need answers to mass question

[snowbird]

Can somebody tell me if the incidents below abuses of the mass??? I feel very uncomfortable when stuff like this happens but I will be honest I am not very knowledgeable on what is allowed and what isn’t within the Mass.

1. Today-The priest left the Mass after distributing Holy Communion and He gave permission for a nun to give a mini presentation on “lay people doing missions work,” then she preceded to give us the final blessing and concluded the Mass. The priest was walking around the back of the church while this was taking place.
2. Religious are scheduled regularly to give the “homily” during daily masses
3. Changing the response of “The word of the Lord” after the first reading to something about Our Creator…then we respond “Thanks be to God.” This doesn’t happen everyday but frequently.
4. The prayer right after the petitions is given by a religious
5. The vessels aren’t cleansed after Holy Communion but are put to the side to be done later

I don’t want to be a trouble maker and maybe none of this is wrong but it just doesn’t quite seem right to me either!!!

 

[Cluny]

1–May be acceptable as a rare thing in special circumstances.

5–Ablution of the vessels after the dismissal, while not the traditional Latin practice, is general in some Eastern Churches.

 

[FrDavid96]

Can somebody tell me if the incidents below abuses of the mass??? I feel very uncomfortable when stuff like this happens but I will be honest I am not very knowledgeable on what is allowed and what isn’t within the Mass.

1. Today-The priest left the Mass after distributing Holy Communion and He gave permission for a nun to give a mini presentation on “lay people doing missions work,” then she preceded to give us the final blessing and concluded the Mass. The priest was walking around the back of the church while this was taking place.
2. Religious are scheduled regularly to give the “homily” during daily masses
3. Changing the response of “The word of the Lord” after the first reading to something about Our Creator…then we respond “Thanks be to God.” This doesn’t happen everyday but frequently.
4. The prayer right after the petitions is given by a religious
5. The vessels aren’t cleansed after Holy Communion but are put to the side to be done later

I don’t want to be a trouble maker and maybe none of this is wrong but it just doesn’t quite seem right to me either!!!

1, 2, 3, 4 All abuses. No question about it, no wiggle-room, not a matter of interpretation. #1 and 2 in fact are very serious abuses.

#5 might be a licit option but only if it’s a priest or deacon who is actually doing the ablutions after Mass.

 

[John_Lilburne]

Numbers 1-4 are not following the instructions. The priest’s tasks are being done by others.

Regarding Number 5, the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal describes the ritual cleansing of vessels during Mass, but also has:
“163. … Nevertheless, it is also permitted, especially if there are several vessels to be purified, to leave them suitably covered on a corporal, either at the altar or at the credence table, and to purify them immediately after Mass following the dismissal of the people.”

This is also in 183: “It is also permissible to leave the vessels that need to be purified, suitably covered, at the credence table on a corporal and to purify them immediately after Mass following the dismissal of the people.”

These can be looked up at www.romanrite.com/girm.html.

 

[snowbird]

1, 2, 3, 4 All abuses. No question about it, no wiggle-room, not a matter of interpretation. #1 and 2 in fact are very serious abuses.

#5 might be a licit option but only if it’s a priest or deacon who is actually doing the ablutions after Mass.

Should something be done then? This priest is a scholar and I am not well educated so I don’t know how effective I would be in saying something to him.

 

[FrDavid96]

Should something be done then? This priest is a scholar and I am not well educated so I don’t know how effective I would be in saying something to him.

He already knows that what he is doing is a very serious abuse.

I can’t offer any suggestions on what “should” be done.

The Holy See has reserved to itself deciding what should be done when one simulates presiding at the Mass (your #1).

 

[Cluny]

… then she preceded to give us the final blessing and concluded the Mass…<<

This clause I did not read, and was definitely wrong. (My eyes are not always what they should be.)

The point that I was trying to make is that it MIGHT be allowable, for good reason, for some else to give an address before the end of Mass (for example, a parish councillor speaking on a special fund drive, or about a special program or outreach of the Church) as long as this does not replace the liturgical homily, which belongs to a bishop, priest, or deacon.

But this should not be a regular thing.

 

[Rolltide]

1. Today-The priest left the Mass after distributing Holy Communion and He gave permission for a nun to give a mini presentation on “lay people doing missions work,” then she preceded to give us the final blessing and concluded the Mass. The priest was walking around the back of the church while this was taking place.

It should be made clear that on point one, the abuse is NOT the mini-presentation, which may be allowed in RARE circumstances, as long as it is after Communion. The abuse is the fact that the nun gave the final blessing and concluded the Mass.

 

[FrDavid96]

It should be made clear that on point one, the abuse is NOT the mini-presentation, which may be allowed in RARE circumstances, as long as it is after Communion. The abuse is the fact that the nun gave the final blessing and concluded the Mass.

Yes, but an important distinction here. She neither gave the final blessing nor concluded the Mass. She simulated doing so–and that is a very serious abuse indeed. We don’t even know who proclaimed the post-communion prayer.

The other very serious problem here is that that particular Mass was never finished. The priest left right after Communion without concluding the Mas.

 

[benedictgal]

There are so many bad things it’s unreal. Let’s start by using Redemptionis Sacramentum to hit the points.

The first one is the homily:

[64.] The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself,142 “should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson.143 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a Priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate”.144

[65.] It should be borne in mind that any previous norm that may have admitted non-ordained faithful to give the homily during the Eucharistic celebration is to be considered abrogated by the norm of canon 767 §1.145 This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.

[66.] The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants”; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.146

Regarding changing the text of the Mass, RS notes that:

59.] The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.

Regarding what the laity cannot do (and this includes religious men and women), Ecclesiae de Mysterio notes that:

1. To promote the proper identity (of various roles) in this area, those abuses which are contrary to the provisions of canon 907 are to be eradicated. In eucharistic celebrations deacons and non-ordained members of the faithful may not pronounce prayers – e.g. especially the eucharistic prayer, with its concluding doxology – or any other parts of the liturgy reserved to the celebrant priest. Neither may deacons or non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the same priest celebrant. It is a grave abuse for any member of the non-ordained faithful to “quasi preside” at the Mass while leaving only that minimal participation to the priest which is necessary to secure validity.

In the same way, the use of sacred vestments which are reserved to priests or deacons (stoles, chasubles or dalmatics) at liturgical ceremonies by non-ordained members of the faithful is clearly unlawful.

Every effort must be made to avoid even the appearance of confusion which can spring from anomalous liturgical practices. As the sacred ministers are obliged to wear all of the prescribed liturgical vestments so too the non-ordained faithful may not assume that which is not proper to them.

What is happening is just plain wrong. Unfortunately, I have sadlyl experienced some of the worst abuses at the hands of priests who are supposed to know better because they hold doctorates in liturgy. Granted, there are many who are faithful, but, there are some who believe that they must engage in creativity to “improve” the Mass.

 

[snowbird]

Yes, but an important distinction here. She neither gave the final blessing nor concluded the Mass. She simulated doing so–and that is a very serious abuse indeed. We don’t even know who proclaimed the post-communion prayer.

The other very serious problem here is that that particular Mass was never finished. The priest left right after Communion without concluding the Mas.

I was trying to remember if there even was a post-communion prayer…I don’t remember!!! I only remember him saying at this time I call Sr.***** to give her talk about the foreign missions and she will give the final blessing and conclude the mass. He then went to the sacristy got out of his vestments and at one point I saw him walking around the church. She then came up, gave her 10 min. presentation, gave the final blessing, and said this mass has ended you may go in peace; then she and the lay mission workers processed out.

I’ve noticed many more (what I would think to be) abuses than the ones that I’ve mentioned in the OP!!! I don’t understand why anybody would want to alter the Mass in anyway. It can be so beautiful when not made a mockery of.

This isn’t my parish!!! However, with my schedule I do attend this church during the week quite often if I want to be able to go to daily mass.

I often wonder if I am offending God by participating; would He rather that I refrain from going? It saddens me because I love starting my day off with mass and receiving Our Lord in Holy Communion.

 

[snowbird]

There are so many bad things it’s unreal. Let’s start by using Redemptionis Sacramentum to hit the points.

The first one is the homily:

Regarding changing the text of the Mass, RS notes that:

Regarding what the laity cannot do (and this includes religious men and women), Ecclesiae de Mysterio notes that:

What is happening is just plain wrong. Unfortunately, I have sadlyl experienced some of the worst abuses at the hands of priests who are supposed to know better because they hold doctorates in liturgy. Granted, there are many who are faithful, but, there are some who believe that they must engage in creativity to “improve” the Mass.

Out of curiosity when a priest (if knowingly) makes changes to the mass wouldn’t that be sinful???

 

[benedictgal]

Out of curiosity when a priest (if knowingly) makes changes to the mass wouldn’t that be sinful???

We can’t judge “sin” to that extent, but, what he has done constitutes a serious and grave liturgical abuse, as the Church sees it.

 

[snowbird]

I am a learning Catholic so please excuse my ignorance but what would actually invalidate the mass?

I know that if the words of consecration are changed that can invalidate the mass and I know if certain substances are added to the bread and wine then it can’t be consecrated but does anything else cause the mass to invalid?

Also, since the mass that I attended was never officially ended what does that mean?

I am a revert to the faith and I am trying to learn as much as possible about our faith.

 

[benedictgal]

I am a learning Catholic so please excuse my ignorance but what would actually invalidate the mass?

I know that if the words of consecration are changed that can invalidate the mass and I know if certain substances are added to the bread and wine then it can’t be consecrated but does anything else cause the mass to invalid?

Also, since the mass that I attended was never officially ended what does that mean?

I am a revert to the faith and I am trying to learn as much as possible about our faith.

Invalid matter and defect of form can invalidate the Mass. Furthermore, the lack of intention, meaning that the priest does not intend to consecrate the species, would also render the Mass invalid.

Now, not having the final blessing, while not rendering the Mass invalid, is ilicit.

Here is Redemptioinis Sacramentum. Click on to the link and it will give you a solid indication of one can and cannot do during the Mass:

adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html#anchor320043

Welcome back home! Sorry that you had to be exposed to what you endured.

 

[snowbird]

Invalid matter and defect of form can invalidate the Mass. Furthermore, the lack of intention, meaning that the priest does not intend to consecrate the species, would also render the Mass invalid.

Now, not having the final blessing, while not rendering the Mass invalid, is ilicit.

Here is Redemptioinis Sacramentum. Click on to the link and it will give you a solid indication of one can and cannot do during the Mass:

adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html#anchor320043

Welcome back home! Sorry that you had to be exposed to what you endured.

Thank you so much for your help!!! I will read the link and hopefully educate myself some more.

It’s scary to think that if the priest doesn’t really have the intention to consecrate the species then it invalidates the mass for the people. I wonder how often that happens??? I pray not very often!!!
Also, how in the world would a lay person know if the species has invalid matter which would cause it to be defected? One wants to trust that the priest is taking care of this properly but we all know that abuses do happen!

 

[FrDavid96]

Thank you so much for your help!!! I will read the link and hopefully educate myself some more.

It’s scary to think that if the priest doesn’t really have the intention to consecrate the species then it invalidates the mass for the people. I wonder how often that happens??? I pray not very often!!!
Also, how in the world would a lay person know if the species has invalid matter which would cause it to be defected? One wants to trust that the priest is taking care of this properly but we all know that abuses do happen!

Snowbird,
The priest must have the intention “to do as the Church does” That means that the Eucharist is still consecrated even if the priest’s personal beliefs about the Eucharist are deficient, and that he does not need to specifically say to himself “I intend to do…” and fill-in-the-blank with the entire Eucharistic doctrine.

As long as he sincerely “intends to do as the Church does” the Eucharist is consecrated.

(Keep in mind that I’m posting only about the issue of intention. Yes, there are other factors which might make what is happening invalid.)

 

[japhy]

Let me make this easy for you…

1. The priest left the Mass after distributing Holy Communion and He gave permission for (A) a nun to give a mini presentation on “lay people doing missions work,” then (B) she preceded to give us the final blessing and concluded the Mass.

(A) is permitted; short announcements and other things are allowed after the Prayer after Communion and before the Final Blessing and Dismissal. (B) is not permitted; it’s the priest’s job to preside and do the Mass.

1. Religious are scheduled regularly to give the “homily” during daily masses

NO. The homily must always be given by an ordained minister: bishop, priest, or deacon. It cannot be substituted with a “reflection” or “homilette” given by a religious or lay person. (cf. GIRM 66)

1. Changing the response of “The word of the Lord” after the first reading to something about Our Creator.

NO. The response is Deo gratias; in English, that’s “Thanks be to God”. (GIRM 128) Changing the words of the Mass is not permitted.

1. The prayer right after the petitions is given by a religious

NO. GIRM 71: “It is for the priest celebrant to direct this prayer from the chair. He himself begins it with a brief introduction, by which he invites the faithful to pray, and likewise he concludes it with a prayer.”

1. The vessels aren’t cleansed after Holy Communion but are put to the side to be done later

YES, this is allowed, but only an ordained minister (bishop, priest, deacon) or an “instituted acolyte” (not your run-of-the-mill altar server or extraordinary minister of Holy Communion) may do the purification of the sacred vessels.

The GIRM can be found here (among other places).