Annotation LXVI

”Not what enters the mouth defiles the man.” — Matthew 15:11

On the Eucharist.

Origen, in the Tomes on Matthew, in the explanation of the present chapter, making mention of the sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord,

calls it a typical and symbolic body, and likewise the bread of the Lord, which — entering into the mouth of those eating — passes into the belly and is cast out into the privy. His words run in this manner: “But someone, falling upon this passage, might say that, just as what enters into the mouth does not defile the man — even if it be thought defiled by the Jews — so what enters into the mouth does not sanctify the man, even if it be believed by the simpler [folk] to sanctify — namely, that which is called the bread of the Lord. And it is, unless I am mistaken, a saying not to be despised, and one therefore desiring a lucid exposition, which to me indeed seems to be such: Just as it is not the food, but the conscience — with the hesitation [doubt] of the one eating — that defiles the eater (inasmuch as he who hesitates, if he eats, has been judged [condemned], because [he eats] not from faith); and just as nothing is impure of itself, [but only] to the polluted and unbelieving [person], yet on account of his own uncleanness and unbelief: so that which is sanctified through the word of God and through supplication does not by its own nature sanctify the user. For if it were so, it would sanctify also him who eats unworthily; nor would anyone, on account of this eating, have become weak or sick, or have fallen asleep [in death]. For Paul demonstrates some such thing, when he says: ‘For this cause many among you are weak and sickly, and many sleep.’¹ Accordingly, in the bread of the Lord too there is a usefulness of eating [only] then, when with unpolluted mind and pure conscience one partakes of that bread. So, as far as concerns the eating in itself: neither on this account — because we do not eat of the bread sanctified by the word of God and through supplication — are we defrauded of any good; nor by eating do we abound in any good. Since indeed the cause of defect is malice and sins, and the cause of abundance is righteousness and right deeds: so that it is such as is said in Paul in these words: ‘Neither if we eat shall we abound, nor if we eat not shall we have less.’ But if whatever enters into the mouth passes into the belly and is cast into the privy: that food also, which is sanctified through the word of God and through supplication, as regards what it has [that is] material, passes into the belly and is cast into the privy. But as regards the prayer which has been added to it, it becomes useful in proportion to faith, effecting that the mind become clear-sighted, looking to that which is useful. Nor is it the matter of the bread, but the word spoken over it, that profits him who eats it not unworthily of the Lord. And these things indeed [are said] concerning the typical and symbolic body. Many things, moreover, could also be said of the Word himself — who was made flesh and true food; whom whoever shall eat shall altogether live forever; whom no evil [man] can eat. For if it could come to pass that one who still persists evil should eat the Word made flesh — since he is the Word and the living bread — it would by no means have been written, ‘Whoever shall eat this bread shall live forever.’” Erasmus of Rotterdam first of all noticed this passage, and in the scholia on the Origenic fragment translated by him, brought it forth to be weighed by the judgment of readers. I, to pronounce my opinion freely, suspect the passage to have been corrupted by heretics.