Works › The Book on the Sacrament of the Eucharist
Volume 38 · pp. 355–358
Chapter II. On the Necessity of the Institution of This Sacrament, 1-3
A marker with ≈ is an approximate page boundary, placed by measure of the text; the page photographs remain the authority. In the paired views, clicking a page marker brings that page into view.
CAPUT II. De necessitate hujus institutionis sacramenti.
1. Necessitas autem institutionis sacramenti quibusdam aliquando venit in dubium.
Potest autem aliquis objicere et dicere, quod cum omnis gratia sacramentalis quantum ad suum substantialem effectum ordinetur contra peccatum, in quo differt gratia sacramentalis a gratia virtutum et donorum, et cum peccatum sufficientem accipiat medicinam ex gratia aliorum sacramentorum, et nihil sit superfluum in numero gratiarum sacramentalium, videtur quod istud superfluit sacramentum. Peccatum enim aut in se, aut in reliquiis consideratur. In se autem consideratur in specie, vel in genere, secundum quod dicimus, quod est originale, vel actuale. Reliquiae autem sunt vel ex poenis in quas ex peccato incidimus, quae sunt difficultas faciendi bonum, et pronitas ad malum, sive ex infirmitate, sive ex ignorantia causata, et reliquiae quae sunt remanentiae debilitatis et corruptionis in corpore ex anima. Contra originale autem sufficiens est medicina baptismus. Contra autem pronitatem excipiendam ne ruat in praeceps, sufficiens medicina est matrimonium. Contra autem eamdem pronitatem minuendam, et ad fortitudinem faciendi bonum et standi in bono augendam, sufficiens est medicina confirmatio. Et contra peccatum actuale cum differentiis suis, sufficiens est medicina paenitentia. Et contra reliquias in corpore et anima remanentes ex utroque peccato, sufficiens est medicina extrema unctio. Nec Eucharistia potest esse sacramentum sicut est sacramentum Ordo: quia hoc est sacramentum constituens in gradu potestatis et dignitatis, quo gradu conferuntur et dispensantur omnia Ecclesiastica sacramenta: et ideo videtur quibusdam illud non esse sacramentum, sed potius inenarrabile donum liberalitatis divinae, quo divina largitas signare voluit ex perceptione praesentium munerum quid in futurum et quam magnum donum exspectare debeamus.
Hoc autem dictum stare non potest: quia ab omnibus doctoribus Augustino, Hieronymo, Ambrosio, Hilario, et a Graecis, Joanne Chrysostomo, et Basilio, et Gregorio Nazianzeno, computatur Eucharistia inter novae legis sacramenta.
Adhuc autem si Eucharistia sacramentum non esset, non essent septem novae gratiae et legis sacramenta.
CHAPTER II. On the necessity of the institution of this sacrament.
1. But the necessity of the institution of the sacrament at one time came into doubt for certain persons.
But someone can object and say that, since every sacramental grace with respect to its substantial effect is ordered against sin, in which sacramental grace differs from the grace of virtues and gifts, and since sin receives sufficient medicine from the grace of the other sacraments, and nothing is superfluous in the number of sacramental graces, it seems that this sacrament is superfluous. For sin is considered either in itself or in its remnants. But in itself it is considered in species or in genus, according as we say that it is original or actual. But the remnants are either from the penalties into which we fall from sin, which are difficulty of doing good and proneness to evil, whether caused from weakness or from ignorance, and the remnants which are remainders of debility and corruption in the body from the soul. But against original sin baptism is a sufficient medicine. But against proneness to be received lest it rush headlong, marriage is a sufficient medicine. But against that same proneness to be diminished, and for the strength of doing good and standing in good to be increased, confirmation is a sufficient medicine. And against actual sin with its differences, penance is a sufficient medicine. And against the remnants remaining in body and soul from both sins, extreme unction is a sufficient medicine. Nor can the Eucharist be a sacrament as Order is a sacrament, because this is a sacrament constituting in a grade of power and dignity, in which grade all Ecclesiastical sacraments are conferred and dispensed. And therefore it seems to some that that is not a sacrament, but rather an unutterable gift of divine liberality, by which divine largess wished to signify from the perception of present gifts what and how great a gift we ought to await in the future.
But this statement cannot stand, because by all the doctors, Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose, Hilary, and among the Greeks John Chrysostom, and Basil, and Gregory Nazianzen, the Eucharist is counted among the sacraments of the new Law.
Moreover, if the Eucharist were not a sacrament, there would not be seven sacraments of new grace and of the Law.
Adhuc autem cum in omnibus sacramentis passio et sanguis Christi operentur contra peccati defectum, valde videretur mirabile et nihilominus improbabile, quod in Eucharistia in qua principaliter passio Christi commemoratur et sanguis cum corpore sumitur, non esset aliqua operatio medicinalis contra peccati morbum: et ideo pro certo tenendum est, quod nihil est quod isti dicunt, praecipue cum Glossa, Matth. XXVI, 27, super illud: Et accipiens calicem, gratias egit, dicat quod Christus Patri gratias egit de tanto sacramento.
2. Ideo dixerunt alii, sicut Praepositivus, et Gulielmus Antisiodorensis, et Stephanus Cantuariensis, et Cantor magnus Parisiensis, quod in veritate Eucharistia sacramentum est principalis dignitatis inter sacramenta. Est tamen etiam donum Dei, sicut ostendimus in secundo hujus partis tractatu.1
Et dicunt sicut in prima objectione proponitur, quod gratia sacramentalis substantialiter et principaliter ordinatur in peccati medicinam, vel in se, vel in reliquiis, vel in effectu peccati. Sed dicunt, quod illa divisio quam ponit objectio, insufficiens est: quia praeter illa quae ibi commemorantur, est etiam veniale de genere et specie peccatorum: et dicunt, quod contra illa ordinatur Eucharistia, quae venialia peccata dicuntur. Dicunt etiam hoc probando per signum veritatis in dicto eorum, quod venialia signantur per pulverem pedum, hoc est, affectuum, qui minutus adhaeret meantibus ad patriam in hoc exsilio. Christus autem ut signaret sacramentum hoc valere contra veniale, ante collationem Eucharistiae lavit pedes discipulorum. Joan. XIII, 10: Qui lotus est, non indiget nisi ut pedes lavet, hoc est, affectus ad extersionem venialium, sed est mundus totus.
Haec autem opinio sicut et prima non est vera: quamvis enim venialia remittantur in perceptione Eucharistiae, tamen non est contra ea substantialiter et principali operatione ordinatum, sicut etiam remittuntur in baptismo et in aliis sacramentis, quamvis contra ea non sint essentiali et principali operatione ordinata. Oportet autem, quod aliquod unum sit in peccato, contra quod istud sacramentum principaliter ordinetur, et quod per alia sacramenta non efficiatur principali operatione.
Moreover, since in all sacraments the Passion and blood of Christ work against the defect of sin, it would seem very wondrous and nevertheless improbable that in the Eucharist, in which principally the Passion of Christ is commemorated and the blood is received with the body, there would not be some medicinal operation against the disease of sin. And therefore it must be held for certain that what these persons say is nothing, especially since the Gloss, Matthew 26:27, on that phrase, "And taking the chalice, he gave thanks," says that Christ gave thanks to the Father concerning so great a sacrament.
2. Therefore others said, such as Praepositivus, and William of Auxerre, and Stephen of Canterbury, and the great Cantor of Paris, that in truth the Eucharist is the sacrament of principal dignity among the sacraments. Yet it is also a gift of God, as we have shown in the second treatise of this part.1
And they say, as is proposed in the first objection, that sacramental grace substantially and principally is ordered as a medicine of sin, either in itself, or in remnants, or in the effect of sin. But they say that that division which the objection posits is insufficient, because besides those things which are commemorated there, there is also venial sin of the genus and species of sins; and they say that against those things the Eucharist is ordered, which are called venial sins. They say this also by proving through a sign of truth in their statement, namely that venials are signified by the dust of the feet, that is, of the affections, which, being fine, adheres to those passing to the fatherland in this exile. But Christ, in order to signify that this sacrament avails against venial sin, before the conferral of the Eucharist washed the feet of the disciples. John 13:10: "He who has been washed does not need except that he wash his feet," that is, his affections unto the wiping away of venials, "but he is wholly clean."
But this opinion, just like the first, is not true. For although venials are remitted in the perception of the Eucharist, nevertheless it is not ordered against them substantially and by its principal operation, just as they are also remitted in baptism and in the other sacraments, although they are not ordered against them by essential and principal operation. But it is necessary that there be something one in sin against which this sacrament is principally ordered, and which is not effected by the other sacraments by their principal operation.
Adhuc autem veniale peccatum non est peccatum simpliciter, sed potius quaedam ad peccatum dispositio: quia cum dicitur veniale peccatum, est ibi oppositio in adjecto: quia peccatum secundum sui perfectam rationem dicit defectum boni in actione, reatu et accusatione dignum: veniale autem privat reatum et accusationem: quia veniale est, cujus reatus nullus est, et accusatio non debet attendi: igitur veniale non est simpliciter morbus: et sic contra illum non debet aliqua una et essentialis medicina ordinari. Sed sicut est non peccatum simpliciter, sed dispositio ad peccatum, ita non unum, sed multa habet remedia in contrarium disponentia, sicut est aqua benedicta, tunsio pectoris, confessio communis in Prima, et ante Missam, et in Completorio, benedictio Episcopalis, et hujusmodi: non est ergo aliquod speciale remedium contra hoc ordinatum.
3. Haec igitur considerando dicimus, quod in veritate Eucharistia est sacramentum, et est contra peccatum in sua gratia quam substantialiter principaliter confert ordinatum: sed non est ordinatum contra veniale peccatum, sicut valde theologice probant rationes inductae. Sed dicimus cum objectione prima, quod omnis gratia sacramentalis contra peccatum vel aliquid quod est in peccato, est ordinata: et bene concedimus, quod contra originale ordinatur baptismus: et si alia peccata remittuntur in baptismo, hoc est ex consequenti, et non ex ordine sacramenti. Consequens autem vocamus quod dicit Ambrosius, quia impium est a Deo dimidiam sperare veniam. Et ideo cum gratia datur contra originale, ex ratione gratiae est, quod nullum peccatum in anima cum gratia remaneat: et ideo omnia peccata delet tam originale quam actuale: sed hoc non est sacramento, sed ex ratione gratiae gratum facientis, quae secum non dimittit esse peccatum mortale in anima. Gratiam autem gratum facientem confert baptismus.
Bene etiam concedimus, quod paenitentia per eumdem modum etiam ordinatur contra actuale. Reliquiae autem quae relinquuntur ex peccato, sunt secundum primam divisionem duplices. Una autem pars reliquiarum facit ad malum pronitatem, sive ex impotentia boni, sive ex ignorantia, sive etiam ex libidine ad malum. Alia autem pars reliquiarum est ex longo defectu boni. Ex prima autem parte reliquiarum duo incurrit homo incommoda, quorum unum est, ut dicit Augustinus,2 concupiscentia ruitura in praeceps, nisi in actum prolapsa, aliqua honestate excipiatur. Et contra hanc ordinatur medicina matrimonii: quia concupiscentia ruitura in praeceps, in actum concubitus progressa, excipitur honestate nuptiarum, vel fide thori, vel signo sacramenti, vel spe prolis, vel duobus his aut certe tribus excusata. Si autem concupiscentia non progreditur in actum, tunc duobus modis attenditur: aut enim consideratur in ipsa pronitate sola ad malum et difficultate ad bonum, et sic contra ipsam est medicina confirmationis: aut consideratur secundum id quod relinquitur in viribus animae et membris corporis, scilicet impedimentum gratiae et gloriae, quod est mala dispositio impediens utrumque, et sic contra reliquias illas extrema unctio ordinatur. Si autem considerentur reliquiae secundum defectum boni, cujus longus defectus inediam inducit boni naturalis secundum destitutionem sui in seipso, sicut longus defectus cibi inducit inediam et defectum boni corporis in seipso, sic contra reliquias peccati ordinatur sacramentum Eucharistiae per modum medicinae: dicit enim Augustinus, quod fames et sitis infirmitates sunt, contra quas infirmitates sumenda sunt alimenta quemadmodum medicamenta: et sicut hic dicitur de fame et siti corporalibus, ita intelligendum est de fame et siti spiritualibus. Amos, VIII, 11: Mittam famem in terram: non famem panis, neque sitim aquae, sed audiendi verbum Domini. Et sic inedia edulii spiritualis cibi et sitis destitutionem et inediam inducunt spiritualis vitae et principiorum ejus, quae inedia causatur ex peccato: et contra hanc substantiali operatione ordinatur cibus sacramenti Eucharistiae, sicut in praemissis in tertio hujus operis tractatu per multa est probatum.3
Moreover, venial sin is not sin simply, but rather a certain disposition toward sin, because when "venial sin" is said, there is there an opposition in the adjective; because sin according to its perfect account says a defect of good in action worthy of guilt and accusation, but venial takes away guilt and accusation, because venial is that whose guilt is none and accusation ought not be attended to. Therefore venial is not simply a disease, and thus against it no one and essential medicine ought to be ordered. But just as it is not sin simply, but a disposition toward sin, so it has not one remedy, but many remedies disposing to the contrary, such as blessed water, striking of the breast, common confession at Prime, and before Mass, and at Compline, Episcopal blessing, and things of this kind. Therefore some special remedy is not ordered against this.
3. Therefore, considering these things, we say that in truth the Eucharist is a sacrament, and is ordered against sin in its grace which substantially and principally it confers; but it is not ordered against venial sin, as the reasons brought in prove very theologically. But we say with the first objection that every sacramental grace is ordered against sin or something which is in sin; and we well concede that baptism is ordered against original sin. And if other sins are remitted in baptism, this is from what follows consequently and not from the order of the sacrament. But we call consequent what Ambrose says, that it is impious to hope for half pardon from God. And therefore when grace is given against original sin, it belongs to the account of grace that no sin remain in the soul with grace; and therefore it destroys all sins, both original and actual. But this is not from the sacrament, but from the account of grace making one pleasing, which does not permit mortal sin to exist in the soul with itself. But baptism confers grace making one pleasing.
We also well concede that penance in the same mode is also ordered against actual sin. But the remnants which are left from sin are twofold according to the first division. One part of the remnants makes proneness to evil, whether from inability for good, or from ignorance, or even from lust toward evil. But the other part of the remnants is from a long defect of good. From the first part of the remnants a human being incurs two disadvantages, of which one is, as Augustine says,2 concupiscence about to rush headlong, unless, having slipped into act, it is received by some honesty. And against this the medicine of marriage is ordered, because concupiscence about to rush headlong, having proceeded into the act of intercourse, is received by the honesty of nuptials, or excused by the faith of the bed, or by the sign of the sacrament, or by hope of offspring, or by these two things or certainly by the three. But if concupiscence does not proceed into act, then it is attended to in two modes: for either it is considered in that proneness itself alone toward evil and difficulty toward good, and thus against it there is the medicine of confirmation; or it is considered according to that which is left in the powers of the soul and members of the body, namely an impediment of grace and glory, which is a bad disposition impeding both, and thus against those remnants extreme unction is ordered. But if the remnants are considered according to defect of good, whose long defect induces starvation of the natural good according to deprivation of it in itself, just as a long defect of food induces starvation and defect of the good of the body in itself, thus against the remnants of sin the sacrament of the Eucharist is ordered by way of medicine. For Augustine says that hunger and thirst are infirmities, against which infirmities foods are to be taken like medicines; and just as this is said here about bodily hunger and thirst, so it must be understood about spiritual hunger and thirst. Amos 8:11: "I will send hunger into the land: not hunger for bread, nor thirst for water, but for hearing the word of the Lord." And thus starvation of the food of spiritual nourishment and thirst induce deprivation and starvation of spiritual life and of its principles; this starvation is caused from sin, and against it the food of the sacrament of the Eucharist is ordered by substantial operation, as in the things set forth before in the third treatise of this work it has been proved through many things.3
Et ex hoc etiam patet solutio objectionis quae facta est ad hoc quod Eucharistia non sit sacramentum.
And from this also the solution of the objection which was made toward this, that the Eucharist is not a sacrament, is clear.
Notes
- See above, Distinction II. (Vide supra, Distinct. II.) ↩
- St. Augustine, Book IX On Genesis according to the Letter, chapter 7. (S. Augustinus, Lib. IX super Genesim ad litteram, cap. 7.) ↩
- See above, Distinction III, Treatises I and II. (Vide supra, Dist. III, Tract. I et II.) ↩
If a page does not appear, its photograph has not been uploaded yet.