Reporting use of Glass Chalice

[revert_jen]

1. What is to be done when there is no greater danger that this piece will be used illicitly than any other, but it is desired to keep it?
2. May such a piece ever be kept for sentimental reasons? Secular use?

I believe that it is not licit to use something that has been consecrated to God for secular use. A table that has been used once as an altar for Mass may or not be considered consecrated to God (not being a canon lawyer, I don’t know), but a Chalice purchased for the purpose of holding the Precious Blood almost certainly will be. I think you could keep it though. Maybe it would be OK to use it in the home as a holy water font? Or you could keep it in a treasured place I suppose and not use it at all. I think the problem is if you then use it as a wineglass or a candy dish or something, that would be sacrilege.

:twocents:

–Jen

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I am making a point. I have a feeling that individuals who use glass Chalices do not believe in the presence and believe it is only a symbol.

That’s a rather strange leap of logic. Perhaps this individual priest feels that the crystal chalice is a beautiful vessel for the blood of Christ. Its not as if he’s using a paper cup. He’s using something that many view to be elegant and beautiful.

My bigger question would be: is this really something to get upset about? So this priest is using a crystal chalice, big deal? What exactly is the motivation in reporting it? Is there a personal dislike for this individual and so someone feels the need to “get” him?

And while you can report this liturgically incorrect chalice to the office of the bishop, its 50/50 whether the bishop’s office will care all that much. At most a letter will go out to this individual priest reminding him of the norms but that will be that.

I fail to see how this could be distracting from the spiritual benefits of the Holy Sacrafice of the Mass.

 

[benedictgal]

That’s a rather strange leap of logic. Perhaps this individual priest feels that the crystal chalice is a beautiful vessel for the blood of Christ. Its not as if he’s using a paper cup. He’s using something that many view to be elegant and beautiful.

My bigger question would be: is this really something to get upset about? So this priest is using a crystal chalice, big deal? What exactly is the motivation in reporting it? Is there a personal dislike for this individual and so someone feels the need to “get” him?

And while you can report this liturgically incorrect chalice to the office of the bishop, its 50/50 whether the bishop’s office will care all that much. At most a letter will go out to this individual priest reminding him of the norms but that will be that.

I fail to see how this could be distracting from the spiritual benefits of the Holy Sacrafice of the Mass.

Maybe, with all due respect, Father, it’s because using a glass chalice goes against what is stated in Redemptionis Sacramentum. After all, the document terms such usage as reprobate.

 

[revert_jen]

My bigger question would be: is this really something to get upset about? So this priest is using a crystal chalice, big deal? What exactly is the motivation in reporting it? Is there a personal dislike for this individual and so someone feels the need to “get” him?

A person can be scandalized by the voluntary public disobedience of a priest during Mass without having a personal dislike of that priest. It is unwise to start down the road of deciding for one’s self which rules of the Church are important enough to obey and which are not. They’re all important enough.

It’s also unwise to assume the worst of people. This applies to the assumption that a person reporting a liturgical abuse has a “motivation” other than a wish that the liturgy would be celebrated licitly. It also applies to the assumption that a priest is being willfully disobedient when commiting the liturgical abuse, instead of being honestly in error about what is allowed.

Which is to say that it is possible that the priest doesn’t realize that he is breaking a rule. That’s why it’s always a good idea to go to the priest in question (alone, and not immediately after Mass) first. You know, “Father, I was reading Redemptionis Sacramentum and it said that glass chalices weren’t allowed, but it looked like the chalice used at Mass last Sunday was glass. See, here it is. I didn’t know if you had seen this part.” Then hopefully that will resolve the issue. If not, you could go up the chain from there.

–Jen

 

[sckcd]

I am making a point. I have a feeling that individuals who use glass Chalices do not believe in the presence and believe it is only a symbol.

The Catholic Church I have been attending uses glass.

 

[benedictgal]

The Catholic Church I have been attending uses glass.

That is cause for worry, as use of a glass “chalice” is reprobated under Redemptionis Sacramentum. This means that it is a liturgical abuse, a serious one. The document does not use reprobate casually. In fact, the only other instance where the word reprobate is found is when the document treats the highly ilicit practice of the priest breaking the host just prior to the consecration. RS also calls this particular practice reprobate.

You can read the whole document for yourself at:

adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html#anchor1186479

You might also find this article helpful, as it was written by a priest who was once in your shoes:

friarminor.blogspot.com/

As you are just beginning your journey into the Church, I don’t want to scare you. But, you still have the right to a Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that is properly celebrated according to the norms and rubrics of the Church… All of us have that right.

 

[sckcd]

I am going to double check this weekend if it’s glass or not. I think it was, but I sit in the very back and didn’t have the best view.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Maybe, with all due respect, Father, it’s because using a glass chalice goes against what is stated in Redemptionis Sacramentum. After all, the document terms such usage as reprobate.

Yes, it is liturgically incorrect to use a glass/crystal chalice. This priest is wrong. But this need to “report him” is problematic. Simply being right is not all there is to life.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

A person can be scandalized by the voluntary public disobedience of a priest during Mass without having a personal dislike of that priest. It is unwise to start down the road of deciding for one’s self which rules of the Church are important enough to obey and which are not. They’re all important enough.

Sorry, I don’t buy it. A glass/crystal chalice while incorrect is not exactly a denial of any dogmatic teaching of the Church. Yes it is a violation of liturgical norms but its not the end of the world here.

It’s also unwise to assume the worst of people. This applies to the assumption that a person reporting a liturgical abuse has a “motivation” other than a wish that the liturgy would be celebrated licitly. It also applies to the assumption that a priest is being willfully disobedient when commiting the liturgical abuse, instead of being honestly in error about what is allowed.

Its not assuming the worst to think that someone who is looking to “report” someone for a minor violation has some kind of ulterior motivtaion, its rather common sense. Perhaps they don’t have something against the priest, perhaps they just enjoy being right but spiritually mature adults don’t go around asking, “Where can I report my priest?” except for serious situations.

Which is to say that it is possible that the priest doesn’t realize that he is breaking a rule. That’s why it’s always a good idea to go to the priest in question (alone, and not immediately after Mass) first. You know, “Father, I was reading Redemptionis Sacramentum and it said that glass chalices weren’t allowed, but it looked like the chalice used at Mass last Sunday was glass. See, here it is. I didn’t know if you had seen this part.” Then hopefully that will resolve the issue. If not, you could go up the chain from there.

It is entirely possible the priest doesn’t know. College chaplains live in a world of their own. But there is no real “chain” to go up. The only thing that can be done is to report it to the bishop’s office and from there they may or may not address it with the priest.

 

[Gaudium86]

Sorry, I don’t buy it. A glass/crystal chalice while incorrect is not exactly a denial of any dogmatic teaching of the Church. Yes it is a violation of liturgical norms but its not the end of the world here.

With all due respect, Father, I disagree that liturgical violations are unimportant. Where does one draw the line between “unimportant” violations and “serious” ones? While violations such as the glass chalice seem small, an accretion of them turns our Catholic Mass into a simple meeting of well-intentioned people.

I recently moved from a wonderful diocese in Pennsylvania to a new diocese in Massachusetts. While I’ve finally found a parish in my city where the Mass and sacraments are offered as prescribed, it took three tries. At the first two parishes, I found startling deviations from liturgical norms. This is not to say that the priests at issue are bad people. Yet by (for instance) ad-libbing defined prayers and failing to offer a confessional screen, they were depriving me of the Catholic experience to which the Church has given me a right.

Its not assuming the worst to think that someone who is looking to “report” someone for a minor violation has some kind of ulterior motivtaion, its rather common sense. Perhaps they don’t have something against the priest, perhaps they just enjoy being right but spiritually mature adults don’t go around asking, “Where can I report my priest?” except for serious situations.

I did not report these violations to the bishop, as I’ve been busy with my new parish. Yet if I had, it certainly would not have been in an effort to just “get a priest in trouble.” While there are certainly a few unstable elements in every parish, I think most people have much better things to do with their time.

By the way, does anyone know if dioceses ever observe their priests after ordination or offer liturgical refreshers? To my mind, it would be much better if violations were dealt with internally. I get the impression that many people want to see abuses stop but don’t want to threaten their relationship with their priest by involving the bishop.

 

[Malkin71]

With all due respect, Father, I disagree that liturgical violations are unimportant. Where does one draw the line between “unimportant” violations and “serious” ones? While violations such as the glass chalice seem small, an accretion of them turns our Catholic Mass into a simple meeting of well-intentioned people.

I recently moved from a wonderful diocese in Pennsylvania to a new diocese in Massachusetts. While I’ve finally found a parish in my city where the Mass and sacraments are offered as prescribed, it took three tries. At the first two parishes, I found startling deviations from liturgical norms. This is not to say that the priests at issue are bad people. Yet by (for instance) ad-libbing defined prayers and failing to offer a confessional screen, they were depriving me of the Catholic experience to which the Church has given me a right.

I did not report these violations to the bishop, as I’ve been busy with my new parish. Yet if I had, it certainly would not have been in an effort to just “get a priest in trouble.” While there are certainly a few unstable elements in every parish, I think most people have much better things to do with their time.

By the way, does anyone know if dioceses ever observe their priests after ordination or offer liturgical refreshers? To my mind, it would be much better if violations were dealt with internally. I get the impression that many people want to see abuses stop but don’t want to threaten their relationship with their priest by involving the bishop.

That last paragraph sums it all up the best! I feel the same way too!

 

[zab]

zenit.org/article-8181?l=english

On the basis of these considerations I would say that in most cases glass is unsuitable material for use as a chalice, but the latitude provided in liturgical law does not allow for an outright prohibition.

 

[Malkin71]

Yes, it is liturgically incorrect to use a glass/crystal chalice. This priest is wrong. But this need to “report him” is problematic. Simply being right is not all there is to life.

If they know it is wrong to have a Glass Chalice, WHY HAVE ONE? Question, where do we draw the line? Hersays sprung up throughout history and have been confronted. If it hadn’t what shape would we be in? We are required to have a proper Mass. To celebrate Mass properly, ruberics should be followed. Having a glass chalice is against the ruberics.

What next grape kool aide instead of wine?

 

[zab]

If they know it is wrong to have a Glass Chalice, WHY HAVE ONE? Question, where do we draw the line? Hersays sprung up throughout history and have been confronted. If it hadn’t what shape would we be in? We are required to have a proper Mass. To celebrate Mass properly, ruberics should be followed. Having a glass chalice is against the ruberics.

What next grape kool aide instead of wine?

The link that I posted earlier answered the question about glass chalices and the final note was: "On the basis of these considerations I would say that in most cases glass is unsuitable material for use as a chalice, but the latitude provided in liturgical law does not allow for an outright prohibition." zenit.org/article-8181?l=english
Were the glass (or perhaps crystal) chalices donated? Perhaps at the time that these chalices were obtained it was not known that it was not really a good choice. What kind of budget does your campus chapel have? Could you have a fundraiser and even get the neighboring parish or parishes to contribute to purchase more appropriate chalices?

 

[Malkin71]

The link that I posted earlier answered the question about glass chalices and the final note was: "On the basis of these considerations I would say that in most cases glass is unsuitable material for use as a chalice, but the latitude provided in liturgical law does not allow for an outright prohibition." zenit.org/article-8181?l=english
Were the glass (or perhaps crystal) chalices donated? Perhaps at the time that these chalices were obtained it was not known that it was not really a good choice. What kind of budget does your campus chapel have? Could you have a fundraiser and even get the neighboring parish or parishes to contribute to purchase more appropriate chalices?

This is from the GIRM

usccb.org/liturgy/current/GIRM.pdf

III. SACRED VESSELS
327. Among the requisites for the celebration of Mass, the sacred vessels are held in special
honor, especially the chalice and paten, in which the bread and wine are offered and consecrated,
and from which they are consumed.
328. Sacred vessels are to be made from precious metal. If they are made from metal that rusts
or from a metal less precious than gold, then ordinarily they should be gilded on the inside.
329. 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. This applies to all vessels which hold the hosts, such as the paten,
the ciborium, the pyx, the monstrance, and other things of this kind.
330. As regards chalices and other vessels that are intended to serve as receptacles for the
Blood of the Lord, they are to have bowls of nonabsorbent material. The base, on the other hand,
may be made of other solid and worthy materials.

 

[zab]

This is from the GIRM

usccb.org/liturgy/current/GIRM.pdf

III. SACRED VESSELS
327. Among the requisites for the celebration of Mass, the sacred vessels are held in special
honor, especially the chalice and paten, in which the bread and wine are offered and consecrated,
and from which they are consumed.
328. Sacred vessels are to be made from precious metal. If they are made from metal that rusts
or from a metal less precious than gold, then ordinarily they should be gilded on the inside.
329. 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. This applies to all vessels which hold the hosts, such as the paten,
the ciborium, the pyx, the monstrance, and other things of this kind.
330. As regards chalices and other vessels that are intended to serve as receptacles for the
Blood of the Lord, they are to have bowls of nonabsorbent material. The base, on the other hand,
may be made of other solid and worthy materials.

I’m not disputing what the G.I.R.M. says.
What can you do to help provide the needed sacred vessels at your campus chapel?

 

[MusicMan]

If they know it is wrong to have a Glass Chalice, WHY HAVE ONE? Question, where do we draw the line? Hersays sprung up throughout history and have been confronted. If it hadn’t what shape would we be in? We are required to have a proper Mass. To celebrate Mass properly, ruberics should be followed. Having a glass chalice is against the ruberics.

What next grape kool aide instead of wine?

Do you honestly expect an Arian-esque or Lutheran-like group to splinter from the Catholic Church over the use of sacred vessels at Mass?

The material of a chalice is not dogmatic or part of beliefs. The rubrics of the Mass are disciplines of the Church.

 

[Mattapoisett64]

If they know it is wrong to have a Glass Chalice, WHY HAVE ONE? Question, where do we draw the line? Hersays sprung up throughout history and have been confronted. If it hadn’t what shape would we be in? We are required to have a proper Mass. To celebrate Mass properly, ruberics should be followed. Having a glass chalice is against the ruberics.

What next grape kool aide instead of wine?

Whatever else a glass chalice may be, it isn’t heresy. That’s h-e-r-e-s-y. And yes, it is against the rubrics. That’s r-u-b-r-i-c-s. And no, we’re not likely to have Kool-Aid at Mass. That’s A-i-d. And there was a period prior to the current clarification when glass / crystal chalices - particularly Waterford - seemed somewhat common in this area. The “why have one” response is likely that they were purchases or gifts from an earlier time.

 

[zab]

I’m not disputing what the G.I.R.M. says.
What can you do to help provide the needed sacred vessels at your campus chapel?

Sorry, I have mistaken you for the OP who was writing about the use of glass chalices at his “collage”

 

[centurionguard]

In my Archdiocese in Atlantic Canada (“New Brunswick”) one large parish with over 10,000 families has regrettably been using glass crystal chalices for over five years now.
Does the Archbishop know about it ? He clearly does but in his discretionary liberalized wisdom, he has sought to do absolutely nothing about it dispite numerous complaints.
Letters were sent to both the Canadian Nuncio and the Vatican to no avail.
It certainly doesn’t take five years to get an answer to this kind of liturgical abuse.
However; the clergy members adopting this abuse will give answer to it by their Creator.