Mass Out-of-Town

[SwizzleStick]

We attended a family reunion out-of-state over the weekend. As usual, before leaving we researched location and Mass times for a nearby Catholic Church so we could attend Mass on Sunday morning. While Mass was pretty much the same as usual, there were differences and also two abuses, I think. I do not think the validity of the Mass was affected, (I sure hope not). Perhaps someone can help clarify?

For the Profession of Faith, we recited the Apostle’s Creed instead of the Nicene Creed.

The chalice the priest used for the Consecration was made from a ceramic material, like pottery. I know the chalice is supposed to be made from a precious metal.

I believe these two things would be classified as liturgical abuses, but do not affect the validity of the Mass. Can anyone clarify for me?

 

[Corki]

Apostles Creed is sometimes allowed. Since this was a one time thing to attend this parish, I wouldn’t worry about it. (Same thing happened to me on my vacation last month)

Precious metal or other precious material is to be used for the altar vessels. Ceramic is definately not allowed. But this doesn’t affect validity at all - it is just tasteless.

Hope you had a good time at your reunion. Be at peace.

 

[MusicMan]

The Mass you attended was valid. Both of the concerns you had are violations of the rubrics, but they do not affect the validity of the Mass.

There are any number of reasons why a priest may elect to use the chalice you described, however, as you are well aware the rubrics do not allow for such a chalice to be used.

I have found in my short time on this earth that there are a number of priests who, during the summer, feel the need to shorten the Mass. Perhaps it’s because it’s Ordinary Time, and perhaps because the Faithful have their BBQs to get to – maybe even Father has been invited to dinner at a parishoner’s BBQ. The Gloria is omitted, the Creed is omitted, or in your case, the Apostle’s Creed is substituted.

I have never truly understood the need to do this. An hour isn’t that long to begin with, and there are many holy, orthodox priests who say Mass in less.

We have a delightful priest in our area who, prior to retirement, was pastor of the parish in the next town over. Upon his retirement, he remained in the area. When he says Mass, the Mass is so “read the black, do the red” that it’s almost scary. He said the Mass I attended this weekend. 40 minutes. No abuses. Full sermon (and a good one too). Nothing was rushed or hurried.

 

[SwizzleStick]

Thank you Corki and MusicMan. I tried not to let the issues make it a less prayerful Mass for me, but I couldn’t help but be concerned. I really don’t understand why this happens. One should be able to attend the same Liturgy at any given Catholic Church, but that just isn’t the case. At least it was a valid Mass with just a couple of issues. From what I’ve read here and other sites, things can be so much worse, so I’ll just count my blessings.

Thanks again!

 

[Joe_5859]

It would take a lot to make a Mass invalid. As long as the priest says “This is my body” and “This is my blood” and is using valid eucharistic matter (per GIRM 319 and 321), you can be pretty sure that the Mass is at least valid (even if gravely illicit).

As to the two things you spoke of, I’m not sure that they would even necessarily constitute abuses. I could be wrong (as I’m speaking from memory), but I believe it is permissible to use either the Apostle’s Creed or the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. (I believe that they ordinarily use the Apostle’s Creed in Canada, for instance). The GIRM 67 says that the Profession of Faith must be recited “in a formula approved for liturgical use”. One would have to check the liturgical books to see what forms are approved. I have a hard time imagining that the Apostle’s Creed would not be approved for use in the liturgy.

As for the chalice, although GIRM 328 says that they must be made “from precious metal”, GIRM 329 admits a concession and says that “In the dioceses of the United States of America, sacred vessels may also be made from other solid materials that, according to the common estimation in each region, are precious, for example, ebony or other hard woods, provided that such materials are suited to sacred use and do not easily break or deteriorate.” So, simply because the chalice was not made of precious metal does not mean necessarily that it was an abuse (although, it could have been).

I recall the story a priest friend of mine told me of his bishop (who shall remain nameless). Another priest approached the bishop with a handmade ceramic chalice that a family member had made for him and asked him if he could use it for Mass. The bishop knocked the chalice off the table onto the ground. When it did not break, the bishop said, “Yes, you can use it.”

 

[YADA]

For the Profession of Faith, we recited the Apostle’s Creed instead of the Nicene Creed.

The chalice the priest used for the Consecration was made from a ceramic material, like pottery. I know the chalice is supposed to be made from a precious metal.

The Apostle’s Creed is used at times [mostly at masses with lots of children, not sure why as the differences are not that great ]

The chalice may have a precious metal inside the bowl … our pastor uses a very beautiful chalice that is primarily a red ceramic with some gold trim and it contains a gold lining inside the bowl …*** it is an appropriate vessel*** but may not look like it … from afar …

Personally, I would not judge based upon the appearance of the outer shell …

 

[Joe_5859]

Thank you Corki and MusicMan. I tried not to let the issues make it a less prayerful Mass for me, but I couldn’t help but be concerned. I really don’t understand why this happens. One should be able to attend the same Liturgy at any given Catholic Church, but that just isn’t the case. At least it was a valid Mass with just a couple of issues. From what I’ve read here and other sites, things can be so much worse, so I’ll just count my blessings.

Thanks again!

Certainly, if those were the worst two things you found there, I’d consider switching parishes! (Especially seeing as they very well might not even be abuses.)

When I first became more devout in my faith in college and started learning more about the liturgy, I started seeing “abuses” everywhere I went outside the parish I went to at the time. When I moved away and was forced to confront it, I quickly realized (1) that I did not know nearly as much about the rubrics as I thought I did, and (2) many of the things I thought were abuses really weren’t. This realization really helped me to stop spending so much time keeping a mental checklist of abuses, and instead spend more time focusing on the Sacred Mysteries.

Of course, if something is blaringly wrong, I definitely still notice (and get irked) but I try not to let it steal my peace. Usually, it’s the little things that would bother me and still bother me, because, by and large, the parishes I’ve attended haven’t been bad. (For example, “why, oh why are they using oil candles rather than candles made from beeswax!”…That one still bugs me for some reason. But less so than it used to. )

 

[SenorSalsa]

I recall the story a priest friend of mine told me of his bishop (who shall remain nameless). Another priest approached the bishop with a handmade ceramic chalice that a family member had made for him and asked him if he could use it for Mass. The bishop knocked the chalice off the table onto the ground. When it did not break, the bishop said, “Yes, you can use it.”

thats quite the test.

I imagine that priest would have been pretty disappointed if it did not pass the test.