When is a Mass considered invalid?

[Tartini]

I am a Traditionalist Catholic. I often have a difficult time at attending the NO Mass (only if I absolutely have to), but will if the liturgical situation is properly handled.

What is the position of the Church on the faithful who have a conscientious objection to some ways the NO is celebrated, but realize the obligation? I often see great differences that disturb me and I feel that something is not in order.

I do not want to seem to be over scrupulous in the matter, and must remember my position in the whole of the matter. If there is an unusual amount of laxity and “rushing through” going on during the Mass, I feel that I am not receiving a valid Communion and that I am attending a protestant tent revival rather than the Sacrifice of Holy Mass.

 

[Mel_Stones]

Have you ever actually attended a protestant tent revival? Trust me there is nothing even remotely close to rushing through present at one.

I keep seeing NO mass on the forum. What is is?

 

[LilyM]

I’m not a Canon lawyer, but my understanding is that four things, and four things only, will make the Mass invalid:

a) improper matter. Meaning that the Eucharistic bread has additional ‘ingredients’ such as honey, eggs, dried fruit or the like. If you are absolutely certain any such thing is being added, it’s not valid. It’s fine if it’s wholemeal though.

Or the Eucharistic wine is not wine (say if grape juice were used).

b) improper form. Meaning the words of consecration ‘This is My body … This is My blood …’ are not said or are deliberately said wrongly. Again, don’t presume it’s being done deliberately unless you go to several Masses by the same priest and they are always said wrong.

c) lack of intent. Meaning you are certain that the priest does not intend to consecrate the bread and wine.

d) lack of capacity (for want of a better term). This happens where a ‘Mass’ is said by people who aren’t validly ordained priests (ie women, non-Catholics).

Nothing else, no matter how grave an abuse, will impact on the validity of the sacrament.

I’ve seen some argue (even here on CAF) that one has the right to not go to Mass if there are lots of abuses. I would say that as long as a valid Mass is available to you your obligation to attend remains under Canon Law, and you must go to that Mass.

That being said, where we see these or other abuses, we certainly have a right, and even perhaps a duty, as Redemptionis Sacramentum states, to in charity correct the priest. And if necessary take the matter further - to the pastor of the parish, their Bishop or even the Papal Nuncio or the Vatican itself. Doing so is probably more likely to be effective than simply not going.

 

[rkrispies]

Have you ever actually attended a protestant tent revival? Trust me there is nothing even remotely close to rushing through present at one.

I keep seeing NO mass on the forum. What is is?

NO is short for Novus Ordo. What some others call (properly) the Ordinary Form. The Vatican refers to it as the Ordinary Form (or OF) and so should we. Many traditionalists stick with the Novus Ordo versus Tridentine (or TLM) rite rather than Ordinary versus Extraordinary Form.

Chris

 

[SMHW]

I am a Traditionalist Catholic. I often have a difficult time at attending the NO Mass (only if I absolutely have to), but will if the liturgical situation is properly handled.

What is the position of the Church on the faithful who have a conscientious objection to some ways the NO is celebrated, but realize the obligation? I often see great differences that disturb me and I feel that something is not in order.

I do not want to seem to be over scrupulous in the matter, and must remember my position in the whole of the matter. If there is an unusual amount of laxity and “rushing through” going on during the Mass, I feel that I am not receiving a valid Communion and that I am attending a protestant tent revival rather than the Sacrifice of Holy Mass.

First of all, the term “valid” is probably not really appropriate to use in conjunction with the term “Mass”. “Valid” is more appropriately applied to the sacrament of the Eucharist, which I suspect is what you actually meant. The Eucharist is either consecrated to become the Body and Blood of Christ or it isn’t. LilyM pretty much covered what was necessary for the Eucharist to be valid.

Now you can have a validly consecrated Eucharist within the context of a Mass which has all sorts of illicit (unlawful) and/or inappropriate parts (or lack thereof). Attending such a Mass may affect how disposed you are to properly receive communion but if you do receive, you will have received a valid Eucharist.

 

[FrCorey]

NO is short for Novus Ordo. What some others call (properly) the Ordinary Form. The Vatican refers to it as the Ordinary Form (or OF) and so should we. Many traditionalists stick with the Novus Ordo versus Tridentine (or TLM) rite rather than Ordinary versus Extraordinary Form.

Chris

but NO is shorter, so we just say NO!

 

[Joe_5859]

I’m not a Canon lawyer, but my understanding is that four things, and four things only, will make the Mass invalid:

a) improper matter. Meaning that the Eucharistic bread has additional ‘ingredients’ such as honey, eggs, dried fruit or the like. If you are absolutely certain any such thing is being added, it’s not valid. It’s fine if it’s wholemeal though.

Or the Eucharistic wine is not wine (say if grape juice were used).

b) improper form. Meaning the words of consecration ‘This is My body … This is My blood …’ are not said or are deliberately said wrongly. Again, don’t presume it’s being done deliberately unless you go to several Masses by the same priest and they are always said wrong.

c) lack of intent. Meaning you are certain that the priest does not intend to consecrate the bread and wine.

d) lack of capacity (for want of a better term). This happens where a ‘Mass’ is said by people who aren’t validly ordained priests (ie women, non-Catholics).

Nothing else, no matter how grave an abuse, will impact on the validity of the sacrament.

I’ve seen some argue (even here on CAF) that one has the right to not go to Mass if there are lots of abuses. I would say that as long as a valid Mass is available to you your obligation to attend remains under Canon Law, and you must go to that Mass.

That being said, where we see these or other abuses, we certainly have a right, and even perhaps a duty, as Redemptionis Sacramentum states, to in charity correct the priest. And if necessary take the matter further - to the pastor of the parish, their Bishop or even the Papal Nuncio or the Vatican itself. Doing so is probably more likely to be effective than simply not going.

Spot on.

Also, it bears mentioning that a thousand illicit actions do not add up to make a Mass invalid. They could have liturgical dancers, clowns, balloons, nuns reading the Gospel, lay people giving the homily, children gathered around the altar for the Our Father, glass chalices, clay ciboriums, and any number of other things. But as long as there is a validly ordained priest using valid matter for the eucharistic species and valid form for the words of consecration, then the Mass is valid.

 

[Joe_5859]

but NO is shorter, so we just say NO!

How is NO shorter than OF?

 

[Tartini]

Spot on.

Also, it bears mentioning that a thousand illicit actions do not add up to make a Mass invalid. They could have liturgical dancers, clowns, balloons, nuns reading the Gospel, lay people giving the homily, children gathered around the altar for the Our Father, glass chalices, clay ciboriums, and any number of other things. But as long as there is a validly ordained priest using valid matter for the eucharistic species and valid form for the words of consecration, then the Mass is valid.

It does make me feel very thankful to be able to attend a Latin Mass, now that you pointed this out.

 

[LilyM]

It does make me feel very lucky to attend a Latin Mass, now that you pointed this out.

Why? Christ is equally present wherever there is a valid Eucharist, for those with the heart and mind to discern Him. Since “God alone suffices”, as St Teresa said, then these other things should neither disturb nor frighten us, as she also said!

 

[Tartini]

Why? Christ is equally present wherever there is a valid Eucharist, for those with the heart and mind to discern Him. Since “God alone suffices”, as St Teresa said, then these other things should neither disturb nor frighten us, as she also said!

I agree wholeheartedly, I think that you have missed what I meant in regards to the quote. I simply feel a certain respect is mandatory in such a situation. Perhaps my question is not as clear as it could be, or it is posted in the wrong catagory. I would probabally be getting very different responses to it if it were in the Traditional category, I am almost certain. With the elements presented in the quote, why would one ask “why”? I would most certainly rather take Holy Communion alone at my own home than in a situation where my conscience is disturbed by the often liberal surroundings that accompany a NO Mass.

 

[japhy]

I’ve seen some argue (even here on CAF) that one has the right to not go to Mass if there are lots of abuses. I would say that as long as a valid Mass is available to you your obligation to attend remains under Canon Law, and you must go to that Mass.

I wouldn’t say we have that right, but we do have the right to a Mass celebrated in the manner prescribed by the Church. We also have the right (which you pointed out) of charitably bringing abuses to the attention of our pastor, our bishop, or even higher up the “chain of command”.

Also, it bears mentioning that a thousand illicit actions do not add up to make a Mass invalid. … But as long as there is a validly ordained priest using valid matter for the eucharistic species and valid form for the words of consecration, then the Mass is valid.

But that should not be what we settle for.

 

[Joe_5859]

I would most certainly rather take Holy Communion alone at my own home than in a situation where my conscience is disturbed by the often liberal surroundings that accompany a NO Mass.

And yet, as Catholics, we are bound by Canon Law to attend Mass every Sunday. We are not obligated to receive Holy Communion every Sunday. Believe me, I am as disturbed as you are by liturgical abuses, but the solution is never to withdraw. The Catholic faith has never been a private “me and Jesus” religion.

In my previous post, I was grossly exaggerating to make a point. I have never encountered most of the abuses that I listed and only seldom encountered some of them (like glass chalices). Perhaps I’ve just had the good fortune of living in good dioceses, but I do not believe such major abuses are the norm in most Catholic parishes.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

I would most certainly rather take Holy Communion alone at my own home than in a situation where my conscience is disturbed by the often liberal surroundings that accompany a NO Mass.

I hope you mean “receive” Communion.

But receiving Communion does not fulfill your obligation to attend Mass.

You are obligated to attend Mass every Sunday and holy day of obligation. You are only obligated to receive Communion once a year. Mass and Communion are not the same thing.

And you may not receive Communion if you have failed to attend Mass on a Sunday or holy day (through your own fault) until you have confessed and been absolved.

Your conscience should be disturbed if YOU sin, not by the actions of others.

Find the church/priest with the celebration of Mass that your are most comfortable (least uncomfortable?) with in the geographic area where it is reasonable to travel, and attend regularly.

When you find serious abuses, address them 1) privately with the priest; then if that doesn’t help, 2) with the pastor, if he is not the priest in question; then, if that doesn’t help, 3) with the bishop, and as a last resort, with the appropriate Congregation in Rome. At each step, respect, honesty, and patience are needed.

In the meantime, pray for the priests responsible for the abuses (if they are real abuses). In particular, offer some of those Masses for a more reverent celebration of the Mass in your community. If attending these Masses gives you such anguish, you can unite your suffering to the suffering of Christ on the Cross and have something very real to offer at the Mass.

If you have children you bring with you to Mass, you can catechize them afterward if there was anything preached or done at Mass that was definitely wrong. Do this in a way that does not show disrespect for the priest or priesthood, but rather in a constructive way. Be sure you do not pass on to them any negative feelings about going to Mass.

And be sure not to confuse “abuses” with your personal preferences.

 

[Joe_5859]

But that should not be what we settle for.

I wholeheartedly agree. I never meant to imply otherwise. From my experience in these discussions, it seems like something that always bears mentioning. I’ve seen people act as though heaping enough illicit actions will eventually cross a threshold and invalidate the Mass. That’s not an accurate viewpoint.

 

[Tartini]

I was exaggerating to make a point as well. I should be careful not to let my conservative blood get the best of me. I am in full understanding at what is happening today and why, but I will always be proud to be a Catholic. The modern world is often disturbing, but we have been saying that for centuries. I see a great deal of things like this:when one has a toothache, one goes to the dentist. There may be some discomfort involved, but in the long run, the effects are benificial. Resignation and patience are great virtues in situations where there are no choices. I am very thankful that I do have a choice. I realize this more when I am at Mass, either it be a Latin Mass or a New Order Mass, that it is a priviledge to even be able to be there. Things could be very different.

 

[Tartini]

I hope you mean “receive” Communion.

But receiving Communion does not fulfill your obligation to attend Mass.

You are obligated to attend Mass every Sunday and holy day of obligation. You are only obligated to receive Communion once a year. Mass and Communion are not the same thing.

And you may not receive Communion if you have failed to attend Mass on a Sunday or holy day (through your own fault) until you have confessed and been absolved.

Your conscience should be disturbed if YOU sin, not by the actions of others.

Find the church/priest with the celebration of Mass that your are most comfortable (least uncomfortable?) with in the geographic area where it is reasonable to travel, and attend regularly.

When you find serious abuses, address them 1) privately with the priest; then if that doesn’t help, 2) with the pastor, if he is not the priest in question; then, if that doesn’t help, 3) with the bishop, and as a last resort, with the appropriate Congregation in Rome. At each step, respect, honesty, and patience are needed.

In the meantime, pray for the priests responsible for the abuses (if they are real abuses). In particular, offer some of those Masses for a more reverent celebration of the Mass in your community. If attending these Masses gives you such anguish, you can unite your suffering to the suffering of Christ on the Cross and have something very real to offer at the Mass.

If you have children you bring with you to Mass, you can catechize them afterward if there was anything preached or done at Mass that was definitely wrong. Do this in a way that does not show disrespect for the priest or priesthood, but rather in a constructive way. Be sure you do not pass on to them any negative feelings about going to Mass.

And be sure not to confuse “abuses” with your personal preferences.

Thank you for the gentle correction in my terms, and for the sound advice.

 

[Magnus467]

I agree wholeheartedly, I think that you have missed what I meant in regards to the quote. I simply feel a certain respect is mandatory in such a situation. Perhaps my question is not as clear as it could be, or it is posted in the wrong catagory. I would probabally be getting very different responses to it if it were in the Traditional category, I am almost certain. With the elements presented in the quote, why would one ask “why”? I would most certainly rather take Holy Communion alone at my own home than in a situation where my conscience is disturbed by the often liberal surroundings that accompany a NO Mass.

Where are all these liberal surrounding that I hear about? I have have attended many OF Masses and never experienced an abuse (at many different CHurches). I wouldn’t assume there will be abuses at a OF. I’ve heard of abuses at the EF as well.

Of course you will get different responses in the Traditionalist forum. To some of them, the OF is nothing but an abuse ridden protestant service.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I do not want to seem to be over scrupulous in the matter, and must remember my position in the whole of the matter. If there is an unusual amount of laxity and “rushing through” going on during the Mass, I feel that I am not receiving a valid Communion and that I am attending a protestant tent revival rather than the Sacrifice of Holy Mass

++++++++++++

**How you feel doesn’t matter.

There are only four things that make a Eucharistic Sacrifice invalid:

1. Lack of proper matter: that is, pure wheat bread and pure grape wine with only a little water added at the offertory.
2. Lack of proper intention to accomplish the mystery of the Eucharist (or “confect” in Wester terminology). This is hard to prove. If the priest has gone to the trouble of wearing the vestments, saying the prayers, and performing the ceremonial actions, intention is presumed.
3. Lack of proper form. This would apply ONLY if the Words of Institution or Epiclesis were so mangled as to not clearly refer to the bread and wine becoming the Body and Blood of Christ. (This would pretty much require a deliberate act. Merely stumbling over the words would not invalidate the mass as such.)
4. Lack of proper minister, that is, a validly ordained priest or bishop. This is very easy to ascertain.

These, as you see are four OBJECTIVE criteria. Violation of any one would make the Mass invalid.

Other violations of the rubrics or “rushing through” or anything that upsets your conscience will NOT invalidate it, regardless of how you “feel” about it.

On the other hand, if you take offence in such a situation, you should definitely refrain from Communion, precisely because this Mass would be valid, and you would bring judgement upon yourself if you did receive because your heart was not right.**

 

[japhy]

I realize this more when I am at Mass, either it be a Latin Mass or a New Order Mass, that it is a privilege to even be able to be there. Things could be very different.

Just a suggestion: Since the Novus Ordo Mass can be celebrated in Latin, the term “Latin Mass” is ambiguous, and using it in juxtaposition with “Novus Ordo Mass” furthers the misconception that the Novus Ordo can’t be celebrated in Latin.

I recommend following our Holy Father’s example and using “Extraordinary Form” and “Ordinary Form” to distinguish between the two.