Valid but illicit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Valid but illicit, also known as valid but illegal, is a term used within Roman Catholicism to describe the unauthorized but valid practice of sacraments. In Roman Catholic theology several kinds of people have the inherent ability to perform the sacraments (see Catholic minister). However to be lawful or licit, that ability must be exercised in accordance with the wishes of the Church and the rules of Canon law.

The term is sometimes used to refer to the valid administration of baptism by persons forbidden to do so. It does not include sacraments whose invalidity follows from the fact that the minister of the sacrament has not been ordained to the priesthood.

The term is used especially in regard to the ordinations of clergy. All bishops have the inherent ability to ordain a baptized male to be a deacon, priest, or bishop. A valid but illicit ordination, as the name suggests, is one where a bishop uses his valid ability to ordain someone whom under canon law or instruction from the pope he was prohibited from ordaining, it therefore being illicit. The implication of this view is that, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, most of Orthodox Christianity is "valid but illicit".^{[citation needed]} They have maintained apostolic succession and the form of Holy Orders, and would need only reconciliation with the Holy See to be considered lawful clergy.

A bishop who validly but illicitly ordains someone to the episcopate is excommunicated according to the Canon law of the Catholic Church. Though the ordination is valid, and the person duly ordained becomes a bishop^{[verification needed]}, by participation in the ceremony they are automatically excommunicated, as is the bishop responsible for the act. The excommunication can only be lifted by the Pope. In the twentieth century, French Catholic Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre is said to have earned automatic excommunication for his valid but illicit ordinations of bishops without a Papal mandate. However, his defenders argue that he acted under grave fear, which, according to Canon Law, excuses from automatic excommunication. These kinds of ordinations are also the case of Brazilian Catholic Bishop Carlos Duarte Costa.

Another example of would be the use of leavened bread for the Eucharist in the Latin Rite. Catholic law in the Roman Rite states that hosts must be made of wheaten flour and water, with no additions. If yeast is added, the Eucharist is considered valid but illicit in the Roman Rite. (Most Eastern Catholic Churches use leavened bread for the Eucharist, and for many of them it is illicit to use unleavened bread.) If, however, butter, honey, or eggs are added, particularly in large quantities, or if rice or rye flour are substituted for the wheat flour, transubstantiation is not considered to take place; the Mass would be illicit and invalid, according to Catholic teaching.