What has a very great bearing on the confection of every Sacrament is the
intention of the minister. This is certainly true as far as the Eucharist
is concerned. Canon Law does not enter into this, but moral theology does.
It is essential for the priest as he celebrates Mass to have the intention
of doing what the Church does. The fact that he himself may not personally
believe in the transubstantiation, does not take away the validity of the
confection; the confection takes place as long as he has at least the
virtual intention of doing what he is mandated to do by the Church. A
virtual intention is one grade lower from an actual intention wherein the
latter is one in which the minister is fully aware of the intention he is
making and makes it clearly and deliberately; the former is an intention
which the minister has in mind and will, but one in which there is a degree
of distraction. Now, it follows that if the priest who is the celebrant
does not have the intention of doing what the Church does, but has a
private or personal intention of his own opposed to that of the Church, his
confecting is not valid. In the case of the Eucharist, it means that
transubstantiation does not take place.
We know that Christ is the principal Confector of all of the Sacraments;
nonetheless, He cannot do it alone. He needs to do it through a human
being. In some cases one who is ordained, in other cases one who is not
ordained. In order for the Eucharistic Sacrifice to take place validly,
Christ must work through a validly ordained minister with the least
requirement - that of doing together with Christ that which the Church
mandates (Manuale Theologie Moralis - DM Primer nos. 62-69 inc.). Without
this intention, though the matter and form be present (bread, wine, and the
words of consecration) the confection of Eucharist does not take place.
Now for the ugly part; the above has all been part of the beautiful. The
meek and humble Jesus is being met these days with new Judases, with new
Pilates, with new executioners. There have risen within the ranks of
Christ's priests those who are attacking Him, those doing serious harm to
many of the faithful. They are those who have been ordained and who
celebrate but with a bent on doing not what the Church wants, but choose to
fulfill their own concept of what they believe the Mass should be. Whether
they were given the incentive to act this way within their seminary
training or whether they have been bitten by the New Age serpent, I cannot
say.
They do not consider the Mass as an act of sacrificial worship, but a
celebration, a celebration of life, even a celebration of Christ's
resurrection. They are promoting the Body of Christ, but not the
Sacrificial Body. They have replaced the Sacrificial Body with the
Mystical Body and are rejoicing over the fact that we are all members of
that Body, of which we are, but not without destroying for themselves and
for others the essential truth, the teaching of the Church that the Mass is
primarily a sacrificial act, the unbloody sacrifice of the Cross.
Next installment: Further erosion of the Sacrificial nature of the Mass.