Wednesday Liturgy: Celebrating the Mass Silently
ROME, JULY 1, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Q: Recently at our local national shrine I was visiting the Blessed Sacrament when a young priest whom I had never seen before began to set up for Mass. I sat down to wait, really happy to be there for this surprise Mass; it was 10 p.m. The priest "said" the whole Mass silently. At first I was confused. I'd never seen this before. It actually was quite beautiful nonetheless, and he did speak once, to invite us to receive Communion. Tell me about this please. If the canon is a public prayer, how can this be? Was it indeed valid? -- T.H., Santa Clara, California
A: From the description I would suppose that the Mass was celebrated by a traveling priest who had not had time to celebrate beforehand. In this, at least, he showed commendable devotion to his daily Mass, which is recommended for all priests even if nobody can be present.
If a priest celebrates alone or with just an acolyte he may use a subdued voice in celebrating Mass. He may not, however, "say" any part of the Mass internally. Because the Mass is a public prayer of the Church, all of its parts, including the readings, must be proclaimed vocally.
This vocal proclamation, even if audible only to the priest himself, is required for the Mass to be licit and is essential to the validity of the consecration.
Pope Pius XII affirmed this point in a 1956 discourse regarding silent concelebration. The issue was later formalized in a decree of the then Holy Office on March 8, 1957, that declared that according to Christ's institution, only he who pronounces the words of consecration validly celebrates.
In the case at hand, given the late hour, the priest was probably surprised to see anybody present at all and might not have known how to react.
Although perhaps excused by inexperience, the moment he realized that there were people present and interested in participating in the Mass (as shown by his inquiry regarding Communion), he should have celebrated in such a manner that the people could hear him and take the parts proper to the assembly.
In this way the Mass as an action of the whole Church would have been manifested more clearly.
All that I have said up to now presupposes that the priest celebrated according to the ordinary Roman rite and in the vernacular.
If he was using the extraordinary form of the Roman rite, then he would have correctly celebrated Mass in a low voice and in Latin.
Q: Recently at our local national shrine I was visiting the Blessed Sacrament when a young priest whom I had never seen before began to set up for Mass. I sat down to wait, really happy to be there for this surprise Mass; it was 10 p.m. The priest "said" the whole Mass silently. At first I was confused. I'd never seen this before. It actually was quite beautiful nonetheless, and he did speak once, to invite us to receive Communion. Tell me about this please. If the canon is a public prayer, how can this be? Was it indeed valid? -- T.H., Santa Clara, California
A: From the description I would suppose that the Mass was celebrated by a traveling priest who had not had time to celebrate beforehand. In this, at least, he showed commendable devotion to his daily Mass, which is recommended for all priests even if nobody can be present.
If a priest celebrates alone or with just an acolyte he may use a subdued voice in celebrating Mass. He may not, however, "say" any part of the Mass internally. Because the Mass is a public prayer of the Church, all of its parts, including the readings, must be proclaimed vocally.
This vocal proclamation, even if audible only to the priest himself, is required for the Mass to be licit and is essential to the validity of the consecration.
Pope Pius XII affirmed this point in a 1956 discourse regarding silent concelebration. The issue was later formalized in a decree of the then Holy Office on March 8, 1957, that declared that according to Christ's institution, only he who pronounces the words of consecration validly celebrates.
In the case at hand, given the late hour, the priest was probably surprised to see anybody present at all and might not have known how to react.
Although perhaps excused by inexperience, the moment he realized that there were people present and interested in participating in the Mass (as shown by his inquiry regarding Communion), he should have celebrated in such a manner that the people could hear him and take the parts proper to the assembly.
In this way the Mass as an action of the whole Church would have been manifested more clearly.
All that I have said up to now presupposes that the priest celebrated according to the ordinary Roman rite and in the vernacular.
If he was using the extraordinary form of the Roman rite, then he would have correctly celebrated Mass in a low voice and in Latin.
posted by Chipi Buenafe at
9:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home