Consecration Validity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bunky_2010
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bunky_2010

Guest
Peace be with you!

I participated at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass recently where the celebrant did not place the chalices given to extraordinary ministers of holy communion on the corporal but on the altar linen during the consecration.

I was under the impression that only what is on the corporal is consecrated.

Please help me understand so I know for sure that what I am recieving is truly the Precious Blood of our Lord.

PAX.
 
Bunky_2010 said:
I was under the impression that only what is on the corporal is consecrated.
Click to expand...
No.

What is consecrated is whatever the celebrant intends to consecrate. (Often, he places everything he intends to consecrate on the corporal, for ease of identifying what he’s consecrating, but there’s nothing special about the corporal that ‘causes’ consecration.)
Please help me understand so I know for sure that what I am recieving is truly the Precious Blood of our Lord.
Click to expand...
It really was. Be at peace.
 
Gorgias:

Thank you for your response.

This certainly makes sense to me.

The concern come up because most of the Masses that I have participated at the celebrant will place everything on the corporal.

If anybody else wants to weigh in then please do so.

PAX,

Jeff.
 
From what I have seen on television, at papal Masses, the many dozens of ciboria are placed on a side table as there are far too many to put on the altar, let alone the corporal.
 
Bunky_2010 said:
Peace be with you!

I participated at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass recently where the celebrant did not place the chalices given to extraordinary ministers of holy communion on the corporal but on the altar linen during the consecration.

I was under the impression that only what is on the corporal is consecrated.

Please help me understand so I know for sure that what I am recieving is truly the Precious Blood of our Lord.

PAX.
Click to expand...
Your concern perhaps arises from some knowledge you encountered that those of us who are priests of a certain generation were taught to form the intention to consecrate “what is on or above the corporal of the altar”. In fact, I was taught (and did) to form this as a habitual intention on the day of my priestly ordination.

In fact, it is still my normative intention as I prepare to offer Mass. That said, it has happened that I have been the celebrant of a Mass where the altar had no corporal. So, I simply adjusted my intention accordingly. Similarly, I have been in parishes where it was not possible to place everything to be consecrated on the corporals available…and I adjusted my intention accordingly again.

The elements do not even have to be on the altar to be consecrated – and those who have distributed Communion at Masses of the Holy Father have personally experienced this.

A matter such as this should not be causing you any anxiety.
 
This topic appears fairly regularly here.

Here’s a little primer on how it works:
  1. The “default” intention is that the priest intends to consecrate whatever elements (bread/wine)* are on the corporal.
If the hosts are on the corporal, then the priest does intend to consecrate them, unless he has a specific intention to the contrary.

Whatever is not on the corporal is not consecrated (see below).

Whatever is on the corporal is consecrated, even if the priest is unaware that the host is there (unlikely, but possible).
  1. The priest may consecrate what is not-on-the-corporal, under the condition that he must actively intend to consecrate it.
    Further: if the priest places the bread on the altar (but not the corporal) at the offertory, then he has such an intention. This also applies to any other situation where the priest knows that the hosts are on the altar and does intend to consecrate them—regardless of how or when they were placed there.
That paragraph applies to the OP’s situation.

If the hosts are not on the corporal, then the priest must have the intention to consecrate them.

If there are hosts outside the corporal, but the priest is unaware, then those hosts are not consecrated.
  1. The priest may consecrate what is not on the altar, but it must be near the altar (ie close-by the altar, not in the sacristy or some other place). In this case, he must very specifically intend to consecrate those hosts.
Some practical examples of when the hosts are not consecrated:

If a host is placed on the altar (not on the corporal) without the knowledge of the celebrant. This might happen by accident, or someone else might place it/them there intentionally. If the priest is unaware that the host is there, then it is not consecrated.

Hosts which are present elsewhere in the sanctuary, but not on the altar are never consecrated, but see #3 for the exception.

The priest can always have the intention to not-consecrate any particular hosts. For example, if the priest notices that a few stray hosts were dropped onto the altar (even onto the corporal) before Mass, but too late to pick them up (unlikely but possible) then he can intend to not-consecrate them.

At large Masses (such as papal Masses attended by hundreds of thousands) all the chalices and ciboria are placed in front of at least one priest who is concelebrating. The main celebrant (eg pope) intends to consecrate whatever is laid out for that purpose and the concelebrating priests certainly have the outward intention to consecrate whatever is immediately in front of them.
*for brevity, I’ll simply write “bread” but in reality it applies to “bread and/or wine”
 
Don Ruggero & FrDavid96:

Thank you for your clarifications.

It really never crossed my mind about “intent”. I was thinking about other Masses where this is common due to the number of chalices.

This all makes sense to me.

I hope that priests in general, if possible, would try to put the bread\wine to be consecrated on the corporal as I don’t think most lay faithful understand “intent” as discussed in this thread.

God bless you all and may Mary keep you.

PAX.
 
Bunky_2010 said:
Don Ruggero & FrDavid96:

Thank you for your clarifications.

It really never crossed my mind about “intent”. I was thinking about other Masses where this is common due to the number of chalices.

This all makes sense to me.

I hope that priests in general, if possible, would try to put the bread\wine to be consecrated on the corporal as I don’t think most lay faithful understand “intent” as discussed in this thread.

God bless you all and may Mary keep you.

PAX.
Click to expand...
Most of the faithful cannot even see the corporal. Which is another way of saying, most of them have no clue about the rule, and if asked, would most likely answer either that they had no idea, or presumed that everything on the altar was to be consecrated.
 
otjm said:
Most of the faithful cannot even see the corporal. Which is another way of saying, most of them have no clue about the rule, and if asked, would most likely answer either that they had no idea, or presumed that everything on the altar was to be consecrated.
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with the presumption that if the cup is offered, it is valid?
 
otjm said:
I don’t know - maybe cracker jacks started delivering police badges? 😃
Click to expand...
Except to be fair, the OP didn’t question the validity of the Mass itself but unique in that he was asking how extensive was the consecration. To be honest, I didn’t know either.
 
ProVobis said:
Except to be fair, the OP didn’t question the validity of the Mass itself but unique in that he was asking how extensive was the consecration. To be honest, I didn’t know either.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I got that part.

The whole issue could have been resolved by the OP going up to the priest after Mass and saying something like " Father, could you help me? It is my understanding…"

Instead of following that route, we now have a thread which, while it instructs, also has the background of encouraging others in a public (as opposed to private) questioning of whether the priest is capable of following the rubrics, or whether perhaps he (he being the priest of the parish in which other readers reside) is either incapable of following instructions, or is ignorant of those instruction (after having received the training which priests go through in the seminary), or, God Forbid, he might be “One of those!”.

Not everyone who asks questions is simply seeking information. I am not questioning the OP, but rather stating my position that publicly questioning the priest’s rubrics has a tendency to encourage others to start down that path. There are (seemingly) legions who know just enough about rubrics to be dangerous. Questions of this sort have a tendency among some to encourage them to start down the path of questioning everything, particularly if the priest in question may not be someone they particularly like, for whatever reason.

And I have been around since the '40’s, so I am well aware that there have been priests who, to say it politely, have taken liberties with the rubrics. They are not, however, in the majority, nor have they ever been in our lifetimes.

And if there is a priest who doesn’t follow the rubrics, the solution does not lay in spreading the matter through the internet to any and every individual who has a connection to it.

We go to Mass to worship God; it is not helpful to many who can (and do) get distracted to the point of questioning every move or lack of move of the priest. All of us, especially those who “have a badge”, need to let go and let God, and get back to why we are present at Mass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top