Attending Mass Heretical Priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter MilesVitae
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MilesVitae

Guest
Is it wrong to attend a Mass celebrated by a priest who I know disagrees with Church teachings?
 
That depends. If he holds to heresy regarding the Most Holy Eucharist yes as you will not know whether the consecration is valid or not. If he holds to heresies in other places… well I would keep a wide berth and only attend as an absolute last resort. Even then you may be dispensed from any obligation.

And it should be remembered the the validity of the Eucharist is not dependent on the state of the priest’s soul. Even a priest in the depths of sin can validly confect the Eucharist.

But yes keep a wide berth.
 
Te_Deum said:
That depends. If he holds to heresy regarding the Most Holy Eucharist yes as you will not know whether the consecration is valid or not. If he holds to heresies in other places… well I would keep a wide berth and only attend as an absolute last resort. Even then you may be dispensed from any obligation.
Click to expand...
This is incorrect and you should refrain from giving this advice. As long as the priest intends in SOME form to “do what the church does” then the Eucharistic celebration will be valid. The priest does not even need to believe in the Real Presence for this to be the case.

Person, Form, Matter, and Intent. That’s all that’s required.
 
MilesVitae said:
Is it wrong to attend a Mass celebrated by a priest who I know disagrees with Church teachings?
Click to expand...
Why would it be WRONG to do so? It may not be BEST to do so if the priest is offering disordered homilies, but it certainly wouldn’t be SINFUL to go to a valid mass.
 
promethius said:
This is incorrect and you should refrain from giving this advice. As long as the priest intends in SOME form to “do what the church does” then the Eucharistic celebration will be valid. The priest does not even need to believe in the Real Presence for this to be the case.

Person, Form, Matter, and Intent. That’s all that’s required.
Click to expand...
But if the man holds to heresies regarding the Eucharist he obviously cannot intend to do what the Church does. That will invalidate the action.
 
Te_Deum said:
But if the man holds to heresies regarding the Eucharist he obviously cannot intend to do what the Church does. That will invalidate the action.
Click to expand...
That is incorrect. He only needs to “intend to do what the church does”. He does not need to believe what the church believes (otherwise this would have been phrased that the priest must intend to do what the church intends". If he believes that the church merely feeds people in the middle of mass, and INTENDS to therefore do that, then that satisfies the requirement for intent and the Eucharistic rite is valid.

He does not need to intend transubstantiation… he must only intend to do what he considers the church to be doing, in any way, shape, or form.
 
promethius said:
He does not need to intend transubstantiation…
Click to expand...
Of course, transubstantiation isn’t Church dogma. Only the Real Presence is. I believe Eastern Catholics don’t hold with transubstantiation for example.
…] he must only intend to do what he considers the church to be doing, in any way, shape, or form.
Click to expand...
If the priest knows Church teaching, and dissents from it, how can he be said to be doing what the Church does? Or even what he considers what the Church does when he knows his belief is different from what the Church teaches?
 
Te_Deum said:
If the priest knows Church teaching, and dissents from it, how can he be said to be doing what the Church does? Or even what he considers what the Church does when he knows his belief is different from what the Church teaches?
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter, he doesn’t have to intend what the church TEACHES it does, or what the church intends. He only has to intend in any way, shape, or form to do what the church does. Trent was VERY specific in their wording on this matter precisely for this reason.
 
promethius said:
Why would it be WRONG to do so? It may not be BEST to do so if the priest is offering disordered homilies, but it certainly wouldn’t be SINFUL to go to a valid mass.
Click to expand...
Well, heresy is a sin which has “automatic” excommunication (I forget the technical term that is correct) attached to it. I suppose I don’t know for sure that he is in a state of excommunication, since I don’t know his knowledge of canon law, but it seems to me unlikely that he is unaware. Wouldn’t it be a sin to attend a Mass by a priest who isn’t allowed to celebrate Mass (due to excommunication)?
 
Te_Deum said:
And it should be remembered the the validity of the Eucharist is not dependent on the state of the priest’s soul. Even a priest in the depths of sin can validly confect the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
Just so there is no confusion - this is not what I am wondering about.
 
MilesVitae said:
Is it wrong to attend a Mass celebrated by a priest who I know disagrees with Church teachings?
Click to expand...
are you the bishop of his diocese or his religous superior? no? then you are not in a position to label him a heretic. If you have concerns, report them.
 
MilesVitae said:
Well, heresy is a sin which has “automatic” excommunication (I forget the technical term that is correct) attached to it. I suppose I don’t know for sure that he is in a state of excommunication, since I don’t know his knowledge of canon law, but it seems to me unlikely that he is unaware. Wouldn’t it be a sin to attend a Mass by a priest who isn’t allowed to celebrate Mass (due to excommunication)?
Click to expand...
First, we can’t just go determining him to be a heretic. He must obstinately be refusing to conform his belief to that of the church in order to be a heretic, and this is something for the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith to determine. Launching back into the pre-inquisition days of laypersons baldly accusing others of heresy is not going to help the church…

So you assume the person is a heretic, but unless there is some validation of that by some authority, you are not certain of it.

Second, even if a priest is excommunicated, they still can say a valid mass (even though they are not SUPPOSED to say mass), and therefore it is not a SIN to attend. Again, perhaps not the BEST option, but certainly not sinful.
 
MilesVitae said:
Is it wrong to attend a Mass celebrated by a priest who I know disagrees with Church teachings?
Click to expand...
No. The mass, the confession, the baptism of that priest are valid, as far as I know. But I could be wrong. Suppose that he says mass but has no intention of saying mass, it is another matter.

It is confusing the scenario. Can you give the example that you have in mind?
 
MilesVitae said:
Is it wrong to attend a Mass celebrated by a priest who I know disagrees with Church teachings?
Click to expand...
Its not wrong, but his teachings can potentially harm your soul. But the Mass is still the Mass, and God acts through the priest regardless of his sins.
 
Pfaffenhoffen said:
No. The mass, the confession, the baptism of that priest are valid, as far as I know. But I could be wrong. Suppose that he says mass but has no intention of saying mass, it is another matter.
Click to expand...
Again, my question has nothing to do with the validity of the Mass.
 
Pfaffenhoffen said:
It is confusing the scenario. Can you give the example that you have in mind?
Click to expand...
He has told me that he disagrees with some of the Church’s teachings, though he did not go into detail about which ones specifically.

In the course of this conversation, however, he told me he thought we would soon see the Church being open to or allowing woman priests. That is the closest I have to an explicit denial of a specific infallible teaching.
 
promethius said:
So you assume the person is a heretic, but unless there is some validation of that by some authority, you are not certain of it.
Click to expand...
I’ve been told this before - maybe by you in another thread, actually. But I still do not understand it. What if he tells me that he disagrees with Church teaching?
 
A priest is only a heretic if excommunicated or otherwise removed for heresy. This is solely the bishop’s prerogative.

If the bishop allows the priest to celebrate mass, then we Catholics are free to attend the mass. Prudence may dictate not attending this priest’s masses, and improper teachings ought to be brought to the bishop’s attention. However, we lay faithful do not have the right to declare it sinful to attend a lawfully installed priest’s masses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top