Adding Honey To The Bread

[thessalonian]

Last week our pastor gave a pretty good talk on the Eucharist. But at one point he encouraged the making of Eucharistic bread by parishioners saying that they should add honey. Does this invalidate the eucharist. If you could provide documents that would be great.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='09 November 2009 - 09:48 PM' timestamp='1257821316' post='1999279']
Last week our pastor gave a pretty good talk on the Eucharist. But at one point he encouraged the making of Eucharistic bread by parishioners saying that they should add honey. Does this invalidate the eucharist. If you could provide documents that would be great.
[/quote]
My training was that such a thing would invalidate it, although I can't presently find anything indicating that it makes it any more than illicit.

The Code of Canon Law: Can. 924
§1. The most holy Eucharistic sacrifice must be offered with bread and with wine in which a little water must be mixed.
§2. The bread must be [b][i]only[/i][/b] wheat and recently made so that there is no danger of spoiling.

This may help... [url="http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/09/eucharistic_bre.html"]Jimmy Akin on a similar topic[/url].

The Diocese of Lincoln seems to help us make the distinction between validity and licitness, although it doesn't provide a source (but I trust Lincoln, having lived there):

http://www.dioceseoflincoln.org/purple/mass/mass.htm

"In the Latin rite of the Catholic Church the only ingredients permitted in the altar breads which will be consecrated at Mass are wheat flour and water. The wheat flour may be whole or refined. It is illicit (illegal) to use any other ingredients and it would be seriously sinful for a priest to knowingly permit such an abuse. If more than half the liquid were not water (for instance, eggs, molasses, shortening, etc.) or if more than half the flour were not wheat flour, the Eucharist offered would not only be illicit but also invalid. In other words, it would truly not be a Mass at all. To knowingly worship an invalid Eucharist would be a sin of idolatry."

The Papal Bull of St. Pius V, De Defectibus, is also helpful: http://www.dailycatholic.org/defectib.htm

I hope this all helps. It seems it depends on the amount of other substances in the Eucharist, but it is at least illicit.

God bless,

Micah

[Theoketos]

From Redemptionis Sacramentum 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. 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. [b]It is a grave abuse to introduce other substances, such as fruit or sugar or honey, into the bread for confecting the Eucharist.[/b]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Theoketos' date='10 November 2009 - 10:52 PM' timestamp='1257911524' post='2000171']
From Redemptionis Sacramentum 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. 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. [b]It is a grave abuse to introduce other substances, such as fruit or sugar or honey, into the bread for confecting the Eucharist.[/b]
[/quote]
Which was quoted in the link to Jimmy Akin's blog.

Anyway, I'd like to clarify. A grave abuse does mean grave matter for sin, but something can be illicit and still valid and still be a grave abuse, so I don't think RS answers the question, although it does certainly say very clearly that the priest in question should not be doing this.