Continuing with the catechesis on the Mass, we can wonder: what is the Mass, essentially? The Mass is the memorial of the paschal Mystery of Christ. It makes us participants in His victory over sin and death, and gives full meaning to our life.
Therefore, to understand the value of the Mass we must first and foremost understand the biblical meaning of “memorial”. It is “not merely the recollection of past events but … they become in a certain way present and real. This is how Israel understands its liberation from Egypt: every time Passover is celebrated, the Exodus events are made present to the memory of believers so that they may conform their lives to them” ( Catechism of the Catholic Church , 1363). Jesus Christ, with His passion, death, resurrection and ascension to heaven, brought the Passover to fulfilment. And the Mass is the memorial of His Passover, of His “exodus”, that He fulfilled for us, to bring us out of slavery and to introduce to the promised land of eternal life. It is not merely a memory, no, it is more: it is making present what happened twenty centuries ago.
The Seder (Order) Meal was developed by Rabbinical Judaism after Titus had destroyed the City of Deicide as this Jewish author states:
Therefore, to understand the value of the Mass we must first and foremost understand the biblical meaning of “memorial”. It is “not merely the recollection of past events but … they become in a certain way present and real. This is how Israel understands its liberation from Egypt: every time Passover is celebrated, the Exodus events are made present to the memory of believers so that they may conform their lives to them” ( Catechism of the Catholic Church , 1363). Jesus Christ, with His passion, death, resurrection and ascension to heaven, brought the Passover to fulfilment. And the Mass is the memorial of His Passover, of His “exodus”, that He fulfilled for us, to bring us out of slavery and to introduce to the promised land of eternal life. It is not merely a memory, no, it is more: it is making present what happened twenty centuries ago.
Anticipating possible problems resulting from this catechesis of the Mass, ABS wants to address and correct a modern error - that the Last Supper/First Mass was a seder.
IT. WAS. NOT. *
The Seder (Order) Meal was developed by Rabbinical Judaism after Titus had destroyed the City of Deicide as this Jewish author states:
Almost everyone doing serious work on the early history of Passover traditions, including Joseph Tabory, Israel Yuval, Lawrence Hoffman, and the father-son team of Shmuel and Ze’ev Safrai, has rejected Finkelstein’s claims for the great
antiquity of the bulk of the Passover Haggadah.
What is particularly significant about this consensus is that these scholars are not radical skeptics. These scholars believe that, generally speaking, we can extract historically reliable
information from rabbinic sources. But as demonstrated by the late Baruch Bokser in his book The Origins of the Seder, practically everything preserved in the early rabbinic traditions concerning the Passover Seder brings us back to the time immediately following the Roman destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E.
It’s not that rabbinic literature cannot be trusted to tell us about history in the first century of the Common Era. It’s that rabbinic literature—in the case of the Seder—does not even claim to be telling us how the Seder was performed before the destruction of the Temple.
Council of Trent (Sess. 22, c. 1): “After Christ had celebrated the ancient Passover, which the multitude of the sons of Israel sacrificed in memory of their going out of Egypt, He instituted a new Passover, that He Himself should be immolated by the Church(ab ecclesia), by means of (per) the priests, under (sub) visible
signs, in memory of His passage from this world to the Father, when He redeemed us by the shedding of His Blood, and delivered us from the power of darkness, and translated us to His Kingdom.”
Catena Aurea:
BEDE; When the rites of the old Passover were finished, He passed to the new, in order, that is, to substitute the Sacrament of His own Body and Blood, for the flesh and blood of the lamb. Wherefore there follows: And as they did eat, Jesus took bread; that is, in order to show that He Himself is that person to whom the Lord swore, You are a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedec. There follows: And
blessed, and broke it.
BEDE; This may be also taken literally, for from the hour of supper up to the time of resurrection He was about to drink no wine. Afterwards He partook both of meat and drink, as Peter testifies, Who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
BEDE; Having finished the rites of the old
Passover, He passes on to the new, which He
desires the Church to celebrate in memory of His redemption, substituting for the flesh and blood
of the lamb, the Sacrament of His own Flesh and
Blood in the figure of the bread and wine, being
made a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech. …
BEDE; For this reason then the Apostles communicated after supper, because it was necessary
that the typical passover should be first completed,
and then they should pass on to the Sacrament of the true Passover. But now in honor of so great a Sacrament, the masters of the Church think right
that we should first be refreshed with the spiritual banquet, and afterward with the earthly
THEOPHYL. But how is our Lord said to sit down, whereas the Jews eat the Passover standing?
Mass was a seder.
The second stage of my rethinking came from studying the Jewish Passover liturgy.
The structure of the Passover seder, known as the Haggadah, appears to have been formalized long before the time of Jesus. In fact, the Gospel accounts seem to assume
its structure in narrating details of the Last Supper.[Readers may complain about my assuming the proto-Talmudic character of the liturgical structure of the seder. Someone
could argue that it is anachronistic to retroject the seder liturgy from the Mishnah back
to the first century. I respond by pointing out that virtually all scholars recognize
substantial similarities in form between the Jewish paschal liturgy recorded in the
New Testament and the Mishnah. For instance, Paul’s mention
of "the cup of blessing" (1 Cor. 10:16) surely connects with the third cup. I don’t
know any commentator who denies a connection here. Moreover, the Mishnah is not
known for an innovative approach to liturgical reforms. Thus, so long as I am not building my argument on a comprehensive identity of form between the two, I think I avoid any anachronism and remain on safe ground--indeed, the same safe ground as the vast
majority of exegetes (e.g. Joachim Jeremias) and liturgiologists (e.g. Joseph Jungmann).]
Why didn't Hahan cite Trent or Tradition? Because, presumably, a prot and a lib are sexier...
(Jeremias was a prot and Jungmann was a lib)
https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f106_Dialogue_26.htm