The necessary intention for sacramental validity can be a complex area of theology, and seems to be frequently misunderstood. Abbé Hervé Belmont gives an explanation, and applies it to the new rites.
I was pleased to see Fr. Belmont several times mention that a deliberate intention to simulate destroys the requisite intention (and therefore validity).
Some argue that, so long as proper form and matter are used (as though intention were inextricably bound up with intention, or subsisted within it), and there is no manifestation of a contrary intention in the external forum, the sacrament is infallibly valid.
This was the error of Catharinus, who opined that even if the minister formed a covert contrary intention, the sacrament would still be valid, so long as proper form/matter are used.
I was pleased to see Fr. Belmont several times mention that a deliberate intention to simulate destroys the requisite intention (and therefore validity).
Some argue that, so long as proper form and matter are used (as though intention were inextricably bound up with intention, or subsisted within it), and there is no manifestation of a contrary intention in the external forum, the sacrament is infallibly valid.
This was the error of Catharinus, who opined that even if the minister formed a covert contrary intention, the sacrament would still be valid, so long as proper form/matter are used.
Meant to say, “…as if intention were inextricably bound up with FORM…”.
Absolutely. This was the defense the Anglicans made.