Ask a Question - or - Return to the Liturgy Forum Index

Question Title Posted By Question Date
Validity of Novus Ordo Dave Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Question:

I have a friend who wonders if the Novus Ordo Mass, at least when said in English, might be invalid. The reasons he gives regard the fact that at the consecration the English version uses "for all" instead of "for many" in regard to Jesus shedding His Blood. I thought that for the Mass to be valid at the very least "This is My Body" and "This is My Blood. Do this in remembrance of me" must be said. His concerns don't apply to the original Latin version, by the way.

But then there's the fact that in the consecration of the chalice, prior to the elevation, the phrase "mysterium fidei" is missing, unlike in the canon of the Tridentine Mass (Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei novi et aeterni testamenti mysterium fidei qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum). He claims that it seems that Florence defined that this is part of the necessary form of the Sacrament.

And then the final issue is that he says there's controversy in general as to whether or not Paul VI's Missale Romanum properly promulgated a Mass at all.

Thanks in advance for your help. I don't know how to answer my friend.

Question Answered by Mr. Jacob Slavek

Dear Dave,

What would motivate anyone to believe that the so-called "Novus Ordo" Mass is invalid in the first place?  Of course it is valid, and it was given to us by the Church.

Anyway, on to your specific concerns.  "For all" is an acceptable translation of "pro multis".  I admit that it is not the translation that I personally would use, but it still is linguistically good and theologically correct.  Ultra traditionalists will attempt to pick nits but there really is nothing to pick here, it is good.  The Church has approved "for all".  Besides, it is not exact words that are required for validity, if they were then translating the Liturgy would not be possible at all.  Sacraments are gifts from God and do not come from "magic words" of priests.  (Although exact words are required for licit celebration)

The "mysterium fidei" is not missing, it rather has moved so that the people can respond to it.  In English it has become "Let us proclaim the mystery of faith" which although is not an exact translation, sounds better to an English speaker.  In any case, the "mysterium fidei" is not essential for validity anyway.

Finally, you didn't mention any specific controversy that your friend had mentioned.  I'm sure in any large community such as the Church or governments or committees that there will be much controversy and debates and discussions when there are about to be major changes.  Controversy can be healthy and good, and does not invalidate any changes.  When all is said and done though, in the Catholic Church, the changes ARE promulgated, the changes ARE valid, and the Holy Spirit Guides the Church.

Please feel free to write back if you need more help since there are no good reasons at all to believe that the Mass is invalid.

Mr. Slavek
Footer Notes: (a) A Eucharistic Minister is clergy (Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion). Laity are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and should never be called Eucharistic Ministers.

(b) There is no such Mass called the Novus Ordo. The Current Mass is the Roman Missal of 2000, or the Oridinary Form of the Mass. The Tridentine Mass is the Roman Missal of 1962, or the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. Please refrain from using the term, Novus Ordo. Thanks.

(c) The titles of Acolyte and Lector belong exclusively to the Installed Offices of Acolyte and Lector, who are men (only) appointed by the Bishop. These roles performed by others are Altar Servers and Readers, respectively.