F
francesco920
Guest
Don’t you mean illicit?
- Status
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
In this case unless the woman was involved in the consecration then it was probably valid but definitely illicit.Don’t you mean illicit?
**
5. Problematic Abuses - Those which are Illicit
There are many more illicit abuses being practiced throughout the diocese of the world. Only some of the most common ones are listed here. Note that there is no attempt to prioritize the abuses as to most to least common or any such ranking. The abuse and the related Church teaching on the proper practice are presented.
**5.12 Concelebrating Mass with Ministers of Other Faiths **
In the name of “ecumenism,” some dissenters have been celebrating Mass with other faiths. This is strictly disallowed.
Canon 908 Catholic priests are forbidden to concelebrate the Eucharist with priests or ministers of Churches or ecclesial communities which are not in full communion with the catholic Church.
**5.13 Offering Holy Communion to those of Other Faiths **
Also in the name of “ecumenism,” some priests invite those of other faiths to receive Holy Communion. This is strictly disallowed except for a few cases with Eastern Christian Churches (see Vatican II Decree On the Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite Orientalium Ecclesiarum).
Canon 908 Catholic priests are forbidden to concelebrate the Eucharist with priests or ministers of Churches or ecclesial communities which are not in full communion with the catholic Church.
Canon 844 ß1 “Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments only to catholic members of Christ’s faithful, who equally may lawfully receive them only from catholic ministers, except as provided in ß2, 3 and 4 of this canon and in can. 861 ß2. (note: the latter covers Baptism)”
ß2 “*Whenever necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage commends it, and provided the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, Christ’s faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a catholic minister, may lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid. *(note: Protestant ministers do not pass this test)”
ß3 “*Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the eastern Churches not in full communion with the catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask for them and are properly disposed. The same applies to members of other Churches which the Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned. *(note: Protestant faiths do not pass this test)”
ß4 “*If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgment of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other Christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed. *(note: this covers the case where a Protestant converts on his deathbed)”
ß5 “In respect of the cases dealt with in ß2, 3 and 4, the diocesan Bishop or the Episcopal Conference is not to issue general norms except after consultation with the competent authority, at least at the local level, of the non-Catholic Church or community concerned.”
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
**
**
The priest must have the intent of doing what the Church does, that being the intent to make Jesus physically present via the miracle of transubstantiation at the consecration. The Council of Trent - a dogmatic council in response to the Protestant heresy - declared against the Protestant view which denies the necessity of the intention of the minister. St. Thomas Aquinas also covers this requirement in Summa Theologica (Third Part, Question 64, Articles 8, 9, 10). Council of Trent, Seventh Session, March 3, 1547; Canon 11: " If anyone says that in ministers, when they effect and**confer the sacraments, there is not required at least the intention of doing what the Church does, [Eugene IV in the decr. cited.] let him be anathema."
**
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
**
Canon 924 ß1 *The most holy Sacrifice of the Eucharist must be celebrated in bread, and in wine to which a small quantity of water is to be added. *ß2 *The bread must be wheaten only, and recently made, so that there is no danger of corruption. *ß3 The wine must be natural, made from grapes of the vine, and not corrupt.
Canon 926 In the Eucharistic celebration, in accordance with the ancient tradition of the Latin Church, the priest is to use unleavened bread wherever he celebrates Mass.
GIRM 282. According to the tradition of the entire Church, the bread must be made from wheat; according to the tradition of the Latin Church, it must be unleavened.
GIRM 283. The nature of the sign demands that the material for the eucharistic celebration truly have the appearance of food. Accordingly, even though unleavened and baked in the traditional shape, the eucharistic bread should be made in such a way that in a Mass with a congregation the priest is able actually to break the host into parts and distribute them to at least some of the faithful. (When, however, the number of communicants is large or other pastoral needs require it, small hosts are in no way ruled out.) The action of the breaking of the bread, the simple term for the Eucharist in apostolic times, will more clearly bring out the force and meaning of the sign of the unity of all in the one bread and of their charity, since the one bread is being distributed among the members of one family.
GIRM 284. The wine for the Eucharist must be from the fruit of the vine (see Lk 22:18), natural, and pure, that is not mixed with any foreign substance.
GIRM 285. Care must be taken to ensure that the elements are kept in good condition: that the wine does not turn to vinegar or the bread spoil or become too hard to be broken easily.
Any other matter of Altar breads, especially forms becoming more popular with dissenters such as cakes or cookies, invalidates transubstantiation. St. Thomas Aquinas also covers this requirement in Summa Theologica (Third Part, Question 74, Articles 1 through 8). There are rare exceptions where Bishops may grant individual priests with allergies or alcohol problems the right to use low-gluten altar breads or mustem (a specific form of grape juice with fermentation suspended). It is gravely sinful for a priest to celebrate Mass knowing the matter is invalid.
**
Note that this article deals with only the Western Latin Rite Church. There are different rules for Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, such as Byzantine Catholic. For the Western Latin Rite Catholic Church, valid matter consists of wheat unleavened bread and grape wine.
Canon 924 ß1 *The most holy Sacrifice of the Eucharist must be celebrated in bread, and in wine to which a small quantity of water is to be added. *ß2 *The bread must be wheaten only, and recently made, so that there is no danger of corruption. *ß3 The wine must be natural, made from grapes of the vine, and not corrupt.
Canon 926 In the Eucharistic celebration, in accordance with the ancient tradition of the Latin Church, the priest is to use unleavened bread wherever he celebrates Mass.
GIRM 282. According to the tradition of the entire Church, the bread must be made from wheat; according to the tradition of the Latin Church, it must be unleavened.
GIRM 283. The nature of the sign demands that the material for the eucharistic celebration truly have the appearance of food. Accordingly, even though unleavened and baked in the traditional shape, the eucharistic bread should be made in such a way that in a Mass with a congregation the priest is able actually to break the host into parts and distribute them to at least some of the faithful. (When, however, the number of communicants is large or other pastoral needs require it, small hosts are in no way ruled out.) The action of the breaking of the bread, the simple term for the Eucharist in apostolic times, will more clearly bring out the force and meaning of the sign of the unity of all in the one bread and of their charity, since the one bread is being distributed among the members of one family.
GIRM 284. The wine for the Eucharist must be from the fruit of the vine (see Lk 22:18), natural, and pure, that is not mixed with any foreign substance.
GIRM 285. Care must be taken to ensure that the elements are kept in good condition: that the wine does not turn to vinegar or the bread spoil or become too hard to be broken easily.
Any other matter of Altar breads, especially forms becoming more popular with dissenters such as cakes or cookies, invalidates transubstantiation. St. Thomas Aquinas also covers this requirement in Summa Theologica (Third Part, Question 74, Articles 1 through 8). There are rare exceptions where Bishops may grant individual priests with allergies or alcohol problems the right to use low-gluten altar breads or mustem (a specific form of grape juice with fermentation suspended). It is gravely sinful for a priest to celebrate Mass knowing the matter is invalid.
**
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
**
Sorry for the number of quotes. But these are from the “horses mouth” so to speak and I did not want to abbreviate them. IMHO if I had only referred to them many would not read the information so I posted it.
**
Christ took the bread and the cup and gave thanks; he broke the bread and gave it to his disciples, saying: “Take and eat, this is my body.” Giving the cup, he said: “Take and drink, this is the cup of my blood. Do this in memory of me.” Accordingly, the Church has planned the celebration of the eucharistic liturgy around the parts corresponding to these words and actions of Christ. The key phrases which confect the Eucharist are “This is My Body” and “This is … My Blood,” which when said by a priest with the proper intention and matter (explained above), truly show the priest acts in the Person of Christ. Other parts of the Eucharistic prayer are, according to St. Ambrose (also quoted in Summa Theologica), essentially preparatory; “by all the other words spoken, praise is rendered to God, prayer is put up for the people, for kings, for others, but when the time comes for perfecting the Sacrament, the priest no longer uses his own words but the words of Christ.” St. Thomas Aquinas also explains this requirement in great detail in Summa Theologica (Third Part, Question 78, Articles 1 through 6). Changing the words of the preparatory parts of the Eucharistic prayer is illicit and gravely sinful for the priest, but would not invalidate the Eucharist as long as “This is My Body” and “This is … My Blood” are said.
Sorry for the number of quotes. But these are from the “horses mouth” so to speak and I did not want to abbreviate them. IMHO if I had only referred to them many would not read the information so I posted it.
**
F
francesco920
Guest
KathleenElsie,
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Thank you for posting the relevant canons.
J
johnstown_johnn
Guest
To make a Mass valid 5 parts must be accomplished.
The Gospel is an integral part of the Mass; if not presented the balance of the Mass cannot be achieved. The Gospel is read by the celebrant but in rare circunstances can be read by a deacon. We have an elderly retired priest who can barely see; he uses a huge magnifying glass for the Offertory prayers, much of it he knows by rote.
Now, if the minister in this case wore priestly vestments of even a Roman collar priestly suit defies the Canon.
Woman are NOT priests in the Holy Catholic Church and Protestants are NOT allowed to read the Gospel to the Faithful during Mass. Not even an “ordained Protestant woman.”
This flies-in-the-face of a valid Mass. While appreciated, the Canon extracts provided, only address the Consecration and oversteps the Gospel.
Some say this “mass” was illicit" some (me) say “invalid” one perception is wrong; the other correct.
There are NO gray areas in the conduct of the Mass. The Mass is NOT a kabuki improvisation; it is either valid, invalid (or illicit and that is borderline to invalid; not the other way around) .
As Catholics we cannot accept anything but VALID.
The Gospel is an integral part of the Mass; if not presented the balance of the Mass cannot be achieved. The Gospel is read by the celebrant but in rare circunstances can be read by a deacon. We have an elderly retired priest who can barely see; he uses a huge magnifying glass for the Offertory prayers, much of it he knows by rote.
Now, if the minister in this case wore priestly vestments of even a Roman collar priestly suit defies the Canon.
Woman are NOT priests in the Holy Catholic Church and Protestants are NOT allowed to read the Gospel to the Faithful during Mass. Not even an “ordained Protestant woman.”
This flies-in-the-face of a valid Mass. While appreciated, the Canon extracts provided, only address the Consecration and oversteps the Gospel.
Some say this “mass” was illicit" some (me) say “invalid” one perception is wrong; the other correct.
There are NO gray areas in the conduct of the Mass. The Mass is NOT a kabuki improvisation; it is either valid, invalid (or illicit and that is borderline to invalid; not the other way around) .
As Catholics we cannot accept anything but VALID.
K
KCT
Guest
My husband and I were talking about Dan Rodrick’s column this morning. Dan’s right we live in a democracy, which means he’s free to join any church he wants.
Hopefully Archbishop O’Brien will use this opportunity to teach the faithful. It’s not likely the Sun will publish that, but hopefully he’ll use the Catholic Review to instruct. —KCT
Hopefully Archbishop O’Brien will use this opportunity to teach the faithful. It’s not likely the Sun will publish that, but hopefully he’ll use the Catholic Review to instruct. —KCT
B
baltobetsy
Guest
Baltimore is the premier see because it was the first diocese in the United States, the New World, for that matter.What is a premier see?
Does this man want the Holy Catholic Church to be a democracy?
And yes, Dan Rodricks wants the Holy Catholic Church to be a democracy. I am very familiar with his opinion columns, and he places greater emphasis on people’s feelings than anything else. This is an example of the dire situation of Baltimore Catholics, who for a very long time, have been left in the care of priests and bishops who let matters of truth and law and liturgy take second place to people’s feelings. God would never want anyone’s feelings hurt, would He? God would never want anyone disappointed, would He? God would never want anyone to be inconvenienced, would He? God would never want anyone to take up his cross and follow, would He? Oops.
Betsy
B
baltobetsy
Guest
Actually, the Gospel is to be read by the deacon, and may be read by the priest celebrant in the absence of a deacon. Just wanted to keep things accurate here. Sorry to be picky.
Betsy
J
johnstown_johnn
Guest
So then, we here in my parish are attending an illicit Mass? The celebrant reads the Gospel and follows with the Homily.
This has been the way I have known it all my life. Did Vatican 2 require deacons to read the Gospel? Is that Canon Law?
We here are missing something, aren’t we?
This has been the way I have known it all my life. Did Vatican 2 require deacons to read the Gospel? Is that Canon Law?
We here are missing something, aren’t we?
I
ImmaculataChamp
Guest
Bless the Bishop! 
T
tiggeriffic
Guest
YES!!!
We certainly are missing something. Now I know that by posting this I am opening up myself for all kinds of responses. I know some people are going to go completely crazy posting responses and telling me how horrible I am. I am sure some posters will quote the Catechism and some might even quote Canon Law to show me why my opinion is wrong. But I have sat by long enough and I have to say something. We are missing something - we are missing the whole point. I know every organization has to have rules or everything would be in total chaos. Believe me, I get that. I am a teacher and my classroom has rules just for that reason. But lets not loose sight of the important things when we get caught up in the rules. We are all followers of one of the biggest rule breakers there was. Jesus Christ broke all the rules in his day. He was radical and was even crucified for that. I was appalled when I read the post suggesting the family could have a law suit because of this. Come on folks - a law suit because the Gospel was read by someone other than the priest. Is the mass illicit or invalid - are the words any different when proclaimed by someone other than the priest? Is it the fact it was another denomination? or was it that she was a woman? I applaud this priest and I think he is just the progressive thinking type of person we need in our church. Tradition is beautiful, but we have to have growth too. Again, I reference Jesus as progressive and a mover and a shaker. He totally shook up what his followers were used to. Why are we so closed to the possibility of the Holy Spirit in our midst? Let’s not loose sight of the important things - in this case the important thing was to celebrate this womans life. Her family wanted this Episcopal Priest there to help do that. She proclaimed the Gospel - she did not spit on it, she did not do a strip tease, she did not speak ill of the Catholic Church - she proclaimed the Gospel.
We are way too worried about the small stuff folks, who can wash the vessels after communion, who can proclaim the Gospel, is it valid or not. You know how I feel about is it valid or not - the same way I do about people who ask “Did that mass count” when they attend a wedding or funeral or other special liturgy on the weekend. If you have to ask, then no it did not count!
Lets pay attention to the Holy Spirit and the prophets in our midst and work to build the Kingdom.
J
johnstown_johnn
Guest
There has to be decorum. In worship (Mass) there has to be discipline and continuity. Were we to just let an “everything goes that makes us feel good” then we would have a continuing improvisation from one Mass to the next.
The reason for orthodoxy and tradition is so that we have a foundation TO HAND DOWN TO OUR PROGENY.
If “anything goes” then there is NOTHING to be passed on.
Discipline and continuity is the foundation. Can’t build anything on a cracked foundation…not even a toolshed.
__
Peace
The reason for orthodoxy and tradition is so that we have a foundation TO HAND DOWN TO OUR PROGENY.
If “anything goes” then there is NOTHING to be passed on.
Discipline and continuity is the foundation. Can’t build anything on a cracked foundation…not even a toolshed.
__
Peace
M
Mary1973
Guest
This all comes down to one word: obedience. I remember when I was a child, when Father told you to something, you did not question it (not bad things). Priests were obedient to their bishops. After Vactican II, obedience was one of many things that was lost in the shuffle.
Archbishop O’Brien comes from the military. I am sure he takes obedience very seriously.
Archbishop O’Brien comes from the military. I am sure he takes obedience very seriously.
B
baltobetsy
Guest
If the deacon is present, he should read the Gospel. If there is no deacon present, the celebrant reads it. No problem. Does your deacon stand aside to allow the priest to read the Gospel? I’ll bet not.
Betsy
J
johnstown_johnn
Guest
The priest reads the Gospel while there is a deacon present. On occasion the deacon reads the Gospel.
However, it has always been the priest’s role to read the Gospel and deliver the Homily immediately after. Maybe they do things differently in Baltimore; they certainly do some innovative things here too.
However, it has always been the priest’s role to read the Gospel and deliver the Homily immediately after. Maybe they do things differently in Baltimore; they certainly do some innovative things here too.
B
baltobetsy
Guest
Interesting. Maybe it would make a good thread in Liturgy & Sacraments. Surely someone will have the relevant directions. We shouldn’t derail this thread further, do you think?
Betsy
J
johnstown_johnn
Guest
I really do not think the matter of reading the Gospel is off topic since it is reported the Protestant Woman Minister did read the Gospel at that “Mass.”
It is very much a part of the “liturgical abuse” and undoubtedly one of the many reasons the Catholic priest was fired. I don’t think this is a “derailment” since the abuses are the focus.
Do you agree?
- Status