Case 7. Intention to Consecrate

Caius, a priest doubtful whether he had given consent to an evil thought, anxiously began to celebrate Mass. While celebrating Mass he judged now that he had consented and now otherwise; occupied with his doubts, he did not notice that the server, since the Most Holy Sacrament was not reserved on the altar, had placed on the corporal a small host for Communion. After receiving Communion and hearing the Confiteor recited by the server, he looked and saw the small host on the corporal. At first he did not know what was to be done, but soon, remembering that some years before he had formed the intention of consecrating at Mass whatever capable of being properly consecrated was placed on the altar, although afterwards, having forgotten the intention, he had never renewed it, he gave the host to the server for Communion. Afterwards, however, tormented by doubts, he asked a confessor whether he had sinned by celebrating without previous confession or contrition, and whether he ought to have given the host to the server. Hence it is asked:

1. What is required for a valid consecration of the Eucharist?

2. How does a priest sin by celebrating in mortal sin?

3. What is to be said of the case?

1. What is required for the valid consecration of the Eucharist?

The proper matter must be physically present and must be determined by the intention of the priest when he utters the words of consecration.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 84.

2. How does a priest sin who celebrates in mortal sin?

He commits several mortal sins: by consecrating the

Holy Eucharist in sin, by communicating in sin, and by administering Holy Communion to himself though he knows that he is unworthy to receive it.²

2 Ibid., p. 33.

3. The case. Caius should have made up his conscience finally before saying Mass as to whether he had sinned or not. Frequently this can be done in such cases by means of presumptions. If more frequently than not he consents to such bad thoughts when attacked by them, he should presume that he consented in this doubtful case, and should go to confession. If he does not usually consent, the presumption is in his favor, and he may conclude that he did not consent in this doubtful case. If he can not make up his mind but remains in doubt he should at least elicit an act of contrition before saying Mass. He should not have given the host for Communion to his server, for it could hardly have been consecrated under the circumstances. An actual or at least virtual intention is required for the validity of the consecration. He had not an actual intention, for he had not noticed the small host until the communion. Nor had he a virtual intention, for the purpose which he had formed many years before of consecrating whatever was capable of being consecrated with decency had not been renewed, and had been forgotten. It could not then continue to have an influence on the act of consecration, and some influence is required for a virtual intention. We must, then, conclude that the small host was not consecrated and it should not have been given for communion.