Is this mass valid?


#1

I went to mass 2 weeks ago, the priest said the old translation of the eucharistic prayers and the doxology. I was really surprised when i heard "take this all of you and eat it, this is my body" and "the blood of the new and everlasting convenant which will be poured out for you and for all". Was this mass valid? I know he had the intention to consecrate the Eucharist but when i asked him after mass which he didn't say the new translation he said he was saying what the missal told him to. I made the point about the changes in the words to the eucharistic prayers that the other priests were using at my church and the next time he said mass, he used the correct translation. This has been going on since the new translation took effect so I am curious if the masses were truly valid.


#2

[quote="romancatholic94, post:1, topic:306336"]
I went to mass 2 weeks ago, the priest said the old translation of the eucharistic prayers and the doxology. I was really surprised when i heard "take this all of you and eat it, this is my body" and "the blood of the new and everlasting convenant which will be poured out for you and for all". Was this mass valid? I know he had the intention to consecrate the Eucharist but when i asked him after mass which he didn't say the new translation he said he was saying what the missal told him to. I made the point about the changes in the words to the eucharistic prayers that the other priests were using at my church and the next time he said mass, he used the correct translation. This has been going on since the new translation took effect so I am curious if the masses were truly valid.

[/quote]

Yes. It may be illicit (sinful for the priest) if he were doing it out of disobedience, but it's really hard to invalidate a Mass by a properly ordained priest.

Generally, unless the essential words of the consecration( "this is my body", "this is the chalice of my blood", are altered, or improper species are used - not wheat bread and/or grape wine), the Mass is valid.

I've been to some horrible, sacriligious Masses when travelling, that included wholesalle butchery of the missal, and even mistreatment of the Body and Precious Blood of Christ, but they all maintained the bare minimum for validity.

God Bless


#3

The mass was valid, but illicit


#4

Proper form is **required **for the validity of the Sacrifice. Is the old translationthe proper form for the mass? Obviously it was the proper form before the New Translation was promulgated, but the old translation no longer falls under the category of proper form. Therefore, I would say the mass is invalid. Ask your confessor for clarification, but I would confess missing Mass in this case.


#5

[quote="KLJM12, post:4, topic:306336"]
Proper form is **required **for the validity of the Sacrifice. Is the old translationthe proper form for the mass? Obviously it was the proper form before the New Translation was promulgated, but the old translation no longer falls under the category of proper form. Therefore, I would say the mass is invalid. Ask your confessor for clarification, but I would confess missing Mass in this case.

[/quote]

We should not be confessing things that are not sins. There is no reason to confess this and no reason for the person to think he missed Mass. The person committed no sin at all. Sin is a deliberate offense against God. If anything was done wrong, it was done by the priest saying the Mass, but this does not necessarily make the Mass invalid, nor does it mean the priest committed a sin. We don't know what he had in mind. Such thinking leads to unnecessary guilt and scrupulosity, and these are bad things spiritually.

For your own sake, I suggest you talk with a priest or spiritual director about what actually constitutes sin and what should be confessed. Also, read up on it in the Catechism. I mean this in all Christian charity and concern.


#6

[quote="bilop, post:2, topic:306336"]
Yes. ** It may be illicit (sinful for the priest) if he were doing it out of disobedience**, but it's really hard to invalidate a Mass by a properly ordained priest.

Generally, unless the essential words of the consecration( "this is my body", "this is the chalice of my blood", are altered, or improper species are used - not wheat bread and/or grape wine), the Mass is valid.

I've been to some horrible, sacriligious Masses when travelling, that included wholesalle butchery of the missal, and even mistreatment of the Body and Precious Blood of Christ, but they all maintained the bare minimum for validity.

God Bless

[/quote]

And it is possible that the priest may have simply made a mistake - not that the old translation was being used wilfully, but out of habit, accidentally grabbing the wrong book, forgetting his glasses so the book was hard to read, etc. It still shouldn't happen, but if it was a one-time occasion, or you were a visitor to the parish, I think it would be better to not concern yourself about the validity or licitness of the Mass.

If you attend Mass regularly at this parish or Mass celebrated by this priest and this (or other things that shouldn't be happening) continues, then it would be time to be concerned. Or if there were many, many things "off" about Mass that day. But if this was it, and you aren't familiar with this parish or this priest, then I wouldn't spend time worrying about it.


#7

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.