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!)

