{"title":"牧师可以为特殊目的做弥撒吗?","authors":"Thomas Crean","doi":"10.1353/atp.2022.0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Some contemporary theologians have claimed that it is misleading to speak of a priest as offering Mass for a special intention, and that it would be more accurate to speak of him as inviting all present to pray for that intention. My article traces the roots of this opinion in the historical work of Edward Kilmartin and the speculative work of Karl Rahner. I argue that Kilmartin misinterpreted or misrepresented his mediaeval sources, and that Rahner's account of the nature and fruits of the Mass is implausible, on both magisterial and liturgical grounds. I conclude that the concept of priestly intention contained in canon law is theologically well-founded.","PeriodicalId":40281,"journal":{"name":"Antiphon-A Journal for Liturgical Renewal","volume":"26 1","pages":"281 - 301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can a Priest Offer Mass for a Special Intention?\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Crean\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/atp.2022.0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT:Some contemporary theologians have claimed that it is misleading to speak of a priest as offering Mass for a special intention, and that it would be more accurate to speak of him as inviting all present to pray for that intention. My article traces the roots of this opinion in the historical work of Edward Kilmartin and the speculative work of Karl Rahner. I argue that Kilmartin misinterpreted or misrepresented his mediaeval sources, and that Rahner's account of the nature and fruits of the Mass is implausible, on both magisterial and liturgical grounds. I conclude that the concept of priestly intention contained in canon law is theologically well-founded.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40281,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antiphon-A Journal for Liturgical Renewal\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"281 - 301\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antiphon-A Journal for Liturgical Renewal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/atp.2022.0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antiphon-A Journal for Liturgical Renewal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/atp.2022.0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT:Some contemporary theologians have claimed that it is misleading to speak of a priest as offering Mass for a special intention, and that it would be more accurate to speak of him as inviting all present to pray for that intention. My article traces the roots of this opinion in the historical work of Edward Kilmartin and the speculative work of Karl Rahner. I argue that Kilmartin misinterpreted or misrepresented his mediaeval sources, and that Rahner's account of the nature and fruits of the Mass is implausible, on both magisterial and liturgical grounds. I conclude that the concept of priestly intention contained in canon law is theologically well-founded.