Can the Host be pre-consecrated?

At Mass yesterday, a priest friend of our pastor was filling in for Father while he attended his sister’s funeral. He went to seminary with Father Carlos and tries his best to help out. Well anyways, the priest prepared the gifts- poured the wine and put the host in the little vessels for the ministers, and then the next thing I knew people were going up to receive. But there was no consecration! I was tempted to think that I had just missed it, but I would definitely have remembered the bells. Is it possible that for some reason Father Carlos consecrated the elements beforehand? And could I have actually missed it and not know it? Because nobody else seemed to notice.

If there was no consecration, it wasn’t a mass at all.

It certainly is possible that it was decided not to have a mass for this particular funeral. It isn’t ordinary from my experience, however.

This wasn’t happening at the funeral, rather at what was normally a weekday Mass.

Sounds like a Communion Service - which IS very much like a Mass sans consecration.

Such services do happen and are legit - although I don’t know why, having a priest present, a complete Mass wouldn’t have been said. Assuming he was Catholic and not laicised or suspended from duties or something, maybe he was?

I would have guessed it was a Communion service (using Hosts consecrated at a previous Mass and reserved in the tabernacle) if you hadn’t said “poured the wine.” No wine is involved in a Communion service, and conecrated wine (Precious Blood) normally cannot be reserved.

Is it possible that the Consecration actually happened and you just didn’t notice? Perhaps the priest spoke the words very quietly? The bells are not necessary.

Otherwise I’m completely puzzled.

Without the consecration it’s a Communion service.
Hosts from previous Masses are often distributed at Mass, but usually accompanied by hosts consecrated at the present Mass.


General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM)[1], and many clarifications have been made in other documents such as Instruction Concerning Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery (Inaestimabile Donum).

“The most serious type of abuse makes the Mass “invalid.” For a Mass to be invalid, the Consecration of the Eucharist does not occur.”

“The serious abuses which invalidate the Mass are all those which inhibit transubstantiation, that is fail to bring about Jesus’ True Presence in the Eucharist. The Church has very specifically defined what must - and must not - occur so that transubstantiation will result. There are four conditions required for a valid Consecration resulting in the miracle of transubstantiation. All of these conditions must be present for a valid Consecration. This is dogma. Therefore, anyone who denies these requirements is liable to heresy.”

4.2 Condition Two - Intent of the Priest
The priest must have the intent of doing what the Church does, that being the intent to make Jesus physically present via the miracle of transubstantiation at the consecration. The Council of Trent - a dogmatic council in response to the Protestant heresy - declared against the Protestant view which denies the necessity of the intention of the minister. St. Thomas Aquinas also covers this requirement in Summa Theologica (Third Part, Question 64, Articles 8, 9, 10).

But if the priest poured the wine, surely he was preparing for Consecration.

Are you sure your mind didn’t drift off and you missed the Consecration? It seems possible if not likely…

I see that I’ve confused people- this was Sunday Mass- the visiting priest was saying Mass in the Father’s place while the Father was at a funeral (his sister’s). It was real Mass! And yes, the wine was poured, so I’m assuming it couldn’t have been already consecrated, as I think it’s an abuse to pour consecrated wine, right? But no, it went straight from the pouring to the drinking- no “this is my body”, “this is my blood” etc, no bells rung. I’m almost positive!

edit: this was the second Mass, so maybe it’s possible that it was actually some kind of Communion service and I didn’t know?

I keep thinking back to that and it seems so clear- one moment the gifts were being prepared, the next the priest was coming forward and distributing them. I really wonder because the fact is it’s a pretty liberal church in the first place- father Carlos often says things like “i hope the luturgy police aren’t here today, because we’re doing things differently”…

However, the OP noted that water and wine were used, that should indicate that the consecration was supposed to happen.

The way the OP described it, the events seemed to have followed in rapid succession. Even the fastest celebrant can’t go from the offertory to Holy Communion in rapid fire succession.

I happened to attend Mass at another pairsh. My parochial vicar was filling in for the pastor. The experience was not good for neither him nor me and it discombobulated him to the point that he forgot to consecrate the Precious Blood. The only way that I could get a message to him (as I was in the very back pew) was to be the last one to receive Holy Communion and tell him that the Precious Blood had not been consecrated. He thanked me and went back and did just that.

A Communion Service involves the Liturgy of the Word and the Distribution of Holy Communion and a blessing. That is it. There are provisions for this kind of service at a funeral (if the deacon is presiding, for example); however, the fact that the OP mentioned water and wine makes this situation very troubling.

I’ve never attended a Communion service, so admittedly :o I wasn’t entirely sure if pre-consecrated Precious Blood could be reserved and used.

Having said which - regrettably the ‘pouring of the wine into the vessels’ that the OP noticed was possibly done (although it is an abuse) AFTER the Consecration, at the Agnus Dei. After which the normal procedure IS pretty much to head straight to distribution of Communion.

Now if it was EP2 the EP can be done quite quickly, and some priests do make little show of elevating the Host or ringing bells or what have you.

My PV, although I love him to death, has the notorious habit of using EP II too much. However, he is not going that fast to the point that if you were to sneeze, you would miss it. Even one of our senior priests who also loves EP II and recites it rather quickly does pause to catch his breath during the Mysterio Fidei.

True, I wouldn’t mind seeing a bit more of a mix-up of EPs too - some of the others are really beautiful.

Now while I don’t sneeze much, I do get distracted easily (unfortunate side effect of suffering from ADD) so it’s not unheard of for me to miss part or all of the Consecration, although in recent times I’ve been making more of an effort, with vastly improved results :o

It is possible that he could have used Hosts from the Tabernacle. However the Precious Blood is almost NEVER reserved in the Tabernacle.

The general confusion here that no one seems able to discern just what happened leads me to suspect that whatever happened wasn’t exactly kosher. It’s very disturbing.

It’s quite possible that nothing untoward happened. I’ve been known to suddenly come to and realize that we’re at the end of Consecration and I have no memory of how we got there – and I don’t suffer from ADD, I just happened to go off on a tangent in my head and something Fr. said or did snapped me back to reality.

Maybe Fr. didn’t use the bells.

Well, I guess it’s not a huge deal. I am confused, though. And positive that I didn’t just miss it. Heck, for all I know the priest was just afraid that he might knock over the Blood with his sleeves. He was wearing Father C’s vestments, and Father C is about four times as big as the visiting priest. He was engulfed in purple lol. I guess I’ll never know. Is it valid to use reserved Hosts and just use unconsecrated wine? IDK why anyone would want to, but it’s possible that might have been done, I guess.


Using pre-sanctified particles and unconsecrated wine is approved in some Byzantine churches for specific liturgies under specific conditions but I have never heard of that done in the Latin Rite.

I have the same thing with the Nicene Creed, strangely enough.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit