Article II. The Proximate Matter of the Eucharist

174. The proximate matter of every sacrament is the application of the remote matter, as has already often been said. Therefore, since the remote matter of the Eucharist is bread and wine, its proximate matter is the application of the bread and wine, which is made in the consecration. By some authors, however, the species of the Eucharist, insofar as they contain the Body and Blood of Christ, are called the proximate matter of the Eucharist. Here proximate matter is taken in the first sense.

175. 1. For valid consecration it is required: a) that the matter to be consecrated be physically present; b) that it be determined.

a) The physical presence of the matter is had whenever, according to the common estimation of men, the words "here" and "this" can rightly be applied. Hence all the hosts contained in a ciborium are validly consecrated, although they cannot all be seen; likewise, the consecration of hosts in a covered ciborium placed before the priest is valid; all newly ordained priests validly consecrate with the bishop, even if they stand rather far from the altar and see neither the bread nor the chalice. Whether the consecration of a host hidden beneath the corporal or at a corner of the altar, or of a ciborium placed upon the bench of the candlesticks, is valid must be determined not from its physical presence alone, but from the prior intention of the celebrating priest. For such hosts are more present to the celebrating priest than the host to be consecrated is present to newly ordained priests in their first Mass. Since these cases occur not rarely, it is preferable that every priest once and for all form a clear intention of consecrating according to the manner to be explained below in n. 177.

b) The determination of the matter to be consecrated by the actual or virtual intention of the consecrating priest is required for the validity of the sacrament. The reason is that every action must have a determinate terminus, and moreover the particles "here" and "this" require a special determination. In practice it is to be counseled that this determination not be exaggerated too much with regard to number; for example, let the priest not determine the number of hosts by saying or thinking: I wish to consecrate twenty hosts, or one host. For if there were then in fact not twenty but twenty-two hosts, or if there were not one but two, it is doubtful whether and which ones would be consecrated. Therefore, let the priest simply propose to himself to consecrate the consecrable matter placed before him.

Theologians dispute whether droplets of wine adhering to the sides of the chalice, within or without, are consecrated. Droplets adhering to the outside of the chalice are not considered consecrated, because no priest is presumed to have such an intention and to act so irreverently against the Most Holy Sacrament. There is not, however, sufficient reason for doubting the consecration of the droplets adhering within. For they are certainly present and can licitly be consecrated. It seems better if the priest forms the intention of consecrating whatever is consecrable in the chalice, nor is there any reason why he should restrict his intention to the continuous quantity of wine. For it easily happens that, because of the movement of the chalice, droplets adhere to its inner side. But if he did not wish to consecrate these droplets, he would have to wipe them away carefully immediately before the consecration, which would be quite burdensome.

It likewise does not appear why small crumbs which, having been separated from the hosts during the consecration, are found in the ciborium should not be consecrated, unless the priest has formed a special intention concerning them. Some theologians counsel excluding such crumbs from the consecration in order to avoid irreverence; but other authors counsel rather that whatever consecrable matter is found in the ciborium be consecrated, because otherwise unconsecrated crumbs are mixed with consecrated crumbs, namely, with those which later fall from the consecrated hosts through friction. The second opinion pleases us more, because according to the first manner of acting that irreverent mingling of unconsecrated and consecrated crumbs is always present; but in the second manner no irreverence occurs if the priest diligently gathers and consumes all the crumbs in the purification of the ciborium.

176. 2. For licit consecration it is required that the consecrable matter be: a) upon an altar, whether consecrated or portable; b) upon the corporal;⁵³ c) held in the hands of the priest or contained in an open vessel; d) that the consecration take place in Mass and that the thing to be consecrated be upon the altar at least before the offertory.⁵⁴

a) If the altar is consecrated, let the priest take care that all the consecrable matter be upon the corporal; but if it is a portable altar, it is not enough that the matter to be consecrated be found upon the corporal, but it is also required that it be upon the sacred stone. Nevertheless, if because of the narrowness of this stone the chalice and ciborium cannot stand upon it at the same time, it seems sufficient that at least some part of the base be upon the stone during the consecration. Yet stones so narrow are to be rejected insofar as this is possible.

b) To celebrate Mass without a corporal (or upon a corporal not blessed) cannot be excused from grave sin unless a grave necessity of celebrating urges.⁵⁵

c) Both at the offertory and at the consecration, the lid of the ciborium is to be removed. This binds under venial sin. The host which pertains to the essence of the Mass, as likewise the chalice in which the wine to be consecrated is contained, must be held by the priest in his hands during the consecration.

d) Consecration can never be licitly performed outside Mass. Likewise, it is absolutely never lawful to consecrate one species alone. Thus all teach, and expressly the Code of Canon Law, c. 817, which calls such a manner of acting nefas. Indeed, a consecration performed outside Mass is probably invalid. For "the priest, speaking in the person of Christ, confects this sacrament."⁵⁶ But a priest acts neither in the person of Christ nor according to the intention of the Church when he wishes to consecrate outside Mass. For the power of consecrating is nothing other than the power of celebrating Mass. Hence, in the ordination of a priest it is said: "Receive the power to offer sacrifice." Since this is so, the consecration would probably be invalid if, for example, a wicked priest pronounced the words of consecration over loaves kept in a baker's shop,⁵⁷ unless, however, he wished such a most criminal consecration to be called a Mass.

Hosts to be consecrated (in a ciborium) are to be placed upon the corporal at the beginning of Mass or at least before the offertory. For a reasonable cause, hosts brought in a ciborium after the offertory can licitly be consecrated, provided that their oblation is then supplied mentally. A greater cause is required in order that hosts brought after the preface but before the Canon may be consecrated. But a grave cause is required (for example, if otherwise a great multitude of the faithful would have to depart without the Communion requested, or would have to wait too long) in order that it be lawful to consecrate hosts brought after the Canon has already begun. The reason for this precept is deduced from the order of the Mass, in which the liturgical act of oblation, which begins at the offertory and ends with the secret prayers, is distinguished from the act of consecration, which begins with the preface. Hence this order is inverted if particles to be consecrated are brought after the offertory has already been made; but a greater inversion is present if the liturgical act of consecration has already begun in the preface.⁵⁸ Yet if only one person is to communicate, a particle from the priest's host can be given to him. It is never lawful to consecrate particles after the consecration of the Mass has already been completed, for this would be sacrilegiously to repeat an essential part of the Mass.

Consecrated hosts must remain upon the altar until after the Communion of the celebrating priest.⁵⁹

⁵³ Cf. Roman Missal, De defect. Miss., tit. 10.

⁵⁴ Cf. Roman Missal, Ritus celebrandi Missam, tit. 7, n. 3.

⁵⁵ Cf. St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 386.

⁵⁶ Eugene IV, Decree for the Armenians (Denz., n. 698).

⁵⁷ St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 196, dub. 3. St. Thomas cannot be alleged as certainly contrary to this opinion, because he does not speak of the valid consecration of one species except in Mass.

⁵⁸ Cf. St. Alphonsus, ibid., n. 217; Noldin, De sacr., n. 115.

⁵⁹ Cf. below, n. 230.

177. Scholion. Whether the consecration is valid if, through forgetfulness or inadvertence, the consecrating priest has not observed some grave liturgical precept. This case occurs quite frequently; for example, the consecrable matter is not upon the corporal, the chalice has not been duly consecrated, water was not mixed with the wine, etc. Some authors think such a consecration invalid, because the priest is not considered to have the intention of consecrating if the consecration, considered objectively, would be a grave sin. Thus, for example, St. Alphonsus⁶⁰ calls common and more probable the opinion which holds that a ciborium left outside the corporal through forgetfulness is not consecrated. The solution to this controversy depends upon the intention of the priest. For it seems beyond solid doubt that matter validly consecrable is present in these cases sufficiently physically and determinately. Every difficulty indeed vanishes if the priest once and for all forms a determinate intention, for example, of consecrating nothing except the consecrable matter found upon the corporal or in the chalice; or, what seems better, of consecrating all the consecrable matter which is found upon the altar and which at the beginning of Mass he wished to consecrate. In practice, it is to be counseled that every priest form one or the other intention. But if such an intention has not been formed, then a distinction must be made. Either the consecration pertains to completing the sacrifice itself, and then it is valid, notwithstanding any defect whatsoever introduced by ecclesiastical law. For the intention not to leave the sacrifice mutilated must prevail. Hence, for example, a consecration made in a chalice not consecrated, upon a corporal not blessed, in leavened bread, etc., is valid. Or the consecration of such matter does not pertain to completing the sacrifice, since it is accidental matter, for example, a ciborium left outside the corporal through forgetfulness; and then nevertheless it seems to be truly consecrated, insofar as it is consecrable matter and physically present, provided that at the beginning of Mass or at least immediately before Mass the priest had the intention of consecrating this determinate matter. The reason is that all things required for valid consecration seem to be present, namely, consecrable matter physically present and determined, and the intention of the minister, which is by no means considered revoked because some rubric (although in itself gravely binding) was not observed through inculpable inadvertence.⁶¹

Note. Hosts doubtfully consecrated can never be proposed for adoration or distributed to the people for Communion because of the danger of material idolatry; rather, they are either to be consumed before the ablution, or conditionally consecrated again in another Mass (not in the same Mass).

⁶⁰ Ibid., n. 217.

⁶¹ Thus also Göpfert, *Moraltheol.*⁷ III, 54; Ballerini in notes to Gury, Comp. theol. mor. II, n. 283; and American Ecclesiastical Review (1912), 660-674, where this question is treated with a lively pen.