Article II. On the Proximate Matter or on the Use of Remote Matter

I say 1st. For valid consecration, besides suitable matter, it is required 1st. that the matter to be consecrated be so physically present that it can be designated by the pronouns this, here; for otherwise the words of the form would not be true; 2nd. that through the intention of the Minister it be determined in the individual, for otherwise the intention would have no force, because it would be applied to no thing. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, nn. 211 and 214. - Scavini, lib. 3, n. 148.

I say 2nd. For licit consecration it is required 1st. that the priest in no way recede from the use of the Church, especially as determined by the Rubrics of the Roman Missal: hence first of all it is necessary that the matter to be consecrated be decent and clean on account of the reverence owed to so great a sacrament; 2nd. that it be placed on the altar and on the corporal, indeed also on the sacred stone, according to Benedict XIV, de Sacrificio Missae, sect. 2, n. 139; 3rd. that the ciborium or chalice to be consecrated be uncovered; 4th. that it be done at the time of the Canon prescribed by the Rubric. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, nn. 218 and 219. 5th. But if it happens that the priest lacks the larger host and it cannot be obtained, he licitly celebrates with a smaller one, even if he celebrates only from devotion. - Sebastiani, n. 440.

You Will Resolve. 1st. Hosts lying hidden under others or otherwise covered are validly consecrated. Likewise wine in a chalice covered with a veil, pall, or for any reason is validly consecrated; because for the true presence of the matter it suffices that it can be demonstrated by the pronouns this or here. Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 212.

2nd. The consecration is valid if a priest, indeed wishing to consecrate the matter which he holds in his hands or which he sees or knows to have been placed upon the corporal, thinks that there is only one host or two hosts to be consecrated, when there are several, whether placed by himself or by another; the reason is that a priest is always presumed to wish to consecrate whatever is decently consecrable; and therefore, by the general will of consecrating all things which are present, he has a virtual will also of consecrating those things which he thought were not present. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 216.

3rd. The same must be said if someone has brought to the altar several hosts to be consecrated, or before the Sacrifice has been warned concerning hosts already placed on the altar to be consecrated, or notices that they are brought by another so that they may be consecrated, even if, while he consecrates, he does not so expressly remember them or even has not uncovered them at the oblation, provided that they are present on the corporal; because the preceding intention virtually perseveres. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 216.

4th. A priest sins by consecrating a broken or stained host; but, scandal being set aside, only venially, unless the stain or fracture is enormous. Yet if he notices some fracture or stain, even a notable one, after he has offered the host, he will be able entirely licitly to consecrate it, because already through the oblation it was in some way dedicated and sanctified to God. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 204.

Question 1. Must a ciborium left outside the corporal through forgetfulness be judged consecrated?

Resp. Many affirm from the fact that there was already present a positive will of consecrating that ciborium at the beginning of Mass, nor was that will retracted; therefore it persevered virtually at the time of consecration. But others deny, and St. Alphonsus calls their opinion common and more probable. The reason is that the priest is not presumed to have wished to consecrate that matter placed outside the corporal, since this is mortal sin, especially because it does not pertain to the integrity of the sacrifice. - Whatever may be the intrinsic value of each opinion, in practice that ciborium will have to be consecrated again under condition in another Mass; and if there is question of a small number of particles which can easily be consumed, they certainly should be consumed, but after the ablution and before the purification. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 217; and Hom. Ap. Exam. Ordinand., n. 99.

Question 2. Is a ciborium judged consecrated which indeed is placed on the corporal, but which through forgetfulness remained closed at the time of consecration?

Resp. Affirmatively, and the reason is both because thus bears the practice of priests and the almost common consensus of theologians, and because any priest is always judged to have the absolute intention of consecrating whatever, with his knowledge, is upon the corporal and is honorably consecrable. Nor should you object from parity sought from the preceding question, for it is answered that although the Church wills the ciborium to be opened for greater reverence, nevertheless, since this irreverence does not seem notable, and can happen more frequently, this precept does not press so much as the precept of not consecrating outside the corporal.

Question 3. Are drops of wine adhering to the chalice, either outside or inside, judged consecrated?

Resp. Negatively as to both; because the priest is not presumed to wish to consecrate anything except the wine which is in the chalice and which is drinkable after the manner of one. But because some think, not improbably, that drops adhering inside are consecrated, these are to be diligently collected. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 215.