Consecration of a chalice in the traditional Roman manner

A Catholic Life has a great entry about the consecration of a chalice in the older, traditional older Roman Rite.  Be sure to check it out!

 

Consecration of a chalice in the traditional Roman manner
0 votes, 0.00 avg. rating (0% score)
FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Just Too Cool, Linking Back, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Consecration of a chalice in the traditional Roman manner

  1. FrCharles says:

    Thanks for the link! As my parents are unbelievers, I discouraged them from giving me a chalice at my ordination two years ago. A confrere, feeling bad for me, found me a hand-me-down chalice once given to a priest by his parishioners in 1945. So now I am imagining and giving thanks for these same prayers and rites which I presume were offered for it at its consecration. I had to have it re-gilded, but according to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, (1305,2) chalices do not lose their consecration when this becomes necessary. Since this is not addressed in the current code, we may presume that it remains in force.

  2. viennaguy says:

    Is that Bishop Williamson?

  3. Davidtrad says:

    Yes, that looks like Bishop Williamson.

  4. Sacristymaiden says:

    Neat!

  5. ridiculusmus says:

    He should be wearing a rochet. A bishop should never wear a surplice, and if it’s a alb, it’s wrong.

  6. ssoldie says:

    Gee! Fr Charles, I was told by a priest that if it(subject) was not addressed in the new Code of Canon Law of 1983, it was automatically abrogated, I have hoped and prayed this is not true.

  7. wchoag says:

    Nice pic of Bishop Williamson!

  8. FrCharles says:

    ssoldie: I consulted my personal canonical counsel on the issue, and here’s what he says:

    CL [My initials, short for Br. Charles Lwanga]

    The 1917 Code was indeed abrogated with the promulgation of the new 1983 Code. However, the principle contained in the canon may still be a valid canonical principle and when the 1983 Code is silent, the 1917 Code can still at least be instructive (even if it is not authoritative or conclusive). Accordingly, if nothing else speaks to the issue of the consecration of a chalice that has been re-gilded, it is appropriate to look to canonical provisions of the past.

    Br. James, O.F.M., Cap.