Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Masses for the Living and the Dead
ROME, JUNE 19, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Some readers responded to the question (June 5) on whether Mass offered for the living was more efficacious than that offered for the dead.
A meticulous reader did an online search for the supposed quotes of St. Anselm and Pope Benedict XV and turned up several pages that all provided the same quotes, including the same grammatical errors: "A great Doctor of the Church, St. Anselm declares that a single Mass offered for oneself during life may be worth more than a thousand celebrated for the same intention after death," and "Pope Benedict XV tells us, 'The Holy Mass would be of greater profit if people had it offered in their lifetime rather than having it celebrated for the relief of their souls after death. ... The fruits of the Sacrifice of the Mass are in effect much greater efficacy [sic] during one's life than after one's death because the application which is made to those well-disposed among the living is more direct, more certain and more abundant.'"
As our reader points out, none of these sites provide bibliographical references to the sources of these quotes. And an electronic search of St. Anselm's works failed to find any text corresponding to the supposed quote.
This does not prove that the quotes are false, nor that they are doctrinally groundless. But it does remind us to be wary of uncritically using the Internet as a source of knowledge, and to always attempt to verify our sources.
A correspondent from Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, asked: "Several people have told me that having Mass offered for a living person is 'more efficacious' than if that person attended Mass himself. How would you respond to this statement? I would think that attending the holy sacrifice of the Mass oneself, if not prevented by some serious reason such as poor health, would be more efficacious."
In general we should avoid focusing the question of the efficacy of a Mass in such a way that reduces, commodifies or limits the infinite efficaciousness of Christ's holy sacrifice.
It is like asking which is more efficacious, driving oneself or having someone drive for you? In the end the important thing is reaching your destination.
God's granting of grace cannot be standardized. Whether a person receives more spiritual benefit from attending Mass or from having someone offering a Mass for him depends on a plethora of factors ranging from God's liberality to the person's subjective willingness to correspond to the gift of grace.
If any difference might be found it is that, for Catholics, attending Mass (unless legitimately impeded) is a necessary means of spiritual progress and even a necessary means of salvation. Having Mass offered for one, however, does not enjoy the same degree of necessity and some people could even reach sanctity even if nobody ever remembered to offer a Mass for their benefit.
Some readers responded to the question (June 5) on whether Mass offered for the living was more efficacious than that offered for the dead.
A meticulous reader did an online search for the supposed quotes of St. Anselm and Pope Benedict XV and turned up several pages that all provided the same quotes, including the same grammatical errors: "A great Doctor of the Church, St. Anselm declares that a single Mass offered for oneself during life may be worth more than a thousand celebrated for the same intention after death," and "Pope Benedict XV tells us, 'The Holy Mass would be of greater profit if people had it offered in their lifetime rather than having it celebrated for the relief of their souls after death. ... The fruits of the Sacrifice of the Mass are in effect much greater efficacy [sic] during one's life than after one's death because the application which is made to those well-disposed among the living is more direct, more certain and more abundant.'"
As our reader points out, none of these sites provide bibliographical references to the sources of these quotes. And an electronic search of St. Anselm's works failed to find any text corresponding to the supposed quote.
This does not prove that the quotes are false, nor that they are doctrinally groundless. But it does remind us to be wary of uncritically using the Internet as a source of knowledge, and to always attempt to verify our sources.
A correspondent from Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, asked: "Several people have told me that having Mass offered for a living person is 'more efficacious' than if that person attended Mass himself. How would you respond to this statement? I would think that attending the holy sacrifice of the Mass oneself, if not prevented by some serious reason such as poor health, would be more efficacious."
In general we should avoid focusing the question of the efficacy of a Mass in such a way that reduces, commodifies or limits the infinite efficaciousness of Christ's holy sacrifice.
It is like asking which is more efficacious, driving oneself or having someone drive for you? In the end the important thing is reaching your destination.
God's granting of grace cannot be standardized. Whether a person receives more spiritual benefit from attending Mass or from having someone offering a Mass for him depends on a plethora of factors ranging from God's liberality to the person's subjective willingness to correspond to the gift of grace.
If any difference might be found it is that, for Catholics, attending Mass (unless legitimately impeded) is a necessary means of spiritual progress and even a necessary means of salvation. Having Mass offered for one, however, does not enjoy the same degree of necessity and some people could even reach sanctity even if nobody ever remembered to offer a Mass for their benefit.
posted by Chipi Buenafe at
10:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home