Consecrating the Eucharist

[Nonzi]

Is it possible for a priest to make an error in consecrating the Eucharist, making it not Our Lord’s true body? If so, what would that mean for his congregation, who believe the are receiving Jesus’ body but are not?

 

[MtnDwellar]

The Church sets the bar very low so that errors which invalidate the consecration are unlikely. They are possible. In the event of an invalid consecration, the parishioners would not incur the penalty of sin but would not receive the full sacramental grace of the Eucharist.

 

[InThePew]

Is it possible for a priest to make an error in consecrating the Eucharist, making it not Our Lord’s true body? If so, what would that mean for his congregation, who believe the are receiving Jesus’ body but are not?

As it happens, I saw a mass online the other day like this - the priest changed the words of institution (not sure if deliberately or accidentally) saying: “this is my body which is given up for you” rather than “…will be given up for you”. This isn’t simply a matter of words (like using the old translation which the priest also did), it actually affects the meaning.

Fortunately, there wasn’t much of a congregation (just two or three others) but did they still receive Jesus or just a piece of bread? The short answer is that if the consecration wasn’t valid then the bread and wine were never changed into the body and blood of Christ. However, Christ’s gift of himself to us in the Eucharist is not of course limited by human action and so our Lord could, in theory at least, choose to change the bread and wine into his body and blood despite the error. Having said that, consecration of the eucharist obviously isn’t something to be taken lightly nor should we presume on Our Lord’s grace. So the best answer is that while the physical body and blood of Christ wouldn’t be received by those present, they would nonetheless still receive the spiritual effects and benefits of the sacrament.