Licit or Illicit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jlw
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jlw

Guest
What if the Creed is not spoken during Mass??

We went to another parish in the interest of time last week and were troubled by a few things, but my jaw dropped when after the homily (about, amazingly enough, respecting other people’s creeds) was finished the celebrant did not begin to recite our Creed as faithful Catholics!!! Went straight to the collection as the altar girls, (in their sloppy robes and sneakers), set up the altar as the priest ramained in his chair.

Was it vaild?? What examples of conduct or speech might make a Mass invalid??
 
there are times when it is optional, and don’t ask me when those times are… you priest could probably tell you, or maybe Deacon Ed is watching…

but i doubt it would invalidate any mass… and i could be wrong here.
 
Not exactly optional, SG, but here’s the info:

544. The Creed is omitted (in a Sunday Mass when infants are baptized within the Mass) because the Profession of Faith before the Baptism takes its place.​

Click to expand...

551. (In a confirmation Mass celebrated by the bishop) the Creed is omitted because the Profession of Baptismal Faith takes its place.​

Click to expand...

265. The Creed…is to be said on all Sundays and solemnities, and … may be said on other occasions when it seems appropriate (see General Instruction of the Roman Missal, #44).​

Click to expand...
N.B. The instruction “Eucharisticum Mysterium”, no 45, says: “In the celebration of the Eucharist above all, no one, not even a priest may on his own authority add, omit, or change anything in the Liturgy.”
Click to expand...
Only in Masses where Baptism or Confirmation takes place, where the Professions of Faith take the place of the Creed, may the Creed not be said, because it would be duplicating what had already been our profession of faith.

Unless the OP somehow missed the Baptism (unlikely), or the Confirmation (pretty nigh impossible), this is a serious matter of someone tampering with the liturgy.

There is the chance that the priest forgot the Creed. . .and out of charity I think that’s a reasonable assumption to make. Someone should let him know (nicely!) so that this situtation doesn’t arise again.
 
Tantum ergo:
Not exactly optional, SG, but here’s the info:

Only in Masses where Baptism or Confirmation takes place, where the Professions of Faith take the place of the Creed, may the Creed not be said, because it would be duplicating what had already been our profession of faith.

Unless the OP somehow missed the Baptism (unlikely), or the Confirmation (pretty nigh impossible), this is a serious matter of someone tampering with the liturgy.

There is the chance that the priest forgot the Creed. . .and out of charity I think that’s a reasonable assumption to make. Someone should let him know (nicely!) so that this situtation doesn’t arise again.
Click to expand...
but it doesn’t make the mass illicit… I believe that was the question… wasn’t it?
 
Well, he actually asked if it made the Mass invalid (it doesn’t), but it does make the Mass illicit. Valid, but illicit.

I had actually posted earlier just the above answer to this thread but the post was eaten up in some sort of “database error” apparently. Don’t know whether it was my server, CA server, or whatever, but a couple of my posts were eaten!
 
Well, he actually asked if it made the Mass invalid (it doesn’t), but it does make the Mass illicit. Valid, but illicit.

I had actually posted earlier just the above answer to this thread but the post was eaten up in some sort of “database error” apparently. Don’t know whether it was my server, CA server, or whatever, but a couple of my posts were eaten!

N.B. I tried to post this a minute ago and had more trouble again getting it to post. Hope this goes through this time.
 
Tantum ergo:
Well, he actually asked if it made the Mass invalid (it doesn’t), but it does make the Mass illicit. Valid, but illicit.

I had actually posted earlier just the above answer to this thread but the post was eaten up in some sort of “database error” apparently. Don’t know whether it was my server, CA server, or whatever, but a couple of my posts were eaten!

N.B. I tried to post this a minute ago and had more trouble again getting it to post. Hope this goes through this time.
Click to expand...
Thanks, guys.

If the Mass is valid, then what, in theory, is wrong when a Mass being illicit?? I think I have my terms confused. :o
 
Ok, a valid Mass means basically that the Mass itself fulfilled its normative function: liturgy of the word and liturgy of the eucharist, such that the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass through the consecration of the bread and wine to become body and blood, soul and divinity, of our Lord was carried out.

But, there can be things going wrong (i.e., illicit) during the Mass that don’t make the Mass itself invalid, but make parts of it wrong.

Not saying the Creed is wrong, but it doesn’t interfere with the overall purpose of the Mass. Therefore, the Mass itself is valid, but that omission of the Creed makes the Mass illicit.

If the priest, OTOH, changed the words of the consecration, not only would that be illicit (wrong), but this action would change the validity of the Mass, interfering enough with its normative function to make this Mass not only illicit, but invalid as well.

Some liturgical abuses only make a Mass illicit, but some make it not only illicit but invalid. . .and that’s the problem. Even an illicit abuse is still interfering with the right of the congregation to receive a licit, valid Mass. . .and some illicit abuses can segue into invalid abuses very easily.
 
:mad: What have Altar Girls in sloppy robes and sneakers go to do with anything? If your problem is with the omission of the Creed then state that. Lay off the fact that you personally do not like the presence of Altar girls.

Ok I agree no sneakers EVER whether Altar boy or girl but, I am getting fed up to the back teeth with people who critisize these things just because they feel they are not correct.

Altar Girls have been given a duty by the Holy Father and each individual Bishop has the power to introduce them to the Altar if he so feels it is necessary.

Come on. Get real and leave the idea of Altar girls alone. Your obvious distraction at Holy Mass would leave me to ask if your participation in the Eucharist was licit or, in your own words, if it was illicit or invalid.
 
Okay, here’s the deal…

As already noted, the Creed may be omitted *from its normal place *if there is a baptism or confirmation at the Mass since the creed will occur in the context of that celebration. Any other omission of it makes the Mass illicit, but not invalid. Note that the Gloria is omitted during penitential seasons (Lent and Advent).

Deacon Ed
 
Deacon Ed:
Okay, here’s the deal…

As already noted, the Creed may be omitted *from its normal place *if there is a baptism or confirmation at the Mass since the creed will occur in the context of that celebration. Any other omission of it makes the Mass illicit, but not invalid. Note that the Gloria is omitted during penitential seasons (Lent and Advent).

Deacon Ed
Click to expand...
Thanks Deacon!!
 
Tantum ergo:
Ok, a valid Mass means basically that the Mass itself fulfilled its normative function: liturgy of the word and liturgy of the eucharist, such that the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass through the consecration of the bread and wine to become body and blood, soul and divinity, of our Lord was carried out.

But, there can be things going wrong (i.e., illicit) during the Mass that don’t make the Mass itself invalid, but make parts of it wrong.

Not saying the Creed is wrong, but it doesn’t interfere with the overall purpose of the Mass. Therefore, the Mass itself is valid, but that omission of the Creed makes the Mass illicit.

If the priest, OTOH, changed the words of the consecration, not only would that be illicit (wrong), but this action would change the validity of the Mass, interfering enough with its normative function to make this Mass not only illicit, but invalid as well.

Some liturgical abuses only make a Mass illicit, but some make it not only illicit but invalid. . .and that’s the problem. Even an illicit abuse is still interfering with the right of the congregation to receive a licit, valid Mass. . .and some illicit abuses can segue into invalid abuses very easily.
Click to expand...
I really appreciate this!! Thanks!!
 
Fergal said:
:mad: What have Altar Girls in sloppy robes and sneakers go to do with anything? If your problem is with the omission of the Creed then state that. Lay off the fact that you personally do not like the presence of Altar girls.

Ok I agree no sneakers EVER whether Altar boy or girl but, I am getting fed up to the back teeth with people who critisize these things just because they feel they are not correct.

Altar Girls have been given a duty by the Holy Father and each individual Bishop has the power to introduce them to the Altar if he so feels it is necessary.

Come on. Get real and leave the idea of Altar girls alone. Your obvious distraction at Holy Mass would leave me to ask if your participation in the Eucharist was licit or, in your own words, if it was illicit or invalid.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Whoa!! Sorry, wrong side of the bed??😃

I do get distracted at Mass rightly (and certainly wrongly) by:

~priests who call attention himself as performer/entertainer, rather than GOD.

~sloppily dressed and/or irreverened alter servers (p.c., ya know)

~sloppily/immodestly dressed or irreverend (talking,etc)parrishioners

~The “sign of peace” (RIGHT BEFORE Agus Dei??) at what I think is very distracting at a VERY important part of Mass. It’s NOT about US, ok?? We can shake and hands, hug, and talk AFTER Mass. It’s not supposed to be a recieving line, for goodness sake!

~Chior directors who make the music central to the “production” rather than just adding beauty to the Holy Mass.

~Church announcments at the beginning of Mass rather than at the end of Mass??

Look you have a point about distractions. I am guilty as charged!!
I remind myself all the time: *“The Mass is the Mass is the Mass! Focus on the sacrifice of Christ!”. *

But at the same time, don’t I have a point too??

PS: I don’t agree with altar girls just as I don’t agree with woman priests!! It’s all the same to me. Christ was a man, and his apostles were men. Mary, very near and near to my heart, was and is not Christ, and therefore girls are not to be trained to be alter Christos!
 
jlw said:
:~The “sign of peace” (RIGHT BEFORE Agus Dei??) at what I think is very distracting at a VERY important part of Mass. It’s NOT about US, ok?? We can shake and hands, hug, and talk AFTER Mass. It’s not supposed to be a recieving line, for goodness sake!Look you have a point about distractions. I am guilty as charged!!
Click to expand...

But it is not about what YOU like. You don’t want the celebrant canging anything, so shouldn’t that be even more true for you?
Girm
The Rite of Peace
Click to expand...
  1. The Rite of Peace follows (The Lord’s Prayer) by which the Church asks for peace and unity for herself and for the whole human family, and the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament.
Click to expand...
As for the sign of peace to be given, the manner is to be established by Conferences of Bishops in accordance with the culture and customs of the peoples. It is, however, appropriate that each person offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner.
Click to expand...
PS: I don’t agree with altar girls just as I don’t agree with woman priests!! It’s all the same to me. Christ was a man, and his apostles were men. Mary, very near and near to my heart, was and is not Christ, and therefore girls are not to be trained to be alter Christos!

Again, this is not YOUR decion. I thought you said
It’s NOT about US, ok??
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Mysty101:
But it is not about what YOU like. You don’t want the celebrant canging anything, so shouldn’t that be even more true for you?

Again, this is not YOUR decion. I thought you said
Click to expand...
You are right!! AND…

It’s terribly distracting for the Sign of Peace to become a “shout out” and “recieving line” where parishioners (and even the priest!) MOVE from their seats TURNING THEIR BACK on the Body and Blood of Christ and suddenly, what IS a sacred and sober moment of the Mass becomes instead a theatre–at intermission or something!!!

Again, altar girls have been permitted, but not required. So in accordance with the culture and customs of the people, I would rather attend a parish where young boys are being trained to be priests, if they so choose.

Are you for women being priests???
 
What about for tv Mass? Locally, we have a priest that blows through a Sunday liturgy in less than 30 minutes. Last time I watched, he did not recite the Credo, and he might have omitted the Gloria when normally we would have recited it. This was I’d say two weeks ago or three at the most.
 
40.png
Mysty101:
I am in favor of whatever the Church decides is best for us.
Click to expand...
At the present time, it is for men to priests. WHY???

You may not care why, and think that is secondary to the matter of obedience, but I think asking why is central to arriving at the fullness of faith here in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
 
40.png
jlw:
At the present time, it is for only men to priests. WHY???

You may not care why, and think that is secondary to the matter of obedience, but I think asking why is central to arriving at the fullness of faith here in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Click to expand...
That is the Taboo in Newchurch. And the Newchurch faithful will not respond, except, “your’s is not to reason WHY, your’s is just to live or die”.
Or:
“I am in favor of whatever the (new)Church decides is best for us.”
If you ask WHY too many times you get ad hominim’d.

No one questions the disrespect of Christ, the Supreme Authority OVER ALL bishops, that the bishops THEMSELVES dish out in 7 course meal fashion. You just eat it.
 
Tantum ergo:
…I had actually posted earlier just the above answer to this thread but the post was eaten up in some sort of…but a couple of my posts were eaten!.
Click to expand...

He did it… I saw him…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top