Sect. 266Efficacy of the Holy MassEfficacy of the Holy Mass
I. The principal source of the value of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is the opus operatum; that is, the work done by Christ offering Himself to the Father for us. Accidental value accrues to it from the personal worth of those who offer it with Christ; that is, ex opere operantis. These are: the priest, who acts as the minister of Christ; the faithful, who, in one way or another, take part in the celebration; the Church, as the spouse of Christ.
II. 1. Provided the necessary conditions be present, there can be no doubt that the offering priest, and the faithful who assist or serve at Mass, or who have Mass said for them, acquire, ex opere operantis, certain benefits proportionate to their personal dispositions. These fruits of the sacrifice are, of course, finite. In as far as they consist in satisfaction and impetration, they may be applied to others, in virtue of the communion of saints; but the merit proper, being entirely personal, is not transferable.
2. The Church, as the mystical body of Christ, daily offers herself through Him to God. Each priest offers in the name of the whole Church (Heb. 5). From this point of view, God always accepts the sacrifice independently of the personal worth of the priest. The operans here is the immaculate spouse of Christ, whose adoration and praise, thanksgiving, satisfaction, and prayers, ascend to Him as an odour of sweetness. Hence the prayers of the Mass receive a (finite) value from the dignity of the Church (ex opere operantis), and no Mass is “private” in the sense that only one or a few persons share in its fruits.
III. Christ is the Minister of the Eucharistic Sacrifice: (1) as the author of the rite, and as delegating the priest to act in His Name; (2) as actually performing the sacrificial action in each Mass, when, by a present act of His will, He constitutes Himself the victim, and offers Himself to the Father. From this point of view the value of the sacrifice is entirely independent of the human priest, the Church, and the faithful. As far as these are concerned, the value is wholly ex opere operato. But with regard to Christ, the merit and satisfaction are derived from His death on the Cross ex opere operantis; the value accruing to the sacrifice from the dignity and work of the sacrificer and the victim, is derived from Christ Himself offering and offered on the altar. In both respects the value of the Mass is simply infinite; for it is the Sacrifice of the Cross daily renewed until the sanctification of mankind is consummated. This infinite merit, however, is not a newly acquired merit, but only the new presentation of the merit acquired once for all by Christ’s death. The impetration and intercession (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24), as distinguished from the merit on which they rely, are new acts of Christ as Priest of the daily sacrifice.
IV. Although the merits presented to God in the Mass are infinite in themselves (in actu primo), their application to individuals can only be finite (in actu secundo), because it cannot exceed the finite capacity of the receiver, and is, moreover, measured by the intention of Christ as man, and by the acceptance of God. The exact measure of the application is determined by the Divine laws ruling the supernatural order. It is, therefore, an idle task to pursue the question further. The curious will find the conflicting opinions of theologians in Suarez, disp. 79, § ii. 12; De Lugo, disp. 19, § 9; Ysambert, in 3, q. 83, disp. 7 a. 1, 8, 10).
V. The Mass is offered “for our needs” (Council of Trent, sess. xxii. can. 3), as distinguished from sins and punishments. This points out its character of “impetration,” otherwise the power to obtain for us Divine assistance in our spiritual wants, and also in natural wants not incompatible with our supernatural end. The intrinsic value of the sacrifice is sufficient to “impetrate” the satisfaction of all possible needs; but in its actual working it is limited as stated above (IV.).
VI. The same canon lays down that the Mass is offered “for punishments and satisfactions,” whereby the character of propitiation is pointed out. These pains and punishments are (1) those which the living members of the Church either have to undergo for their sins, or take upon themselves as spontaneous satisfactions, and (2) the pains suffered by the souls in purgatory. All liturgies are unanimous on this latter point. But if the Mass obtains the remission of the pains of the departed, much more may it be expected to remit the pains and penalties of the living.
VII. Again, in the same canon, we are taught that the Mass is offered “for sins.” The propitiatory bearing of the Eucharistic sacrifice on sin requires a special explanation. The Council’s doctrine on Justification shows that, in the present order of things, there is no other ordinary means of immediate sanctification than the personal acts of the sinner (ex opere operantis) or the efficacy of the sacraments (ex opere operato). Hence the Eucharist, as a sacrifice, is not appointed to be a vehicle of habitual grace; if it were, it would be a sacrament of the new Law. On the other hand, the universal Church proclaims aloud that the Eucharist is a “propitiation for sins.” To reconcile the two statements, the latter must be taken to imply, not that the Mass imparts “immediate” sanctification, but that it propitiates God, Who, favourably looking down upon the sinner, brings him to repentance and justification by the ordinary means. Such is the doctrine of the Council: “The sacred Synod teacheth that this sacrifice is truly propitiatory.… For God, appeased by its oblation, grants grace and the gift of repentance, and remits crimes and even the greatest sins” (sess. xxii. chap. 2). Although mortal sin is here chiefly aimed at, we may apply the same principle to venial sins. These also are remitted, ex opere operato, inasmuch as the Divine Justice, appeased by the sacrifice, does not punish venial sins by a withdrawal of grace, but continues to supply sufficient help to avoid mortal sin and to repent of venial sin.
VIII. The nature of the Eucharistic sacrifice entitles us to distinguish three degrees in the distribution of its fruits.
1. The priest, as minister and delegate of Christ, offers the sacrifice for the Church as a whole, and consequently for all its members, and indirectly also for such as are only members in potentia. The good resulting from this application is aptly termed fructus generalis.
2. According to the universal practice, based upon the general rule that works of satisfaction and prayers may be applied to others, the priest applies the fruit of this sacrifice to certain specified persons, either living or dead. This special intention carries with it the fructus specialis. It confers upon these persons all the fruits of the sacrifice which do not belong either to the Church as a whole or to the person of the sacrificing priest.
3. The personal benefit to the priest is called fructus specialissimus, because it is the most specialized of the three. It arises from the sacred function itself in which the priest acts as another Christ, and partakes of the Sacred Victim. The faithful who take part in the celebration by their presence and intention, likewise gather a special fruit analogous to the fructus specialissimus of the priest (Cf. Suarez, disp. 79).
I. The principal source of the value of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is the opus operatum; that is, the work done by Christ offering Himself to the Father for us. Accidental value accrues to it from the personal worth of those who offer it with Christ; that is, ex opere operantis. These are: the priest, who acts as the minister of Christ; the faithful, who, in one way or another, take part in the celebration; the Church, as the spouse of Christ.
II. 1. Provided the necessary conditions be present, there can be no doubt that the offering priest, and the faithful who assist or serve at Mass, or who have Mass said for them, acquire, ex opere operantis, certain benefits proportionate to their personal dispositions. These fruits of the sacrifice are, of course, finite. In as far as they consist in satisfaction and impetration, they may be applied to others, in virtue of the communion of saints; but the merit proper, being entirely personal, is not transferable.
2. The Church, as the mystical body of Christ, daily offers herself through Him to God. Each priest offers in the name of the whole Church (Heb. 5). From this point of view, God always accepts the sacrifice independently of the personal worth of the priest. The operans here is the immaculate spouse of Christ, whose adoration and praise, thanksgiving, satisfaction, and prayers, ascend to Him as an odour of sweetness. Hence the prayers of the Mass receive a (finite) value from the dignity of the Church (ex opere operantis), and no Mass is “private” in the sense that only one or a few persons share in its fruits.
III. Christ is the Minister of the Eucharistic Sacrifice: (1) as the author of the rite, and as delegating the priest to act in His Name; (2) as actually performing the sacrificial action in each Mass, when, by a present act of His will, He constitutes Himself the victim, and offers Himself to the Father. From this point of view the value of the sacrifice is entirely independent of the human priest, the Church, and the faithful. As far as these are concerned, the value is wholly ex opere operato. But with regard to Christ, the merit and satisfaction are derived from His death on the Cross ex opere operantis; the value accruing to the sacrifice from the dignity and work of the sacrificer and the victim, is derived from Christ Himself offering and offered on the altar. In both respects the value of the Mass is simply infinite; for it is the Sacrifice of the Cross daily renewed until the sanctification of mankind is consummated. This infinite merit, however, is not a newly acquired merit, but only the new presentation of the merit acquired once for all by Christ’s death. The impetration and intercession (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24), as distinguished from the merit on which they rely, are new acts of Christ as Priest of the daily sacrifice.
IV. Although the merits presented to God in the Mass are infinite in themselves (in actu primo), their application to individuals can only be finite (in actu secundo), because it cannot exceed the finite capacity of the receiver, and is, moreover, measured by the intention of Christ as man, and by the acceptance of God. The exact measure of the application is determined by the Divine laws ruling the supernatural order. It is, therefore, an idle task to pursue the question further. The curious will find the conflicting opinions of theologians in Suarez, disp. 79, § ii. 12; De Lugo, disp. 19, § 9; Ysambert, in 3, q. 83, disp. 7 a. 1, 8, 10).
V. The Mass is offered “for our needs” (Council of Trent, sess. xxii. can. 3), as distinguished from sins and punishments. This points out its character of “impetration,” otherwise the power to obtain for us Divine assistance in our spiritual wants, and also in natural wants not incompatible with our supernatural end. The intrinsic value of the sacrifice is sufficient to “impetrate” the satisfaction of all possible needs; but in its actual working it is limited as stated above (IV.).
VI. The same canon lays down that the Mass is offered “for punishments and satisfactions,” whereby the character of propitiation is pointed out. These pains and punishments are (1) those which the living members of the Church either have to undergo for their sins, or take upon themselves as spontaneous satisfactions, and (2) the pains suffered by the souls in purgatory. All liturgies are unanimous on this latter point. But if the Mass obtains the remission of the pains of the departed, much more may it be expected to remit the pains and penalties of the living.
VII. Again, in the same canon, we are taught that the Mass is offered “for sins.” The propitiatory bearing of the Eucharistic sacrifice on sin requires a special explanation. The Council’s doctrine on Justification shows that, in the present order of things, there is no other ordinary means of immediate sanctification than the personal acts of the sinner (ex opere operantis) or the efficacy of the sacraments (ex opere operato). Hence the Eucharist, as a sacrifice, is not appointed to be a vehicle of habitual grace; if it were, it would be a sacrament of the new Law. On the other hand, the universal Church proclaims aloud that the Eucharist is a “propitiation for sins.” To reconcile the two statements, the latter must be taken to imply, not that the Mass imparts “immediate” sanctification, but that it propitiates God, Who, favourably looking down upon the sinner, brings him to repentance and justification by the ordinary means. Such is the doctrine of the Council: “The sacred Synod teacheth that this sacrifice is truly propitiatory.… For God, appeased by its oblation, grants grace and the gift of repentance, and remits crimes and even the greatest sins” (sess. xxii. chap. 2). Although mortal sin is here chiefly aimed at, we may apply the same principle to venial sins. These also are remitted, ex opere operato, inasmuch as the Divine Justice, appeased by the sacrifice, does not punish venial sins by a withdrawal of grace, but continues to supply sufficient help to avoid mortal sin and to repent of venial sin.
VIII. The nature of the Eucharistic sacrifice entitles us to distinguish three degrees in the distribution of its fruits.
1. The priest, as minister and delegate of Christ, offers the sacrifice for the Church as a whole, and consequently for all its members, and indirectly also for such as are only members in potentia. The good resulting from this application is aptly termed fructus generalis.
2. According to the universal practice, based upon the general rule that works of satisfaction and prayers may be applied to others, the priest applies the fruit of this sacrifice to certain specified persons, either living or dead. This special intention carries with it the fructus specialis. It confers upon these persons all the fruits of the sacrifice which do not belong either to the Church as a whole or to the person of the sacrificing priest.
3. The personal benefit to the priest is called fructus specialissimus, because it is the most specialized of the three. It arises from the sacred function itself in which the priest acts as another Christ, and partakes of the Sacred Victim. The faithful who take part in the celebration by their presence and intention, likewise gather a special fruit analogous to the fructus specialissimus of the priest (Cf. Suarez, disp. 79).
Seção 93% da obra, de A Manual of Catholic Theology (Wilhelm & Scannell, sobre a Dogmatik de Scheeben). Ver o original.