Hypothetical Validity Quiz

[Ziggamafu]

1. A scandalously sinful priest says he can do things any way he wants and decides to take the congregation outside and celebrate the Eucharist on a picnic table, with no Liturgy. He doesn't pray. He doesn't care. He has unleavened wheat bread and wine and all he does is read the "This is my Body....this is my Blood" verses, perhaps disrupting or missing a few words because of a sudden smoker's cough. The people then pay the Eucharist adoration. Was the Sacrament valid and if not, were the people sinning by adoring the bread and wine?

2. The same priest is asked to give absolution to some kid. He doesn't go into the confessional booth, he just asks the kid what his sins are, without any preperatory prayers or readings or the sign of the cross or anything. The kid starts to confess, but before he can get into the specifics of his first sin (let alone all the rest) the priest looks at his watch, cuts the kid off, and says, "hey kid, I'm missing the game," and then pronounces the words of absolution (but some of the words are disrupted by his smoker's cough). Then the priest hurries off. Was the Sacrament valid and if not, would the kid be sinning by receiving the Eucharist at the next Mass?

3. After watching his football game (he had a lot of the parish money riding on it), the priest realizes that he's late for a baptism. He curses as he rushes off to the sanctuary, grabbing a bottled water on the way. As he's about to enter the sanctuary, he sees that the person about to be baptized is just arriving. The priest jogs up to meet the guy at the door. "Sorry, I'm supposed to meet...uh...someone tonight; we're gonna have to make this quick," he says, taking a swig of his water. The priest then eyes his water as the idea dawns on him. "Marvelous!" he cries, and pats the confused catechumen on the back. "Guess we don't even have to waste time going in there," he says, walking the catechumen back out to his car. The priest suddenly dumps the rest of his bottled water over the guy's head, saying "I baptize you in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." Was this a valid baptism?

The point of these absurdities is to figure out what the bare minimum is for each Sacrament to be valid, regardless of the number of abuses.

[Paphnutius]

Here are some CCC pargraphs that may aid you:

This one deals with the changing of the rites.

1125 For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the minister or the community. Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy.

This one deals with the righteousness of the minister or that absence thereof (his sinfulness).

1128 This is the meaning of the Church's affirmation 49 that the sacraments act ex opere operato (literally: "by the very fact of the action's being performed"), i.e., by virtue of the saving work of Christ, accomplished once for all. It follows that "the sacrament is not wrought by the righteousness of either the celebrant or the recipient, but by the power of God." 50 From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister. Nevertheless, the fruits of the sacraments also depend on the disposition of the one who receives them.

A sacrament is not made invalid because of the sinfulness of the person.

[journeyman]

scholars or clergy, please step up

I think the issues are not validity/invalidity but perhaps licit/illicit?

a. the priest doesn't have to be a saint for the sacrament to be valid
b. the sacraments don't "need" to be inside the building or a particular room in the building to be valid

c. a lot of this could be covered by intent on the part of the parish, penitent, catechumen.

Do these examples fill me with confidence in the glory of God's chosen representative at the parish level? No.

But take the same three examples - imagine a church under persecution -

camoflaging the eucharist as a picnic celebration might escape "official" notice and the death or persecution of the participants

hearing confession in a "sidewalk" confessional might be overheard, but avoids a place that would get you persecuted, and could appear to be a chance encounter rather than a religious observance

using a commercially available bottle to (three times is required, I think) throw water on someone could be camoflage again

the earliest church met in remote places and in secret to avoid detection . . . and perform the rites in a manner befitting the sacred ceremonies. In a future where the persecutors have night vision goggles and infra red detectors capable of picking out body heat - a church in hiding is going to have to hide in plain view

Since we're not currently being overtly persecuted, and despite not having a priest at our parish, I'll pass on even inviting this guy to come in to cover . . .

[Ziggamafu]

For situation 1: Can a priest, anywhere and at any time, if possessing the proper elements (bread and wine), utter something along the lines of, "Jesus said, 'This is my Body and this is my Blood'" and have transubstantiation occur?

For situation 2: Can a priest, anywhere and at any time, if a person confesses a sin, absolve the sin by simply saying something along the lines of, "I absolve you of your sin."

For situation 3: Can a priest, anywhere and at any time, splash water on someone and yield regeneration by saying the words of baptism?

...there are people who get crazy scrupulous about the Sacraments, frequently doubting that God's grace is present because they frequently doubt that the Sacraments were legitimate. So what are the bare minimums? Is it just a matter of the proper elements and the proper sentence? So what are those bare essentials for each Sacrament?

[phatcatholic]

i would say "yes" to these three questions. my understanding is that the minimim requirements for a sacrament to be valid are the proper form, matter, and intent. the form would be the words, the matter would be the elements (water, bread, wine, oil, ect). the proper intent would be to do what the Church does. all of these seem to be fulfilled in your 3 situations, thus the sacraments would be validly conferred.

[Ziggamafu]

So what if the priest coughs during the words of consecration (consecration is when he quotes the scriptures, right?) and a few words are missed? Is the Sacrament still valid?

Or what if, unbeknownst to the congregation, the priest has abandoned his faith and has desecrated the Sacrament somehow, and is only pretending to do what the Church intends to privately mock and blaspheme Christ?

[journeyman]

as initially posted, Ziggamafu made "intent" less than certain . . . but in the spirit of charity, I have been giving the priest the benefit of the doubt

#3, baptism, in an emergency, can be done by a lay person - in that situation, intent seems to take precedence over ordination . . . form is I believe limited to baptising in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and there's no requirement to use blessed water

[Ziggamafu]

haha...i tried to make the priest look as humorously crooked as possible, but it's nice of you to give him the benefit of the doubt!

[Guest JeffCR07]

It seems to me that all of them would be valid, though licit is another matter.

Dealing with the cough obstructing the words, yes, I think it would still be valid. Keep in mind, the Anaphora of Adai and Mari does not have the words of consecration explicitly in it, but it is understood as valid precisely because the form of the sacrament is implicitly assumed within the entirety of the anaphora itself.

[Ziggamafu]

woah...*really* big / weird words used, there...um...

...uh...

yeah!

[Paphnutius]

If I am not mistaken, the Anaphora of Adai and Mari is a Eucharistc prayer that does not use the intstitution narrative. It is the only one that one may use w/o the narrative I think.

[phatcatholic]

does anyone have the wording for it? it can be used in the roman rite? i've never heard of it either......

[Paphnutius]

I found this link that appears to be it [url="http://www.geocities.com/rik_turner/Anaphora_of_SS_Addai_and_Mari.html"]http://www.geocities.com/rik_turner/Anapho...i_and_Mari.html[/url] but I am not sure. I am just buying time until Jeff gets back.

BTW how do I ad a link so that it looks like a word and such? I oftne do not post links due to my ignorance.

Edited December 7, 2005 by Paphnutius

[jezic]

in times of persecution and near death, the intent becomes the most important i believe. A validly ordained minister with the proper intent can celebrate Mass outside ( i am not sure if you need a dispensation for this in normal circumstances though either. The preference would be to have an altar, but i don't think it is required.)

In situations of persecution i believe that as long as the Sacrament is preserved as fully as possible and the intent is properly ordered the Sacrament is performed.

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Dec 6 2005, 09:26 PM']BTW how do I ad a link so that it looks like a word and such? I oftne do not post links due to my ignorance.
[right][snapback]814115[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
click the "http://" button, which is below the "bold" and "italics" buttons and then just follow the instructions