ASK FATHER: Is a concelebrated Mass just one Mass or several Masses?
Posted on 18 June 2019 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf [https://wdtprs.com/2019/06/ask-father-is-a-concelebrated-mass-just-one-mass-or-several-masses/]
From a reader…
QUAERITUR:
Your recent post and “rant” regarding concelebration made me realize…I don’t actually know what happens at a concelebrated Mass. Is it technically two Masses (if there are two concelebrating priests)? How does that actually work?
At first glance, yes, this can be confusing. It seems as if there are as many Masses as their are priests concelebrating. This is especially so because priests are able to accept a stipend even when they concelebrate. Hence, it seems that there are more than one Mass.
However, it’s a philosophical principle that there can be various instrumental causes united under an agent cause. That is, there can be a main celebrant and various concelebrants with their own intentions to apply the merits of the Mass (which are infinite) to this or to that purpose (thus the stipend) but, in fact, at the time of the consecration they all have (we hope) the same intention to consecrate the Eucharist.
Sometimes an analogy of baptism is used. If several priests were to pour water and say the formula of baptism simultaneously over the head of a child, there would be one baptism occurring in the child, not many baptisms.
At a concelebration there is ONE Mass with more than one celebrant,
That said, I think that, as far as the Novus Ordo is concerned, concelebration ought to be safe, legal and rare.
I will concelebrate for, say, an ordination to the priesthood, but not to the diaconate. I won’t concelebrate at weddings and funerals. I am happy to attend in choir. Having clerics in choir also adds to the decorum of the moment.
Concelebration has its place. In the traditional Roman Rite, newly ordained priests each have their own missal and they consecrate with the ordaining bishop. That seems fitting. The rest of the priests present don’t, however. They manifest their unity of priesthood by imposing hands during the rites.
At gatherings of priests, say that a bunch of guys get away at someone’s lake place “up north”, it is tempting to have one concelebrated Mass. It’s “brotherly”, quick, and over. It seems to me better that priests should serve Mass for each other, even if multiple altars must be set up so that it doesn’t take all day (thus, cutting into golf time). It’s good for a priest to serve Mass occasionally.
Frankly… more, reverently offered, Masses are better. How could it not be so?
———————
some helpful comments from this posting…
Fr_Andrew says:
Being the ossified manualist that I am, might I take one slight issue with what you’ve said (while not disagreeing with your conclusion).
I would object to taking of stipends for simple concelebration under the understanding that the Mass is of infinite value.
Dusting off my old copy of Fr Nicholas Halligan’s Administration of the Sacraments (1962), I find in there something which makes a great deal of sense. Creatures, he says, are not capable of producing infinite goods, and the Mass is a creature, even though linked to the Cross. “Though the Sacrifice of the Cross is infinite in itself, it remains limited in its application; otherwise all men would be justified and saved, as likewise one Mass would suffice to save the whole world and eliminate Purgatory,” yet the Church’s practice is to repeatedly offer Mass.
And this is why Halligan distinguishes the various fruits of the Mass including the “special or ministerial fruits” which are those which are offered for the intention he makes (based on a stipend or his own pro bono choosing). “The share of each one in these fruits is probably diminished as they are applied to more persons or purposes,” he writes (on p. 131).
Prümmer and Merkelbach seem to agree with Halligan’s assessment in their relevant sections, unless my Latin is not as good as I think it is.
Having studied that, I have never taken a stipend when I have concelebrated Mass, unless the donor was clear that he was okay with this. I am sure that if the Church allows it that one is free to do so, but I am troubled by the practice, and as you say, prefer that there be more Masses, rather than more celebrants. I also try to avoid it whenever possible.
That follows on the “general fruits” of which he writes, which come from the Mass being not only the Sacrifice of Christ, and therefore the Public Worship of the Church no matter if offered by a priest alone at his altar, or surrounded by thousands. The Church needs as much of those fruits as possible, so I’m keen on obtaining for our Holy Mother as many as possible!
robtbrown says:
Geoffrey,
I have to wonder whether you have ever been present when many low masses are being said at once. The first time I ever saw it was at Fontgombault in 1972. I don’t think I’ve ever been present at anything more impressive.
It is impressive because all the masses are whispered. The experience is one of intense silence, yet it is possible to know what is happening because of the gestures of the celebrants.