Rebuttal to Joe Mizzi
This is his article, his words
are in black, mine red:
The Eucharist: Memorial or Sacrifice?
Question: The Apostles and early believers recognized the sacrificial
character of Jesus' instruction, "Do this in remembrance (Gr. anamnasin) of me" is better translated
"Offer this as my memorial sacrifice."
Anamnesis ("remembrance") has sacrificial overtones. It
occurs only eight times in the NT and the Greek OT. All but once (Wisdom 16:6)
it is in a sacrificial context (Hebrews 10:3, Leviticus 24:7, Numbers 10:10 and
Psalm 38 [39] and 70 [70]). In these cases the term anamnesis
can be translated as "memorial portion," "memorial
offering," or "memorial sacrifice." Thus in the remaining two
occurrences of anamnesis (Luke 22:19; 1
Corinthians 11:24), Christ’s words "Do this in remembrance of
Me," can be translated as "Offer this for my memorial sacrifice."
Given the sacrificial character of the Eucharist, there is little doubt this
translation is appropriate.
Answer: We owe a great debt to the scholars of the original
biblical languages for the translations and explanations of the sacred text.
However, it is not uncommon in popular apologetics
that reference is made to the Hebrew and Greek merely as a show off. We who do
not know the Hebrew and Greek languages feel rather intimidated by this kind of
arguments. Yet, I have learned to maintain an attitude of healthy skepticism in
these circumstances. After all, linguistic experts are fallible human beings
like the rest of us, and they may also be hopelessly
biased and plainly deceptive. Equipped with basic tools, a Greek lexicon, a
concordance and common sense, it is not difficult to detect flaws in the
argument presented above.
It
is not showing off...it's using facts. This paragraph
is just empty talk.
The suggested translation it is not
appropriate at all. Jesus did not say, “Offer this for my memorial sacrifice.”
Rather, He said: “Do this in remembrance (anamnesis) of me” (Luke
22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24,25). The Greek words used
in the New Testament for sacrifice is thusia
and thuo. The Greek word anamnesis
does not mean sacrifice. According to The Old/New
Testament Greek lexicon based on Thayer's and Smith's Bible Dictionary, anamnesis
simply means “a remembering, recollection.”
Lidell Scott Lexicon says:
ἀνάμνη-σις , εως, h(, (ἀναμιμνῄσκω
)2.
memorial sacrifice, LXX Nu.10.10,
cf. Ev.Luc.22.19.
3.
παλίνδρομος
ἀ.,
of the moon, Secund.Sent.6.
In the New Testament, the same word is used in Hebrews 10:3. It is also used in the Septuagint
to translate several Hebrew words (azkarah in Leviticus 24:7 meaning “a
reminder; specifically remembrance-offering; memorial”; zikrown in
Numbers 10:10 meaning “a memento or memorable thing, day or writing, memorial,
record”; zakar, found in the titles of Psalms 38 and 70, meaning “to
mark so as to be recognized, i.e. to remember).
We should note the following:
1. The Catholic apologist does not
claim that anamnesis means sacrifice. He only says that it has
“sacrificial overtones” and that “Do this in remembrance of me” can be
appropriately translated “Offer this for my memorial sacrifice” - even though
there is no respectable translation, not even a Catholic translation, that
actually does so! For example, the Douay-Rheims Bible translates "for a commemoration
of me" and the Catholic New American Bible: "do this in memory
of me" and "in remembrance of me". The Catholic
translators would have been more than willing to write down "memorial
sacrifice" instead of "remembrance" if only they could!
2. It is not true that its
occurrence in Psalm 38 and 70 is in a sacrificial context. One only has to read
the two psalms to verify that the subject in not sacrificial.
The
Targums of Psalm 38 and 70 say it was a FRANKINCENSE
offering. The targums were homiletic translations of
the Scriptures into Aramaic, they were how the ancient
Jews read the text. Psalm 38:1 of the targum
reads:
"a psalm of David; over a bunch of frankincense, as a
memorial for Israel."--Psalm 38:1 of targum
Likewise
Psalm70’s targum reads:
"by David: to
make a memorial over a bunch of frankincense"-Psalm 70:1, targum
3. Anamnesis is sometimes used in sacrificial contexts. Among other
purposes, Old Testament sacrifices served as a remembrance. The Levitical
sacrifices served to bring to mind the sins of the people. “But in those
sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year” (Hebrews
10:3). Similarly the frankincense, the blowing of the trumpets and the various
sacrifices were memorials (Leviticus 24:7 and Numbers 10:10).
However, it must be stressed that
other things also served as a remembrance (such as psalms in Psalms 38
and 70; stones in Joshua 4:7; crowns in Zechariah 6:14 and a book
in Exodus 17:14). Clearly, a sacrifice can serve as a memorial, but it does not
follow that whatever serves as a memorial must be a sacrifice! A rose may be
red, but not every red object must be a rose. Therefore
the word anamnesis used by Jesus in the Lord’s Supper does not
necessarily imply that the Supper is a sacrifice.
Joshua
4:7 uses a different word, even lexicons list them
separately, as do Zechariah and Exodus
The Catholic apologist argues,
“Given the sacrificial character of the Eucharist, there is little doubt this
translation (“memorial sacrifice”) is appropriate.” The apologist is
supposed to prove that the Eucharist is a sacrifice from the word anamnesis;
instead he assumes that the Eucharist is a sacrifice to prove that the word anamnesis
means a memorial sacrifice! That is begging the question.
The Supper is a remembrance
of Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice on the cross. It is not the sacrifice
itself.
Nor true, those many verses and a better
lexicon shows the word does carry a sacrificial meaning, Mizzi must prove his
claims. Instead he is jumping to conclusion when he’s got no reason to
do so.
Also note Mizzi’s article he pretended to refute was a copy and paste
of Catholic.com’s “On This Rock.”