How do we dispose of glass chalices?

[jpoii]

Break them into very small pieces. Then you can burry them.

You do not need to break them it is covered in Canon Law that you can get a decree from the Bishop to remove the blessing from the vessel and then you may use the object for whatever you wish. Canon 1269 alludes to it and canon 1212 actually talks about the removal process.
They never have to be destroyed

 

[benedictgal]

You do not need to break them it is covered in Canon Law that you can get a decree from the Bishop to remove the blessing from the vessel and then you may use the object for whatever you wish. Canon 1269 alludes to it and canon 1212 actually talks about the removal process.
They never have to be destroyed

However, I don’t think that this particular Canon invisioned that reprobated material be used as a sacred vessel. Also bear in mind that one would have certain misgivings about using something that had contained the Precious Blood. Something in your response just doesn’t sit well.

Do you have the actual wording for the citations you mentioned? It would be helpful to actually read the texts before making a carte blanche application.

Incidentally, my former parish in Austin used glassware for the distribution of the Precious Blood. I hope that they now have the appropriate sacred vessels.

 

[jpoii]

However, I don’t think that this particular Canon invisioned that reprobated material be used as a sacred vessel. Also bear in mind that one would have certain misgivings about using something that had contained the Precious Blood. Something in your response just doesn’t sit well.

Do you have the actual wording for the citations you mentioned? It would be helpful to actually read the texts before making a carte blanche application.

Incidentally, my former parish in Austin used glassware for the distribution of the Precious Blood. I hope that they now have the appropriate sacred vessels.

No I do not have the wording right now but it comes code of canon law of 1983 and yes it applies to those reprobated material especially. The law is the law. I happen to know this because I just happen to be taking a cannon law class and we covered this last week. To quote my Professor a canon lawyer and who has a S.T.D. to the best of my memory said "The pastor can get the decree and then take them home and use the for dinner party glassware”.

Oh for those who do not know a S.T.D. stands for Sacred Theology Doctorate. It is a liturgical decree similar to a PHD:thumbsup:

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

You do not need to break them it is covered in Canon Law that you can get a decree from the Bishop to remove the blessing from the vessel and then you may use the object for whatever you wish. Canon 1269 alludes to it and canon 1212 actually talks about the removal process.
They never have to be destroyed

un-officially Canon 1269 says that what belongs to a parish church can only be transferred to another parish church, not to an individual. Canon 1212 is speaking of “Sacred places”. A chalice is not a “Sacred Place”.

Can. 1269 Sacred objects in private ownership may be acquired by private persons by
prescription, but they may not be used for secular purposes unless they have lost their
dedication or blessing. If, however, they belong to a public ecclesiastical juridical person,
they may be acquired only by another public ecclesiastical juridical person.

Can. 1212 Sacred places lose their dedication or blessing if they have been in great
measure destroyed, or if they have been permanently made over to secular usage, whether
by decree of the competent Ordinary or simply in fact.

Maybe Cameron can comment?

 

[benedictgal]

No I do not have the wording right now but it comes code of canon law of 1983 and yes it applies to those reprobated material especially. The law is the law. I happen to know this because I just happen to be taking a cannon law class and we covered this last week. To quote my Professor a canon lawyer and who has a S.T.D. to the best of my memory said "The pastor can get the decree and then take them home and use the for dinner party glassware”.

Oh for those who do not know a S.T.D. stands for Sacred Theology Doctorate. It is a liturgical decree similar to a PHD:thumbsup:

Here’s the thing, though. If you start throwing documents around, you’ve got to have the wording to back them up. I think it was a very crass thing for your professor to say.

 

[jpoii]

un-officially Canon 1269 says that what belongs to a parish church can only be transferred to another parish church, not to an individual. Canon 1212 is speaking of “Sacred places”. A chalice is not a “Sacred Place”.

Can. 1269 Sacred objects in private ownership may be acquired by private persons by
prescription, but they may not be used for secular purposes unless they have lost their
dedication or blessing. If, however, they belong to a public ecclesiastical juridical person,
they may be acquired only by another public ecclesiastical juridical person.

Can. 1212 Sacred places lose their dedication or blessing if they have been in great
measure destroyed, or if they have been permanently made over to secular usage, whether
by decree of the competent Ordinary or simply in fact.

Maybe Cameron can comment?

did you read the commentary along with it? Yes the main thrust was places as I recall but toward the end of the commentary it is where objects are brought in.

 

[jpoii]

Here’s the thing, though. If you start throwing documents around, you’ve got to have the wording to back them up. I think it was a very crass thing for your professor to say.

Sorry it offended you, but the point was without the blessing there is nothing special about it

 

[lizaanne]

Sorry it offended you, but the point was without the blessing there is nothing special about it

So - without the blessing, the fact that it once held the blood of Jesus Christ is nothing special!!

Wow - am I glad that I still function under my own common sense in the world. I have never heard of anything more ridiculous in my life.

~Liza

 

[benedictgal]

Sorry it offended you, but the point was without the blessing there is nothing special about it

How do you know that these items weren’t blessed? I don’t think that the OP mentioned that they had not been.

 

[Daprato]

A blessed or consecrated object that no longer has any use should be properly disposed of, so that it cannot possibly be misused.

In depends on the circumstance and the chalices themselves.

If the chalices were actually consecrated (not too likely as that is no longer the practice) it might indeed be best to destroy them. If they are blessed however it would be wrong to destroy them if they were significant vessels (ex. Waterford) that could be employed elsewhere in the parish in a liturgical use. At my parish consecrated or not, if they were significant enough – works of art or very historical, they would go into our parish museum.

Better yet, carefully package and label them and place them in safe storage. One day your new vessels will need to be set out to be re-plated and you can place these vessels back into service for the month or two your other ones will be gone.

They could also be used if you happen to have a large outdoor Mass for a special celebration and would rather not buy more gold vessels for the once or twice a year event.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

In depends on the circumstance and the chalices themselves.

If the chalices were actually consecrated (not too likely as that is no longer the practice) it might indeed be best to destroy them. If they are blessed however it would be wrong to destroy them if they were significant vessels (ex. Waterford) that could be employed elsewhere in the parish in a liturgical use. At my parish consecrated or not, if they were significant enough – works of art or very historical, they would go into our parish museum.

Better yet, carefully package and label them and place them in safe storage. One day your new vessels will need to be set out to be re-plated and you can place these vessels back into service for the month or two your other ones will be gone.

They could also be used if you happen to have a large outdoor Mass for a special celebration and would rather not buy more gold vessels for the once or twice a year event.

You can never place glass or crystal chalices “back into service” licitly, even temporarily.

 

[benedictgal]

You can never place glass or crystal chalices “back into service” licitly, even temporarily.

Amen to that! Although, I think that the only notable exceptions to using glassware was during the Mexican Revolution of the early 20th century. In one of Blessed Miguel Pro’s biographies, there is an account that he had to use glassware as a chalice. The Mexican clergy had to hide the precious vessels to keep them out of the hands of the anti-clerical regime. Once Blessed Miguel concluded the Mass, the glassware was smashed and reverently buried. They had to move quickly and quietly, lest the soldiers and police had the opportunity to arrest everyone for attending a forbidden service.

But, that is the exception and not the norm. So, Marauder, there is a precedent for glassware, but only under EXTREME circumstances, and, as is documented in Pro’s biographies, the glassware was broken and buried.

 

[Daprato]

You can never place glass or crystal chalices “back into service” licitly, even temporarily.

Actually prior to RS, a Waterford crystal chalice in Ireland would have been most appropriate per the GIRM. Someone said in an earlier posting that crystal was never appropriate and that’s not true.

I guess it comes down to the fact that many parishes do not have the means for two complete sets of chalices and ciboria and that using old crystal chalices would be far superior than cheap stemware and glass candy dishes – or unbreakable lexan or aluminum.

 

[Marauder]

But, that is the exception and not the norm. So, Marauder, there is a precedent for glassware, but only under EXTREME circumstances, and, as is documented in Pro’s biographies, the glassware was broken and buried.

You keep acting like I say I approve of the use of the crystal during a normal Mass. I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT. All I have been talking about is the fact that you and others keep saying the ONLY option is to destory them. That is not the case. You have yet to provide proof of that. I have provided a source that says that a “unservicable” chalice can be reused in another sacred manner. Have you provided ANYTHING other then your feelings to say otherwise?

By the way, the only approved use of glassware wasn’t in the cases you mentioned. Actually any place where hardship would require it would allow the case. If Maximillian Kolbe had a glass to use in the concentration camp, it would be allowed. If members of the true Catholic church in China in prison or other places can only find glassware they would be allowed to use it. You are acting like it is a MAJOR violation. Yes it is a liturgical abuse, but it doesn’t in any way affect the validity of the Mass.

 

[benedictgal]

You keep acting like I say I approve of the use of the crystal during a normal Mass. I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT. All I have been talking about is the fact that you and others keep saying the ONLY option is to destory them. That is not the case. You have yet to provide proof of that. I have provided a source that says that a “unservicable” chalice can be reused in another sacred manner. Have you provided ANYTHING other then your feelings to say otherwise?

By the way, the only approved use of glassware wasn’t in the cases you mentioned. Actually any place where hardship would require it would allow the case. If Maximillian Kolbe had a glass to use in the concentration camp, it would be allowed. If members of the true Catholic church in China in prison or other places can only find glassware they would be allowed to use it. You are acting like it is a MAJOR violation. Yes it is a liturgical abuse, but it doesn’t in any way affect the validity of the Mass.

Maurader, it is a major violation. You are the one who has not provided sufficient documentation. Whatever you did provide was somewhat flawed. It seems like the only one making any sense here is Brother Rich.

 

[benedictgal]

Actually prior to RS, a Waterford crystal chalice in Ireland would have been most appropriate per the GIRM. Someone said in an earlier posting that crystal was never appropriate and that’s not true.

I guess it comes down to the fact that many parishes do not have the means for two complete sets of chalices and ciboria and that using old crystal chalices would be far superior than cheap stemware and glass candy dishes – or unbreakable lexan or aluminum.

If you can provide the appropriate citation, that might help. However, the documents still say that it must be a precious metal.

 

[Marauder]

Maurader, it is a major violation. You are the one who has not provided sufficient documentation. Whatever you did provide was somewhat flawed. It seems like the only one making any sense here is Brother Rich.

Yes I have provided documentation. By the way if you remember right Brother Rich agreed with ME in theory. All you would have to do is search on the phrase I gave and you would have turned up the link. But since you didn’t even try here is the link.

catholicity.com/encyclopedia/v/vessels,altar.html

You have yet to provide ANYTHING that says it must be destroyed. Also it is a liturgical abuse to use glassware. It does not affect the validity of the Mass in any way. Major abuses mess with the validity of the Mass, using glassware isn’t a major abuse. Note: Since I have to be real clear with you, I am not suggesting people use glassware, I am only saying it isn’t a MAJOR abuse, one which affects validity, to use it.

A chalice which becomes unserviceable is not to be sold, but should, if possible, be used for some sacred purpose.

 

[benedictgal]

Yes I have provided documentation. By the way if you remember right Brother Rich agreed with ME in theory. All you would have to do is search on the phrase I gave and you would have turned up the link. But since you didn’t even try here is the link.

catholicity.com/encyclopedia/v/vessels,altar.html

You have yet to provide ANYTHING that says it must be destroyed. Also it is a liturgical abuse to use glassware. It does not affect the validity of the Mass in any way. Major abuses mess with the validity of the Mass, using glassware isn’t a major abuse. Note: Since I have to be real clear with you, I am not suggesting people use glassware, I am only saying it isn’t a MAJOR abuse, one which affects validity, to use it.

Glassware is still reprobated.

 

[Marauder]

Glassware is still reprobated.

It’s like arguing with a wall. I have NEVER said that someone should use glassware during a normal Mass.

 

[lizaanne]

It seems like the only one making any sense here is Brother Rich.

Hey wait! I make sense too!

~Liza