M
minkymurph
Guest
Can you enlarge on why an ordained priest can consecrate the bread and wine?
I don’t disagree with you. I just don’t think I could explain it.
- Status
I don’t disagree with you. I just don’t think I could explain it.
P
PRmerger
Guest
It has to do with proper matter. You need to have the right “matter” in order for the sacraments to be the sacraments.
For example, water is needed for baptism. It’s not a valid baptism if you use, say, Coke.
Wheat bread and wine are needed for the Eucharist. It’s not a valid consecration if fruitcake and vodka are used.
And an ordained priest is needed to consecrate. It’s not valid if President Obama said the words of consecration.
I’m not being facetious. I’m just saying…
C
curlycool89
Guest
No, the priest is the only one who offers the Body of Christ. There is also a differentiation between the Body of Christ (the Church) and the Body of Christ (the Eucharist); they’re not the same thing.
What you’re thinking of is during the “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands…”, the people in the congregation enable the priest to offer the sacrifice in their names. A congregation is not required for a valid consecration (hence the existence of private masses). Without a priest, there is no consecration.
The priest is able to consecrate the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ by acting in persona Christi by virtue of receiving the sacrament of Holy Orders (better known as ordination). The process (if you will) is called Transubstantiation by Catholics. It is one of those things that has to be taken on faith.
You can see a parallel between the Old and New covenants though. In the Old covenant, the Priest (of the High priesthood of Aaron) had to offer the sacrifices that the people would bring. No other person could do this. Just like in the old covenant, the priests of the New offer a sacrifice at the Mass, which is Jesus.
M
minkymurph
Guest
No, I know your not being facetious. This would be how I would understand sacrametality, and this is why, as I understand it, the priest has to be male. Proper form.It has to do with proper matter. You need to have the right “matter” in order for the sacraments to be the sacraments.
For example, water is needed for baptism. It’s not a valid baptism if you use, say, Coke.
Wheat bread and wine are needed for the Eucharist. It’s not a valid consecration if fruitcake and vodka are used.
And an ordained priest is needed to consecrate. It’s not valid if President Obama said the words of consecration.
I’m not being facetious. I’m just saying…
M
minkymurph
Guest
Yes, this is how I understand it, with one exception.
As I understand it, the body of Christ is not offered at the Mass.
This is because Christ offered his body once and for all time. It is not offered over and over again. That’s what some Protestants think we believe. Christ rose body and soul to heaven and his sacrifice is presented to us by becoming the body and blood of Christ. It is not offered again. During the Mass, the spirit is invoked, and transform the bread and wine; the point of the Mass were the priest places his hands over the gifts and makes the sign of the cross. The people are kneeling when this happens. This is why I said we play different roles during the Mass. As you say, not everyone consecrates the gifts.
Through our baptism, we are mystically incorporated into the body of Christ; his dying and rising. We all partake of the body and blood of Christ which was offered for us.
Therefore, I would say that no one actually offers the body of blood of Christ at the Mass. The gifts are consecrated by the ordained priest, everyone partakes and therefore everyone participates.
This is why the comment ‘we all offer the body and blood of Christ’ threw me.
Anyone else want to add anything or explain further?
L
LilyM
Guest
Yes, the couple are ministers, so is the priest. Note that the Catechism doesn’t say that the priest isn’t ALSO a minister. It’s not a case of either/or, it’s a case of both the priest AND the couple being ministers.
Without a priest or deacon, blessing a marriage on behalf of the Church, if one of the parties is Catholic there is no valid or sacramental marriage. That’s the very definition of a minister - one who is required to act in order for a sacrament to take place.
A valid marriage wouldn’t take place if the priest merely sat there, said and did nothing and just watched the couple exchange vows and let someone else say all the prayers of the service. He’s NOT a mere passive witness, he’s an active participant in the confection of the sacrament. In other words a minister.
NOT if one of the parties is Catholic - in that case, unless there is a dispensation by the Catholic party’s bishop from disparity of cult, the marriage is neither sacramental nor valid and can be annulled. And even in that event the marriage must take place in front of a Catholic priest or deacon to be valid. Theoretically a dispensation can be given from that requirement, if memory serves, but it rarely if ever is given in practice. THAT is how important the blessing of the marriage by a Catholic priest or deacon - his ministry (action to bring about the sacrament) - is.
Different rules apply to Catholics than non-Catholics, including different rules about who is the minister of the sacrament. In the Orthodox faith it is ONLY the priest, and NOT the couple, who is the minister, for example. We aren’t that extreme. We allow that BOTH the couple AND the priest (de facto) are ministers. Fact remains that a valid marriage certainly can’t happen, for a Catholic, without the ministry of the priest - at least not without a dispensation which is rarely if ever given.
C
curlycool89
Guest
No, the Mass is truly a sacrifice. You can also take a look at this answer from Fr. Vincent Serpa. You can also look at the Catechism starting at #1357.Yes, this is how I understand it, with one exception.
As I understand it, the body of Christ is not offered at the Mass.
This is because Christ offered his body once and for all time. It is not offered over and over again. That’s what some Protestants think we believe. Christ rose body and soul to heaven and his sacrifice is presented to us by becoming the body and blood of Christ. It is not offered again. During the Mass, the spirit is invoked, and transform the bread and wine; the point of the Mass were the priest places his hands over the gifts and makes the sign of the cross. The people are kneeling when this happens. This is why I said we play different roles during the Mass. As you say, not everyone consecrates the gifts.
J
jmcrae
Guest
As I understand it, what is sacrificed by the human priest is the bread and wine - the thanksgiving sacrifice of Melchizedek (hence, “Eucharist” which means “thanksgiving”) - what happens then is that the bread and wine is taken into Heaven, and replaced with Christ’s sacrifice of Himself, under the appearances of that same bread and wine.
What we receive in Holy Communion is not the priest’s sacrifice of bread and wine (which has gone away into Heaven after having been presented to God on the Altar), but rather, Christ’s sacrifice of Himself.
A
adrift
Guest
No the priest is not. If the marriage is not consummated no marriage takes place. It is the couple alone not both. Note The Catechism DOES NOT mention the priest as minister only as witness. It says that the couple in the Latin Rite is the ministers.
You are mixing up two things. One is the form demanded by the Church. The form demands that a priest WITNESSES the vows of commitment. The other is what actually constitutes the sacrament. Baptism it is the words along with the water being poured. Eucharist it is the words of consecration and so on. Marriage is the taking of vows and consummation.
Nope only a witness. I do not see any documentation that prayers of the service is necessary. I do not see that he has to do anything you suggest. He is not an active participant in the confection of the sacrament. The “confection” of the sacrament is the consummation.
My statement obviously spoke to non Catholics. When non Catholics are received into the Church their marriage is regarded as valid.
So?
Catechism
It still remains that the couple are the administers of the sacrament with the priest acting ONLY as a witness to the couples vows.
They express their consent to the Church which is represented by the priest.
The priest does not give his consent only his witness to the consent. He acts in the name of the Church to the couples consent. He is NOT a participant but a witness.
P
PRmerger
Guest
That is not correct. At the moment that a man and woman make their vows a marriage exists and is valid.
HOWEVER, if it is unconsummated, it becomes a marriage that may be dissoluble. At the moment they make their One Flesh Union, the marriage becomes indissoluble.
A
adrift
Guest
Why then is it possible to dissolve it if there is a marriage? Why is it indissoluble at the moment “they make their One Flesh Union”?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Ontologically, that is, at its essence, a marriage becomes indissoluble when they become One Flesh. What existed 30 seconds prior to the consummation–2 separate entities–exists no more after the union is consummated. Thus, it is indissoluble.
Why can an unconsummated marriage be dissolved? Because they are not one.
A
adrift
Guest
In other words, without consummation there is no marriage.
A
adrift
Guest
Canon Law
I don’t see that this has to be a man only.
L
LilyM
Guest
Wow - never noticed that Canon before
I can’t imagine it ever being put into practice though - it’s not like there’s ever an emergency situation where marriges MUST be solemnised within a particular timeframe, unlike, say baptism which sometimes must be performed in circumstances where there is a danger of death.
I can’t imagine it ever being put into practice though - it’s not like there’s ever an emergency situation where marriges MUST be solemnised within a particular timeframe, unlike, say baptism which sometimes must be performed in circumstances where there is a danger of death.
M
minkymurph
Guest
I agree with you the Mass is a sacrifice.
However, is it not the case the case that the Mass is not series of sacrifices, but a re-inactment of the one sacrifice of Christ and this is why is it imperitive the person who stands in the place of Christ is male? That he is not sacrificed over and over again. The *same *sacrifice of the cross is presented us? The one original sacrifice presented because Christ rose body and soul to heaven. Therefore, the one sacrifice is ongoing and not limited to time and place? It is not the case that Christ is sacrificed again and again but we are raised up to heaven during the Mass and not Christ is sacrificed again?
I appreciate that I may not be fully understanding you. There are times it is so hard to express our belief in limited human language and that is why many Protestants do not really understand our belief in the Mass?
A
adrift
Guest
Me neitherWow - never noticed that Canon before
I can’t imagine it ever being put into practice though - it’s not like there’s ever an emergency situation where marriges MUST be solemnised within a particular timeframe, unlike, say baptism which sometimes must be performed in circumstances where there is a danger of death.
J
JimG
Guest
Yes, a marriage is both valid and licit once vows are exchanged. Consummation seals and ratifies that bond which already exists.
That’s why we have wedding receptions–to celebrate a newly existing marriage bond formed by mutual public consent, and witnessed by a priest.
(Consummation alone does not create a marriage. Otherwise, every one night stand would be a new marriage.)
A
adrift
Guest
I don’t disagree with what you are stating. There has to be a commitment given in front of the Church but without consummation there is no sacrament. It is this very reason that a one night stand is a sacrilege.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Yep. Imagine what society would look like if our celebration of a newly formed marriage happened after the consummation!
Clearly, the moment a man and woman exchange vows they are married.
It becomes indissoluble when the marriage is consummated.
But we don’t have to wait until it’s indissoluble to celebrate the newly formed, sacramental marriage!
- Status