Chapter I. On the Nature and Virtue of the Sacrifice of the Mass

I say. The Mass is not only a true and properly so-called sacrifice of the new law, but also perfectly contains the diverse aspects of the sacrifices of the old law. The first is established from the Council of Trent, sess. 22, can. 1, where these things are had: "If anyone shall have said that in the Mass there is not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice, or that to be offered is nothing other than that Christ is given to us to be eaten, let him be anathema." But the other is established from can. 3 of the same session; and therefore the Sacrifice of the Mass is latreutic, insofar as it is specially offered to God in acknowledgment of His supreme dominion; it is eucharistic, insofar as it is offered in thanksgiving for benefits conferred by God; it is propitiatory and satisfactory, insofar as through it we obtain both pardon of sins and remission of the punishment owed to them; finally, it is impetratory, insofar as it is offered to God for benefits to be obtained from Him through the merits of Christ. - Cf. De Augustinis, part. 3, Thesis 17, p. 316. - Lehmkuhl, n. 164.

Question 1. Whether and how does the Sacrifice of the Mass differ from the Sacrifice of the Cross?

Resp. It does indeed differ, but only accidentally; for since the victim is the same, the formal nature of the sacrifice is the same, and the principal offerer or priest is the same, there certainly cannot be an essential difference. But several accidental differences are assigned; the principal ones are, on the one hand, from the part of the victim, which in the Mass is immortal and on the altar of the Cross was mortal; and, on the other hand, from the part of the offerer, because on the Cross Christ offered the sacrifice through Himself, but in the Mass He offers it through the hands of ministers. - Cf. De Augustinis, part. 3, Thesis 15, Scholion, p. 293.

Question 2. In what properly does the essence of the Sacrifice of the Mass consist?

Resp. Theologians dispute much about this matter, but more probably it must be said to consist in the consecration alone, because only in the consecration is the mystical slaying of the victim properly found; although this is explained in a diverse way by the patrons of this opinion, especially by Suarez and Cardinal de Lugo. - But St. Alphonsus held as more probable the opinion which places the essence of the Sacrifice of the Mass also in communion. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 305. - De Augustinis, part. 3, Thesis 16, p. 298. - Lehmkuhl, n. 165.

It is unlawful, even when extreme necessity urges, to consecrate the one matter without the other, or even both, outside the celebration of Mass (Can. 817).

Question 3. Can the Sacrifice of the Mass be offered for all indiscriminately?

Resp. It is permitted to apply Mass for any persons whatsoever, both living and also the dead expiating their offenses by the fire of purgatory, with due regard for the prescription of Can. 2262, §2, n. 2. (Can. 809). This prescription has itself thus: "Nevertheless Priests are not prohibited from applying Mass privately and with scandal removed for him (i.e. an excommunicated person); but, if he is one to be avoided, only for his conversion." This power is indeed most ample, for any persons whatsoever, living as well as dead, expiating their offenses by the fire of purgatory; and although an excommunicated person does not become a participant of indulgences, suffrages, and the public prayers of the Church, priests are not prohibited from applying Mass privately and with scandal removed for him; but if he is one to be avoided, only for his conversion; therefore for any living excommunicated persons it is lawful so to apply it, indeed for one to be avoided, provided it is only for his conversion; for all souls of the dead, provided they are purging. We see, therefore, the opinion of Cardinal Bellarmine confirmed, which Benedict XIV explains in the Constitution Ex quo primum: "Now heretics and schismatics are subject to the censure of major excommunication. But the sacred Canons of the Church forbid public prayer for excommunicated persons. For this reason the Venerable Cardinal Bellarmine writes most excellently to our matter: 'Someone asks whether at this time it is lawful to offer the Sacrifice for the conversion of Heretics or of some Infidels. The reason for doubting is that the whole Liturgy of the Latin Church, which is now in use, is referred to the faithful, as is clear from the prayers of oblation both outside and within the Canon. I answer. I judge that this is lawful, provided nothing is added to the Mass, but the Sacrifice is applied only through the intention of the priest to the conversion of infidels or heretics: for pious and learned men do this, whom we cannot reprehend, nor does there exist an express prohibition of the Church.'" But Cardinal Bellarmine here speaks of the application of Mass in the ordinary sense. Therefore, the Supreme Pontiff makes this doctrine of Bellarmine his own. And what pious and learned men did at that time, many pious priests do even today, that is, secretly apply the special fruit in diverse cases, without public announcement and without a special liturgical prayer. Nor do various recent responses demonstrate that this is illicit. The following cases are resolved thus.

For tolerated excommunicated persons, a secret celebration can be made, both for their conversion and, according to others and not improbably, for any other honest end; nor is secret application forbidden for those same persons when dead, if their good faith and repentance are probable. Cf. Wernz, v. 3, n. 542. Gasparri, n. 483. Concerning heretics and schismatics, living and dead, the same must be said: secret celebration is permitted for the conversion of the living or for other honest ends, and for the rest of the dead if their good faith is probable. Concerning living infidels, these things certainly seem able to be rightly established: for their conversion and any other honest intention, secret celebration is licit; for those same persons dead in infidelity, secret celebration is licit provided before death they gave probable signs of repentance. But in all these cases scandal must be avoided, communication with one to be avoided must be avoided, the stipend from him must be avoided, etc., lest men judge that the Church esteems faithful and pious sons and heretics, excommunicated persons, or other outcasts by one and the same valuation; furthermore, if there is any other special law in this matter, it must be diligently observed.

And therefore it is not lawful to say Mass and to accept alms from a heretic or schismatic for their intention, unless it is established that the alms are offered by them for obtaining conversion. - Cf. Response of the Holy Office, 19 April 1837. On the other hand, we can celebrate Mass for the intention of infidels and accept alms from them, provided there is no scandal and nothing is added in the Mass, and as regards the intention it is established that nothing evil or erroneous or superstitious underlies it in the infidels offering the alms. Holy Office, 12 Jul. 1865. Therefore stipends are licitly accepted from infidels, and Mass is applied for their liberation from illness, etc. S. C. de Prop. Fide, 11 March 1848. But it is not lawful to accept stipends for infidels or heretics or schismatics or excommunicated persons dead in manifest infidelity, heresy, schism, or contumacy: this prohibition is valid not only when an application of this kind would be known to many, but also when it would be known only to the priest and to him who gives the alms. Holy Office, 7 April 1875. Marc, n. 1601. A priest to whom a stipend is offered for some heretic in particular will be able to respond that he can apply Mass for all the faithful departed, with the intention also of helping that soul, if it is acceptable before God. It is not illicit sometimes to pray publicly and say Mass for living infidel, heretical, or schismatic kings as governing the state; but to do the same for those same persons when dead is forbidden by the old and new discipline of the Church. Gregory XVI to the Bishops of Augsburg, 16 Feb. 1842. - Cf. Gasparri, nn. 478 and following. "Il Monitore Eccles." v. 13, p. 132. - Wernz, v. 3, n. 542. - Genicot, n. 221. - Bulot, nn. 375 and following. - Sebastiani, n. 453.

Question 4. How manifold is the fruit of the Sacrifice of the Mass?

Resp. The fruit of the Mass is distinguished under a twofold heading, namely from the part of the offerer and from the part of the victim.

I. From the part of the offerer. - Since the offerer is twofold, namely Christ and the priest, hence from the part of the offerer the fruit of the Mass is of a twofold kind. The first proceeds from Christ offering and is called ex opere operato, because it is received in view of the merits of Christ and His promise. The other proceeds from the priest offering, insofar as it is received in view of the merit and devotion of the celebrating priest, and is called fruit ex opere operantis. Hence it happens that the sacrifice offered by a holy priest, insofar as it is considered ex opere operato, is of no more benefit than if it were offered by an unworthy Minister; because the sacrifice, considered thus, is the work of Christ and the fruit flows only from the merits of Christ. Wherefore in this sense it can rightly be said that the Mass of a bad priest is worth as much as the Mass of a good priest. But it must be said otherwise if the merit ex opere operantis is attended to; for the more worthy the priest is and the more endowed with devotion, so much the greater does the fruit of the Mass become.

II. From the part of the victim. - Under this heading a threefold fruit of the sacrifice is distinguished, namely general, special, most special.

1st. The general fruit is that which corresponds to the sacrifice insofar as it is a work placed by the priest, as he operates in the name of the whole Church. And indeed all the faithful, although the priest does not think of them, perceive this fruit; but it is attributed to them only by way of impetration, not indeed, as it seems, by way of satisfaction, because from the thousands of sacrifices which are offered daily, any just man, even unknowingly, would obtain remission of an immense punishment, which appears incredible. Those standing by at the sacrifice, and a fortiori those cooperating with it, for example, those serving the priest, etc., participate in this general fruit in a more abundant or more special way. But this fruit, as being ex opere operantis, is the richer in proportion as the devotion and holiness of those assisting and cooperating is greater. Hence, although several hear Mass or minister at it, each one will perceive the whole fruit proportioned to his devotion, not otherwise than if he alone were hearing or ministering.

2nd. The special fruit is that which comes to him or to those to whom the priest specially applies the sacrifice. These participate ex opere operato in the sacrifice, as it is impetratory and propitiatory; indeed also, provided nothing stands in the way, as it is satisfactory.

3rd. The most special fruit is that which comes to the priest offering, insofar as he is a private person offering. For if any cooperators perceive from the sacrifice their own altogether special fruit, much more must the priest who sacrifices perceive this. But whether the priest can apply this fruit to others is uncertain, although it is certain that the priest cannot receive a stipend in order to apply this most special fruit to another. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 312. - Ballerini, note (b), p. 241.

Question 5. Is the value of the Sacrifice of the Mass infinite?

Resp. It is certainly infinite if it is considered in itself, or in the thing offered and in the excellence of the dignity of Christ offering. For Christ Himself in this sacrifice is at once victim and principal offerer. Wherefore the Mass is the oblation of a victim of infinite price, made by Christ the primary offerer, who has infinite merit. Nevertheless it is not, nor can it be, infinite as to the application made to individual men, or as to the effect or fruit, because creatures are not capable of perceiving infinite fruit; but the application can be greater or lesser according as the disposition or capacity of him to whom it is applied has been greater or lesser.

Question 6. Is the application of the fruit of the sacrifice restricted to a certain degree, or is it made indefinitely according to the capacity of those for whom it is offered?

Resp. It is much controverted among theologians. For many contend that the application is made indefinitely according to the capacity of the faithful for whom it is offered, and St. Alphonsus says this opinion is most commonly received. The reason for it is that, on the one hand, since the value of the sacrifice is infinite in itself, it can be applied to innumerable men without being exhausted; but on the other hand, nowhere is found some restrictive law of this application, if from another source there is capacity for receiving. Wherefore, they say, if the sacrifice is offered for one only or for a hundred, each of these will perceive as much fruit as that one. But several other theologians hold that the fruit of the Mass is restricted to a certain degree, because although the Mass in itself and as to sufficiency is of infinite value, nevertheless its effect is limited and restricted in a certain quantity from the will of Christ, who instituted this sacrifice so that ex opere operato it would produce a certain effect or a certain degree of satisfaction, independently of the disposition of men. Nevertheless, the patrons of this opinion concede that this degree of fruit can be increased ex opere operantis, that is, according to the greater devotion of the offering priest and of the person for whom it is offered; and that the fruit itself ex opere operato is not restricted extensively as regards those offering, that is, as regards the priest, ministers, and assistants, so that however great their number is, it is as great in each as it would be in one who alone offered. Besides, these theologians also concede that the diverse fruits of the sacrifice can validly be divided by the celebrant or applied to diverse persons. And they teach that this can indeed also licitly be done both in a free Mass and in a Mass which is owed from fidelity alone and was promised to diverse persons for diverse ends.

Since the second opinion is truly probable, at least extrinsically, seeing that most illustrious theologians hold it, such as Bellarmine, de Sacrif. Missae, lib. 2, cap. 4, prop. 4; Suarez, disp. 79, sect. 12, n. 7; Cardinal de Lugo and Cardinal Bona, who both call it the more common and truer opinion, St. Alphonsus rightly warns that it is not lawful for a priest who accepts a stipend from one person to apply the same Mass at the same time for him and for others, to whom he owes nothing by force of a stipend, unless at least under condition, namely provided that he from whom he accepted the stipend is not defrauded. Yet the placing of this condition, given the solid probability of the first opinion, cannot or ought in any way prevent a priest, through the application of the same sacrifice, from being able to satisfy some obligation to another person which he contracted otherwise than through an accepted stipend. Cf. St. Alphonsus, nn. 312 and following. - Lugo, disp. 19, n. 249. - Ballerini, note (a), p. 242; and note (a), p. 243.

Question 7. Does Mass benefit the dead from the infallible promise of Christ?

Resp. Affirmatively, for Mass is usefully offered for the dead, as is established from Trent, sess. 22, can. 3; but this cannot be done except from the promise of Christ, which is reported in Matt. xxvi, 28: "This is My Blood ... which will be poured out for many unto the remission of sins." This is also established from the words of the form in the conferral of Orders: "Receive the power to offer sacrifice to God, and to celebrate Masses both for the living and for the dead in the name of the Lord. Amen." - Nevertheless, temporal punishment is not remitted to the dead by a certain law, but it benefits them only by way of suffrage, according as it shall have pleased God to accept it. - Cf. Perrone, n. 282.

Question 8. Does a Mass of Requiem benefit the dead more than a Mass of the Saints?

Resp. Negatively, as to the substance or from the part of the sacrifice; but affirmatively as to accidentals or from the part of the prayers, the defect of which devotion can supply. - Note here that a Mass of Requiem and in black vestments can be applied for a living person, provided he who gives the alms has not expressly declared the opposite. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 310, after St. Thomas, Suppl. q. 72, art. 3. - S. C. Rit., 29 Nov. 1856.