Rome's leaders formally accept the doctrine of Christ handed down at the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451), which rightly held that Christ has two natures, one fully human, and the other fully divine. In its famous four alpha-privatives, it declares that Christ possesses these natures "without confusion, without conversion, without division, and without separation." In other words, Christ's two natures subsist in one person (Gk. "prosopon") entirely, and yet, forever distinctly.

This biblical Christology, however, does not in any way seem consistent with what the Roman doctrine of the Mass. More particularly, the problem lies with the teaching known as the doctrine of transubstantiation. Since the ascension of Christ to the right hand of the Father, where he sat down upon His heavenly throne, the Lord Jesus remains seated [except when he stood up to receive the spirit of Stephen (Acts 7)], and will do so until God has subdued all His enemies (see Psalm 110:1; 1 Cor. 15) under Christs feet.

The "Apostle's Creed" (also affirmed by Rome) says of the human nature of Christ, that "from there, he [Christ] will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead; and his kingdom will have no end . . . " This means that the Person, and thus the human body, of Jesus remains specifically located in heaven

But this generates a real problem. On Rome's view, the body and blood of Jesus are physically present in the elements of the Lord's Supper (and this would be true even when many different masses were being said round the world in several, different places simultaneously); and yet his human body remains in heaven as well!

This would, of course, require that his HUMAN body be many places at one and the same moment. Yet, omnipresence is an attribute ONLY of Christ's divine nature, not His humanity. But according to the Bible, both humans and angels are unilocal by nature. We can only be one place at a time. This will also be true of humans after they are glorified in the resurrection of the saints. It is not a function of our sinfulness that we can only be one place at a time, but of our divinely-imposed limitation as human beings. Our human nature makes it thus.

In order to move in for the rescue, here, Rome must appeal to the divine nature of Christ to explain how the body of Jesus can exist in multiple place simultaneously. But Rome then CONFUSES the two natures of Christ, precisely contrary to that Chalcedonian Christology adopted (and yet not adopted!!) by Rome. Christ's body is not physically present in the mass, just because it **IS** tangibly in heaven; and there it will stay until Christ comes again in glory to judge the living and the dead. The confused doctrine of the mass (transubstantiation) thus shows itself heretical and blasphemous, a superstitious confusion of the two natures of Christ, and a standing denial of Chalcedon's Christology.

This also serves to undermine Rome's doctrine of the alleged infallibility of ecumencical or "catholic" Church councils, which in turn renders all of Rome's theology unreliable ON ITS OWN TERMS. Since Rome's apologists attribute the highest form of infallibility (Rome confusedly afffirms different degrees or kinds of infallibility) to the catholic Church, this would render no form of infallibility actually "infallible." And without an infallible source of knowledge available somewhere in one's worldview, no knowledge would be possible at all.

Here we see once again that a denial of any one of the major or minor doctrines of the Word of God actually implies the denial of knowledge. Or said just a bit differently, the contrary to the biblical worldview is logically impossible.