Was this Mass valid?

[marko1967]

Hello everyone,

My wife and I attended Mass at a local church, and the priest used a glass chalice. I thought that the chalice had to be made of a material that cannot break, but I am not sure. Is this the case? Is this Mass valid? I have other issues with this church (non-Priest or non-Deacon doing homilies, other liturgical prohibitions, etc) but that’s for another time and place.

All relevant comments are welcome.

God Bless everyone during the interregnum and beyond!

Mark

 

[Genesis315]

marko1967:

Hello everyone,

My wife and I attended Mass at a local church, and the priest used a glass chalice. I thought that the chalice had to be made of a material that cannot break, but I am not sure. Is this the case? Is this Mass valid? I have other issues with this church (non-Priest or non-Deacon doing homilies, other liturgical prohibitions, etc) but that’s for another time and place.

All relevant comments are welcome.

God Bless everyone during the interregnum and beyond!

Mark

Using the glass chalice is illicit, but it does not affect the validity of the Mass. A glass chalice does not prevent the wine from becoming Jesus’ Blood.

 

[stbruno]

Luckily our sacraments, basically are priest proof.Therefore, I believe this mass is valid. As long as the priest was validly ordained and is using the rubrics of the mass, particularly the Eucharistic prayer which includes the Consecration of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. Unfortunately, a glass chalice is frowned on and not recommended for the simple reason that it may be broken and the Sacred Blood would be scattered unable to be retrieved. That is why even when receiving the Eucharist in 2 species the extra cups should not be made of glass and should be poured into their respective chalices prior to consecration.

 

[rcn]

Genesis315:

Using the glass chalice is illicit

Not necessarily. The diocese may be slow in mandating “Redemptionis Sacramentum”. I have read that various dioceses have asked for clarification and possibly even permission (indult) to continue with practices such as the use of flagons at consecration time, etc. So making blanket statements like “a glass chalice is illicit” is premature at best.

 

[Genesis315]

rcn:

Not necessarily. The diocese may be slow in mandating “Redemptionis Sacramentum”. I have read that various dioceses have asked for clarification and possibly even permission (indult) to continue with practices such as the use of flagons at consecration time, etc. So making blanket statements like “a glass chalice is illicit” is premature at best.

How about this: using a glass chalice is a no-no.

 

[msproule]

It is accurate to describe this practice as “illicit”. There is no such indult (which can only come from the Pope). Here is an exhaustive answer to the question with all of the proper references:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=13136&highlight=glass+chalice

Furthermore, the practice of consecrating the wine in a flagon (of any material) and then pouring the Precious Blood into chalices for distribution after the Consecration is expressly forbidden. It was once allowed in the United States but that permission was later rescinded for good reason (danger of spillage). When the United States submitted a dubium to allow the continuation of this practice, the Holy See responded in the negative.

The fact that some areas are slow to adopt the norms does not necessarily matter. The norms have been clearly stated. The contrary practices are still illicit. Keep in mind that this does not affect the validity of the Consecration.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Here’s an interesting possible poll question:

Which illicit material do you prefer your chalices to be made of:

Glass?

Clay?

On second thought, nah. The rads will just hijack the thread, claiming they’ve never seen a glass chalice at an SSPX chapel and only a homosexual priest would use one. :tsktsk: