Mass rules in extraodinary Circumstances

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I wouldn’t say “in reality”. But under normal circumstances, which would be 97% of the time.

While most of us in the free world, extraordinary circumstance may mean “never”, however somewhere in the world today there are many Catholics who are under persecution. We have a guest priest who’s Canonically Chaldean, but he’s biritual so he celebrates Latin Rite Mass for us. He has many stories about persecution and war, like times where he has to ask people to stay home and not come to Mass for fear that they will be killed. A touching point of that story is that while he did say private Mass for that Sunday, a boy still showed up anyway despite the threat to their lives. But anyway, just to show that these extraordinary circumstances do happen today.

I do not question the presents of extraordinary circumstances. What i do question is even undre those conditions is it right not to follow the rules. I think that is a gift not only to that priest and boy, but to everyone that hears the story in that it show no matter what we do what we have been told which is go to Mass.

 

[FrDavid96]

I do not question the presents of extraordinary circumstances. What i do question is even undre those conditions is it right not to follow the rules. I think that is a gift not only to that priest and boy, but to everyone that hears the story in that it show no matter what we do what we have been told which is go to Mass.

And that’s why it has to be a situation of “impossible” to say that the law does not apply. If one has the ability to follow the rules, then this must be done. It’s like the vestment example. If a priest has vestments available, he must use them. If vestments are truly “impossible” then the priest can still celebrate Mass. If someone stole all the vestments from that church, or if the government confiscated them, would we not likewise admire that same priest for still celebrating Mass even though he isn’t able to use vestments?

 

[JRKH]

And that’s why it has to be a situation of “impossible” to say that the law does not apply. If one has the ability to follow the rules, then this must be done. It’s like the vestment example. If a priest has vestments available, he must use them. If vestments are truly “impossible” then the priest can still celebrate Mass. If someone stole all the vestments from that church, or if the government confiscated them, would we not likewise admire that same priest for still celebrating Mass even though he isn’t able to use vestments?

But do I understand you to say though that the, “situation of ‘impossible’” would never apply to the species used?
For instance, I could easily see an “impossible” situation where a priest would might have nothing but bread and wine of “unknown” composition and “provenance”. Would he be forbidden from using these regardless of dire circumstances and the needs of the flock?

Peace
James

 

[ConstantineTG]

But do I understand you to say though that the, “situation of ‘impossible’” would never apply to the species used?
For instance, I could easily see an “impossible” situation where a priest would might have nothing but bread and wine of “unknown” composition and “provenance”. Would he be forbidden from using these regardless of dire circumstances and the needs of the flock?

Peace
James

We have to follow the right matter. Matter is the outward sign of the Sacrament, so an improper matter would be a wrong sign, therefore invalid Sacrament. If the composition is unknown, its best that the priest do not try to consecrate them (which means not have a Mass at all)

 

[ConstantineTG]

I do not question the presents of extraordinary circumstances. What i do question is even undre those conditions is it right not to follow the rules. I think that is a gift not only to that priest and boy, but to everyone that hears the story in that it show no matter what we do what we have been told which is go to Mass.

Sorry, I’m just commenting that you used the term “in reality” because to some people, “in reality” is what we would consider extreme or extraordinary situations. I never intended to put doubt that you believe extraordinary situations happen. I apologize.

Yes, that priest is truly blessed. His homilies are always interesting and beautiful because he shares his stories and they’re nothing short of inspiring. It puts everything in perspective, especially how we take our faith and our freedom for granted. People here on this board argue tirelessly about altar girls, CITH, standing or kneeling, etc., while there are people out there in this world who can’t even go to Mass without risking their lives. The priest moved from Iraq to Syria and now he’s here in Canada heading a parish of a small group of Chaldean Catholics in our area.

 

[JRKH]

We have to follow the right matter. Matter is the outward sign of the Sacrament, so an improper matter would be a wrong sign, therefore invalid Sacrament. If the composition is unknown, its best that the priest do not try to consecrate them (which means not have a Mass at all)

I must admit to being disappointed in this.
If, "God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham (Mt 3:9), it seems He would be able to, in extraordinary circumstances, provide the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus from extraordinary matter.
Further, it seems inconsevable to me that Our Loving Father would prefer we go without the Eucharist, [especially in highly stressful, crisis type, “impossible” situations rather than use some other matter to confect the Eucharist.
It sounds a bit Pharasitic to me.

Please understand, I am not questioning the Church’s teaching in this matter, but I have a difficult time understanding it.

Peace
James

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I must admit to being disappointed in this.
If, "God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham (Mt 3:9), it seems He would be able to, in extraordinary circumstances, provide the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus from extraordinary matter.
Further, it seems inconsevable to me that Our Loving Father would prefer we go without the Eucharist, [especially in highly stressful, crisis type, “impossible” situations rather than use some other matter to confect the Eucharist.
It sounds a bit Pharasitic to me.

Please understand, I am not questioning the Church’s teaching in this matter, but I have a difficult time understanding it.

Peace
James

I think that the problem lies in our modern hearing and understanding, and being in the west were for the most part we have no real ( I should say I have no real ) understanding of true scarafice.

Which is more of a show of love for the Lord, to go without the Eucharist if one is unable to obtain valid matter ( wheat bread and grape wine) or use a pop tart and cranberry jucie?

To go without because suiteble vesseles are can not be found ( IMHO paper and plactic are under no way ever exceptable)?

I see it no so much as what God can and can not do, But more as what we are asked to do.

as the story that ConstantineTG shared about the boy going to Mass how well are we in the west able to appresheate that. When we have so many here that look for reason not to go.

 

[FrDavid96]

But do I understand you to say though that the, “situation of ‘impossible’” would never apply to the species used?
For instance, I could easily see an “impossible” situation where a priest would might have nothing but bread and wine of “unknown” composition and “provenance”. Would he be forbidden from using these regardless of dire circumstances and the needs of the flock?

Peace
James

Even in a situation of “impossible” anything that goes to validity still has to be followed.

In a case like that, it could come down to exactly what the priest has available. Since we’re discussing hypotheticals here, it’s just not possible for us to describe or even imagine all the potential situations.

The wine is (believe it or not) easier to deal with than the bread. The vast majority of good quality wines would be valid matter, after we’ve eliminated the obvious ones like those labeled blueberry, cherry, etc, or sangria, or which otherwise state on the label that something has been added. If a priest is in a true emergency (or similar) situation and has access to a selection of wines, chances are that he would be able to pick one that would be valid matter. Most good quality wines already meet the standards for valid matter.

Breads though are a different story because most breads available on the shelf would not be (at least in my estimation) valid matter. This topic comes up often, and I’ve sometimes looked at the ingredients in different types of breads available in the store. The list of ingredients is so long that I would never even consider using them for Mass, no matter how dire the situation. If faced with that situation, I’d sooner get some wheat flour and bake my own.

If anything, pita bread made by a local bakery would be the best option. These are often made with only wheat, flour, yeast, and perhaps a little salt. But I would not use any from a commercial bakery (the national brands that we see in grocery stores). The problem here though is that because these cater to special markets, they’re not available everywhere.

The heart of the issue here is that unless the bread and wine are valid matter, there is no Eucharist. That’s what we have to keep in mind. If a priest uses bread that is not valid matter, no matter how much of an emergency it might be, he isn’t consecrating the Eucharist; it’s much worse to have a simulation of the Eucharist than it is to have no Eucharist at all. What I’m saying here is that it’s not an issue of “forbidden” as such, it’s an issue of whether or not the Eucharist is actually consecrated.

 

[JRKH]

FrDavid,
Thanks once again fro your patient explanations. I still stuggle with this but since we ARE talking about extremely unlikely situations, it won’t keep me up at nights.

One last question. Again - thinking only in a dire emergency “impossible” situation.
Your comment above about it being easier to get valid wine than valid bread. Would it be possible to do just the wine? After all, we are taught that each, on it’s own contains the fullness of Christ.

Peace
James

 

[Brendan]

I must admit to being disappointed in this.
If, "God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham (Mt 3:9), it seems He would be able to, in extraordinary circumstances, provide the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus from extraordinary matter.

How about that God will provide the GRACE of the Sacrament in extraordinary circumstances when we cannot partake of the Eucharist under the conditions God Himself set.

Why does one seek the Eucharist except for Grace. And if God offers that Grace in extraordinary ways in extraordinary times, what more do we really need?

But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”

2 Cor 12:9

 

[FrDavid96]

FrDavid,
Thanks once again fro your patient explanations. I still stuggle with this but since we ARE talking about extremely unlikely situations, it won’t keep me up at nights.

One last question. Again - thinking only in a dire emergency “impossible” situation.
Your comment above about it being easier to get valid wine than valid bread. Would it be possible to do just the wine? After all, we are taught that each, on it’s own contains the fullness of Christ.

Peace
James

That one’s easy to answer because the Church has already done so on many occasions. It’s absolutely forbidden for a priest to consecrate one-without-the-other. It would be valid, but it would be a most serious offense for the priest to so so. I don’t even know how a priest would go about this, because he would have to eliminate every reference to “bread” in the Mass and it would make for a very strange experience to say the least.

 

[JRKH]

To FrDavid and to all who have responded.

At this point, though I still don’t fully grasp the issues, I’m afraid further questioning would nor really further my understanding…It would only lead to a fruitless series of “what if’s” (if yoa know what I mean).

Thanks for the patience and the information.
It is greatly appreciated.

Peace
James

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

To FrDavid and to all who have responded.

At this point, though I still don’t fully grasp the issues, I’m afraid further questioning would nor really further my understanding…It would only lead to a fruitless series of “what if’s” (if yoa know what I mean).

Thanks for the patience and the information.
It is greatly appreciated.

Peace
James

You are most welcome. I do wish to apoligize if I have come across as mean spirited or lacking in compassion and understanding.

In things that I have a problem with I try to re,member that i do not need to and instead of praying for understanding I pray for acceptance.

 

[ConstantineTG]

That one’s easy to answer because the Church has already done so on many occasions. It’s absolutely forbidden for a priest to consecrate one-without-the-other. It would be valid, but it would be a most serious offense for the priest to so so. I don’t even know how a priest would go about this, because he would have to eliminate every reference to “bread” in the Mass and it would make for a very strange experience to say the least.

Wouldn’t it invalidate the Mass if the priest is not able to receive both species? Therefore if the priest consecrates the wine only, then you have a valid Sacrament in the Precious Blood of Christ, but otherwise the Mass itself is invalid because the sacrifice is not complete. It would have been as if the priest just went with the consecration outside of Mass. Strictly forbidden as well but still would produce a valid Sacrament.