FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Looking for authoritative resources...
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Hi, all.

Does anyone know where to find authoritative resources regarding the following:

Our new pastor has separated the vessels of elements for distribution to the laity upon a corporal some distance from the corporal with the main chalice and paten these past six weeks or so.  The separation has grown each week and has now reached approximately 14 inches distance.  There is a readily observable treatment of "this" group and "that" group from the offertory onward:

1) While the USCCB allows this for large celebrations, the chalices for the laity are filled prior to Mass and placed on the credence table with no explanation severing a formerly demonstrated connection to the element in the main chalice.  (Sunday Mass is rarely a large celebration here.)
2) The chalices for the laity, though full, are uncovered on the credence table.
3) While the GIRM allows this, without explanation, the chalices for the laity receive no drops of water to show a connection between the element therein and the element in the main chalice.
4) The chalices for the laity are not purified at either the altar or credence table following Holy Communion.
5) The hosts from the plates for the laity when dropped are treated strangely, i.e., neither consumed nor dissolved, but placed in the tabernacle

Taken together and with no forthcoming explanation of the changes, it's hard to see an intention to do as the Church does as regards what is divided by distance on the altar.  Does anyone have an authoritative source on this subject?

Thanks in advance.

See http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/...an-missal/

But these are all Novus Ordo issues, and this is a traditional Catholic site. There's a world of difference between the Novus Ordo Mass and the traditional Mass. You're welcome to post here (!), but just know that we don't focus on how new Mass "should" be offered...

If you want to learn about what we mean by the phrase "traditional Catholicism," see this page:  FETradition

And if you want to learn about the differences between the new Mass and the traditional Mass in particular, see this page: http://www.fisheaters.com/TLMintroduction.html

And, of course, if you have any questions about traditional Catholicism, the traditional Mass, etc., fire away! Smile
Hi, Vox,

Thanks for the response and the link to the GIRM.

I get that there are numerous accidental differences between the Missa Tridentina and the Missa Paulina, but the substance of the two is the same: the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I get that you don't address shoulds and such on regarding the Missa Paulina, but I'm actually interested in resources regarding the validity of the sacrament.  I believe that there is no good reason to doubt that the priest confects the sacrament in the main chalice and upon his paten, but also that there is good reason to believe (and no good reason to doubt from what myself and others have observed) that he does not confect the sacrament in the vessels kept to the side, tempting the congregation to idolatry.

I believe at this point that the Mass itself was valid, but that the priest excludes all of the matter off to the side from his intentions by his treatment of the matter before and after the consecration.  I have read from various non-authoritative resources like Zenit and EWTN, etc. that it is an actual exclusion from proper intention to treat any of the matter as if it is different, i.e., a "THAT" when he is speaking the words "THIS is my body" (Hoc est enim corpus meum) and "THIS is the chalice of my blood" (Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei).

I am looking for authoritative resources from the standpoint of moral theology or decretal law or even the 1917 CIC which deal with this particular issue.  If you or anyone has any direction in this regard, I am all ears.  Thanks, again!
Your wording isn't very clear, to be honest. Are you saying that the priest says, "This is My Body" and also something like "THAT is My Body"? Is that what you mean when you say "this" and "that" in quotation marks?

Regarding the matter of distance, Fr. McNamara addresses it here: http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur152.htm

I've regularly seen at larger parishes the additional ciboria and chalices well over a foot away from the celebrant during consecration; if this were a significant issue, I think the Holy See would have already addressed it especially considering more significant distance is involved for Papal Masses, for example. As Fr. McNamara says, if the elements are on the altar, there doesn't seem to be a problem.

Regarding 1) GIRM no. 73 allows for the chalice to be prepared before Mass but does not specify that the circumstances must be that there is a large celebration. It just happens to be that the main practice has become this for practicality's sake. Fr. McNamara's post here, while not directly related to this issue, may shed some light: http://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zliturg2.htm

Regarding 2), GIRM no. 142 says that after the chalice has been prepared during the offertory, it may be covered with a pall; hence the pall is optional.

Regarding 3), the GIRM does not explicitly state what must be done. Fr. McNamara elaborates on acceptable practices: https://zenit.org/articles/water-and-multiple-chalices/

Regarding 4), GIRM no. 163/279 and 183/247-249 (for Mass with a Deacon or a concelebrated Mass with Deacon, which follows the same procedure) allows the vessels to be purified immediately after Mass in a place apart from the altar and credence table. Preference is clearly and repeatedly given to purifying the vessels during Mass after Communion has ended.

Regarding 5), GIRM no. 280 addresses what to do when the host falls on the ground but not necessarily what to do after picking it up. While it is strange, strictly speaking there doesn't seem to be any directive against placing the host back in the tabernacle in a ciborium with other hosts. Fr. McNamara expands on it here: https://zenit.org/articles/when-a-consec...ost-falls/
) While the GIRM allows this, without explanation, the chalices for the laity receive no drops of water to show a connection between the element therein and the element in the main chalice.

The pouring of water into the wine signifies that Jesus is both man and God. There was a controversy over this issue in the middle east about 2250 years ago in the Armenian community. The Catholics would add a little water to the wine while the Orthodox would not. (They were the monophysites)  They were so upset that they brought their case before the Sultan. The Sultan's reply was that as a Moslem nobody should be using wine and that was the pretext for a persecution of the Christians of the area.
4) The chalices for the laity are not purified at either the altar or credence table following Holy Communion.

The rubrics permit that the chalices can be purified after mass.