Private Masses before Vatican II and differences between East and West

Started by jjoyce1, February 22, 2019, 12:04:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

jjoyce1

I recently ran across a thread on an Orthodox forum which claimed that private liturgies with only the celebrant priest present are not allowed and are considered abusive in the Eastern Rites (The Byzantine and Coptic Churches at the very least). There were some noted exceptions. Someone mentioned that St. Seraphim of Sarov and St. Theophan the Recluse celebrated Divine Liturgy by themselves, but the examples weren't really explained in detail.

One poster also claimed that such was the understanding in the West as well before Vatican II, and that only after the Council was it considered acceptable for a priest to celebrate Mass without at least a server present. That doesn't really make any sense to me because all the Traditional Priests that I know celebrate Private Masses and understand it to be a practice which is firmly rooted in tradition.

I think I remember reading some similar sentiments in Mediator Dei from Pius XII, but I remember it as being more of an encouragement to try to make sure that there are at least servers present if possible than a general condemnation of Private Masses. But the encyclical is also pretty strong on the fact that the liturgy can be licitly celebrated without any of the faithful present.

So what gives? Has it always been considered inadmissible in the East for priests to celebrate the Liturgy in private? Is the idea of a Private Mass a particularly Western idea? And if so, when did it develop, and did it have anything to do with the Council?
If God can work through me, he can work through anyone - St. Francis of Assisi

The Harlequin King

It's partly true. Before the 20th century, a priest needed a papal indult to celebrate Mass without a server or at least one person in the congregation to make the verbal responses (excepting extreme circumstances). Masses without a server are not a direct result of Vatican II, but the post-conciliar liturgy certainly made them a lot more common. Today, it's normal for daily Masses in the new rite to be celebrated without a server, even if it's at a cathedral with a hundred people attending.

jjoyce1

Quote from: The Harlequin King on February 22, 2019, 12:26:15 PM
It's partly true. Before the 20th century, a priest needed a papal indult to celebrate Mass without a server or at least one person in the congregation to make the verbal responses (excepting extreme circumstances). Masses without a server are not a direct result of Vatican II, but the post-conciliar liturgy certainly made them a lot more common. Today, it's normal for daily Masses in the new rite to be celebrated without a server, even if it's at a cathedral with a hundred people attending.

So what about Traditional circles that don't celebrate the new liturgy? My pastor says Private Masses on days when he doesn't have a scheduled Public Mass. I also spent a week over my Christmas break at the Shrine of Christ the King in Chicago this year. There are four resident priests there, and only one Public Mass said for most days during the week. Only one of the four priests will say the Public Mass and then the other three will say Private Masses at some point during the rest of the day. Is this a post-Conciliar thing? Or would this have been commonplace before the Council?
If God can work through me, he can work through anyone - St. Francis of Assisi

The Harlequin King

Quote from: jjoyce1 on February 22, 2019, 01:17:11 PM
So what about Traditional circles that don't celebrate the new liturgy? My pastor says Private Masses on days when he doesn't have a scheduled Public Mass. I also spent a week over my Christmas break at the Shrine of Christ the King in Chicago this year. There are four resident priests there, and only one Public Mass said for most days during the week. Only one of the four priests will say the Public Mass and then the other three will say Private Masses at some point during the rest of the day. Is this a post-Conciliar thing? Or would this have been commonplace before the Council?

Commonplace before the Council, but NOT commonplace before around the turn of the 20th century. Vatican II was not the only paradigm shift in Church history.

jjoyce1

Quote from: The Harlequin King on February 22, 2019, 01:42:41 PM
Commonplace before the Council, but NOT commonplace before around the turn of the 20th century. Vatican II was not the only paradigm shift in Church history.

Why the change at the turn of the century?
If God can work through me, he can work through anyone - St. Francis of Assisi

Sempronius

Bolded parts my highlights


Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and dean of theology at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: In your article "Celebrating the Mass Silently" (January 7, 2008), you say that daily Mass "is recommended for all priests even if nobody can be present." Your opinion is based, presumably, on Canon 904: "Daily celebration is earnestly recommended." However, I have always understood that the rules of the Church on this matter make it clear that a priest should not celebrate Mass if there is not at least one other person present. This is based on the undeniable fact that the Mass is not a private devotion, but the public worship of the Church, and is stated clearly in Canon 906: "A priest may not celebrate the Eucharistic sacrifice without the participation of at least one of the faithful, unless there is a good and reasonable cause for doing so." I would think that the private devotion of the priest, however commendable, would not constitute such a "good and reasonable cause" when faced with this prohibition. — P.A., London

A: This comment is from several years ago, but I wish to revisit the topic.

First of all, I agree with our reader's principle that the Mass is essentially public worship and not a private devotion. It would not be correct for a priest to prefer to celebrate alone whenever having at least one member of the faithful is possible. I would also say that he should usually prefer a community celebration.

However, I would beg to differ that saying Mass alone is forbidden or that a priest's desire to celebrate daily Mass would not constitute a "good and reasonable cause."

The canons referred to by our reader are the following:

"Canon 904. Remembering always that in the mystery of the eucharistic sacrifice the work of redemption is exercised continually, priests are to celebrate frequently; indeed, daily celebration is recommended earnestly since, even if the faithful cannot be present, it is the act of Christ and the Church in which priests fulfill their principal function."

"Canon 906. Except for a just and reasonable cause, a priest is not to celebrate the eucharistic sacrifice without the participation of at least some member of the faithful."

Therefore we have two norms which are not in contradiction. One recommends daily Mass; the other requires the presence of the faithful.

Of these two canons the older tradition is that of Canon 906. The prohibition of Mass without a server, or at least the presence of a member of the faithful who could respond, is found since the 12th century. There were some exceptions, such as during time of pestilence, if it were necessary to bring viaticum to the dying, if the server left during Mass, or if the priest would be obliged to abstain from celebrating for a long time. The insistence of the presence of the server was because the server represented the whole Catholic people.

It must be noted, however, that Canon 906 is actually less restrictive than the equivalent Canon 813.1 of the 1917 Code. The new code no longer requires the presence of the server but any member of the faithful. Also the older code required a "grave cause" or serious necessity to celebrate without anybody present. The current code indicates the weaker expression "just and reasonable cause." According to a respected commentary: "Such a cause would be demonstrated whenever a member of the faithful is unavailable and when the priest is unable to participate in a communal celebration, for example, as a result of illness, infirmity or travel. A just and reasonable cause would not be the mere convenience of the priest or his preference for celebrating alone."

On the other hand, the recommendation to celebrate daily is relatively new. The 1917 Code obliged priests to celebrate several times a year, and it was generally considered that three or four times was sufficient to fulfill the obligation.

However, the practice of daily celebration was increasingly promoted as part of a priest's mission and became ever more common. In this case any celebration of Mass would be a public act because a priest is a public person and his liturgical acts are never a question of private devotion but always an action of the Church.

It was in this context that the Servant of God Felix Cappello (1879-1962), the great Jesuit canonist, gradually persuaded the Holy See to ease the restrictions and consider the personal desire of the priest to celebrate Mass as sufficient cause to celebrate even if no member of the faithful were present.

This line of thinking about the Mass as the priest's central mission was reflected in the thinking of the Second Vatican Council and in papal magisterium. For example, the conciliar document Presbyterorum Ordinis states:

"13. Priests act especially in the person of Christ as ministers of holy things, particularly in the Sacrifice of the Mass, the sacrifice of Christ who gave himself for the sanctification of men. Hence, they are asked to take example from that with which they deal, and inasmuch as they celebrate the mystery of the Lord's death they should keep their bodies free of wantonness and lusts. In the mystery of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, in which priests fulfill their greatest task, the work of our redemption is being constantly carried on; and hence the daily celebration of Mass is strongly urged, since even if there cannot be present a number of the faithful, it is still an act of Christ and of the Church. Thus when priests join in the act of Christ the Priest, they offer themselves entirely to God, and when they are nourished with the body of Christ they profoundly share in the love of him who gives himself as food to the faithful. In like fashion they are united with the intention and love of Christ when they administer the sacraments. This is true in a special way when in the performance of their duty in the sacrament of Penance they show themselves altogether and always ready whenever the sacrament is reasonably sought by the faithful. In the recitation of the Divine Office, they offer the voice of the Church which perseveres in prayer in the name of the whole human race, together with Christ who 'lives on still to make intercession on our behalf.'"

I believe that it is this reflection on the centrality of the Mass in the life of the priest and indeed in the life of the Church that led to the easing of the restrictions that we find in the 1983 code, while maintaining the principle that the community celebration is always preferable.

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal also touches on this subject.

"19. Even though it is on occasion not possible to have the presence and active participation of the faithful, which manifest more clearly the ecclesial nature of the celebration, the celebration of the Eucharist is always endowed with its own efficacy and dignity, since it is the act of Christ and of the Church, in which the Priest fulfills his own principal function and always acts for the sake of the people's salvation. Hence the Priest is recommended to celebrate the Eucharistic Sacrifice, in so far as he can, even daily.

"254. Mass should not be celebrated without a minister, or at least one of the faithful, except for a just and reasonable cause. In this case, the greetings, the instructions, and the blessing at the end of Mass are omitted."

Finally, the 2013 Directory for the Ministry and the Life of Priests:

"67. The priest is called to celebrate the Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice, to meditate constantly on what it means and transform his life into a Eucharist, which becomes manifest in love for daily sacrifice, especially in fulfilling the duties and offices proper to his state. Love for the cross leads the priest to become himself an offering pleasing to the Father through Christ (cf. Rm 12:1). Loving the Cross in a hedonistic society is a scandal, but from a perspective of faith it is the fount of interior life. The priest must preach the redemptive value of the cross with his style of life. It is necessary to evoke the irreplaceable value for the priest of the daily celebration of the Holy Mass — the 'source and summit' of the priestly life — even if it should not be possible to have the faithful present. In this regard Benedict XVI teaches: 'To this end I join the Synod Fathers in recommending "the daily celebration of the Holy Mass, even when the faithful are not present." This recommendation is consistent with the objectively infinite value of every celebration of the Eucharist, and is motivated by its unique spiritual fruitfulness. If celebrated in a faith-filled and attentive way, the Holy Mass is formative in the deepest sense of the word, since it fosters the priest's configuration to Christ and strengthens him in his vocation.'"

The Harlequin King

Quote from: jjoyce1 on February 22, 2019, 02:45:02 PM
Why the change at the turn of the century?

I think the later 19th century led to a sort of reawakening or redefining of priestly identity. Consider how, for example, there were extremely few diocesan priests before St John Vianney who ever became canonized saints. The overwhelming majority of priest-saints before him were in religious orders. But John Vianney paved the way for an ideal of an ordinary parish priest who could be as holy as a religious priest. So whereas before, diocesan priests were only obliged to offer Mass a few times a year, later it became so commonplace for priests to celebrate daily Mass that people came to assume it was actually a requirement for him. I can't tell you how many times I've heard Catholcis say "a priest has to say Mass every day". That's not true, though, and in fact, doesn't make sense when you really think about it. Because if a priest commits a mortal sin in the middle of the night, it's very unlikely that he'll confess it in time for a 6 or 7am Mass the next morning. By the 20th century, though, people tended to assume parish priests were so holy that it wasn't even much of a problem to worry about it. Pre-modern people had far more realistic expectations of priests, though.

St.Justin

New Code

Can.  903 A priest is to be permitted to celebrate even if the rector of the church does not know him, provided that either he presents a letter of introduction from his ordinary or superior, issued at least within the year, or it can be judged prudently that he is not impeded from celebrating.

Can.  904 Remembering always that in the mystery of the eucharistic sacrifice the work of redemption is exercised continually, priests are to celebrate frequently; indeed, daily celebration is recommended earnestly since, even if the faithful cannot be present, it is the act of Christ and the Church in which priests fulfill their principal function.

Can.  905 §1. A priest is not permitted to celebrate the Eucharist more than once a day except in cases where the law permits him to celebrate or concelebrate more than once on the same day.

§2. If there is a shortage of priests, the local ordinary can allow priests to celebrate twice a day for a just cause, or if pastoral necessity requires it, even three times on Sundays and holy days of obligation.

Can.  906 Except for a just and reasonable cause, a priest is not to celebrate the eucharistic sacrifice without the participation of at least some member of the faithful.

Can.  907 In the eucharistic celebration deacons and lay persons are not permitted to offer prayers, especially the eucharistic prayer, or to perform actions which are proper to the celebrating priest.

St.Justin

Old code
648. Every priest is obliged to say Holy Mass several times a year. The Bishop or religious Superior is to see to it that the Priest celebrates at least on all Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation.
656. The Priest shall not say Holy Mass unless he has a server who serves and answers him

St.Justin

The fact that in the early ages of Christianity only the bishop celebrated Mass, assisted by his clergy, who received Holy Communion from the bishop's hands, is the reason that only one altar was erected in each church, but after the introduction of private Masses the necessity of several altars in each church arose.

Monastic priests began, by the seventh century, to celebrate such Masses daily, and side altars were added to the churches to facilitate celebration by priests in a low voice and regardless of the presence of a congregation or religious community.

Josephine87

Fascinating, Harlequin King.  Thank you for sharing your knowledge.  One more thing to keep in mind on the long march out of 1962ville and back to more traditional practices.
"Begin again." -St. Teresa of Avila

"My present trial seems to me a somewhat painful one, and I have the humiliation of knowing how badly I bore it at first. I now want to accept and to carry this little cross joyfully, to carry it silently, with a smile in my heart and on my lips, in union with the Cross of Christ. My God, blessed be Thou; accept from me each day the embarrassment, inconvenience, and pain this misery causes me. May it become a prayer and an act of reparation." -Elisabeth Leseur

Prayerful

Still '62 is better than the nothing which prevails in most places.
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.

Xavier

Holy Mass is called the Daily Sacrifice and the Continual Sacrifice in Scripture. Thus, it is fitting to celebrate it daily, as much as circumstances like the presence of a server etc allow. Fr. Lasance wrote over a century ago, as we were discussing in another thread: "And so it goes on; the divine Host is constantly rising like the sun in its course around the earth. Thus are fulfilled the words of the prophet Malachias [1:11]: 'From the rising of the sun even to the going down thereof, My name is great among the Gentiles; and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to My name a clean oblation: for My name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts." Not an instant of time passes that Mass is not offered, and the Host not adored." http://slatts.blogspot.com/2008/06/in-every-place-there-is-sacrifice.html?m=1

At priory, there was daily Mass with servers and the faithful and some private Masses besides offered by Priests on side Altars.

Moreover, Holy Communion is our Daily Bread, and the faithful have a right to assist at Holy Mass and receive Our Lord frequently, even daily, if properly disposed. Hence, Priests ought to offer Holy Mass as often as reasonably possible, daily being ideal.

St. Pio used to say the world could more easily survive without the sun than without Holy Mass. Every Traditional Mass opens for us the whole infinite treasury of Christ's Passion, gives great glory to God, obtains great grace for the faithful, assists dying souls before it is too late, speedily liberates the suffering souls in Purgatory from terrible torments. Imho, those and similar considerations should lead Priests to desire to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as often as possible.
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

Josephine87

"Begin again." -St. Teresa of Avila

"My present trial seems to me a somewhat painful one, and I have the humiliation of knowing how badly I bore it at first. I now want to accept and to carry this little cross joyfully, to carry it silently, with a smile in my heart and on my lips, in union with the Cross of Christ. My God, blessed be Thou; accept from me each day the embarrassment, inconvenience, and pain this misery causes me. May it become a prayer and an act of reparation." -Elisabeth Leseur