G
georgemiller
Guest
Does a priest have to be in the state of grace in order to validly convey the benefit of a sacrament?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
1
1ke
Guest
No.Does a priest have to be in the state of grace in order to validly convey the benefit of a sacrament?
J
JRS_88
Guest
No, he doesn’t.
T
thistle
Guest
NO.Does a priest have to be in the state of grace in order to validly convey the benefit of a sacrament?
P
peter26
Guest
No, this view is called Donatism and has been condemned as heresy.
B
Brendan_64
Guest
A related question. Does the priest have to believe in the Eucharist to consecrate the host?
G
Ghosty
Guest
Same answer.A related question. Does the priest have to believe in the Eucharist to consecrate the host?
Think of it this way: does the priest have miraculous power, or does God? The priest is the instrument of God, and has no power of his own. Therefore, the state of the priests soul with regard to sin is irrelevant. This is true for all Sacraments and Blessings.
Peace and God bless!
B
Brendan_64
Guest
Would this not affect the required intent? If a priest doesn’t believe then how could he intend to consecrate the host?Same answer.
Think of it this way: does the priest have miraculous power, or does God? The priest is the instrument of God, and has no power of his own. Therefore, the state of the priests soul with regard to sin is irrelevant. This is true for all Sacraments and Blessings.
Peace and God bless!
G
Ghosty
Guest
The intent must be to do what the Church intends. If a priest doubts, but intends to perform the Eucharist as the Church intends, then we have the Eucharist.Would this not affect the required intent? If a priest doesn’t believe then how could he intend to consecrate the host?
Peace and God bless!
P
peter26
Guest
If on the other hand, the priest believes the Eucharist is just a “memorial” or a “symbol” and all he intends is to offer a symbol and memorial, there is no transubstantiation. Belief therefore can be relevant. The state of the priest’s soul is not.
B
Brendan_64
Guest
And what if it goes beyond doubt? What if the priest simply does not believe in the Eucharist? How can a priest intend to do as the Church intends if the priest believes that what the Church intends cannot exist as a reality?The intent must be to do what the Church intends. If a priest doubts, but intends to perform the Eucharist as the Church intends, then we have the Eucharist.
Peace and God bless!
Even this requirement is too high. What is required is simply to intend to do what the Church does.The intent must be to do what the Church intends. If a priest doubts, but intends to perform the Eucharist as the Church intends, then we have the Eucharist.
Peace and God bless!
To intend as the Church intends is ideal, but not required.
Belief therefore, or lack thereof does not by itself affect this minimum intention, because even a doubting priest rarely withdraws his intent to consecrate (note that I said consecrate, which is what the Church does; he does not have to intend to bring about the Real Presence, although again, this is ideal). For intention to be completely lacking, he would have to actively withdraw that intention and consciously tell himself that he is not performing the Catholic rite. This rarely happens.And what if it goes beyond doubt? What if the priest simply does not believe in the Eucharist? How can a priest intend to do as the Church intends if the priest believes that what the Church intends cannot exist as a reality?
P
ProVobis
Guest
No, but it does seem to indicate a bigger problem IMO going forward, especially if he leads others not to believe.A related question. Does the priest have to believe in the Eucharist to consecrate the host?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.