Glass Sacred Vessels

  • Thread starter Thread starter inmaddfox
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

inmaddfox

Guest
In January of 2006 we were told by our paster that any glass Secred Vessels needed to be replaced with ones that were at the very least plated with a precious metal, gold-silver.
It was also said that the bishop could see no reason to delay in accomplishing this.That makes it sound like the Catholic Church had a certain amount of time to get this done. If that is so, was there a deadling? Also was the January 2006 date that these instructions came down from the Magisterium? We are now almost half way through 2011 and there are still some parishes that are still using glass for their Sacred Vessels
 
There is no deadline as such, just ASAP.

I’m not sure where the 2006 date came from. Redemptionis Sacramentum was issued in March 2004, and expressly disapproves “any practice of using for the celebration of Mass common vessels, or others lacking in quality, or devoid of all artistic merit or which are mere containers, as also other vessels made from glass, earthenware, clay, or other materials that break easily.” But that wasn’t even new in 2004; it was just a restatement of existing regulations. If I had to guess, I might think that 2006 is either when your pastor found out about it, or when your bishop sent around a local directive ordering compliance with this norm.
 
Hello from Indianapolis! 😃

Someone more in the know might be able to give a better answer, but I’ll give it a shot.

I’m pretty sure precious metal was to be used the entire time. It might be that parishes were using glass and should not have been. So, Archbishop Buechlein put his foot down. Why there are still parishes using them, I cannot say. It’s likely that he’s not aware it’s still happening.
 
I had a post saying pretty much it has always been the case as far as I knew. The poster before me said it much be eloquently though 👍
 
I remember one pastor telling me that he “accidentally” dropped the “unbreakable” glass vessels once and then he said: “Guess what? They weren’t unbreakable.” Hilarious!
 
The_Curt_Jester said:
I remember one pastor telling me that he “accidentally” dropped the “unbreakable” glass vessels once and then he said: “Guess what? They weren’t unbreakable.” Hilarious!
Click to expand...
Maybe to you, I guess. Personally, I don’t find it “hilarious” at all, but more like a borderline act of sacrilege. Just because current norms do not approve of using glass for the sacred vessels doesn’t make it right to spit all over them. What’s next? Church norms require a tabernacle to be “fixed an immovable,” so if someone comes across an unfixed tabernacle and spray-paints graffiti on it, I suppose that would be an uproarious joke?

A little respect, please. A priest in a concentration camp might be forced to celebrate Mass with a coffee cup, but I’m sure he doesn’t abuse it for the lulz afterward just because it wasn’t a gem-encrusted chalice.
 
The_Curt_Jester said:
As a borderline sacrilege.
Click to expand...
Oh, I see – your little “hilarious” comment fell flat and you had no defense for it, so now you are simply looking for something controversial but completely unrelated to change the subject.

Let me try one: That’s how I view SSPX confessions. Or wait, how about: That’s how I view girl altar boys. Or, that’s how I view people getting blessings in the communion line? That’s how I view people complaining about people getting blessings in the communion line? 😉
 
MarkThompson said:
But that wasn’t even new in 2004; it was just a restatement of existing regulations.
Click to expand...
I believe the explicit rejection of glass was new in 2004; prior to that materials such as glass could in theory be permitted provided they did “not easily break or deteriorate.”
 
Digitonomy said:
I believe the explicit rejection of glass was new in 2004; prior to that materials such as glass could in theory be permitted provided they did “not easily break or deteriorate.”
Click to expand...
Hm, on checking, you seem to be right about that. Thanks.
 
Where does crystal lie in this liturgical law.
At my parish, our priest uses a crystal decanter.
 
Lead_Me_Home said:
Where does crystal lie in this liturgical law.
At my parish, our priest uses a crystal decanter.
Click to expand...
If the decanter is used before the consecration, to bring wine to the altar so that it can be divided among the several chalices, then that is perfectly fine. If the Precious Blood is being consecrated in the decanter and poured out subsequently, then per Redemptionis Sacramentum your real main problem is not the crystal:
106. However, the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the Blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls, or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms.
 
MarkThompson said:
Ma Just because current norms do not approve of using glass for the sacred vessels doesn’t make it right to spit all over them. .
Click to expand...
I hardly think using glass is “spitting” on the norms. “Ignoring” is far different than blatent revolt. Just sayin’ 😉
 
Newbie2 said:
I hardly think using glass is “spitting” on the norms. “Ignoring” is far different than blatent revolt. Just sayin’ 😉
Click to expand...
Deliberately smashing something on the floor and then laughing about it shows pretty much the level of disrespect I indicated. “Ignoring” the chalice would be if he left it in the back of some cupboard in the sacristy.
 
Lead_Me_Home said:
Where does crystal lie in this liturgical law.
At my parish, our priest uses a crystal decanter.
Click to expand...
That is fine for the Wine. But the Percious Blood should not be in glass or earthware as stated above. before concescration it is just wine. so it really does not matter what the container is made of.
 
TheMc said:
But it is. The church has made it perfectly clear that glass chalices are not to be used.
Click to expand...
I remember that in one of the Indiana Jones movies, Indy Jones chose wisely a cup of a carpenter, it wasn’t very fancy to say the least. Some priests I have talked to about their chalice didn’t want a fancy cup because Jesus probably didn’t have one.I have been told that it wasn’t until the eighth century that the Church started using chalices made of precious metal. I think that the whole point of using precious metal chalices, patens and ciboria, is to give glory to God. It is showing respect to provide the best vessels we can that will come in contact with the Body and Blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ. The thing about imulating what Jesus used is that they are not Jesus.
Hard fast rules in dire strates must be set aside, in parts of our world, there are Catholics that are attending clandestin masses for fear of their lives. I’m sure that any kind of cup
or bread will be fine, we’ll leave that to Jesus. But, not using the properly made vessels is just disobedience. I would like to know what the procedures are when a change is made through the Magisterium? I imagine it goes to the Bishops, then he sends it to his Parishes. The system has flaws. I see too many things that are going on and nothing seems to be done. Self Communicating, Glass vessels, self intinction, people not genuflecting. its like the people just don’t know what to do or how to do it properly.
As a EOMC I had to talk to someone after mass because He put the Host in his pocket. He wasn’t a young guy, I don’t understand why he didn’t know better. People are treating the Church as a social hall, loud talking, walking around, children running, its like only a few really understand who is in the Tabernacle and the reverance due Him. Some folks even older than I am say that V2 wanted us to be a more sharing friendly community. Well that’s just fine but do the sharing in the narthex.
While I’m on the stump, I think the Church doesn’t want to correct these problems is because their concerned about the donations. when people get upset they leave the parish or throw less cash in the basket.In the 1950’s about 75% of Catholics supported the Church. Now it is down to about 35%
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top