Author Topic: Intention of the Minister of the Sacraments (Read 868 times)

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #5 on:** October 07, 2009, 11:15:02 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

If externals are insufficient than it must be possible for a priest to withhold internal consent even while performing all the externals correctly.

Agreed. How about giving us a scenario, or poking some holes in St Thomas' teaching?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #6 on:** October 07, 2009, 11:15:48 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Quote from: Pope Pope Alexander VIII, Condemned the following error of the Jansenists (#28), Dec. 7, 1690, which
Baptism is valid when conferred by a minister who observes all the external rite and form of baptizing, but within his heart resolves, I do not intend what the Church does.

See my reply in the other thread.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #7 on:** October 07, 2009, 11:16:32 PM »

Does anyone find fault with St Thomas' arguments?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #8 on:** October 07, 2009, 11:18:00 PM »

Quote

First in regard to the sacrament: for instance, when a man does not intend to confer a sacrament, but to make a mockery of it. Such a perverse intention takes away the truth of the sacrament, especially if it be manifested outwardly.

Here, externals ALONE do not suffice. No worries on that one.

CM · « **Reply #9 on:** October 08, 2009, 12:00:21 AM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Quote from: Telesphorus
If externals are insufficient than it must be possible for a priest to withhold internal consent even while performing all the externals correctly.

Agreed. How about giving us a scenario, or poking some holes in St Thomas' teaching?

Possible scenario: Priest becomes evil. He wants all his parishioners to go to hell. When baptizing, he goes into auto-pilot, performing to the motions purely by habit, all the while intending for the sacrament to fail, intending, perhaps, when someone is not looking, to pour the water on the floor instead, or to mumble the form incorrectly, but never gets a chance, since the parents are watching eagerly.

The priest had not intended to perform all the external rites, but his intention was foiled. Did he change his intention out of fear of the parents' just anger that would no doubt ensue? Or was it his intention all along to foil the sacrament, but it was never able to be actualized?

Valid baptism?

I am not saying I know for sure how to answer this, and I will read the responses with great interest.