Words of consecration

[Anima_Christi]

Today at a daily mass, during the consecration where the priest says, “Take this all of you and eat it. This is my body, which will be given up for you. Do this in memory of me,” the priest forgot to say “Do this in memory of me.” (It is a recently ordained priest). He did not forget to say “Do this in memory of me” when consecrating the wine, though.
Was the consecration valid? Are the words “in memory of me” necessary for validity? And what exactly MUST be said for a valid consecration?
And if it isn’t valid, was the wine at least consecrated since he did say “Do this in memory of me”?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

“Take this, all of you, and eat it. This is My Body which will be given up for you”

and

“Take this, all of you, and drink from it. This is the cup of My Blood, the Blood of the New and Everlasting Covenant. It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of Me.”

Those are the Words of Institution. There is no “Do this…” in the first part, only the second, so it’s fine.

 

[Anima_Christi]

Really!? Then I guess there’s no problem at all! I don’t know why, for some reason I guess I was expecting a “Do this in memory of me” and assumed he’d forgotten it. Funny, I’d never though of it before. Hmm.
Thanks!

 

[batteddy]

As for what is necessary…it needs to be made clear that the bread and wine are becoming the unbloody sacrafice of Jesus’s body and blood.

For the “form” of a sacrament to be valid, it must express the substance of the sacraments.

The Church has the power to determine the licit form…but the requirements for Baptism and Eucharist are especially strict since some form is mentioned in the Gospels themselves.

For Baptism, there needs to be a mention of Baptizing, and it must be done in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

There are still two basic forms that can be used:

“I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” used in the West…

and “Be Baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” used in the East…

But both this Active Indicative form, and this Passive Imperitive form are valid.

For Absolution no trinitarian reference is needed to correctly express the form…“I absolve you of your sins” or even just “I absolve thee” is valid…as is “I forgive you of your sins” or “I remit you sins” though the first “absolvo” in the Latin is the licit one and is considered more proper, even though the others are generally recognized as valid variations that dont change the substantial meaning, though some theologians in the middle ages disagreed.

In the East, deprecatory and passive supplications were and are even used and generally now recognized as valid. Such as:

“May God absolve thee from all thy sins, and through the penance imposed mayst thou be absolved by the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, by the Angels, by the Saints, and by me, a wretched sinner”

The form of marriage may take any form the Church chooses, and even the ministers may change. In the West the couple are the ministers of matrimony on each other, in the Eastern Rites however, the minister is the Priest who truly confers and effects the marriage of the couple…though they still must consumate it.

Even in the Roman Rite, confirmation has greatly changed in form to be more like the East…but is still valid because it still maintains the essence of the sacrament:

“Be signed with the sign of the cross, and be confirmed with the chrism of salvation” was the old way in the Roman Rite…

now it is, “Be sealed with the gift of the Holy Spirit”

Annointing of the Sick some theologians thought must take a supplicatory tone, because James says the person must be prayed over…still the following forms have been used and are now generally recognized as valid:

“I anoint thee with sanctified oil in the name of the Trinity that thou mayst be saved for ever and ever”

“Through this holy unction and His own most tender mercy may the Lord pardon thee whatever sins or faults thou hast committed”-old Roman Rite

“Through this holy anointing may the Lord in His love and mercy help you with the grace of the Holy Spirit. May the Lord who frees you from sin save you and raise you up.”- new Roman Rite

Ordination has many prayers that can accompany it. The old rite has a very long prayer including this important part:

“We beseech Thee, almighty Father, invest these Thy servants with the dignity of the priesthood. Do Thou renew in their hearts the spirit of holiness, that they may hold the office, next to ours in importance, which they have received from Thee, O Lord, and by the example of their lives point out a norm of conduct.”

As for the Eucharist, THIS IS MY BODY, and THIS IS…MY BLOOD, are generally held as all that is necessary…though especially with the chalice more words are added, and some would argue that some reference must be made not only to Transubstantiation, but also the Sacrafice…

In some Eastern Orthodox churches, the Epiklesis is emphasized and held to be the moment of consecration:

“Again we offer to You this spiritual and unbloody sacrifice, and we implore and pray, and entreat You, send down Your Holy Spirit upon us and upon these gifts here present. (Blessing the bread) And make this bread the precious body of Your Christ. (Blessing the chalice) And that which is in this chalice, the precious blood of your Christ. (Blessing both) Having changed them by Your Holy Spirit”

And the anaphora of Addai and Mari, approved by the Vatican as valid…has no Institution Memorial! Nevertheless, it expresses the substance of the sacrament in several places, including here:

“Do Thou, O Lord, through Thy many and ineffable mercies, make the memorial good and acceptable with that of all the pious and righteous fathers who have been pleading before Thee in the commemoration of the body and blood of Thy Christ, which we offer to Thee upon Thy pure and holy altar, as Thou hast taught us.”

So, form is variable…

 

[Edward_Pothier]

Catholics who attend Mass regularly are used to hearing at the end of the words of consecration, “Do this in memory of me.” This formula is part of all the Eucharistic prayers. It therefore comes as a bit of a surprise when the four biblical passages dealing with the Eucharist at the Last Supper are investigated and the relative absence of the “Do this in memory of me” command is noted.

The purpose of this note will be very limited, merely looking at the presence/absence of the command as well as the location (if it exists) both in the biblical texts and the Roman Catholic Eucharistic prayer. It will be unable to compare the varied wordings in the texts (biblical and liturgical) and will not delve into the richness of the memory/remembrance concept.

We have four textual witnesses in the New Testament to consider - the three synoptic gospels and chapter 11 of St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians. The Gospel according to John does not supply any parallel account, not treating the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

Neither the Gospel according to Matthew nor the Gospel according to Mark has any evidence of a "Do this command. See Matthew 26:26-29 and Mark 14:22-25.

The Gospel according to Luke does have such a command, placed after the words over the bread. This statement assumes that the text of the Lukan passage is the “longer” one. A footnote in the RNAB to Luke 22:19c-20 points out a technical difficulty in that some very old NT manuscripts have a “shorter” text which omits verses 19c-20. However, the standard scholarly Greek critical editions now include them and most translations do too (often with a footnote warning such as in the RNAB). If the “shorter” text were correct, then even the Lukan text would not have a “Do this in my memory” command either.

We finally come to St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians - finally in the sense that we have taken the texts in their usual canonical book order. But, as the RNAB footnote on the 1 Cor 11:23-25 passage helpfully reminds: “This is the earliest written account of the institution of the Lord’s Supper in the New Testament.” The note also mentions the “double command to repeat his [Jesus’] own action”. This scriptural text has the commands after both bread and cup words.

Note that in the original Greek of these three New Testament command texts, the exact same language for the commands is used, with the exception of the interspersed equivalent of the “as often as you drink” in the second Pauline one. The difference in “memory” (RNAB in Luke) or “remembrance” (RNAB in 1 Corinthians) is just due to an alternate English translation of the same Greek word. I am unsure why the RNAB translators varied their translations

Now let us consider the liturgical text. In all of the Roman Catholic Eucharistic Prayers after the “Take this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven” part, the section ends with the “Do this in memory of me.” In the Latin from which the ICEL translators based their English Mass translation this is “Hoc facite in meam commemorationem.”

One point which is of interest is the placement of the “Do this in memory of me” in the Catholic Eucharistic Prayers. It comes after the word over the cup of wine. While the Gospels of Matthew and Mark have no “Do this in memory of me” commands, Luke’s has one after the bread word, and Paul’s letter has them after both bread and cup words, the Roman Catholic Eucharistic Prayer has it only after the cup word. This placement is unique, although probably not too much can be made of it. I am fairly sure that the consensus view, even if not expressed formally, is that the liturgical command refers to the entire eucharistic action, not merely the action and words over the cup. Still the prayer text’s independence in the positioning of the “Do this …” is noticeable if one moves beyond comfortable familiarity.

Edward Pothier

 

[Edward_Pothier]

In my previous post on this thread, I omitted the biblical texts dealing with the Eucharistic “Do this in memory of me” words. I will now provide the texts. The biblical translation to be included is the 1986 Revised New Testament of the New American Bible (RNAB).

Neither the Gospel according to Matthew nor the Gospel according to Mark has any evidence of a “Do this” command.
Gospels according to Matthew and Mark:
<Matthew 26:26> While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” <27>Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, <28>for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins. <29>I tell you, from now on I shall not drink this fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father.”

**<Mark 14:22>**While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” <23>Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. <24>He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many. <25>Amen, I say to you, I shall not drink again the fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”

The Gospel according to Luke does have such a command, placed after the words over the bread. This statement assumes that the text of the Lukan passage is the “longer” one. A footnote in the RNAB to Luke 22:19c-20 points out a technical difficulty in that some very old NT manuscripts have a “shorter” text which omits verses 19c-20. However, the standard scholarly Greek critical editions now include them and most translations do too (often with a footnote warning such as in the RNAB). If the “shorter” text were correct, then even the Lukan text would not have a “Do this in my memory” command either.
The Gospel according to Luke:
**<Luke 22:15>**He said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, <16>for, I tell you, I shall not eat it [again] until there is fulfillment in the kingdom of God.” <17>Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; <18>for I tell you [that] from this time on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” <19> Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.” <20>And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you.”
St. Paul in First Corinthians:
**<1 Corinthians 11:23>**For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, <24>and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” <25>In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

Note that in the original Greek of these three New Testament command texts, the exact same language for the commands is used, with the exception of the interspersed equivalent of the “as often as you drink” in the second Pauline one. Using a standard transliteration scheme to represent the Greek letters with regular Roman letters (with “ē” transliterating the Greek “eta”, while “e” represents Greek “epsilon”) the texts are:

touto poieite eis tēn emēn anamnēsin (in Luke 22)

touto poieite eis tēn emēn anamnēsin (in 1 Cor 11:24)

touto poieite, hosakis ean pinēte, eis tēn emēn anamnēsin (in 1 Cor 11:25)

Edward Pothier