded catechism that was produced first that in this sacrament are the true body of Christ and his true blood is something that cannot be apprehended by the senses. So it happens but you don't know about it. It's convenient isn't it? Says Saint Thomas, but only by faith which relies on divine authority. For this reason, the catechism continues, in a commentary on Luke 22 verse 19, this is my body which is given for you. Saint Cyril says, do not doubt whether this is true, but rather receive the words of the Saviour in faith. For sin says the truth, he cannot lie. That is Catholic doctrine. That this bread and this wine is changed, but yet you are not aware of it. I don't deny the miraculous. Don't think I'm standing here as some heathen sceptic who would suggest that God is not able to change things. Oh, I believe in a God who changed water into wine. But the people knew about it. You see, miracle, and this is a very important point, just as an aside. Miracles are supra-reason. They are above reason. They are not contra-reason. They are not against reason. Some miracle whereby a change in substance happens without us being aware of it is not according to reason. But when God the Son changed water to wine, the people did not say, why are you giving me water? So a change, the change that's proposed to your thinking, is a change that is utterly impossible. You see, in light of this particular doctrine of transubstantiation, we need to understand, as those who stand in a Protestant heritage, that it was this doctrine that our reformers died for. They died regarding their conviction in this doctrine. Bishop Ryle, back in the 1800s, wrote a little booklet is now put together as five English reformers and there's a section in that that I also have published as a track. Why were all reformers burned? And he says this. Great indeed would be our mistake if we supposed that they suffered for the vague charge of refusing submission to the Pope. For desiring to maintain the independence of the Church of England. Was that simply all they suffered for? Says Ryle. Nothing of the kind. The principal reason why they were burned was because they refused one of the peculiar doctrines of the Roman Church. On that doctrine, in almost every case, hinged their life or death. If they admitted it, they might live. If they refused it, they must die. The doctrine in question was the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the consecrated elements of bread and wine in the Lord's Supper. Did they? Believe it, that the body and blood of Christ were really, that is corporally, literally, locally and materially present under the forms of bread and wine after the words of consecration were pronounced. Did they believe that? Or did they not? That was the simple question. If they did not believe and admit it, they were burned. Just let me listen to the accounts of two particular martyrs that are given forth. John Bradford, first of all. He says this, The chief thing which I am condemned for as an heretic is because I deny in the sacrament of the altar, which is not Christ's supper, but a plain perversion, as the papists now use it, to be a real, natural and corporal presence of Christ's body and blood under the forms and actions of bread and wine. That is because I deny transubstantiation, which is the darling of the devil. and daughter and heir to anti-Christ religion. Ryle, very succinctly, brings his account to an end and says, and so he was condemned and burned. Bishop Ridley, the condemnation against him is in these words. The said Nicholas Ridley affirms, maintains and stubbornly defends certain opinions, assertions and heresies contrary to the word of God. and the received faith of the church. So, what's he going to deny here? Well, let's listen. As in denying the true and natural body and blood of Christ to be in the sacrament of the altar. And secondarily, in affirming the substance of the bread and wine to remain after the words of consecration. And Ryle again says, and so he was condemned and burned. This doctrine is a doctrine that caused the death of our Reformers, those upon whose heritage we stand. And so in light of this false doctrine that undergirds the Mass, what are the reasons then, in the second place, why no Christian should attend the Mass? You see, it is one thing to demonstrate the errors of the doctrine of transubstantiation, and I don't pretend to be exhaustive in that. There may be things that come to your mind, and, well, they didn't say that, and they didn't say that, and that's fine. I've been selective in what we've dealt with here, but simply undermining that particular doctrine. We must go further and show, well why should no Christian be there? You see, those who attend the Mass might well say, well I don't believe in transnunciation. But I'm going there, but not participating. I'm not taking part, I'm simply there as an observer. So we need to go further. Why? Why should no Christian be present at such an event? Well, the first reason, and these are in no particular order of importance and some are shorter than others. There are five of them. The first one is, to attend the mass, is in light of what we said, is to say that the reformers died for no reason. You see, if we attend the mass, what we are saying is that the reformers were wrong. That simply they should have denied their convictions and lived, rather than standing for the truth and dying. What we're saying is that their martyrdom was unnecessary. You say, well, I don't see that as a very serious thing. You know, they were men of a different age, and they may well have different convictions than we have now. And I don't see that as being particularly serious. You see, it is incredibly serious. Because if we say we are Protestants, and I use that term not in terms of an upbringing, but of a conviction. Then if we are happy to deny their martyrdom, then we're happy to throw out our entire heritage. Why was there any reformation? If we attend the mass, if we're happy to be there, then our reformers died in vain. They died for no reason. Furthermore, God is not so unmindful of their sacrifice. For in heaven their blood cries out. God will avenge their blood one day. And it is a shame for any so-called Protestant to look so dimly upon their blood when God in heaven one day will avenge that blood. It is a very serious thing to assert that the Reformers died for no reason. But the second reason is that the Mass is the central part of what is a false gospel. Regarding the sacraments generally, the Catechism states this. To celebrate it worthily in faith, the sacraments confer the grace that they signify. They are efficacious, that is, they work, because in them Christ himself is at work. Furthermore, the Catechism says this. The Church affirms that for believers, The Sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation. Those aren't my words. Those are the words of the Catechism. That the Sacraments are necessary for salvation. Sacramental Grace is the Grace of the Holy Spirit. The fruit of which is the spirit of adoption, making the faithful protectors in the divine nature by uniting them in a living union with the only Son, the Saviour. In other words, you unite the Christ by receiving the sacraments necessary to salvation. In the Compendium Catechism it says this, what are the sacraments? The sacraments instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church are efficacious signs. Now again, if you understand English, you will question that very couplet. How can a sign be efficacious? But regardless of that, they are efficacious signs of grace, perceptible to the senses. Through them, divine life is bestowed upon us. For what reason? Are the sacraments necessary for salvation? For believers in Christ? The sacraments, even if they are not all given to you as a faithful, are necessary for salvation because they confer sacramental grace, forgiveness of sins, adoption as children of God, confirmation to Christ the Lord and membership in the Church. The Holy Spirit heals and transforms those who receive the sacraments. That's the words of the catechism 2005-2006. This is not some archaic document. This is what they believe right here and now. With grace and patience we must assert that this is a false gospel. It's a false gospel. You see you will talk perhaps to Roman Catholic friends and Roman Catholic neighbours and they will talk about forgiveness and adoption because it's in their catechism. But what you mean is something very far removed from what they mean. They are teaching some false gospel. But having looked at that issue of the sacraments generally, you must understand that the Mass is at the very centre of this false gospel. It says this, the Eucharist is the source and summit of the Christian life. The other sacraments and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and work of the apostles are bound up with the Eucharist. and are oriented toward it. So, if all the sacraments are necessary for salvation, and the Mass is the very centre of that, then the Mass is the centre of a false gospel. A false gospel. You see, the Christian's duty is to defend the faith. Jude makes it very clear that we are to contend earnestly wrestle, vehemently use every part of our being to contend for the faith, for the truth of the gospel. You know, by attending the Mass, we're like one of those big guard dogs. You know, the ones that climb on the metal fences and they growl at you and they bare their teeth. But when you come to wars and they roll over and want their tummies scratched, That's what we're doing, attending the Mass. In our confession of faith, we bare our teeth. In our statements, we make clear that we are imputing the Mass. And then we go there, and we get our bellies scratched. That's why. That's why it must not be there. Because we are propagating a false gospel. You see, Paul makes it very clear in Galatians chapter 1, and you can turn there if you're If you have Bibles in your hands, in Galatians chapter 1, Paul makes it very clear that he marvels that they are so soon removed. Galatians 1 verse 6. Removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel which is not another. Just because the Roman Church would propagate some notion that they are providing forgiveness and adoption Just because they use those terms does not mean it's a gospel. Because this other gospel is not another. But there be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of Christ. You see the grace of God. The grace of God is not dispensed through some man. Some priest who claims to have power over Christ and the ability to bring Christ to men. The grace of God does not come through sacraments. But sovereignly through the Spirit. By grace are you saved through faith. Apart from works. Works and faith do not combine in terms of salvation. We do work by faith. But unto salvation we are saved apart from works. The work of a man, the work of our own hands. We are sovereignly saved by God's grace. Look at Titus chapter 3. And just see that taught there. I show this because this is one of the proof texts given perhaps for the sacraments being a means of saving grace. It says there in chapter 3, verse 4, "...but after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost." And perhaps we'll say, and of course the Mass is not particularly in view here, but perhaps we'll say, well there you see, the washing of regeneration. There you have it. Baptism brings about regeneration. But you've got to look at it in terms of the context. Not by works of righteousness which we have done. So would any Roman priest suggest that the baptism was not a work of righteousness? Are they going to say that their washing is an unrighteous work? Because we're not saved by works of righteousness, but by the grace of God in the washing of regeneration. In other words, by the rebirth, which is like an unto-a-washing, unto-a-cleansing in terms of the Old Testament. But it's grace. That being justified, verse 7, by His grace. Or entrance into forgiveness of sins, or entrance into adoption as children of God is all by grace. By grace. And I suggest to you, more than that, I tell you very clearly that to attend the Mass is to give credence to a false gospel. It's to give credence to a gospel that damns souls. It's to give hope to those who are there and suggest that perhaps what we're involved in is not too bad after all. It's to propagate a false gospel. The third thing we should look at, and I trust you're patient with time tonight, I realise that I normally finish about now. That's probably not going to happen. In fact, it's not going to happen tonight. Just be patient with me. I won't go much longer. But there are things that need to be said here. I'm not going to come back to this, at least not for a wee while. So let's just take time on this. The act or the Elevation of the Host is an act of idolatry. And this is very, very important in terms of the attendance of the Mass. You see, a key aspect of the Mass is what is known as the Elevation of the Host. There is the prayer that supposedly changes the substance. And the host is elevated. You see, there is a thing in terms of modern evangelicalism that we tend to define idolatry in terms of spiritual idolatry. Rightly so, we tell people that idolatry is putting anything before God. Spiritual idolatry. Your wife, your job, money, all of these things that are put before God, that's idolatry. But in so doing, we have perhaps forgotten that there is real idolatry. Idolatry, again according to Bishop Ryle, a very helpful definition is this. Idolatry is a worship in which the honour due to God in Trinity and to Him only is given to some of His creatures or to some invention of His creatures. You see, we have accepted often in many cases like pictures of Jesus are acceptable. We've been so focused upon spiritual idolatry, warning people about loving things more than God. And that is right and proper. But we've forgotten that people are also susceptible to physical, literal, real idolatry. In this elevation of the Mass, the raising of the bread before the people of the Catechism ask this question. What kind of worship is due to the sacrament of the Eucharist? It's interesting, they don't ask, first of all, is worship Jew? They presume that. What kind of worship is Jew is the question. The worship Jew to the sacrament of the Eucharist, whether during the celebration of the Mass or outside it, is the worship of Latria. That is the adoration given to God alone. The church guards with the greatest care, hosts that have been consecrated. She brings them to the sick. and to other persons who find it impossible to participate at Mass. This is a continuation of the Catechism. She also presents them for the solemn adoration of the faithful. And she bears them in processions. Idolatry. Because Christ, again in the larger Catechism says this, because Christ himself is present in the sacrament of the altar, he is to be honoured with the worship of adoration. To visit the Blessed Sacrament is a proof of gratitude, an expression of love and a duty of adoration toward Christ our Lord. I hope you understand that there is no God in the host. That it is simply bread made by man's hand. And therefore to offer worship toward that which is of man's hand is idolatry. It's a breaking of the second commandment. And very simply, can I ask you a question? Would you be happy amongst a gathering where there is a Buddha being worshipped? Would you be happy in a gathering where there is a golden calf being worshipped? Would you be happy in the company of the people of God when they worshipped the golden calf? Would you be happy with Neda and Abihu and their strange fire? Would that have thrilled your soul? Would you have felt that it was more important to be part of the crowd than to be outside the camp? To be part of an idolatrous worship service? To see a public face? You see, the word of God is so very clear. Wherefore, we read these words, wherefore my dearly beloved, leave, leave from my daughter. Don't cosy up to it. Don't get friendly with it. Or before you know it, you'll be sucked into it. You're to run a mile. You're to flee. Not wander, but run. Flee. You see, Paul is very clear that the works of the flesh in Galatians 5 are manifest, which are these, adultery, fornication, uncleanliness, lasciviousness, idolatry. See, those who are present at the Mass, I am sure, would not want to be present in a brothel. And yet, adultery and fornication are the works of the flesh, as is idolatry. And Paul tells in Romans 13, But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lust thereof. Beware idolatry. How can you be present in a service that is promoting idolatry? The fourth reason is that the sacrifice so-called of Mass is blasphemous. We believe in our own heritage that the body and blood of Christ are symbolised in the Lord's Supper. It's a symbolic thing as I said in 1 Corinthians 11. It's in remembrance We show forth, literally we proclaim the Lord's death. We don't re-enact it. But listen again to the words of the Catechism. In what way is the Eucharist a memorial of the sacrifice of Christ? Oh, beware words. The Catechism has the questions, in what way is it a memorial? I believe this is ecumenical language. This is language that would appeal to the Christian. I'm paying attention to the one who would say, well, we believe it's a memorial, don't we? The Eucharist, the answer is this. It is a memorial, in the sense, always listen for the sense. In the sense, that at next present and actual, the sacrifice which Christ offered to the Father on the cross, once for all, on behalf of mankind. You say, well, they talk about the cross of Christ being once and for all. And the Eucharist is a memorial that makes it present to us. You must read on. The sacrificial character of the Holy Eucharist, the term memorial, is moving away. The sacrificial character is manifested in the very words of institution. This is my body which is given for you. And this cup is the new covenant, my blood, that will be shed for you. The catechism is going to say this. The sacrifice of the cross and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one and the same sacrifice. The priest and the victim are the same. Only the manner of offering is different. And note that they've gone from memorial to sacrifice to offering. And before you know it, you've been sucked in. Error has privately crept upon you. And now they are talking about offerings. Offering, of course, the word, which is the word of sacrifice. Only the manner of offering is different, it says. In a bloody manner on the cross. In an unbloody manner in the Eucharist. The other catechism adds the fearful words. And truly propitiatory. that the Mass itself is a sacrifice which is able to appease God's wrath. I personally believe that there can only be two reasons why Christians would not run away from this. One is that they have absolutely no understanding of what the Mass is like. While the other reason is that they have no appreciation for their Saviour. And that is fearful. Because if, if to us who believe Christ is precious, and if His death is all in all to our soul, I for the life of me cannot understand why any Christian could watch the Mass, and not find their Holy Being raising up within themselves, that they find themselves exploding, saying, Stop it! Stop it! I just cannot see how a Christian can watch it and not be utterly revulsed to the point of vomiting nearly because it's suggesting that your blessed saviour who died for your sins once and for all is being re-sacrificed upon a Romish altar and that in some way you must believe this because Calvary was not enough and all the language of Hebrews once and once and for all. It means nothing because it has to happen again and again and again and again. Why can't anybody reason within their own heads and not get up and overturn the tables? It's a blasphemy and it must be rejected. Of course, the very notion of a bloodless sacrifice cannot be propitiatory. Without shedding of blood, there is no remission. So in no way can a bloodless sacrifice remove the wrath of God for your sins. And your only hope is Calvary. See, we could turn to all the portions of God's Word, and perhaps we could look at just one portion. We'll turn to Hebrews chapter 10. Just for the sake of any of you who are taking notes. Hebrews 7, 27. Hebrews 9, verse 12. Hebrews 9, verse 28. And then Hebrews 10, verses 10 to 14. Repeat the emphasis of the Word of God. That Christ's work is once and for all. Hebrews 10, verse 10. By the witch will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God. And we looked at this text in terms of remission. And again, I reminded you that there is no seat in the temple or no seat in the tabernacle. Because the works there were never finished. But when Christ on the cross cried out, it is finished. He was exalted to the right hand of God and sat down because His work is done. Never to be repeated. So that you have the joy of knowing your sins are gone and gone forever. You need no other sacrifice for sin. Romans 6 says this, knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more. The sacrifice is done. Fifthly, and finally, the Eucharist also involves prayer for the dead. Listen to this. The Eucharistic sacrifice is also offered for the faithful departed who have died in Christ but are not yet wholly purified. so that they may be able to enter into the light and peace of Christ. It's offered in reparation, apparently, for the sins of the living and the dead. In your presence at the Roman Catholic Mass, you are giving approval for hope to those who die without hope. It is appointed unto man once to die, and after is the judgment. There is a gulf fixed which no man can cross. And I warn you, if you are at a price in this meeting tonight, that no matter what Eucharistic sacrifice may be offered for you, you will not be brought from hell to heaven. This is the day of salvation. Now is the time. And no matter what some Roman priests may pray on your behalf. If you are not in Christ when you die, you will not be found in heaven in the life you are after. You see, in all of these things, God's verdict is very, very clear. Isaiah 5 verse 20 says this, Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil. And put darkness for light and light for darkness. and that put bitter for sweet, then sweet for bitter. Let us, let us with all of our hearts, maintain the stand of separation from all those who would cozy up to a false gospel and deny the Word of Christ on our behalf. The lesson is very plain. Salvation is only found in the finished Word of Christ. the one mediator. That is where salvation is found. Not in a church. Not in this church. Not in any person of their own appointment. But in the person of Christ and His work. That is where salvation is found. He died once and for all. His blood was shed so that atonement was made. And He sits down having completed the work. But that's where your hope must rest. In all the negativity of this sermon, don't miss that positive. If you're outside of Christ in this meeting tonight, there is a work that has been done. Perfectly done. Completed and finished. And if you rest in that work, your sins can be forgiven. And you can avoid the wrath of God. Perhaps we could sing I know we've gone on a long time tonight, and I appreciate your patience with this message tonight. I think it would be useful just to sing as we close the words of 95. Just to consecrate ourselves afresh. These types of messages tend to be negative, and it is important to reaffirm our adoration of our Savior. We don't worship a host, but we do worship the Lamb of God. In this Word of 95, man of sorrows, what a name for the Son of God who came ruining sinners to reclaim. We rise up with those words. Hallelujah. What a Savior. We'll sing verses 1, 2, and 4. 1, 2, and 4. And we'll stand together and worship the Lord. O star of wondering, star that's on a cloudy day, brilliant sinner to reclaim, Alleluia, what a Savior! Mary, Jane, and Stolten Root, in Thy place come and be near. Send Thy pardon when it comes. Alleluia, Lord and Saviour. lifted up her teeth and eyes, and if they wish what they try, time in them may come to hide. Alleluia for the Saviour. Eternal God and Heavenly Father, we do rejoice in the glorious truth that no matter what some false church may say, they cannot remove the glory of our Saviour. We thank you, Lord, that He is the Saviour of men. And we pray, dear God, that even this night we would reaffirm our commitment to Him, that we would stand firm upon the truth that His work is complete and finished. We pray to your God for in this meeting, and they know nothing of these things. They know nothing of this Savior. We pray, O Lord, that they would be drawn to Christ tonight. That they be pointed away from their own efforts and their own works. And they would see in Christ all they need. O Lord, help us. Help us to stand for truth. We pray that for each of us, whatever our responsibility may be, that we would not allow Christ in His name to be cast in the gutter. We would rather exalt Him as the one mediator, as the Saviour, and as our Lord. We pray these things for His glory. Amen.