Want to go to daily Tridentine mass, but only available by Independent Priest

[snowbee]

Clarifications on this please. Would it be a sin to attend a daily Tridentine mass offered by an independent priest.
I attend a Tridentine mass in the diocese every Sunday now and love the reverence for the mass but if a priest is out of communion with Rome does that sour the Liturgy?
I am pretty sure the sacrament is valid, being an ordained priest, but am unsure as to what my standing would be with the Diocese and Rome.
I wish that the diocese would offer that beautiful way of worshiping and as we know our Holy Father has tried to make it more available but priests and bishops are still fighting it.

 

[UponTheAltar]

The rule is that a priest can celebrate the old mass instead of the Novus Ordo if it suits his prayer preference better so long as there is an understanding that the Novus Ordo is valid and just as acceptable. If a priest has rejected the new mass and has thus separated himself from Rome then he is no longer in communion with the Holy See. It would also make sense to say that if a priest is no longer in communion with the church that he has, like all other churches that have separated themselves from the church, cut himself off from the Real Presence. That is to say, the mass is not valid. It would be a mere mimic of the old mass but, not a valid mass or Eucharist. If you can find yourself a tridentine mass that is still in line with Rome, go for it but, I suggest staying away from such a mass and go back to your regular Parish for now. Sorry.

 

[gentle_atheist]

It would also make sense to say that if a priest is no longer in communion with the church that he has, like all other churches that have separated themselves from the church, cut himself off from the Real Presence. That is to say, the mass is not valid. It would be a mere mimic of the old mass but, not a valid mass or Eucharist.

This is simply not true. Once a priest, always a priest. The mass is valid. Only the sacraments of confession and holy matrimony are arguably invalid because an independant priest has no jurisdiction over the laity.

Whether or not it is a sin for the OP to attend masses offered by the priest depends on the reason for attending those masses. If the reason is that the OP is attracted to the beauty and reverence of the TLM then it’s OK. But if the reason is that the OP rejects the validity of the Novus Ordo then it’s a sin. Here’s a letter from the Vatican that addresses the issue:

PONTIFICIA COMMISSIO “ECCLESIA DEI”
N. 539/99 Rome, 28 September 1999

Mr. Joseph E. Rebbert
10024 Piebald Lane
Dewey, Arizona 86327
U.S.A.

Dear Mr. Rebbert,

We wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter to His Eminence Cardinal Ratzinger. It has been transmitted to this Pontifical Commission as dealing with matters that come within our particular competence. With regard to the schismatic Society of St. Pius X we can say the following:

1. The priests of the Society of St. Pius X are validly ordained, but suspended, that is prohibited from exercising their priestly functions because they are not properly incardinated in a diocese or religious institute in full communion with the Holy See (cf. canon 265) and also because those ordained after the schismatic episcopal ordinations were ordained by an excommunicated bishop. They are also excommunicated if they adhere to the schism (cf. Ecclesia Del, #5, c). While up to now the Holy See has not defined what this .adherence consists in, one could point to a wholesale condemnation of the Church since the Second Vatican Council and a refusal to be in communion with it (cf. canon 751 on the definition of schism). Further, it is likely that these priests, after eleven years in a society whose head is now an excommunicated bishop, effectively adhere to the schism. . .
2. Concretely this means that the Masses offered by the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are valid, but illicit i.e., contrary to Canon Law. The Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony, however, require that the priest enjoys the faculties of the diocese or has proper delegation. Since that is not the case with these priests, these sacraments are invalid. It remains true, however, that, if the faithful are genuinely ignorant that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X do not have the proper faculty to absolve, the Church supplied these faculties so that the sacrament was valid (cf. Code of Canon Law c. 144).
3. The situation of the faithful attending chapels of the Society of St. Pius X is more complicated. They may attend Mass there primarily because of an attraction to the earlier form of the Roman Rite in which case they incur no penalty. The difficulty is that the longer they frequent these chapels, the more likely it is that they will slowly imbibe the schismatic mentality which stands in judgement of the Church and refuses submission to the Roman Pontiff and communion with the members of the Church subject to him. If that becomes the case, then it would seem that they adhere to the schism and are consequently excommunicated. For these reasons this Pontifical Commission cannot encourage you to frequent the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X. On the other hand it would seem that you are among those who attend Mass in chapels of the Society of St. Pius X because of the reverence and devotion which they find there, because of their attraction to the traditional Latin Mass and not because they refuse submission to the Roman Pontiff or reject communion with the members of the Church subject to him. At the same time it must be admitted that this is an irregular situation, even if the circumstances which have caused it have come about through no fault of your own, and it should be remedied as soon as circumstances permit.

With prayerful best wishes I remain

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Msgr. Camille Perl
Secretary

 

[crazzeto]

Clarifications on this please. Would it be a sin to attend a daily Tridentine mass offered by an independent priest.
I attend a Tridentine mass in the diocese every Sunday now and love the reverence for the mass but if a priest is out of communion with Rome does that sour the Liturgy?
I am pretty sure the sacrament is valid, being an ordained priest, but am unsure as to what my standing would be with the Diocese and Rome.
I wish that the diocese would offer that beautiful way of worshiping and as we know our Holy Father has tried to make it more available but priests and bishops are still fighting it.

The priest needs Jurisdiction to celebrate the Mass, with out a formal OK from his Bishop, even being a valididly ordained priest, he may not celebrate the Tridentine mass.

I understand that at this time there is movement with in the vatican to prepare the masses for fully unleashing this mass. That is, the goal is to remove any need for special permission to celebrate this mass. But at this time, special permission is required. More over, the preist needs the faculties to do this (even when the restriction is removed).

I would consult your local priest, and if necessary Bishop before attending, and certainly before receiving communion.

 

[Ockham]

The priest needs Jurisdiction to celebrate the Mass, with out a formal OK from his Bishop, even being a valididly ordained priest, he may not celebrate the Tridentine mass.

This is not my understanding. Any priest can say the EF with or without his bishop’s approval. Can you provide a source to the contrary position?

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070707_lettera-vescovi_en.html

 

[malphono]

This is not my understanding. Any priest can say the EF with or without his bishop’s approval. Can you provide a source to the contrary position?

That’s true but it presumes that the priest has faculties in the first place. In order to offer Mass publicly (whether EF or OF doesn’t matter), a priest must first have faculties from the local Ordinary. The one exception I can think of is for religious of Pontifical Right, and even there the exception is only partial: they may offer Mass within their own houses (which may be open to the public but are not parish churches) but, without diocesan faculties, they still may not do so in parish churches or other chapels or oratories.

 

[Ockham]

That’s true but it presumes that the priest has faculties in the first place. In order to offer Mass publicly (whether EF or OF doesn’t matter), a priest must first have faculties from the local Ordinary. The one exception I can think of is for religious of Pontifical Right, and even there the exception is only partial: they may offer Mass within their own houses (which may be open to the public but are not parish churches) but, without diocesan faculties, they still may not do so in parish churches or other chapels or oratories.

Good point, but I think the question is does the priest need special permission to say the EF.

 

[Robert_Burns]

Clarifications on this please. Would it be a sin to attend a daily Tridentine mass offered by an independent priest.
I attend a Tridentine mass in the diocese every Sunday now and love the reverence for the mass but if a priest is out of communion with Rome does that sour the Liturgy?
I am pretty sure the sacrament is valid, being an ordained priest, but am unsure as to what my standing would be with the Diocese and Rome.
I wish that the diocese would offer that beautiful way of worshiping and as we know our Holy Father has tried to make it more available but priests and bishops are still fighting it.

It goes back to the Supreme Law of the Church. A validly ordained Priest who uses Proper Form , Matter and Intent confects the Sacrament and you recieve Valid Sacraments.

He is guilty of Mortal Sin in doing so by being disobedient.

In addition - if he is separated from the Unity of the Church because of his infidelity to obedience then there is a possiblity of Leading you into Schism with improper sermons or even heresy.

So the answer is - the Validity of the Sacraments depends entirely on Proper Form Matter and Intent.

Do you run a risk that the Sacraments you recieve are invalid because of the possibilty of defects. Yes , you do.

Are they automatically invalid because of the infidelity of the Priest - No they arent.

But then on the other hand - in the OF we have Clown Masses with Priests supposedly in “good standing” as well as openly preaching things that are contrary to Church Doctrine and we have seen them all chronicled here at various times so you run a greater risk in a parrish like that IMO.

Its not an easy decision to make.

The best course of action is to put it in GOD’S hands. Jesus Said - “Ask and ye shall recieve seek and ye shall find knock and it shall be opened to you” so pray on these things - and put GOD first - Pray the Holy Rosary live the commandments and if anything is amiss where you are regardless of where you go to Mass - Ask GOD to lead you to HIM. He wants you to go to Mass and He wants to come to you. If you provide the effort in search of Him he will provide the Sacraments to you.

Pax vobis

 

[crazzeto]

Good point, but I think the question is does the priest need special permission to say the EF.

This document says “in principal” no, but everything I’ve been hearing is that it has been regulated by the local Bishop. More over, the consecration of the host, does in fact require the consent of the Bishop (per the fathers), I’m not sure what conditions are attached to this. I’ll have to do some research there, I will say this:

Currently it seems the EF is not wide open. It doesn’t seem like any parish anywhere can just start offering it, rather to date it has been requiring the consent of the local Bishop (none required from Rome). In my dioceses for instance, we have it available on the first sunday of the month at the Cathedral, and that is about it.

 

[Ockham]

"Resistance to Latin Mass liberalization is disobedient and proud, says bishop

Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments blasted as “disobedience” the reaction of many bishops to the Pope’s motu proprio document Summorum Pontificum, which lifted the restrictions of the older “extraordinary rite” of the Mass.

The document instructs bishops that priests who wish to follow the older rite must be allowed to do so without asking permission, and says that congregations who request the Tridentine Mass must be provided it.

Archbishop Ranjith decried the action “and even rebellion” of many bishops who are trying to limit access to the older Mass. “On the part of some dioceses, there have been interpretive documents that inexplicably aim to limit the ‘motu proprio’ of the pope,” he said earlier this month."

catholicnewsagency.com/news/resistance_to_latin_mass_liberalization_is_disobedient_and_proud_says_bishop/

 

[malphono]

This document says “in principal” no, but everything I’ve been hearing is that it has been regulated by the local Bishop. More over, the consecration of the host, does in fact require the consent of the Bishop (per the fathers), I’m not sure what conditions are attached to this. I’ll have to do some research there, I will say this:

Currently it seems the EF is not wide open. It doesn’t seem like any parish anywhere can just start offering it, rather to date it has been requiring the consent of the local Bishop (none required from Rome). In my dioceses for instance, we have it available on the first sunday of the month at the Cathedral, and that is about it.

SP removed the previous “indult” (wherein the permission of the local Ordinary was required) and thus freed the EF from the stranglehold of many bishops who (to this day) are diametrically opposed to it.

Nonetheless, and SP notwithstanding, it still depends on which diocese. In some places, the local Ordinary continues to try to rule with an iron fist and do whatever possible to stifle the EF. In other places, the local Ordinary himself publicly offers the EF and in doing so, sets an example for his priests.

 

[Ockham]

Nonetheless, and SP notwithstanding, it still depends on which diocese. In some places, the local Ordinary continues to try to rule with an iron fist and do whatever possible to stifle the EF.

Then by Archbishop Ranjith’s description that bishop is disobedient and proud. I would suggest reporting such actions to his superior.

 

[Robert_Burns]

SP removed the previous “indult” (wherein the permission of the local Ordinary was required) and thus freed the EF from the stranglehold of many bishops who (to this day) are diametrically opposed to it.

Nonetheless, and SP notwithstanding, it still depends on which diocese. In some places, the local Ordinary continues to try to rule with an iron fist and do whatever possible to stifle the EF. In other places, the local Ordinary himself publicly offers the EF and in doing so, sets an example for his priests.

Precisely - so the dichotomy is that despite what the POPE says - many Bishops openly defy him. To me - that is the problem more than Laity seeking the sacraments which they have been told by the Pope they are entitled to or Priests who are attempting to do that which the Pope has said is ok to do and because of the opposition of Certain Bishops , Priests and even Laity as we have seen in this very forum from time to time - who for whatever reason - vehemently oppose the Traditional rites.

 

[crazzeto]

Precisely - so the dichotomy is that despite what the POPE says - many Bishops openly defy him. To me - that is the problem more than Laity seeking the sacraments which they have been told by the Pope they are entitled to or Priests who are attempting to do that which the Pope has said is ok to do and because of the opposition of Certain Bishops , Priests and even Laity as we have seen in this very forum from time to time - who for whatever reason - vehemently oppose the Traditional rites.

Pardon what sacrament is being denied? And what Bishop is openly defying the Pope? Are you suggesting bishops lack local jurisdiction?

What I read indicates that the vatican it’s self does not oppose EF, it doesn’t say the local bishop can’t regulate it… Which in some cases is what is happening. While I, and apparently you disagree with that position, those Bishops take, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to accuse them of being in open and obstiant defince of Rome.

That is quite a serious charge.

 

[Ockham]

Pardon what sacrament is being denied? And what Bishop is openly defying the Pope? Are you suggesting bishops lack local jurisdiction?

What I read indicates that the vatican it’s self does not oppose EF, it doesn’t say the local bishop can’t regulate it… Which in some cases is what is happening. While I, and apparently you disagree with that position, those Bishops take, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to accuse them of being in open and obstiant defince of Rome.

That is quite a serious charge.

Did you read the link I provided? You have yet to offer anything but your opinion and personal belief. Provide something authorative to make your position respectable.

 

[crazzeto]

Did you read the link I provided? You have yet to offer anything but your opinion and personal belief. Provide something authorative to make your position respectable.

Yes, in fact I have… It was your link I was commenting about…

 

[MarkThompson]

Clarifications on this please. Would it be a sin to attend a daily Tridentine mass offered by an independent priest.
I attend a Tridentine mass in the diocese every Sunday now and love the reverence for the mass but if a priest is out of communion with Rome does that sour the Liturgy?
I am pretty sure the sacrament is valid, being an ordained priest, but am unsure as to what my standing would be with the Diocese and Rome.
I wish that the diocese would offer that beautiful way of worshiping and as we know our Holy Father has tried to make it more available but priests and bishops are still fighting it.

Okay, the discussion has taken a somewhat unrelated turn, so let me say it: no, definitely do not go to a service offered by any so-called “independent priest.” (You of course have no way of knowing that he’s actually a priest at all.) This is not some spunky little guy exercising a mischievous act of civil disobedience against those grumpy old meanies who don’t like “real” worship. This is someone who is now outside the church – if he was ever in it – has spurned all lawful canonical authority, and commits a massive, mortal sin every time he says Mass (if indeed he has valid orders, which, again, you don’t know).

The chance of encountering heretical, separatist preaching and strong pressure is very high. “Independent priests” don’t make their living by you coming to Mass once or twice, dropping a dollar in the collection basket, and then continuing on your normal life as a Catholic in communion with the legitimate Church. They want you to follow them: not just weekdays, but Sundays. Not just so you can go to a Latin Mass, but, they’ll tell you, so you can go to a Mass that isn’t invalidated by modernist heresy or whatever.

It’s really hard to imagine what could be more dangerous to the soul of a traditionalist-minded person who considers himself to be still a “learning Catholic” than to get ensnared in the webs of someone like this. Ask yourself what St. Pius X would say if you asked him, “Your Holiness, I’m thinking of getting involved with a(n alleged) priest who is subject to no Church authority, is totally out of communion with the bishops who are the successors of the Apostles, and almost certainly preaches heresy and denies the canonical authority of the Church. Is that a traditional thing to do?”

To those of who who think the OP’s question called for a theoretical debate on whether there ought to be more TLMs rather than an immediate condemnation of these alleged “independent priests,” shame on you.

 

[Ockham]

Yes, in fact I have… It was your link I was commenting about…

My apologies then, I must have missed it. Could you re-post please?

 

[crazzeto]

My apologies then, I must have missed it. Could you re-post please?

I appologize, I got confused as to which link you were referring to… Rather I was referencing “SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM”.

With your posting I tract my comments about needing permission to institute EF… However I retain my comments regarding requiring the faculties, and still have reservations about attending any Mass held by any “independant” priest.

 

[PJM]

=snowbee;6906871]Clarifications on this please. Would it be a sin to attend a daily Tridentine mass offered by an independent priest.
I attend a Tridentine mass in the diocese every Sunday now and love the reverence for the mass but if a priest is out of communion with Rome does that sour the Liturgy?
I am pretty sure the sacrament is valid, being an ordained priest, but am unsure as to what my standing would be with the Diocese and Rome.
I wish that the diocese would offer that beautiful way of worshiping and as we know our Holy Father has tried to make it more available but priests and bishops are still fighting it.

**As to sinfullness: Depends on WHY the priest is “Independent”? If it’s is soley because he insist on his RIGHT to say the Mass in it’s Traditional and Extrodinary Form; no sin on your part [His Bishop would be in error.] If His authority to say Mass or hear Confessions has ben revolked for some other Canonical cause the Mass would be “valid” [so long as valid matter and form are used] BUT ILLICIT.

Because your question is weekday, none obligatory attendance I personally would avoid it for fear of giving SCANDAL. BUT the Mass would be valid nevertheless. Your call.

I venture a guess that you might earn GREATER GRACES with proper devout attendance at your “N.O. Mass”?

Love and prayers,
Pat**