142. The Mass of Ordination

1. Ricardus, a priest about to be ordained soon, doubts whether the words of consecration, which the newly ordained priests pronounce together with the bishop, ought to be pronounced by him merely materially and recitatively, as a sign of power received, or formally and significatively for concelebrating with the ordaining bishop. He is also very anxious with regard to the pronouncement of those words, lest he finish them before the bishop and thus the bishop not consecrate; or lest he finish them after, and thus he himself not consecrate. Besides, since he received a fat stipend from a friend for the first Mass which he himself will celebrate, he asks whether for that stipend he can apply the Mass which he will celebrate with the bishop in the ordination itself.

It is asked: What is to be said to the Case?

R. To the 1st doubt of Ricardus. Although the newly ordained priests, in that Mass of ordination, are only secondary concelebrants, nevertheless they are truly celebrating; and therefore Ricardus must have the intention of consecrating. This is clearly drawn from the Roman Pontifical. Hence Benedict XIV, de Sacrif. miss., l. 3, c. 16, n. 6, says: "It must be established that by those recently ordained the words of consecration must not be pronounced materially and recitatively, but significatively; so that the intention of all be directed to the same moment of consecration. This is not to be understood in such a way that they must have the intention of consecrating at the same moment at which the bishop has pronounced the last words of the form, whether they themselves completed the form before or after; for the effect of the form cannot be suspended; but it must be understood that they ought to employ every zeal so that they pronounce the last words of the form together with the bishop, with that intention that, completing the form of consecration in this way, they consecrate together with the bishop; from which it happens that if they finish the form before or after the bishop, they do not consecrate, because they did not have the intention of consecrating while finishing in this way."

Hence the response to the 2nd doubt of Ricardus is clear. For it suffices that he have the intention of pronouncing the words in the due manner and of consecrating the same host and the same chalice with the bishop, then employing zeal and diligence lest he pronounce them before the bishop. And this is enough, nor must he anxiously labor over the proposed inconveniences. For they seem to be sufficiently removed if it is considered that the bishop is in the Case the principal consecrator, and the newly ordained priests concur as accessories to the same consecration; and the form which they pronounce with the bishop is morally joined with that which the bishop himself pronounces. From this it happens that even if the priests complete the form a little before or a little after the bishop, nevertheless it is to be judged as pronounced morally together with the bishop, and constitutes one and the same consecration. Wherefore, whether the priests pronounce it before or after, their intention must be referred after the manner of the pronouncement of the bishop with whom they concelebrate. Benedict XIV, place cited, n. 7.

To the 3rd doubt of Ricardus, it seems one must respond: Negatively. For the ordained man indeed is not the principal celebrant, but nevertheless he is truly celebrating. Wherefore the authority of applying the Mass for whomsoever he wishes cannot be taken away from him. But, notwithstanding this, it is not lawful for the priest to accept the alms, because he who furnishes the alms asks that the customary Mass be celebrated at the altar. Besides, because in reality there is not had a multiple sacrifice of the Mass, but one; the fruit of which is applied by the bishop, the principal celebrant. There are indeed several priests offering, and several offerings of priests, but in reality the sacrifice in the Case is only one. Wherefore, unless the one giving the alms knows this and consents, it does not seem that the newly ordained priest can satisfy, by this concelebration of the Mass, the application of the sacrifice of the Mass from the stipend received. Besides, this concelebration of Mass is not in reality the first Mass which Ricardus himself celebrates, and for which therefore he received a fat stipend from his friend. Cf. Benedict XIV, place cited, n. 10.