Audio only:
Does James White’s appeal to Hebrews 10:14 really disprove the Catholic claim that the Mass is the same sacrifice as Calvary? In this episode, Karlo Broussard breaks down his argument and show how shifting definitions of “perfection” actually undermine his case and reveal a deeper harmony between Scripture and the Catholic understanding of the Mass.
TRANSCRIPT:
Hebrews 10:14 says Christ’s sacrifice has “perfected” for all time those who are being sanctified. Yet, when Catholics leave Mass, which they believe is the single sacrifice of Christ re-represented (CCC 1364), they aren’t completely perfect.
Protestant apologist James White argues this proves the Mass isn’t the sacrifice of Christ. Is he right? That’s what we’re gonna talk about today.
>>>>
Hey, what’s up guys! Welcome back to the channel! So glad to have you with me. If you haven’t done so already, don’t forget to subscribe to the channel. Also, I’d like to invite you to consider helping keep this podcast going by financially supporting us over on patreon at doctorkarlo.com with “doctor” spelled out.
>>>>
So, concerning White’s objection, you can find him making this argument in many of his publications and debates, but for today’s purposes, we’re gonna focus on his fairly recent 2025 debate with Joe Heschmeyer on whether the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice.
Now, just to be clear, my responses here aren’t meant to undercut anything Joe said — he did excellent work. I’m just taking a different route in addressing White’s argument.
Another quick note before we dive in: White’s reasoning isn’t as straightforward as you might hope. It takes a bit of unpacking to see exactly what he’s getting at. So we’ll spend a little more time than usual teasing out his argument before moving into our responses.
Alright, let’s start with White’s general statement of the argument.
In his opening statement, White says:
[VIDEO]
“[W]ithin the Roman Catholic system, 27:50 you can come to mass 10,000 20,000 30,000 times in your life, and that is 27:58 supposed to be the sacrifice of Christ. You are coming to the 28:03 Cross—that’s what you’re doing. And yet in Roman Catholicism the vast majority of people 28:10 who do that, upon their death, will not go into the presence of God because they are not perfected. They will go into purgatory 28:18 and they will undergo satis passio. And you can have masses said for them back here on Earth to lessen their time in 28:25 purgatory or if they commit a mortal sin and are not reconciled to the church 28:30 before their death even though they’ve gone to the cross over and over again they die under the Judgment of God and 28:37 are lost and so there is the difference: you have a completed sacrifice that perfects 28:44 those for whom it’s made because of the Union of the elect with Christ versus a 28:50 perpetuation of a propitiatory sacrifice that does not perfect you. You can come 28:55 to the cross in the mass and you’re not perfected by that. You can receive Grace. You can receive forgiveness but it’s not 29:02 Perfection. That is the vast difference between these two perspectives.
He then quotes Hebrews 10:14 for support:
[VIDEO]
[V]erse 14 likewise says for by one offering one offering—not one dragged out through the ages—for by one offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. He has perfected—not us, not a sacramental system—he has perfected for all time by one sacrifice. One and one only.
So, here’s White’s argument in a nutshell:
P1: If the Mass were the single sacrifice of Christ, then we would walk away from the Mass perfected (since Hebrews 10:14 says Christ’s one sacrifice perfects).
P2: But we don’t walk away from the Mass perfected.
C: Therefore, the Mass is not the single sacrifice of Christ.
Right away, we hit a problem: what does White mean by “perfected”? Or, to be more precise, how is White interpreting the “perfection” spoken of in Hebrews 10:14?
As we’re going to see, at times he seems to interpret it along the lines of moral perfection—being totally sinless and interiorly holy, or what theologians call sanctified.
Other times, he seems to interpret “perfection” in terms of being perfectly saved—in his own theological sense, eternally secure with all future sins forgiven.
Still other times, he seems to interpret “perfection” in terms of perfect glory, the heavenly perfection God has prepared for the elect.
Given that White shifts between all three meanings throughout the debate—whether intentionally or not, I can’t say, we end up with White making three different arguments.
So our responses depend on which sense of “perfection” he intends.
Let’s take them one at a time.
In the clip we watched, notice that White brings up purgatory:
[VIDEO]
[I]n Roman Catholicism the vast majority of people 28:10 who do that, upon their death, will not go into the presence of God because they are not perfected. They will go into purgatory 28:18 and they will undergo satis passio. And you can have masses said for them back here on Earth to lessen their time in 28:25 purgatory
Notice that for White Catholics aren’t perfect because they go to purgatory—which deals with being made completely holy. This tells us White seems to be using “perfection” here to mean sanctification, or interior holiness.
He reinforces this later in the debate when he says:
[VIDEO]
[A] number of Old Testament 34:51 passages are cited about Christ coming to fulfill the will of God. Verse 10 of Hebrews 10: “by this will we have been 35:00 Sanctified through the offering the body of Jesus Christ.” How often? “once for 35:07 all.” Temporal adverb: “once for all.” Does it say that we can 35:14 receive some sanctification, we can receive some Grace now and we’ll get a little bit more the next time. a little 35:20 bit more the next time? No by this will—that’s the New Covenant—we have been Sanctified we have been made holy 35:27 through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for 35:33 all.
So, with this understanding of “perfection”—in terms of sanctification, White’s argument would be:
P1: If the Mass were Christ’s single sacrifice, we’d walk away completely sanctified.
P2: But we don’t walk away completely sanctified.
C: Therefore, the Mass isn’t Christ’s single sacrifice.
Now, we agree with premise 2 — we’re not completely holy after Mass. No qualms there. But premise 1 is the problem.
First, White can’t demand perfect sanctification in this life because the author of Hebrews doesn’t. Hebrews 10:14 itself says that Christ’s sacrifice perfects those who are “being sanctified” (present participle in the Greek), which implies an imperfect state of sanctification.
Second, the logic of this version of the objection actually undermines White’s own theology of justification by faith.
For White, the fruits of Christ’s sacrifice are applied when a person professes faith. But does that person instantly become completely holy inside? No — even White admits believers still sin and grow in sanctification over time.
White confirms this later in the debate with Joe. Joe asks White,
[VIDEO]
[G]iven the once for all 2:20:25 nature of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and given the fact that justification occurs once, how do you understand 2:20:30 ongoing forgiveness in the Christian Life—in places like the Lord’s Prayer or 1 John 1:9?
White responds,
[VIDEO]
[W]e are in 2:20:37 relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit dwells within us, and it is our desire. Since we still live 2:20:45 in a fallen state and since we still experience sin in our lives, we want 2:20:53 to deal with that [sin]. We want to be cleansed from that [sin].
So by White’s own logic, if the Mass can’t be the sacrifice of Christ because we’re not made instantly holy, then faith itself couldn’t make us approach that same sacrifice — since believers aren’t instantly holy either!
If he’s going to demand that we walk away from the cross in the Mass completely sanctified, he’d have to demand that we walk away from the cross in faith completely sanctified.
But that would be absurd.
Thus, he shouldn’t demand that we walk away from the cross in the Mass completely sanctified.
A third response is that White’s argument is a non-sequitur. The consequent (“we would walk away from the Mass completely sanctified) doesn’t necessarily follow from the antecedent (“If the Mass were Christ’s sacrifice). There’s another explanation as to why someone could walk away from the Mass without being fully sanctified other than the Mass not being Christ’s sacrifice. That explanation is our disposition.
In Catholic theology, the fruits that bear from Christ’s sacrifice being applied to us in the Mass will be determined by our disposition—the interior openness and faith with which we approach the altar.
It’s similar to how Protestants explain backsliders. If someone professes faith but later falls away, Protestants don’t blame the cross—they say the person’s faith wasn’t genuine. The problem was in the individual’s disposition.
So if a Protestant can appeal to disposition to explain a lack of fruit in faith, Catholics can do the same regarding the Mass.
Now, White might reply that his previous appeal to purgatory isn’t about holiness but about punishment . . .. that Catholics still have a debt of temporal punishment for forgiven sins, so he might argue, means the sacrifice wasn’t “perfect.”
He made this more refined point in his 1991 debate with Fr. Mitch Pacwa, saying that if punishments remain, reconciliation hasn’t taken place. He states,
[VIDEO]
Christ’s death on the cross is fully and completely propitiatory 1:03:45 Romans chapter 3 verse 25 and I hope that you will at least make an attempt 1:03:50 to look at these passages Romans 3:25 speaking of Christ Jesus that we are justified as a gift by His grace through 1:03:57 the redemption which is in Christ Jesus whom God the Spade displayed publicly as 1:04:03 a propitiation in his blood a propitiation in his blood through faith 1:04:08 Jesus Christ is our one propitiation he has propitiated satisfied for all of our 1:04:16 sin now why then do we does the Roman Catholic Church say that the mass is offered for satisfactions that is a 1:04:23 propitiatory sacrifice but it is not one that perfects completely and totally those for whom it is made obviously it 1:04:30 shows it is another kind of sacrifice . . .
Then, a few moments later, speaking about the effect of Christ’s sacrifice, he says this:
[VIDEO]
[T]his is a completed action that we 1:05:49 have been reconciled to him this is brought out in other passages as well all through Scripture now if punishments 1:05:54 remain that must be remitted either through works of satisfaction or attending the Eucharistic sacrifice or 1:06:01 in purgatory some day where our own sufferings are satisfy Co are considered to be sufferings of atonement whereby we 1:06:07 atone for these things if punishments remained and reconciliation has not taken place either reconciliation has 1:06:15 taken place the death price where it has not if there are still punishments to be undergone the 1:06:20 reconciliation is not taking place
This, however, assumes a particular view of how God applies the merits of Christ’s death — namely, that once you’re reconciled, you can never again incur guilt or punishment.
But that’s not the biblical picture.
1 John 1:9 says, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
To seek God’s forgiveness by confessing our sins means we’ve incurred guilt, and with that guilt comes some kind of debt of punishment, whether temporal or eternal. So when John talks about God forgiving our sins and removing that debt, he’s really talking about being reconciled to God. And notice something important — John says “we.” He’s including himself. He’s talking to Christians here, which implies believers can indeed fall into sin and need forgiveness again.
Hebrews 12:6 says,“the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.” The Greek term for “chastise” literally implies punishment. And ones receiving such punishment are God’s children—aka., Christians.
So, contrary to what White believes, Christians can still incur a temporal debt of punishment after conversion.
That a believer can still suffer for post conversion sins doesn’t mean the application of Christ’s death was ineffective—it simply means God applies its fruits over time, in response to our ongoing need for purification.
Since this potential counter argument against the Mass depends entirely on White’s assumption about how God applies the merits of Christ’s death to believers—and that assumption is false—it follows that his potential counter argument carries no weight against the Catholic claim that the Mass is the sacrifice of Christ.
So, to recap this first version of White’s argument—the version that reads the “perfection” in Hebrews 10:14 along the lines of perfect sanctification:
- White’s logic contradicts Hebrews 10:14 itself.
- White’s logic would refute his own theology of justification by faith,
- The lack of total holiness after Mass comes from our limited disposition, not Christ’s sacrifice.
- And Scripture clearly supports the idea that believers can be reconciled again after post conversion sins, which undermines White’s assumption that perfection means no more reconciliation ever.
Alright — let’s move to the next interpretation.
At times, White seems to shift from sanctification to salvation—at least his particular view of salvation, which is eternal security.
Here’s what he said as part of the previous statement, which I left out for clarity’s sake. He says,
[VIDEO]
[I]n Roman Catholicism the vast majority of people 28:10 who do that, upon their death, will not go into the presence of God because they are not perfected. They will go into purgatory 28:18 and they will undergo satis passio. And you can have masses said for them back here on Earth to lessen their time in 28:25 purgatory . . .
That’s the part we already talked about. Then he says,
[VIDEO}
Or, if they commit a mortal sin and are not reconciled to the church 28:30 before their death even though they’ve gone to the cross over and over again they die under the Judgment of God and 28:37 are lost.
There’s the shift in meaning. To speak of dying “under the judgment of god” and thereby be “lost” in the sense of damnation is clearly to speak about salvation, not just holiness.
A few moments later, after quoting Hebrews 7:24, White says this to further his point about salvation:
[VIDEO]
[T]herefore he 31:02 is able to save forever those who draw near to God through him since he always lives to make intercession for them the 31:09 sacrifice of Christ and the intercessory work of Christ one work which results 31:15 not in our ability to save ourselves but in the assertion that he is able to save 31:21 forever and completely those who draw nigh unto God by him that is not through 31:27 a mass that is through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ that is his ability to do that
Notice the emphasis on Christ’s ability to “save forever and completely those who draw nigh unto God.”
So, with this interpretation of “perfection,” the argument becomes:
P1: If the Mass were the single sacrifice of Christ, we’d walk away completely saved—on White’s view, eternally secure.
P2: But we don’t walk away completely saved because we can lose salvation through mortal sin.
C: Therefore, the Mass isn’t Christ’s sacrifice.
The issue here is that by “perfectly saved” White means “once saved, always saved.”
But that’s a separate debate that we simply can’t get into given the limitations of our scope for this episode. Suffice it to say, if eternal security isn’t true, this version of White’s argument collapses.
Finally, in the Q&A with Heschmeyer, White hints at a third sense of “perfection”—glorification.
Joe asks,
[VIDEO]
[G]iven the one once for all 2:20:25 nature of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and given the fact that justification occurs once, how do you understand 2:20:30 ongoing forgiveness in the Christian Life in places like the Lord’s Prayer or 1 John 1:9?
White answers,
[VIDEO]
[R]ight uh well we are in 2:20:37 relationship with God through the Holy Spirit the Holy Spirit dwells within us and it is our desire since we still live 2:20:45 in a fallen State and since we still experience sin in our lives that we want 2:20:53 to deal with, that we want to be cleansed from, that we know that that is a all 2:20:58 that’s already a reality. We read Romans chapter 8 we’ve been Justified uh 2:21:04 we’ve been glorified we’ve already been seated in the Heavenly places in Christ Jesus that’s the issue of the now and 2:21:10 the not yet.
Notice that White appeals to something that’s already a reality from God’s perspective, even though it hasn’t yet been experienced in time by the elect—namely, their heavenly glory. So, here White seems to take the “perfection” in Hebrews 10:14 to refer to that eternal glory God has willed for the elect from all eternity, a glory they simply haven’t yet come to experience.
So, in this version of the objection, it would look something like this:
P1: If the Mass were the single sacrifice of Christ, we’d walk away with perfect heavenly glory.
P2: But we don’t walk away glorified.
C: Therefore, the Mass isn’t Christ’s sacrifice.
Again, the logic backfires. White doesn’t believe believers are already glorified when they first come to faith. So if that logic disproves the Mass, it disproves faith, too.
But just because the logic is bad with this interpretation of “perfection,” that doesn’t mean it’s a bad interpretation. It just means you can’t use it against the Mass.
That the “perfection” refers to the glory of the elect in heaven is probably the most accurate reading of Hebrews 10:14.
As St. Thomas Aquinas explains in his Commentary on Hebrews, the “perfection” in that verse mirrors Christ’s own “perfection” in Hebrews 2:10 and 5:9 — meaning the perfection of Christ’s corporeal nature in glory: freedom from suffering and death.
Similarly, the author is likely envisioning a perfection that is already guaranteed for the elect but not yet experienced — just as Catholics believe.
The elect are still being sanctified in time, even though their ultimate glorification is secure in God’s eternal plan.
So yes — we can approach the same sacrifice of Christ in the Mass without being “perfectly glorified” yet.
So, what have we seen?
White’s argument against the Mass rests on shifting meanings of “perfection,” and in every sense, it falls apart:
- If “perfection” means sanctification, the argument turns against his own theology of faith by justification and it ignores human disposition.
- If it means salvation, it assumes a view of salvation—eternal security—that we would argue is false.
- If it means future glory, the argument, again, turns against White’s own theology of justification by faith.
In short, nothing in Hebrews 10:14 contradicts the Catholic claim that the Mass is the one same sacrifice of Christ, made present sacramentally for our sanctification.
Christ’s sacrifice is perfect — we just have to receive it with the proper dispositions for its fruits to be perfectly appropriated within us.
Well, my friends, that’s it for today! If you found this video helpful, make sure to like, subscribe, drop a comment below, and share it with someone who might need to hear this. And for more resources, check out my website at karlobroussard.com.
If you want me to come and speak at your event, visit catholicanswersspeakers.com.
Lastly, I’d love for you to consider supporting me over on Patreon. I can’t continue doing this podcast without your financial support. You can find me over on patreon at doctorkarlo.com with “doctor” spelled out.
Thanks for hanging out, and I’ll see you next time!