How do we dispose of glass chalices?

[roymckenzie]

Actually it is a chalice. Glass has been used in the past for chalices. Read the Catholic encyclopedia for examples. Even one of the earliest chalices that was thought at one time to be the Holy Grail was in fact glass. The church has said that glass is not valid for ordinary Mass but it doesn’t affect the validity of the Mass in any way. The wine still becomes the precious blood. It is a practice of the church that glass is not to be used both due to the fact that it is breakable and most glass is considered not a high enough quality to be considered a noble material.

Actually you are wrong there. Wonder Bread would still become the body of Christ. Any wheat containing bread becomes the body of Christ. Use of bread that contains anything other then wheat and water makes it illicit (except you can add yeast in Eastern rite) but it is still valid matter. The farther you get from the wheat/water combination the more illicit it is, but in unusual situations like concentration camps, prison, etc. different bread materials have been used. But hosts consisting of wheat and water only should be used for Masses except for extraodinary circumstances.

Matthew Arnold did a great study on the Holy Grail and I believe he has strong evidence that is now in Portugal and made of metal. I have serious doubts that the Jews of Jesus day would have use glass for their Passover meal. Remember the Passover Meal was to be acted out as if they were eating the last meal right before they hit the road for the promised land. It seems to me that getting ready for the road in those days glass would have been hard to keep in one piece.

You are saying that any wheat bread can be the Eucharist but I can not find a single respectable Catholic reference to support that position. An example of what I have found can be located at newadvent.org/cathen/01349d.htm . If you have an example of where Wonder Bread is allows for the Holy Eucharist please post it so I can know.

 

[Marauder]

Matthew Arnold did a great study on the Holy Grail and I believe he has strong evidence that is now in Portugal and made of metal.

I never said it was the Holy Grail, just that it was thought to have been the Holy Grail. See the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on chalices for an explanation.

You are saying that any wheat bread can be the Eucharist but I can not find a single respectable Catholic reference to support that position.

Obviously you won’t find something that says Wonder Bread will not validly become the Body because that is to specific. I also don’t know the exact ingrediants of Wonder Bread so I can’t say if it contains wheat.

See the following for a good article on what would make something invalid vs. illicit. Pay close attention to the quoted section at the end.

cin.org/users/james/questions/q101.htm

I have to look a little more for a better example, but I have heard it discussed in situations similar to Maximillian Kolbe in a concentration camp. Basically in the end it came down to that even if he found a wheat cracker, it could become the body of Christ validly. The key is that it has to be wheat based, if not then it is definitly invalid. The farther you get from wheat and water the more illicit it becomes.

As I said before, using anything other then wheat flour and water under normal circumstances is illicit and in normal situations why tempt the validity of the Mass.

Here is a quote from a Catholic Answers site:

The addition of any other ingredients to the wheat bread and grape wine render the celebration *illicit. *If the additions are of notable quantity, the matter has doubtful validity. If the additions are significant enough that, in the judgment of reasonable men, the matter no longer consists of wheat bread and grape wine, then the matter is invalid.

 

[roymckenzie]

I never said it was the Holy Grail, just that it was thought to have been the Holy Grail. See the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on chalices for an explanation.

Obviously you won’t find something that says Wonder Bread will not validly become the Body because that is to specific.

See the following for a good article on what would make something invalid vs. illicit. Pay close attention to the quoted section at the end.

cin.org/users/james/questions/q101.htm

I have to look a little more for a better example, but I have heard it discussed in situations similar to Maximillian Kolbe in a concentration camp. Basically in the end it came down to that even if he found a wheat cracker, it could become the body of Christ validly. The key is that it has to be wheat based, if not then it is definitly invalid. The farther you get from wheat and water the more illicit it becomes.

As I said before, using anything other then wheat flour and water under normal circumstances is illicit and in normal situations why tempt the validity of the Mass.

I am thinking the source you provide “cin.org/users/james/questions/q101.htm” clearly states Wonder Bread as invalid matter. According to USAToday usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-29-wonderbread_x.htm?csp=34 Wonder Bread has 20 other ingredients besides flower, water, yeast and salt.

 

[Marauder]

I am thinking the source you provide clearly states Wonder Bread as invalid matter. According to USAToday usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-29-wonderbread_x.htm?csp=34 Wonder Bread has 20 other ingredients besides flower, water, yeast and salt.

Like I said, I am not sure about the ingrediants of Wonder Bread itself so I can’t be sure whether it can be, but whether it could or not in the extraordinary sense like Maximillian Kolbe’s situation depends on many factors, but to tempt that type of stuff in the normal situation isn’t a good idea. Also, except in extraordinary senses I doubt a priest would have the proper intent if they were trying to bless Wonder bread.

I am still looking for the discussion in respect to the Maximillian Kolbe situation. This is also diverging from the topic.

 

[Leopard]

…I am not suggesting that the congregation rush the Sanctuary but I am suggesting that the sacristan or other church official should be free to destroy such objects.

In my experience, sacristans have limited authority when it comes to destroying or discarding church property. In general, sacristans may have authority to dispose of consumable or perishable materials that are past usefulness, such as unconsecrated altar breads, wine, candles, etc., and they may have authority to retire certain objects not usually considered consumable or perishable, such as linens worn or stained beyond repair.

But this authority usually does not extend to permanent objects. Rather the opposite, the sacristan has the duty to care for and protect these objects if a priest to whom the sacristan is responsible has decided that those objects will be used in masses he celebrates. If it happens that those objects are not licit for use in the mass, it is the priest who will be answerable for his actions to his superiors and to God, not the sacristan.

If the sacristan has been ordered by the pastor of other legitimate ecclesial authority to destroy certain glass vessels, then it would be appropriate for him or her to do so. But the sacristan should not arbitrarily decide that he or she may do so on his or her own authority.

 

[roymckenzie]

Like I said, I am not sure about the ingrediants of Wonder Bread itself so I can’t be sure whether it can be, but whether it could or not in the extraordinary sense like Maximillian Kolbe’s situation depends on many factors, but to tempt that type of stuff in the normal situation isn’t a good idea. Also, except in extraordinary senses I doubt a priest would have the proper intent if they were trying to bless Wonder bread.

I am still looking for the discussion in respect to the Maximillian Kolbe situation. This is also diverging from the topic.

In my memory of the events that St Kolbe used valid matter that his friends snuck into the camp… I have trouble believing that St Kolbe would ever use illicit material.

 

[Marauder]

In my memory of the events that St Kolbe used valid matter that his friends snuck into the camp… I have trouble believing that St Kolbe would ever use illicit material.

The discussion was a theoretical discussion, not about what actually did happen. It was similar to “If someone gave Maximillian Kolbe a wheat cracker, would it become the body of Christ” and the answer was Yes. But since I can’t find the discussion online anymore I guess I don’t have proof the discussion existed. So I guess I will conceed that point.

But it doesn’t change the fact that a glass chalice is still a chalice, even if it is an illicit chalice. The fact that glass currently can not be used for chalices is a practice of the church, that is changeable if the church as a whole wishes it. Just because something is made of what is now considered illicit material doesn’t make it invalid. Just like a host with a couple extra ingredients doesn’t make it invalid, just illicit. If a glass chalice was intended to be a chalice and carried the blood of Christ it should be assumed it is a chalice and treated like one. Thus to get rid of a glass chalice it should either be re-used in some other sacred manner or destroyed and buried.

 

[benedictgal]

The discussion was a theoretical discussion, not about what actually did happen. It was similar to “If someone gave Maximillian Kolbe a wheat cracker, would it become the body of Christ” and the answer was Yes. But since I can’t find the discussion online anymore I guess I don’t have proof the discussion existed. So I guess I will conceed that point.

But it doesn’t change the fact that a glass chalice is still a chalice, even if it is an illicit chalice. The fact that glass currently can not be used for chalices is a practice of the church, that is changeable if the church as a whole wishes it. Just because something is made of what is now considered illicit material doesn’t make it invalid. Just like a host with a couple extra ingredients doesn’t make it invalid, just illicit. If a glass chalice was intended to be a chalice and carried the blood of Christ it should be assumed it is a chalice and treated like one. Thus to get rid of a glass chalice it should either be re-used in some other sacred manner or destroyed and buried.

Marauder, your comments still do not negate the fact that Cardinal Arinze noted that glassware is forbidden. What part of that do you not understand? Did you not read his comments?

There were notable exceptions, like St. Maximilian Kolbe and Blessed Miguel Pro, but this existed during the time of persecution. Those were exceptions. The rule has been “no glassware”. As I said before, are you willing to argue with the good Cardinal on that one?

 

[Marauder]

Marauder, your comments still do not negate the fact that Cardinal Arinze noted that glassware is forbidden. What part of that do you not understand? Did you not read his comments?

There were notable exceptions, like St. Maximilian Kolbe and Blessed Miguel Pro, but this existed during the time of persecution. Those were exceptions. The rule has been “no glassware”. As I said before, are you willing to argue with the good Cardinal on that one?

See post #72 where I already discussed this when you brought up Cardinal Arinze’s quote before. I have never advocated using glass at a Mass. This thread only deals with the disposition of a glass chalice after it has been used.

Honestly having a discussion with you is like having a discussion with a wall.

 

[benedictgal]

See post #72 where I already discussed this when you brought up Cardinal Arinze’s quote before. I have never advocated using glass at a Mass. This thread only deals with the disposition of a glass chalice after it has been used.

Honestly having a discussion with you is like having a discussion with a wall.

But, in the previous post you wrote, you were still defending the practice. Just accept the fact that glassware is prohibited and that they must be destroyed. You just don’t seem to get it.

 

[Marauder]

But, in the previous post you wrote, you were still defending the practice. Just accept the fact that glassware is prohibited and that they must be destroyed. You just don’t seem to get it.

Where did I defend the use of chalices? Point it out to me. You have yet to point to any document that says a glass chalice must be destoryed. I have pointed to a document that says a chalice that is “unservicable” must be reused in a sacred manner OR destroyed. You are the one that doesn’t “get it” because you continue manifest something that is different from the teachings of the church.

 

[Marauder]

Where did I defend the use of chalices? Point it out to me.

Ooops typo. Should have said “Where did I defend the use of glass chalices? Point it out to me.”