A reader writes:
Merry Christmas Mr. Akin, I was curious if you could take a moment to
comment on the following:http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/3547357.html
I am particularly interested in the "valid" and "illicit" part
associated with this Mass.
First a note for those who may not read further: "Licit" means "in conformity with the law," while "illicit" means "not in conformity with the law." A celebration of the liturgy is in conformity with the law (licit) if those celebrating it don’t break any of the Church’s laws in their celebration. It is illicit if they do break such laws.
"Valid," by contrast," means (effectively) "real," while "invalid" means "unreal."
This is important in the context of liturgy, for example, because even an unlawful (illicit) celebration of the Mass may have at its heart a valid (real) consecration of the Eucharist.
From an ultimate perspective, the FIRST question one should ask about a celebration of the Eucharist is whether it is valid (i.e., does Jesus really become present?).
The SECOND question is whether–even if Jesus does really become present–the celebration is lawful (licit) according to the Church.
Based on the first two questions, one needs to ask a THIRD question: Is attending this Mass sinful or non-sinful? If the consecration is INVALID or the Mass as a whole is ILLICIT then the answer is presumably sinful.
HERE’S MORE ON THE SITUATION IN ST. LOUIS FROM ST. LOUIS NATIVE, DR. EDWARD PETERS.
(BTW, special congratulations to Ed for finally joining the 21st century and getting REAL [valid] permalinks for his blog, which will DRAMATICALLY enhance its effectiveness. His new blog design is quite cool, too! Check it out!)
Thank you for straightening this out, Jimmy. On another thread, someone (who shall remain nameless) was making Ex Cathedra pronouncements (again) to the opposite effect.
And I just had a question on this very topic… At my church on Christmas Eve, they used white wine for communion. I’d never seen this done before, and was wondering whether it was illicit and/or invalid, or if it was just fine although uncommon.
The only reference I can find in the GIRM is:
284. The wine for the eucharist must be from the fruit of the vine (see Lk 22:18), natural, and pure, that is not mixed with any foreign substance.
Thanks to Ed Peters for his knowledgeable comments.
I have bookmarked your newly permalinked ‘blog.
Bear: the color of the wine is a matter of preference only. There are other standards that apply which relate to validity/liceity, but none involve the color.
Jimmy: Is there a sense in which one might speak of a certain Mass as being invalid, even supposing that the Eucharist is really confected? That is, a Mass in which the full grace effects of the celebration would be somehow inhibited, but perhaps after the transformation of the bread and wine, however before the priest recieves. It’s a matter of wild speculation, I guess, but I get the question more often than one may think – what happens if a Mass is interupted between the raising of the chalice and the communication of the celebrant?
On the same lines, I have a question about attending illicit and/or invalid Masses. I came to the Catholic Church from a “high church” Anglican parish and miss the beauty of its liturgy very much (there is an Anglicn Use parish about 1 1/2 hours away, so I make it over there occasionally, but it is difficult).
I’m not sure if the priest at my old Anglican parish is in apostolic succession by way of the “Dutch Touch” (few people know that some of the Anglicans restored valid orders by using Old Catholics in ordinations… no way to tell who is/who ain’t valid now, so the presumption is invalidity for all). If the priest is not in apostolic succession, the Mass is invalid. If he is, the Mass is illicit because it is not in communion with Rome.
I know that under either circumstance I cannot take communion. My question is this… is it a sin to go to a service at my old parish if I also meet my Sunday obligation at a Catholic parish? If it isn’t a sin and I don’t take communion, is it a sin to go to the altar rail with the communicants for a blessing (you know, the arms crossed)?
I would appreciate any and all thoughts, because this is an issue that has troubled greatly.
Tim
I have another random question. Suppose I go to Mass and gingerbread is used. As I understand it, this is a very serious liturgical abuse. What would I be required to do in said situation? Should I go to another Mass at another parish? Does this not fulfil my Sunday obligation? What advice do you give?
I smell a troll.
I asked a serious question. Go on and mock me. I can see it was a mistake trying to actually get some viewpoints on a situation that is important to me.
I wasn’t referring to you.
bill912,
Who were you referring to?
There are hundreds of Latin Tridentine parishes
in the USA to attend where Latin is the Language, if you like high Masses.
ERRONEOUS PASTORAL MATERIAL DELETED.
After the service, coffee and cookies, even beer and wine, if offered, is fine.
Consider packing a few apologetic tracts for handing out when visiting.
RECOMMENDATIONS OF DISSIDENT GROUPS DELETED.
Okay, Catholic Defender.
You’ve been kicked off several other blogs and you’ve already got two strikes here, so there’s one more left.
I give people a wide latitude in expressing theological opinions–even when they are in disagreement with the Church–but the opinions and advice you express are continuously and significantly flawed.
I normally cut a lot of slack when people say such stuff in the comboxes, figuring that my readers are intelligent enough to spot problems and that they’re likely to write back correcting erroneous statements.
But enough is enough.
I’m tired of the constant drip, drip, drip of semi-dissident or outright dissident opinion and advice you’ve been leaving, and I’ve gotten complaints about it from quite a number of readers.
Rather than just giving you a third strike, though, I’m afraid that I’m going to have to ask you to refrain from expressing theological opinions or making theological recommendations on the blog. You can comment on other matters if you want.
Doing so will constitute the third strike.
If, after a while of behaving yourself, I may permit some theological commentary from you, but the present situation of constant provocations is not to continue.
Other semi-trolls (e.g., Realist) please take note.
Bill912, that “gingerbread” remark may not be from a troll. There were a couple of occasions in the last few years when, during SPRED Masses (the ones geared to the mentally disabled) at Communion they would distribute, not hosts, but bits of what looked like a large cornmeal-molasses cookie. I was so startled I just stood there and stared; I admit I eventually took the thing and ate it but felt that I hadn’t communicated. Thereafter I would avoid SPRED Masses, or if I found myself at one, not go to Communion.
So, Little Budapest, if you really did encounter gingerbread, the fault is theirs, not yours. Since it’s possible to assist at Mass without taking Communion there wouldn’t be any need to hunt up another Mass for that day. But I wouldn’t blame you for feeling thoroughly pissed off, either.
Annalucia got it right. Sorry to get you into intruder mode Bill. It was an honest concern of mine. If you really want to get technical, an individual can encounter a wide variet of things that could be classified as liturgical abuses. Case in point: the use of gender-inclusive language in the creed.
The use of gingerbread for the celebration of the Eucharist is what I was referring to. Again, you don’t need to remind me that it is an extrmeley serious liturgucal abuse. I am simply wondering about what I should do.
Again, I did not intend to troll. It’s an simple question. Bear asked a question about the use of white wine, which inspired me to ask my question.
My apologies
MY apologies, Littlebudapest. Got to bring my troll-sniffer in for a tune-up.
Regarding gingerbread for communion, the following part of Redemptoris Sacramentum is highly relevant:
[48.] The bread used in the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice must be unleavened, purely of wheat, and recently made so that there is no danger of decomposition.[123] It follows therefore that bread made from another substance, even if it is grain, or if it is mixed with another substance different from wheat to such an extent that it would not commonly be considered wheat bread, does not constitute valid matter for confecting the Sacrifice and the Eucharistic Sacrament.[124] It is a grave abuse to introduce other substances, such as fruit or sugar or honey, into the bread for confecting the Eucharist.
So Pepperidge Farm whole wheat bread would be valid, though a grave abuse, but gingerbread would be invalid (since although it has “bread” in the name, no one considers it bread, including the dictionary).
Tim,
since what you asked for were opinions, and seeing as that is all I am qualified to give, here it goes (and I invite any correction that may be offered by one more theologically knowledgable than myself). So long as you fulfill your Mass requirement for a weekend, I don’t see why it would be a sin to attend the Anglican liturgy. Personally, I would shy away from those places where you suspect that a schismatic apostolic succession might have been tied in, because there the situation is of a little more gravity. As for approaching the altar rail for a blessing, that might be seen as a tacit approbation of Anglican orders, so I would also personally avoid that.
Again, just my opinion, and I am open to correction…
Does anyone have any comment upon my earlier question about Mass being interrupted, and what to properly “call” such a Mass. I’ve heard sacramental theologians say that unless the priest celebrant consumes the Eucharist, the “Mass is invalid.” They have further cautioned from conflating that idea with the notion that the Eucharist would be invalid. I know there’s also debate and speculation as to exactly when and by what means transubstantiation takes place, given differences between the Orthodox and Catholic churches on the placement of the epiclesis.
I hope I don’t seem to be splitting straws. You have no idea how much this stuff gets talked about within the walls of a seminary, as zany as the hypotheticals may be, and I would just like to have a little more knowledge of the matter.
Tim:
From the Vatican II Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio ยง8:
“In certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers ‘for unity,’ and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. … Yet worship in common (communicatio in sacris) is not to be considered as a means to be used indiscriminately for the restoration of Christian unity. … Witness to the unity of the Church very generally forbids common worship to Christians, but the grace to be had from it sometimes commends this practice. The course to be adopted, with due regard to all the circumstances of time, place, and persons, is to be decided by local episcopal authority, unless otherwise provided for by the Bishops’ Conference according to its statutes, or by the Holy See.”
Another consideration: if you actively take part in an invalid Mass, aren’t you in a way bearing false witness in that you appear to recognize it as valid through your exterior conduct?
Perhaps you should ask the priest at the Anglican Use parish the next time you go there.
Thank you Patrick. I downloaded the English translation from the EWTN website and will read it carefully.
Does anyone have any comment upon my earlier question about Mass being interrupted, and what to properly “call” such a Mass
Humm.
I’m trying to ponder what would do this. I suspect that something that interrupts Mass is of sufficient gravity as to give you grave cause to miss Mass.
Of course Jesus is there, wherever two or three are gathered in my Name,So at the last supper did Jesus put water in with the wine , or he himself representing Humanity..or was Judas repsenting Humanity?