Licit to attend weekly NO Masses with abuses?
#79
(04-23-2009, 09:08 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: So, McMaster, if an inward intention or lack thereof doesn't matter as long as the proper form and there is no outward lack of intention, please explain the following:

If a priest has 3 hosts on the altar, and he intends to Consecrate 2, only 2 are Consecrated, correct? Likewise, it may be a practice "Mass" (e.g., to instruct Seminarians) and he will in fact say the words of Consecration with no Consecration taking place because he intends none.

Neither has an outward show of intent, only an inward one, and proper form is used.  By how you are interpreting Aquinas, it seems that these other hosts would be Consecrated even though, AFAIK, they are not.

Please explain 1) If these hosts in my example(s) would be Consecrated or not, and, 2) please explain your answer in light of your interpretation of St. Thomas.

If a priest has 3 hosts on the altar, and he follows the formula of consecration but intends to consecrate <i>zero</i> because he doesn't believe the prescribed words have any supernatural effect, only zero are consecrated, correct? No, not necessarily. That is St. Thomas's point: "the minister of a sacrament acts in the person of the whole Church, whose minister he is; while in the words uttered by him, the intention of the Church is expressed; and ... this suffices for the validity of the sacrament, except the contrary be expressed on the part either of the minister or of the recipient of the sacrament" (S.T. III, Q. 64, Art. 8, reply obj. 2). If it were not so, "he who approaches a sacrament could not know whether he has received the sacrament. Consequently he could have no certainty in regard to salvation" (ibid., obj. 2).

Because of the <i>recipient's need for certainty regarding the sacraments,</i> it is the certain, manifest, and unchanging intention of the Church--not the uncertain, hidden, and changeable intention of the minister--that is ultimately decisive. If there is no recipient, however, this principle does not apply, so no consecration unintended by the celebrant takes place. From this it follows that the hosts in your example would not be consecrated, on the supposition that they would not be given to recipients who might be misled into thinking they were consecrated.

God bless you!

Don McMaster
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Licit to attend weekly NO Masses with abuses? - by McMaster - 04-24-2009, 06:37 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)