I am curious about this too. My understanding is that if the words of consecration are not said correctly, then it isn’t a valid Mass. But I’m not sure how “messed up” they have to be. One time I attended a Mass where the priest said the words backwards - the words for the cup with the bread, and vice versa. After the consecration he looked up and said, “Wait, that wasn’t right, was it? Sorry about that!” but then he continued on with the Mass. I’m sure he intended to do it correctly, which probably meant that he did. This is probably the case with elderly priests too - the words may not be correct but the intent to consecrate is still there, so it still happens.I’ve read a lot of threads on hear about various liturgical abuses–everything from people not liking the choice of music to more serious offenses like heretical homilies and the like. Often, the advice given is to stay through Mass and take Communion because, no matter how bad it is, Jesus is still present. My question is, How bad does it have to be for it to not be a valid Mass?
I don’t think this is correct. The state of the soul or belief of the celebrant does not affect the Presence as it is the sole action of the Holy Spirit. If the Mass is celebrated correctly (pretty much) Jesus comes to us. He probably comes, anyway, because He wants to be with us so much.One example, a priest not believing in transubstantiation when he say the words of consecration.
You could be right. This happens to be my understanding, however I would welcome other people’s information.I don’t think this is correct. The state of the soul or belief of the celebrant does not affect the Presence as it is the sole action of the Holy Spirit. If the Mass is celebrated correctly (pretty much) Jesus comes to us. He probably comes, anyway, because He wants to be with us so much.
People don’t do magic or make anything happen. Not even priests.
Jesus is not present on Good Friday since the altar is stripped and the blessed sacrament is not there.Wait, so the SSPX masses are not valid? I thought they were just especially Latin masses, and there’s been a thread on here about that. Where could I get more info on making sure I go to a valid Latin mass?
Actually, even if the priest does not believe, the Church supplies the defect (because how would you know what the priest believes?) as long as he says or means to say the right words.One example, a priest not believing in transubstantiation when he say the words of consecration.
From your Bishop. On this issue, do not trust the Internet.Wait, so the SSPX masses are not valid? I thought they were just especially Latin masses, and there’s been a thread on here about that. Where could I get more info on making sure I go to a valid Latin mass?
This is not correct. The priest does not have to believe in transubstantiation for it to take place. As a matter of fact, the Lanciano miracle is said to have taken place in the hands of a doubting priest.One example, a priest not believing in transubstantiation when he say the words of consecration.
The Church teaches that even if the Priest doesn’t believe in the Real Presence, it still Transubstaintiates. By virtue of His Ordination, the Sacraments flow through the Priest “Ex Opere Operato”. Which applies to the similar question “What if the Priest has a mortal sin on his soul, is it still a valid Consecration?” For us, luckily, yes, for him unfortunatley, no.One example, a priest not believing in transubstantiation when he say the words of consecration.
They are in schism, they separated themselves from the Church. Search the forum or just Google.Wait, so the SSPX masses are not valid? I thought they were just especially Latin masses,…
I would still believe Valid. Remember, when those hands come down onto his head at ordination, He has the Power to work the Sacraments, even if He doesn’t believe in them, because it is CHRIST acting through the Priest. Hence the term, Alter Christus. Ex Opere Operato.Okay, by pushing this query toward the end of the spectrum … suppose the priest is very, very bad or has some sort of mental defect and DOES NOT intend to consecrate the bread and wine.
He says the right words and uses the right matter, but he lacks intent. Does the Consecration take place?
This question has been on my mind after reading about the Ohio priest who murdered a nun; according to the article he was involved in satanic activity. Conceivably, someone so depraved might lack intent.
“Lack” can be a bit misleading of a word. The fact that the priest is going through the motions by reciting the prescribed prayers and words of consecration, suggests that he intends, at least at a minimal level, to do what the Church intends. So if the priest thinks to himself, “I’ll plan out my picks for the afternoon football games while I get through these memorized words I’m supposed to say,” my understanding is that the intent is still there and the consecration is still valid.Okay, by pushing this query toward the end of the spectrum … suppose the priest is very, very bad or has some sort of mental defect and DOES NOT intend to consecrate the bread and wine.
He says the right words and uses the right matter, but he lacks intent. Does the Consecration take place?
This question has been on my mind after reading about the Ohio priest who murdered a nun; according to the article he was involved in satanic activity. Conceivably, someone so depraved might lack intent.
That’s even too high a standard which the Church does not require. A priest need only intend to do what the Church does.“Lack” can be a bit misleading of a word. The fact that the priest is going through the motions by reciting the prescribed prayers and words of consecration, suggests that he intends, at least at a minimal level, to do what the Church intends.