§ 1. On the Value and Effects of the Mass in General

Notions. For the sake of clarity, it must first be explained what is meant by these terms: the value, dignity, effects, and fruits of the Mass, lest confusion arise, especially since these terms are not understood in one manner by diverse authors. Then it must be said briefly who the diverse offerers are in the sacrifice of the Mass.

235. The value of the Mass includes two things: dignity and efficacy (power); or, as St. Alphonsus says:²⁹² "Value is that efficacy which the Mass has from the dignity of the offerer and of the thing offered for conferring goods upon the offerer and upon those for whom it is offered."

²⁹² Theol. mor. l. 6, n. 312.

236. The effects of the Mass are all those things which are actually produced by it with respect both to God and to the world.

The effects of the Mass are five, namely: 1. the latreutic effect: for the Mass produces adoration and the most excellent worship of God; 2. the eucharistic effect, insofar as the Mass renders thanks to God for benefits received; 3. the impetratory effect, because the Mass most efficaciously obtains goods, both temporal and spiritual; 4. the propitiatory effect, because the Mass renders God propitious to us, so that He remits sins;²⁹³ 5. the satisfactory effect, because the Mass causes the remission of the punishments due for sins.

It must be noted that a meritorious effect does not belong to the Mass insofar as it is a sacrifice accomplished in the person of Christ or in the name of the Church. For Christ merits nothing further through the Eucharistic sacrifice, since He Himself is outside the state of meriting and the redemption was completed on the Cross; neither does the Church merit anything through the sacrifice of the Mass, since every merit supposes a personal act. But if the Mass is considered as a personal good act of the priest, then he certainly merits ex opere operantis an increase of grace and glory. Moreover, since not only the celebrating priest, but also the faithful who assist or who give the stipend for the Mass offer the Mass, all of them merit an increase of grace and glory, provided, however, that they place no obstacle. For all who are in the state of mortal sin can properly merit no good, as was said above in I, n. 139. Therefore, a priest offering Mass in the state of mortal sin merits nothing and obtains no good effect; on the contrary, he commits a grave sacrilege. But the faithful who are in the state of mortal sin and who offer Mass with the priest indeed merit nothing, but they can obtain other good fruits, for example, impetratory and propitiatory fruits.

²⁹³ Council of Trent, session 22, c. 2 and can. 3 (Denz., nn. 940 and 950).

237. The fruits of the Mass are taken indiscriminately by some theologians for the effects of the Mass, but they are better understood as only those effects which the Mass produces for men (and not for God). For we call the fruits of a thing those effects which we enjoy. Therefore, the fruits of the Mass are only a determinate part of the effects of the Mass, namely, the propitiatory, satisfactory, and impetratory effects.

238. There are several offerers in the Mass, who nevertheless do not all properly sacrifice, since priestly order is required for sacrificing, whereas a moral conjunction with the sacrificing priest suffices for offering. Now the following offer:

1. Christ, who is the principal offerer, not only because He Himself instituted the sacrifice of the Mass, but also because He offers through priests as through His vicars, who therefore pronounce the words of consecration in the person of Christ: "For this is My Body, etc."

2. The Church, which has appointed the priest to offer the Mass to God.

3. The priest himself, who indeed sacrifices in the name of Christ and of the Church, but also offers the Mass as a private person.

4. All the faithful, but especially those who serve at or assist at the Mass, or who have given a stipend. Hence these words also are recited in the Canon: "This oblation, therefore, of our service and also of Thy whole family"; and: "Remember, O Lord, Thy servants ... for whom we offer unto Thee, or who offer unto Thee, this sacrifice of praise."

239. Principle 1. The dignity of the sacrifice of the Mass is infinite.

The reason is that in the sacrifice of the Mass both the principal offerer and the victim itself (namely, Christ God) are of infinite dignity. Moreover, the sacrifice of the Mass is the same as the sacrifice of the Cross, which certainly is of infinite dignity.

Principle 2. The value of the Mass (that is, its efficacy or power) is infinite: a) as regards sufficiency; b) as regards the latreutic, eucharistic, and propitiatory effects; c) as regards the so-called special fruits.

The first part of this principle is clear from the fact that the sacrifice of the Mass is the same as the sacrifice of the Cross, which certainly is sufficient for conferring infinite graces because of the infinite dignity of the offerer and of the victim.

The second part is evident from the fact that the principal offerer in the Mass is Christ, who by sacrificing causes an infinite act of adoration, thanksgiving, and propitiation. For such worship is exhibited to God through the Mass that no greater worship can be exhibited absolutely.

The third part is easily understood from the notion of the special fruits, which - as will be explained more fully below - are those which all who assist at the sacrifice of the Mass receive. Now this fruit is received by all, however many assist, and it is not diminished even if innumerable men are present at the same Mass and participate in its fruit.

240. Principle 3. The fruits of the Mass actually produced are limited; this limitation seems to arise both from the disposition of the man receiving and from the will of Christ instituting.

All theologians indeed teach that the fruits of the Mass (taken in the strict sense explained above) are actually finite, because otherwise it would follow that one Mass would suffice for the salvation of the whole world and would empty all purgatory, and that it would not be lawful to say several Masses for one and the same deceased person. But the difficult question arises: whence does this limitation of the fruits of the Mass arise, when the Mass in itself is of infinite value? There are two opinions.

The first asserts that this limitation arises from the will of Christ alone, who so established it. The reason for this will is that Christ commanded that this sacrifice be celebrated not once but repeatedly. Therefore, He did not will an infinite effect. Hence it is also the practice of the Church that several Masses are celebrated for one deceased person. Moreover, it is not apparent why the Church permits stipends to be accepted for the offering of Masses, and indeed one for each individual Mass, if those who do not give stipends have an equally great share of the fruit. This opinion, which Noldin²⁹⁴ calls altogether to be held, is commonly held by modern authors of the Society of Jesus, for example, Chr. Pesch,²⁹⁵ Lehmkuhl,²⁹⁶ Génicot,²⁹⁷ and also by several others.²⁹⁸ Among the ancients, St. Bonaventure,²⁹⁹ Suarez,³⁰⁰ and Lugo³⁰¹ are cited for this opinion.

The other opinion teaches that the limitation of the fruits of the Mass arises principally from the condition of the man offering or receiving, but that in itself the value of the Mass is extensively and intensively infinite. Hence, according to this opinion, one Mass applied for several persons profits them equally as much as if it were applied for one. For if the value is infinite and the fruit is measured according to the capacity of the man, nothing is taken away from one if it is also bestowed upon others; for an infinite treasury cannot be exhausted. St. Thomas seems to favor this opinion, saying: "Although ... this oblation from its quantity suffices to satisfy for every punishment, nevertheless it becomes satisfactory for those for whom it is offered, or also for the offerers, according to the measure of their devotion, and not for the whole punishment."³⁰² According to this text must be explained the words which St. Thomas wrote when younger: "Although the power of Christ, which is contained under the sacrament of the Eucharist, is infinite, nevertheless the effect to which that sacrament is ordained is determinate";³⁰³ and: "If, therefore, a suffrage made for many were of as much value to each individual as if it were made for one alone, it would seem that the Church ought not to have instituted that Mass or prayer be made for someone individually, but that it should always be said for all the faithful departed; which is manifestly false."³⁰⁴ For in that entire question the Angelic Doctor is not treating specially of the Mass, but of the suffrages of the Church in general. Moreover, it is readily conceded that even the Mass, insofar as it is a suffrage instituted by the Church, has a finite effect, and therefore, the more persons to whom it is applied, the less it assists each individual. For the Wycliffite proposition (19) was condemned: "Special prayers applied to one person by prelates or religious profit that person no more than general prayers, other things being equal."³⁰⁵

The foundation of this opinion is the infinite efficacy not only of the thing offered but especially of Christ, the principal offerer, which ought not to be limited by the finite oblation of the priest. St. Alphonsus³⁰⁶ calls this opinion, speculatively speaking, the more probable,³⁰⁷ and cites for it Gonet, Cajetan, the Salamancans, Cano, Concina, Wigandt, Holzmann, etc. Among the moderns, the disciples of St. Alphonsus hold it, such as Marc, Aertnys, etc. Billuart writes of this controversy:³⁰⁸ "Each [opinion] is probable; and although I seem to incline toward the second, nevertheless I acknowledge that neither is certain, but that each suffers its own difficulties. Hence, for practice, it is advisable that the celebrant offer specially, insofar as he can and ought, for those for whom he is bound to offer from justice; but for those for whom he offers at the same time from charity, piety, friendship, or another gratuitous title, let him offer as much as he can."

From all that has been said it seems to follow that the fruit of the Mass is indeed limited in fact, but that the principal proximate cause of this limitation is unknown. For the rest, it is not unfittingly said that the fruit of the Mass is limited because Christ, knowing the insufficient disposition of the recipient, so established it.

²⁹⁴ De sacr., n. 173.

²⁹⁵ Prael. dogm. VI, n. 934.

²⁹⁶ Theol. mor. II, n. 251.

²⁹⁷ Theol. mor. II, n. 218.

²⁹⁸ Cf. Gihr, Das hl. Meßopfer, § 17, p. 118 ff.

²⁹⁹ In 4, dist. 45, a. 2, q. 3 ad 4. The mind of the Holy Doctor seems to be doubtful.

³⁰⁰ De relig., disp. 79, sect. 12, n. 7.

³⁰¹ De sacr. euchar., disp. 19, n. 246.

³⁰² S. theol. 3, q. 79, a. 5.

³⁰³ In 4, dist. 45, q. 2, a. 4, sol. 3 ad 2.

³⁰⁴ Loc. cit., quaestiunc. 2, arg. "Sed contra."

³⁰⁵ Denz., n. 599.

³⁰⁶ Theol. mor. l. 6, n. 312.

³⁰⁷ Gaudé (in the new edition of St. Alphonsus, note on loc. cit.) says: "Later, however, namely in the year 1769, both in the little work De caerem. Missae, part 3, De abus. in accipiendis Missis, n. 26-28, and in his work on Trent, session 22, n. 22, the Holy Doctor called the former opinion the more common and defended it."

³⁰⁸ De euchar., diss. 8, a. 5.

241. The manner of producing the effects. 1. The latreutic and eucharistic effects are produced ex opere operato. For Christ Himself adores God the Father and renders thanks to Him in the sacrifice of the Mass.

2. The impetratory effect or fruit of the Mass proceeds: a) ex opere operato, insofar as Christ Himself obtains for us by offering His merits to the Father; b) from the action of the Church, which sacrifices and supplicates; c) ex opere operantis on the part of the priests or the faithful. Any good whatsoever, whether temporal or spiritual, can be obtained through the sacrifice of the Mass. For the Mass is a most efficacious prayer; nevertheless, the good petitioned is obtained neither immediately nor always, because an obstacle can be present on the part of the recipient, just as other prayers also are not heard immediately and always.

3. The propitiatory effect or fruit renders God, who is angered because of our sins, propitious to us. And this in a twofold manner: a) Since in the sacrifice of the Mass the merits of the sacrifice of the Cross are applied to us, God is appeased, granting more abundant graces so that man can elicit acts of charity and contrition necessary for obtaining the remission of sins. This propitiatory fruit is indeed produced ex opere operato, but not infallibly, because God never remits actual sins without the conversion of man, which is sometimes lacking. b) Because of the prayers of the Church and of the sacrificing priest. Nothing occurs so frequently in the prayers of the Mass as: Be propitious, O Lord; Be appeased, O Lord; etc. This second manner is almost referred to the impetratory fruit. For the first object of prayers to be presented to God ought to be the remission of every fault. For what profit are other goods if God is offended with us because of our sins? Therefore, the propitiatory effect seems to precede the impetratory effect. For as long as God is hostile to us and not yet propitious or appeased, we obtain no graces, or few graces (ordinarily at least).

It is self-evident that the sacrifice of the Mass does not directly and immediately destroy mortal sins, since this remission is reserved to the sacraments. For the sacrifice was instituted directly for the worship of God and not for the remission of sins. But neither are venial sins remitted directly through the Mass insofar as it is a sacrifice. Thus holds the far more probable opinion. The reason is the same. It remains, therefore, that mortal and venial sins are said to be remitted through the sacrifice of the Mass insofar as more abundant actual graces are granted for eliciting contrition or for worthily receiving the sacraments.

242. 4. The satisfactory effect or fruit of the Mass is the remission of the temporal punishment due for sins committed and not yet discharged. Hence the Council of Trent³⁰⁹ teaches that souls detained in purgatory are assisted chiefly by the sacrifice of the altar. The reason for this fruit is the sacrifice of the Cross itself, which is renewed and applied in the Mass and which washes away not only sins but also the punishment of sin. The satisfactory fruit is produced ex opere operato, as is evident, and that infallibly and immediately; but it does not always destroy the whole punishment, but only such a part of it as the faithful are worthy to receive. Therefore, if the Mass is offered for some deceased person, it is certain that he draws some relief from it. Nevertheless, it does not follow from this that wealthier deceased persons, for whom very many Masses are offered, are in a better condition than the poor, for whom no Mass is specially applied; for the poor, if God so disposes, perhaps participate more in all the other Masses, since in each of them prayer is made for all the departed; but the wealthy, on account of their incapacity and unworthiness, are perhaps greatly limited in receiving the fruits.

³⁰⁹ Session 25, on purgatory (Denz., n. 938).