Choose style:
Subscription Options:

One-time Donations:

Author Topic: Philosophical consideration of Eucharistic Consecration  (Read 862 times)

yablabo

Thank you for your response.

I am not denying that the altar breads and wine are upon the altar.  I am proposing that these are neither "before the priest" nor "upon a corporal" in my specific case.  If these had only to be "on the altar", then why did Fr. McNamara include "before the priest" and "upon a corporal" in the statement he made?

Also, if intention makes the sacrament, as you imply, then does the priest's intention to consecrate a cake or a cup of grape soda suffice to confect the sacrament?   

My whole point in this examination is regarding the matter of the sacrament, not the intention of the priest.

Panum

sac·ra·ment
ˈsakrəmənt/
noun
noun: sacrament; plural noun: sacraments

    a religious ceremony or act of the Christian Church that is regarded as an outward and visible sign of inward and spiritual divine grace, in particular.
        (in the Roman Catholic and many Orthodox Churches) the rites of baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, ordination, and matrimony.
        (among Protestants) baptism and the Eucharist.

  It is good to try to perform church rituals in accordance with the rubrics specified by Holy Mother church. These are set forth for consistency, uniformity, and in the magisterial authority of the Holy see throughout the Church. God however sees the hearts of men and while a rubric is important and should be followed in obedience, there are always some exceptions. I know of a case where a dying soldier was baptized with his own blood. This is licit and is valid and called a baptism of intent. So to look at this further, the preferred method of baptism in the Catholic church is immersion. Most people in the church are baptized by sprinkling/or pouring however. So the point is; Intent IS important and God honors this because he is not a lawyer.

So when some priest or layperson calls some lack in form to attention we should try to bring practice into conformity to what the Church specifies as the norm. This doesn't mean that incorrect form nullifies a sacrament  per say, (except that the prayer of consecration must be followed).
 In the instance of a formal exorcism, the prayers are deliberately prayed, word for word, only by priests authorized and trained under the authority of their bishop, because this is necessary when confronting the worm, Satan, who is a lawyer. (that prayer in Latin in an amazing, very through, prayer.) The authorized priest stands in, Persona Christi. This is one reason a layperson is not authorized to pray the full formal prayer of exorcism.
It is licit for laypersons to pray prayers for deliverance. It is just wise and prudent to do so with either your priest present or under his authority.

If you can't get your head around this issue then I suggest you talk to your priest about it and submit to his direction.  It is good to desire reverence. We need much more of this in the Church. I think that reverence starts in the heart and becomes an outward sign of our devotion. So if you see something a priest may possibly be doing in a casual or possibly erroneous way, then respectfully ask him about it and if you don't get a satisfactory answer then commit to pray for him. Bringing our own hearts into conformity to Christ Jesus is hard enough. As a soul makes progress in this way, the soul finds peace and charity and doesn't fret over things as much.   
 

yablabo

sac·ra·ment
ˈsakrəmənt/
noun
noun: sacrament; plural noun: sacraments

    a religious ceremony or act of the Christian Church that is regarded as an outward and visible sign of inward and spiritual divine grace, in particular.
        (in the Roman Catholic and many Orthodox Churches) the rites of baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, ordination, and matrimony.
        (among Protestants) baptism and the Eucharist.

  It is good to try to perform church rituals in accordance with the rubrics specified by Holy Mother church. These are set forth for consistency, uniformity, and in the magisterial authority of the Holy see throughout the Church. God however sees the hearts of men and while a rubric is important and should be followed in obedience, there are always some exceptions. I know of a case where a dying soldier was baptized with his own blood. This is licit and is valid and called a baptism of intent. So to look at this further, the preferred method of baptism in the Catholic church is immersion. Most people in the church are baptized by sprinkling/or pouring however. So the point is; Intent IS important and God honors this because he is not a lawyer.

So when some priest or layperson calls some lack in form to attention we should try to bring practice into conformity to what the Church specifies as the norm. This doesn't mean that incorrect form nullifies a sacrament  per say, (except that the prayer of consecration must be followed).
 In the instance of a formal exorcism, the prayers are deliberately prayed, word for word, only by priests authorized and trained under the authority of their bishop, because this is necessary when confronting the worm, Satan, who is a lawyer. (that prayer in Latin in an amazing, very through, prayer.) The authorized priest stands in, Persona Christi. This is one reason a layperson is not authorized to pray the full formal prayer of exorcism.
It is licit for laypersons to pray prayers for deliverance. It is just wise and prudent to do so with either your priest present or under his authority.

If you can't get your head around this issue then I suggest you talk to your priest about it and submit to his direction.  It is good to desire reverence. We need much more of this in the Church. I think that reverence starts in the heart and becomes an outward sign of our devotion. So if you see something a priest may possibly be doing in a casual or possibly erroneous way, then respectfully ask him about it and if you don't get a satisfactory answer then commit to pray for him. Bringing our own hearts into conformity to Christ Jesus is hard enough. As a soul makes progress in this way, the soul finds peace and charity and doesn't fret over things as much.

Thank you once again for your response.

If you check out Session 8 of the Council of Florence (Bull of Union with the Armenians), you will see this:

"All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of doing what the church does. If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected.
...
"Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the kingdom of heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water, either hot or cold. The form is: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. But we do not deny that true baptism is conferred by the following words: May this servant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit; or, This person is baptized by my hands in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. Since the holy Trinity is the principle cause from which baptism has its power and the minister is the instrumental cause who exteriorly bestows the sacrament, the sacrament is conferred if the action is performed by the minister with the invocation of the holy Trinity. The minister of this sacrament is a priest, who is empowered to baptize in virtue of his office. But in case of necessity not only a priest or a deacon, but even a lay man or a woman, even a pagan and a heretic, can baptize provided he or she uses the form of the church and intends to do what the church does. The effect of this sacrament is the remission of all original and actual guilt, also of all penalty that is owed for that guilt. Hence no satisfaction for past sins is to be imposed on the baptized, but those who die before they incur any guilt go straight to the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God. "

Blood is not valid matter for a baptism, regardless of circumstance or intention.

I also am not pointing out a lack of form, I am pointing a lacking in matter.  Matter is subject to accidents such as location...and substituting incorrect matter DOES per se invalidate the attempt to perform a sacrament. 


In His Love

Blood is not valid matter for a baptism, regardless of circumstance or intention.
Yes it is.

"[Saint] Emerentiana, a Roman virgin and the foster-sister of the blessed Agnes, while she was still a Catechumen, burning with faith and charity, rebuked the idol-worshippers who were full of fury against the Christians, whereupon a mob assembled and stoned her. Praying in her torment at the grave of Saint Agnes, and having been baptized in her own blood, so generously shed for Christ, she gave up her soul unto God."

http://iteadthomam.blogspot.ca/2008/01/s-emerentiana-patroness-of-feenyites.html
Holy Face of Jesus, I love you.

Have a blessed Lent, Fishies!

Panum

Blood has water in it. I don't hardly think that we who are redeemed by blood, could possibly think that Jesus the Christ would condemn us on such a legality. Jesus whose immaculate heart burns for our redemption is Love, and love does not obsess over legalities.  Being overly legal about things is something He regularly condemned. Obsessing about these kind of things is a form of obsessive compulsive disorder or scrupulosity. I say this in concern and respect. I have one son who struggled with this. This is an issue where one has to submit ones heart and mind in humility to Christ Jesus, and pray for the grace of peacefulness. I would suggest that obsessing over legal definitions of correctness is a tactic of our enemy who attempts to tie us up in chains of bondage. Chesterton wrote "it is said, poor so and so, they have lost their reason, actually people who reason too much lose their humanity." (something like this)  Many people obsess over form. I have been called a heretic for changing how I sometimes pray the rosary. For Pete's sake, St. John Paul the second did this regularly. It is prayer. I would much rather spend my time either praying for the redemption of souls or working to evangelize them than worrying about form. I don't hardly think that when I stand before Christ Jesus in judgement that I will get a merit badge for correctness of form, I think instead he will hold me to account for how well I loved and served Him and how I treated His other children on earth.  My only real "fear" is that I will miss an opportunity to bring Him souls that He puts in my path.


yablabo

Blood is not valid matter for a baptism, regardless of circumstance or intention.
Yes it is.

"[Saint] Emerentiana, a Roman virgin and the foster-sister of the blessed Agnes, while she was still a Catechumen, burning with faith and charity, rebuked the idol-worshippers who were full of fury against the Christians, whereupon a mob assembled and stoned her. Praying in her torment at the grave of Saint Agnes, and having been baptized in her own blood, so generously shed for Christ, she gave up her soul unto God."

http://iteadthomam.blogspot.ca/2008/01/s-emerentiana-patroness-of-feenyites.html

Your comment is an example of a logical fallacy; it's a change in supposition.  We're discussing sacraments, not analogous terms.

In His Love

Blood is not valid matter for a baptism, regardless of circumstance or intention.
Yes it is.

"[Saint] Emerentiana, a Roman virgin and the foster-sister of the blessed Agnes, while she was still a Catechumen, burning with faith and charity, rebuked the idol-worshippers who were full of fury against the Christians, whereupon a mob assembled and stoned her. Praying in her torment at the grave of Saint Agnes, and having been baptized in her own blood, so generously shed for Christ, she gave up her soul unto God."

http://iteadthomam.blogspot.ca/2008/01/s-emerentiana-patroness-of-feenyites.html

Your comment is an example of a logical fallacy; it's a change in supposition.  We're discussing sacraments, not analogous terms.
I'm not sure if you're a Feeneyite or if I'm misunderstanding your position. I just wanted to clarify, in case it's the former, that blood will work for Baptism depending on the situation. Water is the ordinary means.
Holy Face of Jesus, I love you.

Have a blessed Lent, Fishies!

yablabo

Blood is not valid matter for a baptism, regardless of circumstance or intention.
Yes it is.

"[Saint] Emerentiana, a Roman virgin and the foster-sister of the blessed Agnes, while she was still a Catechumen, burning with faith and charity, rebuked the idol-worshippers who were full of fury against the Christians, whereupon a mob assembled and stoned her. Praying in her torment at the grave of Saint Agnes, and having been baptized in her own blood, so generously shed for Christ, she gave up her soul unto God."

http://iteadthomam.blogspot.ca/2008/01/s-emerentiana-patroness-of-feenyites.html

Your comment is an example of a logical fallacy; it's a change in supposition.  We're discussing sacraments, not analogous terms.
I'm not sure if you're a Feeneyite or if I'm misunderstanding your position. I just wanted to clarify, in case it's the former, that blood will work for Baptism depending on the situation. Water is the ordinary means.

Thank you for your response.

To clarify, I am not a "Feeneyite"; I find Fr. Feeney's history and the St. Benedict Center reprehensible. 

Also, to clarify, blood is not proper matter for the sacrament of Baptism, and using it cannot effect what the sacrament effects.  It's taught infallibly by Pope Eugenius IV that: "All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of doing what the church does. If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected."  The only matter for the sacrament of Baptism is water. 

Two problems with posing the martyrs of the early Church as a proof that blood is a valid matter for the sacrament of Baptism: (1) this sacrament was not required to effect Justification until the promulgation of the Gospels, (2) neophytes were also classed amongst the catechumenate.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss philosophical input regarding my original proposition that the priest only consecrates what is before him on the altar and not what he has separated to the side.  If you have any authoritative sources, or insight to share, I would be glad to know it.

-- Nicole

Panum


------------ Dr. Ludwig Ott FUNDAMENTALS OF CATHOLIC DOGMA

4. The Necessity of Baptism

1. Necessity of Baptism for Salvation

Baptism by water (Baptismus fluminis) is, Since the promulgation of the
Gospel, necessary for all men without exception, for salvation. (De fide.)

The Council of Trent declared against the Reformers, whose idea of
justification led them to deny it, the necessity of Baptism for salvation:
Si quis dixerit, baptismum liberum esse, hoc est non necessarium ad
salutem, A.S. D 861 Cf. D 791. As to the moment of the beginning of the
baptismal obligation, the Council of Trent declared that after the
promulgation of the Gospel B (post Evangelium promulgatum) there could be
no justification without Baptism or the desire for the same. D 796. The
necessity of Baptism for salvation is, according to John 3, 5 and Mk. 16,
16, a necessity of means (necessitas medii), and, according to Mt. 28, 19,
also a necessity or precept (necessitas praecepti). The necessity of means
does not derive from the | intrinsic nature of the Sacrament itself, but
from the designation of Baptism as an indispensable means of salvation by
a positive ordinance of God. In J special circumstances the actual use of
the prescribed means can be dispensed with (hypothetical necessity).

Tradition, in view of John 3, 5, strongly stresses the necessity of
Baptism for salvation. Tertullian, invoking these words, observes: " It is
determined by law that nobody can be saved without baptism " (De bapt. 12,
I).  Cf.  Pastor Hermae, Sim. IX 16.

2. Substitutes for Sacramental Baptism

In case of emergency Baptism by water can be replaced by Baptism of desire
or Baptism by blood. (Sent. fidei prox.)

a) Baptism of desire (Baptismus flaminis sive Spiritus Sancti) Baptism of
desire is the explicit or implicit desire for sacramental baptism (votum
baptismi) associated with perfect contrition (contrition based on
charity).
   
The Council of Trent teaches that justification from original sin is not
possible " without the washing unto regeneration or the desire for the
same."

According to the teaching of Holy Writ, perfect love possesses justifying
power. Luke 7, 47: "Many sins are forgiven her because she hath loved
much." John 14, 21: " He that loveth me shall be loved of my Father: l and
I will love him and will manifest myself to him." Luke 23, 43 • " This ,
day thou shalt be with me in Paradise."

The chief witnesses from Tradition are St. Ambrose and St. Augustine. In
the funeral oration on the Emperor Valentine II, who died without Baptism,
St.  Ambrose says: " Should he not acquire the grace for which he longed?
Certainly: As he desired it, he has attained it . . . His pious desire has
absolved him " (De obitu Valent. 51, 53). St. Augustine declared: " I find
that not only suffering for the sake of Christ can replace that which is
lacking in Baptism, but also faith and conversion of the heart (fidem
conversionemque cordis), if perhaps the shortness of the time does not
permit the celebration of the mystery , of Baptism " (De bapt. IV 22, 29).
In the period of early Scholasticism St. !  Bernard of Clairvaux (Ep. 77
c. 2 n. 6-9), Hugo of St. Victor (De sacr. 116, 7) and the Summa
Sententiarum (V 5) defended the possibility of Baptism of desire against
Peter Abelard. Cf. S. th. III 68, 2.
         
Baptism of desire works ex opere operantis. It bestows Sanctifying Grace,
which remits original sin, all actual sins, and the eternal punishments
for sin.  Venial sins and temporal punishments for sin are remitted
according to the intensity of the subjective disposition. The baptismal
character is not imprinted nor is it the gateway to the other sacraments.

b) Baptism of blood (baptismus sanguinis)

Baptism of blood signifies martyrdom of an umbaptised person, that is, the
patient bearing of a violent death or of an assault which of its nature
leads to death, by reason of one's confession of the Christian faith, or
one's practice of Christian virtue.

Jesus Himself attests the justifying power of martyrdom. Mt. to, 32: "
Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess
him before my Father who is in Heaven." Mt. 10 39 (16, 25): " He that
findeth his life shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me
shall find it." John 11 12, 25: " He that hateth his life in this world
keepeth it unto life eternal."
      
From the beginning the Fathers regarded martyrdom as a substitute for
Baptism. Tertullian calls it "blood Baptism" (lavacrum sanguinis) and
ascribes to it the effect of "taking the place of the baptismal bath if it
was not received, and restoring that which was lost" (De bapt. I6).
According to St. Cyprian, the catechumens who suffer martyrdom receive "
the glorious and most sublime blood-Baptism" (Ep. 73, 22). Cf. Augustine,
De civ. Dei XIII 7.
      
As, according to the testimony of Tradition and of the Church Liturgy (cf.
Feast of the Innocents), young children can also receive blood-Baptism,
blood-Baptism operates not merely ex opere operantis as does Baptism of
desire, but since it is an objective confession of Faith it operates also
quasi ex opere operato. It confers the grace of justification, and when
proper dispositions are present, also the remission of all venial sins and
temporal punishments. St.  Augustine says: " It is an affront to a martyr
to pray for him; we should rather recommend ourselves to his prayers "
(Sermo 159 I.) Baptism by blood does not confer the baptismal character.
Cf. S. th. III 66, 11 and 12.

Zedta

  • Red Fish
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3,315
  • Total likes: 288
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Wha'd ya expect, from a cigar smokin' gorilla?
As to the Baptism of Blood issue, especially that of the Innocents/Unborn: It would seem to me that if a child is unborn, they are not subject to Original Sin, since being unborn, are not able to live a human existence and are nut subject to those responsibilities. I tend to think their souls return to heaven, from whence they came.



But, as to the original question at hand:

Objects to be consecrated during Mass must be located on the Corporal and uncovered during the act of Consecration. The container that holds the wine to be used for the Consecration, is removed from the Altar prior to Consecration and its opening covered. Any 'bread' or 'wine' left covered in its container during Consecration is not so Consecrated.

So then, it would seem, distance is of no issue so long as the distance does not remove the object from being upon the Corporal.

At least, that is what I was taught as an Altar Boy, to be Acolyte, in the preVatican II Church.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out

In the world it is called Tolerance, but in hell it is called Despair, the sin that believes in nothing, cares for nothing, seeks to know nothing, interferes with nothing, enjoys nothing, hates nothing, finds purpose in nothing, lives for nothing, and remains alive because there is nothing for which it will die

A democracy which makes or even effectively prepares for modern, scientific war must necessarily cease to be democratic. No country can be really well prepared for modern war unless it is governed by a tyrant, at the head of a highly trained and perfectly obedient bureaucracy
Huxley

The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything  
Einstein

Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried


Subscription Options:

One-time Donations: