Philosophical consideration of Eucharistic Consecration
[Image: elements.jpg]

As an introduction, I am quoting from

Quote:The question of distance must also be addressed. As our reader points out, if intention alone is sufficient, what would prevent long-distance consecration? Here the words of consecration themselves should help us. There has to be some meaning to the words "Take this," and "This is my body (blood)." The word "this" is not the same as "that" or "over there."

Liturgical norms usually require that all that is to be consecrated be present before the priest on the altar and upon a corporal. On very exceptional circumstances, such as large papal Masses, ciboria with hosts have been held by priests and deacons who are around or immediately behind the altar during the Eucharistic Prayer. Thus some relationship between the altar and the hosts to be consecrated is always maintained even though on some occasions the physical distance might be relatively large.

On one or two occasions, when the number of people made it impossible for the priests around the altar to distribute Communion to everyone from the hosts consecrated at the Mass, hosts consecrated at another Mass and reserved at a nearby church were used to distribute Communion to those furthest away. Not even the Holy Father believed that he could consecrate at a distance.

Yes, the photograph is low quality.  Also, I have blurred the priest and background to protect his identity.

The issue at hand is as follows:

All the vessels are in one indistinct group at the offertory.  However, at the point that the priest fills his chalice and removes the main host from the general ciborium, he separates everything meant for himself into a new group, so that there are two different groups of vessels on the altar.  I have never seen a priest do this before except when an altar server forgets to take the cruet of wine off the altar.  The priests I've seen don't call the errant server back, but rather remove the cruet some distance to the side of the altar so that it is separate from the group of elements before him.

Applying the philosophical standards from Fr. McNamara's article cited above, it appears that one must conclude that while there is a valid Mass and that the priest truly consecrates the elements before him, he does not consecrate the elements removed to the side.  The priest only consecrates what he can reasonably call "this" in front of him, but not what a reasonable man would call "that" over there.

I am looking for philosophical input.  Thank you.

-- Nicole

Messages In This Thread
Philosophical consideration of Eucharistic Consecration - by yablabo - 12-04-2016, 04:03 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)