Eucharist Class - Full Notes - Fr. Justin

Course Outline:

Week 1 – Theme: Introduction; Topics: The Greatest Sacrament, Why the Eucharist?; Thematic elements: The Eucharist and the Incarnation, The Eucharist and Heaven, The Eucharist and the Church, The Eucharist and Mary

Required Reading: Feingold Chapter 1; Hoping Chapter 12

Suggested Reading: CCC 1322-27, 1382-90, 1402-12; Augustine, Summa theologiae III, q.65, a.3; Burke, Divine Love Made Flesh; Henri De Lubac, The Splendor of the Church, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999: Chapter IV: The Heart of the Church; Haffner, The Mystery of Mary.

CCC 1322-27

The Greatest Sacrament (cf Feingold, 33)

CCC 1324 – “The Eucharist is ‘the source and summit of the Christian life’ (LG 11). ‘The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch’ (PO 5).

Summa theologiae III, q.65, a.3: Whether the Eucharist is the Greatest Sacrament?

Sed contra: Pseudo-Dionysius – “no one receives the hierarchical perfection save by the most God-like Eucharist.” Therefore . . .

Absolutely speaking, the sacrament of the Eucharist is the greatest of all the sacraments

3 ways:

1) It contains Christ Himself substantially, other sacraments contain a certain instrumental power which is a share in Christ’s power

What is by essence is greater that what is by participation

2) Viewed from the sacraments in relation to one another – ordained to the Eucharist as to their end

Orders: ordained to the consecration of the Eucharist

Baptism: for the purpose of receiving the Eucharist

Confirmation: perfected so as not to fear receiving the Eucharist

Penance and Anointing: prepared to receive the Eucharist (receive the Body of Christ worthily)

Marriage: in signification, touches the Eucharist – signifies the union of Christ with the Church, of which union the Eucharist is a figure

- Ephesians 5:32

3) Viewed from the Rites of the Sacraments – nearly all the rites terminate in the Eucharist

Relatively speaking:

Baptism is the greatest because it is the most necessary

Order is the greatest from the view of perfection, next comes Confirmation

Anointing relates to Penance the way Confirmation relates to Baptism – Baptism and Penance are more necessary, Confirmation and Anointing are more perfect

Why the Eucharist?

Hoping, Chapter XII – the Sacrament of the Gift

1) Gift of life, p.411

2) Gift of presence, p.422

3) Gift of transformation, p.434

Feingold

Analogies: Physical Life / Friendship – S.T. III, q.65, a.1

Life in the Body

Life in the Soul

Sacrament

Physical Birth: we begin to be

Spiritual Birth: we begin to live w. God’s life

BAPTISM

Physical Growth: we are brought to full size and strength

Spiritual Growth: we are strengthened, made battle-ready, by the Holy Spirit

CONFIRMATION

Physical Nourishment: We eat and drink in order to preserve the life and strength that we have received.

Spiritual Nourishment: We eat and drink in order to preserve the life and strength that we have received.

HOLY

EUCHARIST

Physical sickness: We get sick and need to be restored to health.

Spiritual sickness: We get spiritually sick by sin and need to be restored to health.

CONFESSION

Physical weakness: We need other helps in order to stay strong.

Spiritual weakness: We need other helps to stay strong in the midst of trials.

ANOINTING OF

THE SICK

In our physical life, we need someone to govern and perform public acts.

In our spiritual life, we need a guide and someone to perform the public acts of worship.

HOLY ORDERS

In our physical life, we need to have families and raise our children.

In the spiritual life, we need to have someone that will be the first to ensure spiritual life in children.

HOLY MATRIMONY

Friendship: John 15, Matthew 25, Acts 9

Sacrament

Virtue

Defects from sin

Baptism

Faith

Remedy to original sin

Anointing / Extreme Unction

Hope

Ordained against venial sin

Eucharist

Charity

Ordained against malice

Order

Prudence

Ordained against ignorance

Penance

Justice

Ordained against mortal sin

Matrimony

Temperance

Ordained against concup.

Confirmation

Fortitude

Ordained against weakness

3 Principle Ends:

1) Presence

a. Divine Condescension wishing to dwell with us

b. Teaching perfect virtue

c. The merit of faith

2) Sacrifice

a. Expiatory Sacrifice of Atonement

b. Full Revelation of the Divine Love

3) Communion

a. Divinization of Man / The Eucharist is the principal means of divinization

b. Dignity of man

c. The Eucharist is the nuptials of the lamb with His Church

The Eucharist and the Holy Spirit

1. Prepares: CCC 1093 – The Holy Spirit prepares for the reception of Christ

2. Recalls: CCC 1099 – The Holy Spirit recalls the mystery of Christ

3. Makes Present: CCC 1104 – The Holy Spirit makes present the mystery of Christ

4. Unites: CCC 1108 – The Communion of the Holy Spirit

The Eucharist and Mary (cf CCC 721-25; 37-38)

Burke, Divine Love Made Flesh, p.57: “Mary guides us to the Holy Eucharist in two ways. First of all, our Blessed Mother certainly participated in the Holy Mass from the very beginning of the Church’s life, even as she was present with the Apostles in the Cenacle after the Resurrection, praying with them for the Descent of the Holy Spirit. By exercising her ecclesial maternity, Mary leads us to the Holy Eucharist.”

“Mary also guides us to Christ in the Blessed Sacrament by the whole manner of her life, which can aptly be described as Eucharistic.”

- Woman of the Eucharist

- Model of the Church

Annunciation:

p.58: “At the moment of the Incarnation, Mary anticipated what happens for us faithful at every Eucharist: Christ becomes present for us, under the species of bread and wine, so that we may receive Him into our very being.”

- Amen and Fiat

p.59: Mary, the First Tabernacle

cf. Haffner, The Mystery of Mary, p.252

Sacrifice

p.59: “Just as we are most perfectly united with Christ through participation in the Holy Eucharist, so Mary, from the very moment of the Incarnation, poured out, with her Incarnate Son, her entire life.”

p.60: “Who, then, can better teach us to unite ourselves to the sacrifice of Christ in the Holy Eucharist than mary?”

Memorial

p.60: “Therefore, at every Eucharist, Christ once again gives Mary to us as our Mother and gives us to her as her true sons and daughters, as He did when He died on the Cross for us.”

p.112: “The relationship of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the Holy Eucharist is seen, in a striking way, by placing side by side the Annunciation and the Deposition from the Cross. At the Annunciation, our Blessed Mother accepted her vocation and mission as Mother of God. Through her obedient response to the Announcement of the Archangel Gabriel, Mary received the Redeemer into her womb for the salvation of mankind. As the Creed says, God the Son ‘was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.’ At the Annunciation, Mary emptied herself as her own will in order to make God’s will her own.”

p.113: “The Blessed Virgin shared in a most privileged way in the saving work of Christ. She shows us how we are called to share, with and in Christ. She shows us how we are called to share, with and in Christ, in the salvation of the world. As our Lord was dying on the Cross, He gave His Mother to His Apostle John who represents us all in the Church. Mary, the Mother of Christ, is the Mother of the Church who lovingly leads her children to salvation in Christ, above all through the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.”

Assumption

p.110: “As we witness the offering of the glorious Body and Blood of Christ for our salvation in the Holy Eucharist, we understand our own body is destined to share in the glory of Christ Who is seated at the right hand of the Father.”

Haffner, The Mystery of Mary

The Mystery of the Incarnation

St Augustine: “Of the flesh of Mary, He took flesh, in this flesh the Lord walked here, and He has given us this same flesh to eat for our salvation; and no eats that flesh without having first adored it . . . as we do not sin adoring it, but sin if we do not adore it” (Commentary on the Psalm 98,9; PL 27, 1264)

Memorial of Calvary

Wedding of Cana: p.252 – “There is a profound parallel between the prefiguration of the Eucharist at Cana in Galilee when Mary was present and the Institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

Magnificat: p.253 – “In the Eucharist the Church is completely united to Christ and His sacrifice, and makes her own the spirit of Mary. In this sense, Mary’s Magnificat can be read in a Eucharistic key. The Eucharist, like the Canticle of Mary, is first and foremost praise and thanksgiving.”

p.254: “The Magnificat expresses Mary’s spirituality, and there is nothing greater than this spirituality for helping us to experience the mystery of the Eucharist. The Eucharist has been given to us so that our life, like that of Mary, may become completely a Magnificat.”

The Eucharist and the Church

CCC 1325 – “The Eucharist is the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being. It is the culmination both of God’s action sanctifying the world in Christ and of the worship men offer to Christ and through him to the Father in the Holy Spirit.”

De Lubac, The Splendor of the Church, Chapter IV – The Heart of the Church

Which Body is “Mystical”?

p.126: “Yet nonetheless it is only toward the midpoint of the Middle Ages – in the second half of the twelfth century – that this body of Christ which is the Church begins itself to be qualified by the adjective ‘mystical’. Previously, this description was confined to the Eucharist. But from that point onward it was to be the Church that was so called and thus distinguished from both the Eucharist and Christ in his earthly life or his heavenly glory.”

What does “Mystical” mean?

What it doesn’t mean:

- Not “physical”

- Not “moral”

- Not invisibile

p.132: “. . . the first theologians to speak of the Church as the mystical body of Christ are aiming at giving an exact commentary upon it. And they speak of it in a eucharistic context. By ‘the mystical body’ they mean neither an invisible body nor a ghostly image of a real one; they mean the corpus in mysterio, the body mystically signified and realized by the Eucharist – in other words, the unity of the Christian community that is made real by the ‘holy mysteries’ in an effective symbol (in the strict sense of the word ‘effective’). To read them is to prove the point. In different terms, it is ‘the union, indissolubly both spiritual and corporate, of the Church’s members with Christ present in the sacrament’. Thus, the Mystical Body is the Body par excellence, that with the greater degree of reality and truth; it is the definitive Body, and in relation to it the individual body of Christ himself may be called a figurative body, without any detraction from its reality.”

- compares it to the res

p.133: “Thus everything points to a study of the relation between the Church and the Eucharist, which we may describe as standing as cause to each other. Each has been entrusted to the other, so to speak, by Christ; the Church produces the Eucharist, but the Eucharist also produces the Church. In the first instance the Church is involved in her active aspect (as described earlier) – in the exercise of her sanctifying power; in the second case she is involved in her passive aspect, as the Church of the sanctified. But in the last analysis it is the one Body which builds itself up through this mysterious interaction and through the conditions of our present existence up to the day of its consummation.”

p.133: “The Church produces the Eucharist, and it was principally to that end that her priesthood was instituted . . .”

p.151 – But if the sacrifice is accepted by God and the Church’s prayer listened to, this is because the Eucharist, in its turn, realizes the Church, in the strict sense of the words. The Eucharist is the sacrament ‘by which the Church is now united’, as St. Augustine puts it [Contra faustum, bk.12, chapter 20]; it completes the work that baptism began. ‘From the side of Christ as he lay upon the cross there flowed the sacraments whereby the Church is built’ [St. Augustine, De civitate dei, bk. 22, chapter 17; St. Thomas, Summa theologiaeIII, q.64, a.2, ad 3].”

p.153: “The Church thus really makes herself by the celebration of the mystery; the holy and sanctifying Church builds up the Church of the saints. The mystery of communication is rounded out in a mystery of communion – such is the meaning of the ancient and ever-fresh word ‘communion’, which is currently used to describe the sacrament. The Church of this world is embodied in the Church of heaven, and the ministerial hierarchy, thus preparing that kingdom of priests which Christ wishes to make of us all to the glory of his Father, is, in the exercise of its most sacred function, thus entirely at the service of the hierarchy of sanctity.”

p.154 – “O sign of unity, O bond of charity.” (Augustine, In Joannem, tract. 26, no.13; PL 35, 1613).

p.156: “The Church, like the Eucharist, is a mystery of unity – the same mystery, and one with inexhaustible riches. Both are the Body of Christ – the same Body.”

p.160: “ ‘The mystery of Jesus Christ is accomplished when all his members are united to offer themselves to him and with him’ (St. Augustine, Sermo 272; PL 38, 1248). For ‘it is in the Eucharist that the mysterious essence of the Church receives a perfect expression’, and likewise it is in the Church’s catholic unity that the hidden significance of the Eucharist produces the fruit of effective results: ‘for the virtue that is there understood is unity, that, built into his Body, made members of him, we may be what we receive.’ (St. Augustine, Sermo57, n.7; PL 38,389). If the Church is thus the fullness of Christ, Christ in his Eucharist is truly the heart of the Church.

Union & Charity

Summa theologiae III, q.82, a.2, ad 3 – The Eucharist is the sacrament of ecclesiastical unity, which is brought about by many being one in Christ.

Feingold, p.5-10

p.5: The Eucharist is paired with the theological virtue of charity, which is supernatural love of friendship with God, a friendship both filial and spousal. The Eucharist is the sacrament of charity because it was instituted to nourish us with love for God and neighbor, binding the Church together in her vertical and horizontal dimensions. In this way it is the sacrament of ecclesial unity.”

Burke, p.68 – “In the Holy Eucharist, we best and most fully know the love of God for us. The Holy Eucharist unveils the truth about God’s love for us and nourishes, within us, the freedom to love as God loves. If we have lost a sense of wonder and profound gratitude before the Eucharistic Sacrifice and the Real Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ in the consecrated Host, then we do not recognize the truth which is before our eyes.

C.S. Lewis, “The Weight of Glory”: p.45: “The load, or weight, or burden of my neighbor’s glory should be laid on my back, a load so heavy that only humility can carry it, and the backs of the proud will be broken. It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping other to one or other of these destinations. It is the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations – these are mortal and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit – immortal horrors or everlasting splendours. . . Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses. If he is your Christian neighbor, he is holy in almost the same way, for in him also Christ vere latitat – the glorifier and the glorified, Glory Himself, is truly hidden.”

The Eucharist and Heaven

CCC 1326 – Finally, by the Eucharistic celebration we already unite ourselves with the heavenly liturgy and anticipate eternal life, when God will be all in all (cf. 1 Cor.15:28)

CCC 1402-05 – VII. The Eucharist – “Pledge of the Glory to Come”

Hoping

p.418: “When the Giver of all gifts makes himself a gift, the definitive revelation of God occurs.”

p.422: “The intrinsic connection between Easter and Eucharist is manifested in the New Testament in the accounts of the meal of the risen Lord with his disciples (Lk 24:13-35; Jn 21). The bodily Resurrection of Jesus and his Ascension signify for his disciples a new form of presence. Jesus is no longer ‘in the flesh’, that is, in his earthly-bodily presence, close to the disciples. His new form of presence is a ‘believed bodily presence with visible absence’. It is the presence of a ‘pure gift’ that is not visible but nevertheless is no less real than physical presence. . . The transitory, temporally limited presence of Jesus among his disciples has consolidated with his Resurrection and Ascension into a gift of ‘definitive presence’ that is given to us in bread and wine.”

p.433: “The Eucharist aims at the transformation of the person who receives the gift of the Eucharist in faith. The only possible response on the part of the recipient is gratitude, the Amen of agreement, and the practice of self-giving corresponding to the gift received.”

Week 2 – Theme: The Sacrament; Topics: The Eucharist in the Old Testament, The Eucharist in the New Testament, Thematic Elements: Typology, Patristic Exegesis, The Eucharistic provenance of the New Testament

Required Reading: Feingold Chapter 2&3

Suggested Reading: CCC 1328-44; Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.6; Scott Hahn, Consuming the Word; The Fourth Cup Brant Pitre, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist: Unlocking the Secrets of the Last Supper, New York: Double Day, 2011; Interpretation and Inspiration

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.6: Whether the Paschal Lamb Was the Chief Figure of this Sacrament?

Obj.1 – Melchisedeck

Obj 2 – Manna

Obj 3 – Holy of Holies with the Blood

Sed contra: The Apostle says (1 Cor 5: 7-8) “Christ our Pasch is sacrificed; therefore let us feast . . . with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

3 things to consider in this sacrament:

Sacramentum tantum: bread and wine

Res et sacramentum: Christ’s true Body

Res tantum: Grace (effect of this sacrament)

In relation to sacramentum tantum, the chief figure of this sacrament was the oblation of Melchisedech, who offered up bread and wine.

In relation to Christ crucified, Who is contained in this sacrament, its figures were all the sacrifices of the Old Testament, especially the sacrifice of expiation, which was the most solemn of all.

With regard to effect, the chief figure was the Manna, having in it the sweetness of every taste (wisdom 16:20), just as the grace of this sacrament refreshes the soul in all respects

The Paschal Lamb foreshadowed this sacrament in 3 ways:

1. Because it was eaten with unleavened loaves

- exodus: 12:8 – they shall eat flesh . . . and unleavened bread

2. because it was immolated by the entire multitude of the children of Israel on the 14th day of the moon; and this was the figure of the Passion of Christ, Who is called the Lamb on account of His innocence

3. as to the effect, because by the blood of the Paschal Lamb the children of Israel were preserved from the destroying Angel, and brought from the Egyptian captivity;

In this respect the Paschal Lamb is the chief figure of this sacrament, because it represents it in every respect.

Commentary on the Letter to the Corinthians, par.246: “But this lamb was a figure of the innocent Christ, of whom it is said: behold the Lamb of God (John 1:36). Therefore, just as that lamb was slain by the children of Israel in order that God’s people be delivered from the avenging angel and after being freed from the slavery under the Egyptians, pass over the Red Sea, so Christ was slain by the children of Israel, in order that God’s people be delivered from sin by baptism, as though by the Red Sea. Now that lamb was called the pasch of the Jews, because it was immolated as a sign of the passing; hence the disciples ask: where do you wish us to prepare for you to eat the pasch? (Matthew 26:17), i.e. the paschal lamb.”

- Points out the Greek and Hebrew meanings of Pasch

New Covenant:

Luke 22:20

Jeremiah 31:31 (Gen.48:14)

Exodus 24:8

See Uwe Lang’s analysis, 24-27

Isaiah 53: “for many”

The Roman Mass, 27: “it seems clear that by alluding to Isaiah 53 in the words of institution, Jesus presents his own death as sacrificial and redemptive (see also Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45, where he refers to himself as the Son of Man who came to ‘give his life as a ransom for many’).”

Other references to the New Covenant:

1 Cor 11: 25

2 Cor 3:6 – ministers of a new covenant

1 Tim 3:8-13

Hebrews 8; 9:15; 12:24

From The Roman Mass, p.11: “While these perspectives of more recent scholarship enrich our understanding of the early Eucharist, they tend to underestimate the singular character of the Last Supper, which is attested both in the Synoptics and in Paul, and hence would seem to be intrinsically linked with the core of the New Testament canon emerging in the second century.”

Similarities between development of OT/NT Canon and development of Passover / Mass

- The Roman Mass, p.15 – the Passover Seder developed in contrast to the Mass / so did the OT Canon

-

The Roman Mass, p.20: “If we follow the standard assignment of the Synoptic Gospels to the Flavian period (AD 69-96), then the earliest witness to the Last Supper narrative would be 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, Scott Hahn has noted the singular character of this text in the Pauline corpus:

The only significant narrative overlap between the Gospels and the letters attributed to Saint Paul is the institution narrative. Though Paul was Jesus’s most prolific interpreter, he rarely quoted the Master. Yet here he carefully narrated the scene and reported Jesus’s words at length. It is by far the longest quotation of Jesus’s teaching found in the Pauline corpus. The Apostle emphasized that he himself is not the origin of the tradition. He is simply passing on what has already been well established in the Church. . . .

Hahn’s observation is important: the institution narrative in 1 Corinthians is by far the most substantial verbatim quotation the apostle ever makes of Christ’s teachings. Moreover, Paul presents it as having been handed down to him from the Lord himself. The letter’s date (AD 53/54) means that we are less than a generation away from the reported events.”

Paul’s words were formulaic

The Roman Mass, 22-23: “While Paul must have received some instructions between his conversion experience outside Damascus in c.34 and his visit to Jerusalem in c.37, his account of the Lord’s Supper (δειπνον κυριακον) (1 Cor. 11:20; the expression is found only here in the New Testament) is held to reflect liturgical practice at Antioch, where he stayed in the early 40s. The Syrian metropolis had become a centre of the Helenist followers of Jesus after the martyrdom of Stephen (Acts 11:19). In Corinth, the Lord’s Supper was combined with the (evening) meal, though the ritual action with bread and wine was clearly distinct from it. . . . The formulaic way in which Paul presents Jesus’ sayings at the Last Supper suggests their liturgical use, which would have been familiar to his addressees.”

Consuming the Word

The Word is meant to be consumed:

p.6: “This is the truth Romanus knew, and Jerome, and Gregory, and John experienced, and Ezekiel foresaw. Salvation comes by way of a covenant – a covenant embodied in a Word, a Word that is made flesh, a Word that is consumed.”

New Testament / Covenant did not originally refer to the texts, but came very quickly to be identified with the liturgy

p.30: [quoting Father Theodore Stylianopoulos] “The expressions ‘Old Testament’ and ‘New Testament’ were not applied to the sacred books until the end of the second century. For the Apostle Paul and the early Christians the ‘new covenant’ was neither a book nor a collection of books, but rather the dynamic reality of the new bond between God and Christian believers based on the person and saving work of Chirst.”

New Testament is the Eucharist

p.39: “What the first Christians knew as the ‘New Testament’ was not a book, but the Eucharist.”

p.40: “The documents only gradually took that name, again because of their liturgical proximity to the covenant sacrifice, the Eucharist. They were the only books approved to be read in the Eucharistic liturgy, and they were ‘canonized’ for that very reason. Thus, precisely as liturgical books, they were called the New Testament.”

p.43: “The document we call the New Testament presents the rite called the New Testament as something central to Christian belief and life. Redemption, as Christ accomplished it, makes little sense apart from his Eucharistic offering. Salvation, as Christ accomplished it, makes little sense apart from his Eucharistic offering.

The only significant narrative overlap between the Gospels and the letters attributed to Saint Paul is the institution narrative.”

The New Testament texts were the first liturgical books

p.45: “The New Testament as a document presumes and depends upon the New Testament sacrifice and the New Testament meal [mentions Farkasfalvy].

What these scholars recognize is that the documents we call the New Testament were written to be proclaimed in the context of the sacrament we call the New Testament.”

The New Testament presumes the Eucharist

p.56: “From Clement through Eusebius, from Basil through Leo, the Fathers of the early Church knew – and not only knew, but took for granted – that every written word of the New Testamentpresupposed the enactment of the liturgy of the New Testament in the Church of the New Testament. The Gospels, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse were written to be read aloud in the Church’s assembly, and some of these books even come with instructions for the lector (see Revelation 1:3 and 1 Thessalonians 5:27). The inspired documents mention the Church’s ritual life, often in passing, as they refer to many other important matters. If they do not address the sacramental concerns of later centuries, it is because those questions never occurred to the Apostles, or to their successors who were faithful to the apostolic tradition . . . or to their successors, or to their successors.”

Analogy of the Word (cf. pp.85, 93-96, analogy of faith, p.106)

And the Incarnation

And the Eucharist

Cf. De Lubac, Scripture in the Tradition: “The Act of Christ in fulfilling the Scriptures and simultaneously bestowing the fullness of their meaning upon them is also compared by Christian tradition to the act of eucharistic consecration. For in truth Scripture is bread, but bread which becomes for the Christian life-giving food which it must be only after it has been consecrated by Jesus. . .”

Read the New Testament, think you are at Mass

p.134: “For the scriptural texts themselves presume the context of the Mass. The Apostles and evangelists seem to be writing with liturgical proclamation in mind.

If we read the New Testament as they wrote it, we’ll read it from the heart of the Church. And that heart is Eucharistic. It is the heart of Jesus.

p.145: “If while we are reading the New Testament we do not see that the New Testament is the Eucharist, then we are profoundly misunderstanding the New Testament.”

Inspiration and Interpretation

A. Gospel – from Inspiration & Interpretation

1. The Canonical Principle

a. “written for our instruction:

Rom 15:3

1 Cor 9:10

1 Cor 10:11

b. “Prophets and apostles”

c. Sameness of Christ / Sameness of Spirit

2. From Canonical Principle to Canon

a. Pauline or Petrine Pedigree

Rom 16:25 το εὐαγγελιον μου

Marcion v. Papias

b. Paul recognizes diversity in unity

Gal 2:9 [see Farkasfalvy 99]

c. κατα

Farkasfalvy, 102: “By using kata, the titles both assert the oneness of the gospel and recognize its multiplicity in various literary compositions”.

Farkasfalvy, 100: “We want to argue that the latter meaning (ευαγγελιον as a narrative account) is a close and direct derivative from its original sense (meaning the salvific message) and this its secondary sense already existed in the first century.”

Truly I tell you, wherever the good news (ευαγγελιον) is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her. (Mk 14:9 and Mt 26:13)

1. Wherever the Good News is proclaimed

2. What she has done will be told in remembrance of her

Learn:

1. Some episodes are a matter of choice

2. Mark and Matthew take the Lord’s instructions of the narrative as concomitant with the Good News; this is a compulsory episode

p.101: “While in this text the word ευαγγελιονdoes not mean a book; it means that the gospel message is inseparable from concomitant narration of stories, and so, at least by connotation, these narratives are linked with the meaning of ευαγγελιον. In this way, one can see how and why, in a short time, the word ευαγγελιον came to mean the salvific message as contained in a chain of stories about Jesus.”

Oldness and Newness to the Gospel genre:

I. Eucharistic Provenance of the New Testament

Cf. Acts 20:7

A. Summary: Farkasfalvy, 86: “the entire New Testament is of Eucharistic provenance.”

Farkasfalvy, 86-87: “The importance of the Eucharist as the cradle of the New Testament cannot be sufficiently emphasized. . . all scriptural texts of the New Testament arose with an eye on the Eucharistic assembly, and that assembly was the locus and framework for their ecclesial and sacramental exegesis; hence, they are all bound up with studying and preaching in service of building up (erecting, constituting, and edifying) the Church – ad aedificationem Ecclesiae.”

B. The Gospels

Farkasfalvy, 86: “the way our canonical gospels were composed presupposes the spread of the Jesus tradition to communities gathered in cultic assemblies to witness, experience, and respond to the coming of the Lord. The apostolic memory of the Jesus tradition was exercised in the early Church not for the sake of the biographical reconstruction of a great man’s memory, but in order to present episode by episode, as well as to extend to new generations, those salvific encounters his original disciples had with him during his life and ministry.”

1. The narrative structure

a. Institution Narratives serve as “theological overtures” in synoptic Gospels

b. Other Narratives manifest a Eucharistic link

Each Gospel has at least one recounting of the multiplication of the loaves, Mt and Mk have two.

Farkasfalvy, 66: “There must be a reason that this story is reproduced with such unparalleled repetition. No answer is convincing unless it shows that the story has been perceived in close relation to Christological and ecclesiological realties that constitute the core of the Christian faith. Of course, such a connection is verified if the story is read in a Eucharistic context.”

Ibid.: “It describes the community that Jesus formed around himself to reenact and bring to fullness the experience of Israel in the desert with thousands of people miraculously fed.”

c. The very narrative structure shows a Eucharistic provenance

Farkasfalvy, 72: “the insight of the form critics should help us realize that the first Eucharistic assemblies came about when Jesus’ original disciples began to gather after experiencing the first evidences of the resurrection, and that, in the course of these early gatherings, there developed an organic process of recalling and retelling the memories of Jesus’ ministry. It was therefore a Eucharistic cradle provided by early Christian worship that the narrative tradition which stands behind the synoptics was formed and shaped in live exchange with an audience assembled for hearing about Jesus.”

- For audiences who identified themselves with those described in the narratives

Farkasfalvy, 74: “I do claim, however, that the presentation of Jesus’ ministry as peripatetic – episode after episode, he continues to arrive and be approached as he passes from place to place – is the telltale mark of the Eucharistic framework in which the Jesus tradition was chiseled first into oral patterns and afterwards into the literary compositions of our canonical gospels.”

“I would only add that this neither mere coincidence nor the consequence of biographic data factually remembered, although, indeed, historically speaking, Jesus spent his ministry in an ongoing process of traveling. The consistent portrayal of Jesus as the one coming and being encountered originates in the presence of cultic (Eucharistic) congregations, gatherings held for the purpose of reliving the past encounters.”

2. Jesus as “One who comes”

1. Ερχομενοςin Mt.

- Mt. 3:18 – Jesus is the one coming after John

- Mt. 11:2

- Mt 8:17

- Mt 14:2 5

- Mt 17:7

- Mt 26:64

2. Ερχομενοςin Jn

- Jn 1:15, 27

- Jn 3:31-32; 6:14; 11:27

Farkasfalvy, 78: “Thus his coming is in a transcendental sense a descent, so that in the explicitly Eucharistic text about the bread of life this coming is said to be ‘coming down from heaven’ and is associated semantically with the previous uses of the term Ερχομενος.”

“This theologically deepened Johannine usage integrates Christology, Eucharist, and a sacramentally ‘realized’ eschatology into a unified vision of Christ’s coming as an unfolding process that penetrates cosmos and history.”

C. The Epistles

Farkasfalvy, 86: “ . . . the apostolic letters were intended to be presented to communities assembled in liturgical worship”

Farkasfalvy, 64: “the Pauline letters were read, partially or in their entirety, as substitutes for the actual presence of the Apostle”.

D. The Book of Revelation

Farkasfalvy, 86: “The Book of Revelation was patterned according to an outline of the Sunday assembly as it was customarily celebrated in the late first century in Asia Minor”.

II. The Eucharist

A. Miracles with Bread and the Words of Institution, The Roman Mass – Lang’s conclusion, p.31

1. Old Testament

Exodus 16:14 – And when the dew had gone up, there was on the face of the wilderness a fine, flake-like thing, fine as hoarfrost on the ground. 15 When the people of Israel saw it, they said to one another, ‘What is it?’ For they did not know what it was. And Moses said to them, ‘It is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat.

2 Kings 4:42-44 – A man came from Baal-shalishah, bringing the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of grain in his sack. And Elisha said, ‘Give to the men, that they may eat.’ 43 But his servant said, ‘How am I to set this before a hundred men, that they may eat, for thus says the Lord, ‘They shall eat and have some left.’’ 44 So he set it before them. And they ate, and had some left, according to the word of the Lord.

2. New Testament – The multiplication of the Loaves is the only miracle other than the Resurrection that is recorded in all 4 Gospels – Why?

a. Matthew

Mt. 14:14-21

5 loaves – 5 books of the Law

2 fish – Law / Prophets (Prophets / Psalms)

Boy – the Jewish People

12 baskets leftover – the new Israel led by the 12

Mt. 15:32-39

- refers to both in Mt.16:9-12

Mt 26:26 – Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ 27 And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.’”

The Roman Mass, 26: “The Last Supper account in Matthew would seem to be a literary (and probably liturgical) redaction of the account in Mark, from which it is distinguished by only a few additions. The most noteworthy differences are as follows: adding the exhortation ‘eat (φαγετε) after ‘take’ (Mt. 26:26). In the rite over the cup, in place of the description ‘and they all drank of it’ there is the Lord’s exhortation ‘drink of it, all of you’ (v.27). Finally, the cup saying includes ‘for the forgiveness of sins’ after ‘for man’, emphasizing the propiatory effect of the sacrificial action (v.28). The eschatological conclusion of the domnical words substitutes ‘kingdom of God’ with ‘my Father’s kigndom’ (v.29).”

‘poured out’ to the cup of the Last Supper or to the blood, cf. The Roman Mass, 26: “C. Boughton makes a lexical and grammatical argument in favour of the latter; the verb denotes the forceful shedding of a liquid, as in an act of sacrifice, rather than the orderly pouring, as during a meal; the aspect of the Greek verb points to completion and fulfillment in the future.”

b. Mark

Mk 6:37-44

Mk 8:1-10

Mk 14:22 – “And as they were eating, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them, and said, ‘Take, this is my body.’ 23 And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave to them, and they all drank it. 24 And he said to them, ‘This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. 25 Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.’”

c. Luke

Lk.9:13-17

Lk 22:28 – Eucharistic Fulfillment – Passover / Kingdom with apostles sitting on thrones and eating at the table

Lk 22:14 – And when the hour came, he sat at table, and the apostles with him. 15 And he said to them, ‘I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, 16 for I tell you I shall not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.’ 17 And he took a chalice, and when he had given thanks he said, ‘Take this, and divide it among yourselves; 18 For I tell you that from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.’ 19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying. ‘This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ 20 And likewise the chalice after supper, saying, ‘This chalice which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.’”

The Roman Mass, 29: “[T]here are two significant explanatory additions: the body is ‘given (διδομενον)’ and the blood is ‘shed (εκχυνομενον)’. While the latter is also found in Mark and Matthew, the former is unique to Luke. In the context of the Passion narrative, both additions point to the sacrificial character and the salvific benefit of bread and wine offered by Jesus to his disciples.’”

d. John 6

B. John 6

6:11 – “giving thanks” – Eucharisteo

CCC 1328 – The inexhaustible richness of this sacrament is expressed in the different names we give it. Each name invokes certain aspects of it. It is called:

- Eucharist, because it is an action of thanksgiving to God

- The Lord’s Supper, because of its connection with the supper which the Lord took with his disciples on the eve of his Passion and because it anticipates the wedding feast of the Lamb in the heavenly Jerusalem.

- the Breaking of the Bread

- the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the savior and includes the Church’s offering

6:20 – “It is I” or “I Am”

- cf. Exodus 3:14

6:26 – bread that endures to eternal life

Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of John, par.895: “This food is God himself, insofar as he is the truth which is to be contemplated and the Goodness which is to be loved, which nourish the spirit: eat my bread (Prov.9:5); wisdom will feed him with the bread of life and understanding (Sir 15:5). Again, this food is the obedience to the divine commands: my food is to do the will of him who sent me (John 4:34). Also, it is Christ himself: I am the bread of life (John 6:35), for my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed (John 6:56). And this is so insofar as the flesh of Christ is joined to the Word of God, which is the food by which the angels live.”

6:31 – Manna from heaven, but it perished

- it melted in the morning (Ex.16:21)

- went bad if it was stored (Ex.16:19-20)

Pitre on Jn 6:30-34, p.99: “The Jewish crowds knew that the Messiah was supposed to be a new Moses. They also knew that he was supposed to bring back the miracle of the manna. So, in order to test Jesus and see if he was in fact the one, they asked him to establish his messianic pedigree by performing a miracle. They challenged him to give them the new manna from heaven, with one twist. They wanted him to do so not just for forty years [stopped in Joshua 5:10-12], like the old manna, but for always.”

1. Invitation to faith (6:35-47)

Pitre, p.102: “Jesus surrounded his teaching about the mystery of his presence in the Eucharist with references to the manna from heaven.”

Pitre, p.103: “If a first-century Jew believed that the old manna was supernatural bread from heaven, then could the new manna be just a symbol? If the old manna was the miraculous ‘food of the angels,’ could the new manna be just ordinary bread and wine? If so, that would make the old manna greater than the new! But that is not how salvation history works in the Bible.”

2. Invitation to the Eucharist (6:48-58)

6:48 – Eat flesh? – How can this be?

Do they misunderstand or do they just not believe?

Look at John 3:4 – When Nicodemus doesn’t understand, Jesus restates in a different way what He means.

When the Jews challenge this teaching on the Eucharist, Jesus doesn’t restate in a different way, He restates in a stronger way.

Esthio: eat (6:49, 50,51, 53)

Trogo: chew, gnaw (6:54, 56, 57, 58)

In the Old Testament, drinking blood was forbidden.

Gen.9:4 – Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.

Lev.17:10-13 – 11 for the life of the flesh is in the blood

Deut.12:16 – Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall pour it out upon the earth like water

Blood was life, to drink the blood of animals was to take on their life, which was lower than that of human beings.

Blood of Christ is life of Christ. It elevates us to be SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF GOD

6:55 – has eternal life

Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of John, par.972: “Accordingly, he says, eternal life, because one who eats this bread has within himself Christ, who is the true God and eternal life, as John says (1 John 5:20).Now one has eternal life who eats and drinks, as it is said, not only in a sacramental way, but also in a spiritual way. One eats and drinks sacramentally or in a sacramental way, if he receives the sacrament; and one eats and drinks spiritually or in a spiritual way, if he attains the reality of the sacrament [res sacramenti]. This reality of the sacrament is twofold: one is contained and signified, and this is the whole Christ, who is contained under the species of bread and wine. The other reality is signified but not contained, and this is the mystical body of Christ, which is in the predestined, the called, and the justified. Thus, in reference to Christ as contained and signified, one eats his flesh and drinks his blood in a spiritual way if he is united to him through faith and love, so that one is transformed into him and becomes his member: for this food is not changed into the one who eats, but it turns the one who takes it into itself, as we see in Augustine . . And so this is a food capable of making man divine and inebriating him with divinity. The same is true in reference to the mystical body of Christ, which is only signified, if one shares in the unity of the Church.”

- unity in the Church brought about by the Holy Spirit

Pitre, p.103: [on Jn 6:58] – he who eats this bread will live forever: “The only other reference in the Jewish Bible to being able to ‘eat and live for ever’ refers to the fruit of the Tree of Life, from which Adam and Eve were driven out (Gen 3:22).”

6:62-64 – Spirit and life

1. Mystery of His Divinity

2. Mystery of the Resurrection

The Roman Mass, 35: “Brant Pitre argues that the key to understanding this passage is the statement about the Son of man ascending into heaven. When Jesus declares that ‘the flesh’ on its own is ‘of no avail’, he reiterates that eating ‘his flesh’ is not an act of cannibalism but means ‘consuming his resurrected and spirit-filled body in the form of food and drink’. Jesus also makes clear that such sacramental eating does not work automatically but offers union with Christ and pledge of eternal life through faith.’”

The Flesh:

Pitre, p.114: “In other words, just as the Pharisees rejected Jesus because they did not recognize his supernatural origin but instead judged him only according to his appearance, so, too, Jesus’ disciples did not believe his Eucharistic teaching because they didn’t understand the supernatural nature of the new manna from heaven. They judged only by its appearances. They didn’t understand that he wished to give them his resurrected body and blood, miraculously present under the veil of bread and wine.”

Not really new:

Pitre, p.114: “For example, in one ancient Jewish commentary on Genesis, Rabbi Joshua states, ‘He who serves God to his death will be satisfied with the bread of the World to Come’ (Genesis Rabbah 82:8).

III. The Crucifixion – from Pitre

A. Why was Jesus Crucified?

1. For Blasphemy

Mk 14:62

2. For claiming divinity implicitly

Dan 7 and Psalm 110 cf Jn 19:5-7

Psalm 22 (esp. 26-29) and Mk 15:37-39

Pitre, 168: “And so the prophecies begin to be fulfilled. Far from being evidence that Jesus died a failure, the cry of dereliction is evidence that he saw his death as the fulfillment of the prophecies that would bring about the conversion of the pagan peoples of the world to the worship of the God of the Jews. And look around you now. What are literally billions of non-Jews from the Gentile nation doing? Worshiping the one God of the Jewish people. And when did this phenomenon begin? With the passion and death of Jesus of Nazareth on the cross.”

3. The temple of His Body

Jn 2:18-21; Jn 19:31-35 – Blood and Water

Pitre quotes Josephus, "So these High Priests, upon the coming of their feast which is called the Passover, when they slay their sacrifices, from the ninth hour to the eleventh . . . found the number of sacrifices was 256,500; which, upon the allowance of no more than ten that feast together, amounts to 2,700,200 persons that were pure and holy.”

“So at the time when Jesus lived, if you were approaching the Temple during the feast of Passover from the vantage point of the Kidron Valley, what might have you seen? A stream of blood and water, flowing out of the side of the Temple Mount.”

B. The Fourth Cup

Problem: nothing of cross to suggest to a Jewish observer that this was a sacrifice

From Hahn, The Fourth Cup, 161: “The Last Supper is what transformed Good Friday from an execution into a sacrifice – and Easter Sunday is what transformed the sacrifice into a sacrament.. Christ’s body was raised in glory, so it Is not communicable to the faith. Indeed, the Eucharist is the same sacrifice he offered by instituting the Eucharist and then dying on Calvary; only now his sacred humanity is deified and deifying. It is the high-priestly sacrifice hat he offers in heaven and on earth.”

1. Covenant

Definition: family relationship, consanguinity

Sacrifice:

It was a warning, a substitution, a representation

2. Passover:

St. Justin: “For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up inhte form of a cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb.”

- Taken from Fourth Cup, 78; cf. Dialogue with Trypho, 40.

3. Last Supper is a Passover Meal

CCC 1340

Passover is the Life of Christ:

Lk 2:41-46: Finding in the Temple

Jn 2:13-17: Cleansing of the Temple

Jn 6:4ff: Multiplication of Loaves and teaching on Eucharist

Jn 2:13; 6:4; 11:55 and 13:1: 3 Passovers

4. Four Cups – from Fourth Cup, 108

First Cup: First course consisted of a special blessing spoken over the first cup of wine, followed by the serving of a dish of herbs

Second Cup: The Second course included a recital of the Passover narrative, the questions and answers, and the “Little Hallel” (Psalm 113), followed by the drinking of the second cup of win

Third Cup: The Third course was the main meal, consisting of lamb and unleavened bread, after which was drunk the third cup of wine, known as the ‘cup of blessing’

1 Cor 10:16

Mk 14:24

Fourth Cup: The culmination of the seder was the singing of the Great Hallel (Psalm 114-118) and the drinking of the fourth cup of win, often called the “cup of consummation”.

Mk 14:25

Mk 14:26

Cup / Hour

Cup of Wrath: Isaiah 51:17; Jeremiah 25:15; Habbakuk 2:15-16

Mt 20:22; Mk 10:38 – baptism / cup

Jn 12:27; Jn 18:11

Mt 26:39

CCC 612 – The cup of the New Covenant, which Jesus anticipated when he offered himself at the Last Supper, is afterwards accepted by him from his Father’s hands in his agony in the garden at Gethsemane, making himself ‘obedient unto death.’ Jesus prays: ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this cup from me . . .’ Thus he expresses the horror that death represented for his human nature. Like ours, his human nature is destined for eternal life; but unlike ours, it is perfectly exempt from sin, the cause of death. Above all, his human nature had been assumed by the divine person of the ‘Author of life,’ the ‘Living One.’ By accepting in his human will that the Father’s will be done, he accepts his death as redemptive, for ‘he himself bore our sins in his body on the tree.’

Jn 19:29; cf. Ex 12:22

Fourth Cup, 116: “This verse reveals something very significant. Jesus had left unfinished the Passover liturgy when he chose to omit the fourth cup. He had stated his intention not to drink wine again until he came into the glory of his kingdom. Then he refused wine offered to him on one occasion, right before being nailed to the cross (Mk 15:23). Finally, at the very end, Jesus was offered ‘sour wine’ or ‘vinegar’ (Jn 19:30; Mt.27:48; Mk 15:36; Lk 23:36). All the Synoptics testify to this. But only John tells us how he responded: ‘When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ‘It is finished’; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit’ (Jn 19:30)”.

Paul – 1 Cor.11:25

Resurrection appearances – appearances are different, substance is the same (kids get this)

Feingold

Old Testament Figure

Passage in Old Testament

Meaning / Relation to the Eucharist

New Testament Reference (if applicable)

Fathers of the Church, Thomas Aquinas, CCC

The Shekhinah

Ex. 24:16-17; 1 Kings 8:10-13

The Presence, the Spirit that effects the change,

Transfiguration, Annunciation,

Ambrose of Milan, On the Mysteries, 3.13

The Ark of the Covenant

Ex. 29:42-46; Ex. 40:34-28

Mercy seat

Hebrews 9:2-7

The Meeting Tent

Ex. 25:8; Ex. 29:42-46; Ex. 40:34-38; Num 35:34

Meeting place of God and man, in the sanctuary

John 1:14;

The Temple

2 Chr 7:1-2; Deut. 12:10-14;

Ezekiel

Sacrifice in the place that God would appoint, Temple is a symbol of unity, unity also in faith and worship, sacrifice coincides with mysterious presence, spiritual nourishment, God’s Name dwelt in the Temple – Name = Presence

John 2:19-21; 1 Cor.6:13-20

Priesthood and Sacrifice before Mosaic Law

Gen.4:3-5; Gen.8:20-21; Gen.22:8

“God will provide the sacrifice”

Rom 8:32

Priesthood and Sacrifice after Mosaic Law

First Born: Ex.4:22; 19:6, Ps 89:27, 2 Sam 6:12-19; 1 Kings 3:15, 8:62-63

First born was son and priest

Heb. 1:2-13, 5:5-6, 12, Lk 2:7; Rom 8:17, 29; Col 1:15,18; 1 Pet 2:9; Rev. 1:5-6

Cyprian of Carthage

Manna

Ex. 16:4-35 / Wisdom 16:20-21/

Psalm 78:25

Bread from heaven, gratuitous, unknown / mysterious, daily bread, suited to every taste, bread of angels, food for pilgrimage

Jn 6:48-51

Tychonius, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 2:17; Augustine, Tractate on John, 26:13

The Offering of Melchizedek

Genesis 14:17-20 / Psalm 110:4

Melichizedek = King of righteousness, offered bread and wine,

Hebrews 7

Cyprian of Carthage; Ambrose of Milan, On the Mysteries, 8.45

The Bread of Presence

Ex 25:30 / Leviticus 24:5-9 /

Ex. 29:40 & Num 28:4-7 / 1 Sam 21:4-6

Matter of bread consecrated, set aside from ordinary use, holy communion consumed by priests, sacrificial offerings accompanied daily sacrifice of unblemished lamb, adoration of the Eucharist, place with the Ark of the Covenant, the end of the old covenant priesthood and the beginning of the new

Matthew 12:1-6

Origen, On Leviticus, 13; Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogic Catecheses, 4.5-6

The Passover: Unleavened Bread and Four Cups

Psalm 116:13 – lift up the cup of salvation

Memorial food of exodus and Passover [the sea], spiritual food, baptism / liturgical reenactment / unleavened bread symbolizes the purity of the heart produced by Eucharist

Leaven – Luke 12:1, 1 Cor. 5:6-8; His cup; 1 Cor 10:16

Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 40:1-3; Origen, Against Celsus, 8:22

The Tree of Life

Gen. 3:22-24

Immortality, sharing of divine life

John 6:50-51 / Rev. 2:7, 22:2

Feast of Booths

Lev.23

Concludes with day of Atonement, reflections on liturgy

Jn 12:24 – statement of the grain of wheat provides context of Peter’s confession

Jesus of Nazareth, 306

Yom Kippur / Day of Atonement

Lev. 16:21-22, Lev. 23:26-32

Blood and mercy, vicarious atonement, covenantal relationship (p.51-52)

Rom 3:24, John 17, Heb 12, 2 Cor.5:20, Rom 12:1

Bethlehem

Micah 5:2, 2 Sam 5:2, Ruth 2:4, 14

House of Bread, Birthplace of the King, eat Bread and drink wine

Matthew 2:5-6; Luke 2

The Twelve

1 Kings 4:7

Solomon appointed 12 put them in charge of feeding the people

Mark 6

CCC 765

Pitre

New Moses

p.28: Moses inaugurates the New Exodus riding on a donkey

p.28-29: about worship, sealed in blood, beheld God, ate and drank (Ex 24:5-11)

1. sealed in blood

2. ends in a banquet

p.32: “According to Jewish tradition, in the new world created by God, the righteous will no longer feast on earthly food and drink, but on the ‘presence’ of God:

In the World to Come there is no eating or drinking . . . but the righteous sit with crowns on their heads feasting on the brightness of the divine presence, as it says, ‘And they beheld God, and did eat and drink (Ex 24:11).’ (Babylonian Talmud, Berakoth 17a).

Vision will replace eating

New Passover

p.72: “When we compare Jesus’ action to these ancient Jewish traditions, it doesn’t take much imagination to figure out his point. By means of his words over the bread and wine of the Last Supper, Jesus is trying in no uncertain terms, ‘I am the new Passover Lamb of the new exodus. This is the Passover of the Messiah, and I am the new sacrifice.”

New Manna

p.84: Reserved the Manna in the Tabernacle

“By means of this action, God was telling the Israelites that the manna was not only miraculous; it was holy. Indeed, it was most holy – so sacred that it was to be reserved in the Holy of Holies itself. Intriguingly, the purpose of reserving this manna was not so that people might eat it, but so that they might look upon it. It was reserved so ‘that they may see the bread.’”

- Exodus 16:32-34

p.87: Manna was “from the beginning”

- ground in heaven, used in the heavenly liturgy by St. Michael the Archangel

p.95: epiousios – supersubstantial bread, cf. CCC 2837

Jerome’s vulgate: “Give us this day our supersubstantial bread”

p.96: “In sum, the hope for the new manna from heaven stands at the very center of the Lord’s Prayer, the one prayer that we know Jesus taught to his disciples.

New Bread of the Presence

p.117: “[I]n the second century A.D., Rabby Menahem of Galilee taught that ‘In the World to Come all sacrifices would be annulled, but the thanksgiving sacrifice will never be annulled’ (Leviticus Rabbah 9:7).”

p.119-20: Bread of the Presence part of the instructions of worship

Ex.25:23-24

p.121: “Therefore, the most literal translation of the Hebrew is the Bread of the Face. From this perspective the meaning of the expression is clear, but the implications are enormous: the Bread of the Presence is nothing less than the Bread of the Face of God. In this view, somehow, the bread itself is a visible sign of the face of God.”

Ex. 24:9-11: Bread and Wine of the Presence of God

p.122: Bread and Wine were signs of 1) God’s presence and 2) the everlasting covenant

1. Everlasting covenant

2. Bread of the Presence was a “perpetual offering”

p.123: “[T]he Bread of the Presence was a ‘perpetual’ offering, to be continually present before the Lord in the Tabernacle. It was to be a perpetual sign of the fact that although the Israelites were no longer at Mount Sinai, God was still with them.”

- flames of the Menorah were to be kept burning ‘continually’ alongside the bread

3. Unbloody sacrifice

4. Most holy

p.125: [Before the destruction of the temple] every week, Sabbath worship revolved around the offering of the fresh Bread of the Presence and of the eating of the bread by the priests in the Holy Place.

THE BREAD OF THE PRESENCE WAS THE SABBATH SACRIFICE

Bread of the Presence and Melchizedek

Change shown by the Golden Table

Shown to Pilgrims

p.130: “According to both the Jerusalem Talmud and Babylonian Talmud, at each of the feasts, the priests in the temple would do something remarkable. They would remove the Gold Table of the Bread of the Presence form within the Holy Place so that the Jewish pilgrims could see it. When they removed the holy bread, the priests would elevate it and say the following words:

They [the priests] used to lift it [the Gold Table] up and exhibit the Bread of the Presence on it to those who came up for the festivals, saying to them, ‘Behold, God’s love for you!” (Babylonian Talmud, Menahoth 29A).”

Love and Marriage Bond

To See the Face of the Lord

Jesus and the Bread of the Presence

David’s priesthood, the disciples are priests, Greater than the temple

Pitre, p.143:

BREAD OF THE PRESENCE

LAST SUPPER

1. 12 cakes for the 12 tribes

1. 12 disciples for the 12 tribes

2. Bread and wine of God’s presence

2. Bread and wine of Jesus’ presence

3. An ‘everlasting covenant’’

3. a new “covenant”

4. As a remembrance

4. in ‘remembrance’

5. Offered by High Priest and eaten by Priests

5. offered by Jesus and eaten by the disciples

6. Eaten at the gold table in the temple in Jerusalem

6. Jesus’ Table in the Kingdom of the Father

4th Cup

Week 3 – Theme: Matter and Form; Topics: Presence, Development of Eucharistic Doctrine;

Required Reading: Feingold Chapters 4&5

Suggested Reading: CCC 1373-81; Council of Ephesus (431); Thomas, Trent, Decree on the Most Holy Eucharist, cc.1-8

CCC 1373-81:

CCC 1374 – The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique. It raises the Eucharist above the other sacraments as ‘the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend’ (S.T. III, q.73, a.3). In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist ‘the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained’ (Trent).

CCC 1375 – It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament.

The Matter of the Eucharist: q.74

Review of Matter and Form from metaphysics:

Essence / Form: specifies, makes it be what it is.

The Typology of Manna encourages us to ask, “What is it?”

Can also be identified often with what: essence can be part or whole in human beings

If we are to ask in the Sacraments: what is form? And does this answer what is the sacrament?

What is the form? The Word(s), words make rational

Word and Sacrament

So

Viewed as a whole:

Word is the sacrament

Viewed as a Part:

Word is the form

Cf. S.T. III, q.78, a.5: for such is the relation of God’s word to the things made by the Word.

See John 1: The Word became Flesh.

The Fathers on the Word:

Irenaeus in Feingold, 141: “When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God, . . . [it] becomes the Eucharist, the body and blood of Christ.”

Augustine in Feingold, 158: “In Sermon 277 to the neophytes on Easter, St. Augustine says that the visible bread and wine on the altar, ‘sanctified by the word of God,’ is His Body and Blood.

You ought to know what you have received, what you are about to receive, and what you ought to receive every day. That bread which you see on the altar, sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That cup, or rather what the cup contains, sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ.”

“He makes the same point in Sermon 229 to the neophytes on the Eucharistic liturgy, in which he also stresses the conversion of the elements through the power of the word by which the communicants are made into the Body of Christ:

What you can see here, dearly beloved, on the table of the Lord, is bread and wine; but this bread and wine, when the word is applied to it, becomes the body and blood of the Word. . . . Because, yes, the very Word took to himself a man, that is the soul and flesh of a man, and became man, while remaining God. For that reason, because he also suffered for us, he also presented us in this sacrament with his body and blood and this is what he even made us ourselves into as well.”

St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Gregory of Nyssa in Feingold, 162: the words of consecration to a knife.

St. Cyril of Alexandria in Feingold, 170 [Third Letter Against Nestorius (Letter 17.12)]: “Proclaiming the death according to the flesh of the only Son of God, that is, of Jesus Christ, and confessing his Resurrection from the dead and his Ascension into heaven, we celebrate the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and we thus approach the spiritual blessings and are made holy, becoming partakers of the holy flesh and of the precious blood of Christ, the Savior of us all. And we do this, not as men receiving common flesh, far from it, nor truly the flesh of a man sanctified and conjoined to the Word according to a unity of dignity, or as one having had a divine indwelling, but as truly life-giving and very own flesh of the Word himself.”

St. John Damascene in Feingold, 174 [An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith4.13]: “If, then, ‘the word of the Lord is living and effectual’ [Heb 4:12], and if ‘whatsoever the Lord pleased he hath done’ [Ps 134:6]; if He said, ‘Be light made, and ti was made’; . . . if by His will God the Word Himself became man and without seed caused the pure and undefiled blood of the blessed Ever-Virgin to form a body for Himself; - if all this, then can He not make the bread His body and wine and water His blood?”

Gregory of Nyssa in Feingold, 202 [Great Catechism, 37.105-7]: “Rightly, then, do we believe that now also the bread which is consecrated by the Word of God is changed into the Body of God the Word . . . . It is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, ‘This is My Body.’”

John Chrysostom in Feingold, 202 [De Proditione Judae, homily 1 and 2]: “The priest is the representative when he pronounces those words, but the power and the grace are those of the Lord. ‘This is my Body,’ he says. This word changes the things that lie before us; and as that sentence ‘increase and multiply,’ once spoken, extends through all time and gives to our nature the power to reproduce itself; even so that saying ‘This is my Body,’ once uttered, does at every table in the Churches from that time to the present day, and even till Christ’s coming, make the sacrifice complete.”

See again Thomas’ commentary on John 6: Notes the Word as food for the purpose of Wisdom

Par.914: “Now the bread of wisdom is called the bread of life to distinguish it from material bread, which is the bread of death, and which serves only to restore what has bee lost by a mortal organism; hence material bread is necessary only during this mortal life. But the bread of divine wisdom is life-giving of itself, and no death can affect it. Again, material bread does not give life, but only sustains for a time a life that already exists. But spiritual bread actually gives life: for the soul begins to live because it adheres to the word of God: for with you is the fountain of life (Ps 35:10). Therefore, since every word of wisdom is derived from the only begotten Word of God – the fountain of wisdom is the only begotten of God (sir. 1:5) – this Word of God is especially called the Bread of Life. Thus Christ says, I am the bread of life. And because the flesh of Christ is united to the Word of God, it also is life-giving. Thus, too, his body sacramentally received, is life-giving: for Christ gives life to the world through the mysteries which he accomplished in his flesh. Consequently, the flesh of Christ, because of the Word of the Lord, is not the bread of ordinary life, but of that life which does not die. And so the flesh of Christ is called bread.”

A. See Ratzinger on the Word:

a. Connection to the Eucharist

1. Spiritual Worship

p.80: “In the words addressed by Jesus to the Father, the ritual of the Day of Atonement is transformed into prayer . . . Sacrificial animals are a thing of the past. In their place are what the Greek Fathers called thysia logike – spiritual sacrifices [literally: sacrifices after the manner of the word] – and what Paul described in similar terms as logike latreia, that is, worship shaped by the word, structured on reason (Rom 12:1).”

2. Shaped by Logos

p.80: “Admittedly, this ‘word’ that supplants the sacrificial offerings is no ordinary word. To begin with, it is no mere human speech, but rather the word of him who is ‘the Word’, and so it draws all human words into God’s inner dialogue, into his reason and his love.”

- cf Heb. 10:5; Ps 40:6

“The Word is now flesh, and not only that: it is his body offered up, his blood poured out.”

3. Made flesh

p.80: “With the institution of the Eucharist, Jesus transforms his cruel death into ‘word’, into the radical expression of his love, , his self-giving to the point of death. So he himself becomes the ‘Temple’. Insofar as the high-priestly prayer forms the consummation of Jesus’ self-gift, it represents the new worship and has a deep inner connection with the Eucharist”

See commentary on the rational sacrifice:

Eucharist:

Words of 1 Cor 11:23-25 refer to two OT Passages:

a. Jeremiah 31:31 – promise of the New Covenant

“Jesus tells the disciples and tells us: now, at this moment, with me and with my death the new covenant is fulfilled; by my Blood this new history of humanity begins in the world”

b. Exodus 24:8 – “Behold the blood of the covenant”

Words of 1 Cor 10:16-17 – the cup of blessing

Personal and social dimension of the Sacrament of the Eucharist

“Christ personally unites himself with each one of us, but Christ himself is also united with the man and the woman who are next to me.”

Full realism of this doctrine: “Christ gives us his Body in the Eucharist, he gives himself in his Body and thus makes us his Body, he unites us with His Risen Body”

Marriage: mutual submission must use the language of love whose model is Christ’s love for the Church.

B. Spiritual Worship – 3 texts from Romans

1. Rom 3:25 – propitiatory of the temple, lid covering the ark

“This rite was an expression of the desire truly to be able to cast all our sins into the abyss of divine mercy and thus make them disappear. With the blood of animals, however, this expiation was not achieved; a more real contact between human sin and divine love was required. This contact took place on the Cross of Christ. . . This is not, therefore, a spiritualization of true worship; on the contrary, it is true worship: real divine-human love replaces the symbolic and temporary form of worship”.

2. Rom 12:1

Paradox of words: sacrifice normally requires the death of the victim, Paul speaks on the contrary of the lifeof the Christian

Spiritual worship – rationabile obsequium

“In any case it is not a matter of less real worship or even worship that is only metaphorical but rather of a more concrete and realistic worship – a worship in which the human being himself, in his totality as a being endowed with reason, becomes adoration, glorification of the living God.”

Psalm 50(49) – the sacrifice acceptable to God

Daniel 3:15-17 – in the heart of the furnace

3. Rom 15:15

Minister – “Saint Paul interprets his missionary activity among the world’s peoples to build the universal Church as priestly service. To proclaim the Gospel in order to unite peoples in the communion of the Risen Christ is a ‘priestly’ action. The apostle of the Gospel is a true priest, he does what is central to the priesthood: prepares the true sacrifice.”

Goal of Missionary Activity – “the cosmic liturgy: that the peoples united in Christ, the world, may as such become the glory of God, an ‘acceptable [offering], sanctified by the Holy Spirit’

“Here the dynamic aspect appears, the aspect of hope in the Pauline conception of worship: Christ’s gift of himself implies the aspiration to attract all to communion in his body, to unite the world. Only in communion with Christ, the exemplary man, one with God, does the world thus become as we all wish it to be: a mirror of divine love. This dynamism is ever present in the Eucharist – this dynamism must inspire and form our life.”

Johannes Quasten, Patrology, vol.I, p.218 : “What Justin really rejects is the material sacrifice of creatures as practiced by the Jews and pagans. By means of his concept of sacrifice he attempts to bridge the gap between pagan philosophy and Christianity just as he uses his concept of the Logos for that same end. His ideal is the λογικη θυσια, the oblatio rationabilis, the spiritual sacrifice which the Greek philosophers declared to be the only veneration worthy of God. Here, as in the case of the Logos, Christianity represents the fulfillment of a philosophic ideal because it possesses such a spiritual sacrifice. For this reason Jesus agrees with the pagan philosophers as well as the prophets of the Old Testament, that external sacrifices must be abolished. There is no longer any room for bloody material sacrifices. The Eucharist is the desired spiritual sacrifice, the λογικυ θυσια , because the Logos himself, jesus Christ, is here the victim. Justin’s identification of the λογικη θυσια with the Eucharist proved extremely happy. By incorporating this idea into the Christian doctrine he appropriated for Christianity the highest achievements of Greek philosophy, and stress at the same time the new and unique character of Christian worship. He retained an objective sacrifice while on the other hand he emphasized the spiritual character of Christian sacrifices. Thus the term, oblatio rationabilis, in the canon of the Roman Mass expresses better than any other word Justin’s concept of sacrifice.”

a.1: Whether the Matter of this Sacrament is Bread and Wine?

Sed contra, quote Pope Alexander, Ep. Ad omnes Orthod. i, Bread and Wine

From Liber pontificalis: (pope 107-115) – He introduced the passion of the Lord into the words of the priest at the celebration of Mass.

Singles out 4 reasons why it was reasonable for the Lord in the Gospel of Matthew to specific Bread and Wine:

1. Use of the Sacrament: bread and wine are common food

2. Christ’s Passion – blood was separated from the body

Therefore in this sacrament, which is the memorial of our Lord’s Passion, the bread is received apart as the sacrament of the body, and the wine as the sacrament of the blood.

3. The Partakers

Quotes Ambrose, Mag. Sent. iv, D. xi, on 1 Cor. 11:20 – this sacrament avails for the defense of the soul and body; and therefore Christ’s body is offered under the species of bread for the health of the body, and the blood under the species of wine for the health of the soul, according to Lev.17:14 – the life of the animal (vulgate of all flesh) is in the blood.

4. Effect with regard the whole Church

Made up of many believers, just as bread is composed of many grains, and wine flows from many grapes,

a.2: Whether a Determinate Quantity of Bread and Wine is Required for the Matter of this Sacrament?

The end of this sacrament is the use of the faithful

a.3: Whether Wheaten Bread is Required for the Matter of This Sacrament?

Sed contra: John 12:24 – Unless the grain of wheat falls to the ground . .

Wheat is the most common.

Fittingness for Wheat: from Catholic Answers, accessed 9/17/21 - https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/why-wheat-bread

Falls to the ground, dies, is broken open

Golden

Image of Christ – the Grain of Wheat

Image of the Apostles – Lk 22:31-32 Sift like Wheat

Image of the Church – Mt 13:24-30

Passover

Wheat of Life – Song of Songs 7:3, belly a heap of wheat, surrounded by lilies

Finest Wheat – Psalm 81:16; Psalm 147:14

Wheat Bread / Gold – 1 Chron. 21:18-28; cereal offering, paid for by gold, on mt Moriah

Ad 1: quotes Augustine:

Barley Bread serves to denote the hardness of the Old Law: because it is hard and because Augustine said:

The flour within the barley wrapped up as it is within the most tenacious fibre, denotes either the Law itself, , which was given in such manner as to be vested in bodily sacraments; or else it denotes the people themselves, who were not yet despoiled of carnal desires, which clung to their hearts like fibre.

But this sacrament belongs to Christ’s sweet yoke, and to the truth already manifested, and to a spiritual people.

a.4 Whether This Sacrament Ought to Be Made of Unleavened Bread?

Quotes Gregory the Great – unleavened bread refers to the virginal conception

4 reasons:

1. Christ’s institution

2. Sacrament of Christ’s Body, free from corruption

3. The Sincerity of the faithful, which is required in the use of the sacrament

Ad 1: cf. S.T. III, q.46, a.9, Ad 1

a.5: Whether Wine of the Grape is the Proper Matter of This Sacrament?

- Sed contra: as our Lord compared Himself to the grain of wheat so also He compared Himself to the vine, Jon 15:1 – I am the vine; but only bread from wheat is the matter of this sacrament, therefore only wine from the grape is the proper matter of this sacrament

1. Christ’s institution

2. Adopted as the matter of the sacraments which is properly and universally considered as such.

3. In keeping with the effect of the sacrament = spiritual

Psalm 103:15 – wine may cheer man’s heart

Wedding at Cana: The Lamb of God (Jn 1:34) goes to a Wedding Banquet

2:1 – On the third day

Fr. Raymond Brown calls this the first week of the New Creation

2:3 – they have no wine

Wine = grace

2:4 – Hour (at the hour speaks of the chalice John 12:27; Luke 22:42)

2.:5 – to the Deacons: “Do whatever he tells you”

St. Thomas on why she waits until now, following John Damascene

2:7 – separate the water

Gen.1:9 – And God said, ‘Let the waters under the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”.

Numbers 19:11 – He who touches the dead body of any person shall be unclean seven days; he shall cleanse himself with the water on the third day and one the seventh day, and so be clean

- “seven oneself” is covenant language

Among Moses’ first signs Ex.7:14-19: water to blood

Gen. 49:10-11 – The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs; and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples. Binding his foal to the vine and his donkey’s colt to the choice vine, he washes his garments in wine and his vesture in the blood of grapes;

- Interesting to note that Joseph predicts the Exodus, cf. Gn.50:24-25 – “I am about to die; but God will visit you, and bring you up out of this land to the land which he swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob . . . God will visit you, and you shall carry up my bones from here.”

o Interesting interesting is that is a prediction of the pillar of cloud

2:10 – the good wine

From Ignatius Study Bible

1. an abundance of wine is a sign of the messianic age (Isaiah 25:6; Joel 3:18; Amos 9:13)

2. It signifies the joys of marital love (Song 1:2;4:10;7:9)

3. The transformation of water into wine anticipates the transubstantiation of wine into blood when Jesus gives himself to the world in the eucharistic liturgy (Jn 6:53; 1 Cor 10:16)

4. The wine of the marital celebration looks beyond this life to the marriage supper of the Lamb in heaven (Rev. 19:7-9; CCC 1335).

From Ancient Christian Commentaries

Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John 8.4.1-3: Is it any wonder that he who came to that house for a wedding came to this world for a wedding? . . . Therefore he has a bride here whom he has redeemed by his blood and to whom he has given the pledge of the Holy Spirit as a pledge. He wrested her from enslavement to the devil, he died for her sins. He arose again for her justification. Who will offer such great things to his bride? Men may offer some trinkets or other from the earth such as gold, silver, precious stones, horses, slaves, farms or estates. Will anyone offer his blood? For if he gives his blood to his bride, he will not be alive to take her as his wife. But the Lord, dying free of anxiety, gave his blood for her in order that when he arose, he might have her whom he had already joined to himself in the womb of the Virgin. For the Word was the bridegroom, and human flesh was the bride. And both are the one Son of God and likewise the Son of man. That womb of the Virgin Mary where he became the head of the church was his bridal chamber.

§ Give His flesh to the one whose flesh he assumed.

Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Lectures 4.2– [Jesus] once changed water into wine by a word of command at Cana of Galilee. Should we not believe him when he changes wine into blood? It was when he had been invited to an ordinary bodily marriage that he performed the wonderful miracle at Cana. Should we not be much more ready to acknowledge that to ‘the sons of the bridal chamber’ he has granted the enjoyment of his body and blood.

a.6: Whether Water Should be Mixed with the Wine?

Sed contra: Pope Alexander

1. On account of the institution: the Lord instituted this sacrament in win tempered with water according to the custom of that country.

- Prov. 9:5 – Drink the wine which I have mixed for you

2. it harmonizes with the representation of the Lord’s Passion

Pope Alexander: “In the Lord’s chalice neither wine only nor water only ought to be offered, but both mixed, because we read that both flowed from His side in the Passion.

Cf. John 19:31-34

3. Adapted for signifying the effect of this sacrament:

Pope Julius (pope 337-352; council Bracarens iii, canon 1): We see that the people are signified by the water, but Christ’s blood by the wine. Therefore, when water is mixed with the wine in the chalice, the people is made one with Christ.

4. appropriate to the fourth effect of the sacrament – entry into everlasting life

Quotes Ambrose: de sacramentis v. the water flows into the chalice, and spring forth into everlasting life.

Ad 1 – as ambrose says, just as Christ’s sacrifice is denoted by the offering of Melchisedek, so likewise it is signified by the water which flowed from the rock in the desert

- 1 Cor. 10:4 – they drank of the spiritual rock which came after them

a.7: Whether the Mixing with Water is Essential to This Sacrament? Follows Cyprian (epistle 62, my version of the summa names this ep. 63)

par.5 – Quotes proverbs 9:1ff – Wisdom has build her house, slaughtered bases, mixed her wine

par.6 – Gen.49:11 – “but when the blood of the grape is mentioned, what else is set forth than the wine of the cup of the Lord?”

[Read the whole letter]: 13. For because Christ bore us all, in that He also bore our sins, we see that in the water is understood the people, but in the wine is showed the blood of Christ. But when the water is mingled in the cup with wine, the people is made one with Christ, and the assembly of believers is associated and conjoined with Him on whom it believes; which association and conjunction of water and wine is so mingled in the Lord's cup, that that mixture cannot any more be separated. Whence, moreover, nothing can separate the Church— that is, the people established in the Church, faithfully and firmly persevering in that which they have believed— from Christ, in such a way as to prevent their undivided love from always abiding and adhering. Thus, therefore, in consecrating the cup of the Lord, water alone cannot be offered, even as wine alone cannot be offered. For if any one offer wine only, the blood of Christ is dissociated from us; but if the water be alone, the people are dissociated from Christ; but when both are mingled, and are joined with one another by a close union, there is completed a spiritual and heavenly sacrament. Thus the cup of the Lord is not indeed water alone, nor wine alone, unless each be mingled with the other; just as, on the other hand, the body of the Lord cannot be flour alone or water alone, unless both should be united and joined together and compacted in the mass of one bread; in which very sacrament our people are shown to be made one, so that in like manner as many grains, collected, and ground, and mixed together into one mass, make one bread; so in Christ, who is the heavenly bread, we may know that there is one body, with which our number is joined and united.

Thomas:

1. the union of the people with Christ

2. the flowing of water from the side of Christ hanging on the cross refers to the same, because by the water is denoted the cleansing from sins = the effect of Christ’s passion.

Ad 2: flowing of water wasn’t necessary for Christ’s passion, blood was necessary, but water shows the effects of the passion which is the washing away sins, and refreshment from concupiscence.

a.8: Whether Water Should be Added in Great Quantity?

Of the Form of This Sacrament: q.78

a.1: whether this is the form of this Sacrament: “This is My Body,” and “This is the Chalice of My Blood”?

sed contra: quotes Ambrose, De sacramentiis, iv: The consecration is accomplished by the words and expressions of the Lord Jesus. Because, by all the other words spoken, praise is rendered to God, prayer is put up for the people, for kings, and others; but when the time comes for perfecting the sacrament, the priest uses no longer his own words, but the words of Christ. Therefore it is Christ’s words that perfect this sacrament.

Different from the other sacraments;

1. Sacrament is accomplished by the consecration of matter; the other sacraments are perfected using consecrated matter, derives instrumentally a spiritual power, which the priest who is an animated instruments can pass on to inanimate instruments.

2. In the other sacraments, consecration consists in a blessing; in this sacrament the consecration of the matter consists in the miraculous change of the substance, and can only be done by God.

- the minister in performing this sacrament has no other act save the pronouncing of the words.

a. the form of this sacrament implies the consecration of the matter

b. the form of this sacrament is pronounced as if Christ were speaking in person, so that it is given to be understood that the minister does nothing in perfecting this sacrament except to pronounce the words of Christ.

a.2: Whether this is the proper form for the consecration of the Bread: This is My Body?

a.3: Whether this is the proper form for the consecration of the Wine: This is the Chalice of My Blood, etc.?

a.4: Whether in the Aforesaid Words of the Forms there be any created power which causes the consecration?

For since these words are uttered in the person of Christ, it is from His command that they receive their instrumental power from Him, just as His other deeds and sayings derive their salutary power instrumentally, as was observed (q.48,a.6; q.56, a.1, ad 3)”

[Words of institution have the same instrumentality as Words spoken by Christ]

a.5: Whether the aforesaid expressions are true?

Literal sense: words signify things

Spiritual sense: things signify things

Sacramental sense: words make present the things they signify

Sed contra: John 14:6 – I am the truth. The words are pronounced in the person who said, “I am the Truth”.

a.6: Whether the Form of the Consecration of the Bread accomplishes its Effect before the Form of consecration of the Wine be completed?

Of the Change of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ: q.75

a.1: Whether the Body of Christ be in this Sacrament in Very Truth, or merely as in a figure or sign?

Sed contra, quotes Hilary, De trinitate 8: There is no room for doubt regarding the truth of Christ’s body and blood; for now by our Lord’s own declaring and by our faith His flesh is truly food, and His blood is truly drink.

And Ambrose, De Sacramentis vi : As the Lord Jesus Christ is God’s true Son, so is it Christ’s true flesh which we take, and His true blood which we drink.

Because He said so – Truth Himself speaks truly, or else there is nothing true

Quotes Luke 12:19; Cyril

Suitable:

1. For the perfection of the New Law

Sacrifices of the Old Law contained in fgure the sacrifice of Christ’s Passion

- Hebrews 10:1

Sacrifice of the New Law have something more – Christ Himself crucified, not merely in signification or figure, but also in truth.

Contains Christ Himself

- quotes Dionysius Eccle Hierar iii

Perfective of all the other sacraments, which participate in Christ’s virtue [power]

2. Belongs to Christ’s Love

Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, 9 – nature of friends to live with friends

Promises us His Bodily Presence as a reward: where the Body is, there the Eagles gather (Matthew 24:28)

Not just then, but now

“meanwhile in our pilgrimage He does not deprive us of His bodily presence; but unites us with Himself in this sacrament through the truth of His Body and Blood”

· John 6:57

Hence, this sacrament is the sign of supreme charity, and the uplifter of our hope, from such familiar union of Christ with us.

3. Belongs to the perfection of faith

Concerns his humanity and his divinity (Jn 14:1) – You believe in God, believe also in Me

Faith is of things unseen (Heb. 11:1) – Christ shows us His Godhead invisibly; in this sacrament He shows us His flesh invisibly

Names Berengarius: his heresy and his profession of faith

Ad 1: quotes Augustine, In psalm 4, Tract xxvii

Ad 3: [summary of the content of q.76]:

Christ’s Body is not present in the same way as a body is in place, which is by it dimensions are commensurate with the place.

Christ’s Body is present in a special manner which is proper to this sacrament.

Christ’s Body is upon many altars, no as in different places, but sacramentally

Christ’s Body is not present there only in sign, though sacraments are signs

Christ’s Body is here after a fashion proper to this sacrament.

a.2: Whether in This Sacrament the Substance of the Bread and Wine remains after the Consecration?

Sed contra: Ambrose, De Sacramentiis, iv – Although the figure of the bread and wine be seen, still, after the Consecration, they are to be believed to be nothing else than the body and blood of Christ.

GOD IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF CONTRADICTION:

Can’t be that the substance of bread remains after the consecration:

1. by such an opinion, the truth of this sacrament is destroyed:

Anything which comes to be in a place it wasn’t previously does so by a change of a place or a change of another thing into itself

Not by a change of place by local motion – 3 reasons

- it would then cease to be in heaven

- it would pass through all the intermediary spaces

- not possible for one movement to terminate in different places at the same time.

Therefore, Christ’s body comes to be by a change of the substance of bread into itself.

· What is changed into something different, doesn’t remain the same.

2. Contrary to the form of the Sacrament

Form says, “This is my Body”, because the substance of Bread is never the Body of Christ.

3. such an opinion is opposed to the veneration of this sacrament which is adored with latria

4. contrary to the rite – The Host doesn’t break the fast.

Ad 1: God wedded his divine power to the bread wine so that they would change

a.3: Whether the Substance of the Bread or Wine is Annihilated after the Consecration of This Sacrament, or Dissolved into Their Original Matter?

Sed contra Augustine, 83 questions, God is not the cause of tending to nothing

GOD DOES NOT CAUSE NONBEING

Matter is new to being either by movement or by change.

Not movement.

What kind of change?

Not accidental change

Not substantial change

a.4: Whether Bread can be converted into the Body of Christ?

Sed contra: Eusebius Emesenus (300-60) – to thee it ought neither to be a novelty nor an impossibility that earthly and mortal things be changed into the substance of Christ.

“I answer that, as stated above (a.2), since Christ’s true body is in this sacrament, and since it does not begin to be there by local motion, nor is it contained therein as in a place, as is evident from what was stated above (a.1, ad 2), it must be said then that it begins to be there by conversion of the substance of bread into itself.”

Quotes Ambrose, de sacramentiis, iv

Quotes Ambrose, de mysteriis, iv

Quotes John Chrysostom, hom. Xlvii:

Every agent acts according as it is in act.

The determination of everything in actual existence comes from its form.

No natural or created agent can act except by changing the form in something.

Every change made according to nature’s laws is a formal change.

God is infinite act

o His action extend to the whole nature of being.

§ He can change the form

§ He can also change the being

“And this is done by Divine Power in this sacrament; for the whole substance of bread is changed into the whole substance of Christ’s body, and the whole substance of the wine into the whole substance of Christ’s blood. Hence this is not a formal, but a substantial conversion; nor is it a kind of natural movement: but with a name of its own, it can be called transubstantiation.”

Fourth Lateran Council, 1215

There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice. His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been changed in substance, by God’s power, into his body and blood, so that in order to achieve this mystery of unity we receive from God what he received from us. Nobody can effect this sacrament except a priest who has been properly ordained according to the church’s keys, which Jesus Christ himself gave to the apostles and their successors.

a.5: Whether the accidents of the Bread and Wine remain in this sacrament after the change?

a.6: Whether the substantial form of the bread remains in this sacrament after the Consecration?

a.7: Whether this change is wrought instantaneously?

a.8: Whether this proposition is false: The Body of Christ is made out of bread?

- it is evident to sense that all the accidents of the bread and wine remain after the consecration

- and this is reasonably done by Divine providence

o First of al, because it is not customary, but horrible, for men to eat human flesh, and to drink blood

§ Therefore, Christ’s flesh and blood are set before us to be partaken of under the species of those things which are the more commonly used by men, namely, bread and wine

o Secondly, lest this sacrament might be derided by unbelievers, if we were to eat our Lord under his own species

o Thirdly, that while we receive our Lord’s body and blood invisibly, this may redound to the merit of faith

Ad 1: in the book of de causis:

- an effect depends more on the first cause of all things, it is possible for that which follows to remain, while that which is first is taken away

ad 2: there is no deception in this sacrament

- for the accidents which are discerned by the senses are truly present.

- But the intellect, whose proper object is substance – de anima

- Preserved by faith from deception

o This serves to the third argument,

§ Faith is not contrary to the senses, but concerns things to which sense does not reach.

Ad 4: accidents which remain have some semblance of the subject.

a.6: whether the substantial form of the bread remains in this sacrament after the consecration?

- the substantial form of bread is of the substance of bread.

o But the substance of the bread is changed into the body of Christ

o Therefore the substantial form of the bread does not remain

- It cannot be that the substance in addition to the accidents remains:

o 1. because if the substantial form of the bread were to remain, nothing of the bread would be changed into the body of Christ, excepting the matter

§ and so it would follow that it would be changed not into the whole body of Christ, but into this matter, which is repugnant to the form of this sacrament: This is my body

o 2. because if the substantial form of the bread were to remain, it would remain either in matter, or separated from matter.

§ The first cannot be – for if it were to remain in the matter of the bread then the whole substance of the bread would remain, which is against what was said

§ Nor could it remain in any other matter, because the proper form exists only in its proper matter

· But if it were to remain separate from matter, it would then be an actually intelligible form, and also an intelligence; for all forms separated from matter are such

o 3. it would be unfitting this sacrament,

§ because the accidents of the bread remain in this sacrament, in order that the body of Christ may be seen under them.

Ad 2: the soul is the form of the body, giving it the whole order of perfect being, i.e., being, corporeal being, and animated being, and so on.

- therefore the form of the bread is changed into the form of Christ’s body, according as the latter gives corporeal being, but not according as it bestows animated being.

a.7: whether this change is wrought instantaneously?

- a change may be instantaneous from a threefold reason:

o 1. on the part of the form, which is the terminus of the change

§ for if it be a form that receives more and less, it is aquired by its subject successively, such as health; and therefore because a substantial form does not receive more and less, it follows that its introduction into matter is instantaneous

o 2. on the part of the subject, which sometimes is prepared successively for receiving the form;

§ thus water is heated successively

§ when however, the subject itself is in the ultimate disposition for receiving the form, it receives it suddenly as a transparent body is illuminated suddenly

o 3. on the part of the agent

§ which possesses infinite power, wherefore it can instantly dispose the matter for the form.

§ When Christ says, (Mk. 7:34), be thou opened, immediately his ears were opened.

- For these three reasons this conversion is instantaneous

o 1. because the substance of Christ’s body which is the term of this conversion, does not receive more or less

o 2. because in this conversion there is no subject to be disposed successively

o 3. because it is effected by God’s infinite power

ad 1: it must be said that this change, is wrought by Christ’s words which are spoken by the priest, so that the last instant of pronouncing the words is the first instant in which Christ’s body is in the sacrament

- and that the substance of the bread is there during the whole preceding time.

- Of this time no instant is to be taken as proximately preceding the last one, because time is not made up of successive instansts, as is proved in the Physics.

- And therefore the first instant can be assigned in which Christ’s body is present

o But a last instant cannot be assigned in which the substance of bread is there, but a last time can be assigned.

a.8: whether this proposition is false: the body of Christ is made out of bread?

- the conversion of bread into the body of Christ has something in common with creation, and with natural transmutation, and in some respect differs from both.

o Being from non-being

o Christ from bread

o White from black

o Fire from air

Of the Way in which Christ is in This Sacrament: q.76

a.1: Whether the Whole Christ is Contained under this Sacrament?

Sed contra: [quotes Ambrose]

Whole Christ present

Ephesus, 431:

- We will necessarily add this also:

o Proclaiming the death according to the flesh of the only begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, and professing his return to life from the dead and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody worship in the churches and so proceed to the mystical thanksgivings (benedictions; eulogiais) and are sanctified, having partaken of the holy flesh and precious blood of Christ, the savior of us all.

o This we receive not as ordinary flesh, heaven forbid, nor as that of a man who has been made holy and joined to the Word by union of honor, or who had a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and real flesh of the Word.

§ For being life by nature as God, when he became one with his own flesh, he made it also to be life-giving, as also he said to us:

· Amen I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood

§ For we must not think that it is the flesh of a man like us (for how can the flesh of man be life-giving by its own nature?), but as being made the true flesh of the one who for our sake become the son of man and was called so.

Ad 1: quotes Ephesus

a.2: Whether the Whole Christ is Contained under Each Species of This Sacrament?

Sed contra: gloss on 1 Cor 11:25 –

Whole Christ in each species

a.3: Whether Christ is Entire under Every Part of the Species of the Bread and Wine?

Whole Christ is in every part of the species

a.4: Whether the Whole Dimensive Quantity of Christ’s Body is in This Sacrament?

Principle of individuation is relevant here.

If the dimensive quantity is lacking in the conversion, there is no individuation in Thomas’ mind.

By concomitance, Christ’s Body is individual and the dimensive quantities are there, but in the change, they are not. There is no individuation

Sed contra

Any part of Christ is in this sacrament in two ways:

1. by the power of this sacrament – the dimensive quantities are not present in this sacrament.

2. from real concomitance – Christ’s body is not deprived of its dimensive quantity and other accidents, by real concomitance the whole dimensive quantity of Christ’s body and all its other accidents are in this sacrament.

Ad 1: the manner of being of everything is determined by what belongs to it of itself, and not according to its accidents.

Sweetness is in sight after the manner of whiteness.[sweetness isn’t essential object of sight, something visible is]

The substance of Christ’s body is present on the altar by the power of this sacrament, while its dimensive quantity is there concomitantly and as it were accidentally.

Therefore the dimensive quantity of Christ’s body is in this sacrament, not according to its proper manner (namely, that the whole is in the whole, and the individual parts in individual parts), but after the manner of substance, whose nature is for the whole to be in the whole, and the whole in every part.)

Distinctions: whole in whole / individual parts in individual parts ; whole in whole / whole in every part

· The former: the way dimensive quantity is in something

· The latter: the way substance is in something

a.5: Whether Christ’s Body Is in This Sacrament As in a Place?

a.6: Whether Christ’s Body is in This Sacrament Movably?

a.7: Whether the Body of Christ, As It Is in This Sacrament, Can be Seen By Any Eye, at Least by a Glorified One?

a.8: Whether Christ’s Body is Truly There When Flesh or A Child Miraculously in This Sacrament?

Of the Accidents which Remain in this Sacrament, q.77

a.1: Whether the Accidents remain in this Sacrament without a subject?

a.2: Whether in This Sacrament the Dimensive Quantity of the Bread or Wine is the subject of the other accidents?

a.3: Whether the species remaining in this sacrament can change external objects?

a.4: whether the sacramental species can be corrupted?

a.5: whether anything can be generated from the Sacramental species?

a.6: whether the sacramental species can nourish?

a.7: Whether the sacramental species are broken in this sacrament?

a.8: Whether any liquid can be mingled with the consecrated wine?

q.76, a.5: whether Christ’s body is in this sacrament as in a place?

- Christ’s body is in this sacrament not after the proper manner of dimensive quantity, but rather after the manner of substance.

o But every body occupying a place isi n the place according to the manner of dimensive quantity, namely, inasmuch as it is commensurate with the place according to its dimensive quantity.

o Hence it remains that Christ’s body is not in this sacrament as in a place, but after the manner of a substance, that is to say, in that way in which substance is contained by dimensions

o Because the substance of Christ’s body succeeds the substance of bread in this sacrament

§ Hence as the substance of bread was not locally under its dimensions but after the manner of substance, so neither is the substance of Christ’s body

§ Nevertheless the substance of Christ’s body is not the subject of those dimensions, as was the substance of the bread

§ Therefore the substance of the bread was there locally by reason of its dimensions, but the substance of Christ’s body is compared with that place through the medium of foreign dimensions, so that, on the contrary, the proper dimensions of Christ’s body are compared with that place through the medium of substance, which si contrary to the notion of a located body.

- Hence in no way is Christ’s body locally in this sacrament

Ad 1: Christ’s body is not in this sacrament definitively, because then it would be only on the particular altar where this sacrament is performed,

- whereas it is in heaven under its own species, and on many other altars under the sacramental species

- likewise it is evident that it is not in this sacrament circumscriptively, because it is not there according to the commensuration of its own quantity.

- But that it is not outside the superficies of the sacrament, nor on any other part of the altar, is due not to its being there definitively or circumscriptively, but to its being there by consecration and conversion of the bread and wine

Ad 2: the place in which Christ’s body is, is not empty;

- nor is it properly filled with the substance of Christ’s body, which is not there locally.

- But it is filled with the sacramental species, which have to fill the place either because of the nature of dimensions, or at least miraculously, as they also subsist miraculously after the fashion of substance.

Ad 3: the accidents of Christ’s body are in this sacrament by real concomitance.

- therefore those accidents of Christ’s body which are intrinsic to it are in this sacrament

- but to be in a place is an accident when compared with the extrinsic container.

- Therefore it is not necessary for Christ to be in this sacrament as in a place.

a.6: whether Christ’s body is in this sacrament movably?

- when anything is one, as to subject, and manifold in being, there is nothing to hinder it from being moved in one respect, and yet to remain at rest in another

o just as it is one thing for a body to be white, and another things, to be large

- hence it can be moved as to its whiteness, and yet continue unmoved as to its magnitude.

- But in Christ, being in Himself and being under the sacrament are not the same thing

o Because when we say that he is under this sacrament, we express a kind of relationship to this sacrament

o According to this being, then Christ is not moved locally of Himself, but only accidentally as in a place,

o But what is not in place, is not moved of itself locally, but only according to the motion of the subject in which it is.

- In the same way neither is it moved of itself according to the being which it has in this sacrament, by any other change whatever,

o As for instance, that it ceases to be under this sacrament

o Because whatever possesses unfaling existence of itself, cannot be the principle of failing.

§ But when something else fails, then it ceases to be in it

§ Just as God, whose existence is unfailing and immortal, ceases to be in some corruptible creature because such corruptible creature ceases to exist.

o In this way, since Christ has unfailing and incorruptible being, he ceases to be under this sacrament,not because he ceases to be, nore yet by local movement of his own, as is clear form what has been said, but only by the fact that the sacramental species cease to exist.

Ad 3: the body of Christ remains in this sacrament not only until the morrow, but also in the future, so long as the sacramental species remain, and when they cease, Christ’s body ceases to be under them, not because it depends on them, but because the relationship of Christ’s body to those species is taken away, in the same way as God ceases to be the Lord of a creature which ceases to exist.

a.7: whether it can be seen by the eye?

- the eye is of two kinds:

o the bodily eye properly so-called, and the intellectual eye, so-called by similitude

o but Christ’s body as it is in this sacrament cannot be seen by any bodily eye.

§ First of all, because a body which is visible brings about an alteration in the medium, through its accidents.

· Now the accidents of Christ’s body are in this sacrament by means of the substance;

· So that the accidents of Christ’s body have no immediate relationship either to this sacrament or to adjacent bodies

· Consequently they do not act on the medium so as to be seen by any corporeal eye

§ Secondly, because Christ’s body is substantially present in this sacrament.

· But substance, as such, is not visible to the bodily eye, nor does it come under any one of the sense nor under the imagination, but solely under the intellect, whose object is what a thing is.

o Therefore, properly speaking, Christ’s body according to mode of being, which it has in this sacrament, is perceptible neither by the senses nor by the imagination, but only the intellect, which is called the spiritual eye.

- It is perceived differently by different intellects:

o For since the way in which Christ is in this sacrament is entirely supernatural, it is visible in itself to a supernatural, i.e., the Divine intellect, and consequently to a beatified intellect, of angel or of man, which through the participated glory of the Divine intellect, sees all supernatural things in the vision of the divine essence.

§ It can be seen by a wayfarer through faith alone, like other supernatural things.

§ And not even the angelic intellect of its own natural power is capable of beholding it.

§ Consequently the devils cannot by their intellect perceive Christ in this sacrament, except through faith, to which they do not pay willing assent, yet they are convinced of it from the evidence of signs.

Ad 1: our bodily eye, on account of the sacramental species is hindered from beholding the body of Chrsit underlying tehm,

- not merely as by way of a veil (just as we are hindered from seeing what is covered with any corporeal veil)

- but also because Christ’s body bears a relation to the medium surrounding this sacrament, not through its own accidents, but through the sacramental species

ad 2: Christ’s own bodily eye see Himself existing under the sacrament yet it cannot see the way in which it exists under the sacrament, because that belongs to the intellect.

- but it is not the same with any other glorified eye, because Christ’s eye is under the sacrament, in which no other glorified eye is conformed to it.

a.8: whether Christ’s body is truly there when flesh or a child appears miraculously in this sacrament?

- sed contra: when such apparitions take place, the same reverence is shown to it as was shown at first, which would not be done if Christ were not truly there, to whom we show reverence of latria.

o Therefore when such apparitions occur, Christ is under the sacrament

- Such apparition comes about in two ways, when occasionally in this sacrament flesh, or blood, or a child is seen:

o 1. sometimes it happens on the part of the beholders, whose eyes are so affected as if they outwardly saw flesh, or blood, or a child, while no change takes place in the sacrament.

§ This seems to happen when to one person is is seen under the species of flesh or of a childe, while to others it is seen as before under the species of bread,

§ Or when to the same individual it appears for an hour under the appearance of flesh, or a child, and afterwards under the appearance of bread

§ Nor is there any deception there, because such species is divinely formed in the eye in order to represent some truth, namely, for the purpose of showing that Christ’s body is truly under the sacrament.

§ Since in this way no change is made in the sacrament, it is manifest that, when such apparition occurs, Christ does not cease to be under this sacrament.

o 2. sometimes happens that such apparition comes about not merely by a change wrought in the beholders, but by an appearance which really exists outwardly.

§ This indeed is seen to happen when it is beheld by everyone under such an appearance and it remains so not for an hour, but for a considerable time.

· In this case, some think that it is the proper species of Christ’s body.

· Nor does it matter tha sometimes Christ’s entire body is not seen there, but part of his flesh, or else that it is nto seen in youthful guise, but in the semblance of a child, because it lies within the power of a glorified body for it to be seen by a non-glorified eye either entirely or in part, and under its own semblance or in strange guise.

§ But this seems unlikely,

· 1. because Christ’s body under its proper species can be seen only in one place, wherein it is definitively contained.

o Hence since it seen in its proper species, and is adored in heave, it is not seen under its proper species in this sacrament

· 2. because a glorified body, which appears at will, disappears when it wills after the apparition.

o But that which appears under the likeness of flesh in this sacrament, continues for a long time,

o Preserved in a pyx, it would be wicked to think of Christ under his proper semblance

§ Consequently it remains to be said that while the dimensions remain the same as before, there is a miraculous change wrought in the other accidencts, such as shape, color, and the rest, so that flesh, or blood or a child are seen.

· This is not deception to represent truth.

· Namely to show by this miraculous apparition that Christ’s body and blood are truly in this sacrament.

· Thus it is clear that as the dimensions remain, which are the foundation of the other accidents, the body of Christ truly remains in this sacrament.

q.77: Of the accidents which remain in this sacrament

a.1: whether the accidents remin in this sacrament without a subject?

- sed contra: Gregory says in an Easter Homily – de corp. et sang. Dom. Xx the sacramental species are the names of those things which were there before, namely, the bread and the wine

- the species of the bread and wine, which are perceived by our senses to remain in this sacrament after consecration, are not subjected in the substance of the bread and wine, for that does not remain

o nor in the substantial form, for that does not remain – if it did remain it could not be a subject (Boethius de trin. I)

- furthermore it is manifest that these accidents are not subjected in the substance of Christ’s body and blood, because the substance of the human body cannot in any way be affected by such accidents

o nor is it possible for Christ’s glorious and impassible body to be altered so as to receive these qualities

- There are some who say that they are in the surrounding atmosphere as in a subject

o But even this cannot be

§ 1. because atmosphere is not susceptive of such accidents

§ 2. because these accidents are not where the atmosphere is, nay more, the atmosphere is displaced by the motion of these species.

§ 3. because accidents do not pass from subject to subject, so that the same identical accident which was first in one subject be afterwards in another

· because accident is individuated by the subject

· hence it cannot come to pass for an accident remaining identically the same to be at one time in another

§ 4. since the atmosphere is not deprived of its own accidents, it would have at the one time its own accidents and others foreign to it.

· Nor can it be maintained that this is done miraculously in virtue of the consecration, because the words of consecration do not signify this, and they effect only what they signify

- Therefore it follows that the accidents continue in this sacrament without a subject

o This can be done by divine power

§ For since an effect depends more upon the first cause than on the second, God Who is the first cause both of substance and accident, can by his unlimited power preserve an accident in existence when the substance is withdrawn whereby it was preserved in existence as by its proper cause

· Just as without natural causes He can produce other effects of natural causes He can produce other effects of natural causes

Ad 1: since being (ens) is not a genus, then esse cannot be of itself the essence of either substance or accident

- consequently, the definition of substance is not – a being (ens) of itself without a subject but it belongs to the quiddity or essence of substance to have essenot in a subject

- while it belongs to the quiddity or essence of accident to have esse in a subject.

- But in this sacrament it is not in virtue of their essence that accidents are not in a subject, but through the Divine power sustaining them

o Consequently they do not cease to be accidents because neither is the definition of accident withdrawn from them, nor does the definition of substance apply to them

Ad 3: these accidents acquired individual esse in the substance of the bread and wine; and when this substance is changed into the body and blood of Christ, they remain in that individuated esse which they possessed before, hence they are individual and sensible

Ad 4: These accidents had no esse of their own nor other accidents, so long as the substance of the bread and wine remained

- but their subjects had such esse through them,

o just as snow is white through whiteness

- but after the consecration the accidents which remain have esse,

o hence they are compounded of esse and essence,

a.3: whether the species remaining in this sacrament can change external objects?

- because everything acts insofar as it is an actual ens, the consequence is that everything stands in the same relation to action (agree) as it does to esse

o therefore, because, it is an effect of the divine power that the sacramental species continue in the esse which they had when the substance of the bread and wine was present, it follows that they continue in their action.

o Consequently, they retain every action which they had while the substance of bread and wine remained,

§ Now that the substance of the bread and wine has passed into the body and blood of Christ.

Ad 1: the sacramental species, although they are forms existing without matter, still retain the same esse which they had before in matter, and therefore as to their esse they are like forms which are in matter.

Ad 2: the action of an accidental form depends upon the action of a substantial form in the same way as the esse of an accident depends upon the esse of substance.

- therefore, as it is an effect of divine power that the sacramental species exist without substance, so is it an effect of divine power that they can act without substantial form, because every action of a substantial or accidental form depends upon God as the first agent

ad 3: the change which terminates in a substantial form is not effected by substantial form directly

- but by means of the active and passive qualities, which act in virtue of the substantial form

- but by divine power this instrumental energy is retained in the sacramental species, just as it was before

- and consequently their action can be directed to a substantial form instrumentally, just in the same way as anything can act outside its species, not as by its own power, but by the power of the chief agent.

Week 4 – Theme: Matter and Form; Topics: Transubstantiation; Obstacles

Required Reading: Feingold Chapters 6-8

Suggested Reading: CCC, Ambrose, On the mysteries, cc.8-9; Lateran IV (1215);

From Kappes, The Secret History of Transubstantiation: Pulling Back the Veil on the Eucharist

History of Transubstantiation:

Old Testament / New Testament Image

Passages

Meaning / Relation to the Eucharist

New Testament References

References in the Tradition

Lot’s wife turned to salt

Gen. 19: 26

Turned to stone / references of stones turned to people

Matthew 3:8-10; Luke 3:7-9

Cyril of Alexandria

Moses’ staff turned to the serpent

Ex 7

Change of one substance to another

Philo of Alexandria, Ambrose, Lanfranc, Guitmund

Moses’ dead hand to living hand

Ex 4:6-7

Change of one substance to another, appearance of white hand

Philo of Alexandria, Tertullian

Water from Rock

Numbers 20

1 Cor. 10:4

Cyril of Jerusalem

Water to Blood

Ex 7

Change of one substance to another

Philo of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Cyril of Alexandria, St. Ambrose, St. Leontius of Jerusalem

Water to Ice / Hail

Psalm 147

Manna, substantial changes, appearances

Rev. 1:14-15; Rev. 8: 1-7

St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Augustine, Lanfranc

Lazarus

Jn 11

Substantial change to living flesh

Hippolytus

Cana

John 2

Change of one substance to another

Hippolytus, Cyril of Jerusalem

Nestorius accuses Cyril of Alexandria of holding transubstantiation

Gold, incense, hail, stone, bread are all types of the Eucharist

Transmutation becomes identified as transubstantiation in Leontius of Jerusalem and in Guitmund.

St. Ambrose: see p.182

Guitmund: To be sure, there is a difficulty which troubles some who believe that this change cannot occur, and it is this: in the physical world there is hardly any change in the whole of nature which is even remotely similar to it. For when one thing is substantially transmuted into another (substantialiter transmutatur), it is usually changed into that which did not exist before: for example, the staff of Moses transmuted into a serpent, which was at first not a serpent, but then began to be a serpent; when, however, we say that the bread is changed, it is not changed into that which had not been flesh, but we confess that it is transmuted into the flesh which was already the flesh of Christ, without any increase in the flesh of the Lord himself. And although we do not deny that this change is difficult for us to understand in this age, it is, however, not difficult to believe.”

Objections to Transubstantiation:

Paschalius Radbertus(d. ca.859) and Ratramnus (d.870)

Radbertus’ presupposes Augustine’ theory of signs, following Tertullian and Ambrose

Presence of Body and Blood is both in figura and in veritate

Hoping, p.182: “Even though Radbertus does not mean the identity of Christ’s historical and sacramental Body in the sense of a material identity, his strong emphasis on the identity of the historical and Eucharistic Body does lead to the idea of a sort of ‘repetition’ (reiteratio) of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross in the Eucharist”

Canonized by Pope Gregory VII in 1073

Ratramnus sees figura and veritas as opposed

Condemned in 1050 as John Scotus Eriugena

Berengarius:

Feingold says as a result of the Rationalist tendency that existed at the time:

Claimed to hold the faith of the Church concerning the real presence, denied the conversion of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of Christ because he thought such a conversion was impossible (Feingold, 239)

Thought it contradictory to hold Body in Heaven and on the Altar

No distinction between substance and accidents

“Therefore, Berengarius thought he had no choice but to view the Eucharist, after the consecration, as a mere symbol or figure of Jesus Christ through which the faithful spiritually receive the Body and Blood of Christ ‘for faith and understanding,’ although the substance of bread and wine remain.”

Argued with Lanfranc, the predecessor of St. Anslem

Cardinal Humbert composed the profession of faith for Berengarius

John Wycliffe – advocated consubstantiation

From John H. McKenna, Become What you Receive, p.176: “John Wycliffe (d.1384), an Aristotelian at Oxford, rejected the Thomistic distinction between substance and accidents and in so doing remained closer to the original Aristotle. He concluded that the accidents of bread and wine do not continue to exist without their subject or substance; that the substance of the bread and wine remains; and that there is no corporeal presence of Christ in the Eucharist. In adhering to an Aristotelian framework, Wycliffe had to interpret Christ’s Eucharistic presence as ‘purely symbolic’.

Luther

Pierre d’Ailly (d.1420, important at Council of Constance, student of Ockham, taught Gabriel Biel (d.1494)

Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church

Rejects “transubstantiation”; but not “Real Presence”

From “consubstantiation” to “ubiquitism”

Argues with Zwingli and Karlstadt – calls the “Sacramentarians” and “heretics”

Zwingli:

- concerned about those who receive unworthily

- argued with Luther

- “is” = “signifies”

Calvin:

- Likewise concerned about those those receive unworthily

From Feingold, p.303: “John Calvin has a position on the Eucharist that is more radical than Luther’s but differs from Zwingli’s by emphasizing a dynamic encounter with Christ through the sacrament.”

Anglican:

From Feingold, p.307:

- Reject transubstantiation

- Restrict presence to the moment in which the Eucharist is consumed in faith

- Only for the person who consumes in faith

Reflections:

Concerns of “reformers” over the worthy reception of Holy Communion

Lack of metaphysics, or refusal to think metaphysically, lead to the disagreements, contradictions, and infelicities

o Don’t receive unworthily if you don’t believe

o One way of getting around respect for the “Presence” and reception of “nonbelievers”

Contemporary Catholicism:

From John H. McKenna, Become What you Receive, p.181: “The criticisms of transubstantiation are varied. It is not a question, within Roman Catholic circles at least, of denying a distinctive, objective eucharistic presence. Nor is it a question of denying that a real, ontological change takes place. What are being criticized are perceived weaknesses in the explanation. There has been and, continues to be, the danger of viewing the change in an overly physical way. Aquinas and others tried to avoid a materialistic interpretation and to place the issue on the metaphysical, sacramental level rather than on the physical level. . . ‘Substance’ in many people’s minds and in science textbooks means material, physical. There is also the danger of focusing on the elements and their change rather than the purpose of the change, namely, ‘real presence’ in the faithful, and an encounter with Christ.”

Week 5 – Theme: Effects of the Mass: Topics: Sacrifice, Relation between Transubstantiation and Sacrifce, Sacrifice of the Mass and Sacrifice of Calvary, the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Holy Trinity, The three levels of the Sacrament applied to Sacrificial nature of the Mass, Objections to Sacrificial Nature of the Mass

Required Reading: Feingold Chapters 9&10

Suggested Reading: CCC 1356-72; St.Augustine, Sermon 227B; John Chrysostom, On the Priesthood; St. Thomas, Trent,

Sacrifice

Trinitarian Theology

Feingold on the Trinitarian Dimension of the Sacrifice, p.337: “The Sacrifice of Calvary is the supreme sacrifice ultimately because of its Trinitarian nature. Mankind is reconciled with the Father through the self-donation of the Son and in the Spirit, who is give to us through the Sacrifice of the Son. Christ’s sacrifice manifest the structure of the Trinitarian life.”

C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, IV.2: “The Three-Personal God”: A good many people nowadays say, ‘I believe in a God, but not in a personal God.’ They feel that the mysterious something which is behind all other things must be more than a person. Now the Christians quite agree. But the Christians are the only people who offer any idea of what a being that is beyond personality could be like. All the other people, though they say that God is beyond personality, really think of Him as something impersonal: that is, as something less than personal. If you are looking for something super-personal, something more than a person, then it is not a question of choosing between the Christian idea and the other ideas. The Christian idea is the only one on the market.”

Jacques Maritain, The Person and the Common Good, p.39: “Love is not concerned with qualities. They are not the object of our love. We love the deepest, most substantial and hidden, the most existing reality of the beloved being. This is a metaphysical center deeper than all the qualities and essences which we can find and enumerate in the beloved. The expressions of lovers are unending because their object is ineffable.

Love seeks out this center, not, to be sure, as separated from its qualities, but as one with them. This is a center inexhaustible, so to speak, of existence, bounty and action; capable of giving and of giving itself; capable of receiving not only this or that gift bestowed by another, but even another self as a gift, another self which bestows itself. This brief consideration of love’s own law brings us to the metaphysical problem of the person. For love is not concerned with qualities or natures or essences but with persons.”

Cf. Feingold p.354; on Trent – what specifies the sacrifice of the Eucharist is love.

Inviolability of the person

St. John Paul II, Evangelium vitae, par.18: “The which once led to discovering the idea of ‘human rights’ – rights inherent in every person and prior to any Constitution and State legislation – is today marked by a surprising contradiction. Precisely in an age when the inviolable rights of the person are solemnly proclaimed and the value of life is publicly affirmed, the very right to life is being denied or tampled upon, especially at the more significant moments of existence: the moment of birth and the moment of death.”

Oriented toward communion

St. John Paul II, Evangelium vitae, par.19: “And it is also in view of this entrusting that God gives everyone freedom, a freedom which possesses an inherently relational dimension. This is a great gift of the Creator, placed as it is at the service of the person and of his fulfilment through the gift of self and openness to others; but when freedom is made absolute in an individualistic way, it is emptied of its original content, and its very meaning and dignity are contradicted.”

What is incommunicable can only approach communication in relation

In the Trinity: the incommunicable is perfectly communicated, to the extent that it can be (circumincession)

In us: not perfectly communicated, relational not subsistent relations

In other words: difference senses of “what it means to be a person is to be relational”

Ratzinger, Benedict XVI: “Retrieving the Tradition: Concerning the notion of person in theology”, 17:1, 1990:

p.447: “Let us summarize: in God there are three persons – which implies, according to the interpretation offered by theology, that persons are relations, pure relatedness. Although this is in the first place only a statement about the Trinity, it is at the same time the fundamental statement about what is at stake in the concept of person.”

Summa theologiae I, q.29, a.3: Whether the Word “Person” should be said of God?

Sed contra: In the creed of Athanasius we say: One is the person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit

Response:

I answer that, Person signifies what is most perfect of a rational nature – that is, a subsistent individual of a rational nature.

Hence, since everything that is perfect must be attributed to God, forasmuch as His essence contains every perfection, this name person is fittingly applied to God; not, however, as it is applied to creatures, but in a more excellent way; as other names also, which, while giving them to creatures, we attribute to God.

Ad 4: It may be said that God has a rational nature, if reason be taken to mean, not discursive thought, but in a general sense, an intelligent nature. But God cannot be called in individual in the sense that His individuality comes from matter; but only in the sense which implies incommunicability. Substance can be applied to God in the sense of signifying self-subsistence. There are some, however, who say that the definition of Boethius, quoted above (a.1), is not a definition of person in the sense we use when speaking of persons in God. Therefore Richard of St. Victor amends this definition by adding Personin God is the incommunicable existence of the divine nature.

Summa theologiae I, q.29, a.4: Whether this word ‘person’ signifies relation?

sed contra: On the contrary, Boethius says De Trinitate that every word that refers to the persons signifies relation. But no word belongs to person more strictly than the very word person. Therefore this word person signifies relation.

Response:

To determine the question, we must consider that something may be included in the meaning of a less common term which is not included in the more common term;

as rational is included in the meaning of man, and not in the meaning of animal.

So that it is one thing to ask the meaning of the word animal and another to ask its meaning when the animal in question is a man.

Also, it is one thing to ask the meaning of this word person in general; and another to ask the meaning of person as applied to God.

For person in general signifies the individual substance of a rational nature.

The individual in itself is undivided, but is distinct from others

Therefore person in any nature signifies what is distinct in that nature: thus in human nature it signifies this flesh, these bones, and this soul, which are the individuating principles of a man, and which, though not belonging to person in general, neverthless do belong to the meaning of a particular human person.

Now distinction in God is only by relation of origin, . . . while relation in God is not as an accident in a subject, but is the divine essence itself; and so it is subsistent, for the divine essence subsists.

Therefore, as the Godhead is God so the divine paternity is God the Father, Who is a divine person.

Therefore a divine person signifies a relation as subsisting.

And this is to signify relation by way of substance, and such a relation is a hypostasis subsisting in the divine nature, although in truth that which subsists in the divine nature is the divine nature itself.

Thus it is true to say that the name person signifies relation directly, and the essence indirectly; not, however, the relation as such, but as expressed by way of a hypostasis.

So likewise it signifies directly the essence, and indirectly the relation, inasmuch as the essence is the same as the hypostasis: while in God the hypostasis is expressed as distinct by the relation:

and thus relation, as such enters into the notion of person indirectly.

Thus we can say that this signification of the word person was not clearly perceived before it was attacked by heretics. Hence, this word person was used just as any other absolute term. But afterwards it was applied to express relation, as it lent itself to that signification, so that this word person means relation not only by use and custom, according to the first opinion, but also by force of its own proper signification.

q.30, a.1: Whether there are several persons in God?

Sed contra: Athanasius says: One is the person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit are several persons.

Response:

It follows from what precedes that there are several persons in God. For it was shown above that this word person signifies in God a relation as subsisting in the divine nature. It was also established that there are several real relations in God; and hence it follows that there are also several realities subsistent in the divine nature; which means that there are several persons in God.

Ad 1: The definition of person includes substance, not as meaning the essence, but the suppositum which is made clear by the addition of the term individual. To signify the substance thus understood, the Greeks use the name hypostasis. So, as we say, three persons, they say three hypostases.

Ad 2: The absolute properties in God, such as goodness and wisdom, are not mutually opposed; and hence, neither are they really distinguished from each other.

Therefore, although they subsist, nevertheless they are not several subsistent realities – that is, several persons.

But the absolute properties in creatures do not subsist, although they are really distinguished from each other, as whiteness and sweetness;

On the other hand, the relative properties in God subsist, and are really distinguished from each other. Hence the plurality of such properties suffices for the plurality of persons in God.

Communicating the incommunicable

Person: individual substance of a rational nature

What is incommunicable / Nature is what is communicable

e.g. we are both human beings, but I am not you

Song: “I don’t know what it is like to be you”

3-fold incommunicability of the person:

Super V Metaphysicae, par. 903

1. not communicable to inferiors

2. not communicable to individuals

3. what exists apart is one

Scriptum super Sententiis I, d.25, q.1, a.1, ad 7:

1. universal community is lacking

2. particular community is lacking

3. assumable community is lacking

John Wippel’s restatement:

1. cannot be communicate the way a universal is in some way communicated to individuals

2. cannot be communicated the way a part is assumed by a whole

3. cannot be communicated the way a nature might be assumed by another supposit

TOB 163-68 – communion of persons

p.164: the body reveals man

The Human Person According to John Paul II, p.89: “Man has the capacity to experience his interior life, an attribute proper to him; he can manifest this self-reflection in his choices.” Cf. Love and Responsibility, 23, 24.

- Incommunicability of the human person.

- We communicate ourselves by words / actions

Feingold:

Clarification on Religion as a part of the virtue of Justice:

An allied virtue – lacks something of the ratio, is related to, but not the same as, justice

What does it lack from the definition of Justice: to give to someone their due?

We can never give God what we owe Him.

Other allied virtues with similar quirks:

Piety

Patriotism

Interior Sacrifice / Exterior Sacrifice

p.324: spiritual acts due from us to God: praise, honor, gratitude, obedience – “These spiritual acts are a kind of interior sacrifice or gift of self to God, and they are the heart of the virtue of religion, which is the habitual attitude of seeking to give fitting glory to God.”

p.325: “In sacrifice, we externally offer to God something that symbolically represents and accompanies the interior ordering of our hearts to God in seeking to given Him His due and to repair for our offenses against Him.”

- external

- internal

p.325-26: “The inner sacrifice of the contrite heart is more important, but our human nature also requires a sensible manifestation of what occurs in the heart, and thus we need to offer God visible sacrifices, just as we offer visible tokens of our love, gratitude, and sorrow to our loved ones.”

4 distinct purposes:

5. Adoration

6. Thanksgiving

7. Propitiation

8. Supplication

Sacrifice and Oblation:

1. offered to God as an oblation – subtraction from man’s ordinary use and being given over to divine worship.

2. somehow changed to sensibly manifest God’s exclusive dominion – as when an animal is immolated.

[Transubstantiation profoundly shows God’s dominion]

The Word is both perfectly

St. Thomas, Summa theologiae III, q.102, a.3:

Every sacrifice is an oblation, but not vice versa

Sacrifice: Something must be done to the thing:

§ Animals are slain, burnt

§ Bread is broken, eaten, blessed

First fruits = oblations, not sacrifices (nothing was done to them)

Tithes = neither oblation nor sacrifice, because offered to the ministers of divine worship, not immediately to God

[point: be careful with words, recognize when it is being used in an extended sense, analogically]

From Feingold:

Blood = life (p.328)

Priesthood

Cf. St. Augustine De Trinitate 4.3.19 – four things in every sacrifice

1. Whom it is offered to

2. Whom is offered by

3. What it is that is offered

4. Whom it is offered for

Offers his heart (p.336): Nothing less than the Sacred Heart of Jesus Himself, burning with love for man, is present, mystically immolated together with His entire humanity and offered in his holy and immaculate sacrifice.”

Sacrifice of the Word / Offering of the Heart / Pouring of the Blood

Lessons:

Offering the HEART

[In the Mass: all the negativity of Calvary has been removed, and all that remains are the goodness, love of God, fruits of his saving action]

Objections to the Sacrificial Nature of the Mass:

From Luther and Calvin:

Argument of Rejection of the Sacrifice of the Mass as a “Good Work”

Argument from Mass as Christ’s Testament

Argument that the Eucharist is a Banquet rather than Sacrifice

Argument that the Mass as Sacrifice implies an Angry God in need of appeasement

Argument that the Sacrifice of the mass Implies that Christ would be killed again in every Mass

Argument that the Sacrifice of the Mass Would Detract from Calvary

From the Last Century:

Mass is a Banquet

Christ has done away with Cultic Sacrifice

Sacrificial Aspect of the Mass is a Later Development

Further points on Sacrifice:

Sacrifice of the Word / Offering of the Heart / Pouring of the Blood = Manifested at the same moment

Ratzinger on worship and sacrifice:

Spirit of the Liturgy, 27: “What is worship? What happens when we worship? In all religious sacrifice is at the heart of worship. But this is a concept that has been buried under the debris of endless misunderstandings. The common view is that sacrifice has something to do with destruction. It means handing over to God a reality that is in some way precious to man. Now this handing over presupposes that it is withdrawn from use by man, and that can only happen though its destruction, its definitive removal from the hands of man. But this immediately raises the question: What pleasure is God supposed to take in destruction? Is anything really surrendered to God through destruction? One answer is that the destruction always conceals within itself the act of acknowledging God’s sovereignty over all things. But can such a mechanical act really serve God’s glory? Obviously not.”

True Surrender:

Spirit of the Liturgy, p.28: True surrender to God looks very different. It consists – according to the Fathers, in fidelity to biblical thought – in the union of man and creation with God.

1. Not destruction, but way of being

2. Divinization

True surrender: “Belonging to God has nothing to do with destruction or non-being: it is rather a way of being. It means emerging from the state of separation, of apparent autonomy, of existing only for oneself and in oneself. It means losing oneself as the only possible way of finding oneself (Mk 8:35; Mt 10:39). That is why St. Augustine could say that true ‘sacrifice’ is the civitas dei, that is love-transformed mankind, the divinization of creation and the surrender of all things to God: God all in all (cf. 1 Cor.15:28). That is the purpose of the world. That is the essence of sacrifice and worship.

And so we can now say that the goal of worship and the goal of creation as a whole are one and the same – divinization, a world of freedom and love. (The Spirit of the Liturgy, 28)

Surrender all things to God = essence of sacrifice and worship

Divinization:

1. Teilhard de Chardin: back drop of evolutionary biology, cosmos is process of ascent, a series of unions.

Spirit of the Liturgy, p.29: From here Teilhard went on to give a new meaning to Christian worship: the transubstantiated Host is the anticipation of the transformation and divinization of matter in the Christological ‘fullness’. In his view, the Eucharist provides the movement of the cosmos with its direction; it anticipates its goal and at the same time urges it on.”

2. Older tradtion –exitus / reditus

a. Plotinus [fall from the infinite

b. Christian

i. exitus - is positive, act of God’s being, free act of creation

ii. reditus – return, not to abolish creation, but to bestow its final perfection

- Good Shepherd

“It accepts creation from God as his offer of love, and thus ensues a dialogue of love, that wholly new kind of unity that love alone can create. The being of the other is not absorbed or abolished, but rather, in giving itself, it becomes fully itself. . . . If ‘sacrifice’ in its essence is simply returning to love and therefore divinization, worship now has a new aspect: the healing of wounded freedom, atonement, purification, deliverance from estrangement. The essence of worship, of sacrifice – the process of assimilation, of growth in love, and thus the way into freedom – remains unchanged.” (spirit of the liturgy, 33)

Spirit of the Liturgy, p.34: “The shepherd who rescues him and takes him home is the Logos himself, the eternal Word, the eternal Meaning of the universe dwelling in the Son.”

“But now sacrifice takes the form of the Cross of Christ, of the love that in dying makes a gift of itself. Such sacrifice has nothing to do with destruction. It is an act of new creation, the restoration of creation to its true identity. All worship is now a participation in this ‘Pasch’ of Christ, in his ‘passing over’ form divine to human, from death to life, to the unity of God and man.”

o P.35: THE ONLY REAL GIFT MAN SHOULD GIVE TO GOD IS HIMSELF.

Offering the Heart, Offering the Word:

Behold the Pierced One: p.54: “All of us are Thomas, unbelieving; but like him, all of us can touch the exposed Heart of Jesus and thus touch and behold the Logos himself. So, with our hands and eyes fixed upon this Heart, we can attain to the confession of faith: ‘My Lord and my God!’”

Behold the Pierced One, p.67: “It is the Logos which is at the center of us all – without our knowing – for the center of man is the heart, and in the heart there is the ηγεμονικον – the guiding energy of the whole, which is the Logos. It is the Logos which enables us to be logic-al, to correspond to the Logos; He is the image of God, after which we were created. Here the word ‘heart’ has expanded beyond the reason and denotes ‘ a deeper level of spiritual / intellectual existence, where direct contact takes place with the divine’. It is here, in the heart, that the birth of the divine Logos in man takes place, that man is united with the personal, incarnate Word of God.”

Behold the Pierced One, p.69: “This Heart is not concerned with self-preservation but with self-surrender. It saves the world by opening itself. The collapse of the opened Heart is the content of the Easter mystery. The Heart saves, indeed, but it saves by giving itself away. Thus, in the Heart of Jesus, the center of Christianity is set before us. It expresses everything, all that is genuinely new and revolutionary in the New Covenant. This Heart calls to our heart. It invites us to step forth out of the futile attempt of self-preservation and, by joining in the task of love, by handing ourselves over to him and with him, to discover the fullness of love which alone is eternity and which alone sustains the world.”

The Crucifixion as an openness

Introduction to Christianity, p.240: “The event of the crucifixion appears there as a process of opening, in which the scattered man-monads are drawn into the embrace of Jesus Christ, into the wide span of his outstretched arms, in order to arrive, in this union, at their goal, the goal of humanity. But if this is so, then Christ as the man to come is not man for himself but essentially a man for others; it is precisely his complete openness that makes him the man of the future.”

§ Ties this to the Trinity

Introduction to Christianity, p.240: “This brings us straight back again to the mystery of the Cross and Easter, a mystery that is, indeed, viewed by the Bible as a mystery of transition. . . “One of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water” (Jn 19:34). For John, the picture of the pierced side forms the climax not only of the crucifixion scene but of the whole story of Jesus.”

§ P.242: by following him who as the pierced and opened one has opened the path to the future.

· This means in the end that Christianity, which as belief in the creation acknowledges the primacy of the Logos, the creative meaning as beginning and origin, also acknowledges it in a specific way as the end, the future, the coming one.

Offering of the Heart:

Offering of a contrite heart, rent heart, the offering desired (See Ordination retreat notes)

Psalm 50:13 – Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High

Joel 2:12-13: ‘yet even now,’ says the Lord, ‘return to me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning; and rend your hearts and not your garments.’ Return to the Lord, your God, for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, and repents of evil.

A rent Heart / a Contrite Heart

Psalm 51:15ff: O Lord, open my lips, and my mouth shall show forth thy praise.

v.16: For thou hast no delight in sacrifice; were I to give a burnt offering, though wouldst not be pleased.

v.17: The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

The Offering, a Priestly offering, of a rent heart, a heart torn, pierced

Circumcision of the Heart:

Gal. 2:23

v.23: circumcision of the heart

from Catholic Commentary on Scripture, 34: “Circumcision of the foreskin imposes on the recipient the moral and spiritual obligation to circumcise the heart – to cut away the stubbornness of the will that resists obedience to the Lord (Deut 10:16; Jer 4:4).”

cf. Deut 30:6 – promise that God will circumcise hearts; cf. Ez. 36:25-27

a new circumcision: 2 Cor 5:1, cf Deut. 10:6; 30:6; Col. 2:11

Here I am

Genesis 22:11, 31:11, 46:3

Gen 22:1 - Abraham’s invitation to sacrifice Isaac

Gen. 22:11 – stays his hand

Gen. 31:11; 46:3 – Jacob

1 Samuel 3:4 – Samuel to replace Hophni and Phinehas, Here I am, speak Lord our servant is listening

Isaiah 6:8 – “Here I am, Send me”, has the coal touch his lips

Acts 9:10 – Ananias’ response to the Lord, the one who baptizes Saul

Hebrews 10:9 –

10:5 0 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, ‘Sacrifices and offerings thou hast not desired, but a body hast thou prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings thou hast taken no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Lo, I have come to do thy will, O God, as it is written of me in the roll of the book.’

When he said above, ‘Thou hast neither desired nor taken pleasures in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings’ (these are offered according to the law), then he added, ‘Lo, I have come to do your will”.

Psalm 40

Matthew 26:39 – And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt”.

John 6:38 – I have come down from heaven, not do my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.

John 4:34 – my food is to do the will of the one who sent me

John 8:29 – do what is pleasing to Him

This is what Jesus does

Learned obedience from what he suffered – Hebrews 5:8; his priestly offering

This is what Heaven is

Eternal Offering

From Feingold on Mediator Dei’s solution on the Sacrifice of the Mass:

1. The Mass is a relative sacrifice, true sacrifice, because a true priest, Jesus Christ, ‘by an unbloody immolation offering Himself a most acceptable victim to the Eternal Father, as He did upon the cross.’”

2. The same sacrifice as Calvary

Difference in the Mode of Offering:

1. Bloody on calvary

2. Unbloody – bloody is sacramentally represented through the separation of the consecration of the bread into the Body and the wine into the Blood

Earlier had quoted Cajetan, p..353:

1. The sacrifice of Calvary was offered under proper species; the Mass is offered under sacramental species

2. The sacrifice of Calvary was a sacrifice in itself, whereas the Mass is a sacrifice not from itself but through its intrinsic relation to the sacrifice of the Cross, which it was instituted to sacramentally represent and memorialize

o Thus Calvaray is an absolute sacrifice

o The Mass is a relative sacrifice

3. Although the Victim of Calvary is equally contained in both, only the sacrifice of Calvary brought about Christs death, whereas in the Mass it is sacramentally signified but not physically brought about.

4. The sacrifice of Calvary, by its very nature, is incapable of repetition, whereas Christ instituted the sacrifice of the altar to be repeated daily in every place to bring about the participation of the Church in the offering.

Then later remarked, p.357: “There are many elements in the liturgical rite, such as the fractioning of the host, that symbolize the sacrifice of Calvary without constituting properly the essence of the sacrifice.”

Sacrifice (of the Mass and of Calvary) is identical:

1. The Victim is Jesus Christ, through the miracle of Transubstantiation

2. The Priest who offers is Jesus Christ, through the ministerial priest

3. The Ends for which the Mass is offered are the same

a. To give Glory to God

b. To give Thanks

c. To satisfy for sin

d. To make supplication for all our needs

Sacrifice (of the Mass and of Calvary) are distinguishable:

1. The mode of offering:

a. Bloody

b. Unbloody

2. Christ alone v. Totus Christus

a. Christ alone offered the sacrifice of Calvary (with His Mother, St. John, other disciples at the foot of the Cross)

b. The Church

Week 6 – Theme: Effects of the Mass; Topics: Sacrifice;

Required Reading: Vonier, Chapters 9-14

Suggested Reading: Augustine, City of God X.6

CCC 1356-72

Offering to the Father what He has given us(CCC 1357)

Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving (CCC 1359-61)

Sacrifice because it is a memorial of Christ’s Passover (CCC 1365)

One single sacrifice (CCC 1367)

Sacrifice of the Church (CCC 1368)

The whole Church is united with the offering and intercession of Christ (CCC 1369)

CCC 1358: We must therefore consider the Eucharist as: [note the Trinitarian connotations]

o Thanksgiving and praise to the Father

o The sacrificial memorial of Christ and his Body

o The presence of Christ by the power of his word and of his Spirit

CCC 1370: To the offering of Christ are united not only the members still here on earth, but also those already in the glory of heaven. In communion with and commemorating the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, the Church offers the Eucharistic sacrifice. In the Eucharist the Church is as it were at the foot of the cross with Mary, uniting with the offering and in intercession of Christ.

St. Augustine: “Of the true and perfect sacrifice”, City of God X.6, [also the readings from the Office of Readings for Friday, 28th week of Ordinary Time]:

A true sacrifice, then, is every work done in order that we may draw near to God in holy fellowship:

Done, that is, with reference to that supreme good and end in which alone we can be truly blessed.

Therefore, even the mercy we extend to men is not a sacrifice if it is not given for God’s sake.

For, though performed or offered by man, a sacrifice is a divine thing, as the Latin authors of old showed when they used the word sacrificium

Thus, a man who is consecrated in the name of God and pledged to God is himself a sacrifice insofar as he dies to the world so that he may live to God

The Body

For this too pertains to mercy: to that mercy which each man shows to himself. And so it is written, ‘Have mercy on thy soul by pleasing God.’(Ecclesiasticus 30:24). Our body also is a sacrifice when we chasten it by temperance, if we do so, as we ought, for God’s sake, so that we may not yield our members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, but as instruments of righteousness unto God.

The apostle exhorts us to this when he says: ‘I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service’ (Rom 12:1).

The body, then, which, because it is inferior, the soul uses as a servant or an instrument, is a sacrifice when it is used rightly and with reference to God.

The Soul

And, if this is so, how much more does the soul itself become a sacrifice when it directs itself to God so that, inflamed with the fire of His love, it may receive His beauty and be pleasing immutably by its submission to Him!

This, indeed, the apostle adds in what follows, when he says: ‘And be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed in the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God.’

The Church

Since, therefore, true sacrifices are works of mercy shown to ourselves or to our neighbours, and done with reference to God; and since works of mercy have no object other than to set us free from misery and thereby makes us blessed; and since this cannot be done other than through that good of which it is said, ‘It is good for me to be very near to God’ (Psalm 73:28): it surely follows that the whole of the redeemed City – that is, the congregation and fellowship of the saints – is offered to God as a universal sacrifice for us through the great High Priest Who, in His Passion, offered even Himself for us in the form of a servant, so that we might be the body of so great a Head (Phil 2:7).

For it was this form that He offered, and in its that He was offered, because it is according to it that He is our Mediator.

In this form He is our Priest; in it, He is our sacrifice.

Thus when the apostle has exhorted us to present our bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, our reasonable service, and not to be conformed to this world, but to be transformed in the renewing of our mind, that we might prove what is the good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God, that is, the true sacrifice of ourselves, he says:

For I say, through the grace of God which is given to me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to deal soberly, according as God hath dwelt to every man the measure of faith. For, as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members of one another, having gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us. (Rom 12:3ff)

This is the sacrifice of Christians: ‘We, being many, are one body in Christ.’ And this also, as the faithful know, is the sacrifice which the Church continually celebrates in the sacrament of the altar, by which she demonstrates that she herself is offered in the offering that she makes to God.”

St. John Vianney, The Little Catechism of the Cure D’Ars:

- p.37 – All good works together are not of equal value with the sacrifice of the Mass, because they are the works of men, and the holy Mass is the work of God. Martyrdom is nothing in comparison; it is the sacrifice that man makes of his life to God; the Mass is the sacrifice that God makes to man of His Body and of His Blood.

- Oh, how great is a priest! If he understood himself, he would die. . . . God obeys him; he speaks two words, and Our Lord comes down from Heaven at his voice, and shuts Himself up in a little Host.

- p.38 – After the Consecration, the good God is there as He is in Heaven. If man well understood this mystery, he would die of love.

Vonier, A Key to the Doctrine of the Eucharist

On the risk of overspiritualizing:

Vonier, c.16 [p.128]: “To spiritualize the sacrifice and to make of it exclusively an act of the created will or of the created mind would be the abolition of the sacrifice; all sacrifices are of the things that are bodily.”

However:

Word became Flesh

Figurative became Literal

Vonier [p.129]: “The sacrifice of the cross is not primarily definable in terms of spirit, but in terms of the body; it is not the heroic fortitude of Christ on the cross which constitutes the sacrifice, but the material fact – we need not hesitate to use the word – of the pouring out of the Blood.”

Cf. Summa theologiae III, q.48, a.3, ad.1

Summa theologiae III, q.62, a.6 – The Power of Christ’s passion is hooked up to us by faith and the sacraments: though differently, for the connection, which is through faith, happens by the act of the soul, the connection however, which is through the sacraments happens through the use of external realities.

Chapter 1 – Faith – faith is a means of contact with Christ

- p.2: This membership is indeed a condition, sine qua non, of my becoming one day a member of Christ; but a member of Christ I shall not become unless some new realities be brought into play. These new realities which are the link between me and Christ are faith and the sacraments.

- p.5: Faith and the Sacraments: “Faith has primarily an instrumental role [different from charity]. Now the sacraments are truly such another set of means for the attainment of that final object, to be united with Christ in charity. The sacraments complete and render more efficacious that instrumentality of faith, but they make it more real, if possible, and certainly more infallible in its effect.

Cf. The Little Catechism of the Cure d’Ars: p.41 – Ah! If we had the eyes of angels with which to see Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is here present on this altar, and who is looking at us, how we should love Him! We should never more with to part from Him. We would wish to remain always at his feet; it would be a foretaste of Heaven: all else would become insipid to us. But see, it is faith we want. We are poor blind people; we have a mist before our eyes. Faith alone can dispel this mist.

Chapter 2 – Sacraments

Summa theologiae III, q.61, a.4 – The sacraments are certain signs protesting faith by which man is justified.

- p.7: A sacrament is always an external sign witnessing to that more recondite quality of the soul, the faith that justifies man by bringing him into contact with Christ.

- p.7-8: Faith and sacraments are indissolubly united; though faith may be called the older and more universal factor. The sacramental system is grafted on faith; it is essentially the executive of our faith; it is, shall we say, the reward of faith.

- Because of her faith the Church is granted those further powers of reaching Christ which make Christ not only the object of devout contemplation, but of physical possession; the sacramental reality is granted to those who have faith

- John 6: He who does the work of God by believing in Him whom the Father has sent is the one to whom Christ will give His Flesh to eat and His Blood to drink.

- To every one that has, more shall be given. . .

- Because of her generous faith the Church is given the abundant riches of the sacraments.

Chapter 3 – The Power of Sacramental Signification

- p.12: never deprive the sacraments of this constitutional property of signification:

- the demonstrative nature as a sign

- the representative nature as a sign

- p.13: Sacraments, then, are truly signs from heaven. In no other sphere of human transactions does the external sign become such an efficient messenger of the internal reality.

- p.14 – Every sacrament, then, has something to declare: it recalls the past, it is the voice of the present, it reveals the future.

- it can embrace heaven and earth, time and eternity, because it is a sign; were it only a grace it would be no more than the gift of the present hour; but being a sign the whole history of the spiritual world is reflected in it.

“O sacred Banquet, wherein Christ is received, the memory of His passion is recalled, the soul is filled with grace, and there is given to us a pledge of future glory.”

- p.14 – the difference between graces and sacraments:

- If my heart be touched by God’s grace . . . it is essentially a spiritual fact of the present moment.

- Such is not the case with the sacraments; through them it becomes possible to focus the distant past and future in the actual present; through them historic events of centuries ago are renewed, and we anticipate the future in a very real way. All this is possible only in virtue of the sacramental sign, which not only records the distant event, but, somewhat like the modern film, projects it upon the screen of the present.

- p.17 – Faith and Sacrament:

- the external things are as solid a road to Christ as the act of the soul. The sacramental signs, which are the external things alluded to by the Angelic Doctor, have become, in God’s Providence, a distinct supernatural world, as real as the supernatural world of graces given to the souls of men. At the same time, those sacred signs differ radically from the acts of man’s soul performed under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. They are visible, palpable realities, not breathings of the Spirit in the hearts of men. They are not mere aids to man’s memory; they are not just opportune reminders of the invisible. ‘If anyone says that sacraments have been instituted solely for the purpose of fostering faith, let him be anathema.” External things have been taken hold of by God as directly as man’s souls.

Chapter 4 – The Perfection of Sacramental Signification

- p.18: The sacraments are signs of God’s action; they are perfect signs because they contain and they bring about the very thing they signify.

Summa theologiae III, q.62, a.1, ad 1 – The sacraments of the New Law are at the same time causes and signs; and on this account it is commonly said that they bring about what they signify. From this it also appears that they are sacraments in the most perfect sense of the word, because they are related to something sacred, not only under the aspect of sign, but also under the aspect of cause.

Summa theologiae III, q.61, a.4, ad 2 – But our sacraments not only contain grace, they cause it.

- p.19: The wonderful signs we call sacraments are not only powerful in reminding us of the things of God, they have power to make them live again. They are instruments of the almighty power of God; they are tools in the hands of Christ.

- a tool (which is definitely a cause) may also be a sign

- e.g. a man with a sword

- p.20 – The importance of both signification and causation

- The two concepts are strictly inseparable in this matter of the sacrament. The sacrament must be cause in such wise as actually to represent the past, the present, and the future; and it must be sign in such wise as actually to effect the thing which it proclaims.

- p.21: Sacramental presence

- not in propria specie

- but in specie aliena

- At the same time these signs and symbols, which are the constitutional elements of the sacramental world, are most powerful instruments in the hand of God. They are His tools

- if we were met by Christ in Person in our churches, such gracious encounters would have nothing in common with what is called the sacramental Presence. His presence in the sacrament must be truly such that at no time could it be seen otherwise than by the eye of faith.

- cf. Summa theologiae III, q.76, a.1

Chapter 5 – Sacramental Thought

- p.23: The sacramental world is a new world created by God, entirely different from the world of nature and even from the world of spirits.

- The creative power of symbols, the productive efficacy of signs, the incredible potentialities of simple things in the hand of God to produce spiritual realities, nay even to reproduce them in their historic setting: all this belongs to the sacramental world and makes it profoundly unlike anything else in heaven or on the earth.

- p.25: Sacraments are not substitutes for anything else, they are their own end and justification. They produce their own grace, and in a way entirely different from all the other modes of participating in the divine life.

Summa theologiae III, q.62, a.3 – A sacrament of the New Law is an instrumental cause of grace. Therefore grace is in a sacrament of the New Law, not indeed according to a likeness of species, as an effect is in an univocal cause; nor according to any kind of form which is proper, permanent, and proportionate to such an effect, as effects are contained in causes not univocal, as, for instance, things which are generated are in the sun. But grace is contained in the sacrament of the new law according to a certain instrumental power which is transient, and incomplete as a natural being.

- p.26: A sacrament is like neither of these [the man generating a man, the sun generating equivocal effects]; it not only brings about effects which are utterly dissimilar, but it causes without any of that permanent and proportionate vigor which is, for example, in the sun. It has no such permanent and natural fixity of being.

- With all its realism, a sacrament is a power which is transient, and incomplete as a natural being.

- sacraments are elusive

- Our devotion to the sacraments will be all the sounder and much enlarged if we grasp the fact that the kingdom of God may be truly found in those external and insignificant elements because they are the signs of spiritual things; but sings, as we have so often said, full of divine efficacies.

- p.27: The difference between Catholics and Protestants:

- Protestantism is blind to the things of that intermediate world which lies between the creature and the uncreated God; the sacramental world, which is neither nature nor divinity, yet which partakes of both

- p.27: the sacramental world is truly a mystical world in the best sense of the word: it is reality without fixity of being.

- Our dear sacraments are truly a stream of life and light: they are unceasing in their operation

- p.28: But the use of external things, of the sacramental signs, also links us up with Christ, historically as well as actually.

- Sacraments of the New Law presuppose the existence of Christ

- The reason is this, that Christ in His flesh is the effective cause of all the powers that are in the Christian sacrament.

- efficient cause is prior in terms of actual existence

- A mental act, like that of faith, may precede the event; but the signs which are full of actual efficacy receive their power from the historic event or person, and therefore imply the important circumstance that the event has taken place, that the person has lived and died.

p.28-29: Sacraments are truly an energy that comes from Christ in person, a radiation from the charity of the Cross, a stream of grace from the pierced side of Christ.

Summa theologiae III, q.62, a.5 – It is manifest that the sacraments of the Church derive their power specifically from the passion of Christ, whose efficacy is linked to us, as it were, through the receiving of the sacraments. As a sign of this, from the side of Christ hanging on the Cross there flowed water and blood, of which the one belongs to Baptism and the other to the Eucharist, which are the two principal sacraments.

Chapter 6 – The Sacramental Role

- p.31: Sacraments consequently represent the Cross in the double aspect of atonement for sin and worship of God.

- p.32: The Thomistic view of the sacrament then is clear; it indissolubly united cult and sanctification; it prepares us for the idea of the Christian sacrifice, which is highest worship, being found in a sacrament; as sacraments are cult, not by a kind of after-thought, but through their first and most conspicuous element.

- We must ever remember that the sacrament is a res sacra – a sacred thing – given to man so as to enable him to approach God. It is the cup of sacrificial blood which man holds in his hand so that he may have the right of entering into the Holy of Holies. In the sacramental system man is active, not only passive; in it he gives back to God God’s own gifts.

Summa theologiae III, q.63, a.6 – A sacrament may belong to the divine cult in three ways; first, by way of the thing done, second, by way of the agent, third, by way of the recipient. By way of the action itself, the Eucharist belongs to the divine cult because in that sacrament divine worship is found in a supreme manner, as it is the sacrifice of the Church . . . . As for agents in the sacraments, we have the sacrament of Order, because through this sacrament men are delegated to confer the sacrament on others. Pertaining to recipients, however, we have the sacrament of Baptism, because through this is conferred on man power of receiving the other sacraments of the Church, whence it is called the door of the sacraments. To this latter class also belongs the sacrament of Confirmation.

- p.33: Sacraments are activities, even on the part of man, because they are either the divine cult itself, or man’s sanctification for the divine cult. It would certainly be an impoverishment of the sacramental system if in it man were merely passive, were nothing but a recipient; the sacraments would lack the fire of life, the exhilaration of generous action.

- Sacramental grace:

Summa theologiae III, q.62, a.2 – The sacramental grace adds to grace commonly so called, over and above the virtues and gifts, a certain divine help which enables man to reach the end of the sacraments.

Summa theologiae III, q.62, a.2, ad 3 – The ratio of sacramental grace is considered itself to grace commonly so called, as a ratioof species to genus.

p.33: There is no overlapping in their activities; there is no confusion in their respective roles; they are not interchangeable in their purpose; they are as completely different in their spiritual results as they are different in their external symbols.

E.g. Baptism:

Summa theologiae III, q.69,a.2, ad 1: The suffering of the passion of Christ is communicated to the one who is baptized inasmuch as he becomes a member of Christ, as if he himself had born that pain, and therefore all his sins are remitted through the pain of Christ’s passion.

- Rom. 6:8

- corpus: it is clear, then, that to everyone who is baptized the passion of Christ is communicated as a healing power, as if he himself had suffered and died.

Chapter 7 – The Sacramental Setting of the Eucharist

- p.36: The Blessed Eucharist reaches the very Throne of God; it is more than the food of the soul giving immortality, it is the Blood of the New Covenant, it is the sacrifice of the Lamb unspotted.

- it is the sacrament par excellence

- It is the first of the sacraments, not because at any point it breaks through the divine circle of sacramental significance, but because from within that great circle it rises to the Throne of God.

- p.36-37: Eucharist as Sacrament, Eucharist as Sacrifice – two ways of referring to the same thing, precisely because it is a sacrament.

- the Eucharistic Sacrifice is an essentially sacramental thing; the Eucharist is a sacrament at its best because it is a ritual offering to God in the New Covenant.

- p.38: The sacrament is a representation of an historic fact, not an ethical deed which has new meritoriousness.

- The term ‘sacrament’ in fact covers the whole Eucharist as with a golden baldachino of glory; the sacrifice of the Church, Mass, is truly the sacrament at its best and fullest; and the sacrifice of the Mass, if it has any human explanation, must be explained in sacramental concepts.

[The Importance of a Sacramental Worldview]

Man as microcosm, things represent things (and make them present)

- 3 concepts:

1. the representative signification in every sacrament of a past, present, and a future

- the past being the death of Christ on the cross, the present being the very thing which the external symbol signifies, the future being the union with Christ in glory.

2. not only man’s healing, but also God’s glorification, i.e. the divine cult

- It will be readily perceived that the Eucharistic sacrifice which is radically a representative sacrifice of a past immolation, and which is essentially a supreme act of worship, moves easily within such broad views concerning sacraments in general.

3. the sacrament actually contains what it signifies

- This notion of containing, to which the Doctor clings with such tenacity in his general theory on the sacraments, makes it possible for him to speak of the immolated Christ as being contained in the sacrament

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.4, ad 3 – The sacrament is called a victim because it contains Christ Himself who is the victim of salvation.

Chapter 8 – Sacramental Harmony

- p.42: The Eucharist ought really to illuminate for us all the other sacraments with its own radiance. The Eucharist is the sun in the firmament of sacramental grace.

- talks of the danger of giving the Eucharist a position where it is hardly a sacrament any more, while at the same time, lowering the status of the other sacraments to conventional forms of lesser spiritual power.

- p.43: We may put it in the following way: One sacrament, while remaining entirely a sacrament, and indeed through the very laws of its sacramentality, and not as an unusual feature or external adjunct, contains the true Body and Blood of Christ; it does this in virtue of its sacramental state, not because it is more than a sacrament.

- p.44: 3-fold reason for the supremacy of the Eucharist

1. In it Christ is contained substantially, while in the other sacraments there is a certain instrumental power derived from Christ.

2. all the other sacraments prepare men for the Eucharist, and find in it their consummation.

3. Catholic practice makes the other sacraments end in the celebration of the Eucharist.

- p.45: Is the Eucharist a Sacrament?

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.1, ad 2 – As the power of the Holy Spirit is with regard to the water of Baptism, so the true Body of Christ is with regard to the appearance of bread and wine and therefore the species of bread and wine effect nothing except through the power of Christ’s true Body.

- p.46: The Eucharist, though it contain the very Body and Blood of Christ, has still only an instrumental causality with regard to eternal glory; and this is the very definition, according to St. Thomas, of the whole sacramental causality: it is instrumental in the hands of God. The sacramental thing, the outward sign, receives from God all the powerful energies and delicate precision that an artist puts into the tool with which he carves a statue.

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.1, ad 3:

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.1, ad 3

A sacrament is so called because it contains something sacred. Now a thing may be sacred in two ways, either absolutely, or with reference to something else. The difference between the Eucharist and the other sacraments which have a matter known to the senses is this, that the Eucharist contains something sacred absolutely, namely Christ Himself; but the water of Baptism contains something sacred with regard to something else, that is to say, it contains the power of sanctifying; and the same thing may be said of the chrism and of other sacramental things. Consequently, the sacrament of the Eucharist is fully accomplished in the very consecration of the matter, while the other sacraments are fully accomplished in the application of the matter to the man to be sanctified.

From this another difference follows; for in the sacrament of the Eucharist what is the ‘res et sacramentum’ is in the matter itself; while what is the ‘res tantum’ – i.e., the grace which is given – is in the one who receives the Eucharist; but in Baptism both are in the recipient, that is to say, character, which is the ‘res et sacramentum’ and the grace of remission of sins, which is the res tantum, and the same may be said of the other sacraments.

- p.47: The fundamental principle, that the Eucharist is complete, is perfectly accomplished in the consecration of the matter, is the basis of all we have to say on the sacramental aspect of Mass; the Consecration is, of course, the complete Eucharist, because it is the perfect memorial of Christ’s passion.

- p.48-49: sacramentum tantum, res et sacramentum, res tantum

Chapter 9 – The Sacramental Idiom of Saint Thomas

- p.50: The Eucharistic sacrifice is entirely subsumed under the concept of the Eucharistic sacrament – nay, more, the Eucharistic sacrament is said by him to have its main expression and celebration in the consecration; which consecration again, according to him, is the direct and complete sacramental representation of Christ’s passion, and as such, is sacrifice.

- p.53: So the Eucharist is fully sacrament the moment it is consecrated. It fulfills its mission then, because then the sacrament-sacrifice is accomplished.

- The sacrament already exists, has accomplished its great mission, has fulfilled the role, before the faithful approach to receive It. Shall we say that the faithful come in at the end of the sacred drama? The sacrament has been completed, has shed its light heavenwards and earthwards, before the faithful eat It, because the sacrifice has been performed once more. If sacrifice and sacrament were not identical, how could it ever be said that the use of the sacrament comes after the sacrament.?

- p.54: One and the same sacrament has a two-fold function:

1. the more common sacramental function of feeding the soul, in which function it resembles all the other sacraments, and which, therefore, may be called directly sacramental

2. the function of the sacrifice, which is a property exclusive to the Eucharist, and which it is quite legitimate to distinguish from the ordinary function of spiritual feeding without losing in any way its own innate sacramentality.

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.6: Paschal Lamb is the most perfect figure of the Eucharistic sacrament

Chapter 10 – The Sacramental View of the Sacrifice of the Mass: Its Negative Aspect

- p.57: Distinguish 2 things:

1. First, that on the altar, at a given moment, there is offered up the perfect sacrifice whose elements are absolutely divine, being, in fact the Body and Blood of Christ.

2. But they are not to give to that sacrifice a meaning which is in any way merely natural, as if it were a sacrifice in the sense in which other sacrifices have been offered here on earth, as if that element of destruction were present which has been the common property of all natural sacrifices.

- In other words, the principle that in the Mass our sacrifice is a sacrament implies two things, both equally directly:

1. first, that there is a real sacrifice

2. that it is a sacrifice of a kind unknown to human experience.

- p.58: Now the Eucharistic sacrifice is the very opposite; no human experience will tell us the nature of that sacrifice; such a sacrifice is not meant to come under human observation. The sacrifice which is a sacrament belongs to an order of things which could never be known to us except through faith. It is commonly called the mystical sacrifice, or the unbloody sacrifice

- sacramental sacrifice

- sacrament-sacrifice

- none of those natural details of Christ’s sacrificial act on the Cross are to be read into the sacrament-sacrifice which takes place on the altar

- p.58: 2 types of sacrifice

1. in natura

2. in sacramento

- p.58 [Our edition p.72]: We surround the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice with every kind of reminder of Christ’s real sacrifice on the Cross . . .

- . . . But we know that the sacrament itself, which is being celebrated throughout, has no such human accidents, that it is a simple thing without succession of events; and though it be in our hands, it is still worlds apart from the earthly conditions in which we live

Summa theologiae III, q.80, a.2:

Summa theologiae III, q.80, a.2

In this sacrament Christ Himself is contained, not indeed in His proper species, but in the species of the sacrament. Therefore it is possible to eat Christ spiritually in a twofold manner; in one way as He exists in His proper species, and in this way the angels eat spiritually Christ Himself, insofar as they are united with Him in the enjoyment of perfect charity and in the clear vision (which sort of bread we also expect to find in heaven), such union not being by faith only, as we have it here on earth.

The other way of eating Christ spiritually is as He is under the appearances of the sacrament, insofar, namely, as a man believes in Christ with a desire of receiving the sacrament; and this is not only eating Christ spiritually, but also eating the sacrament itself, a thing that does not belong to the angels; and therefore, though it behooves the angels to eat Christ spiritually, it does behoove them to eat the sacrament spiritually.

- p.61: Though the text just cited from Saint Thomas refers more directly to the eating of the bread of the Eucharist, its spirit applies to the Eucharistic sacrifice as well. We are truly dealing with a spiritual sacrifice in the sense that there is no physical death in it, though there be in it all that reality which is indispensible to the sacrifice.

- The two sacrifices belong to entirely different spheres or modes of being; one could never, to use a colloquial phrase, stand in the way of the other.

- p.62: Christ’s natural sacrifice and Christ’s Eucharistic sacrifice stand to each other in a relationship which is truly unique in the whole realm of revealed truth; one represents the other, but one does not complete the other.

Chapter 11 – The Sacramental View of the Sacrifice of the Mass: Its Positive Aspect

- p.64: Sacramenta efficiunt quod significant

- p.64: So in this sacrament of the Eucharist, we know that it is a sacrifice because its words and its elements clearly signify sacrifice; we know that there is the Body and Blood of Christ as clearly as Baptism signifies the washing of the soul. Everything else that makes the Eucharist such a marvel of divine power follows upon the signification; it does not precede it. Bread is changed into Christ’s Body, wine is changed into Christ’s Blood, because the sacramental signification absolutely exacts such a change: for if such a change did not take place the Eucharistic significance would be a false and lying thing.

Summa theologiae III, q.78, a.4, ad 3 – The words, through which the consecration takes place, work sacramentally; therefore the power of changing, which is in the forms of these sacraments, follows upon the signification.

Summa theologiae III, q.78, a.2, ad 2:

Suppose that God were to say: ‘Let this be my Body’ in an absolute way, without any historic significance of meaning, as He said at the beginning: ‘Let there be light’. Such an act of God would have nothing in common with the Christian sacrament, because, as is evident, the all-important element of significance would be excluded from such an absolute fiat. The Eucharistic sacrament is performed, not through a divine imperative, but through a divine symbolism, or, if you prefer it, through a divine remembrance of the past.

The same word of God which works in the creation of all things operates also in this consecration. But in each case in a different manner; for here it operates effectively and sacramentally, i.e. in virtue of its signification. Whence it is fitting that the ultimate effect of the consecration be signified by a substantive verb in the indicative mood and present tense. But in the creation of the things it worked simply effectively, which efficacy was due to the command of His wisdom, and therefore in that creation the divine word is expressed by a verb in the imperative mood, according to Gen. 1:3 – Let there be light, and light was made.

- p.68 [p.83]: In the sacrament the Church must act the spiritual things with such clearness, power and directness, that no one will question her meaning; she really means to accomplish what she acts, as it were, on the stage of sacramental symbolism. The inward reality of the sacrament is the prolongation of the signification of the sacrament.

- p.69 [p.83]: Sacramental significance, then, is the only door through which we may draw nigh to the nature of Christ’s sacrifice on the altar. We possess what we signify, neither more nor less; if there is more, it is no longer the sacrament; if there is less, we are deceived. The whole questions is whether the Eucharistic rite – the words and deed of Christ first, of our selves acting in the Person of Christ secondarily – does literally signify Christ’s death on the Cross in its reality. The Catholic Church has always maintained that such is the case, and this is why she puts such faith in the sacrifice of the Mass.

- p.70: The glorious rite of the Mass, developing around the traditional action of the Last Supper, is the most potent instance of that profound instinct of the Catholic Church which tells her that the external sign is the measure and guarantee of the internal reality.

Chapter 12 – The Essence of the Eucharistic Sacrifice

- p.72: The contents of the Eucharistic mystery are so great that whosoever holds faithfully to Transubstantiation and the Real Presence cannot error substantially in his piety.

[Dogma and spirituality]

- p.72-73: Saint Thomas is too keen and clear-headed a sacramentalist ever to become an ultra-realist; even when he says that Christ is immolated in the sacrament, his whole mode of thinking is sacramental, as his words imply, not natural

- p.73 [p.89]: The essence, then, of the sacrifice of Mass ought to be completely stated before we touch Christ in the personal aspect; that is to say, the Eucharistic sacrifice is not directly a mystery of Christ’s Person, it is primarily a mystery of Christ’s Body and Blood. Christ’s Body is offered up, Christ’s Blood is offered up; these are the inward kernel of the external sign in the sacrificial rite; and beyond these – the Body and the Blood – the sacrament, as sacrament, does not go.

- p.73: When we offer up the great sacrifice we say that we are re-enacting Christ’s death sacramentally. Now Christ’s death is the separation of His Body and Blood; we do neither more nor less when we sacrifice at the altar. We do not enter directly into the mystery of Christ’s Person; we enter into the mystery of His Body and Blood.

The two individually, the Body and Blood, and the figurative rite, do not make a sacrifice. But the two together: 1) the Body and Blood separated as a prolongation which 2) signify the body and blood of Christ on Calvary.

- p.74: Here then we must find the essence of the Eucharistic sacrifice. In the sacrifice of Mass we have the separation of Christ’s Body and Blood brought about, not by a fiat of God’s omnipotence irrespective of any precedent or human conditions, but as a prolongation of the whole commemorative rite which historically, and as an unbroken change of remembrance, is linked up with the dead Christ on the Cross.

- Absolutely speaking, separation of Body and Blood on the altar would not in itself make a sacrifice, nor would a figurative rite make a true sacrifice; but the two together, one as the human act of commemoration, and the other as the divine prolongation, the inward kernel of reality, of that same act, make the Eucharistic sacrifice.

Summa theologiae III, q.81, a.4, ad 3: The Soul of Christ is in the sacrament through real concomitance, because it is not without the body; but it is not in the sacrament through the power of consecration, and therefore if this sacrament had been consecrated or celebrated at the time when the soul was really separated from the body, the soul of Christ would not have been under the sacrament.

Summa theologiae III, q.81, a.4, ad 2: If at the time of Christ’s passion when the blood was really separated from the body of Christ this sacrament had been consecrated, under the appearance of bread there would have been only the body, and under the appearance of the wine there would have been only the blood.

- p.76 [p.92]: It is evident from the very nature of the hypothesis here made by Saint Thomas that the reality of the Eucharistic sacrifice could never depend on an intrinsic change, either in Christ’s Person or in His Body and Blood, at the moment of the sacrificial immolation on the altar. . . . The immolation itself never causes a new state.

- if Christ be a mortal man like ourselves – the Eucharistic immolation is accomplished in the mortal Body and Blood

- if Christ be in the glorious state, as He is now – the Eucharistic immolation is accomplished in an immortal Body and Blood

Summa theologiae III, q.81, a.4 – in the pyx, if species had been reserved, he would have died.

Summa theologiae III, q.81, a.4

Whatever belongs to Christ as He is in Himself, may be attributed to Him both in His natural existence and in His sacramental existence, such as to live, to die, to suffer pain, to be animate or inanimate, and other such attributes. But whatever concerns Christ in connection with external bodies, can be attributed to Him in His natural existence only, and not in His sacramental existence, such as to be mocked, to be spate upon, to be crucified, to be scourged, and other such things.

- p.77 [p.93]: The meaning of Saint Thomas is clear and extremely important. Diversity of state in the sacrament comes only from the diverse modes of Christ’s natural existence; sacramental immolation, as such, does not cause a new kind of state.

Summa theologiae III, q.81, a.4, ad 1: and therefore Christ as He is under the sacrament cannot suffer [external violence], but He can die.

- p.77 [p.94]: Suppositions like these are very instructive because they bring home to us the great truth that if there are changes in Christ’s state under the Eucharistic form, such changes are not the result of the sacramental immolation, but they are anterior to it; we offer up at the altar the Body and Blood such as we find them.

- Difference between Protestant and Catholic [p.94-95]:

- The Protestant would go only so far as to say that the Eucharistic bread and wine represent Christ’s Body and Blood; the Catholic goes beyond that and says that Christ’s Body under the appearance of bread and Christ’s Blood under the appearance of wine represent His natural Body and Blood as they were on Calvary. This is the true and final expression of sacramental representation; and such representation suffices by itself to constitute the sacrifice, because the representation is of that moment of Christ’s wonderful existence when He was truly the Victim of sacrifice, His precious Blood drained from His Body.

Chapter 13 – Eucharistic Representation, Application, and Immolation

- p.80: Comparison between Christ at the Supper and Christ now:

- Christ, who gave His Body and Blood to the Apostles at the Last Supper, was whole and entire at the head of the festive board.

- The Christ whose Body and Blood is on the Catholic altar is whole and entire in heaven.

- But the Eucharistic Body and Blood are representations of Christ in the state in which He was not whole and entire; when He was broken on the Cross at His death.

- The Eucharistic Body and Blood at the Last Supper, therefore, were the representation, or more accurately the presentation, of the Christ who would be broken on the Cross the following day, not of the Christ who was there at the head of the table.

- The Eucharistic Body and Blood on our altars are the re-presentation – here the word (taken in its radical meaning) is quite accurate – not of the Christ who is in heaven, but again of the Christ who was broken on Calvary

- p.81: It is the very nature of the Eucharistic sacrifice to be a representation of the past

- the full Person of Christ on the altar could not be a representation of Himself

- The mere memory of the death of Christ could never be the living Lord.

- But His Body and Blood, separated in sacramental truth, can be the memory or representation of that Lord whose Body was on the Cross, whose Blood was poured out on the hill of Calvary.

- p.81: Each one of the seven sacraments is representative of the passion of Christ in its own way; but the Eucharist represents it in a most realistic fashion, because it is what Christ was at one time, Body and Blood.

- When Christ was Body and Blood only He was the perfect sacrifice; and the Eucharist is a perfect sacrifice because it again makes present – such is the literal meaning of re-presentation – all there was on this earth of Christ after He had pronounced His consummatum est (it is finished), when His Soul had been given up to the Father.

- p.82: 2 degrees of signification

- p.82: Though we insist so much on the truth that at the consecration in the Mass we come into contact directly, in virtue of the sacrament, with Christ’s Body and Blood, not with His whole Person, the representation, which is the very nature of the Eucharistic sacrifice, terminates in that sacred Person.

- but the Person broken on Calvary

- That Christ should have ever been one who was Body and Blood in a state of separation gives to the Eucharistic separation its whole meaning.

- The Eucharistic separation of Body and Blood is the memory, the representation, of that real separation in historic time.

In other words, when the soldier’s lance pierced his side.

- Body and Blood separated on the altar would have no meaning but for the historic precedent on Calvary when the last drop of Christ’s Blood was drained from His Body.

- p.82-83: By application we mean that individual benefit to every believer in Christ’s Passion; the merit, the sacrificial atonement of that great immolation on the Cross coming down on the individual man and entering his soul.

- The Eucharistic sacrifice is the divine means whereby the individual believer comes into contact with the sacrifice of the Cross.

- p.83: As the Body and Blood on the altar are such a perfect representation of the broken Son of God on Calvary, they are also the most immediate and complete contact of the soul with all the saving power of Golgotha.

- So it can be said that in the Eucharistic sacrifice Christ is truly immolated, because the immolation of Christ on Calvary is brought home to us in such a realistic manner.

- He is not immolated again.

- But we do say that He is immolated, because the Calvary immolation is represented so truly, is applied so directly, through the Eucharistic Body and Blood.

- p.83: This one great truth that illumines the Eucharistic doctrine with a light as clear as that of the rising sun is that one phase of the career of the Son of God on earth is kept perpetually present among us with an exactness of reproduction that is truly astonishing.

- p.84: The Whole Christ is there:

Summa theologiae III, q.52, a.3

Summa theologiae III, q.52, a.1, ad 2

- p.84-85: But who does not see how the Eucharist becomes a thing of palpitating reality if it is made clear that the one phase of the Christ-career which is the most sublime and the most heroic – His state of immolation as the divine Victim – is brought back to us in the identical elements that constituted it nearly two thousand years ago: Body on the one hand and Blood on the other hand, hypostatically united with the divine Person?

- p.86: Here indeed is the Christus passus– the Christ who has suffered – who is thus contained in the Eucharist. In virtue of the sacrament, the Eucharist contains, not the mortal Christ, nor even the dying Christ, nor does it contain the glorious Christ; but it contains the Christ directly after His death.

- At the Last Supper:

- in virtue of His direct act: He was contained in the Eucharist in that phase of His existence which was to come about soon after on Calvary

- in virtue of concomitance He was contained therein in the fullness of the mortal phase of His Divine Personality

- If Mass had been celebrated during the three days of Christ’s death

- the Eucharist would have contained the second phase of the Christ-personality, and nothing more.

- there would have been no other concomitant personal quality

- Today on our altar

- in virtue of the sacrament we have that second or middle phase of the Christ-personality

- in virtue of concomitance we have also the whole third phase in the Christ-personality, His glorious life.

- p.87: Such, then, is the content of the Eucharistic sacrament. Christ in the state of Victim before God, His Body and Blood a sacrifice of sweet savor to the Lord.

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a1, ad 3

Summa theologiae III, q.73, a.3, ad 3 – The Eucharist is the sacrament of the passion of Christ, inasmuch as man is rendered perfect by being linked up with the dead Christ.

Chapter 14 – The Oneness of the Christian Sacrifice

- p.88: The sacrifice of the Christian altar and the Sacrifice of Calvary are one and the same

- p.89: It is the genius and very nature of the Christian sacrament to be an act which may be repeated indefinitely, though the content, or, if you like, the object of the act, be immutable. This is the representative role of the sacrament. Such a thing cannot happen anywhere outside the sacramental sphere.

- But the sacramental presence and the sacramental offering of Christ are not historic events in His career; they do not form new chapter in the book of His life.

Summa theologiae III, q.83, a.1, ad 1

- p.90: A sacrament is not an act in the drama, however great that drama may be; a sacrament is essentially the representation of the whole drama. The historic drama must be complete before sacraments are possible [this gets clarified with regard to the Last Supper]

- p.90: Now the Christian sacrament, and above all, the sacrament-sacrifice, is a representation, an application, an immolation, and a containing of the whole immensity of the universal sacrifice.

- p.91: Mass is the memory or the monument of Christ’s passion. Is it not the very purpose of a monument to stand for the complete victory, the final triumph?

Sacraments both supremely depend on historical events and are mysteriously aloof from them.

- p.93: As the sacrament is essentially a representation, it could be instituted at any moment by Christ, provided that He existed bodily in the reality of the Incarnation, and not only in the hope of the believer. That great act of Redemption, the immolation of Christ on the Cross, could be represented before, as well as after, His crucifixion.

Summa theologiae III, q.66, a.2, ad 1

- p.94: Christ, on the eve of leaving this world, gave us the memory or monument of Himself, and nothing in the nature of that great monument obliged Christ to wait until after the event for this. The monument is such that He could erect it before the event, it being a sacrament. The institution of the Eucharistic sacrament at the Last Supper, then, was not so much Christ’s vow to die, as His anticipated triumph in His death.

Chapter 15 – Saint Thomas and the Council of Trent on the Oneness of the Christian Sacrifice

Summa theologiae III, q.83, a.1:

- p.97: In the sacrament of the Eucharist, then, representation and application of the sacrifice of the Cross are the only kind of immolation to be admitted in the sacrifice of the Christian altar. The Cross is Christ’s true immolation; the Mass is its perfect image, therefore it is an immolation.

Summa theologiae III, q.83, a.1, ad 1

- p.98: The Body which is offered up is one and the same everywhere, be it on the Cross, be it on the Christian altar. The sacrifice of Calvary and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are to each other in the relationship of patter and replica; the one contains exactly what the other contains.

Summa theologiae III, q.83, a.1, ad 2

Summa theologiae III, q.83, a.1, ad 3

- p.99: This carries the representative character of the Eucharistic immolation to the utmost degree of reality. In the Eucharist we have that which made even Christ natural immolation so remarkable, that the priest and the victim were the same.

- For [St. Thomas] there are two representative elements, the priest at the altar and the sacramental Body and Blood. The priest represents Christ; the Eucharistic elements represent Christ’s Body and Blood.

- the Christian priesthood is as truly representative of Christ’s priesthood as the Eucharistic Body is representative of Christ’s natural Body.

- p.100: The Christian priesthood is as truly a sacrament as the Christian sacrifice is a sacrament. The two stand to each other in the relation in which Christ stood to His immolation on the Cross. Sacramentally the Catholic priesthood is one with the Eucharistic victim as naturally Christ was one with that which He offered on the Cross.

- p.102: The Council of Trent safeguards the oneness of the Calvary sacrifice and the Eucharistic sacrifice precisely because it keeps them so well apart in their respective modes of being.

Week 7 – Theme: Effects of the Mass; Topics: Communion;

Required Reading: Feingold Chapters 11&12

Suggested Reading: CCC 1391-1401; Benedict XVI, Sacramentum Caritatis, Joseph Ratzinger, Feast of Faith, Rene Laurentin, A Short Treatise on the Virgin Mary

John 19:25-27 – But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdelene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son!’ 27 Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother!’ And form that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

From the moment that the disciples professed their belief in Him, Jesus prepared them for this event:

His disciples:

Mt. 16:16 followed by 16:21 – From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

Mt. 20: 17 (the 3rd time) – And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside, and on the way he said to them, 18 ‘Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death, 19 and deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged and crucified, and he will be raised on the third day.

Same parallels in Mk 8:31ff; 9:30ff; 10:32ff

His mother:

Lk 2:49 – ‘How is it that you sought me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?’ 50 And they did not understand the saying which he spoke to them. 51 And he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them; and his mother kept all these things in her heart.

Jn.2:4: ‘O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.’

Laurentin, A Short Treatise on the Virgin Mary, p.238: “In a more exact analogy, on the sacramental level the priest suffices for the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass, and yet the participation of the faithful is important. In the fundamental sacrifice, Mary plays a role analogous to that of the faithful in the sacrifice of the Mass. For all its human congruity, Mary’s presence at the foot of the Cross makes no necessary contribution to Christ’s work, but it does bring out the rich harmony of the Redemption. On this ground God required her active participation. As consent of the immaculate Virgin and her own flesh and blood had been incorporated into the mystery of the Incarnation, her consent and her suffering were incorporated into the mystery of the Redemption.”

· A human person

· The virtue of faith

· Consent in the offering

· The suffering of the soldier’s lance

Transfiguration as preparation for the Passion and anticipation of the Eucharist

Mt. 17: 1ff and Mt. 17:22 – As they were gathering in Galilee, Jesus said to them, ‘The Son of Man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day.’ And they were greatly distressed.

Sacrifice and Communion

Sacrifice continued . . .

Feingold, p.489: “In this connection of sacrifice and communion, it is important to understand that there is an order: the sacrifice precedes the communion, and the communion is the culmination and fruit of the sacrifice.”

“The communion in the sacrifice presupposes that God has first been propitiated by the sacrifice, which enables the faithful to enter into deeper intimacy with Him.”

“Communion” with the Sacrifice

By Christ – offers His Body . . . offers His BODY

Binds us to the Father

By the Priest – on behalf of the people

Binds the people to Christ

By the faithful – on behalf of the world

Binds the world to the Church

2 reasons from Feingold:

1. Man is social creature – Therefore it is fitting that God be adored, thanked, praised, petitioned, and have satisfaction made not by isolated individuals but by communities or societies.

2. Sacrifice offered to God is not only an essentially social act but also one that, by its very nature, binds society more closely together by expressing the common orientation of society to its proper end, which is union with God and the manifestation of His glory and goodness through sharing in them. Sacrifice, therefore, serves to ‘re-bind’ society with God and the members of society with one another.

Feingold on Interior oblation:

p.406: Furthermore, as mentioned above, every ritual sacrifice, by its nature, is an external sign of the interior oblation of the hearts of the faithful. This interior oblation is not just that of the priest and on behalf of whom sacrifice is offered. The logic of sacrifice requires that each person make his own interior act of self-offering and intend that it be represented by the external bodily sacrifice that is offered on the people’s behalf by the priest, who is their mediator before God.

- This is where Feingold speaks of “spiritual sacrifices”

p.417: “The interior sacrifice of the heart must be sincere, and the exterior sacrifice must be proportioned to it as a worthy sign of the interior offering.”

Ways of talking about Sacrifice:

1. Separation of the Body and Blood

2. Sacrifice of the Word

3. Offering of the Heart

Internal made external, external made internal

Sacred Heart, Divine Mercy, Morning Offering, Gertrude the Great, all similar language, have as their heart active participation in the Mass.

1. The Words of each:

Eternal Father, I offer you the body and the blood, soul and divinity of your dearly beloved son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.

O Jesus, in union with your most precious blood poured out on the cross and offered in every Mass, I offer you today my prayers, works, joys, sorrows, and sufferings for the praise of you holy name and all the desires of your sacred heart; in reparation for sin, for the conversion of sinners, the union of all Christians and our final union with you in heaven.

Eternal Father, I offer you the most precious blood of thy divine son, Jesus, in union with the Masses said throughout the world today, for all the holy souls in purgatory, for sinners everywhere, for sinners in the universal church, those in my own home, and within my family.

2. Active Participation:

What it is:

SC 14 – “Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that fully conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy”.

What it is not:

Sacramentum caritatis52 – It should be made clear that the word ‘participation’ does not refer to mere external activity during the celebration.

Divine Mercy and the Third Millenium – the canonization homily (both Weigel and Kosicki)

1. the Law of the Gift – VII “man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself.

2. the need to live mercifully

- trying to live action of total surrender – where will we find it?

- in the same homily: “it is not easy to love with a deep love, which lies in the authentic gift of self. This love can only be learned by penetrating the mystery of God’s love. Looking at him, being one with his fatherly heart, we are able to look with new eyes at our brothers and sisters, with an attitude of unselfishness and solidarity. All this is mercy!”

- looking at His Heart, looking for the authentic gift of self

2 points from the work of Joseph Ratzinger

1. What is worship – somehow tied up with sacrifice, giving glory to God, “handing over to God a reality that is in some way precious to man” (Spirit of the Liturgy, 27)

- “surrender of all things to God” – essence of sacrifice and worship

2. Active Participation

a. misunderstood to mean something external – what it is not

Sacramentum caritatis52 – In fact, the active participation called for by the Council must be understood in more substantial terms, on the basis of a greater awareness of the mystery being celebrated and its relationship to daily life.

b. What it is – participation in the central action

- action is God’s

Spirit of the Liturgy, 173: “The real ‘action’ in the liturgy in which we are all supposed to participate is the action of God himself. This is what is new and distinctive about the Christian liturgy: God himself acts and does what is essential. He inaugurates the new creation, makes himself accessible to us, so that, through the things of the earth, through our gifts, we can communicate with him in a personal way.”

- real action will be one in which God is pouring out His gifts

2 images of Grace

Wounds:

St. Augustine: “In my deepest wound, I saw your glory, and it dazzled me”

Origins: Little Sisters of the Lamb – wounded I will never cease to love

- Resolution, “though wounded, I will not stop loving” Story of being insulted, wanting to strike out

- Deeper: Spiritual Physics – “Because I am wounded, I am needy”,

From Noonday Devil:

On tears: p.38: “make a notch so that mercy might pour into that gap, into that wound, just as the mercy of God was engulfed in Christ’s wound of love on the Cross.”

“Vulnerability radiates the beauty of God Himself” from Spiritual Direction

“When a big, hulking man starts to cry; or when a strong, successful businessman awkwardly communicates tender love to his wife; when a little child looks with big, hungry eyes at one who can feed her; or a little boy bursts into song, it pierces our cynicism and reaches our hearts” (Spiritual Direction, 49).

Vulnus means Wound

Vulnerability, Wound-ability

“When we can see and expose those intimate, vulnerable places in us and receive love there, we are affirmed at the deep level of the goodness of our person and the value of our lives. When we can experience intimacy with and affirmation from a person, it helps us experience a deeper intimacy with and affirmation from God” (Spiritual Direction, 51)

Causes of the Wound:

Sin:

Our own

That of Others

Disappointment:

The Mystery of Failure – JHN

Some Definite Service:

God knows me and calls me by my name.… God has created me to do Him some definite service; He has committed some work to me which He has not committed to another. I have my mission—I never may know it in this life, but I shall be told it in the next.

Somehow I am necessary for His purposes… I have a part in this great work; I am a link in a chain, a bond of connection between persons. He has not created me for naught. I shall do good, I shall do His work; I shall be an angel of peace, a preacher of truth in my own place, while not intending it, if I do but keep His commandments and serve Him in my calling.

Therefore I will trust Him.

Whatever, wherever I am, I can never be thrown away. If I am in sickness, my sickness may serve Him; In perplexity, my perplexity may serve Him; If I am in sorrow, my sorrow may serve Him. My sickness, or perplexity, or sorrow may be necessary causes of some great end, which is quite beyond us. He does nothing in vain; He may prolong my life, He may shorten it; He knows what He is about. He may take away my friends, He may throw me among strangers, He may make me feel desolate, make my spirits sink, hide the future from me— still He knows what He is about.… Let me be Thy blind instrument. I ask not to see— I ask not to know—I ask simply to be used.

Love and Beauty:

Origen (from Fr Vincent’s book , p.130): If then a man can extend his thinking as to ponder and consider the beauty and grace of all the things that have been created in the Word, the very charm of them will so smite him, the grandeur of their brightness will so pierce him as with a chosen dart – as says the prophet – that he will suffer from the dart Himself a saving wound, and will be kindled with the blessed fire of His love”.

Ratzinger (again from Fr Vincent): The encounter with beauty can become the wound of the arrow that strikes the soul and thus makes it see clearly, so that hene forth it has a criteria, based on what it has experienced, cand can now weigh the arguments correctly

Some wounds don’t heal

Meditation on Heaven and Hell

Characters on the soul

Some wounds

St. Paul’s Thorn

2 Cor 12:7ff: And to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me; but he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”

St. Catherine’s comment

Dialogue, 145: “Sometimes my providence leaves my great servants a pricking, as I did to my gentle apostle Paul, my chosen vessel. After he had received my Truth’s teaching in the depths of me the eternal Father, I still left him the pricking and resistance of his flesh. Could I and can I not make it otherwise for Paul and the others in whom I leave this or that sort of pricking? Yes. Then why does my providence do this? To give them opportunity for merit, to keep them in the self-knowledge whence they draw true humility, to make them compassionate instead of cruel toward their neighbors so that they will sympathize with them in their labors. For those who suffer themselves are far more compassionate to the suffering than are those who have not suffered. They grow to greater love and run to me all anointed with humility and ablaze in the furnace of my charity. And through these means and endless others they attain perfect union – such union and knowledge of my goodness that while they are still in their mortal bodies they taste the reward of the immortals. . . And whoever loves much will have great sorrow; therefore those whose love grows will know more sorrow.”

Glorify God

- This is my story, God conquered this

- This is what happened, God was present uniquely here

Martyrs and other saints

Saint Augustine, City of God, XXII, c.19: “I do not know why this is so, but the love we bear for the blessed martyrs makes us desire to see in the kingdom of heaven the marks of the wounds which they received for Christ’s name; and it may be that we shall indeed see them. For this will not be a deformity, but a badge of honor, and the beauty of their virtue – a beauty which is in the body, but not of the body – will shine forth in it.”

- Lacking limbs will be restored, but some “marks of their glorious wounds, still visible in their immortal flesh.”

Father Hoffer cites, Benedict XVI, Spe salvi on St. Josephine Bakhita’s 144 wounds

Spe salvi, 3: To come to know God—the true God—means to receive hope. We who have always lived with the Christian concept of God, and have grown accustomed to it, have almost ceased to notice that we possess the hope that ensues from a real encounter with this God. The example of a saint of our time can to some degree help us understand what it means to have a real encounter with this God for the first time. I am thinking of the African Josephine Bakhita, canonized by Pope John Paul II. She was born around 1869—she herself did not know the precise date—in Darfur in Sudan. At the age of nine, she was kidnapped by slave-traders, beaten till she bled, and sold five times in the slave-markets of Sudan. Eventually she found herself working as a slave for the mother and the wife of a general, and there she was flogged every day till she bled; as a result of this she bore 144 scars throughout her life. Finally, in 1882, she was bought by an Italian merchant for the Italian consul Callisto Legnani, who returned to Italy as the Mahdists advanced. Here, after the terrifying “masters” who had owned her up to that point, Bakhita came to know a totally different kind of “master”—in Venetian dialect, which she was now learning, she used the name “paron” for the living God, the God of Jesus Christ. Up to that time she had known only masters who despised and maltreated her, or at best considered her a useful slave. Now, however, she heard that there is a “paron” above all masters, the Lord of all lords, and that this Lord is good, goodness in person. She came to know that this Lord even knew her, that he had created her—that he actually loved her. She too was loved, and by none other than the supreme “Paron”, before whom all other masters are themselves no more than lowly servants. She was known and loved and she was awaited. What is more, this master had himself accepted the destiny of being flogged and now he was waiting for her “at the Father's right hand”. Now she had “hope” —no longer simply the modest hope of finding masters who would be less cruel, but the great hope: “I am definitively loved and whatever happens to me—I am awaited by this Love. And so my life is good.” Through the knowledge of this hope she was “redeemed”, no longer a slave, but a free child of God. She understood what Paul meant when he reminded the Ephesians that previously they were without hope and without God in the world—without hopebecause without God. Hence, when she was about to be taken back to Sudan, Bakhita refused; she did not wish to be separated again from her “Paron”. On 9 January 1890, she was baptized and confirmed and received her first Holy Communion from the hands of the Patriarch of Venice. On 8 December 1896, in Verona, she took her vows in the Congregation of the Canossian Sisters and from that time onwards, besides her work in the sacristy and in the porter's lodge at the convent, she made several journeys round Italy in order to promote the missions: the liberation that she had received through her encounter with the God of Jesus Christ, she felt she had to extend, it had to be handed on to others, to the greatest possible number of people. The hope born in her which had “redeemed” her she could not keep to herself; this hope had to reach many, to reach everybody.

Fr Hoffer: “When people would express their pity for her, she would say that is her enemies who should be pitied, as they didn’t know Jesus. Imagine Josephine Bakhita in the happiness of heaven, the fulfillment of her hope, now with glorified wounds. She shows these glorious wounds to Jesus, as a triumph of victory with him in forgiving sinners. She shows these glorious wounds to the other saints, as a particular badge of co-membership with them in the body of Christ, who suffered, died, and rose for our salvation.”

Maria Goretti:

A Reflection on Maria Goretti, Christian Love, and the Sermon on the Mount:

Actually, my point in bringing her up was to illustrate a point of the Gospel of “Turn the other cheek”. I don’t think you were there that weekend, but I was pointing out that God in Christ invites us to mirror the love of the Father. As children will often resemble their parent, we as God’s children are meant to love like God loves. God loves with this exceptional love. A love that offers his cheek to be struck, strips down and offers his clothes, and carries his cross up calvary. Then I pointed out that this outrageous love doesn’t change when we realize that the Lord’s instructions in the Sermon on the Mount are also a call to arms - to fight against injustice by means of our love - the only way that injustice can be defeated. I pointed out that love draws attention to and even aggravates injustice. When we love, it highlights the injustice and makes it, in a way, worse. Christ does this. He is hit, and asks “Why do you strike me . . . “, he invites us to turn to the other cheek to invite our oppressor to add insult to injury, he invites those forced into service up to one mile to go two instead, thus highlighting and aggravating the oppression of the Romans over the Jews. He tells people to give up the cloak when the tax collector demands the shirt off your back. Hence the comparison to the pagans and tax collectors. His nail marks are a permanent reminder not only of God’s outrageous love, but also of the cruelty that human beings have not just for one another but for God. A permanent mark that purifies as much as it is a sign of God’s overcoming love. I said that this is how God loves, this is how God’s children are called to love. Then I brought up Maria Goretti. Hers is a story not only of forgiveness, but of painful realization of the wounds we inflict. Her assailant, as you know, stabbed her 14 times. She appeared to him in prison and offered him 14 lilies. Each lily, not only a sign of forgiving love, but also what I imagine to be a painful and purifying reminder of his crimes. Hers is story of power in spite of apparent weakness. Not strong enough physically to overpower her assailant, but far more powerful spiritually in her capacity to participate in the love of God. Her appearance to her attacker is one of strength, of justice, of mercy, and of God’s amazing and purifying love. I would hope that other victims see in her that though violence has been done to them, they have a power in Christ that can take anything and reveal the heart of God - pierced and glorified

Jesus’ Body at Resurrection

Luke 24: 39-40

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae III, q.54, a.4: “whether Christ’s Body ought to have risen with its scars?

See Homiletic and Pastoral Review, “Glorious Wounds – Christ’s and Ours” by Fr. Andew Hoffer, O.P.

Objection 1: Bodies rise incorrupt, but wounds and scars imply defect and corruption

Objection 2: Bodily integrity an issue, gross says fr Hoffer

Objection 3: Proof that it was the same body, not needed once assured of this, wrong to think that anything would come and go

Body: Fitting

1. Bede, “not from an inability to heal, but to wear them as an everlasting trophy of his victory, quotes Augustine

2. Confirm the hearts of the disciples as the faith in the resurrection

3. When He advocates for us with the Father, to show them to the Father

a. Hoffer quotes Heb 7:25

4. To show them to sinners “that He may convince those redeemed in His blood, how mercifully they have been helped, as He exposes before them the traces of the same death.

5. In the judgment day he may upbraid them with their just condemnation

Quotes Augustine, De symbol. Ii : Christ knew why He kept the scars in His body. For, as He showed them to Thomas who would not believe except he handled and saw them, so will He show His wounds to His enemies, so that He who is the Truth may convict them, saying; ‘Behold the man whom who crucified; see the wounds you inflicted; recognize the side you pierced, sine it was opened by you and for you, yet you would not enter.”

Response 1: scar remained for the increase of glory, trophies of his power, special comeliness will appear in the places scarred by the wounds.

Reponse 2: greater beauty of glory compensates for the openings, break in tissue. quotes Leo the Great: “it sufficed for his personal faith for him to have seen what he saw; but it was on our behalf that he touched what he beheld..

Response 3: other reasons why scars remain, quotes Augustine, Gregory,

Reflection on Thomas, in part from Fr. Carola

Fr Carola, “How deep his misery must have been! For the Easter faith is an ecclesial faith. The disciples collectively encountered the Risen Lord in the Upper Room where they had previously shared the first Eucharist with Him. . . . Thomas failed to profess this Easter faith and to share in his brothers’ joy because he stood apart from the brotherhood. Removed from ecclesial communion, as it were, Thomas lacked the faith and joy which was theirs.”

John 20:24-29

“So I send you”, sent to Thomas

Whoever receives you, receives me – Thomas can’t

Can’t share their joy

8 days later

“put your fingers here” – Jesus knows Thomas’ heart

Providence,

Christ entering into Thomas’ woundedness

Behold such a heart / Divine Mercy

Thomas saw Christ’s Heart, Thomas saw the open heart wound – saw Divine Mercy

Jesus to Mary Margaret

Autobiography, p.95: “Behold this Heart, which has loved men so much, that It has spared nothing, even to exhausting and consuming Itself, in order to testify to them its Love; and in return I receive from the greater number nothing but ingratitude by reason of their irreverence and sacrileges, and by the coldness and contempt which they show Me in this Sacrament of Love.

Autobiography, 52-53, her first meeting with the Heart of Jesus:

Aflame, a furnace

Filled with treasures

Bursting, can’t keep it in

Discloses secrets, conveys marvels

Asks for her heart,

Thankful for the scars

Song: Grateful for the Scars: I Am They

Waking up to a new Sunrise

Looking back from the other side

I can see now with open eyes

Darkest water and deepest pain

I wouldn’t trade it for anything

‘Cause my brokenness brought me to you

And these wounds are a story You’ll use

So I’m thankful for the scars

‘Cause without them I wouldn’t know your heart

And I know they’ll always tell of who you are

So forever I am thankful for the scars

Now I'm standing in confidence With the strength of Your faithfulness And I'm not who I was before No, I don't have to fear anymore

So I'm thankful for the scars 'Cause without them I wouldn't know Your heart And I know they'll always tell of who You are So forever I am thankful for the scars

I can see, I can see How You delivered me In Your hands, In Your feet I found my victory I can see, I can see How You delivered me In Your hands, In Your feet I found my victory

I'm thankful for Your scars 'Cause without them I wouldn't know Your heart And with my life I'll tell of who You are So forever I am thankful

I'm thankful for the scars 'Cause without them I wouldn't know Your heart And I know they'll always tell of who You are So forever I am thankful for the scars So forever I am thankful for the scars

- Access to the interior, window to see the Heart

Wounds let the light in

I was halfway up the mountain When the rocks I held gave way I came tumbling like an avalanche To the bottom where I lay And with the taste of blood And the twist of bone My healing could begin

'Cause the wound is where the light The wound is where the light The wound is where the light gets in

I have stood there like a hostage With a knife held to my vein Captive to the poison That I took to numb the pain 'Cause everybody wishes They were born with thicker skin

But the wound is where the light The wound is where the light The wound is where the light gets in

It's tricky how the heart works When the break-ups and the big jerks Make us never wanna hurt that way again Maybe I'm naive but in every scar I see The place where love is trying to break in 'Cause the wound is where the light gets in

You can recognize a saint By the scars they don't disguise You can pick a real sinner By the kindness in their eyes So if you're stumbling in the dark And bleeding at the shin

Remember the wound is where the light The wound is where the light The wound is where the light gets in

The wound is where the light The wound is where the light The wound is where the light gets in

Preface Dialogue:

Ordo missae:

Dominus vobiscum

Et cum spiritu tuo

Sursum corda

Habemus ad dominum

Gratias agamus domino deo nostro

Dignum et iustum est

In unum corpus:

p.289: sursum corda:

- Cyprian: de dominica oratione 31:

o Moreover, when we stand for prayer, most beloved brethren, we should be alert and intent on our petitions with a whole heart. Let every carnal and wordly though depart, and let the mind dwell on nothing other than that alone for which it prays. Therefore, the priest also before his prayer prepares the minds of the brethren by first uttering a preface, saying: ‘lift up your hearts’, so that when the people respond: ‘we lift them up to the Lord,’ they may be admonished that they should ponder on nothing other than the Lord. Let the breast be closed against the adversary and be open to God alone, and let it not suffer the enemy of God to approach it at the time of prayer.

- Augustine: sermo: hoc quod videtis:, Pl 46

- Post salutionem, quam nostis, id est: Dominus vobiscum, audistis: sursum cor.

o Tota vita Christianorum verorum sursum cor, non Christianorum nominee solo, sed Christianorum re ipsa, et veritate tota vita sursum cor.

o Quid est sursum cor?

§ Spes in deo, non in te.

§ Tu enim deorsum, deus sursum est.

· Si spem habes in te, cor deorsum est, not est sursum.

o Ideo, cum audieritis (a) a sacerdote: sursum cor!

o Respondetis: habemus ad dominum.

§ Laborate, ut verum respondeatis.

o Sequitur sacerdos et dicit: domino deo nostro gratias agamus.

§ Unde gratias agamus?

§ Quia sursum cor habemus, et nisi ille illud levasset, in terra iaceremus.

§ Et inde iam, quae aguntur in precibus sanctis, quas audituri estis, ut accedente verbo fiat corpus et sanguis Christi.

o Nam tolle verbum, panis est, et vinum.

§ Adde verbum, et iam aliud est.

· Et ipsum aliud quid est?

· Corpus Christi et sanguinis Christi.

o Tolle ergo verbum, panis est, et vinum

§ Adde verbum, et fiet sacramentum

§ Ad hoc dicitis: amen.

· Amen in latine interpretatur, verum.

o Deinde dicitur dominica oratio.

- Ceasarius of Arles, d. 543: sermon 73

o When the majority of the people – in fact, what is worse, almost all of them – leave church as soon as the lessons have been recited, to whom will the priest say: ‘Lift up your hearts’? Moreover, how can they reply that they have lifted them up when they go down into the streets both in body and in heart? Or how will they be able to shout with trembling and with joy: ‘Holy, holy, holy, blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.? Again , when the Lord’s Prayer is said, who will be able to exclaim with humility and truth: ‘forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors’?

Feingold, p.420: The sacrifices of the Mystical Body are sanctified by the sacrifice of the Head and are offered together with it.

Active Participation and Ars Celebrandi – Feingold, p.432

Sacramentum Caritatis, par.40: “Emphasizing the importance of the ars celebrandi also leads to an appreciation of the value of the liturgical norms. The ars celebrandishould foster a sense of the sacred and the use of outward signs which help to cultivate this sense, such, for example, the harmony of the rite, the liturgical vestments, the furnishings and the sacred space.”

Orientation

From Feast of Faith, p.140ff: “Where priest and people together face the same way, what we have is a cosmic orientation and also an interpretation of the Eucharist in terms of resurrection and trinitarian theology. Hence it is also an interpretation in terms of Parousia, a theology of hope, in which every Mass is an approach to the return of Christ.”

1. Helps combat the anthropocentric view of the world – “a rediscovery of the value of the church building’s eastward orientation would help, it seems to me, in recovering a spirituality which embraces the dimension of creation.”

2. East and Cross were fused – the cross had an eschatological meaning – “Even now, when the priest faces the people, the cross could be placed on the altar in such a way that both priest and people can see it. At the eucharistic prayer they should not look at one another; together they ought to behold him, the Pierced Savior (Zech 12:10; Rev. 1:7)

3. Relationship of community to its leader

Week 8 – Theme: Minister(s) & Recipients; Topics: Participation, Fruits of the Mass; Thematic Elements: Priesthood, Liturgy

Required Reading: Feingold Chapters 13-15

Suggested Reading: CCC 1136-44;

Fruits of the Sacrifice

o Please, Thank you, Sorry, Wow

Feingold on the 4 Ends of the Mass:

1. Sacrifice of Praise – p.454: “By devoutly celebrating Mass, participating in Mass, or having Mass offered, we give immeasurably more glory to God than by any other means, for the sacrifice of the Mass makes present Christ’s glorification of God on Calvary.

2. Sacrifice of Thanksgiving – p.455: “This end of the Mass, present throughout, is exemplified in the Preface of Eucharistic Prayers, in which God is praised for His work of creation, redemption, and the particular mystery being celebrated in the liturgy of the day.”

3. Sacrifice of Impetration (Petition) – p.456: “[T]he sacrifice of the Mass is the best way to present our petitions before God, for in the Mass the Blood of Christ is poured out for us, the Blood that ‘speaks more graciously than the blood of Abel’ (Heb 12:24).

4. Propitiatory Sacrifice (expiation of sin) – p.456: “The Mass is the most perfect expiatory or propitiatory sacrifice that can be offered or even conceived, for it is the expiation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man, for all the sins of the world.”

Concelebration / “Private” Masses

St. Thomas distinguishes: Use or Reception of this Sacrament

1. In general

2. As Christ uses this Sacrament

q.80: Of the use or receiving this sacrament in general

a.1: Whether there are two ways to be distinguished of eating Christ’s Body

sed contra: The gloss says on 1 Cor 11:29 – He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, etc.; We hold that there are two ways of eating, the one sacramental, and the other spiritual

2 Things to consider:

1. The Sacrament

The perfect way, then of receiving this sacrament is when one takes it so as to partake of its effect.

It sometimes happens that man is hindered from receiving the effects of this sacrament; and such receiving of the sacrament is an imperfect one.

Therefore, as the perfect is divided against the imperfect so sacramental eating, whereby the sacrament only is received without its effect, is divided against spiritual eating, by which one receives the effect of this sacrament, whereby a man is spiritually united with Christ through faith and charity.

Summary:

Perfect reception: Sacrament + Effects (Spiritual Eating) = United with Christ through faith and charity

Imperfect reception: Sacrament only

2. Its Fruits (See q.79)

a.1: Whether grace is bestowed through this Sacrament?

1. Principal Effect of this Sacrament: From what is contained in the Sacrament, namely, Christ himself

- visibly brought life of grace upon the world (John 1:17 – Grace and truth), invisibly gives grace by coming sacramentally into man

Quotes Cyril on Luke 22:19 – God’s life-giving Word by uniting Himself with His own flesh, made it to be productive of life. For it was becoming that He should be united somehow with bodies through His sacred flesh and precious blood, which we receive in a life-giving blessing in the bread and wine.

2. On the part of what is represented by this sacrament, which is Christ’s Passion (q.74, a.1; q.76, a.2 ad 1).

- Therefore this sacrament works in man the effect which Christ’s Passion wrought in the world.

Quotes John Chrysostom on the words from John 19:34: “Immediately there came out blood and water”: “Since the sacred mysteries derive their origin from thence, when you draw nigh to the awe-inspiring chalice, so approach as if you were going to drink from Christ’s own side.” Hence our Lord Himself says (Matthew 26:28) – This is My Blood . .. which shall be shed for many unto the remission of sins.”

3. Effect of this sacrament is considered from the way in which this sacrament is given; for it is given by way of food and drink

- Therefore this sacrament does for the spiritual life all that material food does for the bodily life, namely by sustaining, giving increase, restoring, and giving delight.

Quotes Ambrose (De Sacramentis, v): This is the bread of everlasting life, which supports the substance of our soul.

Quotes John Chrysostom (Hom. xlvi in Ioann): When we desire it, He lets us feel Him, and eat Him, and embrace Him.” Hence our Lord says, John 6: 56): My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.

4. The effect of this sacrament is considered from the species under which it is given.

Quotes Augustine (tract. xxvi, in Ioann): Our Lord betokened His body and blood in things which out of many unites are made into some one whole: for out of many grains is one thing made, namely bread; and many grapes flow into one thing, namely wine.

Therefore he observes elsewhere: O sacrament of piety, O sign of unity, O bond of charity!

And since Christ and his Passion are the cause of grace; and since spiritual refreshment, and charity cannot be without grace, it is clear from all that has been set forth that this sacrament bestows grace.

Summary:

Cause of Grace:

1. Christ

2. Passion

Effects of Grace:

3. Spiritual Refreshment

4. Charity

The Eucharist which present all four causes grace.

Communion

Three fundamental ideas expressed by communion in the sacrifices of Judaism and natural religions, (Feingold, 488):

1. Symbolizes a union with the sacrificial victim that is offered

2. Represents communion with God, to whom the sacrifice is offered and with whom peace has been established through the sacrifice offered and accepted

3. Represents communion among all who share in the sacrificial meal, binding them together in the household of God.

Effects of Communion

Sacramental Grace

Summary of Feingold, commenting on St. Thomas:

Special effect of a particular sacrament (p.492)

(-) Special ways particular sacraments remedy sin and consequences (p.492)

The Eucharist remedies (habitual complacency with sin and a lack of fervor, ignorance in the practical intellect, weakness and lack of constancy in the irascible appetite, and disordered inclinations in the concupiscible appetite) by attracting the soul to a greater fervor of charity.

(+) Divine assistance ordained unto certain special effects which are necessary in the Christian life (p.493)

Actual grace ordered to the end of each particular sacrament (p.494)

The Eucharist gives actual graces ordered to its proper ends, which are the enkindling of greater charity for God and neighbor, and the glorification of God through offering the sacrifice of the Christian life in union with Christ’s Paschal mystery (p.495).

Sacramental Grace and Docility to God’s Inspirations

p.496: “We are docile to what we love. The more we love our teachers, the more we are capable of being instructed by them. If this is true of human teachers, it is still more true of the inward Teacher, the Paraclete. It is reasonable to think that sacramental grace strengthens this docility that comes from grace and charity by focusing it according to the mission of each sacrament.”

Connection between Sacramental Grace and ‘the Inward Reality and Sign’

p.498: “Despite the brevity of the presence of this inward reality and sign in the recipient, the Eucharist has a unique, unsurpassable dignity because this inward reality is not a quality of the recipient, as in the other sacraments, but the very Body and Blood of Christ and His Paschal mystery. For this reason, the Eucharist sanctifies those who worthily receive it by configuring them with the heart of Christ and His sacrificial love, and with the life of grace, charity, reconciliation, and communion that He won for us by His Paschal mystery, ultimately communicating to us the Life that is to flower into eternal life.

The sacramental grace proper to the Eucharist, as the sacrament of charity, therefore, is to nourish the soul with the ardor of sacrificial love for God and neighbor, configuring one with the love of Christ. Above all, the Eucharist helps us deepen our union with God through this marriage feast with the Son. And because it causes us to grow in the love of God, the Eucharist binds the Church together in charity, and also aids the soul to grow in deeper contrition and interior conversion. It thus further nourishes and develops the proper effect of the sacrament of Penance.”

St. Thomas on the Effects of Communion

The Eucharist sanctifies by Substantially Containing Christ

The Eucharist Makes Present Christ’s Passion

The Eucharist Sanctifies by Way of Spiritual Nourishment

The Eucharist is the Sacrament of Ecclesial Charity

Increase of Sanctifying Grace

p.502: “The principal effect of Holy Communion is to nourish the participation in the divine life that we initially receive in Baptism”

CCC 2000: Sanctifying grace is an habitual gift, a stable and supernatural disposition that perfects the soul itself to enable it to live with God, to act by his love.

Nature – Powers – Acts – Ends (Happiness)

Eg. the Metal Ball

Increase of Charity

Acts: in addition to giving an increase in the virtue of charity, the sacramental grace of Holy Communion stimulates the will to make more fervent acts of affective and effective love (p.504).

St. Thomas quoting John Damascene (q.79, a.1, ad 2): “This sacrament confers grace spiritually together with the virtue of charity. Hence Damascene (De fide Orthodox. 4) compares this sacrament to the burning coal which Isaias saw (6:6): ‘For a live ember is not simply wood, but wood united to fire; so also the bread of communion is not simple bread, but bread united with the Godhead.’ But as Gregory observes in a Homily for Pentecost, “God’s love is never idle; for, wherever it is, it does great works.’ And consequently through this sacrament, as far as its power is concerned, not only is the habit of grace and of virtue bestowed, but it is furthermore aroused to act, according to 2 Cor. 5:14: ‘The charity of Christ presseth us.’”

Ends: since we receive Christ in His act of giving Himself to the end, Communion nourishes us with that same ecstatic love by configuring us with what we have received (p.505).

St Thomas, In IV Sent, d.12, q.2, a.1, qla.1, ad 3: It belongs to charity to transform the lover into the beloved, because charity is such that it brings about ecstasy, as Dionysius says. And since the increase of virtues caused by this sacrament comes about through the changing of the one eating into the spiritual food eaten, therefore to this sacrament is specially attributed the increase of charity rather than an increase of other virtues.”

Increase of Faith, Hope, the Infused Moral Virtues, and Gifts of the Holy Spirit

Communion and the Forgiveness of Sins

Mortal Sin (q.79, a.3)

From the part of what is re-presented: Yes, Christ’s Passion wrought the forgiveness of mortal sins in the world.

From the part of the recipient:

Not effective:

Conscious of mortal sin: not a proper recipient, because not alive.

Same reason why Baptism comes first

I.e., Dead people don’t need to eat, to give them food is to waste it.

Effective:

1. Person receives not actually, but in desire

2. Person receives who is not conscious of mortal sin, communion will perfect contrition and obtain forgiveness

“Nevertheless this sacrament can effect the forgiveness of sin in two ways. First of all, by being received, not actually, but in desire; as when a man is first justified from sin. Secondly, when received by one in mortal sin of which he is not conscious, and for which he has no attachment; since possibly he was not sufficiently contrite at first, but by approaching this sacrament devoutly and reverently he obtains the grace of charity, which will perfect his contrition and bring forgiveness of sins.”

See Feingold on Spiritual Communion, p.530: distinction between properly spiritual communion as efficacious, perfect act of contrition, properly spiritual communion / and “true desire for Communion . . . undoubtedly greatly beneficial, but not yet a desire that is capable of anticipating the principal effects of Communion” (p.531).

Venial Sin (q.79, a.4): from the sacrament in itself and from the reality of the sacrament, yes.

Future Sin (q.79, a.6): yes, food preserves life and staves off death, and protects the body by means of arms by which one defends oneself.

- i.e.: food protects from death and enhances immune system

“Now this sacrament preserves man from sin in both of these ways. For, first of all, by uniting man with Christ through grace, it strengthens his spiritual life, as spiritual food and spiritual medicine, according to Psalm 103, 5: [That] bread strengthens (may strengthen) man’s heart. Augustine likewise says (Tract xxxvi In Ioann.): approach without fear; it is bread, not poison. Secondly, inasmuch as it is a sign of Christ’s Passion, whereby the devils are conquered, it repels all the assaults of demons. Hence Chrysostom says (hom. xlvi, in Ioann): Like lions breathing forth fire, thus do we depart from that table, being made terrible to the devil.”

Image: Receiving the Eucharist makes us “fire-breathing lions”

Punishment due to Sin (q.79, a.5): sacrifice and sacrament

· Sacrifice: offered up, effect in the offerer, has a satisfactory power . . .

. . . Therefore, although this offering suffices of its own quantity to satisfy for them for whom it is offered, or even for the offerers, according to the measure of their devotion, and not for the whole punishment.

-cf. Mark 12:43, Luke 21:4 – the Widow’s Mite

· Sacrament: received , effect in the recipient, depend on measure of devotion and fervor

Holy Communion and Spiritual Consolation

Feingold references S.T. III, q.79, a.1, ad 2 [This is the same place where he quoted John Damascene above]: “Hence it is that the soul is spiritually nourished through the power of this sacrament, by being spiritually gladdened and as it were inebriated with the sweetness of the Divine goodness, according to the Canticle 5:1: Eat, O friends, and drink, and be inebriated, my dearly beloved.’”

Indwelling of the Trinity and Holy Communion

Feingold (p.513, n.62) quotes Scheeben, Mysteries of Christianity, 528: “The oneness of substance and life existing between the Father and the Son is transmitted to us and reproduced in us most perfectly by the Eucharist. In particular, the Eucharist is the agency that effects the real and perfect mission of the divine persons to the outerworld. Above all it crowns the Son’s mission to us on this earth. For in the Eucharist the Son unites Himself to us in the most perfect way, to give us in general the power to become sons of God, and also to make us one Son of God by incorporating us in Himself. In the Eucharist we likewise perceive the real and intimate mission of the Holy Spirit. For, since the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the Son, is really united to the Son’s body, in which He reposes and dwells, He also comes to us in the same body, to unite Himself to us therein to communicate Himself to us, and to give Himself to us as our own.”

Last Supper and Pentecost happen in the same room

Feingold appeals to the distinction of the res et sacramentum and the res tantum – “Although, on the level of the res et sacramentum, we are receiving the humanity of the Second Person of the Trinity, in the res tantum, we receive an increase of the Indwelling of all three divine Persons. As the res et sacramentum is the sign and cause of the res tantum, so reception of Christ’s Body and Blood is the instrumental cause of the increase of the life of the Blessed Trinity in us” (p.514)

Feingold (p.514) quotes Scheeben, Mysteries of Christianity, 529: He [the Spirit] lives on in the Son’s flesh and blood with His fire and His vitalizing energy, as proceeding from the Son, and fills the sacred humanity with His own being to sanctify and glorify it. Particularly in the Eucharist He glorifies and spiritualizes the Son’s human nature like a flaming coal, so that it takes on the qualities of sheer fire and pure spirit. Straightway He makes use of the Eucharist as an instrument to manifest His sanctifying and transforming power to all who come into contact with it, and as a channel to communicate Himself to all who receive it and feast upon it.”

Sacrament of Ecclesial Unity

The State of Glory as an Effect of Communion – that from which it derives its effects (Christ and His Passion) and that through which it works its effect (the use of the sacrament and its species) both cause the attainment of eternal life.

Recipients of the Sacrament:

St. Thomas

q.79, a.7: Whether this Sacrament benefits others besides the recipients?

Sed contra: Prayer is made for many others during the celebration of this sacrament; which would serve no purpose were the sacrament not beneficial to others. Therefore, this sacrament is beneficial not merely to them who receive it.

This sacrament is not only a sacrament, but also a sacrifice.

For it has the nature of a sacrificeinasmuch as in this Christ’s Passion is re-presented, whereby Christ offered Himself a Victim to God (Eph. 5:2), and it has the nature of a sacramentinasmuch as invisible grace is bestowed in this sacrament under visible species.

So, then, this sacrament benefits recipients by way both of sacrament and of sacrifice, because it is offered for all who partake of it.

Canon of the Mass: “May as many of us as, by participation at this Altar, shall receive the most sacred body and blood of Thy Son, be filled with all heavenly benediction and grace.”

But to others who do not receive it, it is beneficial by way of sacrifice, inasmuch as it is offered for their salvation.

Canon of the Mass: “Be mindful, O Lord, of Thy servants, men and women . . . for whom we offer, or who offer up to Thee, this sacrifice of praise for themselves and for all their own, for the redemption of their souls, for the hope of their safety and salvation. And our Lord expressed both ways, saying (Matthew 26:28, with Luke 22:20): Which for you, i.e. who receive it, and for many, i.e. others, shall be shed unto remission of sins.”

q.80, a.1: Whether there are two ways to be distinguished of eating Christ’s Body

perfect way: receive the sacrament when one takes it so as also to partake of its effect – spiritual eating: spiritually united with Christ through faith and charity.

imperfect way: someone is hindered from receiving the effect – sacramental eating

q.80, a.10: Whether it is Lawful to receive this sacrament daily?

Sed contra quotes Augustine, De Verb. Dom., Serm. Xxxviii): This is our daily bread; take it daily, that it may profit thee daily.

2 things must be considered:

1. On the part of the sacrament – gives health to men

- in light of this it should be received daily

Quotes Ambrose, De Sacramentis, iv: If, whenever Christ’s blood is shed, it is shed for the forgiveness of sins, I who sin often, should receive it often: I need a frequent remedy.

2. On the part of the recipient, who is required to approach the sacrament with great reverence and devotion

- in light of this: “if anyone finds that he has these dispositions every day, he will do well to receive it daily.”

Quotes Augustine: “Receive daily, that it may profit thee daily . . .So live, as ot deserve to receive it daily.”

But because many persons are lacking in this devotion, on account of the many drawbacks both spiritual and corporal from which they suffer, it is not expedient for all to approach this sacrament every day; but they should do so as often as they find themselves properly disposed.

Ad 5: recounts the different statutes of the Church through the ages.

St. Thomas notes that frequency of communion corresponded to degree of zeal for faith.

Receiving the Eucharist in the State of Sin:

St. Thomas:

q.80, a.4: Whether the Sinner sins in receiving Christ’s Body Sacramentally?

“Whoever receives this sacrament, expresses thereby that he is made one with Christ, and incorporated in His members; and this is done by living faith, which no one has who is in mortal sin. And therefore it is manifest that whoever receives this sacrament while in mortal sin, is guilty of lying to this sacrament, and consequently of sacrilege, because he profanes the sacrament: and therefore he sins mortally.”

q.80, 5: Whether to Approach this Sacrament with Consciousness of Sin is the gravest of all sins?

This sin is specifically graver than many others, yet it is not the greatest of all.

q.80, a.6: Whether the Priest Ought to Deny the Body of Christ to the sinner seeking it?

Distinction between sinners:

Some are secret

Others are notorious

Communion ought not to be given to open sinners when they ask for it.

Quotes St. Cyprian: “You were so kind as to consider regarding actors, and that magician who continues to practice his disgraceful arts among you; as to whether I thought that Holy Communion ought to be given to such with the other Christians. I think that it is beseeming neither the Divine majesty, nor Christian discipline, for the Church’s modesty and honor to be defiled by such shameful and infamous contagion.”

What about Judas?

q. 81, a.2: Whether Christ gave His Body to Judas?

Quotes St. Hilary who holds no, Thomas says this would have been proper, if the malice of Judas is considered.

But Christ serves as a pattern for Justice

- Not in keeping with His teaching authority to sever Judas, a hidden sinner, from Communion with others without an accuser and evident proof;

- lest the Church’s prelates might have an example for doing likewise, and lest Judas being exasperated might take the occasion of sinning.

- Therefore, it remains to be said that Judas received our Lord’s body and blood with the other disciples

ad 2: the wickedness of Judas was known to Christ as God; but it was unknown to Him, after the manner in which men know it. Consequently, Christ did not repel Judas from Communion; so as to furnish an example that such secret sinners are not to be repelled by other priests.

Following Feingold:

Why not?

Canon 916 – A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

Canon 915 – Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”

For priests:

In Sinu Iesu, p.115: “Every time a priest sins, he sins directly against Me and against the Most Holy Eucharist toward which his whole being is ordered. When a priest approaches My altar laden with sins that have not been confessed or for which he has not repented, My angels look on in horror, My Mother grieves, and I am again wounded in My hands and My feet, and in My Heart. I am again struck on My mouth and treated with a terrible ignominy. This is why I call My priests to purity of heart and to frequent confession. This is why I ask you to confess your sins weekly and to let the adoration of My Eucharistic Face purify your heart and make you less unworthy of offering My Holy Sacrifice. The sins of My priests are a grievous affront to My own priesthood and immaculate victimhood.”

For laity:

Feingold, p.541: “The faithful do not ordinarily have grave reason to receive Communion, for its principal effect can be gained by a spiritual communion made after an act of perfect contrition.”

For divorced and remarried (See other handout)

For pro-choice politicians (See other handout):

Communion and Non-Catholics:

From Hoping, Chapter XI: [after reiterating the distinction between table fellowship and communion, convivium of Last Supper / Mass], p.391: “Since the connection between Church unity and communion in the Lord’s Supper is indissoluble, intercommunion can stand only at the end of ecumenical dialogue, not at the beginning. The common bond of Baptism does not suffice as the foundation for a common celebration of the Lord’s Supper. For Baptism is ordered to the common profession of the faith and to the one Eucharist. Eucharistic communion forms the foundation of the Church and at the same time is the expression of ecclesial communion, which according to the Catholic understanding includes the ministry and communion of the bishops. Without agreement on our understanding of Church and ministry, as well as our understanding of ecclesial communion and Eucharistic communion, there can be no common celebration of the Lord’s Supper. For the Eucharist is not only a ‘bond of love’ (vinculum caritatis), but also a ‘sign of unity’ (unitatis signum) and symbol of harmony (symbolum concordiae).”

Personal Experience:

My announcement for funerals: “Many of you know that what we believe happens at Mass is that bread stops being bread and becomes the Body of Christ and that wine stops being wine and becomes the Blood of Christ at the words of Jesus: “This is my Body, This is my Blood.” We make a manger with our hands or receive on our tongue, but before we receive, we say “Amen.” Amen means “I believe” or “so it is”. “Amen, I believe that this is the Body of Christ”. “Amen, I believe that the Catholic Church is the Body of Christ” “Amen, I believe, that I am a member of that Body” “Amen, I believe everything that that Body teaches”. You might say, “Father, that is a lot to ask of someone who isn’t Catholic.” I would say, “You are right, and so we don’t ask that”. Instead, you are invited forward, to cross your arms in front of you, and that indicates to me that you are open to receiving a blessing. I will go ahead and extend that blessing. While we pray for that day when we can all receive from the same altar, that day is not today. And if that day takes a lot longer in coming than we hope, we certainly pray that we will all be reunited again, around the altar in Heaven.”

The Bread of Angels:

q.80, a.2: Whether it belongs to man alone to eat this sacrament spiritually?

Christ contained not in proprie specie, but under sacramental species, 2 ways to eat spiritually:

1. As Christ Himself exists under His proper species

In this way the angels eat Christ spiritually inasmuch as they are united with Him in the enjoyment of perfect charity, and in clear vision (and this is the bread we hope for in heaven), and not by faith, as we are united with Him here

2. Under sacramental species

Ad 1: The receiving of Christ under this sacrament is ordained to the enjoyment of heaven, as to its end, in the same way as the angels enjoy it; and since the means are gauged by the end, hence it is that such eating of Christ whereby we receive Him under this sacrament, is, as it were, derived from that eating whereby the angels enjoy Christ in heaven. Consequently, man is said to eat the bread of angels, because it belongs to the angels to do so firstly and principally, since they enjoy Him in his proper species; and secondly it belongs to men, who receive Christ under this sacrament.

Week 9 – Theme: Minister(s) & Recipients; Topics: Participation, fruitful reception, Ecumenism

Required Reading: Hoping Chapter 11

Suggested Reading: USCCB, The Mystery of the Eucharist in the Life of the Church

Hoping, p.383: “The Church is communion, fellowship of the Word of Christ and of his Body, which causes the Church to become a people.”

3 meanings of Corpus Christi, p.384

1. historical body of Christ

2. the Eucharistic Body

3. ecclesial Body of Christ that consists of many members

Subsistit in

Dominus Iesus, 2000: With the expression subsistit in, the Second Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church, and on the other hand, that ‘outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth,’ that is, in those Churches and ecclesial communities which are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church.

But with respect to these, it needs to be stated that ‘they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.

Par.17: “Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.’

Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church, June 29, 2007:

- Third Question: Why was the expression ‘subsists in’ adopted instead of the simple word ‘is’?

- The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church

o Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are ‘numerous elements of sanctification and of truth’ which are found outside her structure, but which ‘as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity’

o It follows that these separated churches and communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation.

§ If fact, the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation whose value derives from that fullness of grace and truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church.

Commentary on the Document: Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church:

- Notification of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith concerning a book of Leonardo Boff: “the Council chose the word ‘subsistit’ specifically to clarify that the true Church has only one ‘subsistence’ while her outside visible boundaries there are only ‘elementa ecclesiae’ which – being elements of the same Church – tend and lead to the Catholic Church.

- It does not follow [from the change] that the identification of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church no longer holds, nor that outside the Catholic Church there is an absence of ecclesial elements, a ‘churchless void’.

- In fact, precisely because the Church willed by Christ actually continues to exist (subsistit in) in the Catholic Church, this continuity of subsistence implies an essential identity between the Church of Christ and the Catholic Church

- The Council wished to teach that we encounter the Church of Jesus Christ as a concrete historical subject in the Catholic Church.

- Contrary to many unfounded interpretations, therefore, the change form ‘est’ to ‘subsistit’ does not signify that the Catholic Church has ceased to regard herself as the one true Church of Christ.

Attempt at an explanation:

Church of Christ subsists in (is a substance in) the Catholic Church v. acceidental participations in that Church

What is by essence is the cause of what is by accident

Furthermore: The Word susbsists in his human nature

Cf. the woman at the well

Sacrament of Unity

Notes from The Mystery of the Eucharist in the Life of the Church

Par.47: To receive the Body and Blood of Christ while in a state of mortal sin represents a contradiction. The person who, by his or her own action, has broken communion with Christ and his Church but receives the Blessed Sacrament, acts incoherently, both claiming and rejecting communion at the same time. It is thus a counter sign, a lie – it expresses a communion that in fact has been broken.”

Par.48: We need to keep in mind that ‘the celebration of the Eucharist presupposes that communion already exists, a communion which it seeks to consolidate and bring to perfection.’

Visible: communion with teaching of the Apostles , in the sacraments and in the Church’s hierarchical order

Invisible: State of Grace

Notes from Hoping:

p.390: table fellowship v. Last Supper

cf. p.412: “It would also be a misunderstanding to think that the Eucharist simply continues Jesus’ meals with sinners. The Eucharist, Joseph Ratzinger says, is not ‘the sinners’ banquet, where Jesus sits at the table,’ nor is it ‘the public gesture by which he invites everyone without exception’, an open table to which all are invited without preconditions. The Eucharist is ‘the sacrament of those who have let themselves be reconciled by God.’”

[in God is Near Us, pp.42-55]

See also, p.44: “But that means that the Eucharist is far more than just a meal; it has cost a death to provide it, and the majesty of death is present in it.”

Communio

A. Eucharist – communio ecclesiology is Eucharistic ecclesiology (Church, Ecumenism, and Politics 17)

Called to Communion, p.76 – The fathers summed up these two aspects – Eucharist and gathering – in the word communio, which is once more returning to favor today. The Church is communion; she is the communion of the Word and Body of Christ and is thus communion among men, who by means of this communion that brings them together from above and from within are made one people, indeed, one Body.

Church, Ecumenism, and Politics 17 – The first is that Jesus’ Last Supper can now be recognized as the real act of founding the Church: Jesus gives to his disciples this liturgy of death and of his Resurrection and thus bestows on them the feast of life. In the Last Supper he renews the covenant of Sinai, or rather: what was then only a symbolic start now becomes total reality – the communion of blood and life between God and man.

- Passover and Sinai

LG 45

1) united to their pastors – extra nos

2) legitimately organized – He is one

B. Communio-conversion-mission

1. communio

Communion between God and man – “Being at the service of this koinonia between God and men is the sacramental meaning of the Church.” (Joseph Ratzinger 289)

Behold the Pierced One, 86-87, 75 – p.86: According to him [Plato], communion with the gods also brings about community among men. He asserts that this communion is the ultimate aim, the deepest meaning, of all sacrifice and of all cultic activity whatsoever. In this connection he coins a wonderful phrase, which could actually be taken as an intimation of the Eucharistic mystery, when he says that the cult is concerned with nothing other than the preservation and the healing of love.

Principles 53 – Now at last we have reached the inmost core of the concept ‘Church’ and the deepest meaning of the designation ‘ sacrament of unity.’ The Church is communio; she is God’s communing with men in Christ and hence the continuing of men with one another – and, in consequence, sacrament, sign, instrument of salvation. The Church is the celebration of the Eucharist; the Eucharist is the Church; they do not simply stand side by side; they are one and the same. The Eucharist is the sacramentum Christi and, because the Church is Eucharistia, she is therefore also a sacramentum – the sacrament to which all the other sacraments are ordered.

a. The Church grows from within (Church, Ecumenism, and Politics, 15)

- story of the priest on pilgrimage / conversion

b. communio implies a ‘we’

c. allows for development

Consequence:

1. remedies individualism

2. constitutes a liturgical community

3. the unity has a content which is expressed in doctrine

4. mission

2. conversion

Pronounce a ‘yes’ to new beginning and turn from an ‘I’ to ‘no-longer-I’ (Covenant and Communion, 74)

- I and not I – the concept of mission

3. mission

Called to Communion, p.28 – by his Eucharistic action, Jesus calls the disciples into his relationship with God and, therefore, into his mission.

- my teaching is not my own (John 7:16)

- mission theology is again theology of being as relation and of relation as mode of unity (Introduction, 188)

- the true ambassador, he is one with him who sends him (Introduction, 188)

III. Mission

1. Petrine Ministry – witness guaranteed by God

Called to Communion, 56 – Simon, the first to confess Jesus as the Christ and the first witness of the Resurrection, now becomes by virtue of his Abrahamic faith, which is renewed in Christ, the rock that stands against the impure tide of unbelief and its destruction of man.

Jesus of Nazareth p.260 – If being a Christian essentially means believing in the risen Lord, then Peter’s special witnessing role is a confirmation of his commission to be the rock on which the Church is built.

2. Episcopal Ministry – static and local successors of the apostles

3. Priestly Ministry – the foundation of ministerial office in the New Testament: apostleship as participation in the mission of Christ

Joseph Ratzinger, God is Near Us, p.52-53: mention of the pope and bishop

“There is only one Christ. Wherever the Eucharist is celebrated, he is wholly and fully present. Because of that, even in the most humble village church, when the Eucharist is celebrated, the whole mystery of the Church, her living heart, the Lord, is present. But this Christ, fully present, is yet at the same time one. . . . This, too, is something we ought to take to heart anew, that we cannot have communion with the Lord if we are not in communion with each other; that when we go to meet him at Mass, we necessarily go to meet each other, to be at one with each other. Therefore mentioning of the bishop and the pope by name, in the celebration of the Eucharist, is not merely an external matter, but an inner necessity of that celebration. For the celebration of the Eucharist is not just a meeting of heaven and earth; rather, it is also a meeting of the Church then now and a meeting of the Church here and there; it assumes that we visibly enter into a visible unity, one that can be described. The names of the bishop and the pope stand for the fact that we are truly celebrating the one Eucharist of Jesus Christ, which we can receive only in the one Church.”

p.54: the necessity of the priest

Hoping, p.392: 3 controversial points:

1. sacrifice

2. presence

3. priesthood

With Orthodox

Hoping, p.409: “Since the Orthodox Churches associate the reciprocal admission to Holy Communion with the full Eucharistic communion (koinonia) of the Church, they reject as a matter of principle the reciprocal admission to Holy Communion of Churches that are still separated from each other. The reception of the Eucharist ‘presupposes the fullness of the entire ecclesial life which has not yet been attained.’”

With Lutherans:

Hard to say “the somatic Real Presence is no longer necessarily a divisive difference” if saying “there continues to be no consensus between Catholics and Lutherans about the question of the somatic Real Presence Christ in the Eucharistic bread beyond the celebration of the Eucharist or about the practice of Eucharistic adoration . . .”

Key phrase in Hoping perhaps is p.395: “there is no longer a divisive difference between Lutherans and Catholics”

Particularly around the priesthood:

Hoping, p.400: “one cannot be convinced that only an ordained priest can preside validly at the Eucharist but disregard that fact in the case of the churches of the Reformation, especially since they question now as before the connection between priestly ministry and Eucharist.”

Week 10 – Topic: The Rite; Themes: The Eucharist in the Patristic Era, The Roman Mass, Carolingian Reform; Thematic elements: Organic Development, Hermeneutic of Continuity

Required Reading: Lang Chapters 2-4

Suggested Reading: Helmut Hoping, My Body Given For You: History and Theology of the Eucharist, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2015; Enrico Mazza, The Origins of the Eucharistic Prayer, Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1995; Jungmann, The Early Liturgy; Jungmann, The Mass; Jungmann; The Mass of the Roman Rite, vol. I; Klauser, A Short History of the Western Liturgy; Mike Aquilina, The Mass of the Early Christians.

Absence of Conflict:

Hoping, 133: “Unlike the celebration of Baptism and of Reconciliation, the celebration of the Eucharist in Christian antiquity was not the object of theological controversies.”

McGuckin, 716-17: ““Christian liturgy, and the many variations it demonstrates, is a profoundly rich environment that has sustained Christian identity, almost (if not entirely) devoid of controversial battles, but rather focused on an ecstatic and eschatologically elevated sense of God’s redemptive presence in and to his church. Most of the classical liturgical forms were forged in the fires when Christian intellectual life was at its height, and the majestic prayers that make up the eucharistic rites are not only deep and insightful but trained generation after generation of Christians in the fundamental traditions of the faith. Far more than a doctrinal creed (though these too were often incorporated into the liturgies), the liturgy presented the Christian faith as a set of saving deeds by God, whose life ran into this world in a trinitarian outreach and whose mercy was cause for celebratory thanksgiving.”

Organic Development of the Mass

Notes from Lang, The Roman Mass, c.2

2 Principles (Lang, 37)

1. The Last Supper is the foundation of the dogmatic content of the Christian Eucharist, not its liturgical form

2. The Dominical command, ‘Do this in remembrance of me’ (1 Cor 11:24, 25; Luke 22:19) ‘does not refer to the Last Supper as a whole . . . but to the specifically eucharistic action’.

Temple Worship

Hebrews and Revelation

Lang, 39: “First, temple worship offers the hermeneutical key for understanding the saving work of Jesus Christ in the Letter to the Hebrews, which is likely to have been written in Italy (Heb 13:24) – possibly Rome - before the destruction of the Temple in AD 70”

Christ is the High Priest

The source for a sacrificial understanding of the death of Jesus is found in the words of institution at the Last Supper (p.40, referencing Vanhoye)

An allusion to the Eucharist can also be recognized in Hebrews 13:10: ‘We have an altar . . . from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. . . . Stefan Heid argues that this ‘altar’ corresponds to the ‘table of the Lord’ of 1 Corinthians 10:21 and indicates the sacred table that was dedicated for use at the Eucharist.’ (Lang, 40-41)

Lang, 41: “[I]t is evident that the Book of Revelation incorporates liturgical language, but the actual use of these scattered texts in worship can barely be identified.”(references Hoping, 68-70).

Lang, 42-43: “The epilogue of Revelation offers a spiritual interpretation of Christian worship but gives us hardly any clues how this might have related to liturgical practice.”

The nuptial symbolism of the marriage supper of the Lamb shows the Church as bride in loving expectation of her bridegroom, Jesus Christ: ‘The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come’. And let him who hears say, ‘Come’. And let him who is thirsty come, let him who desires to take the water of life without price’ (Rev. 22:17). The desire for communion with Christ culminates in the prayerful invocation, ‘Come, Lord Jesus!’ (Rev 22:20), which the Apostle Paul quotes in the Aramaic form maranatha (1 Cor 16:22).”

Alleluia and Sanctus

Lang, 42: [speaking on Rev. 19] – “The hymns sung at this occasion – the only occurrence of the world ‘alleluia’ in the New Testament (Rev. 19:1, 3, 4,6) – and in the heavenly ‘liturgy of the scrolls (Rev 4-5) might have been used in Christian worship.”

Lang, 42: “Of particular interest is the variation on the Sanctus from Isaiah 6:3, ‘Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come’ (Rev. 4:8). . . .The idea of heaven and earth joined in the praise of God inspired the insertion of the Sanctus into Christian Eucharistic prayers in the fourth (and possibly as early as the third) century.”

Lang, 42, n.18: “The Sanctus is quoted in the late first century by First Clement, 34,6: SC 167, 158. This may reflect liturgical use but not necessarily in the Eucharist.”

Imitatio templi

Lang, 43: “The importance of the imagery of the temple and sacrifice in early Christianity can be understood in the context of what scholars have called the ‘templization’ of Jewish religious life in the late Second Temple period.”

“In other words, forms of Temple worship were imitated in religious practice outside Jerusalem. This found concrete expression in ritual washings with clean water and in meals that were held in common and had a distinctly cultic character. Hayward concludes: ‘For this type of piety, common meals consumed in purity, and in societies characterized by order and hierarchical structure, could be described in sacrificial terms.’ Such practice provides a historical context for the development of baptism and the Eucharist (as well as the ordained ministry) in early Christianity. This is not meant to suggest an unbroken continuity between Jewish temple culture and early Christian liturgy.”

Lang, 44: “The Qumran sect offers an instructive example of how a highly critical attitude towards the current state of the Jerusalem Temple and its priesthood went hand in hand with an imitatio templi, which Jonathan Klawans defines as ‘the effort of channeling the sanctity that pertains to the temple (and its sacrificial cult) to other forms of worship’.”

The Importance of Malachi 1:11 in Early Christianity

Malachi 1:11 – For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.

First reference = 1 Cor 1:2

To Eat is To Participate in the Sacrifice

Summary:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 47: “To conclude this section, any discussion of the early Eucharist needs to mindful that in the ancient world the sacrifice of animals and of the produce of the land was at the very heart of religious worship, whether Greco-Roman or Jewish (before the destruction of the Temple in AD 70). One of the most momentous religious transformations of late antiquity was the interiorization and spiritualization of sacrifice, which was achieved in early Christianity through Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice of the cross, and in rabbinical Judaism as a consequence of the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. It was still taken for granted that some kind of offering had to be made to God and that this sacrifice had to be carried out in an external, ritual form of worship. In the Christian Eucharist, Jewish concepts of sacrifice are not simply superseded but transformed.”

Sources for Early Christian Liturgy

3 Pillars +1 (Lang, 49ff)

1. Monepiscopacy and apostolic succession

2. Baptismal creed and rule of faith

3. The canon of scripture

4. The Last Supper Tradition and the Institution of the Eucharist

Didache

Ignatius of Antioch

Justin Martyr

Scriptural readings: refers to the memoirs of the apostles

Homily given by bishop or presbyter

Followed by prayers that are specified in the post-baptismal Eucharist as intercessions (both for ourselves and for those who have received illumination and for people everywhere)

Eucharistic prayer

1. First part is marked by ‘praise and glory to the Father of all things through the name of his Son and Holy Spirit, “might correspond to the preface” (Lang, 63)

2. Offering ‘thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at his hands’

People respond, ‘Amen.’

Distribution of Communion

Material Settings

Churches

1. House churches (though the term is misleading)

2. Existing buildings were acquired and adapted (mid third century)

3. Dedicated church buildings appear in the second half of the third century

- Porphyry and Eusebius are witnesses

Times and Days

“first half of the first century” – Sunday celebration of the Eucharist

Orientation

Lang, 75: “from very early on, it was a matter of course for Christian to pray facing east.”

Notes from Lang, The Roman Mass, c.3: Development of Eucharistic Prayers in the Third and Fourth Century

3rdcentury, if not earlier

Lang, The Roman Mass, 79: “Regarding the development of early Eucharistic prayers, Anthony Gelston identifies three categories of constitutive elements that were becoming fixed by the beginning of the third century, if not earlier. The first category consists of material from Holy Scripture, including the Sanctus, the institution narrative, and the congregational ‘amen’ at the conclusion of the Eucharistic prayer (see also 1 Cor 14:16).”

The Apostolic Tradition

The Anaphora of Addai and Mari

The Barcelona Anaphora and the Strasbourg Papyrus

After Constantine: Antioch and Alexandria

[Development of a Rite]

Lang, 95: “A ‘rite’ can be defined as a coherent body of liturgical forms and ordinances that are followed by local churches within a particular territory. It would be too early to speak of fully-fledged ‘rites’ in the fourth and fifth centuries; however, we can discern the development of liturgical families around the above-mentioned ecclesiastical centres.”

Antioch

Between 375 and 400 – Apostolic Constitutions

Lang, 96: “This detailed account follows the pattern recorded by Justin in the mid-second century, but offers more detail, listing four Scripture readings (law, prophets, epistle, gospel), a sermon, litanies and prayers for the dismissal of the catechumens, penitents and other groups, prayers of the faithful in the form of a litany, the exchange of peace, offertory, anaphora, communion rites, thanksgiving for communion and dismissal.”

Ordo:

Introductory dialogue with an initial greeting modelled on 2 Cor 13:13

(‘The grace of . . .’)

Praise and thanksgiving (‘it is truly right and just. . .’)

Introduction to the Sanctus

Sanctus

Post-Sanctus

Institution Narrative

Anamnesis

Epiclesis

Intercessions

Doxology

Lang, 97: “The Byzantine Rite developed from the Antiochene liturgical family. Within this tradition, the Eucharistic prayer with the greatest historical impact is the Anaphora of St John Chrysostom, which by the eleventh century had replaced the Byzantine version of the Anaphora of St Basil as the most frequently used in the Divine Liturgy (Eucharist).”

Alexandria

Ordo:

Introductory Dialogue (‘The Lord be with [you] all’)

Praise and thanksgiving (‘It is truly right and just . . .’)

Intercessions (including the deceased)

Introduction to the Sanctus

Sanctus

Epiclesis I

Institution Narrative

Anamnesis

Epiclesis II

Doxology

Other Liturgical Developments

Scripture Readings

Lang, 62: “At a crucial time for the formation of the New Testament canon, ‘memoirs of the apostles’ in Justin most likely stand for the Synoptic Gospels and quite possibly include John as well.”

Between 375 and 400 – Apostolic Constitutions

Lang, 96: “This detailed account follows the pattern recorded by Justin in the mid-second century, but offers more detail, listing four Scripture readings (law, prophets, epistle, gospel), a sermon, litanies and prayers for the dismissal of the catechumens, penitents and other groups, prayers of the faithful in the form of a litany, the exchange of peace, offertory, anaphora, communion rites, thanksgiving for communion and dismissal.”

Lang, 101: “While there are no lectionary sources for the celebration of the Eucharist before the late fourth century, it is very likely that for major feasts and special seasons of the developing liturgical year the appropriate periscopes, that is, ‘particular scriptural passages separated from their biblical context’, were used from very early on.”

Lang, 101: “A source of great importance is the fifth-century Armenian Lectionary, which is generally held to witness liturgical use in fourth-century Jerusalem and can e related to the preaching of Cyril of Jerusalem and the Itinerarium Egeriae.”

- No evidence for popular theory that before the systematic organization of periscopes in the fourth and fifth centuries, there a continuous or consecutive reading (lectio continua) of Scripture at the Eucharist.”

[Homily]

Lang, 62: “The homily followed by prayers that are specified in the post-baptismal Eucharist as intercessions ‘both for ourselves and for those who have received illumination and for people everywhere’.”

Lang, 101: “When early Christian theologians comment on an entire biblical book in the form of consecutive homilies, such as Origen in the first half of the third century and John Chrysostom in the late fourth century, this did not happen in the context of the Eucharist – leaving aside the question of whether they delivered these homilies at all or whether they were literary products. At the celebration of the Eucharist, the presiding bishop would usually choose the readings and there is no suggestion that he was bound to a continuous reading of a biblical book.”

Hoping, p.141: “The blessing over the faithful, like the homily, remained for a long time the prerogative of the bishops. At the time of Augustine, the priest’s homily was still controversial in North Africa.”

Liturgy and Music

Lang, 103: “By the late fourth century, psalms were chanted in the Eucharistic liturgy between readings and during communion. The new practice seems to have been very popular, as is implied by the criticism of fourth-century Church fathers, including Athanasius, Basil of Caesarea, Jerome and Augustine, that singing in church should not be an occasion for aesthetic pleasure but should draw attention to the sacred words and draw the soul to love of God and to a virtuous life.”

- Communal psalmody in the 4th century

Hoping has the psalm partially sung in the mid-6th century

The Formative Period of Latin Liturgy

Hoping, My Body Given For You, 134: “Despite various attempts at reconstruction, the beginnings of the celebration of the Mass in Rome remain for the most part obscure. The predominant language of the liturgy was at first Greek. While in North Africa the Latin language became widespread in the liturgy as early as the turn of the third century, Greek persisted as the liturgical language in Rome well into the fourth century. Latin first became accepted in Rome for the celebration of Baptism, while for the Eucharist Greek was still used extensively until the end of the third century. At the latest under Pope Damasus I (366-384), Latin became established here, too, as the liturgical language; as opposed to the language spoken by the people, this was an elevated cultic language, so that we can speak only in a qualified sense about a vernacular liturgy.”

Greek to Latin

- Latter half of 2nd century Latin translations of Greek works emerged in Rome (Lang, 106)

- Middle 3rd century, transition toward Latin well advanced, clergy corresponded in Latin with Cyprian of Carthage, Novatian composed de Trinitate, quoting from existing Latin translations of the Scriptures

- Pre-Constantinian congregations in Rome were Latin-speaking in the 3rd century

- By the late 4th century, the Latin version of the psalms had acquired such an established status that Jerome only revised it with caution

Lang, The Roman Mass, 107: “Various answers have been given to the intriguing question as to why the transition from Greek to Latin in the liturgy did not keep pace with the changes in the social and cultural contexts of Roman Christianity.”

- Roman tenacity in keeping religious traditions, general conservatism of Romans

- Christological / Trinitarian controversies

Lang, 107: “According to the American Benedictine Allan Bouley, the need for a carefully formulated doctrinal language, especially during the Arian crisis of the fourth century, provided the leaven for creating an official Latin form of liturgical prayers. Bouley’s thesis, that it was the need for orthodox language that facilitated the development of Latin euchology (i.e., prayer texts), is certainly borne out by Ambrose’s efforts to inculcate the Nicene faith in liturgical hymns to combat the presence of Arianism in Milan.”

- Constantine

Lang, The Roman Mass, 109: “The formation of a Latin liturgical idiom was a major contribution to this project of evangelizing Roman culture and thus attracting the influential elites of the city and the empire to the Christian faith. It would not be accurate to describe this process simply as the adoption of the vernacular language in the liturgy, if ‘vernacular’ is taken to mean ‘colloquial’. The Latin of the canon, of the collects and prefaces of the Mass transcended the conversational idiom of ordinary people. This highly stylized form of speech, shaped to express complex theological ideas, would not have been easy to follow by the average Roman Christian of late antiquity.”

The Canon of the Mass

Lang, The Roman Mass, 110: “The most important source for the early Roman Eucharistic prayer is Ambrose of Milan’s series of catecheses for the newly baptized, dating from around 390, known under the title De sacramentis. This text is based on unrevised notes taken directly from Ambrose’s preaching in Milan.”

“Ambrose includes in the mystagogical instruction of De sacramentis extensive quotations from liturgical texts: the formula of renunciation, the formula of baptism – and substantial parts of the Eucharistic prayer.”

“Elsewhere in De sacramentis, the bishop of Milan notes that he follows the ‘pattern and form’ of the Roman church in everything; this would imply that the same Eucharistic prayer from which he quotes was also used in Rome. The prayers included by Ambrose correspond to the core of the Gregorian Canon missae”

Ordo

Fac nobis hanc oblationem (similar to the Te igitur) [Lang, 111]

Quam oblationem (first epiclesis asking for the consecration of the Eucharistic offerings)

Qui pridie(institution narrative)

Unde et memores (the anamnesis and act of offering)

Supra quae (prayer for acceptance of the sacrifice)

Supplices te rogamus (second epicletic prayer for spiritual fruits of sacramental communion)

From Praise to Petition

Preface

Lang, 112: “The Eucharistic prayer begins with the preface (praefatio). As a technical term that distinguishes the initial phase and thanksgiving from the canon properly speaking, praefatio appears in only about the 7th century. However, the word is already employed in a very similar way in the mid-3rdcentury by Cyprian of Carthage, who also cites the priest’s exhortation ‘Sursum corda’ and the people’s response ‘Habemus ad Dominum’.”

Sanctus – Benedictus

Lang, 112: “The Sanctus-Benedictus is not mentioned by Ambrose. The note in the Liber pontificalis, crediting Pope Xystus I (r.c. 117-127) with the introduction of the Sanctus in the Roman Mass, is of no historical value for the second century but rather reflects the established practice of the early sixth century, when the first edition of the work was completed. There is evidence for the liturgical use of the Sanctus (without any indication of the Benedictus) in two Latin writings from the beginning of the fifth century. Bryan Spinks holds that the Sanctus was introduced into the Roman Eucharistic prayer at a date when the text of the canon was already established, at the end of the fourth or in the early fifth century – perhaps at first to be used only on specific occasions.”

Liber Pontificalis VIII. Xystus I – “Xystus, by nationality a Roman, son of Pastor, form the district of the Via Lata, occupied the see 10 years, 3 months and 21 days (2 months and 1 day). He was bishop in the time of Adrian, until the year when Verus and Anniculus were consuls (AD 126). He was crowned with martyrdom. He ordained that consecrated vessels should not be touched except by the ministering clergy. He ordained that no bishop who had been summoned to the Roman apostolic see should be received upon his return to his parish, unless he brought with him the ‘formata’ of general greeting from the apostolic see (unless he brought with him the letter of general greeting from the apostolic see, which is the ‘formata’). He ordained that at the beginning of mass the priest should chant to the people the human, ‘Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, dominus deus Sabaoth,’ etc.”

Te igitur

Ambroses’ Fac nobis hanc oblationem (Lang, 111)

Lang, 113: “The section Te igitur (‘To you, therefore, most merciful Father, we make humble prayer and petition through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord . . .’) may originally have served to connect the petition to accept and bless the offerings (through Christ) with the preceding thanksgiving (through Christ).”

Lang, 112: “Bernard Capelle suggests that in reference to the commendation of the offerings by the priest in the Eucharistic prayer in Pope Innocent I’s letter to Decentius, bishop of Gubbio, makes it likely that an early version of the Te igitur formed part of the canon before 416.”

Intercession for the Living and the Dead

Lang, 114: [On Innocent I’s letter to Decentius] “This would seem to confirm that the Roman Eucharistic prayer contained intercessions for the living by the early fifth century.”

Momento

- Fourth century in classical anaphoras

- Fifth century in Roman Eucharistic Prayer [Letter of Innocent I, to Decentius (Lang, 124)

- Fifth and sixth centuries, reading of diptychs expressed communion with other churches amidst doctrinal struggles

Lang, 115: “The Roman canon is unique in surrounding the core of the Eucharistic action with two distinct sets of intercessions, in the form of a literary diptych: the first for the living (Momento, Domine), including a special remembrance of the Church’s hierarchy, and the second for the dead (Momento etiam, Domine).”

Communicantes

Lang, 117: “The particular phrase ‘communicantes et memoriam venerantes’ (‘In communion with those whose memory we venerate . . .’) may be indebted to an Old Latin variant of Romans 12:13: ‘memoriis sanctorum communicantes’, which has an equivalent in some Greek manuscripts, is attested in the Vulgate tradition in place of the standard ‘necessitatibus sanctorum communicantes’ (‘contributing to the needs of the saints’), and is cited by 4th and 5thcentury Western authors.”

Optatus of Milevis

Special communicantes for feasts

Hanc igitur

Gregory Great added ‘diesque nostors in tua pace dispone atque ab aeterna damnatione nos eripi et in electorum tuorum iubeas grege numerari’ (‘order our days in your peace, and command that we be delivered from eternal damnation and counted among the flock of those you have chosen’). “It is likely that with this addition the Hanc igitur became a permanent fixture in each Mass.”

Institution Narrative and Consecration

Qui Pridie

- Tertullian and the Apostolic Tradition: East / West testimony for words of institution as “part of a common core of early Christian Eucharistic prayers going back to the middle of the second century” (Lang, 118).

- Both in Ambrose’s Eucharistic prayer and in the Gregorian canon, the institution narrative begins with the relative pronoun qui

- Scripture / Liturgy question

- Classical Roman pattern – prayer containing 2 offerings (Lang, 121)

1. Bread and wine

2. Body and Blood of Christ

Invocation of the Saints

Fr. Neil Roy in Lang, 123 – hierarchic and charismatic, icon of Christ with our Lady on one side and John the Baptist on the other = the Mass

Christ the Mediator

Lang, 124: “In the definitive text of the Roman canon, from the earliest manuscript witnesses, the Communicantes, Hanc igitur, Supplices te rogamus, Momento etiam and Nobis quoque prayers conclude with the formula ‘Per Christum Dominum nostrum’. This repeated conclusion makes clear that all prayer is offered through Christ the mediator between God and humanity (see 1 Tim 2:5).”

Possible Antecedents of the Roman Eucharistic Prayer

See footnotes on p.127 in Lang

Lang, 128: [on evidence that the Roman canon contains material that is at least as early as the mid-3rd century]: “In the supra quae there is the striking notion of the ‘atlar on high’ (see Rev.8:3) to which the ‘holy angel’ – Christ himself, the ‘angel of great counsel’ (Is 9:6 LXX) according to the primitive angel-Christology – is asked to carry the Church’s oblation. The references to Abel, Abraham, and Mechizedek are deeply rooted in Jewish tradition, in particular Temple Worship, and the fact that these pre-Mosaic sacrifices are construed as types of the Eucharist would seem to indicate an apologetic context, such as that prevailing in the second century, when Christian authors insisted that the Levitical sacrifices were no longer acceptable to God and saw in the older sacrifices of Able, Abraham and especially in the bread and wine offering of Melchizedek, fitting types of the Christian Eucharist.”

Rhetoric of Salvation

The Collects

1. General nature

Lang, 132: “[T]he question of liturgical audience is a complex one; Mass prayers were originally composed for a specific assembly, in whose presence and name they were addressed to God. However, the use of these prayers soon transcended limits of space and time. In fact, the oldest euchological texts of the Roman Rite are of such a general nature that they could easily speak on behalf of diverse peoples in diverse situations and have done so ever since. These universal features of the Roman Mass, along with its ‘simplicity’ (in comparison with the more elaborate Eastern rites) made its wide diffusion possible.”

Lang, 138: “While there are obvious parallels between Latin liturgical texts of late antiquity and the writings of the Church Fathers of the same period, any effort to identify the author or redactor of a particular prayer will remain in the realm of probability. In the case of the well-known preacher, such as Leo the Great, it is difficult to determine whether he cites a prayer that is already in liturgical use, whether he is the author of the prayer or whether the prayer is formed later by putting together phrases and expressions from his preaching. Moreover, the precise historical origins of a prayer can hardly be determined, because ancient Roman collects are usually general in their content and would fit a variety of particular situations, especially in the turbulent period after the fall of the Western empire that was plagued by military crises and natural disasters.”

2. General structure

(1) An address to God, generally to the Father;

(2) A relative or participial clause referring to some attribute of God, or to one of His saving acts;

(3) The petition, either in the imperative or in the subjunctive

(4) The reason or desired result, for which the petition is made

(5) The conclusion

The Prefaces

Week 10: The Rite in the Roman Stational Liturgy and the Carolingian Age

Mass in the 5th to the 8th century

Lang, The Roman Mass, 212: “the emergence of the ritual form and structure of the Roman Mass in the papal stational liturgy of the late ancient and early medieval periods. The codification of liturgical books in this period has left us a body of prayers, scriptural readings and chants, which are arranged according to the still developing liturgical year.”

Not uniform, 2 distinct traditions:

1. Gelasian type for the use of priests in the city’s titular churches

2. Gregorian type for the papal stational liturgies

Pontifical and Presbyteral Celebrations

Stational liturgies

Lang, The Roman Mass, 154: “A particular church of the city (statio) was assigned for a given day, and the pope would move in solemn procession from his residence in the Lateran palace to the stational church to celebrate Mass.”

- 1stcreated in Jerusalem around the holy sites, later Constantinople, especially in the episcopate of St. John Chrysostom

- The Roman stational liturgy in the 6th and 7th century

25 titular churches within the city walls,

Liturgical Books

Sacramentaries

A book containing the texts recited or chanted by the bishop or priest officiating at the celebration of Mass and other sacraments

1. Gelasian-type sacramentary – compiled originally for the use of priests in the city’s titular churches, earliest mid-8th century (Lang, 157)

Lang, The Roman Mass, 157: “This sacramentary is essentially a Roman book, with additions of Gallican origin, for instance, consecration of virgins, dedication of churches and Masses of Advent.”

Lang on the Gelasian-type sacramentary: “The archetype of this sacramentary is usually dated between 628 and 715, as can be inferred from the fact that the manuscript reflects the modifications made by Gregory the Great to the Canon of the Mass (above all, his addition to the prayer Hanc igitur) but does not yet feature the Masses for the Thursdays in Lent established by Gregory II (r.715-731) or the Agnus Deiintroduced by Serigus I (r.687-701)” (Lang, 157).

Mass sets:

2 collects (oratio)

A secret (secreta)

Proper Preface (also called a contestatio or contestata)

Postcommunion (post communionem)

Prayer of Blessing

2. Gregorian sacramentary

Lang, The Roman Mass, 158: “The Gregorian-type sacramentary emerged from the collection of Mass books for the use of the pope when he celebrated at the Lateran (his cathedral) and in the stational churches of the city. The sacramentary as such cannot be attributed to Gregory the Great, though it may contain material from his pontificate. . . it was redacted probably under Pope Honorius I (r. 625-638) and expanded in the course of the seventh and eighth centuries.”

Mass sets:

3 orations

Collect (oratio)

Prayer over the offerings (super oblata)

Concluding Prayer

Lectionaries

Lang, The Roman Mass, 159: “In fact, the oldest known full lectionaries date from the sixth century and hence are not far removed from the period when readings became fixed for the course of the liturgical year.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 159: “Non-Roman Western rites, such as the Gallican, Milanese or Visigothic, show considerable variety in the selection of biblical pericopes for the celebration of Mass; however, they have features in common that distinguish them from the Roman Rite, above all the use of three readings, the first from the Old Testament(usually a prophecy), the second from the New Testament and the third from the gospels. In the Easter season, the Acts of the Apostles and the Book of Revelation were read. On the feast day of a martyr, it was also customary to have a hagiographical reading in the celebration of the Eucharist.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 160: “When the Liber pontificalis records the liturgical changes introduced by Pope Celestine I (r.422-433) (see the section on the introit below pp.180-182), it affirms that the Mass only contained a Pauline epistle and a gospel reading. While this may not be reliable information for the actual pontificate of Celestine, it would most likely reflect Roman practice in the early sixth century, when the book was compiled.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 161: “The preaching of Augustine is sometimes adduced as a source for the use of three Mass readings in North Africa. There are a few instances in his vast corpus of preaching where he refers to three lessons. However, in sermons where Augustine mentions an Old Testament and a non-gospel New Testament reading, it is not clear whether he was preaching at the Eucharist or another liturgical celebration. The most common scheme that can be identified in Augustine’s sermons for the Eucharist is apostle – psalm – gospel, with the psalm counted as one of the readings. Where he speaks of an OT lesson, it would seem to replace the aposle.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 161: “To conclude this discussion, Roman lectionary sources, which begin to flow in c.600, indicate only two readings for Mass: epistle (which can sometimes be from the Old Testament, from Acts or from Revelation) and gospel, except for special occasions in the liturgical year, such as Ember Saturdays.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 163: “The oldest extant lectionary source in which epistle and gospel readings are joined together for a complete cycle of Sundays and feast days is a document that was to assume a crucial role for the subsequent history of the Roman Mass: the late-eighth-century Comes of Murbach.”

- Originates from an abbey in Alsace

Chant Books

Lang, The Roman Mass, 164: “Roman chant books are mentioned in Anglo-Saxon sources from the mid-eighth century: Egbert (d.766), who received diaconal ordination in Rome shortly before he was made bishop of York (c.732), speaks of a ‘liber antiphonarius’ along with a sacramentary, both of which he believed to be the works of Gregory the Great brought to England by Augustine of Canterbury a century before.”

Chant Notation

Lang, The Roman Mass, 164: “Chant notation is attested sporadically in the ninth and fully developed in the tenth century . . . ‘the earliest musical notation of any kind in Western Europe.’”

“Condification of chant melodies most likely resulted from the considerable expansion of their repertory in the Carolingian period”

“Books with a complete cycle of notated chants emerge around the year 900”

Lang, 166 – Pope Paul I to Frankish King Pippin in 760 that the books he was able to send him included an antiphonale and a responsale.

Ordines

Lang, The Roman Mass, 166: “The Ordines Romanidescribe actual rites and serve as practical instructions for actors in a variety of liturgical celebrations, including Mass, Divine Office, baptism and other sacraments as well as sacramentals (to use the later, scholastic distinction).”

Why they wrote them down:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 167: “Why were the texts written down?’ The written record of a liturgical rite may have served didactic purposes, may have been instrumental in promoting reform or may have been intended to consolidate episcopal authority. Some scriptoria and scribes may even have had an antiquarian interest in collecting obsolete liturgical forms. More commonly, however, ordines were written for pragmatic reasons and were copied, adapted and modified while being in liturgical use.”

Earliest from the Carolingian period – not long after pontificate of Pope Sergius I (r.687-701) but before 750, must be after the inclusion of the Agnus Dei to be sung

Lang, The Roman Mass, 167: “The earliest manuscripts of the Ordines Romani from the Carolingian period do not originate from the city of Rome but were written in Frankish territory and document a process of reception and adaptation of the Roman liturgy. Ordo Romanus Primus offers detailed instructions for the pope’s solemn stational liturgy in Easter week and is in fact the oldest available description of the ritual shape of the Roman Mass. Michel Andrieus’ cirtical edition from the mid-twentieth century documents the complex textual tradition of Ordo Romanus I. While the manuscript evidence, starting in the early ninth century, is Frankish, the document has been established as a record of the Roman church and its liturgy, Andrieu argues for a redaction of the document not long after the pontificate of Serigius I (r. 687-701) but before 750, when there is evidence for the use of Ordo Romanus I in Francia. A terminus post quem can be established by the inclusion of the Agnus Dei to be sung during the fraction of the Eucharistic hosts, as introduced by Pope Sergius according to his biography in the Liber pontficialis. The codification of ritual for the papal stational liturgy would thus be contemporary with the systematic organization of sacramentaries, lectionaries, and chant books.”

Stational Liturgy According to ORDO ROMANUS I

A Synopsis of the Papal Mass in the Early Eighth Century, pp.170-71

READ the whole section

Imperial Ceremonial and Sacred Simplicity

The Role of Chant in the Mass

Lang, The Roman Mass, 173: “Ordo Romanus I brings into relief the fundamental role of chant in the celebration of the Mass. Music does not simply serve as an ornament or embellishment but has a proper liturgical function. The choir (schola cantorum) fulfils a distinctive ministry in singing the ordinary chants (Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus-Benedictusand Agnus Dei) on behalf of the worshipping assembly, and the proper chants that are generally drawn from Scripture (introit, gradual, alleluia or tract, offertory and communion), which, together with the prayers and readings, form an integral part of the Mass formulary.”

The Chants of the Ordinary

Lang, The Roman Mass, 173: “While it is generally assumed that the ordinary of the Mass was originally sung by or at least involved the participation of the assembly, the earliest available sources that offer us a full picture of the ritual shape of the Roman Eucharist, in the form of the papal stational liturgy, assign these chants to a group of trained singers.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 174: “The origins of the Kyrie eleison (‘Lord have mercy’) are not entirely clear. Building on observations by Edmund Bishop, Bernard Capelle saw in the Kyriea remainder of the supplicatory litany known as Deprecatio Gelasii, named after Pope Gelasius. According to Cappelle, Gelasius made this litany part of the entrance rites of the Mass. Gregory the Great later reduced the litany to the acclamation ‘Kyrie eleison’ and added ‘Christe eleison’. Antoine Chavasse refined this thesis by arguing that the Deprecatio Gelasiioriginally served as a substitute for the general intercessions (orations sollemnes) that preceded the preparation of the altar at the offertory. It was only later, perhaps in the pontificate of Gregory the Great, that the litany was moved to the beginning of the Mass. According to Chavasse, the second collect that is attested in the Old Gelasian Sacramentary originally served as the concluding prayer of the litany and was kept even after the litany itself was discarded.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 174: “More recently, Paul de Clerck and John F. Baldovin have argued that the Kyrie derived from the rogational litanies that formed par tof the procession towards the stational church of the day. This type of litanic prayer, modelled on the ektene from Constantinoplitan stational practice, ended in a threefold ‘Kyrie eleison’. Moreover, in Roman stational processions, antiphonal psalmody preceded the litany. When from the end of the sixth century the litany fell out of use on ordinary days, only the introit and the Kyrieremained after the pattern of the earlier stational practice.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 174: “The earliest tangible information about the Kyrie in the Roman Mass actually stems from southern Gaul. The council of Vaison in 529, under the presidency of Caesarius of Arles (d.542), decreed its introduction into the Mass nad the Office, following the example of Rome, Italy and the East. Only the Greek invocation ‘Qurieleison [sic] is mentioned and no indication is given of the form in which it is sung. In 598, however, Pope Gregory the Great notes in a letter to John, bishop of Syracuse, that in Rome the Kyrie is not sung after the Greek manner, that is, by the whole congregation, but in alternation between clerics (presumably the schola cantorum) and people. Moreover, the Roman practice is to sing ‘Christe eleison’ as often as ‘Kyrie eleison’, while the Greeks do not have the invocation to Christ. Gregory also remarks that in daily Masses other verses, which he implies are sung at special occasions, are omitted.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 175: “In Ordo Romanus I, the Kyrie (no invocation to Christ mentioned) is reserved to the schola, and its chanting is repeated until the pope gives the sign to conclude. Ordo Romanus IV, a Frankish adaptation of the Ordo Romanus I dating from the late eighth century, testifies to the ninefold structure of the Kyrie that would later become canonical.”

Gloria

Lang, The Roman Mass, 175: “The opening lines of the Gloria in excelsis repeat the hymn of praise of the angels who announced the birth of Christ to the shepherds in Bethlehem (Lk 2:14). The Gloria originated in Greek as an example of a ‘private psalm’ that follows the model of the biblical psalm – a genre that was popular in the early Christian centuries. The hymn is widely attested as part of morning prayer in the cathedral office of the Greek-speaking East by the late fourth century. According to the Liber pontificalis, Pope Symacchus (r. 498-514) decreed that the Gloria was to be sung in Masses on Sundays and the feast days of martyrs. The entry about Pope Telesphorus (r.c. 126-c.137) introducing the Gloriainto the Midnight Mass at Christmas is anachronistic for the second century but might help to shed light on sixth-century practice.”

Lang, The Latin Mass, 176: “The earliest available Latin version of the Gloria is found in the late-seventh-century Irish collection of texts for the Divine Office, known as the Antiphonary of Bangor.”

Sanctus

Lang, The Roman Mass, 178: “In the Roman Mass, the Sanctus appears as an acclamation in which the people joined in, and this use still echoed in Charlemagne’s Admonitio generalis(see Chapter 6).”

Agnus Dei

Lang, The Roman Mass, 178: “The Agnus Dei is addressed to Christ and takes up John the Baptist’s exclamation, ‘Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world’ (Jn 1:29). As has already been mentioned, Pope Sergius I is recorded to have introduced the chant to be sung during the Eucharistic fraction ‘by the clergy and the people’, perhaps with the clergy invoking ‘Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi’ and the people responding ‘misere nobis’. . . . while the earliest material witness for this Agnus Dei setting date from the twelfth century, it is likely to be much older. Ordo Romanus III, a Romano-Frankish supplement to the Ordo Romanus Iform the late eighth century, specifies that the schola will sing the Agnus Dei until the actual fraction is complete. Thus, the original purpose of the chant is to accompany a particular liturgical action, in a manner similar to the introit or communion.”

The Proper Chants

Introit

Lang, The Roman Mass, 180: “As already noted in my discussion of the Kyrie, the introit is believed to have developed from the practice of antiphonal psalmody preceding the litany in stational processions. According to the Liber pontificalis, Pope Celestine I decreed that psalms should be sung ‘before the sacrifice (ante sacrificium)’, which had not been done before, and the second edition of the Liber pontificalis adds here that the psalms should be sung alternately by all. This note has commonly been interpreted as a reference to the introit chant as early as Amalarius and Hrabanus Maurus in the ninth century.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 182: “In Ordo Romanus I, the introit appears as an antiphon (‘antiphona ad introitum) with several psalm verses as needed to accompany the pope’s procession to the altar. The antiphon is repeated after each part of the final doxology (Gloria Patri and Sicut erat), which is followed by extra psalm verses . . . The vast majority of introits are drawn from biblical texts, and about two-thirds of them are taken from the psalms, especially those belonging to the oldest strata of the repertory. Thus, the note in the Liber pontificalisabout the psalm-singing at the beginning of the Mass gains credence for the early sixth century, if not before.”

Alleluia

Lang, The Roman Mass, 183: “The alleluia as a distinct chant consisting of the choral respond ‘alleluia’ with a melismatic jubiluson the final syllable ‘-ia’, a verse and a repetition of the respond appears relatively late (OR I, 57). . . .If the Greek church historian Sozomenos, writing in Constantinople before 450, offers reliable information in his comparison of customs in different local churches, then in Rome the alleluia was sung only once a year, on Easter Sunday. Perhaps this refers to the solemn chanting of the alleluia at the Easter Vigil. By the year 500, John the Deacon states that in Rome the alleluia was sung only during the seven weeks between Easter and Pentecost, whereas in other churches it was sung throughout the whole liturgical year. At the end of the sixth century, John, bishop of Syracuse, asks in a letter to Pope Gregory the Great whether it was his decision to extend the singing of the alleluia beyond the Paschal season.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 184: At a second stage, the alleluia as an additional chant following the gradual was created. McKinnon sees here the influence of the Byzantine alleluia, which took its inspiration from the distinct alleluia-psalm that was sung after the responsorial psalm and before the Gospel in the Jerusalem liturgy of the early fifth century.”

Others says the musical influence of Byzantium on Rome scarce

Lang, The Roman Mass, 185: “While the origin of the distinct alleluia chant in the Roman Mass remains unclear, William Mahrt rightly describes its liturgical function as ‘the intensification of the effect of the gradual . . . for the purpose of recollection and meditation’ on the epistle reading. The jubilant melismatic character of the fully developed alleluia ‘creates a sense of expectation, which places the gospel as its object and as the peak of the whole Liturgy of the Word.’”

Offertory

Lang, The Roman Mass, 185-86: “Ordo Romanus Idoes not give any intimations about the form of the offertory but states pithily that the schola cantorumshould stop singing when the altar is fully prepared (OR I,85), without any indication of when to start. The origin of the offertory chant has often been seen in a psalm with an antiphon accompanying a liturgical action in the same way as introit and communion. . . . A serious difficulty with this theory lies in the fact that the earliest available offertory chants do not have the form of an antiphon but rather that of a long, melismatic responsory.”

Communion

Lang, The Roman Mass, 186: “Sources from the late fourth century indicate that during the distribution of communion, Psalm 33 was sung by a cantor – an obvious choice because of the verse: ‘Taste and see that the Lord is good.’ This practice is attested around 380 in the Mystagogical Catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem and in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions. There is no contemporary evidence for the Roman practice. Ordo Romanus I leaves precise instruction for the communion chant: the ‘antiphona ad communionem’ is to start as soon as the pope administers the sacrament to the notable laymen in the area of the church called sanatorium. The singing of psalm verses lasts as long as the distribution of communion; once this is completed, the chant concludes with the Gloria, Sicut erat and the ‘versus’, which I take to indicate the extra versus ad repetendum, as in the introit (OR I, 117, 122).”

The Schola Cantorum

Earliest indisputable information about the existence of the schola stems from the pontificate of Adeodatus II (r. 672-676), when the future Pope Sergius I, who had arrive in Rome from Sicily, became a cleric and since he proved to be a talented singer, was entrusted to the prior cantorum for instruction (Lang, The Roman Mass, 188).

Gregory the Great’s instruction that deacons were no longer to act as cantors at Mass

Old Roman Chant

Lang, The Roman Mass, 188-89: “The codification of this plainchant ‘dialect’ occurred considerably later than that of the Gregorian repertory, and the five complete manuscripts with musical notation that have come down to us date from the eleventh to the thirteenth century, beginning with the gradual copied at Santa Maria in Trastevere in 1071. These manuscripts were created in a period when Gregorian chant was gaining ground in the city of Rome and eventually replaced the Old Roman tradition in the pontificate of Innocent III (r.1198-1216).”

Old Roman Chant – Kyrie:

https://youtu.be/KDJtBh3LGJg?si=-Y4KVakH3JBTzfk4

https://youtu.be/2JOShBSsql0?si=sYK0l7XaYDuYSnV6

Similar to Milanese and Beneventan chant

Milanese chant:

https://youtu.be/S0Lb0a6hFuo?si=37m6PRW6iPPYtFRy

Beneventan chant: https://youtu.be/X0MY0TmoQjU?si=7tmUOK5vZFDZcJGK

Particular Questions Relating the Papal Stational Liturgy

Preaching at Mass

Lang, The Roman Mass, 191: “Notably, Ordo Romanus I does not include a provision for a sermon, but can this be taken to mean that preaching at Mass was not known in Rome at the time?”

Homilies of Popes: Leo the Great / Gregory the Great

Gregory’s Regula pastoralis insists on the bishop’s duty to preach

Offertory Rite and Procession

Augustine likely had a formal offertory procession:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 193: “It is often assumed that the offertory procession by the laity is a custom reaching back to the early Christian centuries. More recent scholarship, however, has built on the observation by scholars, such as Edward Yarnold, that there is no unequivocal fourth or fifth century evidence in the Latin West, with the possible exception of Augustine in North Africa, ‘whether or not there was a formal offertory procession, or at what point in the Eucharist (or before it) this offering took place.’”

Fermenteum, Communio and Pax

Summary – 3 interpretations of the fermentum

(1) There was only one eucharistic celebration within the city walls of Rome in the early fourth century. The presbyters alone were given communion in the tituli. They received under both kinds by place the fermentum into a chalice of unconsecrated wine

(2) The bishop (or his representative) alone celebrated on Sundays but communion was sent to the tituli so that all might receive. The fragments (fermentum) were placed in the chalice of unconsecrated wine by the presbyters. Thereby they were consecrated by contact and distributed to the people in the manner that Eastern Christians still distribute communion today, i.e. in spoons . . .

(3) The major celebration of the eucharist took place in the stational church and was presided over by the bishop or his representative. The eucharistic celebrations in the tituli must have begun somewhat later in the morning so that the acolytes could bring the fermentum to those churches and all could recognize by this very tangible sign that there was in principle only one eucharistic celebration on a given Sunday . . . .”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 199: “In a city as large as Rome, assembling the whole Christian people around the bishop for a single Eucharistic celebration may have been an ecclesiological ideal rather than a pastoral-liturgical reality.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 199-200: “The decreasing number of communicants in the course of the fourth century may have led to one of the distinguishing features of the Roman Mass: the place assigned to the kiss of peace. In all other historical rites, both East and West, the peace is exchanged before the offertory; in the Roman Rite, however, it is exchanged right before Holy Communion. . . .Dominic Serra sees the change [from Justin Martyr’s description] in the location of the peace in relation to the declining number of communicants. As many faithful did not receive the sacrament by the end of the fourth century, a rite of dismissal was instituted for them and they would leave the church before communion.”

The Renewed Presence of Greek in the Roman Liturgy

The Direction of Liturgical Prayer in Roman Basilicas

- Helpful clarification of the congregation facing East, wouldn’t have turned back on altar, would have turned to East, so perhaps aligned on the side of the altar

- Custom was to lift eyes and hands in prayer upwards to the sky, and in a closed room, turn toward a door or window

o Cites Origen On Prayer

Lang, The Roman Mass, 208: “Against this background, it would not appear impossible that in a church with a westward apse, the people, along with the priest, turned towards the entrance in the east for the Eucharistic prayer.”

Another line of argument: the apse functioning as a “liturgical east”

The Expansion and Adaptation of the Roman Liturgy in the Carolingian Age

Conclusion [at the end of the chapter]

Lang,The Roman Mass, 255: “Recent studies from a variety of historical disciplines offer a more nuanced understanding of this complex process of exchange and transformation of Roman and Franco-Germanic traditions. These scholarly contributions impress upon us the need to leave behind anachronistic ideas about a sweeping unification of liturgical practice effected by royal and ecclesiastical legislation.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 255: “The success of the Roman-Gregorian liturgy throughout Western Europe was not simply a result of its imposition by authority, but owing to its religious and cultural appeal, as well as its ability to integrate Gallican elements.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 255: “As we shall see in Chapter 7, at the beginning of the second millennium this process came full circle: the mixed Roman-Frankish rite was established in the papal city itself and became the foundation for further liturgical development in the Latin Church.”

In a position to appreciate the enrichment that the Carolingian reforms brought to the Roman Rite

Expansion of Roman Liturgical Practice

Lang, The Roman Mass, 214: “By the early eighth century, the Roman Rite had been established as a recognizable body of liturgical forms and ordinances that was codified in liturgical books.”

Cites Innocent I (r.402-417) letter to Bishop Decentius of Gubbio: all churches in the Latin West should follow not only its doctrine also its worship

Lang, The Roman Mass, 215: “However, demands for Romanization remained generic, and until the middle of the eighth century, we know only of a handful of concrete instructions on liturgical matters sent by popes to bishops north of the Alps.”

p.216: Reasons for Rome’s influence

1. place of the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, episcopal see of the successor of Peter, impressive liturgical celebrations in the city of Rome

2. the cultural and artistic prestige of the city was still considerable

3. Germanic rulers, especially the Franks, saw promotion of the Roman liturgy as helpful for political unification, social cohesion, with a desire to unite a people in the true worship of God because of a sacred duty of rulers

Gregory the Great

Boniface – insisted on the Roman practice of imposition of hands and a second post-baptismal anointing, established the sacrament of confirmation as a separate stage in Christian initiation

The Mass in Merovingian Gaul

Clovis (c.466-511)

Order of the Mass in the Gallican Rite (seventh or early eighth century) (Lang, The Roman Mass, 218)

Salutations

Trisagion and the Kyrie eleison

Propheta (Canticle of Zechariah Benedictus)

Collect post Propheticum

Prophetia (Old Testament reading)

Apostolus (Epistle reading)

Hymnus (Cantical of the Three Young Men: Benedicite)

De Aius ante Evangelium (Trisagion)

Evangelium (Gospel)

Sanctus post Evangelium

Sermon

Preces (litany) with Colllect

Dismissal of catechumens and penitents

Offertory with Sonus (chant) and Laudes (alleluias)

Praefatio (admonition to earnest prayer) and Collectio (Prayer for acceptance of prayers)

Recital of names of the deceased and Collect Post nomina

Collect ad pacem and Kiss of Peace

Eucharistic Prayer

Sursum corda

Contestatio or Immolatio(Preface)

Sanctus

Post-Sanctus

Secreta (Words of Institution)

Post-secreta or Post-mysterium

Doxology

Fraction with chant

Lord’s Prayer

Blessing by the bishop

Communion

Post-Eucharistiam (thanksgiving) and Collect

Dismissal

The Rise of the Carolingian Dynasty and Liturgical Patronage

Lang, The Roman Mass, 219; “As Merovingian authority was waning, Charles Martel and his sons Carloman and Pippin III (also known as Pippin the Short), while still holding on to their ministerial title, began to consider themselves kings in all but name. After Carloman withdrew to the monastic life, the way was open to Pippin to become the first Carolingian King of the Franks, with the approval of Pope Zacharias, in 751. Pope Stephen II, who succeeded Zacharias in 752, travelled to Francia to anoint Pippin king in the abbey church of St. Denis near Paris in 754, thus investing his kingship with a sacred character. Stephen also started the practice of addressing the King of the Franks as ‘Patrician of the Romans.’ While the precise import of this title is not clear, it certainly symbolized the political and religious alliance between the Carolingian dynasty and the papacy, which was to shape the history of Europe.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 223: “To conclude this section, the most far-reaching reform measure under Pippin was the decision, supported by leading bishops, to introduce Roman chant, which was not just a matter of musical preference but had profound implications for the liturgical texts. However, such initiatives were of their very nature local and dependent on resources that could be mustered only in ecclesiastical centres, such as Metz.”

Church Reform in the Age of Charlemagne

Lang, The Roman Mass, 223: “Pippin’s son and successor Charles, known as ‘the Great’ or Charlemagne (born c.742, king 768, crowned emperor 800, d.814), resumed the work of his father with energy and dedication. Charlemagne understood himself as a Christian Caesar who would renew the Roman Empire in union with the papacy.”

Force baptism of the Saxons (denounced by Alcuin), military campaign, not typical of overall effort to shape a new mindset by means of education

De Litteris Colendis (c.794-797) – plan for cultural reform

Lang, The Roman Mass, 225: “The principle’s of Charlemagne’s church reform have been identified as correctio, unanimitasand secundum Romanum usum.”

“While the benefits of such a programme for the social and political cohesion of his realm lay at hand, it also needs to be understood as religiously motivated.”

“The king and (from 800) emperor saw it as his sacred duty to unite his people in the right worship of the one true God and so lead them to salvation.

The Hadrianum and Its Supplement

Lang, The Roman Mass, 225: “A key moment in Charlemagne’s grand project was his request to Pope Hadrian, made in the early 780s through Paul the Deacon, to provide him with the authentic sacramentary of the Roman church, which was presumed to come from Gregory the Great.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 225: “Pope Hadrian responded with some delay between 784 and 791, and he sent Charlemagne the sacramentary known as the Hadrianum, most likely redacted under Pope Honorius I (d.638) and subsequently revised and enlarged.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 226: “The limits of the Hadrianumwere clearly seen, and it was either Charlemagne himself or his successor Louis the Pius who took the initiative to supplement the sacramentary.”

Used to be attributed to Alcuin

Now almost unanimously ascribed to Benedict of Aniane (d.821)

Romanisation and Liturgical Diversity

Lang, The Roman Mass, 228: “Notwithstanding the forceful Carolingian rhetoric of unanimity and Romanisation, there remained in fact a plurality of liturgical books – and hence liturgical uses – under Charlemagne and his successor Louis the Pious: along with circulation of the supplemented Hadrianum, the Old Gelasian, Frankish Gelasian, type-II Gregorian sacramentaries, as well as those of the still vital Gallican patrimony co-existed well into the ninth century.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 229: “The lack of positive evidence that the use of the ‘authentic’ Hadrianum was actually imposed by royal authority may reflect awareness on the part of Charlemagne and his trusted advisors that no programme of reform could be simply legislated and enforced, given the very limited structures of communication and administration in early medieval society.”

Also economic reasons = books were very expensive

Lang, The Roman Mass, 230: “The idea of unanimitas apostolicae sedis cannot be dissociated from unity in divine worship”

Ordo Romanus II

Lang, The Roman Mass, 231: “a supplement to Ordo I, is concerned with the celebration of a stational Mass by a bishop or priest in the absence of the pope. While the document clearly reflects the liturgical settings of the city of Rome, its final instruction would point to a Frankish context”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 231: “In their efforts to adopt the Roman Mass, Frankish clerics and monks were not looking at its simpler, presbyteral form, which they could have observed in titular churches of the papal city but rather at it solemn pontifical form.”

“The Eucharist celebrated by a priest was understood as a simpler form of the episcopal liturgy, with reduced ceremonial.”

“The Carolingian liturgists adapted Ordo Romanus I as the standard measure of the celebration of Mass, to the local conditions and customs of cathedrals and churches of the Frankish realm.”

Gregorian Chant

Personal and Emotive Liturgical Expression

Lang, The Roman Mass, 234-35: “We are now in a better position to appreciate the Romanization of the liturgy in the Frankish Kingdom as a long process, which had begun in Merovingian times and was accelerated under the Carolingian dynasty. It would not be adequate to think of this process as a one-way street, because with the reception of Roman liturgical books, Gallican elements were maintained and inserted into them.”

Blessing of People before Communion

Lang, The Roman Mass, 235: “For instance, codex Vat. Reg. Lat. 316 (the ‘Old Gelasian’) has non-Roman elements, some of which are structural, such as the addition of blessings of the people before communion, some of which are incidental, such as the use of Gallican euchological texts in the place of Roman ones.”

Prayers at the Foot of the Altar

Lang, The Roman Mass, 235-36: “The Frankish adaptation of the Roman Rite has been described as a shift towards a more personal, emotive understanding of and approach to the Liturgy. The Gallican tradition shows a strong sense of spiritual introspection and of personal involvement in ministering at the altar. Such tendency can be identified in the incorporation of specific prayers of a distinct style or register into the already existing structure of the Roman Mass. Prayers composed in the first person (singular or plural) make the bishop or priest celebrant enter into a personal dialogue with God, in which he acknowledges his sinfulness and expresses his fervent hope of receiving divine mercy in the form of a worthily offered Mass.

Such ‘apologies’ are also known in the Byznantine tradition and the oldest known example from the Divine Liturgy is the prayer ‘No one is worthy’ . . . This text is attested in the Liturgy of St Basil of the eighth-century.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 236: “A good example of this priestly liturgical spirituality in the Western tradition is found in the Sacramentary of Echternach, complied at the end of the 9th century form both Gregorian and Gelasian sources. The sacramentary features a short order of Mass, which extends from the preface dialogue to the Agnus Dei. This is preceded by a collection of personal prayers to be said by the priest (and in one case by the deacons) before, during and after the celebration of the Mass.”

“O God, who command that you be entreated by sinners and that the sacrifice of a contrite heart be offered to you, deign to accept this sacrifice, which I, unworthy and confident in your mercy, presume to offer to your kindness, and graciously grant that I myself may be to you both priest and altar and temple and sacrifice, so that, through the exercise of this ministry, I may obtain the remission of my sins, and, both for me and for those for whom [this sacrifice] is offered, your most merciful pardon.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 237: “Such prayers known as apologies (apologiae) are to be said privately by the celebrant at different moments of the Mass. They display an emphasis on personal sin as well as trust in God’s mercy and election, which is expressed in dramatically ascending language and verbal repetition.”

Lang, 237: “Devotions of this kind were also included in the prayer books for the personal use of the Carolingian elites. The small but splendid volume produced between 846 and 869 for Charles the Bald (King of West Francia 843, emperor 875, d.877) by his court school contains variations of prayers that became part of the Ordo Missae (see Chapter 7): a prayer to the Holy Trinity for the acceptance of the sacrifice offered through the hands of the priest with a plea for particular intentions (Suscipe sancta Trinitas), a confession of sins (Confiteor), a response to the priest’s prayer (Orate, fratres), as well as a prayer before and after communion.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 237: “The incorporation of these prayers into the Roman Mass highlights the evolving understanding of the priest’s distinct liturgical role in relation to God and to the lay congregation.”

“There are three moments in particular when the priest offers these apology prayers: at the beginning of Mass, at the offertory and in preparation for taking communion.”

Silence and Liturgical Prayer

Partially silent Canon late 5th or early 6th century (Lang, 238)

Acoustic separation / Visible barriers = like a iconostasis

Silence = High Priest in the Holy of Holies

Ceremonial Concelebration with the pope (late 8th century) (Lang, 239)

Allegorical Reading of the Liturgy

Thomas Aquinas: balance between literal and allegorical reading of liturgy

Signing of the cross by the 8th century

Raising the level of Latinity

Story of Boniface and Pope Zacharias in 746

Baptisms “in nominee patria et filia et spiritus sancti” Boniface wanted to rebaptize, Pope Zacharias said not necessary. – quasi native Latin speaker; Boniface was Anglo-Saxon

Local Reform and Practical Reach

List of books necessary for priests in their ministry in 813 (Lang, 249)

East and West

Lang, The Roman Mass, 253: [quoting Tia M. Kolbaba, “Latin and Greek Christians” in The Cambridge History of Christianity] “In sum, the revival of regular contacts between emperor, pope, and patriarch following the ‘Triumph of Orthodoxy’ in 843 created a climate in which political and cultural exchange could once again flourish. With one foot planted firmly in each world, the city of Rome remained at the centre of developments in both Greek and Latin Christianity, functioning as the most important point of contact for the transmission of cultural ideas between Western Europe and Byzantium.”

Missa Graeca 9th-11thcentury

https://youtu.be/WxhTASCCnUI?si=rBJGXVssqV_KqJgZ

Hagia Sophia 10th century – first witness for sacramental concelebration among priests without the presidency of a bishop

Week 11 – Topic: The Rite and the Tridentine Reform, Themes: The “Tridentine” Mass, the Second Vatican Council and the Reform of the Missal; Thematic Themes: liturgical movement

Required Reading: Lang, Chapters 7-9

Suggested Reading: Romano Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, New York: Herder & Herder, 1997, Gueranger, The Traditional Latin Mass Explained; Hoping Chapters 7&8

Chapter 7: From the Ottonian Revival to the High Middle Ages

Lang, The Roman Mass, 256: “The thirteenth century proved pivotal in several ways, above all when a major step towards liturgical standardization was taken by the decision of the rapidly expanding Franciscan Order to adopt the liturgical use of the Roman curia. Moreover, the profound veneration of the Eucharist at the time brought new elements to the rite of the Mass, such as the elevation of the consecrated species, and led to the institution of the feast of Corpus Christi.”

From the Carolingian to the Ottonian Age

Lang, The Roman Mass, 257: “The Ottonians originated as a ducal family from Saxony and rose to royal power in Germany. In 936, Otto I, known as Otto the Great, was crowned king at Aachen; in 962, the pope invested him with the imperial title, which he held until his death in 973.”

The Holy Roman Empire took shape

The Ordo Missae

Lang, The Roman Mass, 257: “For the purpose of our enquiry, the most momentous step in early medieval liturgical development is the collection of the recurring parts of the Eucharistic celebration into what is known to this day as the Ordo Missae (Order of Mass).”

- Introit

- Kyrie

- Gloria (when ordained)

- Collect (oratio)

- Epistle (apostolus)

- Gradual and alleluia

- Gospel

- Offertory

- Prayer over the offerings (super oblata)

- Per omnia saecula saeculorum

- Preface dialogue

- Common preface

- Canon of the Mass

- Lord’s Prayer with embolism

- Pax Domini

- Agnus Dei

Lang, The Roman Mass, 259: “The embryonic Order of Mass simply organizes the structure and content that is known to us from other liturgical books of Roman descent. A subsequent step is taken with the collections of private prayers to be said by the celebrant at different moments of the rite. The earliest known example of such a collection is attested in the Sacramentary of Amiens . . ., dating from the second half of the ninth century.”

1. Prayers for preparation of Mass, penitential Psalms, washing of hands, prayers for putting on each of the liturgical vestments

2. Follows after the Agnus Dei but begins with the placing of offerings on the altar and lists five texts

- Suscipe, sancta Trinitas

- Orate fratres

- Sanctus

- Lengthy apology

- Prayers for the commingling of the body and blood

- Prayers before and after communion

- Domine Iesu Christe, Fili Dei vivi

- Kissing of the altar at hte end of the Mass attended by the prayer Placeat tibi, sancta Trinitas

- Prayers for the removal of priestly vestments

Ordines in distinct stages, 3 types

1. Apology Type

2. Frankish Type

3. Rhenish Type

3 forms of “Rhenish” Type

Lang, The Roman Mass, 267: “However, it would seem that the contribution of the Ordo Missae was a the same time more fundamental and less visible, since it shifted the rite towards an interiorization of liturgical action and a focus on the personal devotion of the offering priest, with a particular stress on his personal sinfulness and need for divine mercy. While this aspect of priestly spirituality is no doubt important (the recent clerical abuse scandals illustrate very painfully the consequence of priests becoming oblivious to the ascetical dimension of their ministry), there is some foundation for the oft-repeated charge that the early medieval period saw a ‘clericalization’ of the Mass and a detachment of the laity from its liturgical enactment.”

Cluny:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 267: “[A]nother type of Ordo Missae that originated from the Benedictine abbey of Cluny, which was founded in 910 and became a center of monastic and ecclesiastical reform. The Cluniac Ordo Missae, which was probably established by the middle of the eleventh century, stands out for its very sparing use of apology prayers.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 267: “Tirot argues that this monastic Ordo Missae intended to reproduce Ordo Romanus I as closely as possible. Thus, it can be understood as a liturgical expression of the particular character of Cluny’s foundation: by invoking the protection of the Apostles Peter and Paul, the monastery placed itself under the direct authority of the pope, not the local bishop.”

Ordo distinguished by sobriety and restraint

The Romano-Germanic Pontifical and the Ottonian Church

Lang, The Roman Mass, 268: “The compiliation of the Roman-Germanic Pontifical (Pontificale Romano-Germanicum =PRG) has been considered a milestone of liturgical development in the Ottonian age.”

Between 950 and 963 [though cf p.273 for an alternate opinion], monastery of St. Ablan’s in Mainz, a new kind of liturgical book was compiled with the authority of Archbishop William (r.954-968), a natural son of Emperor Otto I.

Assembled various ordines: prayer texts and rubrical instructions, proper to bishop and delegates:

o Ordination of clerics

o Consecration of virgins

o Dedication of churches and altars

o Coronations

o Range of blessings

o Reconciliation of penitents

o Mass ceremonials

Lang, The Roman Mass, 269: “The PRG became the foundational document for the subsequent development of liturgical books for episcopal celebrations.”

Creed:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 269-70: “Henry II is known to liturgical historians above all for his initiative to insert the creed into the Roman Mass.”

“Bern, abbot of Reichenau (d.1048) reports that Henry, staying in the city of Rome in 1014 for his coronation as emperor, was surprised to find that, unlike in Germany, the creed did not form part of the rite of Mass and inquired about the reasons for this absence. He received the response that the Roman church had always stood firm in the Catholic faith according to the teaching of St. Peter. Hence, it was not necessary to have the creed sung at Mass in Rome, unlike in those local churches that were at some point tainted by heresy. However, the newly crowned emperor persuaded Pope Benedict VIII (r.1012-1024) to add the creed to the main celebration of Mass (‘ad publicam missam’).”

Stability of the Mass

Lang, The Roman Mass, 274: [quoting Mary C. Mansfield, The Humiliation of Sinners: Public Penance in Thirteenth-century France] “Undoubtedly some rites hardly altered over many centuries. The canon of the mass, to take the most obvious example, remained stable because of its central importance from ancient times. Generally, as one moved outward from the canon first to the rest of the liturgy of the mass, then to the daily office, and finally to occasional rites like penance, one finds at each step more tolerance for alteration.”

Gloria

Lang, The Latin Mass, 274: “A telling illustration is Bern of Reichenau’s (d.1048) lengthy discussion on the use of the Gloria in excelsis at Mass: Roman custom reserved its use to bishops (except at Easter), while in Germany any priest could intone it on the appropriate days.”

The Reform Papacy and the Roman Liturgy

Lang, The Roman Mass, 275: “The role of Gregory VII (r. 1073-1085) is crucial in this process – not, however, because of a consistent liturgical agenda (which he did not have), but rather because of his claims to papal leadership that set the tone for things to come.”

Bernard of Constance, Micrologus de ecclesiasticis observationibus [stayed in Rome 1079-1084 and 1086-1090]

- Shows the influence of Rhenish Ordo on the Roman custom

- Mentions

o Veni sanctificator

o Concedes suscipe Sancta Trinitas is derived from ecclesial custom, but is not found in the Roman orders

o Domine Iesu Christe qui ex voluntate Patris in preparation for holy communion is based on tradition of ‘holy men’

- Reports with disapproval that during the canon some priests interpolate prayers

o Rule of St. Augsutine: sing what you read is to be sung

Lang, The Roman Mass, 277: “Thus, the Micrologusmay echo the policy of Pope Gregory VII, who demanded that the Roman tradition, purged of recently introduced German customs, should be the norm for the whole Latin Church but only enacted very minor liturgical changes to implement this demand.”

- Every Christian should contribute to the offering

- Tried to replace Mozarabic rite with Roman rite

Lang, The Roman Mass, 279-80: “It would seem that, like Bernold, the champion of his cause in the empire, Gregory VII was above all intent that obedience should be shown to the Roman church by following the pattern of papal liturgy, without insisting on uniformity in every detail. The demand to ‘purify’ the Roman liturgy of Germanic accretions did not translate into a practical programme but remained an ideological gesture towards the emperor. The scope of Gregory VII’s liturgical legistlation is so limited that it hardly qualifies as significant in the history of the Roman Rite. However, his strong statement for papal authority, epitomized in the Dictatus papae, was of long-term consequences for the Western Church in general and for the ordering of its divine worship in particular. Moreover, the (then largely rhetorical) emphasis on investigating apostolic traditions and restoring the purity of ancient Roman observance helped create a mentality that was to have a lasting effect on conceptions of liturgical renewal.”

The Papal Chapel and the Franciscan Liturgy in the Thirteenth Century

Lang, The Roman Mass, 282: [quoting H.E.J. Crowdrey] “The separation of the papal household and the Lateran basilica gave rise to a gathering duality of observance which, in the thirteenth century, under Franciscan influence, led to the liturgy of the papal court’s becoming the general standard for the Western Church.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 283: “Still, the impact of the papal chapel remained geographically limited, and general conformity with Roman liturgical practice began to be observed throughout the Latin Church only with the rapid expansion of the new Franciscan Order in the thirteenth century.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 284: “A momentous step in the history of early Franciscan liturgy is the work of Haymo of Faversham, who served as minister general from 1240 until his death in 1244, after the turbulent second tenure of Elias of Cortona (1232-1239). At the order’s chapter in Bologna in 1243, Haymo presented the ordinal known by its opening words Indutus planeta (‘Wearing the chasuble’ . . .), . . . .Indutus planeta was based on the liturgical use of the papal curia; it was adopted by the Friars Minor and helped to create a unified liturgy of the Mass in the mendicant order.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 285: “The description of the Mass begins with the prayers at the foot of the altar and end with the final blessing. Hence, the prayers of preparation and of thanksgiving, which feature prominently in the Rhenish Ordo Missae, are not included. The introductory rites set the pattern that was to remain stable in the Roman Rite until the reforms of the 1960s: Psalm 42 (Iudica me) with the antiphon Introibo ad altare Dei; the priest’s confession of sins and the ministers’ prayer for forgiveness (no confession of the ministers is indicated); a series of versicles leading to the oration Aufer a nobis, which is said while the priest ascends the altar steps; the prayer Oramus te Domine (with a reference to relics, if they are present on the altar) and the kissing of the altar. . .

The offertory is presented in the form that would later become normative for the Roman Rite, except for a few ceremonial details. The paten with the host is offered with the prayer Suscipe sancta Pater

p.286: “The chalice is then covered with a ‘simple folded corporal’ (what would later become the pall), while the prayer In spiritu humilitatis is said. This is followed by the invocation Veni sanctificator, which is accompanied by the sign of the cross over host and chalice together.

Hanc igitur

Lang, The Roman Mass, 286: “It is interesting to note that no imposition of hands over the offerings at the prayers Hanc igitur is indicated; this gesture is attested only in the fourteenth century. Unlike in the modern reading, it was not interpreted as epicletic, but rather ‘as a way of calling attention (pointing – hanc) to the oblation being offered at that moment.”

Elevation of the Host

Lang, The Roman Mass, 286: “After pronouncing the words ‘Hoc est enim corpus meum’ and bowing in adoration, the priest elevates the consecrated host reverently so that those present can see it. This gesture was an innovation inspired by increased devotion to the sacrament of the altar. There is no elevation of the consecrated chalice at this point, presumably because the precious blood it contained could not actually be seen; the second elevation would be added at a later stage. . . Indutus planetaspecifically notes that from the consecration of the host until the purification of hands, the priest keeps his thumb and index finger, which touched the body of the Lord, closed, except for the signs of the cross when he touches the sacred host – a practice first attested in reformed Benedicting monasticism of the tenth century.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 287: Pope Nicholas III (r.1277-1280) imposed the ‘new’ liturgical books of the Franciscans.

Lang, The Roman Mass, 287: “Subsequently, the ‘Ordo missalis secundum consuetudinem Romanae curie’ was gradually incorporated into missals of local dioceses and religious orders throughout Europe. Thus, through the agency of the Franciscans, a unification of the ritual structure and shape of the Mass was achieved in the Latin Church to a degree that previous popes may have demanded but were never able to implement effectively.”

Through a long and complex process of manuscript transmissions

The Plenary Missal and the Expansion of Private Masses

Lang, The Roman Mass, 290: “The very expression ‘private Mass’ can easily be misleading and needs clarification. Small gatherings for the Eucharist are attested in the first three centuries, when Christian communities found themselves in a vulnerable position and subject to occasional persecutions. Such circumstances demanded a simplicity of external ritual, which continued in places where congregations were small and resources were limited.”

The practice of votive Masses (Lang, 292)

The low voice, doubling of Mass parts due to the devotion of the private Mass = INTERESTING

Lang, The Roman Mass, 293: “The ascendancy of private Masses seems gradually to have given rise to the custom that in the solemn Mass the celebrant would recite in a low voice the ordinary and proper chants that were sung by the schola, as well as the readings proclaimed by the subdeacon and deacon. The first known indication of this new practice comes from the description of the pontifical Mass on Easter Sunday in the Ordo of the Lateran basilica, composed by its prior Bernard in the mid-twelfth century.”

Dominicans

Lang, The Roman Mass, 294: “The Dominican ordinariumof 1256 takes a step further by prescribing that at the (solemn) conventual Mass the priest celebrant and his liturgical assistants recite all the ordinary and proper chants, while they are being sung in choir.”

Francis of Assisi:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 295: “Notably, Francis of Assisi in a letter to all Friars Minor in the autumn of 1224, after his retreat on Mount La Verna, commanded that in the houses of his order only one Mass a day should be celebrated. If there was more than one priest in a house, he should assist at the conventual Mass and not celebrate individually.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 295: “Francis’ concern is thus consistent with the great care he showed for the dignity and decorum of the liturgy; it is also indicative of a certain reaction to the detrimental effects of the enormous proliferation of private Masses.’”

Veneration and Reservation of the Eucharist

Kneeling [common by the 9th century]

Lang, The Roman Missal, 297: “Kneeling during the Eucharistic prayer had become increasingly common among the laity since the ninth century as the adequate posture of worshipping Christ made present in the sacrament. Starting from France, possibly as a reaction to the Albigensian denial of incarnational and sacramental reality, priests would elevate the consecrated hose for the adoration of the faithful, after pronouncing the words of Christ over it.”

Bells

Lang, The Roman Missal, 297: “The practice was confirmed by the bishop of Paris, Odo of Sully (d.1208), and in the course of the thirteenth century, the elevation of the consecrated chalice was likewise introduced. Both elevations could be accompanied by an elevation candle, by the ringing of a handbell or even by the tolling of the church bells. Francis of Assisi promoted these new forms of Eucharistic devotion enthusiastically and strongly encouraged the lay faithful to kneel at the elevation of the consecrated species at Mass and when the Blessed Sacrament is carried in procession.”

Communion

4thand 5th century communion less frequent

Caesarius of Arles, Council of Agde in 506 obliged communion 3 times: Christmas, Easter, Pentecost

Lateran IV (1215) – Easter Duty

Preaching at Mass

Pontifical of William of Durandus, written between 1292 and 1295, associates the bishop’s preaching with the penitential rite, to which indulgences are attached.

Chapter 8: Decline and Vitality in the Later Middle Ages

Lang, The Roman Mass, 307: “In recent decades, however, historians have offered new perspectives on Christianity in the later Middle Ages and have highlighted that elements of decline and vitality existed side by side.”

The Autumn of the Middle Ages?

Reason for precariousness:

- Medieval Warm Period of early 14th century had a detrimental effect on agriculture and caused a series of famines

- The Black Death raged from 1346 to 1353, wiped out a third of the population

- The Hundred Years’ War between England and France 1337 to 1453, brought further decline in population

- 1453, Constantinople is taken by Turks

- Avignon Papacy, schism that followed

- Growth of nation state

- Clergy scandal

- Intellectual

o Via moderna of Ockham

o Via antiqua of Thomas Aquinas

- Spiritual

o Devotion moderna: Internalization of man’s relationship ot God , ascetic spirituality in Spiritual exercises

o Materiality of religious devotion in focus on miraculous, relics, pilgrimages

Religion as a System of Symbols

Popular Participation

Prayer of the Faithful

Lang, The Roman Mass, 316: “Notably, the prayer of the faithful employs local languages, such as Castilian, Catalan, Basque and Breton, as well as Occitan and German dialects. This vernacular rite was inserted at some point during the offertory (after the initial Oremusand before the secreta) and most commonly after the incesation of the gifts and the altar and before the priest’s washing of hands (lavabo). Italian sources stand out for placing the prayer of the faithful after the Sanctus (and sometimes after the Agnus Dei). The priest left the altar and went to the door of the chancel screed or mounted the pulpit. As the English name ‘bidding of the bedes’ indicates, the rite consisted in the priest’s call to prayer for particular intentions, which would typically include: peace, the welfare of the Church, especially the pope, the hierarchy and all in the service of God; the government of the realm, especially the king or prince; the Holy Land; the bounty of the harvest; merchants and labourers; pregnant women; the sick; pilgrims; perseverance in grace; conversion of sinners and the faithful departed, especially those related to the local community and those buried in the church’s cemetery. The actual prayer could take different forms and usually entailed saying the Our Father (and the Hail Mary) once or several times.”

Interesting quote:

Lang, The Roman Mass, 317: [quoting Frank Senn] “The laity have always found ways to participate in the liturgy, whether it was in their language or not, and they have always derived meaning from the liturgy, whether it was the intended meaning or not. Furthermore, the laity in worship were surrounded by other ‘vernaculars’ than language, not least of which were the church buildings themselves and the liturgical art that decorated them.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 318: “It remains true that the laity’s participation in the Mass was at a remove from the action of the officiating priest. Even where lay devotion was literate, as was increasingly the case in the later medieval period, especially with the invention of printing, there was a clear separation between the clergy and the faithful. Primers and other devotional books did not contain translations of the Latin liturgical texts but rather offered spiritual and moral commentary on the Mass. Lay participation was by its very nature ‘untexted’ and ‘unscripted’: it was not regulated by the official liturgical books that gave detailed instructions to the clergy regarding what to say and how to perform the sacred rites. Thus, the faithful were able to engage with the Mass in a variety of ways that are not easy for us to grasp precisely because they were not scripted.”

Pews in the 13th / 14th centuries (Lang, 319)

Pax and blessed bread (Lang, 321)

Unity and Diversity in the Development of the Missal

Lang mentions the Franciscans again on p.322

Lang, The Roman Mass, 323: “With the invention of printing, a comprehensive set of liturgical books for the Sarum use was available in the early sixteenth century.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 324: “In general, diocesan bishops did not have effective control over the making of liturgical books in their territories.”

Nicholas of Cusa tried to enforce correction of missals in 1453 and 1455, largely unsuccessful

Lang, The Roman Mass, 327: “In certain respects, the new possibility of printing missals initially generated greater diversity, rather than leading toward uniformity”

Codification of the Ritual

Lang, The Roman Mass, 328: “The simplified ritual observed in the court setting became the model for the Roman liturgical books promoted in the thirteenth century by the rapidly expanding Franciscan Order.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 328: “As the conciliarist movement diminished because of its failure to deliver its stated programme of renewing the Church ‘in head and members’, the papacy regained momentum, and its liturgical celebrations once again began to be imitated by bishops throughout the Latin Church. In the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century, the papal masters of ceremonies Agostino Patrizi Piccolomini (d.1495), Johann Burchard (d.1506) and Paride Grassi, also referred to by his Latinized name Paris de Grassis (d.1528), were responsible for organizing and recording both liturgy and court ceremonial. They left us three categories of written works: prescriptive ceremonial books, descriptive diaries and treatises.”

Caeremoniale Romanum composed in 1488

Burchard = 1496 Missal (Lang, 332), 2nd edition in 1502 (Lang, 332)

Complaints about a lack of uniformity and abuses in the liturgy, owing to the poor formation of priests and the lack of reliable books (Lang, 333)

The Last Gospel

Lang, The Roman Mass, 334: “[I]n the concluding rites the final blessing follows after the prayer Placeat tibi sancta Trinitas, not vice versa, as in some diocesan uses and in early printed Roman Missals. The ‘Last Gospel’ (Jn 1:1-14), which was not yet in general use and is not included in early printed Roman Missals, is to be read at the altar rather than said in a low voice from memory as the celebrant returns to the sacristy (as was the practice in the Roman pontifical high Mass and in some diocesan uses).”

Genuflections

Lang, The Roman Mass, 334: “The most significant innovation in Burchard’s Ordoconcerns the reverential gesture for the consecrated Eucahrist: when the celebrant has pronounced the dominical words over the bread, he is instructed to genuflect as a sign of adoration (‘genuflexus eam adorat’). Then he elevates the host and after having placed it on the corporal again he genuflects a second time. In the same manner, the consecration of the chalice is followed by a genuflection before and after the elevation. The genuflection replaces the ‘medium bow’ that is indicated in Indutus planeta for the adoration of the body of the Lord.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 335: “The Roman pontifical of 1485 (Pontificalis liber), edited by Patrizi with collaboration of Burchard, appears to be the first liturgical book prescribing a genuflection instead of a bow for the adoration of the consecrated host.”

The Mass and Sacred Polyphony

Avignon Pope John XXII (r.1316-1334) issued the decree Docta Sanctorum Patrum, which is the first known papal document dealing directly with sacred music (Lang, 336)

Liturgical abuses in the 15th century (Lang, 337)

Transformation in Church Architecture

Chapter 9: The Tridentine Reform

Liturgical Life on the Eve of Trent

Lang, The Roman Mass, 343: “As discussed in Chapter 8, the liturgical practice of the late medieval Western Church was not in a general state of decay and decadence, but there were certainly aspects in need of correction.”

The Council of Trent

Lang, The Roman Mass, 345: “As Hubert Jedin has observed, the nations represented at the council expressed a strong desire for a unified missal.”

3 categories of liturgical issues (Lang, 347)

1. Issues of doctrinal character

2. Comments that reflected the new historical consciousness of Renaissance Humanists, who promoted a return ad fontes, that is, to the (biblical and patristic) sources of the Catholic tradition

3. Indications of liturgical malpractice

Lang, The Roman Mass, 349: “The council was concluded prematurely on 4 December 1563, because of alarming news about the ill health of Pope Pius IV. In the final session, it was decided that several reform measures, which the council was not able to complete, should be left to the pope, among them the reform of the breviary and of the missal. The discussions among the council fathers served to establish two fundamental principles for this work: in the first place, the council fathers supported a unification of the Order of Mass and its rubrics; any celebration of Mass was meant to conform to this general standard. Secondly, there was a broad consensus that the Roman Rite should be pruned of more recent accretions, especially those containing apocryphal material, those reflecting private devotions and those judged to be superstitious.”

The Missale Romanum of 1570

The Order of Mass

Lang, The Roman Mass, 351: “The ‘Ordinary of Mass’ (Ordinarium Missae) in the Missale Romanum of 1570 . . . follows the use of the Roman curia and Burchard’s Ordo Missae in its second edition of 1502.”

Calendar and Mass Propers

Lang, The Roman Mass, 353: “Considerable work was done on the liturgical calendar. The very full sanctoral cycle of the pre-Tridentine books was substantially reduced, with the aim of bringing the temporal cycle to the fore again.”

Lang, The Roman Mass, 353: “There were no alterations in the structure of the temporal cycle of the liturgical year, which had been established since the early Middle Ages, and few modifications were made in its prayers, chants and readings. The most substantial change was the purging of the poetic sequences to be sung before the gospel, except those for Easter, Pentecost, and Corpus Christi (as well as the Requiem Mass).”

Hoping, 265: 1stliturgical reform initiated by the central authority of the Church

Most drastic action to the changeable parts of the Mass – Sequences: Easter, Pentecost, Corpus Christi, Dies iraeof the Requiem Mass. In 1727, the Stabat Mater

The Shape of the ‘Tridentine’ Mass

Lang, The Roman Mass, 354: “The Missale Romanum of Pius V thus stands in continuity with the plenary missals of the Roman Rite in the form used by the papal curia, which go back to the thirteenth century. This continuity extends even further to the time of the Gregorian reform in the eleventh century and, in the essential structure and contents of the rite, to the papal stational Mass of Ordo Romanus I. Perhaps the most significant novelty concerns the form of celebration or the ‘shape’ of the Tridentine Mass. As has been discussed in Chapter 7, in the course of the Middle Ages the phenomenon of ‘private Masses’ spread widely and brought with it a simplification of ritual and a concentration of liturgical roles in the person of the priest. At the same time, the solemn or high Mass (Missa solemnis), with the assistance of deacon and subdeacon and the participation of cantors, remained the normative liturgical form.”

Hoping, My Body Given for You, 266: “Following the pattern of Burckard’s Ordo Missae, the Missale Romanum was prefaced with the general rubrics and the ritus servandus [rite to be served] that governs the missa sine cantu et sine ministris [Mass without singing and without deacon and subdeacon]. Besides the missa solitaria of the priest, various supplements are provided in the Missale Romanum for the Missa sollemnis [Solemn Mass]. Burckard’s rite of the Mass may have been selected primarily for practical reasons, since it contains everything that a celebrant must know in celebrating the Mass. It is not true, however, that ‘the decision in favor of ‘silent Mass’ celebrated by the individual priest as the basic form of the post-Tridentine renewed liturgy was connected with Burckard’s rite of the Mass. For the question about the basic ritual form of the Mass in the 1570 Missale, not only the Ritus servandus but the whole Missal should be considered; for example, it contains notes for the intonation of the Gloria and the Credo, for the Prefaces, and so on. The basic form of the Mass is, starting from the Missal, not the missa solitaria, but rather the missa cantata, or Solemn High Mass, which is celebrated with deacon and subdeacon. Finally, the Roman Mass as a hierarchically articulated liturgy must be thought of in terms of the Pontifical Mass that is celebrated by a bishop.”

Reservation of the Eucharist and Church Architecture

St. Charles Borromeo (1538-1584)

Sacred Music

Lang, The Roman Mass, 364: “In sum, the Council of Trent said as little as possible on sacred music, but its discussion of it gave a strong impulse to local synods and bishops who implemented the council’s programme for the reform of ecclesiastical life and discipline. In the years after Trent, concerns for the intelligibility of the text and for an exclusion of secular music from the liturgy were perceived as being in conformity with the council (‘secundum formam concilii’). Practical solutions differed considerably from one place to the other, and this is reflected in the rich variety of polyphonic music at the time.”

Notes from Hoping:

17th/ 18th century – first recitations of the Canon out loud, with the people responding

Pistoia 1786

Gueranger – first Abbot of the Benedictine Abbey of Solesmes (refounded 1833)

“Schott” Missal

p.275: “By the beginning of World War II, 1,650,000 copies of ‘Schott’ alone had been sold in forty-five editions. In all, fifteen million copies of the American people’s missal were printed between 1939 and 1945. We can scarcely overestimate the contribution made by people’s missals to a more deliberate participation of the faithful in the celebration of the Mass.”

Week 12 – Theme: Adoration, Eucharistic poetry and devotion, Eucharistic Miracles

Required Reading: Hoping Chapter 5; Feingold Chapter 16

Suggested Reading: Thomas Aquinas, Adoro te devote, Pange lingua; Alphonsus Liguori; Joan Carroll Cruz, Eucharistic Miracles: And Eucharistic Phenomena in the Lives of the Saints, Charlotte, NC: Tan, 2010. Jan-Heiner Tuck, Gift and Presence: The Theology and Poetry of the Eucharist in Thomas Aquinas, trans. Scott G. Hefelfinger, Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2014.

Adoration and the Heart of Christ

See Feingold, 604:

Eucharistic Adoration directed to the Sacred Heart:

1. Heart is present

2. Supreme offering of the heart

3. Heart speaks to heart

Eucharistic Miracles:

Review:

Transubstantiation: Whole Substance changes, accidents remain the same

Accidents / Appearances

Quantity, quality, action, passion, place, position, time, habitus, relation

Size, color, specifics of chemical makeup, anything testable

Summary:

The Miracle of the Eucharist is that the Eucharist is the Substance of Christ as He IS, right now

- Is the very substance of Christ

Eucharistic Miracles signify the accidents of Christ as He was, remain distinct from substance.

- Are not the very accidents of Christ, seated at the right hand of the Father, glorified,

Email Correspondence with a theologian friend:

Christina,

Good to hear from your and happy feast day! Thank you for offering your communion and all the prayers.

A quick update on my understanding. We were able to go through this in the Eucharist class I teach. In many cases of the eucharistic miracles, there is one accident that remains. Quantity, or the dimensive quantity, of the host, even when the other accidents of appearance, chemical makeup, have changed to flesh and blood. With the one accident remaining, for as long as the dimensive quantity remains, the presence, I think would also remain.

The accidents of flesh and blood, are not the very accidents of the Body and Blood of Christ; the substance as long as the accident of quantity remains would be, the substance of the Body and Blood as they are at this moment, glorified, at the right hand of the Father. However, nothing prevents the accidents from representing Christ’s flesh as it was on the cross, living, heart tissue, suffering, etc. While these would be the most accurate to ascribe to his flesh and blood at this moment, the accidental representation of them as they were is truly a miracle.

My understanding had been similar, but I think this is more accurate.

In Christ,

Fr. Justin

Dear Fr Justin,

Thank you so very much for getting back to me ... just in case you did not receive my previous email, I had a Mass offered for you during the Christmas season - it was offered in Rome on Dec 29th - by one of your former students (Fr David Howell - he is from the archdiocese of Southwark,England, and was in your section of the Patristic seminar the same year that I joined as a guest).

Thank you for your reply - you have gotten to the heart of the text I have been grappling with ...

Concretely, may I assume (and teach) that Jesus is not substantially present in the Lanciano miracle?

My own inclination is that Christ is not substantially present in the Lanciano miracle - nor is He present in the recent miracle in Ireland (Host that dropped on the floor was subsequently placed in a glass of water; it then turned to flesh - so that what appeared was a piece of flesh floating in the water, but no retaining the exact dimensive measurements of the host. Does that sound correct to you?

(I know it sounds a bit knit-picky -- but I know you will understand my desire to get this right ... because even if something is hugely miraculous, that's nothing compared to the actual substantial presence of Jesus Himself ... and even though the miracles are given to build faith, what's important (even crucial) is to be cognisant of when Jesus is actually substantially present.)

I was looking at III, 76, 8 and III, 77, 4 - in case that helps.

Thank you!

In Christ,

Christina

Christina,

It was reading 76,8 that my ideas had changed; I think they were based largely on what is in 77,4. I see a little tension between the two. in the first, it seems Thomas is content to say as long as the accident of quantity remains, so does the substance of Christ. The species of body and blood would not, in a eucharistic miracle, be identified with the species (accidents / appearances) of the body and blood as they are at the right hand of the Father. In 77,4, it seems like he is suggesting whenever the accidents of quantity or quality would change in such a way that suggest a change to the substance of bread if the accidents were still inhering there would mean a cessation of the substantial presence of Christ. The question: does the substantial presence of Christ remain if the quantity remains and the qualities change?

I just went back to the conclusion of 76.8, as that is the context in which he specifically addresses Eucharistic miracles. Here is his conclusion, “And thus it is clear that as the dimensions remain, which are the foundation of the other accidents, the body of Christ truly remains in this sacrament.”

I think that Lanciano would be the real presence still. Perhaps, his answer to obj.3 in 77.4 is helpful. Things corrupt only naturally, not miraculously. He, then, here would be address the natural corruption of quantity or quality, and not the miraculous change of accidents as in Eucharistic miracles. It seems to fit that he would not consider the miracle wrought by God the corruption of which he is speaking which entails the loss of the presence.

This is where I am at this point, at least. It would be interesting to see what the Popes have said about Lanciano. Is there a consistent way of talking about it in magisterial remarks?

In Christ,

Fr. Justin

St. Thomas Aquinas

Summa theologiae III, q. 76, a.8: whether Christ’s body is truly there when flesh or a child appears miraculously in this sacrament?

- sed contra: when such apparitions take place, the same reverence is shown to it as was shown at first, which would not be done if Christ were not truly there, to whom we show reverence of latria.

o Therefore when such apparitions occur, Christ is under the sacrament

- Such apparition comes about in two ways, when occasionally in this sacrament flesh, or blood, or a child is seen:

o 1. sometimes it happens on the part of the beholders, whose eyes are so affected as if they outwardly saw flesh, or blood, or a child, while no change takes place in the sacrament.

§ This seems to happen when to one person is is seen under the species of flesh or of a childe, while to others it is seen as before under the species of bread,

§ Or when to the same individual it appears for an hour under the appearance of flesh, or a child, and afterwards under the appearance of bread

§ Nor is there any deception there, because such species is divinely formed in the eye in order to represent some truth, namely, for the purpose of showing that Christ’s body is truly under the sacrament.

§ Since in this way no change is made in the sacrament, it is manifest that, when such apparition occurs, Christ does not cease to be under this sacrament.

o 2. sometimes happens that such apparition comes about not merely by a change wrought in the beholders, but by an appearance which really exists outwardly.

§ This indeed is seen to happen when it is beheld by everyone under such an appearance and it remains so not for an hour, but for a considerable time.

· In this case, some think that it is the proper species of Christ’s body.

· Nor does it matter tha sometimes Christ’s entire body is not seen there, but part of his flesh, or else that it is nto seen in youthful guise, but in the semblance of a child, because it lies within the power of a glorified body for it to be seen by a non-glorified eye either entirely or in part, and under its own semblance or in strange guise.

§ But this seems unlikely,

· 1. because Christ’s body under its proper species can be seen only in one place, wherein it is definitively contained.

o Hence since it seen in its proper species, and is adored in heave, it is not seen under its proper species in this sacrament

· 2. because a glorified body, which appears at will, disappears when it wills after the apparition.

o But that which appears under the likeness of flesh in this sacrament, continues for a long time,

o Preserved in a pyx, it would be wicked to think of Christ under his proper semblance

§ Consequently it remains to be said that while the dimensions remain the same as before, there is a miraculous change wrought in the other accidencts, such as shape, color, and the rest, so that flesh, or blood or a child are seen.

· This is not deception to represent truth.

· Namely to show by this miraculous apparition that Christ’s body and blood are truly in this sacrament.

· Thus it is clear that as the dimensions remain, which are the foundation of the other accidents, the body of Christ truly remains in this sacrament.

Eucharistic Doubt:

Ratramnus – d.870

Berengarius of Tours – d.1088

Jan Hus – d.1415

Martin Luther – d.1546

John Calvin – d.1564

David Hume – d.1776

Eucharistic Miracles

1. Lanciano, Italy – 8thCentury

Result of studies of March 4, 1971 – p.6: “As a result of the histological (microscopic) studies, the following facts were ascertained and documented: The flesh was identified as striated muscular tissue of the myocardium (heart wall), having on trace whatsoever of any materials or agents used for the preservation of flesh. Both the flesh and the sample of blood were found to be of human origin, emphatically excluding the possibility that it was from an animal species. The blood and the flesh were found to belong to the same blood type, AB. The blood of the Eucharistic miracle was found to contain the following minerals: chlorides, phosphorous, magnesium, potassium, sodium in a lesser degree, and a greater quantity of calcium. Proteins in the clotted blood were found to be normally fractionated, with the same percentage ratio as those found in normal fresh blood.”

2. Braine, France – 1153

3. Ferrerara, Italy – 1171

4. Augsburg, Germany – 1194

5. Altari, Italy – 1228

6. Santarem, Portugal – early 13thcentury

7. Florence, Italy – 1230 and 1595

8. Daroca, Spain – 1239

9. Olmutz, Czechoslovakia – 1242

10. Regensburg, Germany – 1257

11. Bolsena-Orvieto, Italy – 1263

12. Paris, Francis – 1274 and 1290

13. Slavonice, Czechoslovakia – 1280

14. Offida, Italy – 1280

15. Hasselt, Belgium – 1317

16. Siena, Italy – 1330 and 1730

17. Blanot, France – 1331

18. Amsterdam, The Netherlands – 1345

19. Macerata, Italy – 1356

20. Brussels, Belgium – 1370

21. Middleburg-Louvain, Belgium – 1374

22. Seefeld, Austria – 1384

23. Dijon, France – before 1433

24. Avignon, France – 1433

25. Turin, Italy – 1453

26. Morrovalle, Italy – 1560

27. Alcala de Henares, Spain – 1597

28. Faverney, France – 1608

29. Paterno, Italy – 1722

30. Bordeax, France – 1822

31. Dubna, Poland (now Dubna, Russia) – 1867

32. The Two Miracles of Stich, West Germany – 1970

From The Eucharistic Miracles of the World

33. Buenos Aires, Argentina – 1992

p.7: at the moment the sample was studied: “this heart was alive”

- heart tissue with white blood cells, which usually disintegrate in 15 minutes, this test was six years after the fact

- left ventricle, purified blood

- man who suffered greatly

34. Tixtla, Mexico – 2006

p.182-83: blood, DNA of human origin

- flood flowed from interior of Host toward exterior, like a wound

- blood type AB

- presence of fresh blood

- white and red blood cells, lacerated and containing recovery mechanisms like a living tissue

- heart muscle

- unable to extract a genetic profile

Adoration:

Feingold:

p.587: Adoration tied principally to one of three ends:

1. Presence: Christ wished to perpetuate His adorable human presence among us after ascending definitively into heaven.

Reminder: Eucharist connotations of Easter:

John 20:17 – Do not keep clinging to me

Other Resurrection appearances

Adoration tied more remotely to other two ends:

2. Sacrifice: Christ is adored in the Eucharist as the sacrificial Victim of Calvary whose body was given for us and whose blood was ‘poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins’ (Mat.26:28)

p.588: Eucharistic adoration enables us to spend time intimately thanking Him for His sacrificial gift expressed in His Eucharistic words:

p.588: Eucharistic adoration helps us to nurture our desire so that we grow in hunger and thirst for the Bridegroom who feeds His Bride on His own Flesh and Blood so that she may share ever more in His Divinity.

3. Communion: Adoration aids the faithful to be inserted more deeply into the communion of the mystical Body.

Objection to Eucharistic Adoration answered from Spirit of the Liturgy – not an unjustified late development, but a natural maturing of Eucharistic faith – “Eucharistic Amazement”

Ratzinger: “He is here, He Himself, the whole of Himself, and He remains here.’ . . . This deepened awareness of faith is impelled by the knowledge that in the consecrated species He is there and remains there. When a man experiences this with every fiber of his heart and mind and senses, the consequence is inescapable: ‘We must make a proper place for this Presence.’

Second millennium development of tabernacle

“Here He is among us. His presence (Shekinah) really does now dwell among us – in the humblest parish church no less than in the grandest cathedral.”

- Definitive Temple in the New Jerusalem, anticipated here”

p.591: “Communion only reaches its true depths when it is supported and surrounded by adoration.”

Papal Magisteria on Eucharistic Adoration:

Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei

John Paul II, Dominicae Cenae

Benedict XVI, Sacramentum Caritatis

Francis, “Letter to Eucharistic Congress in Genoa

Fr. John Hardon, S.J., The History of Eucharistic Adoration:

p.vii: [Eucharistic Adoration] is authentic Catholic doctrine and it rests on the unchangeable truth of our revealed faith. But it needs to be explained, and the explanation is a classic example of what we called development of doctrine”

120s

Hermits of Egypt and Palestine would retain fragments of the Eucharistic species in their cells

p.2: “The immediate purpose of this reservation was to enable the hermits to give themselves Holy Communion. But these hermits were too conscious of what the Real Presence was, not to treat it with great reverence and not to think of it as serving a sacred purpose.”

“Not only did they have the Sacrament with them in their cells, but they carried it on their persons when they moved from one place to another. This practice was sanctioned by the custom of the fermentum, that certainly goes back to as early as 120 A.D. The rite of the fermentum was a particle of the Eucharist (sometimes dipped in the chalice) transported from the bishop of one diocese to the bishop of another diocese.”

From the time of the Council of Nicaea, we know that fermentum was reserved for the sick and dying.

St. Basil:

p.3: “one of the first unmistakable references to reserving the Blessed Sacrament is found in a life of St. Basil (who died in 379). Basil is said to have divided the Eucharistic Bread into three parts when he celebrated Mass in the monastery. One part he consumed, the second part he gave to the monks, and the third he placed in a golden dove suspended above the atlar.”

600s

p.3: “The life of St. Comgall (died 601) tells how on one occasion he was attacked by heathen Pietists while working in a field. On seeing the chrismal around his neck, the attackers did not dare touch him for fear of some retaliation since they surmised (as the narrator says) that Comgall was carrying his God.”

“[Monks] would have it on their persons when working in the fields or going on a voyage. The species was either placed in a small receptacle (chrismal) worn bandoleer-fashion, or in a little bag (perula) hung around the neck under their clothes. Irish and British manuscripts make frequent mention of this practice.”

800s

p.3: “Certainly by the 800s, the Blessed Sacrament was kept within the monastic church itself, close to the altar. In fact, we have a poem from the year 802, telling of a pyx containing the Sacred Species reserved on the high altar of the abbey church at Lindisfarne in England.”

1000s

two small ancient tabernalces form Pope Victor III (died 1087) gave to Monte Cassino were destroyed in the Allies’ bombing of Monte Cassino

1100s

response to Berengarius: p.5 – “Processions of the Blessed Sacrament were instituted; prescribed acts of adoration were legislate; visits to Chrsit in the pyx were encouraged; the cells of anchoresses had windows made into the church to allow the religious to view and adore before the tabernacle.”

1200s

St. Francis – “all those are damned who see the Sacrament of the Body of Christ which is consecrated on the altar in the form of bread and wine by the words of our Lord in the hands of the priest, and do not see or believe in spirit and in God that this is really the most holy Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

St. Clare

1226- 1792 adoration exposed in the Church of the Holy Cross in Paris

40 hours

1592

Clement VII: “we have determined to establish publicly in this Mother City of Rome an uninterrupted course of prayer in such ways that in the different churches [the specifies them] on appointed days, there be observed the pious and salutary devotion of the Forty Hours; with such an arrangement of churches and times that at every hour of the day and night, the incense of prayer shall ascend without intermission before the face of the Lord.”

1731 – Clement XIII, details on 40 hours

1917 Code of Canon Law – It is recommended . . . that there be held each year a solemn exposition of the Blessed Sacrament for an appropriate, even if not for a continuous, time so that the local community may more attentively meditate on and adore the Eucharistic Mystery (Canon 942).

Religious institutes of perpetual adoration

1654 – Austria, Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration

1817 – Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar

[1883 – (in La Crosse) sisters become Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration]

Gift and Presence, p.164: “For both Calderon [Spanish playwright 1600-1681] and Dante – and this is the only point to take away here – Thomas Aquinas is indeed a respectable poet. And James Joyce, one of the most significant authors of the twentieth century, joined in this assessment.”

p.8: [quotes from Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 62:] “Let us make our own the words of St. Thomas Aquinas, an eminent theologian and an impassioned poet of Christ in the Eucharist.”

p.11: “When Thomas composes a lectio, it is devoted entirely to the explanation of a text at hand; when he crafts a quaestio, it goes beyond textual exposition to deal with the conflict between diverse positions on a particular problem and then to advance a unique solution (solutio / responsio) after weighing the pro and contra arguments. It is not surprising that the literary genus of both requires a conceptually precise, academically oriented language that neutralizes subjective or even affective moments. The same holds for the strictly regulated procedure of the public disputatio, which found its literary reflection en miniature in the articles of the Summa theologiae.”

p.12: “All the more remarkable is the fact that Thomas Aquinas, in whose work the speculative penetration of the truths of faith found a most elevated form, also composed hymns and prayers. The spirituality of Thomas, which in any case is noticeable in a hidden way in his scientific works, is articulated more openly in his hymns.”

p.12: “At any rate, the Eucharistic hymns reveal another side of the Doctor communis, a side of which too little notice has been taken in academic theology. He was not only a philosophically and likewise theologically adept thinker but also a man of profound prayer, who brought his speculative considerations into his meditative contemplation as well. Precisely his prayers enable the spiritual subtext of his theology to be unveiled.”

Office for Corpus Christi

Story of St. Juliana of Liege, vita Juliana, in 1209: “when Juliana gave herself to prayer in her youth, a great and wonderful sign appeared to her. She saw the moon in its splendor, but on the edge was a small crack. She gazed upon it for a long time and knew not at all what it ought to mean. And so she besought the Lord fervently to reveal to her the meaning. He revealed to her that the moon represented the Church, but the dark area at the edge intimated that a feast day was still missing, one which he wished to see celebrated by all the faithful. It was his will that the institution of his Most Holy Sacrament receive its own proper celebration, for the increase of the faith, which was now abating at the end of the world, and for the grace-filled progress of the elect; and all of this more than on Holy Thursday alone, when the Church was already occupied solely with the washing of the feet and the commemoration of his passion. What on ordinary days suffers from neglect on account of too little devotion and carelessness is to be made up on this day. When Christ had revealed this to the virgin, he charged her with the task of beginning this celebration and proclaiming this instruction to the world.”

p.166: In 1246 Bishop Robert of Liege declared . . . that the ‘Feast of the Holy Sacrament’ was to be celebrated in his bishopric on the Thursday after the octave of the Trinity.’

August 11, 1264 – Pope Urban IV promulgated Transiturus de hoc mundo.

DH 846 – In the institution of this sacrament he himself said to the apostles: ‘Do this in memory of me’ [Lk 22:19], so that this high and venerable sacrament should be for us a prime and outstanding memorial of his extraordinary love, by which he has loved us. A wondrous memorial, I say . . . in which the signs are renewed and the marvels are changed, in which all delight is contained . . . . in which we indeed received support for life and salvation. This is . . . the saving memorial in which we recall with gratitude the memory of our redemption, in which we are withdrawn from evil and strengthened in good and go forward to an increase of virtues and graces., in which we really go forward through the bodily presence of the Savior himself.

For the other things we commemorate we embrace in mind and spirit, but we do not thereby obtain their REAL PRESENCE. But in this sacramental memorial of Christ, Jesus Christ is present with us in another form: in fact, in his own substance. For when he was about to go up into heaven, he said to his apostles and their successors: ‘Behold I am with you all days, even to the end of the world’ [Mt 28:20], comforting them by a kind promise that he would remain and be with them even in his bodily presence.”

DH 847 - . . . Transcending the very fullness of generosity, exceeding every form of love, he gave himself as food, O singular and wondrous liberality, where the giver becomes the gift and what is given is entirely the same as the giver!. . . .

He therefore gave himself to us as food, so that man, since he had gone to ruin by death, should by this food be lifted up to life . . . . A taste wounded, and a taste healed. See how, whence the wound arose, the cure too came forth, and, whence death made approach, thence life proceeds. . .

There was also a suitable liberality, and a fitting manner of proceeding in the fact that the eternal Word of God, who is the food and refreshment of the rational creature, should, when made flesh, give himself in edible form to a rational creature of flesh and body, namely, man . . . This bread is taken but, truly, not consumed; it is eaten but not changed; for it is not transformed into the eater; rather, if worthily received, the recipient is conformed to it.

Eucharistic miracle of 1263 in Bolsena

Pange lingua gloriosi

Rhyme and Meter:

A Gift of Presence, 177: “The hymn has six strophes that follow the rhyme scheme A-B-A-B-A-B and each is composed of six lines.”

p.177: “The strophic structure, meter, and melody depend upon the hymn to the cross written by Venantius Fortunatus in the 6th century, Pange lingua gloriosi proelium certaminis, which later (ninth century) found its way into the Divine Office during Passiontide and was used in the veneration of the cross.

Venantius Fortunatus also composed the Vexilla Regis

Linkage between Passion and the Eucharist

Venantius Fortunatus:

Latin (Wikipedia)

English

Pange, lingua, gloriosi proelium certaminis et super crucis trophaeo dic triumphum nobilem, qualiter redemptor orbis immolatus vicerit. De parentis protoplasti fraude factor condolens, quando pomi noxialis morte morsu corruit, ipse lignum tunc notavit, damna ligni ut solveret. Hoc opus nostrae salutis ordo depoposcerat, multiformis perditoris arte ut artem falleret et medelam ferret inde, hostis unde laeserat. Quando venit ergo sacri plenitudo temporis, missus est ab arce patris natus orbis conditor atque ventre virginali carne factus prodiit. Vagit infans inter arta conditus praesaepia, membra pannis involuta virgo mater adligat, et pedes manusque crura stricta pingit fascia. Lustra sex qui iam peracta tempus implens corporis, se volente, natus ad hoc, passioni deditus, agnus in crucis levatur immolandus stipite. Hic acetum, fel, arundo, sputa, clavi, lancea; mite corpus perforatur; sanguis, unda profluit, terra pontus astra mundus quo lavantur flumine. Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis, nulla talem silva profert flore, fronde, germine, dulce lignum dulce clavo dulce pondus sustinens. Flecte ramos, arbor alta, tensa laxa viscera, et rigor lentescat ille quem dedit nativitas, ut superni membra regis mite tendas stipite. Sola digna tu fuisti ferre pretium saeculi atque portum praeparare nauta mundo naufrago, quem sacer cruor perunxit fusus agni corpore.

Sing, my tongue, the glorious battle; Sing the ending of the fray. Now above the cross, the trophy, Sound the loud triumphant lay: Tell how Christ, the world's redeemer, As a victim won the day. Tell how, when at length the fullness Of the appointed time was come, He, the Word, was born of woman, Left for us His Father's home, Blazed the path of true obedience, Shone as light amidst the gloom. Thus, with thirty years accomplished, He went forth from Nazareth, Destined, dedicated, willing, Did His work, and met His death; Like a lamb He humbly yielded On the cross His dying breath. Faithful cross, true sign of triumph, Be for all the noblest tree; None in foliage, none in blossom, None in fruit thine equal be; Symbol of the world's redemption, For the weight that hung on thee! Unto God be praise and glory: To the Father and the Son, To the eternal Spirit honor Now and evermore be done; Praise and glory in the highest, While the timeless ages run.

Text of St. Thomas: Vespers

Pange, lingua, gloriosi Corporis mysterium, Sanguinisque pretiosi, Quem in mundi pretium, Fructus ventris generosi, Rex effudit gentium.

Nobis datus, nobis natus Ex intacta Virgine, Et in mundo conversatus Sparso verbi semine, Sui mores incolatus Miro clausit ordine.

In supremae nocte coenae? Recumbens cum fratribus. Observata lege plene Cibis in legalibus, Cibum turbae duodenae Se dat suis manibus.

Verbum caro, panem verum Verbo carnem efficit, Fitque sanguis Christi merum; Et si sensus deficit, Ad firmandum cor sincerum Sola fides sufficit.

Tantum ergo Sacramentum Veneremur cernui: Et antiquum documentum Novo cedat ritui: Praestet fides supplementurn Sensuum defectui.

Genitori Genitoque Laus et iubilatio, Salus, honor, virtue quoque Sit et benedictio: Procedenti ab utroque Compar sit laudatio. Amen.

V. Panem de caelo praestitisti eis, R. Omne delectamentum in se habentem.

Oremus.

Deus, qui nobis sub Sacramento mirabili Passionis tuae memoriam reliquisti: tribue, quaesumus, ita nos Corporis et Sanguinis tui sacra mysteria venerari, ut redemptionis tuae fructum in nobis iugiter sentiamus: Qui vivis et regnas in saecula saeculorum. Amen (ex Breviario Romano)

Sing, my tongue, the Saviour's glory, Of His Flesh the mystery sing; Of the Blood, all price exceeding, Shed by our immortal King, Destined, for the world's redemption, From a noble womb to spring.

Of a pure and spotless Virgin Born for us on earth below, He, as Man with man conversing, Stay'd, the seeds of truth to sow; Then He closed in solemn order Wondrously His life of woe.

On the night of that Last Supper, Seated with His chosen band, He the Paschal victim eating, First fulfils the Law's command; Then, as Food to His Apostles Gives Himself with His own hand.

Word made Flesh, the bread of nature By His word to Flesh He turns; Wine into His Blood He changes:- What though sense no change discerns? Only be the heart in earnest, Faith her lesson quickly learns.

Therefore, we, before It bending, This great Sacrament adore; Types and shadows have their ending In the new rite evermore: Faith, our outward sense amending, Maketh good defects before.

Honor, laud, and praise addressing To the Father and the Son, Might ascribe we, virtue, blessing, And eternal benison: Holy Ghost, from both progressing, Equal laud to Thee be done. Amen.

V. Thou didst send them bread from heaven, R. Having in itself every delight.

Let us pray.

O God, who under this wonderful Sacrament hast left us a memorial of Thy Passion: grant us, we beseech Thee, so to reverence the sacred mysteries of Thy Body and Thy Blood, that we may ever feel within ourselves the fruit of Thy redemption: Who livest and reignest for ever and ever. Amen (Roman Breviary).

Sections from A Gift of Presence

Doxology to the Exalted Christ as Rex Gentium

p.179: quotes psalm 62:6 – my mouth will praise you with joy

quotes , “to praise is, in truth, to wonder”

p.179: “It is no accident that the Pange linguarefers to a mystery that offers the occasion to render praise. It is certainly notable here that it is not the mystery of the Eucharist that is first of all addressed. Rather, praise is given to the glorified body (corpus gloriosum) of the Lord, which becomes present ever anew in the forms of bread and wine during the celebration of the sacrament of the altar.”

Literally, “sing, my tongue, the mystery of the glorified body”

Pretium mundi – ransom for the world / the world’s price

Psalm 48:7ff – Truly no man can ransom himself or give to God the price of his of life

1 Peter 1:18ff – You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.”

p.180-81: “In the opening stanza, it is the first mystery of the glorified Lord that is lauded, the same Lord who gave his life for us in the Passion. The reference to blood recalls the sacrificial dimension of his death, which is explicitly signified in the forma sacramenti spoken over the wine. . .”

. . . thereafter, he enters into the sphere of consummate perfection by way of resurrection and ascension.”

Rex gentium – widens titulus crucis, “King of the Jews”

Revelation 15:3

O Antiphon:

O Rex Gentium, et desideratus earum, lapisque angularis, qui facis utraque unum : veni, et salva hominem, quem de limo formasti.

O King of the Nations and desired by them, you cornerstone, who make both things one, come and save mankind whom you formed from clay.

p.181-82: “It marks the exalted Christ’s lordly and judicial status, which will be taken up again in another hymn, Verbum supernum prodiens; there, the text dwells upon the Incarnate Word of God and formulates it thus: se regnans [!] dat in praemium. The hymn Pange lingua, however, deals less with articulating the eschatological potential of associating glorification, judgment, and consummate perfection; rather, it concerns itself with gratefully and joyfully extolling the mystery of the glorified Lord.”

The Life of Jesus and the Handing on of the Word

p.182: “In the hymn’s second stanza, a retrospective on the life of Jesus and a whole summary of his earthly existence are offered. The description ranges from his being born of the Virgin Mary, to his public ministry and his work of preaching, all the way to the last supper.”

Nobis natus, nobis datus

p.182: the opening verse of the rings out sonoriuosly, as it takes up the Mariological motif of the first stanza and carries it further (fructus ventris generosi).

Isaiah 9:6 – parvulus enim natus est nobis et filius datus est nobis ; unto us a child is born and a son is given.

p.182: “A gift is mentioned without the giver being explicitly named. But if the Trinitarian life in God is interpreted as an eternal occurrence of giving and receiving, then the rationale for the Incarnation is passing on life: God desires to share himself with others, se aliis communicare. The context of the hymn makes clear that in his Son, God gives himself as gift. The infinite distance between God, the Creator, and men, his privileged creatures, is thereby fundamentally bridged and the possibility with friendship with God inaugurated.”

John 3:16

Sparso verbi semine

p.184: “The time of Jesus’ public ministry is therefore conceived of as the time of sowing the Word . . . ‘In Pange lingua, the synoptic parable of the sower becomes an image integrating the various parts of Jesus’ whole life.’ Jesus preaches and teaches, his proclamation is directed toward concrete addresses and takes place in a dialogical face-to-face with his listeners.”

Preference of verbal over written (cf. John 21:25)

Fruitful reception (From In Matth XIII.l.I (n.1087ff))

1. Memory

2. Charity

3. Solicitude (careful cultivation)

Obstacles to Fruitful Reception:

1. Path, trampled – forgotten

2. Rocky ground, little soil – hard-heartedness

3. Thorns, choked – love of riches / concerns of this world prevent attentive reception

Jesus’ Self-Gift on the Night of the Last Supper

p.187: It is the last meal Jesus spends with his disciples; the mood is tinged with farewells. Jesus lies at table with his ‘brothers’ (fratribus) – as the hymn puts it – and celebrates the Passover meal. He observed the Law (plene observata), as Thomas highlights, and therefore he also took up the prescribed meal (cibis in legalibus) of the Passover celebration.”

1 thought: how fitting that his farewell is also the hello, His last meal is the beginning of his new mode of presence

se dat manibus: “He no longer scatters himself in many words, but rather gathers himself up and then gives himself with his own hands.”

p.187: “He gives himself as food (cibum) to the Twelve, who were chosen as representatives of the tribes of Israel. The word cibus institutes an association, pregnant with meaning, between the old and new covenants. The Passover feasts as dictated by the Law are the figura of the new covenant meal, in which Christ gives himself as food – food that designates in an anticipatory way the heavenly wedding banquet (see Mk 14:25). He gives himself with his own hands, as the hymn states. The covenant of his love becomes perceptible to the senses in the breaking and distributing of the bread, which illuminatingly anticipates the significance of the Passion. With this gesture, the resurrected Lord is recognized by the disciples in Emmaus; with this gesture, the ecclesial tradition of the Eucharistic self-gift of Christ remains bound up.”

2 thoughts:

1. John 12:24 – truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.”

2. Luke 24:31, 35 – They recognized him the breaking of the bread

a. In the breaking, they see the Lord they know – His whole life

b. Last time they saw him was broken

c. Stay with us

The Poetic Pinnacle: The Mystery of Eucharistic Conversion

p.187: “It is no accident that the impetus for Jesus’ giving of himself with his own hands stands architectonically as the focal point of the hymnj. Nor is it an accident that in the fourth stanza the historical fact of this self-gift at the last supper is linked with the question of howthis self-gift can be made present ever anew by the ecclesial community in the history that follows. Without the Word that not only created the things of reality but also can transform them, the mystery of the Eucharist is incomprehensible.”

p.188: refers to the “performative power of the divine Word” / “inner connection between the Incarnation and Eucharist” / verbum efficax, verba testament

caro in John’s gospel discussed twice: 1:14; 6

Grateful Appreciation of the Giver’s Presence in the Gift

p.189: The two concluding stanzas display the grateful reaction of the faithful to this great gift. Sounding rather like a syllogistic deduction, the hymn states: Tantum ergo sacramentum veneremur cernui. The gift of the sacrament cannot leave one indifferent – it demands appropriate expression.”

Question: Is this true?

p.190: The hymn closes with a Trinitarian doxology that impressively produces the plerophoric style of diction proper to hymns. The three divine Persons are named not as Father, Son, and Spirit, but are still fittingly paraphrased (genitori genitoque). In the parts of the Summa theologiae dealing with the Trinitarian theology, Thomas explains that there is generation (generatio) in the divinity: ‘The procession of the Word in the divinity is called generation, and that Word himself proceeding is called Son.’ Temporal, physical concepts are naturally to be kept at arm’s length when dealing with the concept of generation in Trinitarian theology. In contrast with the created realm, where generation always also signifies a change from nonbeing to being, generation in God signifies an eternal event that indicates the relation of origin between Father and Son. From both Father and Son, however, proceeds the reciprocal bond of love, the Spirit (procedenti ab utroque). In the hymn, a shower of predicates is lavished upon the triune God, the origin and end of created being: praise (laus), jubilation (jubilatio), salvation (salus), honor, power (virtus), blessing (benedictio). The exuberance of praise corresponds to the inexpressible wonder of the gift that God gave to the faithful in the Eucharist.”

An Interim Reflection, p.191-92 [worth it]

Sacris solemniis – Matins

English – John David Chambers, 1805-93

Latin

At this our solemn feast let holy joys

Abound,

And from the inmost breast let songs of praise resound,

Let ancient rites depart and all be new around,

In every act, and voice, and heart.

Remember we that even, when, the Last Supper spread,

Christ, as we all believe, the Lamb, with

Leavenless bread,

Among his brethren shared, and thus the law obeyed,

Of all, unto their sire declared.

The typic Lamb consumed, the legal

Feast complete,

The Lord unto the Twelve, the body gave to eat;

The whole to all, no less, the whole to each did meet

With his own hands, as we confess

He gave them, weak and frail, his flesh,

Their food to be;

On them, downcast and sad, his blood bestowed he:

And thus to them he spake, “Receive this cup from me,

And all of you this partake.”

So He this Sacrifice to institute did will,

And charged His priests alone that office to fulfil:

To them He did confide: to whom it pertains still

To take, and the rest divide.

Thus Angels’ Bread is made the Bread of man today:

The Living Bread from heaven with figures dost away:

O woundrous gift indeed! Upon Lord

And Master, may poor,

Servant, and humble feed.

Thee, therefore, we implore, O Godhead, One in Three,

So may Thou visit us as we now worship Thee;

And lead us on Thy way, that we at last may see

The light wherein Thou dwellest aye.

Amen.

Sacris solemniis iuncta sint gaudiia,

Et ex praecordiis sonent praeconia,

Recedant vetera, nova sint omnia,

Corda, voces, et opera.

Noctis recolitur cena novissima,

Qua Christus creditor agnum et azyma

Dedisse fratribus, iuxta legitima

Priscis indulta patribus.

Post agnum typicum, expletis epulis,

Corpus Dominicum datum discipulis

Sic totum omnibus, quod totum singulis,

Eius fatemur manibus.

Dedit fragilibus corporis ferculum,

Dedit et tristibus sanguinis poculum,

Dicens : accipite quod trado vasculum ;

Omnes ex eo bibite.

Sic sacrificium istud instituit,

Cuius officium committi voluit

Solis presbyteris, quibus sic congruit,

Ut sumant, et dent ceteris.

Panis angelicus fit panis hominum,

Dat panis caelicus figuris terminum.

O res mirabilis: manducat Dominum

Pauper, servus et humilis.

Te trina Deitas unaque, poscimus,

Sic nos tu visita, sicut te colimus:

Per tuas semitas duc nos quo tendimus,

Ad lucem quam inhabitas. Amen.

A Gift of Presence, 195: “The hymn Sacris solemniis is prayed in the Office for Matins, that is, at early dawn or in the last hours of night; thus, it has somewhat the status of a hymnic overture.

A Gift of Presence, 196: “After a festive introduction linguistically characterized by moments of alliteration and assonance, there follows in the second stanza a historical reminiscence on Jesus’ last supper, which – again corresponding to the chronology of the synoptics – is characterized as a Passover meal. The third strophe directs one’s attention to the ritual innovation that takes place after the meal, when the body of the Lord is given to the disciples. More precisely, this self-gift of Christ is distinguished into two ritual actions: the gift of his body and the gift of his blood.”

A Gift of Presence, 196: “It is likewise emphasized that in the succession of time Christ wanted this ministry to be perpetuated by priests, who function, so to speak, as ‘instruments’ of passing on (traditio).”

Theology:

Characterized by festivity and joy

A Gift of Presence, 199: “Set within the context of Passover, there follows the establishment of the new covenant. The hymn speaks emphatically of the last supper as coena novissima. The ritual innovation takes place – as the hymn stresses – post agnum typicum, that is, after the satiating meal. The body of the Lord is given to the disciples, or more precisely: it is due to the profession of those praying (fatemur) tha the corpus dominicum was given to the disciples, and indeed to each one entire, since Christ is wholly contained in each part of the gift. The hymn presupposes the teaching of concomitance, without clarifying it in any detail. Christ communicates the self-gift to his own through his own hands – se dat suis manibus. It is hardly by chance that the hands are explicitly mentioned here. It is these hands that break and share the bread. This manual act will not be insignificant for the handing on (traditio) of the testament – the Eucharist.”

Given to the fragile, sad

A Gift of Presence, 200: “This motif lends itself to being translated in such a way that the Eucharistic gift of Christ’s presence transforms the cup of tears into the chalice of blessing and joy, as conjured up by the opening of the hymn . . . It may be judged a special sign of divine beneficence that the giver is himself contained in the gift”

Priests have received their authority likewise by gift

Ends with doxology to anticipate heavenly vision of Glory of God

A Gift of Presence, 202: “The longing for the vision of God expresses itself in the petition for companionship on the journey so that the end might be attained: the light that no longer knows darkness. It is once again characteristic that the eschatological dimension of the Eucharist – its character as viaticum for the homo viator – stands at the end of the hymn.”

Verbum supernum – Lauds

English

Latin

The heavenly Word proceeding forth,

Yet leaving not his Father’s side,

And going to His work on Earth,

Has reached at length life’s eventide.

By false disciple to be given

To foemen for His blood athirst,

Himself, the living Bread from heaven,

He gave to His diciples first.

To them He gave, in twofold kind,

His very Flesh, His very Blood:

Of twofold substance man is made,

And He of man would be the Food.

By birth our fellowmen was He,

Our Food while seated at the board;

He died, our ransomer to be;

He ever reigns, our great reward.

O Saving Victim, opening wide

The gate of heaven to all below:

Our foes press on from every side;

Thine aid supply, Thy strength bestow.

To Thy great Name be endless praise,

Immortal Godhead, One in Three!

O grant us endless length witih Thee.

Amen.

Verbum supernum prodiens,

Nec Patris linquens dexterans,

Ad opus suum exiens,

Venit ad vitae vesperam.

In mortem a discipulo

Suis tradendus aemulis,

Prius in vitae ferculo

Se tradidit discipulis.

Quibus sub bina specie

Carnem dedit et sanguinem,

Ut duplicis substantiae

Totum cibaret hominem.

Se nascens dedit socium,

Convescens in edulium ;

Se moriens in prestium,

Se regnans dat in praemium.

O Salutaris hostia,

Quae caeli pandis ostium;

Bella premunt hostilia,

Da robur, fer auxilium.

Uno trinoque Domino

Sit sempiterna gloria,

Qui vitam sine termino

Nobis donet in patria.

Amen.

From A Gift of Presence, 204:

Rhyme scheme: A-B-A-B

“While the verse endings in the first five stanzas are consonantic or alternatingly consonatic-vocalic, the last stanza exhibits vocalic endings throughout. To be noted are the many verbal forms in the present participle, which determine the texture of the hymn’s first four strophes and are all rooted in the verbum supernum as subject.”

A Gift of Presence, 204: “The hymn Verbum supernum prodiens also gives a central place to the motif of the divine Word’s self-gift – as shown by the various derivatives of dare and tradere – and it articulates various aspects of this gift.”

Theology:

1stStanza:

A Gift of Presence, 205: “The first strophe set up a sweeping arch, which begins at the pre-existence of the divine Word, draw out the event of the Incarnation, and then – in an extremely summary fashion – brings in the life of the incarnate Word up to the threshold of death. God is not only a God in and for himself; he is a God who goes out of himself, is born as a man, and in just this way desires to be a God for and with men.”

2nd Stanza

3rd Stanza

4th Stanza

5th and 6th Stanza (hymn for exposition)

A Gift of Presence, 207: “Nevertheless, there first occurs a caesura: although the first four strophes spoke of the divine Word (verbum supernum), the hymn now shifts the perspective. The sacrifice (hostia), in which the incarnate Word of the Father gives himself, becomes the addressee. . . . The salvific sacrifice – far from being reduced to a thing – is addressed as a person, because in it the eternal Word of the Father is present. Salvific power is ascribed to the converted host. It is able to open the gate to heaven; it gives strength (robur) and aid (auxilium) in the face of daily hardships.”

Lauda Sion - Sequence

Adoro te devote

Latin

English from A Gift of Presence

Gerard Manley Hopkins

Adoro te devote, latens deitas,

Quæ sub his figuris vere latitas;

Tibi se cor meum totum subjicit,

Quia te contemplans totum deficit.

Visus, tactus, gustus in te fallitur,

Sed auditu solo tuto creditur.

Credo quidquid dixit Dei Filius;

Nil hoc verbo Veritátis[6] verius.

In Cruce[6] latebat sola Deitas,

At hic latet simul et Humanitas,

Ambo tamen credens atque confitens,

Peto quod petivit latro pœnitens.

Plagas, sicut Thomas, non intueor:

Deum tamen meum te confiteor.

Fac me tibi semper magis credere,

In te spem habere, te diligere.

O memoriale mortis Domini,

Panis vivus, vitam præstans homini,

Præsta meæ menti de te vívere,

Et te illi semper dulce sapere.

Pie Pelicane, Jesu Domine,

Me immundum munda tuo Sanguine:[6]

Cujus una stilla salvum facere

Totum mundum quit ab omni scelere.

Jesu, quem velatum nunc aspicio,

Oro, fiat illud quod tam sitio:

Ut te revelata cernens facie,

Visu sim beátus tuæ gloriæ. Amen.

O hidden truth, devoutly I adore Thee,

Who truly art within the forms before me.

To thee my heart I bow with bended knee,

As failing quite in contemplating Thee.

Sight, touch, and taste in Thee are each deceived;

The ear alone most safely is believed.

I believe all the Son of God has spoken, than Truth’s own word there is no truer token.

God only on the Cross lay hid from view, but here lies hid at once the humanity too.

And I, in both professing my belief, make the same prayer as the repentant thief.

Thy wounds, as Thomas saw, I do not see,

Yet Thee confess my Lord and God to be.

Make me believe Thee ever more and more,

In Thee my hope, in Thee my love to store.

O thou Memorial of Our Lord’s own dying!

O Bread that living art and vivifying!

Make ever Thou my soul on Thee to live,

Ever a taste of Heavenly sweetness give.

O loving Pelican! O Jesus, Lord!

Unclean I am, but cleanse me in Thy Blood,

Of which a single drop, for sinners spilt, is ransom for a world’s entire guilt.

Jesus, whom for the present veil’d I see, what I so thirst for, when will’t be granted me?

That I may see Thy countenance unfolding,

And may be blest Thy glory in beholding. Amen.

Godhead here in hiding, whom I do adore, Masked by these bare shadows, shape and nothing more, See, Lord, at thy service low lies here a heart Lost, all lost in wonder at the God thou art.

Seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived: How says trusty hearing? that shall be believed; What God’s Son has told me, take for truth I do; Truth himself speaks truly or there’s nothing true.

On the cross thy godhead made no sign to men, Here thy very manhood steals from human ken: Both are my confession, both are my belief, And I pray the prayer of the dying thief.

I am not like Thomas, wounds I cannot see, But can plainly call thee Lord and God as he; Let me to a deeper faith daily nearer move, Daily make me harder hope and dearer love.

O thou our reminder of Christ crucified, Living Bread, the life of us for whom he died, Lend this life to me then: feed and feast my mind, There be thou the sweetness man was meant to find.

Bring the tender tale true of the Pelican; Bathe me, Jesu Lord, in what thy bosom ran— Blood whereof a single drop has power to win All the world forgiveness of its world of sin.

Jesu, whom I look at shrouded here below, I beseech thee send me what I thirst for so, Some day to gaze on thee face to face in light And be blest for ever with thy glory’s sight. Amen.

Faith as access to the Hidden Presence of Christ

Hidden

p.235: “the one at prayer professes to want to subject his whole heart (cor meum totum) to the divine You. . . The act of this self-surrender takes place because the contemplation of the hidden presence of the divine You (te contemplans) is unable to fathom this mystery fully. ”

Romans 10:17 – ergo fides ex auditu

Living in and from Christ

Petitions for faith, hope, love

A Remembrance of the Future – the Longing for Unveiled Vision

1 Cor.13:12 –

p.243: “It is hoped by the one praying that the body of Christ, still veiled (velatum) in the sign of bread, may one day be visible in an unveiled way (revelatum).”

Ambo vere (tamen) credens atque confitens

Rom. 10:9 – If you confess with your lips (in ore tuo) that Jesus is Lord and believe it in your heart (in corde tuo) that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.