What is the thinking which allows concelebrated Masses?

[Sarabande]

Sarabande, you should have caught the papal Mass this morning (live at 2:30AM CDT). It was beautiful and the music was magnificent.

That would have been great to watch. I actually went to bed and forced myself to sleep shortly after writing my last post on this thread. My mind was so mushy. hahaha!

Maybe I’ll be able to check out the Papal mass on Youtube or somewhere else.

 

[Lepanto]

They used to be forbidden (so I understand).

Why were they forbidden in the first place?

How is it now that they are acceptable?

Thank you for all the replies, but can anybody answer the questions in my original post?

(Yes, I’m talking about the Latin church.)

 

[otjm]

Thank you for all the replies, but can anybody answer the questions in my original post?

(Yes, I’m talking about the Latin church.)

I don’t know that it would be correct to say that they were forbidden; only that the rubrics simply did not make them a possiblity.

Whether one priest celebrates the Mass, or a group fo them concelebtrate it together is a matter of discipline, not of faith and morals. So the Church certainly has the power to provide the rules by which Mass may be said by more than one priest together.

As to why they decided to write rubrics which allow that, I have never seen the question posed; I suspect I have seen why they chose to do it, but it has been so long ago I can’t recall the why.

To say that it was forbidden would be to say that there was a specific rule that said that could not be done. I don’t recall that there ever was such a rule; simply that there was no rubrics providing for it.

 

[mullenpm]

I am really surprised at the comments on this thread; I was never aware that concelebrated Masses were considered not proper or out of the ordinary.

The Daily Mass on EWTN is often concelebrated when there are several visiting priests (and for a number of weeks a regular concelebrant who was in the US to study); and, the Sunday Mass at my parish is also concelebrated at times when we have visiting priests.

Now I am confused!!!

 

[Aramis]

One of the reasons for the concelebration becoming normative is to reduce the number of masses going on simultaneously in a given edifice. Some older churches have 2 or even more side altars, in addition to the high altar and possibly the Table of Repose for the tabernacle.

It was not uncommon to have the main mass (usually missa cantata) going on on the high altar, and separate missa privata at one or more side altars. How much better to have all say the liturgy together, and focus all on the same sacrifice of the Mass? Not that it was terribly much an issue in the US… save for monastic communities.

Now, there have been a few occasions in my life I was glad the Missa Privata was not totally banned… but in general, it should be the exception, while for hundreds of years, it was highly prevalent.
-=-=-=-
And as for more clerics reducing extraordinary ministers: technically, lay readers and altar servers are also technicaly extraordinary ministers. The proper minister of the server is the Instituted Acolyte, and the proper minister of the lection is the Instituted Lector. Now, it is permitted and normative to allow these lay readers and altar servers to function without having to devlove the duties upon the celebrant (unlike the Deacon and the Gospel).

But they are still not the ones for whom it is the ordinary ministry.

 

[lak611]

And as for more clerics reducing extraordinary ministers: technically, lay readers and altar servers are also technicaly extraordinary ministers. The proper minister of the server is the Instituted Acolyte, and the proper minister of the lection is the Instituted Lector. Now, it is permitted and normative to allow these lay readers and altar servers to function without having to devlove the duties upon the celebrant (unlike the Deacon and the Gospel).

But they are still not the ones for whom it is the ordinary ministry.

This is correct. However, my grandparents never recalled seeing adult men who were altar servers. It was always boys who served. They never recalled seeing seminarians as servers. The seminarians would have been the Instituted Acolytes years ago.

 

[mullenpm]

Frankly, I am not going to let myself be concerned about any of the posts here implying that con-celebrated Masses are somehow improper or that somehow/someway the extra Priests should go to parishs where they might be needed to say Mass. That seems a quite illogical suggestion.

If a Priest is visiting a parish, for whatever reason, why should he not be allowed to concelebrate the Mass? I don’t see the problem.

I am in the age group that a poster’s grandparents are in and I remember that we had only altar boys to serve Mass; my brothers among them. But, what could possibly be the objection to having seminarians and/or friars assisting at Mass.

And I do not find concelebrated Masses to be distracting. The cocelebrants usually stand back and are not in the way of the celebrant.

I love the Sacrifice of the Mass and will take it with love, no matter how many Priests are at the altar and no matter the servers.

:harp: