Catholic apologist, John Martignoni, in his latest newsletter asks his readers (of which I am one) to respond to an email he received from a non-Catholic. The email Mr. Martignoni received was rather brusque and only offered someone else’s article as a response to his earlier newsletter. Martignoni’s objection to his challenger’s email was that it did not address the Scripture references he cited in his previous newsletter on the sacrifice of the mass. So my response will be to address those references in this and forthcoming blog posts.
The Scripture references Mr. Martignoni cited are: Malachi 1:11, 1 Cor 10:16-18 and various passages in Hebrews. This post will answer to Mr. Martignoni’s assertions regarding Malachi’s prophecy. The newsletter to which I am responding can be read at http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter_details.php?id=181
Malachi 1:11 reads,
“For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.”
In his attempt to make this passage a prophecy of the Catholic mass, Mr. Martignoni asks, “How many churches do you know of that offer incense at any of their worship services?”
Answer: not many.
Question in response: How many churches in the Ante-Nicene period offered incense in their services?
Answer: none.
Why? Because the early church understood, as do most churches today, that the burning of incense is a metaphor for the offering of prayers. This is clearly seen in Psalm 141:2:
“Let my prayer be set before You as incense, the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.” (Psa. 141:2)
This one verse blows Mr. Martignoni’s entire argument out of the water. Not only do we find incense being a metaphor for prayer, we also find sacrifice to be synonymous with prayer. Mr. Martignoni, however, sees Malachi’s “pure offering” as something entirely different.
“This verse from Malachi is telling us that from the rising of the sun to its setting (all day long) some sort of worship service will be taking place among the nations (the Gentiles) in which they offer incense and the only pure offering that has ever been made – Jesus Christ.” (Martignoni)
If that were true why would the author of Hebrews say this:
“Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name.” (Heb. 13:15)
This could not be more relevant to Malachi’s prophecy, so why did Mr. Martignoni not mention it? Well, the answer is obvious, because it is in complete disagreement with his exegesis.
The early church also understood Malachi’s prophecy as offering prayers of thanksgiving. The second century apologist, Justin Martyr, stated the following to Trypho the Jew with regards to Malachi’s prophecy.
“Now, that prayers and giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God, I also admit. For such alone Christians have undertaken to offer, and in the remembrance effected by their solid and liquid food, whereby the suffering of the Son of God which He endured is brought to mind…” (Dialog with Trypho 117)
The solid and liquid food is, of course, the bread and wine of the Eucharist. And what is the Eucharist? The Eucharist is exactly as Justin describes it; it is the offering of thanks in remembrance of Christ’s holy sacrifice and our participation in it. This is summed up well in Justin’s description of a typical Christian gathering in the second century.
“On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president [Bishop] verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.” (First Apology, 67)
This description solidifies the fact that the early church considered the sacrifice to be the giving of thanks over the elements that represent Christ’s atoning sacrifice at Calvary, and participation in that sacrifice by partaking of those elements. As Justin said, “prayers and giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God.”
About the only thing John Martignoni might accomplishing with his newsletter is setting his readers up to be embarrassed when they attempt to apply his arguments in their own discussions with non-Catholics. But then again, maybe it will provide opportunity for them to learn things Catholic apologists will never reveal.

Dear Brother/Sister in Christ,
Your assertion that the burning of incense is a metaphor for the offering of prayers is not scriptural:
Revelation 8:3 Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne. 4The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of the saints, went up before God from the angel’s hand
As you can see both the incense and prayers are separate and therefore your central theme in your response falls apart and fails to counter Mr Martignoni’s statements.
To put your early church writings into context you need to understand that the Eucharist really is the Body and Blood of Jesus please note 1 Corinthians 10 “16Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?”
and if you’re still not convinced then please note St Paul stating that people were getting sick from taking the Eucharist in an unworthy manner 1 Corinthians 11 “24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.”
Now armed with that context from St Paul you can then better understand your early church passages.
Hope that helps, God Bless and for the Journey
Andrew,
The metaphor of incense is indeed Scriptural. I noticed you did not bother to address Psalm 141:2. And Revelation 8:3 only confirms that incense is a metaphor for prayers because the burning of incense is symbolic. Do you really think that angels are in heaven burning incense so that our prayers can reach God? If so please provide biblical evidence.
With regards to the early church you again failed to address my reference. What do you think Justin meant by, “prayers and giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God?”
The early church did not believe that the Eucharist is the literal body and blood of Christ. You have no evidence they believed that and, I assure you, I have plenty of evidence that proves they did not believe it.
I don’t know what you see in 1 Cor. 10 that makes you believe there is evidence there for your real presence doctrine? Ditto for 1 Cor. 11. In 1 Cor. 11 why did Paul refer to the bread as bread if it literally changed into the body of Christ? Again, Paul said, “Whosoever shall eat this BREAD and drink this CUP OF THE LORD, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” If Paul taught them that the bread and cup literally became the body and blood of Christ he would have said, “Whosoever shall eat HIS BODY and drink HIS BLOOD, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” If he believed the bread was no longer bread, why does he call it bread?
Here is a good explanation from the second / third century theologian, Origen on the subject:
“It is not the material of the bread but the word which is said over it which is of advantage to him who eats it not unworthily of the Lord. And these things indeed are said of the typical and symbolical body. But many things might be said about the Word Himself who became flesh, and true meat of which he that eateth shall assuredly live for ever, no worthless person being able to eat it; for if it were possible for one who continues worthless to eat of Him who became flesh. who was the Word and the living bread, it would not have been written, that ‘every one who eats of this bread shall live for ever.’” (Origen, Commentary on Matthew 11:14)
And regarding “continual sacrifice,” I would be very interested in how you reconcile Heb. 13:15 with Mal. 1:11.
In Christ,
Brian
Hello Brian,
Apologies I did not address what you wanted.
The PSALM states “let my prayer be set before You as incense”, this shows they know incense is set before the Lord and that they want their prayer to be set before Him also. Revelation also backs this up by showing the incense and prayers of the saints are set before the Lord. Sorry but it just doesn’t say what you want it to say. You now have two scriptural passages saying the same thing, but it doesn’t say what you want it to.
As for your passage from Justin what do you think God thinks of the prayers and thanks offered by unworthy men? But again you want it to say something it doesn’t – it says what it says not what you want it to say.
Lastly on your point of the Eucharist, you seem to be tying yourself in knots here. Whoever shall eat this bread, think about that, it’s not ordinary bread, if it were why are people getting sick and dying from taking it in an unworthy manner? Maybe you just don’t understand what the Church teaches on transubstantiation, or maybe you just don’t want to know? If you are interested then you can always pop over to a local Catholic Church and have a chat with a priest, or if you’d prefer something less formal try getting hold of a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
If you are interested here’s a link to a YouTube presentation that you may find of interest.
If this hasn’t helped then I apologise and hope you find the answers you need.
Thanks and God bless (and for the journey)
Andrew
Hi Andrew.
The clause “as insense” means that the insence is represenitive of prayer. Justin Martyr explained what the offering of incense is in his dialog with Trypho the Jew:
“He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane [it].” (41)
And what he means by that he later explaines:
“Now, that prayers and giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God, I also admit. For such alone Christians have undertaken to offer, and in the remembrance effected by their solid and liquid food, whereby the suffering of the Son of God which He endured is brought to mind…” (117)
I don’t know what you are asking me here. Can you explain what you mean?
Why am I tying myself in knots; what I said makes perfect sense. People were not getting sick from taking the Eucharist in an unworthy manor, they were getting sick because they were not discerning the Lord’s body when they gathered together in communion.
Did you read what Paul wrote to the Corinthians? The Corinthians were being scandalous in there gathering at the Lord’s table. The rich despised the poor and ate and drank the provisions they themselves brought, some to the point of gluttony and drunkenness. All the while leaving some of the poor without their portion.
Now let me ask you, do you really think the Christians in Corinth believed that the bread and wine was literally the body and blood of Christ in light of their behavior. And why didn’t Paul remind them that the elements were the literal body and blood of Christ if he had actually taught them that? There is nothing there to support you far-fetched conclusion that the elements are Christ’s literal body and blood simply because Paul said some get sick from not discerning the Lord’s body. You, like all Catholics, completely ignore the context.
The YouTube video is more than interesting; it’s down right disturbing. It’s disturbing to me to see a man stand there and lie to believers like that. It’s a pure scam and everybody should stay far away from it.
God bless,
Brian
Hi Brian,
St Justin Martyr whom you keep quoting also seems quite clear on the issue of the Eucharist and on its transmutation properties:
First Apology of St. Justin Martyr CHAPTER LXVI — OF THE EUCHARIST.
And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.
With regards to the YouTube video would you feel any differently if you went to Orvieto Cathedral and saw the blood soaked tunic and stained marble for yourself?
If you still think that I’m just plain wrong then I guess we’ll just have to disagree. However, I do thank you for the discourse and wish us, and our families, every success in finding our way to that narrow gate :)
Have a great day and God bless
Andrew
At the top of this blog you will find an article titled, “Early Church Evidence Refutes Real Presence.” There you will find a detailed response to quote from Justin and much more.
With regards to you question the answer is no.
Thanks for visiting and God bless.
Brian
Dear Brother Brian,
I wanted to write to you again as whilst reading scripture I came across:
Revelation 5:8
“And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.”
Clearly stating that prayers and incense are the same thing. I apologise for my lack of understanding and admonishing you incorrectly on being unscriptural.
Thank you and God Bless.
I admire a person when they admit they have misunderstood, and are willing to publically state that. Now, what does this do to Martignoni’s unscriptural teaching, and HIS misunderstanding? Unfortunatley, he continues on…
divorce rights…
Response to Martignoni’s “Biblical Evidence” for the Catholic Mass (Part 1) « One Fold Blog…