Validly Confecting The Eucharist?

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
the whole Fr. Cutie thing brought up a question for me. since he is validly ordained, going over to the Episcopal/Anglican church, does that mean he truly confects the Eucharist when he celebrates Mass in the Anglican church?

[Jaime]

well there's a few things going on that would make the answer "no".

1. They use different types of bread. There are ingredients that would invalidate it
B. I'm pretty sure the prayers are different. That would invalidate it.
iii. Part of the mystery of the mass is that it is eternal. We are celebrating one mass with all the saints and everyone on earth at the same time. He won't be celebrating that


That plus the Church says he can't celebrate mass.

[Paddington]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1877873' date='May 29 2009, 01:16 PM']That plus the Church says he can't celebrate mass.[/quote]

[dominicansoul]

Will he be excommunicated?

Edited May 29, 2009 by dominicansoul

[Jaime]

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1877885' date='May 29 2009, 12:31 PM']Will he be excommunicated?[/quote]

No he became Episcopal

[StColette]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1877859' date='May 29 2009, 11:47 AM']+J.M.J.+
the whole Fr. Cutie thing brought up a question for me. since he is validly ordained, going over to the Episcopal/Anglican church, does that mean he truly confects the Eucharist when he celebrates Mass in the Anglican church?[/quote]


As hot stuff pointed out, the matter and the form are different in the Anglican Church.

[T-Bone _]

Isn't there intent as well?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='StColette' post='1877889' date='May 29 2009, 10:39 AM']As Jaim[i]e[/i] pointed out, the matter and the form are different in the Anglican Church.[/quote]
The matter used in the Episcopal / Anglican Church is normally unleavened bread, and as far as the "form" (i.e., the words) of the prayer is concerned, there are many Eucharistic prayers that have been used in the history of the Church and so the fact that the Episcopal Church uses a different anaphora than the Roman Rite does not invalidate that rite [i]per se[/i]. The traditional answer of the Roman Church would be that Fr. Cutie's celebration of the Eucharist in the Episcopal Church is illicit, but not necessarily invalid (i.e., as long as he uses the proper matter and form with the proper intention).

On the other hand, the predominant view among Eastern Orthodox theologians would be that Fr. Cutie's celebration of the Eucharist (and also the other sacraments) would be invalid because in Orthodox theology grace is closely tied to the Church, which is the living body of Christ, and he is not a member of a true Orthodox Church.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Thy Geekdom Come]

I hate using the word "confecting" in reference to the sacraments...makes me think of powdered sugar...

[CatherineM]

The letter that his bishop published pretty much pulled his facilities, so I wouldn't consider his Eucharist a valid one. I know he is going to pull some people with him, so more to his shame. And a big shame on the Episcopal bishop for making all this so easy for him. He has no consequences for violating his oaths, and the Episcopal bishop is participating in something that is causing a big rift for us for his benefit. It's poaching at its worse.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1877939' date='May 29 2009, 11:34 AM']The letter that his bishop published pretty much pulled his facilities, so I wouldn't consider his Eucharist a valid one. I know he is going to pull some people with him, so more to his shame. And a big shame on the Episcopal bishop for making all this so easy for him. He has no consequences for violating his oaths, and the Episcopal bishop is participating in something that is causing a big rift for us for his benefit. It's poaching at its worse.[/quote]
Taking away his "faculties" makes his celebration of the Eucharist illicit, not invalid. The Roman Church distinguishes between liceity and validity.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1877919' date='May 29 2009, 01:20 PM']The matter used in the Episcopal / Anglican Church is normally unleavened bread, and as far as the "form" (i.e., the words) of the prayer is concerned, there are many Eucharistic prayers that have been used in the history of the Church and so the fact that the Episcopal Church uses a different anaphora than the Roman Rite does not invalidate that rite [i]per se[/i]. The traditional answer of the Roman Church would be that Fr. Cutie's celebration of the Eucharist in the Episcopal Church is illicit, but not necessarily invalid (i.e., as long as he uses the proper matter and form with the proper intention).

On the other hand, the predominant view among Eastern Orthodox theologians would be that Fr. Cutie's celebration of the Eucharist (and also the other sacraments) would be invalid because in Orthodox theology grace is closely tied to the Church, which is the living body of Christ, and he is not a member of a true Orthodox Church.[/quote]

the flaw in your logic is that priests in mortal sin can celebrate mass validly

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1877957' date='May 29 2009, 12:08 PM']the flaw in your logic is that priests in mortal sin can celebrate mass validly[/quote]
Where have I said that a priest in mortal sin cannot celebrate the Eucharist validly?

Fr. Cutie's moving into a heretical Church, according to traditional Western sacramentology, has no impact on the validity of his celebration of the Eucharist as long as he uses the proper matter and form with the right intention.

[musturde]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1877957' date='May 29 2009, 01:08 PM']the flaw in your logic is that priests in mortal sin can celebrate mass validly[/quote]
That never stopped the Priests and Popes in the Dark Ages.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1877950' date='May 29 2009, 12:53 PM']Taking away his "faculties" makes his celebration of the Eucharist illicit, not invalid. The Roman Church distinguishes between liceity and validity.[/quote]

I realize the church would consider it valid but not licit. I was speaking more to how I would feel. In my heart if something isn't licit it isn't valid either. I know that isn't theologically correct, but I don't store my theology books in my heart. Even if it was valid theologically, I certainly wouldn't attend.