Wine in a chrystal/class dispenser on the alter?

[boatbearer]

The Reality
The Church not only gives us documents like the GIRM and RS but a Teaching Magisterium made of men who not only have many years of formation and education but also carry a special charisma as direct spiritual descendants of the Apostles.

Something comes a long like the use of a crystal chalice. What should a observant Catholic do? Contact the priest or bishop who used the crystal chalice and politely ask why they did so in light of your personal interpretations of the Church documents. Then listen and think about their response.

If the response is from a bishop you’ll likely hear that he has the authority to make such a choice. If you hear that then trust in him! Offer-up your frustration and anger to God and pray doubly hard for both the bishop and yourself. What you probably won’t hear is that he was unaware that he was unable to use the crystal chalice or that he didn’t care what the Church directed on the matter yet that’s what some effectively assume.

If you hear the response from a priest do the same. If you just cannot accept the priest’s explanation then elevate it to your bishop and as above accept the bishop’s explanation and offer any frustration and pain up to God as your own sacrifice and again, re-double your prayer efforts.

The overly simplistic and often angry black/white opinions held by some (who lack authority in the Church) are not only inaccurate and incomplete they are also unhealthy. They are killers of the faith and their commentary does more damage than the crystal chalice ever could.

 

[Phemie]

Yes. I am dead-set against crystal chalices and the sort, but if the Pope gave special permission, which only happened probably once or twice, he could. For example, Pope John Paul II have permission for local potters to make ciboria for the Hosts, when he visited Newfoundland. Though, I do believe it was gold on the inside…

We have two of those in our sacristy cupboard and, no, they are not gold-lined. They are nice pieces of pottery but I certainly wouldn’t think “ah, a ciborium” when I look at one.

 

[benedictgal]

The Reality
The Church not only gives us documents like the GIRM and RS but a Teaching Magisterium made of men who not only have many years of formation and education but also carry a special charisma as direct spiritual descendants of the Apostles.

Something comes a long like the use of a crystal chalice. What should a observant Catholic do? Contact the priest or bishop who used the crystal chalice and politely ask why they did so in light of your personal interpretations of the Church documents. Then listen and think about their response.

If the response is from a bishop you’ll likely hear that he has the authority to make such a choice. If you hear that then trust in him! Offer-up your frustration and anger to God and pray doubly hard for both the bishop and yourself. What you probably won’t hear is that he was unaware that he was unable to use the crystal chalice or that he didn’t care what the Church directed on the matter yet that’s what some effectively assume.

If you hear the response from a priest do the same. If you just cannot accept the priest’s explanation then elevate it to your bishop and as above accept the bishop’s explanation and offer any frustration and pain up to God as your own sacrifice and again, re-double your prayer efforts.

The overly simplistic and often angry black/white opinions held by some (who lack authority in the Church) are not only inaccurate and incomplete they are also unhealthy. They are killers of the faith and their commentary does more damage than the crystal chalice ever could.

With all due respect, boatbearer, you have been proven wrong time and time again. Your aguments simply do not hold water and what you are doing is, as I see it, setting aside and willfully disregarding what the Holy See has decreed in favor of your own skewed interpretation.

Rome is the one with universal authority. The Holy See wrote the GIRM and RS. The Church charges her bishops and priests to be faithful to the norms and the rubrics that She prescribes. Rather than resort to insulting those of us who are defending the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, it would do you well to prayerfully read the documents and heed them.

 

[boatbearer]

Please explain something: what happens when a bishop contradicts what the Church teaches? Please understand, I am not in any way referring to any particular bishop. I am asking about a bishop, any bishop. What happens when what the bishop says goes directly against what the Church says? Which one is in the right, the Church or the bishop? They can’t both be right when they make statements which contradict each other.

There are some things that are written which an individual bishop can give relief to. The use of a crystal chalice would be an excellent example. There are some things which no one (including the Pope) can. Those things which contravene the sacred deposit of faith is the prime example.

The difficulty is that you or I usually do not know what an individual bishop can or cannot grant exception to until relief is granted and the matter becomes a point of discourse. Some people may claim they know but for the most part they do not and that leads to frustration and anger.

The best (and admittedly still weak analogy) I can use is the military. There are some things that come from the Pentagon that CAN be ignored in the field. There are also things that can never be ignored. Try as they might even the military has not defined and documented every instance that may or may not be ultimately ignored. Instead the entire chain of command is given a great deal of education, training and experience. They are then given some level of autonomy. Some (special forces commandos) more than others. The military doesn’t want pre-programmed robots. I suspect that’s doubly true of the Catholic Church and Her Teaching Magisterium.

If you had an individual issue that you were concerned about I would urge you to talk to your bishop about it and really listen to their response.

 

[benedictgal]

There are some things that are written which an individual bishop can give relief to. The use of a crystal chalice would be an excellent example. There are some things which no one (including the Pope) can. Those things which contravene the sacred deposit of faith is the prime example.

The difficulty is that you or I usually do not know what an individual bishop can or cannot grant exception to until relief is granted and the matter becomes a point of discourse. Some people may claim they know but for the most part they do not and that leads to frustration and anger.

If you had an individual issue that you were concerned about I would urge you to talk to your priest or bishop about it and really listen to their response.

Boatbearer, since you will not respond to any of my posts, here is what the GIRM specifically states a bishop can and cannot do:

1. The Diocesan Bishop, who is to be regarded as the high priest of his flock, and from whom the life in Christ of the faithful under his care in a certain sense derives and upon whom it depends,148 must promote, regulate, and be vigilant over the liturgical life in his diocese. It is to him that in this Instruction is entrusted the regulating of the discipline of concelebration (cf. above, nos. 202, 374) and the establishing of norms regarding the function of serving the priest at the altar (cf. above, no. 107), the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds (cf. above, no. 283), and the construction and ordering of churches (cf. above, no. 291). With him lies responsibility above all for fostering the spirit of the Sacred Liturgy in the priests, deacons, and faithful.

Thus, he does not have the authority to willfully set aside whatever the Church has mandated, especially whatever is identified as a grave abuse, as in the case of the often-referenced Redemptionis Sacramentum.

He is responsible for ensuring that the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is maintained, upheld and respected.

Again, rather than insult and demean people and try to promote something that is merely your interpretation, rather than what the Church requires, I suggest that you read the documents and heed them.

 

[ricmat]

I tried to read all the posts in this thread, so maybe I missed this.

How does one purify/clean a decanter? Stick a swirly brush down through the neck?

 

[Newbie2]

But, Priests and Bishops must obey, NO EXCEPTIONS.

Yeah, but they do. That’s the reality we’re talking about. Then what?

Please explain something: what happens when a bishop contradicts what the Church teaches? Please understand, I am not in any way referring to any particular bishop. I am asking about a bishop, any bishop. What happens when what the bishop says goes directly against what the Church says? Which one is in the right, the Church or the bishop? They can’t both be right when they make statements which contradict each other.

Exactly.

So as a practical matter, what can Joe Average parishioner do? Not much, methinks.

Thus, he does not have the authority to willfully set aside whatever the Church has mandated, especially whatever is identified as a grave abuse, as in the case of the often-referenced Redemptionis Sacramentum.

He is responsible for ensuring that the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is maintained, upheld and respected.

Yep. But they don’t always do such. That’s the reality that we’re dealing with.

Again, rather than insult and demean people and try to promote something that is merely your interpretation, rather than what the Church requires, I suggest that you read the documents and heed them.

Heed them how?? If the cup that is offered is crystal, you can choose to take it or leave it.

BTW, I don’t see anything insulting or demeaning in Boatbearer’s posts, at least not intentional. He’s got some good points; that you disagree doesn’t make them insulting or demeaning.

This is overall a pretty good discussion.

 

[boatbearer]

Yeah, but they do. That’s the reality we’re talking about. Then what?

Pray and communicate.

So as a practical matter, what can Joe Average parishioner do? Not much, methinks.

Talk or write to your bishop in an earnest and not angry manner. Ask him to help you explain why he deviated from something that is written in a document like the GIRM or RS. Ask him in a nice way if he has the authority to deviate from what you believe the documents absolutely demand. I think you’ll be surprised by the answers. You’ll certainly be edified. If you write to him in a “gotcha! now fix this!” tone you’ll likely be patronized or ignored altogether.

Some truly need to understand that individual bishops have a wide latitude of authority on a wide latitude of issues. They also need to differentiate between what a bishop can licitly do and perhaps what a bishop should do based on theirs or others personal views.

BTW, I don’t see anything insulting or demeaning in Boatbearer’s posts, at least not intentional. He’s got some good points; that you disagree doesn’t make them insulting or demeaning.

This is overall a pretty good discussion.

Subjects like this are owed deeper discourse than the so commonly canned “the GIRM does not allow it therefore it’s wrong and cannot be done!” arguments. People need to understand where the actual authority rests in the Church, particularly with regard to their local bishops. They need to realize that a bishop can allow a priest to use a crystal chalice (even though it might not be a good idea to do so) in a specific setting yet he can never allow the priest to use Sara Lee Cheesecake Bites and Fresca to celebrate the Mass.

This deeper discourse and hence understanding is necessary because in some cases peoples’ faith depends on it.

The Church is neither reductionist nor black/white on a great many matters in all situations. That fact offends some people and it can lead to frustration, anger and ultimately dissent in many cases.

 

[benedictgal]

Some truly need to understand that individual bishops have a wide latitude of authority on a wide latitude of issues. They also need to differentiate between what a bishop can licitly do and perhaps what a bishop should do based on theirs or others personal views.

Subjects like this are owed deeper discourse than the so commonly canned “the GIRM does not allow it therefore it’s wrong and cannot be done!” arguments. People need to understand where the actual authority rests in the Church, particularly with regard to their local bishops. They need to realize that a bishop can allow a priest to use a crystal chalice (even though it might not be a good idea to do so) in a specific setting yet he can never allow the priest to use Sara Lee Cheesecake Bites and Fresca to celebrate the Mass.

This deeper discourse and hence understanding is necessary because in some cases peoples’ faith depends on it.

The Church is neither reductionist nor black/white on a great many matters in all situations. That fact offends some people and it can lead to frustration, anger and ultimately dissent in many cases.

You have already been shown that the bishop does not have the ample lattitude you think he has when it comes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Your assertion that the GIRM is not as black and white as you claim is wrong. Celebrants need to say the black and do the red.

Again, perhaps you should re-read the documents rather than mislead people into something that is not true. The documents have proved you wrong.

I am curious as to what your experience is with liturgy, other than the planning. Have you read the documents? Have you studied them?

 

[MarkThompson]

Subjects like this are owed deeper discourse than the so commonly canned “the GIRM does not allow it therefore it’s wrong and cannot be done!” arguments. People need to understand where the actual authority rests in the Church, particularly with regard to their local bishops. They need to realize that a bishop can allow a priest to use a crystal chalice (even though it might not be a good idea to do so) in a specific setting yet he can never allow the priest to use Sara Lee Cheesecake Bites and Fresca to celebrate the Mass.

You’ve been round and round on this topic twenty times, but I’ll just say that you don’t know that a bishop may legitimately permit the use of a crystal chalice. You know that a bishop has done it, and then you infer that he had authority to do so; so it would be helpful if you stopped implying that your understanding of episcopal authority is anything other than a surmise. You criticize others for looking at what Rome has said and drawing a conclusion, but all you’ve done is look at what Cardinal Mahony has done and drawn your own conclusions.

 

[boatbearer]

You’ve been round and round on this topic twenty times, but I’ll just say that you don’t know that a bishop may legitimately permit the use of a crystal chalice. You know that a bishop has done it, and then you infer that he had authority to do so; so it would be helpful if you stopped implying that your understanding of episcopal authority is anything other than a surmise. You criticize others for looking at what Rome has said and drawing a conclusion, but all you’ve done is look at what Cardinal Mahony has done and drawn your own conclusions.

My only indicator that he has the authority to allow something like that (unless I speak to him about it in person or read an opinion) is when he does so himself or formally allows others in his charge to do so. In other words a bishop of the Catholic Church (or one of his charges) practically carrying out a decision he has made.

That indicator outweighs my own personal interpretation of Church documents.

My understanding of episcopal authority is certainly no less than other peoples’ understanding of the limits to their own personal interpretations of Church documents.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

I was responding to post #3 “it is a sacriliege, and is offensive to Our Lord”. I assume that you hold the same for that post as well?

My point was that** none of us are in a position to state** what is and what is offensive to our Lord. May I also point out that the over the milennia, Christians have not always used gold chalices, and** it is my personal belief that the Almighty was not offended** by such use.

The Church, through her Magisterium, bishops, and by extension, the General Instruction, is in a position to state what is offensive to Our Lord.

We also need to be careful not to appear to sound like pharisees with statements like “The GIRM is meant to be obeyed, not debated”. I know what you’re saying, but some might say that sounds legalistic. Better, methinks, to say that the authority of God’s Church needs to be obeyed.

Heaven forbid one should sound legalistic. Jesus says in the fifth chapter of Matthew, “say ‘yes’ when you mean ‘yes,’ and ‘no,’ when you mean ‘no’ because anything else is from the Devil.” Sometimes the truth offends people who prefer things circumspect and nebulous for their own advantage. The problem with modern Catholics, especially American ones, is that they deeply resent anyone telling them what they should or should not do. Perhaps they should try that attitude on a police officer the next time they’re pulled over for speeding.

 

[centurionguard]

The Reality
The Church not only gives us documents like the GIRM and RS but a Teaching Magisterium made of men who not only have many years of formation and education but also carry a special charisma as direct spiritual descendants of the Apostles.

Something comes a long like the use of a crystal chalice. What should a observant Catholic do? Contact the priest or bishop who used the crystal chalice and politely ask why they did so in light of your personal interpretations of the Church documents. Then listen and think about their response.

If the response is from a bishop you’ll likely hear that he has the authority to make such a choice. If you hear that then trust in him! Offer-up your frustration and anger to God and pray doubly hard for both the bishop and yourself. What you probably won’t hear is that he was unaware that he was unable to use the crystal chalice or that he didn’t care what the Church directed on the matter yet that’s what some effectively assume.

If you hear the response from a priest do the same. If you just cannot accept the priest’s explanation then elevate it to your bishop and as above accept the bishop’s explanation and offer any frustration and pain up to God as your own sacrifice and again, re-double your prayer efforts.

The overly simplistic and often angry black/white opinions held by some (who lack authority in the Church) are not only inaccurate and incomplete they are also unhealthy. They are killers of the faith and their commentary does more damage than the crystal chalice ever could.

So (“The Reality”) of what your really saying to sum it up in a nut shell is put-up and shut-up. Pray but go easy with the flow of the tide. (“Go along to Get along”)

Gee; no offence but where will the Catholic Church be in the next 1000 years if we all fully subscribe to this thinking.

 

[zab]

The Church, through her Magisterium, bishops, and by extension, the General Instruction, is in a position to state what is offensive to Our Lord.

Heaven forbid one should sound legalistic. Jesus says in the fifth chapter of Matthew, “say ‘yes’ when you mean ‘yes,’ and ‘no,’ when you mean ‘no’ because anything else is from the Devil.” Sometimes the truth offends people who prefer things circumspect and nebulous for their own advantage. The problem with modern Catholics, especially American ones, is that they deeply resent anyone telling them what they should or should not do. Perhaps they should try that attitude on a police officer the next time they’re pulled over for speeding.

So now we are not just insulting other board members, We are insulting especially American ones

 

[Corki]

Pray and communicate.

Talk or write to your bishop in an earnest and not angry manner. Ask him to help you explain why he deviated from something that is written in a document like the GIRM or RS. Ask him in a nice way if he has the authority to deviate from what you believe the documents absolutely demand. I think you’ll be surprised by the answers. You’ll certainly be edified. If you write to him in a “gotcha! now fix this!” tone you’ll likely be patronized or ignored altogether.

Up to this point, I agree with you. If the Bishop has been given the authority to deviate from the GIRM or RS, it will be in writing from the CDW and the Bishop’s office should be happy to show you a copy.

RS was written specifically to address abuses that had crept in because priests and bishops exceeded their authority with regard to the Mass.

If you are patronized or ignored, RS also gives the steps to take to address the issue “up the line”.

 

[I_Fortuna]

8 Can flagons be used in another way at Mass?

Flagons may quite appropriately be used to bring forward the wine at the Presentation the Gifts.Email us at bcl@usccb.org
Secretariat for Divine Worship | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3060 © USCCB. All rights reserved.

On March 22, 2002, the USCCB approved Norms which provided for the pouring of the Precious Blood during the singing of the Lamb of God into chalices for distribution to the faithful. These norms were confirmed by the Holy See on March 22, 2002. On March 25, 2004, the Congregation published an instruction under the title, Redemptionis Sacramentum [RS], which prescribed that “the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the Blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls, or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms” (RS, no. 106).

Therefore I take this to mean that any flagon is o.k. and the wine is consecrated upon being distributed to the silver chalices on the altar in preparation for distribution to the congregation not while in the the flagon. Therefore, it is wine only in the flagon not the Blood of Christ.
Also, there is no pouring of the Blood of Christ and therefore His Holy Blood is protected by the Eucharistic minister while in their possession before returning the chalices to the altar where the Deacon comsumes what has not been comsumed.

 

[Phemie]

My only indicator that he has the authority to allow something like that (unless I speak to him about it in person or read an opinion) is when he does so himself or formally allows others in his charge to do so. In other words a bishop of the Catholic Church (or one of his charges) practically carrying out a decision he has made.

That indicator outweighs my own personal interpretation of Church documents.

My understanding of episcopal authority is certainly no less than other peoples’ understanding of the limits to their own personal interpretations of Church documents.

So I should assume that a bishop has the authority to allow a non-Catholic to receive Communion, not in danger of death or because of an inability to receive from his own pastor, but simply because the person wants to at a funeral? Would the fact that the person asked if it was allowed and was told to ‘pretend you didn’t ask the question’ make you rethink that?

Should I assume that it’s ok for me to receive Communion in the Anglican Church because I saw my pastor do so?

 

[JerrySeibert]

Wow! The answer to the question was answered I think 15 or 20 times. You cannot pour the species… Period. That is this persons answer. To dispute what is a sacrilege is of no concern of ours except to not it to the proper authority to change this Priest’s idea of what is acceptable.

 

[boatbearer]

Up to this point, I agree with you. If the Bishop has been given the authority to deviate from the GIRM or RS, it will be in writing from the CDW and the Bishop’s office should be happy to show you a copy.

RS was written specifically to address abuses that had crept in because priests and bishops exceeded their authority with regard to the Mass.

If you are patronized or ignored, RS also gives the steps to take to address the issue “up the line”.

No. That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m not suggesting that anyone received (or did not receive) written permission from the CDW. The Church is quite clear (as I think we all agree) that we are not (for example), to pour the Precious Blood. I have not and would not argue that.

What some here cannot seem to comprehend is that in some cases individual bishops have the authority to grant exceptions to certain Church rules. Notice I never suggested it was not a standing rule! While obviously I don’t know for sure, I strongly suspect the pouring of the Precious Blood falls within that authority based on the actions of more than one bishop.

As soon as someone starts cutting and pasting from the GIRM or RS they are doing nothing but underscoring the fact they don’t understand what I’m talking about. On the other hand if they can show where a bishop formally gave permission to pour the Precious Blood and the Holy See then formally reversed their permission, I would agree that’s strong evidence that bishops do indeed lack the authority to grant this exception.

Please keep in mind that I am not suggesting it would be good for any bishop to grant such exceptions – only that they have the authority to do so in many cases.

I don’t think some like the idea of a bishop having that much authority – particularly bishops they dislike and particularly on issues that bother them. That doesn’t change the fact that individuals have a great deal of authority that is not always well understood by their critics.

 

[benedictgal]

8 Can flagons be used in another way at Mass?

Flagons may quite appropriately be used to bring forward the wine at the Presentation the Gifts.Email us at bcl@usccb.org
Secretariat for Divine Worship | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3060 © USCCB. All rights reserved.

On March 22, 2002, the USCCB approved Norms which provided for the pouring of the Precious Blood during the singing of the Lamb of God into chalices for distribution to the faithful. These norms were confirmed by the Holy See on March 22, 2002. On March 25, 2004, the Congregation published an instruction under the title, Redemptionis Sacramentum [RS], which prescribed that “the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the Blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls, or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms” (RS, no. 106).

Therefore I take this to mean that any flagon is o.k. and the wine is consecrated upon being distributed to the silver chalices on the altar in preparation for distribution to the congregation not while in the the flagon. Therefore, it is wine only in the flagon not the Blood of Christ.
Also, there is no pouring of the Blood of Christ and therefore His Holy Blood is protected by the Eucharistic minister while in their possession before returning the chalices to the altar where the Deacon comsumes what has not been comsumed.

Bear in mind that the wine is to be poured into the chalices prior to the consecration (during the offertory) and not during the Agnus Dei.