FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Whats up with this Mass I attended? Is this normal Novus Ordo?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 So after work I decide to attend the NO Vigil at a parish not far from me. A round Church without any statues or for that matter any discerning marks of a Catholic Church the tabernacle wasn't even in view. The Mass started with a plea for money because the parish is in the red. I sit down in the chair (no pews or kneelers for these folks) and start trying to say my rosary. As I am doing this some putz slaps me on the shoulder and says "hi I am Chuck". I notice he's got a huge sticker on his shirt that says Minister of Greetings. I think to myself "oh boy this ain't gonna be good". Then out comes the Priest dancing down the aisle to the tune "Social Justice for All". Every song except the Psalm arrangement was about social justice.
 After this things quieted down it became just a normal NO Mass until the Priest began the "liturgy of the Eucharist" He ad libbed the prayers and wouldn't elevate the sacred species(this I sadly have encountered before). What really got me was the Ecce Agnus Dei part of the Mass. The Priest said " This is Jesus who we recognize in the bread and the wine, who reconciles us all black, white and those of all life choices may we recognize him during our Lenten journey in each other and in the poor. Then it went into the "lord I am not worthy etc.[Image: frown.gif]
 In his homily he said that "we bring the gifts of sacrifice the bread and the wine to this table they and each of us our truly the sacrifice of Peace and reconciliation among the Poor."[Image: shrug.gif]
 After Mass there was another plea for money from the Priest and two bulletins one the regular and one that had all the financial info in it and why the parishioners need to give more. Apparently this parish is the merger of another Parish and they can't keep the dollars rolling in. I noticed that 99.9% of the congregation were over 60. This place makes me appreciate good Priests Good conservative Parishes and above all the SSPX and Marcel Lefabvre.


So anyway was this monstrosity even valid?
As long as he said the words of consecration correctly, used valid matter and had proper intent, I'd say it was valid.  You say he didn't elevate the species, did he genuflect?  Intent is rather difficult to judge, but if he didn't genuflect, that should tell you everything right there. 
DrBombay Wrote:As long as he said the words of consecration correctly, used valid matter and had proper intent, I'd say it was valid.  You say he didn't elevate the species, did he genuflect?  Intent is rather difficult to judge, but if he didn't genuflect, that should tell you everything right there. 
Sorry Doc he didn't genuflect just a big bow at the end of the "Eucharistic Prayer" along with the rest of the people except me. I had no idea what was going on.
Baskerville Wrote:
DrBombay Wrote:As long as he said the words of consecration correctly, used valid matter and had proper intent, I'd say it was valid.  You say he didn't elevate the species, did he genuflect?  Intent is rather difficult to judge, but if he didn't genuflect, that should tell you everything right there. 
Sorry Doc he didn't genuflect just a big bow at the end of the "Eucharistic Prayer".

Well a lack of a genuflection isn't an absolute either.  I've seen a traditional priest with bad knees who stuck with a monastic bow at the consecration.

If I'm not mistaken, then proper intent is assumed unless the priest says something that would indicate he has a different intent.  A priest could utter a lot of gibberish, but as long as there's nothing that indicates a different understanding of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, then the Mass would be valid but illicit.  However, the ad lib of the "Angus Dei" may be significant.  Saying that Jesus is within the bread may indicate a belief in consubstantiation or some type of New Theology.  I'd say its a doubtful consecration (but I'm not a theologian, so that's just my  opinion).
I wouldn't say that's "normal" Novus Ordo but unfortunately not uncommon. The no kneelers should've tipped you off. I wouldn't have managed to stick around for the "Liturgy of the Eucharist". *shudders* It's these types of Masses that give me nightmares (literally).
No kneelers?  Not a problem.  Kneel on the floor. That's what they did at the Cathedrals, and that's what I do even if I'm at such a Novus Ordo and no one else does.

If he says the words of Consecration correctly, there is only a very small minute chance that it isn't valid.  He would pretty much have to actively intend not to Consecrate for it not to be valid.  Since it's impossible for us to know the internal forum, we should assume it's valid.

Because a priest behaves boorishly around the Blessed Sacrament, ignores rubrics, and changes part of the liturgy is no reason to assume he doesn't intend to Consecrate.  It just means he's not behaving as a priest should.


LET HOPE AND PRAY THAT THEY GO BROKE. AND MAYBE THE BUILDING CAN BE USE  FOR SOMETHING MORE USEFUL. ALSO STAY AWAY FROM THAT SO CALL  CHURCH THEY HAVE LOST IT.
Doesn't the fact that nearly all Novus Ordo Masses change the formula of consecration, the very words of Christ, from "for many" to "for all" at least throws some serious doubt on the validity of the Mass? - not to mention that they don't even have a true altar but a Lutheran Communion table.

Yes, I am aware that if the priest in question does what the Church intends than it has the merits of being valid, but I have a hard time nowadays taking such a chance.  It is just better to just totally abandon the Novus Ordo and attend the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively (which for me is hard due to the fact that I must drive a four and a half hour round trip just to do so, but I have realized that my salvation is well worth it).
That isn't typical in the NO.
Nic Wrote:Doesn't the fact that nearly all Novus Ordo Masses change the formula of consecration, the very words of Christ, from "for many" to "for all" at least throws some serious doubt on the validity of the Mass?
No.  Not even some not so serious doubt. 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7