Should I attend illicit mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jackpuffin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jackpuffin

Guest
Hi! I’m a student at USC, and the priest here does things very illicitly. The Sunday masses are bearable, but the Wed. night masses are almost unbearable. We sit in a circle, and a student reads the gospel. For a homily we all just “talk”. Then, for the Eucharistic part of the liturgy, we all stand in a circle, and the priest hands us some bread chunk (which may or may not be valid matter), which we are all to consume in unison as a sign of community. It gets so out of hand that sometimes people are laughing disrespectfully during the reception of communion. One student could barely contain himself as he was trying to drink the precious blood of Christ. I have been attending these masses in order to get to know the community and somehow affect a change in things through person to person contact. As well, I tend to keep the “homilies” in the boundaries of orthodoxy. It is sad to see such sacrilege, but should I attend in hopes of evangelizing these poor people?
 
What you should do is document this all, bring it to the Priest’s attention and write your Bishop. All should be done very respectfully of course.
 
Yes I agree. Keep exact records of what is going on and get in touch with the Chancery’s offic immediately. This is clearly an abuse.
40.png
Sanctus:
What you should do is document this all, bring it to the Priest’s attention and write your Bishop. All should be done very respectfully of course.
 
If by “chunk” you mean leavened bread, it’s not even valid. How about the words of the Consecration? You’ve definitely at least hit the mark with illicit. You might want to tape record it and bring it to the bishop. You should definitely write the priest and carbon the bishop. Put everything in writing or on tape for evidence.
 
40.png
bear06:
If by “chunk” you mean leavened bread, it’s not even valid. How about the words of the Consecration? You’ve definitely at least hit the mark with illicit. You might want to tape record it and bring it to the bishop. You should definitely write the priest and carbon the bishop. Put everything in writing or on tape for evidence.
I agree with you on everything other than your first statement. The use of levened bread I don’t believe makes it invalid…illicit, yes, but not invalid. The only reason I think this is because a Latin Rite priest traveling in the East may use levened bread if none other is avaliable and vica versa. Source.

That coupled with an article from James Akin should give jackpuffin some peace

The Following was taken from: This Rock

Matter

The matter required for a valid celebration of the Eucharist consists of wheat bread and grape wine (CIC 924). In the Latin Rite of the Church, the bread must be unleavened for a licit celebration (CIC 926). In all rites of the Church, the wine must be mixed with a small quantity of water for a licit celebration. However, neither the presence of water nor the absence of leaven is needed for a valid celebration.

This is all, however, void if the words of concecration are fooled with, changed, ommited etc.

Respectfully,

Joseph
 
jackpuffin, are you serious? Are you sure this is a Catholic mass? Anyway, when I went to Catholic high school in another town, we had service at this one church near the school and they always used leavened bread and made us hold hands and all that other fancy stuff.
 
40.png
Sanctus:
I agree with you on everything other than your first statement. The use of levened bread I don’t believe makes it invalid…illicit, yes, but not invalid. The only reason I think this is because a Latin Rite priest traveling in the East may use levened bread if none other is avaliable and vica versa. Source.

That coupled with an article from James Akin should give jackpuffin some peace

The Following was taken from: This Rock

Matter

The matter required for a valid celebration of the Eucharist consists of wheat bread and grape wine (CIC 924). In the Latin Rite of the Church, the bread must be unleavened for a licit celebration (CIC 926). In all rites of the Church, the wine must be mixed with a small quantity of water for a licit celebration. However, neither the presence of water nor the absence of leaven is needed for a valid celebration.

This is all, however, void if the words of concecration are fooled with, changed, ommited etc.

Respectfully,

Joseph

Mea Culpa! I’ve read the below a few times and I thought yeast was listed. For a little more info…​

From James Akin’s the Question Box, Nazareth Resource Library cin.org/users/james/questions/q101.htm
Q: What ingredients can be used in making the bread that is consecrated during the Eucharist, and how does it affect the validity of the consecration if other ingredients are used?

A: In the Latin Rite of the Church the bread is to be made with wheat and water only. Nothing may be added to the recipe, and the introduction of materials such as baking powder, salt, and honey render the bread that is used illicit. In the Eastern Rites, leaven may be added to the bread.

Here is what Inestimabile Donum, the Church’s most recent major statement on liturgical abuses, states:

“The bread for the celebration of the Eucharist, in accordance with the tradition of the whole Church, must be made solely of wheat, and, in accordance with the tradition proper to the Latin Church, it must be unleavened. By reason of the sign, the matter of the Eucharistic celebration ‘should appear as actual food.’ This is to be understood as linked to the consistency of the bread, and not to its form, which remains the traditional one. No other ingredients are to be added to the wheaten flour and water. The preparation of the bread requires attentive care to ensure that the product does not detract from the dignity due to the Eucharistic bread, can be broken in a dignified way, does not give rise to excessive fragments, and does not offend the sensibilities of the faithful when they eat it” (Inestimabile Donum 8).

And the Code of Canon Law states:

“The bread must be made of wheat alone and recently made so that there is no danger of corruption” (CIC 924:2).

This means that any admixture of any other substance renders the use of the bread for consecration automatically illicit (unlawful). Concerning the issue of what happens to the validity of the consecration (i.e., whether Transubstantiation occurs), here is what Fr. Nicholas Halligan, one of the foremost sacramental theologians in the country, has to say in his manual of sacramental theology:

"The requisite material for the celebration of the Eucharist and the confection of the sacrament is only weaten bread, recently made whereby the danger of corruption is avoided… Unleavened bread alone is to be used in the Latin Rite.

"The bread must be made from wheat, mixed with natural water, baked by the application of fire heat (including electric cooking) and substantially uncorrupted. The variety of the wheat or the region of its origin does not affect its validity, but bread made from any other grain is invalid material. Bread made with milk, wine, oil, etc., either entirely or in a notable part, is invalid material. The addition of a condiment, such as salt or sugar, is unlwaful but valid, unless added in a notable quantity. Unbaked dough or dough fried in butter or cooked in water is invalid matter; likewise bread which is corrupted substantially, but not if it has merely begun to corrupt…

“The bread must be of wheat flour and only in case of necessity a white material thrashed or crushed from wheat. It must be free from mixture with any other substance besides flour and water. It is gravely unlawful to consecrate with doubtful matter. Altar breads must be fresh or recently baked and must not be allowed to get mouldy, which condition varies with regions, climates, etc.” (Nicholas Halligan, The Sacraments and Their Celebration, {New York: Alba House, 1986}, 65-66).

INAESTIMABILE DONUM
Instruction Concerning Worship Of The Eucharistic Mystery
ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2INAES.HTM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top