Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
| Deinde considerandum est de ritu huius sacramenti. Et circa hoc quaeruntur sex. | We have now to consider the Rite of this sacrament, under which head there are six points of inquiry: |
| Primo, utrum in celebratione huius mysterii Christus immoletur. | (1) Whether Christ is sacrificed in the celebration of this mystery? |
| Secundo, de tempore celebrationis. | (2) Of the time of celebrating; |
| Tertio, de loco, et aliis quae pertinent ad apparatum huius celebrationis. |
(3) Of the place and other matters relating to the equipment for this celebration; |
| Quarto, de his quae in celebratione huius mysterii dicuntur. | (4) Of the words uttered in celebrating this mystery; |
| Quinto, de his quae circa celebrationem huius mysterii fiunt. | (5) Of the actions performed in celebrating this mystery. |
| Sexto, de defectibus qui circa celebrationem huius sacramenti occurrunt. | (6) Of the defects which occur in the celebration of this sacrament. |
Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
Article: 1 [ << | >> ]
| Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod in celebratione huius sacramenti Christus non immoletur. Dicitur enim Hebr. X, quod Christus una oblatione consummavit in sempiternum sanctificatos. Sed illa oblatio fuit eius immolatio. Ergo Christus non immolatur in celebratione huius sacramenti. |
Objection 1: It seems that Christ is not sacrificed in the celebration of this sacrament. For it is written (Heb. 10:14) that "Christ by one oblation hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." But that oblation was His oblation. Therefore Christ is not sacrificed in the celebration of this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, immolatio Christi facta est in cruce, in qua tradidit semetipsum oblationem et hostiam Deo in odorem suavitatis, ut dicitur Ephes. V. Sed in celebratione huius mysterii Christus non crucifigitur. Ergo nec immolatur. | Objection 2: Further, Christ's sacrifice was made upon the cross, whereon "He delivered Himself for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness," as is said in Eph. 5:2. But Christ is not crucified in the celebration of this mystery. Therefore, neither is He sacrificed. |
| Praeterea, sicut Augustinus dicit, IV de Trin., in immolatione Christi idem est sacerdos et hostia. Sed in celebratione huius sacramenti non est idem sacerdos et hostia. Ergo celebratio huius sacramenti non est Christi immolatio. | Objection 3: Further, as Augustine says (De Trin. iv), in Christ's sacrifice the priest and the victim are one and the same. But in the celebration of this sacrament the priest and the victim are not the same. Therefore, the celebration of this sacrament is not a sacrifice of Christ. |
| Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, in libro sententiarum prosperi, semel immolatus est in semetipso Christus, et tamen quotidie immolatur in sacramento. | On the contrary, Augustine says in the Liber Sentent. Prosp. (cf. Ep. xcviii): "Christ was sacrificed once in Himself, and yet He is sacrificed daily in the Sacrament." |
| Respondeo dicendum quod duplici ratione celebratio huius sacramenti dicitur Christi immolatio. Primo quidem quia, sicut Augustinus dicit, ad Simplicianum, solent imagines earum rerum nominibus appellari quarum imagines sunt, sicut cum, intuentes tabulam aut parietem pictum, dicimus, ille Cicero est, ille Sallustius. Celebratio autem huius sacramenti, sicut supra dictum est, imago est quaedam repraesentativa passionis Christi, quae est vera immolatio. Unde Ambrosius dicit, super epistolam ad Heb., in Christo semel oblata est hostia ad salutem sempiternam potens. Quid ergo nos? Nonne per singulos dies offerimus ad recordationem mortis eius? Alio modo, quantum ad effectum passionis, quia scilicet per hoc sacramentum participes efficimur fructus dominicae passionis. Unde et in quadam dominicali oratione secreta dicitur, quoties huius hostiae commemoratio celebratur, opus nostrae redemptionis exercetur. Quantum igitur ad primum modum, poterat Christus dici immolari etiam in figuris veteris testamenti, unde et in Apoc. XIII dicitur, quorum nomina non sunt scripta in libro vitae agni, qui occisus est ab origine mundi. Sed quantum ad modum secundum, proprium est huic sacramento quod in eius celebratione Christus immoletur. |
I answer that, The celebration of this sacrament is called a sacrifice for two reasons. First, because, as Augustine says (Ad Simplician. ii), "the images of things are called by the names of the things whereof they are the images; as when we look upon a picture or a fresco, we say, 'This is Cicero and that is Sallust.'" But, as was said above (Question [79], Article [1]), the celebration of this sacrament is an image representing Christ's Passion, which is His true sacrifice. Accordingly the celebration of this sacrament is called Christ's sacrifice. Hence it is that Ambrose, in commenting on Heb. 10:1, says: "In Christ was offered up a sacrifice capable of giving eternal salvation; what then do we do? Do we not offer it up every day in memory of His death?" Secondly it is called a sacrifice, in respect of the effect of His Passion: because, to wit, by this sacrament, we are made partakers of the fruit of our Lord's Passion. Hence in one of the Sunday Secrets (Ninth Sunday after Pentecost) we say: "Whenever the commemoration of this sacrifice is celebrated, the work of our redemption is enacted." Consequently, according to the first reason, it is true to say that Christ was sacrificed, even in the figures of the Old Testament: hence it is stated in the Apocalypse (13:8): "Whose names are not written in the Book of Life of the Lamb, which was slain from the beginning of the world." But according to the second reason, it is proper to this sacrament for Christ to be sacrificed in its celebration. |
| Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut Ambrosius ibidem dicit, una est hostia, quam scilicet Christus obtulit et nos offerimus, et non multae, quia semel oblatus est Christus, hoc autem sacrificium exemplum est illius. Sicut enim quod ubique offertur unum est corpus et non multa corpora, ita et unum sacrificium. | Reply to Objection 1: As Ambrose says (commenting on Heb. 10:1), "there is but one victim," namely that which Christ offered, and which we offer, "and not many victims, because Christ was offered but once: and this latter sacrifice is the pattern of the former. For, just as what is offered everywhere is one body, and not many bodies, so also is it but one sacrifice." |
| Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut celebratio huius sacramenti est imago repraesentativa passionis Christi, ita altare est repraesentativum crucis ipsius, in qua Christus in propria specie immolatus est. | Reply to Objection 2: As the celebration of this sacrament is an image representing Christ's Passion, so the altar is representative of the cross itself, upon which Christ was sacrificed in His proper species. |
| Ad tertium dicendum quod, per eandem rationem, etiam sacerdos gerit imaginem Christi, in cuius persona et virtute verba pronuntiat ad consecrandum, ut ex supra dictis patet. Et ita quodammodo idem est sacerdos et hostia. |
Reply to Objection 3: For the same reason (cf. Reply Objection [2]) the priest also bears Christ's image, in Whose person and by Whose power he pronounces the words of consecration, as is evident from what was said above (Question [82], Articles [1],3). And so, in a measure, the priest and victim are one and the same. |
Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
Article: 2 [ << | >> ]
| Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod inconvenienter sit determinatum tempus celebrationis huius mysterii. Hoc enim sacramentum est repraesentativum dominicae passionis, ut dictum est. Sed commemoratio dominicae passionis fit in Ecclesia semel in anno, dicit enim Augustinus, super Psalmos, quoties Pascha celebratur, nunquid toties Christus occiditur? Sed tamen anniversaria recordatio repraesentat quod olim factum est, et sic nos facit moveri tanquam videamus dominum in cruce praesentem. Ergo hoc sacramentum non debet celebrari nisi semel in anno. | Objection 1: It seems that the time for celebrating this mystery has not been properly determined. For as was observed above (Article [1]), this sacrament is representative of our Lord's Passion. But the commemoration of our Lord's Passion takes place in the Church once in the year: because Augustine says (Enarr. ii in Ps. 21): "Is not Christ slain as often as the Pasch is celebrated? Nevertheless, the anniversary remembrance represents what took place in by-gone days; and so it does not cause us to be stirred as if we saw our Lord hanging upon the cross." Therefore this sacrament ought to be celebrated but once a year. |
| Praeterea, passio Christi commemoratur in Ecclesia sexta feria ante Pascha, non autem in festo natalis. Cum ergo hoc sacramentum sit commemorativum dominicae passionis, videtur inconveniens quod in die natalis ter celebratur hoc sacramentum, in parasceve autem totaliter intermittitur. | Objection 2: Further, Christ's Passion is commemorated in the Church on the Friday before Easter, and not on Christmas Day. Consequently, since this sacrament is commemorative of our Lord's Passion, it seems unsuitable for this sacrament to be celebrated thrice on Christmas Day, and to be entirely omitted on Good Friday. |
| Praeterea, in celebratione huius sacramenti Ecclesia debet imitari institutionem Christi. Sed Christus consecravit hoc sacramentum hora serotina. Ergo videtur quod tali hora debeat hoc sacramentum celebrari. | Objection 3: Further, in the celebration of this sacrament the Church ought to imitate Christ's institution. But it was in the evening that Christ consecrated this sacrament. Therefore it seems that this sacrament ought to be celebrated at that time of day. |
| Praeterea, sicut habetur de Consecr., dist. I, Leo Papa scribit Dioscoro Alexandrino episcopo, quod in prima parte diei Missas celebrare licet. Sed dies incipit a media nocte, ut supra dictum est. Ergo videtur quod etiam post mediam noctem liceat celebrare. |
Objection 4: Further, as is set down in the Decretals (De Consecr., dist. i), Pope Leo I wrote to Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria, that "it is permissible to celebrate mass in the first part of the day." But the day begins at midnight, as was said above (Question [80], Article [8], ad 5). Therefore it seems that after midnight it is lawful to celebrate. |
| Praeterea, in quadam dominicali oratione secreta dicitur, concede nobis, domine, quaesumus, haec frequentare mysteria. Sed maior erit frequentia si etiam pluribus horis in die sacerdos celebret. Ergo videtur quod non debeat prohiberi sacerdos pluries celebrare in die. | Objection 5: Further, in one of the Sunday Secrets (Ninth Sunday after Pentecost) we say: "Grant us, Lord, we beseech Thee, to frequent these mysteries." But there will be greater frequency if the priest celebrates several times a day. Therefore it seems that the priest ought not to be hindered from celebrating several times daily. |
| Sed in contrarium est consuetudo quam servat Ecclesia secundum canonum statuta. | On the contrary is the custom which the Church observes according to the statutes of the Canons. |
| Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, in celebratione huius mysterii attenditur et repraesentatio dominicae passionis, et participatio fructus eius. Et secundum utrumque oportuit determinare tempus aptum celebrationi huius sacramenti. Quia enim fructu dominicae passionis quotidie indigemus propter quotidianos defectus, quotidie in Ecclesia regulariter hoc sacramentum offertur. Unde et dominus nos petere docet, Luc. XI, panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, quod exponens Augustinus, in libro de verbis domini, dicit, si quotidianus est panis, cur post annum illum sumas, quemadmodum Graeci in oriente facere consueverunt? Accipe quotidie quod quotidie tibi prosit. |
I answer that, As stated above (Article [1]), in the celebration of this mystery, we must take into consideration the representation of our Lord's Passion, and the participation of its fruits; and the time suitable for the celebration of this mystery ought to be determined by each of these considerations. Now since, owing to our daily defects, we stand in daily need of the fruits of our Lord's Passion, this sacrament is offered regularly every day in the Church. Hence our Lord teaches us to pray (Lk. 11:3): "Give us this day our daily bread": in explanation of which words Augustine says (De Verb. Dom. xxviii): "If it be a daily bread, why do you take it once a year, as the Greeks have the custom in the east? Receive it daily that it may benefit you every day." |
| Quia vero dominica passio celebrata est a tertia hora usque ad nonam, ideo regulariter in illa parte diei solemniter celebratur in Ecclesia hoc sacramentum. | But since our Lord's Passion was celebrated from the third to the ninth hour, therefore this sacrament is solemnly celebrated by the Church in that part of the day. |
| Ad primum ergo dicendum quod in hoc sacramento recolitur passio Christi secundum quod eius effectus ad fideles derivatur. Sed tempore passionis recolitur passio Christi solum secundum quod in ipso capite nostro fuit perfecta. Quod quidem factum est semel, quotidie autem fructum dominicae passionis fideles percipiunt. Et ideo sola commemoratio fit semel in anno, hoc autem quotidie, et propter fructum et propter iugem memoriam. | Reply to Objection 1: Christ's Passion is recalled in this sacrament, inasmuch as its effect flows out to the faithful; but at Passion-tide Christ's Passion is recalled inasmuch as it was wrought in Him Who is our Head. This took place but once; whereas the faithful receive daily the fruits of His Passion: consequently, the former is commemorated but once in the year, whereas the latter takes place every day, both that we may partake of its fruit and in order that we may have a perpetual memorial. |
| Ad secundum dicendum quod, veniente veritate, cessat figura. Hoc autem sacramentum est figura quaedam et exemplum passionis dominicae, sicut dictum est. Et ideo in die quo ipsa passio domini recolitur prout realiter gesta est, non celebratur consecratio huius sacramenti. Ne tamen Ecclesia eo etiam die sit sine fructu passionis per hoc sacramentum nobis exhibito, corpus Christi consecratum in die praecedenti reservatur sumendum in illa die. Non autem sanguis, propter periculum, et quia sanguis specialius est imago dominicae passionis, ut supra dictum est. Nec etiam verum est, quod quidam dicunt, quod per immissionem particulae corporis in vinum, convertatur vinum in sanguinem. Hoc enim aliter fieri non potest quam per consecrationem factam sub debita forma verborum. |
Reply to Objection 2: The figure ceases on the advent of the reality. But this sacrament is a figure and a representation of our Lord's Passion, as stated above. And therefore on the day on which our Lord's Passion is recalled as it was really accomplished, this sacrament is not consecrated. Nevertheless, lest the Church be deprived on that day of the fruit of the Passion offered to us by this sacrament, the body of Christ consecrated the day before is reserved to be consumed on that day; but the blood is not reserved, on account of danger, and because the blood is more specially the image of our Lord's Passion, as stated above (Question [78], Article [3], ad 2). Nor is it true, as some affirm, that the wine is changed into blood when the particle of Christ's body is dropped into it. Because this cannot be done otherwise than by consecration under the due form of words. |
| In die autem nativitatis plures Missae celebrantur, propter triplicem Christi nativitatem. Quarum una est aeterna, quae, quantum ad nos, est occulta. Et ideo una Missa cantatur in nocte, in cuius introitu dicitur, dominus dixit ad me, filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te. Alia autem est temporalis, sed spiritualis, qua scilicet Christus oritur tanquam Lucifer in cordibus nostris, ut dicitur II Pet. I. Et propter hoc cantatur Missa in aurora, in cuius introitu dicitur, lux fulgebit super nos. Tertia est Christi nativitas temporalis et corporalis, secundum quam visibilis nobis processit ex utero virginali carne indutus. Et ob hoc cantatur tertia Missa in plena luce, in cuius introitu dicitur, puer natus est nobis. Licet e converso posset dici quod nativitas aeterna, secundum se, est in plena luce, et ob hoc in Evangelio tertiae Missae fit mentio de nativitate aeterna. Secundum autem nativitatem corporalem, ad litteram, natus est de nocte, in signum quod veniebat ad tenebras infirmitatis nostrae, unde et in Missa nocturna dicitur Evangelium de corporali Christi nativitate. |
On Christmas Day, however, several masses are said on account of Christ's threefold nativity. Of these the first is His eternal birth, which is hidden in our regard. and therefore one mass is sung in the night, in the "Introit" of which we say: "The Lord said unto Me: Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee." The second is His nativity in time, and the spiritual birth, whereby Christ rises "as the day-star in our [Vulg.: 'your'] hearts" (2 Pt. 1:19), and on this account the mass is sung at dawn, and in the "Introit" we say: "The light will shine on us today." The third is Christ's temporal and bodily birth, according as He went forth from the virginal womb, becoming visible to us through being clothed with flesh: and on that account the third mass is sung in broad daylight, in the "Introit" of which we say: "A child is born to us." Nevertheless, on the other hand, it can be said that His eternal generation, of itself, is in the full light, and on this account in the gospel of the third mass mention is made of His eternal birth. But regarding His birth in the body, He was literally born during the night, as a sign that He came to the darknesses of our infirmity; hence also in the midnight mass we say the gospel of Christ's nativity in the flesh. |
| Sicut etiam et in aliis diebus in quibus occurrunt plura Christi beneficia vel recolenda vel expetenda, plures Missae celebrantur in die, puta una pro festo, et alia pro ieiunio vel pro mortuis. | Likewise on other days upon which many of God's benefits have to be recalled or besought, several masses are celebrated on one day, as for instance, one for the feast, and another for a fast or for the dead. |
| Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, Christus voluit ultimo hoc sacramentum discipulis tradere, ut fortius eorum cordibus imprimeretur. Et ideo post cenam et in fine diei hoc sacramentum consecravit et discipulis tradidit. A nobis autem celebratur hora dominicae passionis, scilicet vel in diebus festis in tertia, quando crucifixus est linguis Iudaeorum, ut dicitur Marc. XV, et quando spiritus sanctus descendit super discipulos; vel diebus profestis in sexta, quando crucifixus est manibus militum, ut habetur Ioan. XIX; vel diebus ieiuniorum in nona, quando voce magna clamans emisit spiritum, ut dicitur Matth. XXVII. |
Reply to Objection 3: As already observed (Question [73], Article [5]), Christ wished to give this sacrament last of all, in order that it might make a deeper impression on the hearts of the disciples; and therefore it was after supper, at the close of day, that He consecrated this sacrament and gave it to His disciples. But we celebrate at the hour when our Lord suffered, i.e. either, as on feast-days, at the hour of Terce, when He was crucified by the tongues of the Jews (Mk. 15:25), and when the Holy Ghost descended upon the disciples (Acts 2:15); or, as when no feast is kept, at the hour of Sext, when He was crucified at the hands of the soldiers (Jn. 19:14), or, as on fasting days, at None, when crying out with a loud voice He gave up the ghost (Mt. 27:46,50). |
| Potest tamen tardari, maxime quando sunt ordines faciendi, et praecipue in sabbato sancto; tum propter prolixitatem officii; tum etiam quia ordines pertinent ad diem dominicum, ut habetur in decretis, dist. LXXV, cap. quod a patribus. | Nevertheless the mass can be postponed, especially when Holy orders have to be conferred, and still more on Holy Saturday; both on account of the length of the office, and also because orders belong to the Sunday, as is set forth in the Decretals (dist. 75). |
| Possunt tamen etiam Missae celebrari in prima parte diei propter aliquam necessitatem, ut habetur de Consecr., dist. I, cap. necesse est et cetera. | Masses, however, can be celebrated "in the first part of the day," owing to any necessity; as is stated De Consecr., dist. 1. |
| Ad quartum dicendum quod regulariter Missa debet celebrari in die, et non in nocte, quia ipse Christus est praesens in hoc sacramento, qui dicit, Ioan. IX, me oportet operari opera eius qui misit me, donec dies est. Venit nox, quando nemo potest operari. Quandiu in mundo sum, lux sum mundi. Ita tamen quod principium diei sumatur non a media nocte; nec etiam ab ortu solis, idest quando substantia solis apparet super terram; sed quando incipit apparere aurora. Tunc enim quodammodo dicitur sol ortus, inquantum claritas radiorum eius apparet. Unde et Marc. XVI dicitur quod mulieres venerunt ad monumentum orto iam sole; cum tamen venerint, cum adhuc tenebrae essent, ad monumentum, ut dicitur Ioan. XX; sic enim hanc contrarietatem solvit Augustinus, in libro de consensu Evangelistarum. |
Reply to Objection 4: As a rule mass ought to be said in the day and not in the night, because Christ is present in this sacrament, Who says (Jn. 9:4,5): "I must work the works of Him that sent Me, whilst it is day: because the night cometh when no man can work; as long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world." Yet this should be done in such a manner that the beginning of the day is not to be taken from midnight; nor from sunrise, that is, when the substance of the sun appears above the earth; but when the dawn begins to show: because then the sun is said to be risen when the brightness of his beams appears. Accordingly it is written (Mk. 16:1) that "the women came to the tomb, the sun being now risen"; though, as John relates (Jn. 20:1), "while it was yet dark they came to the tomb." It is in this way that Augustine explains this difference (De Consens. Evang. iii). |
| Specialiter tamen in nocte natalis Missa celebratur, propter hoc quod dominus nocte natus est, ut habetur de Consecr., dist. I, cap. nocte et cetera. Et similiter etiam in sabbato sancto circa noctis principium, propter hoc quod dominus nocte surrexit, idest, cum adhuc tenebrae essent, ante manifestum solis ortum. | Exception is made on the night of Christmas eve, when mass is celebrated, because our Lord was born in the night (De Consecr., dist. 1). And in like manner it is celebrated on Holy Saturday towards the beginning of the night, since our Lord rose in the night, that is, "when it was yet dark, before the sun's rising was manifest." |
| Ad quintum dicendum quod, sicut habetur de Consecr., dist. I, ex decreto Alexandri Papae, sufficit sacerdoti in die unam Missam celebrare, quia Christus semel passus est et totum mundum redemit; et valde felix est qui unam digne celebrare potest. Quidam tamen pro defunctis unam faciunt et alteram diei, si necesse est. Qui vero pro pecunia aut adulationibus saecularium uno die praesumunt plures celebrare Missas, non aestimo evadere damnationem. Et extra, de Celebr., dicit Innocentius III quod, excepto die nativitatis dominicae, nisi causa necessitatis suaderet, sufficit sacerdoti semel in die unam Missam solummodo celebrare. | Reply to Objection 5: As is set down in the decree (De Consecr., dist. 1), in virtue of a decree of Pope Alexander II, "it is enough for a priest to celebrate one mass each day, because Christ suffered once and redeemed the whole world; and very happy is he who can worthily celebrate one mass. But there are some who say one mass for the dead, and another of the day, if need be. But I do not deem that those escape condemnation who presume to celebrate several masses daily, either for the sake of money, or to gain flattery from the laity." And Pope Innocent III says (Extra, De Celebr. Miss., chap. Consuluisti) that "except on the day of our Lord's birth, unless necessity urges, it suffices for a priest to celebrate only one mass each day." |
Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
Article: 3 [ << | >> ]
| Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod non oporteat hoc sacramentum celebrare in domo et vasis sacris. Hoc enim sacramentum est repraesentativum dominicae passionis. Sed Christus non est passus in domo, sed extra portam civitatis, secundum illud Heb. ult., Iesus, ut per suum sanguinem sanctificaret populum, extra portam passus est. Ergo videtur quod hoc sacramentum non debeat celebrari in domo, sed magis sub divo. | Objection 1: It seems that this sacrament ought not to be celebrated in a house and with sacred vessels. For this sacrament is a representation of our Lord's Passion. But Christ did not suffer in a house, but outside the city gate, according to Heb. 1:12: "Jesus, that He might sanctify the people by His own blood, suffered without the gate." Therefore, it seems that this sacrament ought not to be celebrated in a house, but rather in the open air. |
| Praeterea, in celebratione huius sacramenti debet Ecclesia imitari morem Christi et apostolorum. Sed domus in qua Christus primo hoc sacramentum confecit, non fuit consecrata, sed fuit quoddam commune cenaculum a quodam patrefamilias praeparatum, ut habetur Luc. XXII. Legitur etiam Act. II quod apostoli erant perdurantes unanimiter in templo; et frangentes circa domos panem, sumebant cum exultatione. Ergo nec modo oportet domos esse consecratas in quibus hoc sacramentum celebratur. |
Objection 2: Further, in the celebration of this sacrament the Church ought to imitate the custom of Christ and the apostles. But the house wherein Christ first wrought this sacrament was not consecrated, but merely an ordinary supper-room prepared by the master of the house, as related in Lk. 22:11,12. Moreover, we read (Acts 2:46) that "the apostles were continuing daily with one accord in the temple; and, breaking bread from house to house, they took their meat with gladness." Consequently, there is no need for houses, in which this sacrament is celebrated, to be consecrated. |
| Praeterea, nihil fieri frustra in Ecclesia debet, quae spiritu sancto gubernatur. Sed frustra videtur adhiberi consecratio Ecclesiae vel altari, et huiusmodi rebus inanimatis, quae non sunt susceptiva gratiae vel spiritualis virtutis. Inconvenienter igitur huiusmodi consecrationes in Ecclesia fiunt. | Objection 3: Further, nothing that is to no purpose ought to be done in the Church, which is governed by the Holy Ghost. But it seems useless to consecrate a church, or an altar, or such like inanimate things, since they are not capable of receiving grace or spiritual virtue. Therefore it is unbecoming for such consecrations to be performed in the Church. |
| Praeterea, solum divina opera debent recoli cum quadam solemnitate, secundum illud Psalmi, in operibus manuum tuarum exultabo. Sed Ecclesia vel altare opere humano consecratur, sicut et calix et ministri et alia huiusmodi. Sed horum consecrationes non recoluntur celebriter in Ecclesia. Ergo neque consecratio Ecclesiae vel altaris cum solemnitate recoli debet. | Objection 4: Further, only Divine works ought to be recalled with solemnity, according to Ps. 91:5: "I shall rejoice in the works of Thy hands." Now the consecration of a church or altar, is the work of a man; as is also the consecration of the chalice, and of the ministers, and of other such things. But these latter consecrations are not commemorated in the Church. Therefore neither ought the consecration of a church or of an altar to be commemorated with solemnity. |
| Praeterea, veritas debet respondere figurae. Sed in veteri testamento, quod gerebat figuram novi, non fiebat altare de lapidibus sectis, dicitur enim Exod. XX, altare de terra facietis mihi. Quod si altare lapideum feceritis mihi, non aedificabitis illud de sectis lapidibus. Exodi etiam XXVII mandatur fieri altare de lignis settim, vestitis aere; vel etiam auro, ut habetur Exod. XXV. Ergo videtur inconvenienter observari in Ecclesia quod altare fiat solum de lapidibus. |
Objection 5: Further, the truth ought to correspond with the figure. But in the Old Testament, which was a figure of the New, the altar was not made of hewn stones: for, it is written (Ex. 20:24): "You shall make an altar of earth unto Me... and if thou make an altar of stone unto Me, thou shalt not build it of hewn stones." Again, the altar is commanded to be made of "setim-wood," covered "with brass" (Ex. 27:1,2), or "with gold" (Ex. 25). Consequently, it seems unfitting for the Church to make exclusive use of altars made of stone. |
| Praeterea, calix cum patena repraesentat sepulcrum Christi. Quod fuit excisum in petra, ut in Evangeliis habetur. Ergo calix debet de petra fieri, et non solum de argento vel auro, vel etiam de stanno. | Objection 6: Further, the chalice with the paten represents Christ's tomb, which was "hewn in a rock," as is narrated in the Gospels. Consequently, the chalice ought to be of stone, and not of gold or of silver or tin. |
| Praeterea, sicut aurum pretiosius est inter materias vasorum, ita panni serici pretiosiores sunt inter alios pannos. Ergo, sicut calix fit de auro, ita pallae altaris debent fieri de serico, et non solum de panno lineo. | Objection 7: Further, just as gold is the most precious among the materials of the altar vessels, so are cloths of silk the most precious among other cloths. Consequently, since the chalice is of gold, the altar cloths ought to be made of silk and not of linen. |
| Praeterea, dispensatio sacramentorum et ordinatio eorum ad ministros Ecclesiae pertinet, sicut dispensatio rerum temporalium subiacet ordinationi principum saecularium, unde apostolus dicit, I Cor. IV, sic nos existimet homo ut ministros Christi et dispensatores mysteriorum Dei. Sed si circa dispensationem rerum temporalium aliquid fieret contra statuta principum, habetur irritum. Ergo, si haec quae dicta sunt, convenienter sunt statuta per praelatos Ecclesiae, videtur quod sine his confici non possit. Et sic videtur sequi quod verba Christi non sint sufficientia ad hoc sacramentum conficiendum, quod est inconveniens. Non ergo videtur conveniens fuisse quod haec circa celebrationem sacramenti statuerentur. |
Objection 8: Further, the dispensing and ordering of the sacraments belong to the Church's ministers, just as the ordering of temporal affairs is subject to the ruling of secular princes; hence the Apostle says (1 Cor. 4:1): "Let a man so esteem us as the ministers of Christ end the dispensers of the mysteries of God." But if anything be done against the ordinances of princes it is deemed void. Therefore, if the various items mentioned above are suitably commanded by the Church's prelates, it seems that the body of Christ could not be consecrated unless they be observed; and so it appears to follow that Christ's words are not sufficient of themselves for consecrating this sacrament: which is contrary to the fact. Consequently, it does not seem fitting for such ordinances to be made touching the celebration of this sacrament. |
| Sed contra est quod ea quae per Ecclesiam statuuntur, ab ipso Christo ordinantur, qui dicit, Matth. XVIII, ubicumque fuerint duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in medio eorum. |
On the contrary, The Church's ordinances are Christ's own ordinances; since He said (Mt. 18:20): "Wherever two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them." |
| Respondeo dicendum quod in his quae circumstant hoc sacramentum, duo considerantur, quorum unum pertinet ad repraesentationem eorum quae circa dominicam passionem sunt acta; aliud autem pertinet ad reverentiam huius sacramenti, in quo Christus secundum veritatem continetur, et non solum sicut in figura. | I answer that, There are two things to be considered regarding the equipment of this sacrament: one of these belongs to the representation of the events connected with our Lord's Passion; while the other is connected with the reverence due to the sacrament, in which Christ is contained verily, and not in figure only. |
| Unde et consecrationes adhibentur his rebus quae veniunt in usum huius sacramenti, tum propter reverentiam sacramenti; tum ad repraesentandum effectum sanctitatis qui ex passione Christi provenit, secundum illud Heb. ult., Iesus, ut sanctificaret per suum sanguinem populum, et cetera. | Hence we consecrate those things which we make use of in this sacrament; both that we may show our reverence for the sacrament, and in order to represent the holiness which is the effect of the Passion of Christ, according to Heb. 13:12: "Jesus, that He might sanctify the people by His own blood," etc. |
| Ad primum ergo dicendum quod regulariter hoc sacramentum celebrari debet in domo, per quam significatur Ecclesia, secundum illud I Tim. III, scias quomodo oporteat te in domo Dei conversari, quae est Ecclesia Dei vivi. Extra Ecclesiam enim locus non est veri sacrificii, ut Augustinus dicit. Et quia Ecclesia non erat concludenda sub finibus gentis Iudaicae, sed erat in universo mundo fundanda, ideo passio Christi non est celebrata infra civitatem Iudaeorum, sed sub divo, ut sic totus mundus haberet se ad passionem Christi ut domus. Et tamen, ut dicitur de Consecr., dist. I, cap. concedimus, in itinere positis, si Ecclesia defuerit, sub divo vel sub tentorio, si tabula consecrata ceteraque sacra mysteria ad id officium pertinentia ibi affuerint, Missarum solennia celebrari concedimus. | Reply to Objection 1: This sacrament ought as a rule to be celebrated in a house, whereby the Church is signified, according to 1 Tim. 3:15: "That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God." Because "outside the Church there is no place for the true sacrifice," as Augustine says (Liber Sentent. Prosp. xv). And because the Church was not to be confined within the territories of the Jewish people, but was to be established throughout the whole world, therefore Christ's Passion was not celebrated within the city of the Jews, but in the open country, that so the whole world might serve as a house for Christ's Passion. Nevertheless, as is said in De Consecr., dist. 1, "if a church be not to hand, we permit travelers to celebrate mass in the open air, or in a tent, if there be a consecrated altar-table to hand, and the other requisites belonging to the sacred function." |
| Ad secundum dicendum quod, quia domus in qua hoc sacramentum celebratur, Ecclesiam significat, sicut et Ecclesia nominatur, convenienter consecratur, tum ad repraesentandum sanctificationem quam Ecclesia consecuta est per passionem Christi; tum etiam ad significandum sanctitatem quae requiritur in his qui hoc sacramentum suscipere debent. Per altare autem significatur ipse Christus, de quo dicit apostolus, Heb. ult., per ipsum offeramus hostiam laudis Deo. Unde et consecratio altaris significat sanctitatem Christi, de qua dicitur Luc. I, quod ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur filius Dei. Unde de Consecr., dist. I, dicitur, altaria placuit non solum unctione chrismatis, sed etiam sacerdotali benedictione sacrari. |
Reply to Objection 2: The house in which this sacrament is celebrated denotes the Church, and is termed a church; and so it is fittingly consecrated, both to represent the holiness which the Church acquired from the Passion, as well as to denote the holiness required of them who have to receive this sacrament. By the altar Christ Himself is signified, of Whom the Apostle says (Heb. 13:15): "Through Him we offer a sacrifice of praise to God." Hence the consecration of the altar signifies Christ's holiness, of which it was said (Lk. 1:35): "The Holy one born of thee shall be called the Son of God." Hence we read in De Consecr., dist. 1: "It has seemed pleasing for the altars to be consecrated not merely with the anointing of chrism, but likewise with the priestly blessing." |
| Et ideo regulariter non licet celebrare hoc sacramentum nisi in domibus consecratis. Unde sic habetur de Consecr., dist. I, nullus presbyter Missam celebrare praesumat nisi in sacratis ab episcopo locis. Propter quod etiam, quia Pagani non sunt de Ecclesia nec alii infideles, ideo eadem distinctione legitur, Ecclesiam in qua cadavera mortuorum infidelium sepeliuntur, sanctificare non licet, sed, si apta videtur ad consecrandum, inde evulsis corporibus, et rasis parietibus vel tignis eius loci, reaedificetur. Sed si haec consecrata prius fuerit, Missas in ea celebrare licet, tamen si fideles fuerunt qui in ea sepulti sunt. Propter necessitatem tamen potest hoc sacramentum peragi in domibus non consecratis, vel violatis, sed tamen de consensu episcopi. Unde in eadem distinctione legitur, Missarum solennia non ubicumque, sed in locis ab episcopo consecratis, vel ubi ipse permiserit, celebranda censemus. Non tamen sine altari portatili consecrato, unde in eadem distinctione legitur, concedimus, si Ecclesiae fuerint incensae vel combustae, in capellis, cum tabula consecrata, Missas celebrare. Quia enim sanctitas Christi fons est totius sanctitatis ecclesiasticae, ideo in necessitate sufficit ad peragendum hoc sacramentum altare sanctificatum. Propter quod etiam Ecclesia nunquam sine altari consecratur, tamen sine Ecclesia quandoque consecratur altare, cum reliquiis sanctorum, quorum vita abscondita est cum Christo in Deo. Unde in eadem distinctione legitur, placuit ut altaria in quibus nullum corpus aut reliquiae martyris conditae comprobantur, ab episcopis qui eisdem locis praesunt, si fieri potest, evertantur. | And therefore, as a rule, it is not lawful to celebrate this sacrament except in a consecrated house. Hence it is enacted (De Consecr., dist. 1): "Let no priest presume to say mass except in places consecrated by the bishop." And furthermore because pagans and other unbelievers are not members of the Church, therefore we read (De Consecr., dist. 1): "It is not lawful to bless a church in which the bodies of unbelievers are buried, but if it seem suitable for consecration, then, after removing the corpses and tearing down the walls or beams, let it be rebuilt. If, however, it has been already consecrated, and the faithful lie in it, it is lawful to celebrate mass therein." Nevertheless in a case of necessity this sacrament can be performed in houses which have not been consecrated, or which have been profaned; but with the bishop's consent. Hence we read in the same distinction: "We deem that masses are not to be celebrated everywhere, but in places consecrated by the bishop, or where he gives permission." But not without a portable altar consecrated by the bishop: hence in the same distinction we read: "We permit that, if the churches be devastated or burned, masses may be celebrated in chapels, with a consecrated altar." For because Christ's holiness is the fount of all the Church's holiness, therefore in necessity a consecrated altar suffices for performing this sacrament. And on this account a church is never consecrated without consecrating the altar. Yet sometimes an altar is consecrated apart from the church, with the relics of the saints, "whose lives are hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3). Accordingly under the same distinction we read: "It is our pleasure that altars, in which no relics of saints are found enclosed, be thrown down, if possible, by the bishops presiding over such places." |
| Ad tertium dicendum quod Ecclesia et altare et alia huiusmodi inanimata consecrantur, non quia sint gratiae susceptiva, sed quia ex consecratione adipiscuntur quandam spiritualem virtutem per quam apta redduntur divino cultui, ut scilicet homines devotionem quandam exinde percipiant, ut sint paratiores ad divina, nisi hoc propter irreverentiam impediatur. Unde et in II Machab. III dicitur, vere Dei virtus quaedam est in loco, nam ipse qui habet in caelis habitationem, visitator et adiutor est loci illius. | Reply to Objection 3: The church, altar, and other like inanimate things are consecrated, not because they are capable of receiving grace, but because they acquire special spiritual virtue from the consecration, whereby they are rendered fit for the Divine worship, so that man derives devotion therefrom, making him more fitted for Divine functions, unless this be hindered by want of reverence. Hence it is written (2 Macc. 3:38): "There is undoubtedly in that place a certain power of God; for He that hath His dwelling in the heavens is the visitor, and the protector of that place." |
| Et inde est quod huiusmodi ante consecrationem emundantur et exorcizantur, ut exinde virtus inimici pellatur. Et eadem ratione Ecclesiae quae sanguinis effusione aut cuiuscumque semine pollutae fuerint, reconciliantur, quia per peccatum ibi commissum apparet ibi aliqua operatio inimici. Propter quod etiam in eadem distinctione legitur, Ecclesias Arianorum ubicumque inveneritis, Catholicas Ecclesias divinis precibus et operibus absque ulla mora consecrate. Unde et quidam probabiliter dicunt quod per ingressum Ecclesiae consecratae homo consequitur remissionem peccatorum venialium, sicut et per aspersionem aquae benedictae, inducentes quod in Psalmo dicitur, benedixisti, domine, terram tuam, remisisti iniquitatem plebis tuae. Et ideo, propter virtutem quam ex consecratione acquirit, consecratio Ecclesiae non iteratur. Unde in eadem distinctione, ex Concilio Nicaeno, legitur, Ecclesiis semel Deo consecratis non debet iterum consecratio adhiberi, nisi aut ab igne exustae, aut sanguinis effusione, aut cuiusquam semine pollutae fuerint, quia, sicut infans a qualicumque sacerdote in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti semel baptizatus, non debet iterum baptizari, ita nec locus Deo dedicatus est iterum consecrandus, nisi propter causas quas superius nominavimus; si tamen fidem sanctae Trinitatis tenuerunt qui consecraverunt. Alioquin, qui sunt extra Ecclesiam, consecrare non possunt. Sed, sicut in eadem distinctione legitur, Ecclesiae vel altaria quae ambigua sunt de consecratione, consecrentur. | Hence it is that such places are cleansed and exorcised before being consecrated, that the enemy's power may be driven forth. And for the same reason churches defiled by shedding of blood or seed are reconciled: because some machination of the enemy is apparent on account of the sin committed there. And for this reason we read in the same distinction: "Wherever you find churches of the Arians, consecrate them as Catholic churches without delay by means of devout prayers and rites." Hence, too, it is that some say with probability, that by entering a consecrated church one obtains forgiveness of venial sins, just as one does by the sprinkling of holy water; alleging the words of Ps. 84:2,3: "Lord, Thou hast blessed Thy land... Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of Thy people." And therefore, in consequence of the virtue acquired by a church's consecration, the consecration is never repeated. Accordingly we find in the same distinction the following words quoted from the Council of Nicaea: "Churches which have once been consecrated, must not be consecrated again, except they be devastated by fire, or defiled by shedding of blood or of anyone's seed; because, just as a child once baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, ought not to be baptized again, so neither ought a place, once dedicated to God, to be consecrated again, except owing to the causes mentioned above; provided that the consecrators held faith in the Holy Trinity": in fact, those outside the Church cannot consecrate. But, as we read in the same distinction: "Churches or altars of doubtful consecration are to be consecrated anew." |
| Propter hoc etiam quod aliquam spiritualem virtutem adipiscuntur per consecrationem, in eadem distinctione legitur statutum, ligna Ecclesiae dedicatae non debent ad aliud opus iungi, nisi ad aliam Ecclesiam, vel igni comburenda, vel ad profectum in monasterio fratribus, in laicorum autem opera non debent admitti. Et ibidem legitur, altaris palla, cathedra, candelabrum et velum, si fuerint vetustate consumpta, incendio dentur, cineres quoque eorum in baptisterio inferantur, aut in pariete aut in fossis pavimentorum iactentur, ne introeuntium pedibus inquinentur. | And since they acquire special spiritual virtue from their consecration, we find it laid down in the same distinction that "the beams of a dedicated church ought not to be used for any other purpose, except it be for some other church, or else they are to be burned, or put to the use of brethren in some monastery: but on no account are they to be discarded for works of the laity." We read there, too, that "the altar covering, chair, candlesticks, and veil, are to be burned when warn out; and their ashes are to be placed in the baptistery, or in the walls, or else cast into the trenches beneath the flag-stones, so as not to be defiled by the feet of those that enter." |
| Ad quartum dicendum quod, quia consecratio altaris repraesentat sanctitatem Christi, consecratio vero domus sanctitatem totius Ecclesiae, ideo convenientius recolitur cum solemnitate consecratio Ecclesiae vel altaris. Propter quod etiam octo diebus solemnitas dedicationis agitur, ad significandam beatam resurrectionem Christi et membrorum Ecclesiae. Nec est opus solius hominis consecratio Ecclesiae et altaris, cum habeat spiritualem virtutem. Unde de Consecr., distinctione eadem, dicitur, solemnitates Ecclesiarum dedicationum per singulos annos solemniter sunt celebrandae. Quod autem octo diebus encaenia sint celebranda, III libro regum, perlecta dedicatione templi, reperies, scilicet VIII. | Reply to Objection 4: Since the consecration of the altar signifies Christ's holiness, and the consecration of a house the holiness of the entire Church, therefore the consecration of a church or of an altar is more fittingly commemorated. And on this account the solemnity of a church dedication is observed for eight days, in order to signify the happy resurrection of Christ and of the Church's members. Nor is the consecration of a church or altar man's doing only, since it has a spiritual virtue. Hence in the same distinction (De Consecr.) it is said: "The solemnities of the dedication of churches are to be solemnly celebrated each year: and that dedications are to be kept up for eight days, you will find in the third book of Kings" (8:66). |
| Ad quintum dicendum quod, sicut legitur de Consecr., dist. I, altaria, si non sint lapidea, chrismatis unctione non consecrentur. Quod quidem competit et significationi huius sacramenti, tum quia altare significat Christum, dicitur autem I Cor. X, petra autem erat Christus; tum etiam quia corpus Christi in sepulcro lapideo fuit reconditum. Competit etiam quoad usum sacramenti, lapis enim et solidus est, et de facili potest inveniri ubique. Quod non erat necessarium in veteri lege, ubi fiebat in uno loco altare. Quod autem mandatur altare fieri de terra vel de lapidibus insectis, fuit ad idololatriam removendam. | Reply to Objection 5: As we read in De Consecr., dist. 1, "altars, if not of stone, are not to be consecrated with the anointing of chrism." And this is in keeping with the signification of this sacrament; both because the altar signifies Christ, for in 1 Cor. 10:3, it is written, "But the rock was Christ": and because Christ's body was laid in a stone sepulchre. This is also in keeping with the use of the sacrament. Because stone is solid, and may be found everywhere. which was not necessary in the old Law, when the altar was made in one place. As to the commandment to make the altar of earth, or of unhewn stones, this was given in order to remove idolatry. |
| Ad sextum dicendum quod, sicut in distinctione eadem dicitur, cap. vasa, quondam sacerdotes non aureis, sed ligneis calicibus utebantur; Zephyrinus autem Papa patenis vitreis Missas celebrari instituit; deinde Urbanus omnia fecit argentea. Postmodum autem statutum est ut calix domini, cum patena, sive ex auro sive ex argento fiat, vel saltem stanneus calix habeatur. De aere autem aut ex aurichalco non fiat, quia hoc vini virtute aeruginem, pariter et vomitum provocat. Nullus autem in ligneo seu vitreo calice cantare praesumat Missam, quia scilicet lignum porosum est, et sanguis consecratus in eo remaneret; vitrum autem fragile est, et posset fractionis periculum imminere. Et eadem ratio est de lapide. Et ideo, propter reverentiam sacramenti, statutum est ut ex praedictis materiis calix fiat. | Reply to Objection 6: As is laid down in the same distinction, "formerly the priests did not use golden but wooden chalices; but Pope Zephyrinus ordered the mass to be said with glass patens; and subsequently Pope Urban had everything made of silver." Afterwards it was decided that "the Lord's chalice with the paten should be made entirely of gold, or of silver or at least of tin. But it is not to be made of brass, or copper, because the action of the wine thereon produces verdigris, and provokes vomiting. But no one is to presume to sing mass with a chalice of wood or of glass," because as the wood is porous, the consecrated blood would remain in it; while glass is brittle and there might arise danger of breakage; and the same applies to stone. Consequently, out of reverence for the sacrament, it was enacted that the chalice should be made of the aforesaid materials. |
| Ad septimum dicendum quod, ubi potuit sine periculo fieri, Ecclesia statuit circa hoc sacramentum id quod expressius repraesentat passionem Christi. Non autem erat tantum periculum circa corpus, quod ponitur in corporali, sicut circa sanguinem, qui continetur in calice. Et ideo, licet calix non fiat de petra, corporale tamen fit de panno lineo, quo corpus Christi fuit involutum. Unde in epistola Silvestri Papae, in eadem distinctione, legitur, consulto omnium constituimus ut sacrificium altaris non in serico panno, aut intincto quisquam celebrare praesumat Missam, sed in puro lineo ab episcopo consecrato, sicut corpus Christi in sindone linea munda sepultum fuit. Competit etiam pannus lineus, propter sui munditiam, ad significandum conscientiae puritatem; et, propter multiplicem laborem quo talis pannus praeparatur, ad significandam passionem Christi. | Reply to Objection 7: Where it could be done without danger, the Church gave order for that thing to be used which more expressively represents Christ's Passion. But there was not so much danger regarding the body which is placed on the corporal, as there is with the blood contained in the chalice. And consequently, although the chalice is not made of stone, yet the corporal is made of linen, since Christ's body was wrapped therein. Hence we read in an Epistle of Pope Silvester, quoted in the same distinction: "By a unanimous decree we command that no one shall presume to celebrate the sacrifice of the altar upon a cloth of silk, or dyed material, but upon linen consecrated by the bishop; as Christ's body was buried in a clean linen winding-sheet." Moreover, linen material is becoming, owing to its cleanness, to denote purity of conscience, and, owing to the manifold labor with which it is prepared, to denote Christ's Passion. |
| Ad octavum dicendum quod dispensatio sacramentorum pertinet ad ministros Ecclesiae, sed consecratio eorum est ab ipso Deo. Et ideo ministri Ecclesiae non habent aliquid statuere circa formam consecrationis, sed circa usum sacramenti et modum celebrandi. Et ideo, si sacerdos verba consecrationis proferat super materia debita cum intentione consecrandi, absque omnibus praedictis, scilicet domo et altari, calice et corporali consecratis, et ceteris huiusmodi per Ecclesiam institutis, consecrat quidem in rei veritate corpus Christi, peccat tamen graviter, ritum Ecclesiae non servans. | Reply to Objection 8: The dispensing of the sacraments belongs to the Church's ministers; but their consecration is from God Himself. Consequently, the Church's ministers can make no ordinances regarding the form of the consecration, and the manner of celebrating. And therefore, if the priest pronounces the words of consecration over the proper matter with the intention of consecrating, then, without every one of the things mentioned above---namely, without house, and altar, consecrated chalice and corporal, and the other things instituted by the Church---he consecrates Christ's body in very truth; yet he is guilty of grave sin, in not following the rite of the Church. |
Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
Article: 4 [ << | >> ]
| Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod inconvenienter ordinentur ea quae circa hoc sacramentum dicuntur. Hoc enim sacramentum verbis Christi consecratur, ut Ambrosius dicit, in libro de sacramentis. Non ergo debent aliqua alia in hoc sacramento dici quam verba Christi. | Objection 1: It seems that the words spoken in this sacrament are not properly framed. For, as Ambrose says (De Sacram. iv), this sacrament is consecrated with Christ's own words. Therefore no other words besides Christ's should be spoken in this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, verba et facta Christi nobis per Evangelium innotescunt. Sed quaedam dicuntur circa consecrationem huius sacramenti quae in Evangeliis non ponuntur. Non enim legitur in Evangelio quod Christus in institutione huius sacramenti oculos ad caelum levaverit; similiter etiam in Evangeliis dicitur, accipite et comedite, nec ponitur omnes, cum in celebratione huius sacramenti dicatur, elevatis oculis in caelum, et iterum, accipite et manducate ex hoc omnes. Inconvenienter ergo huiusmodi verba dicuntur in celebratione huius sacramenti. | Objection 2: Further, Christ's words and deeds are made known to us through the Gospel. But in consecrating this sacrament words are used which are not set down in the Gospels: for we do not read in the Gospel, of Christ lifting up His eyes to heaven while consecrating this sacrament: and similarly it is said in the Gospel: "Take ye and eat" [comedite] without the addition of the word "all," whereas in celebrating this sacrament we say: "Lifting up His eyes to heaven," and again, "Take ye and eat [manducate] of this." Therefore such words as these are out of place when spoken in the celebration of this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, omnia alia sacramenta ordinantur ad salutem omnium fidelium. Sed in celebratione aliorum sacramentorum non fit communis oratio pro salute omnium fidelium et defunctorum. Ergo inconvenienter fit in hoc sacramento. | Objection 3: Further, all the other sacraments are ordained for the salvation of all the faithful. But in the celebration of the other sacraments there is no common prayer put up for the salvation of all the faithful and of the departed. Consequently it is unbecoming in this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, Baptismus dicitur specialiter fidei sacramentum. Ea ergo quae pertinent ad instructionem fidei, magis debent circa Baptismum tradi quam circa hoc sacramentum, sicut doctrina apostolica et evangelica. | Objection 4: Further, Baptism especially is called the sacrament of faith. Consequently, the truths which belong to instruction in the faith ought rather to be given regarding Baptism than regarding this sacrament, such as the doctrine of the apostles and of the Gospels. |
| Praeterea, in omni sacramento exigitur devotio fidelium. Non ergo magis in hoc sacramento quam in aliis deberet devotio fidelium excitari per laudes divinas et per admonitiones, puta cum dicitur, sursum corda. | Objection 5: Further, devotion on the part of the faithful is required in every sacrament. Consequently, the devotion of the faithful ought not to be stirred up in this sacrament more than in the others by Divine praises and by admonitions, such as, "Lift up your hearts." |
| Praeterea, minister huius sacramenti est sacerdos, ut dictum est. Omnia ergo quae in hoc sacramento dicuntur, a sacerdote dici deberent, et non quaedam a ministris, quaedam a choro. |
Objection 6: Further, the minister of this sacrament is the priest, as stated above (Question [82], Article [1]). Consequently, all the words spoken in this sacrament ought to be uttered by the priest, and not some by the ministers, and some by the choir. |
| Praeterea, hoc sacramentum per certitudinem operatur virtus divina. Superflue igitur sacerdos petit huius sacramenti perfectionem, cum dicit, quam oblationem tu, Deus, in omnibus, et cetera. | Objection 7: Further, the Divine power works this sacrament unfailingly. Therefore it is to no purpose that the priest asks for the perfecting of this sacrament, saying: "Which oblation do thou, O God, in all," etc. |
| Praeterea, sacrificium novae legis multo est excellentius quam sacrificium antiquorum patrum. Inconvenienter ergo sacerdos petit quod hoc sacrificium habeatur sicut sacrificium Abel, Abrahae et Melchisedech. | Objection 8: Further, the sacrifice of the New Law is much more excellent than the sacrifice of the fathers of old. Therefore, it is unfitting for the priest to pray that this sacrifice may be as acceptable as the sacrifice of Abel, Abraham, and Melchisedech. |
| Praeterea, corpus Christi, sicut non incoepit esse in hoc sacramento per loci mutationem, ut supra dictum est, ita etiam nec esse desinit. Inconvenienter ergo sacerdos petit, iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum. |
Objection 9: Further, just as Christ's body does not begin to be in this sacrament by change of place, as stated above (Question [75], Article [2]), so likewise neither does it cease to be there. Consequently, it is improper for the priest to ask: "Bid these things be borne by the hands of thy holy angel unto Thine altar on high." |
| Sed contra est quod dicitur de Consecr., dist. I, Iacobus frater domini secundum carnem, et Basilius Caesariensis episcopus, ediderunt Missae celebrationem. Ex quorum auctoritate patet convenienter singula circa hoc dici. | On the contrary, We find it stated in De Consecr., dist. 1, that "James, the brother of the Lord according to the flesh, and Basil, bishop of Caesarea, edited the rite of celebrating the mass": and from their authority it is manifest that whatever words are employed in this matter, are chosen becomingly. |
| Respondeo dicendum quod, quia in hoc sacramento totum mysterium nostrae salutis comprehenditur, ideo prae ceteris sacramentis cum maiori solemnitate agitur. Et quia scriptum est Eccle. IV, custodi pedem tuum ingrediens domum domini, et Eccli. XVIII, ante orationem praepara animam tuam, ideo ante celebrationem huius mysterii, primo quidem praemittitur praeparatio quaedam ad digne agenda ea quae sequuntur. Cuius praeparationis prima pars est laus divina, quae fit in introitu, secundum illud Psalmi, sacrificium laudis honorificabit me, et illic iter quo ostendam illi salutare Dei. Et sumitur hoc, ut pluries, de Psalmis, vel saltem cum Psalmo cantatur, quia, ut Dionysius dicit, in III cap. Eccles. Hier., Psalmi comprehendunt per modum laudis quidquid in sacra Scriptura continetur. |
I answer that, Since the whole mystery of our salvation is comprised in this sacrament, therefore is it performed with greater solemnity than the other sacraments. And since it is written (Eccles. 4:17): "Keep thy foot when thou goest into the house of God"; and (Ecclus. 18:23): "Before prayer prepare thy soul," therefore the celebration of this mystery is preceded by a certain preparation in order that we may perform worthily that which follows after. The first part of this preparation is Divine praise, and consists in the "Introit": according to Ps. 49:23: "The sacrifice of praise shall glorify me; and there is the way by which I will show him the salvation of God": and this is taken for the most part from the Psalms, or, at least, is sung with a Psalm, because, as Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iii): "The Psalms comprise by way of praise whatever is contained in Sacred Scripture." |
| Secunda pars continet commemorationem praesentis miseriae, dum misericordia petitur, dicendo kyrie eleison ter pro persona patris; ter pro persona filii, cum dicitur Christe eleison; et ter pro persona spiritus sancti, cum subditur kyrie eleison; contra triplicem miseriam ignorantiae, culpae et poenae; vel ad significandum quod omnes personae sunt in se invicem. | The second part contains a reference to our present misery, by reason of which we pray for mercy, saying: "Lord, have mercy on us," thrice for the Person of the Father, and "Christ, have mercy on us," thrice for the Person of the Son, and "Lord, have mercy on us," thrice for the Person of the Holy Ghost; against the threefold misery of ignorance, sin, and punishment; or else to express the "circuminsession" of all the Divine Persons. |
| Tertia autem pars commemorat caelestem gloriam, ad quam tendimus post praesentem miseriam, dicendo, gloria in excelsis Deo. Quae cantatur in festis, in quibus commemoratur caelestis gloria, intermittitur autem in officiis luctuosis, quae ad commemorationem miseriae pertinent. | The third part commemorates the heavenly glory, to the possession of which, after this life of misery, we are tending, in the words, "Glory be to God on high," which are sung on festival days, on which the heavenly glory is commemorated, but are omitted in those sorrowful offices which commemorate our unhappy state. |
| Quarta autem pars continet orationem, quam sacerdos pro populo facit, ut digni habeantur tantis mysteriis. | The fourth part contains the prayer which the priest makes for the people, that they may be made worthy of such great mysteries. |
| Secundo autem praemittitur instructio fidelis populi, quia hoc sacramentum est mysterium fidei, ut supra habitum est. Quae quidem instructio dispositive quidem fit per doctrinam prophetarum et apostolorum, quae in Ecclesia legitur per lectores et subdiacones. Post quam lectionem, cantatur a choro graduale, quod significat profectum vitae; et alleluia, quod significat spiritualem exultationem; vel tractus, in officiis luctuosis, qui significat spiritualem gemitum. Haec enim consequi debent in populo ex praedicta doctrina. Perfecte autem populus instruitur per doctrinam Christi in Evangelio contentam, quae a summis ministris legitur, scilicet a diaconibus. Et quia Christo credimus tanquam divinae veritati, secundum illud Ioan. VIII, si veritatem dico vobis, quare vos non creditis mihi?, Lecto Evangelio, symbolum fidei cantatur, in quo populus ostendit se per fidem doctrinae Christi assentire. Cantatur autem hoc symbolum in festis de quibus fit aliqua mentio in hoc symbolo, sicut in festis Christi et beatae virginis, et apostolorum, qui hanc fidem fundaverunt, et in aliis huiusmodi. |
There precedes, in the second place, the instruction of the faithful, because this sacrament is "a mystery of faith," as stated above (Question [78], Article [3], ad 5). Now this instruction is given "dispositively," when the Lectors and Sub-deacons read aloud in the church the teachings of the prophets and apostles: after this "lesson," the choir sing the "Gradual," which signifies progress in life; then the "Alleluia" is intoned, and this denotes spiritual joy; or in mournful offices the "Tract", expressive of spiritual sighing; for all these things ought to result from the aforesaid teaching. But the people are instructed "perfectly" by Christ's teaching contained in the Gospel, which is read by the higher ministers, that is, by the Deacons. And because we believe Christ as the Divine truth, according to Jn. 8:46, "If I tell you the truth, why do you not believe Me?" after the Gospel has been read, the "Creed" is sung in which the people show that they assent by faith to Christ's doctrine. And it is sung on those festivals of which mention is made therein, as on the festivals of Christ, of the Blessed Virgin, and of the apostles, who laid the foundations of this faith, and on other such days. |
| Sic igitur populo praeparato et instructo, acceditur ad celebrationem mysterii. Quod quidem et offertur ut sacrificium, et consecratur et sumitur ut sacramentum, primo enim peragitur oblatio; secundo, consecratio materiae oblatae; tertio, perceptio eiusdem. | So then, after the people have been prepared and instructed, the next step is to proceed to the celebration of the mystery, which is both offered as a sacrifice, and consecrated and received as a sacrament: since first we have the oblation; then the consecration of the matter offered; and thirdly, its reception. |
| Circa oblationem vero duo aguntur, scilicet laus populi, in cantu offertorii, per quod significatur laetitia offerentium; et oratio sacerdotis, qui petit ut oblatio populi sit Deo accepta. Unde, I Paralip., dixit David, ego in simplicitate cordis mei obtuli universa haec, et populum tuum qui hic repertus est, vidi cum ingenti gaudio tibi offerre donaria, et postea orat, dicens, domine Deus, custodi hanc voluntatem. | In regard to the oblation, two things are done, namely, the people's praise in singing the "offertory," expressing the joy of the offerers, and the priest's prayer asking for the people's oblation to be made acceptable to God. Hence David said (1 Para 29:17): "In the simplicity of my heart, I have... offered all these things: and I have seen with great joy Thy people which are here present, offer Thee their offerings": and then he makes the following prayer: "O Lord God... keep... this will." |
| Deinde, circa consecrationem, quae supernaturali virtute agitur, primo excitatur populus ad devotionem in praefatione, unde et monetur sursum corda habere ad dominum. Et ideo, finita praefatione, populus cum devotione laudat divinitatem Christi cum Angelis, dicens, sanctus, sanctus, sanctus; et humanitatem cum pueris, dicens, benedictus qui venit. Deinde sacerdos secreto commemorat, primo quidem, illos pro quibus hoc sacrificium offertur, scilicet pro universali Ecclesia, et pro his qui in sublimitate sunt constituti, I Tim. II; et specialiter quosdam qui offerunt vel pro quibus offertur. Secundo, commemorat sanctos, quorum patrocinia implorat pro praedictis, cum dicit, communicantes et memoriam venerantes, et cetera. Tertio, petitionem concludit, cum dicit, hanc igitur oblationem etc. ut fiat oblatio pro quibus offertur salutaris. |
Then, regarding the consecration, performed by supernatural power, the people are first of all excited to devotion in the "Preface," hence they are admonished "to lift up their hearts to the Lord," and therefore when the "Preface" is ended the people devoutly praise Christ's Godhead, saying with the angels: "Holy, Holy, Holy"; and His humanity, saying with the children: "Blessed is he that cometh." In the next place the priest makes a "commemoration," first of those for whom this sacrifice is offered, namely, for the whole Church, and "for those set in high places" (1 Tim. 2:2), and, in a special manner, of them "who offer, or for whom the mass is offered." Secondly, he commemorates the saints, invoking their patronage for those mentioned above, when he says: "Communicating with, and honoring the memory," etc. Thirdly, he concludes the petition when he says: "Wherefore that this oblation," etc., in order that the oblation may be salutary to them for whom it is offered. |
| Deinde accedit ad ipsam consecrationem. In qua primo petit consecrationis effectum, cum dicit, quam oblationem tu Deus. Secundo, consecrationem peragit per verba salvatoris, cum dicit, qui pridie, et cetera. Tertio, excusat praesumptionem per obedientiam ad mandatum Christi, cum dicit, unde et memores. Quarto, petit hoc sacrificium peractum esse Deo acceptum, cum dicit, supra quae propitio, et cetera. Quinto, petit huius sacrificii et sacramenti effectum, primo quidem, quantum ad ipsos sumentes, cum dicit, supplices te rogamus; secundo, quantum ad mortuos, qui iam sumere non possunt, cum dicit, memento etiam, domine, etc.; tertio, specialiter quantum ad ipsos sacerdotes offerentes, cum dicit, nobis quoque peccatoribus et cetera. | Then he comes to the consecration itself. Here he asks first of all for the effect of the consecration, when he says: "Which oblation do Thou, O God," etc. Secondly, he performs the consecration using our Saviour's words, when he says: "Who the day before," etc. Thirdly, he makes excuse for his presumption in obeying Christ's command, saying: "Wherefore, calling to mind," etc. Fourthly, he asks that the sacrifice accomplished may find favor with God, when he says: "Look down upon them with a propitious," etc. Fifthly, he begs for the effect of this sacrifice and sacrament, first for the partakers, saying: "We humbly beseech Thee"; then for the dead, who can no longer receive it, saying: "Be mindful also, O Lord," etc.; thirdly, for the priests themselves who offer, saying: "And to us sinners," etc. |
| Deinde agitur de perceptione sacramenti. Et primo quidem, praeparatur populus ad percipiendum. Primo quidem, per orationem communem totius populi, quae est oratio dominica, in qua petimus panem nostrum quotidianum nobis dari; et etiam privatam, quam specialiter sacerdos pro populo offert, cum dicit, libera nos, quaesumus, domine. Secundo, praeparatur populus per pacem, quae datur dicendo, agnus Dei, est enim hoc sacramentum unitatis et pacis, ut supra dictum est. In Missis autem defunctorum, in quibus hoc sacrificium offertur non pro pace praesenti, sed pro requie mortuorum, pax intermittitur. |
Then follows the act of receiving the sacrament. First of all, the people are prepared for Communion; first, by the common prayer of the congregation, which is the Lord's Prayer, in which we ask for our daily bread to be given us; and also by private prayer, which the priest puts up specially for the people, when he says: "Deliver us, we beseech Thee, O Lord," etc. Secondly, the people are prepared by the "Pax" which is given with the words, "Lamb of God," etc., because this is the sacrament of unity and peace, as stated above (Question [73], Article [4]; Question [79], Article [1]). But in masses for the dead, in which the sacrifice is offered not for present peace, but for the repose of the dead, the "Pax" is omitted. |
| Deinde sequitur perceptio sacramenti, primo percipiente sacerdote, et postmodum aliis dante; quia, ut dicit Dionysius, III cap. Eccles. Hier., qui aliis divina tradit, primo debet ipse particeps esse. | Then follows the reception of the sacrament, the priest receiving first, and afterwards giving it to others, because, as Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iii), he who gives Divine things to others, ought first to partake thereof himself. |
| Ultimo autem tota Missae celebratio in gratiarum actione terminatur, populo exultante pro sumptione mysterii, quod significat cantus post communionem; et sacerdote per orationem gratias offerente, sicut et Christus, celebrata cena cum discipulis, hymnum dixit, ut dicitur Matth. XXVI. |
Finally, the whole celebration of mass ends with the thanksgiving, the people rejoicing for having received the mystery (and this is the meaning of the singing after the Communion); and the priest returning thanks by prayer, as Christ, at the close of the supper with His disciples, "said a hymn" (Mt. 26:30). |
| Ad primum ergo dicendum quod consecratio solis verbis Christi conficitur. Alia vero necesse fuit addere ad praeparationem populi sumentis, ut dictum est. | Reply to Objection 1: The consecration is accomplished by Christ's words only; but the other words must be added to dispose the people for receiving it, as stated above. |
| Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut dicitur Ioan. ult., multa sunt a domino facta vel dicta quae Evangelistae non scripserunt. Inter quae fuit hoc quod dominus oculos levavit in caelum in cena, quod tamen Ecclesia ex traditione apostolorum habuit. Rationabile enim videtur ut qui in suscitatione Lazari, ut habetur Ioan. XI, et in oratione quam pro discipulis fecit, Ioan. XVII, oculos levavit ad patrem, in huius sacramenti institutione multo magis hoc fecerit, tanquam in re potiori. |
Reply to Objection 2: As is stated in the last chapter of John (verse 25), our Lord said and did many things which are not written down by the Evangelists; and among them is the uplifting of His eyes to heaven at the supper; nevertheless the Roman Church had it by tradition from the apostles. For it seems reasonable that He Who lifted up His eyes to the Father in raising Lazarus to life, as related in Jn. 11:41, and in the prayer which He made for the disciples (Jn. 17:1), had more reason to do so in instituting this sacrament, as being of greater import. |
| Quod autem dicitur manducate, et non comedite, non differt quantum ad sensum. Nec multum refert quid dicatur, praesertim cum verba illa non sint de forma, ut supra dictum est. | The use of the word "manducate" instead of "comedite" makes no difference in the meaning, nor does the expression signify, especially since those words are no part of the form, as stated above (Question [78], Article [1], ad 2,4). |
| Quod autem additur omnes, intelligitur in verbis Evangelii, licet non exprimatur, quia ipse dixerat, Ioan. VI, nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis, non habebitis vitam in vobis. |
The additional word "all" is understood in the Gospels, although not expressed, because He had said (Jn. 6:54): "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man... you shall not have life in you." |
| Ad tertium dicendum quod Eucharistia est sacramentum totius ecclesiasticae unitatis. Et ideo specialiter in hoc sacramento, magis quam in aliis, debet fieri mentio de omnibus quae pertinent ad salutem totius Ecclesiae. | Reply to Objection 3: The Eucharist is the sacrament of the unity of the whole Church: and therefore in this sacrament, more than in the others, mention ought to be made of all that belongs to the salvation of the entire Church. |
| Ad quartum dicendum quod duplex est instructio. Una, quae fit noviter imbuendis, scilicet catechumenis. Et talis instructio fit circa Baptismum. Alia autem est instructio in qua instruitur fidelis populus, qui communicat huic mysterio. Et talis instructio fit in hoc sacramento. Et tamen ab hac instructione non repelluntur etiam catechumeni et infideles. Unde dicitur de Consecr., dist. I, episcopus nullum prohibeat Ecclesiam ingredi et audire verbum Dei, sive gentilem sive haereticum sive Iudaeum, usque ad Missam catechumenorum, in qua scilicet continetur instructio fidei. | Reply to Objection 4: There is a twofold instruction in the Faith: the first is for those receiving it for the first time, that is to say, for catechumens, and such instruction is given in connection with Baptism. The other is the instruction of the faithful who take part in this sacrament; and such instruction is given in connection with this sacrament. Nevertheless catechumens and unbelievers are not excluded therefrom. Hence in De Consecr., dist. 1, it is laid down: "Let the bishop hinder no one from entering the church, and hearing the word of God, be they Gentiles, heretics, or Jews, until the mass of the Catechumens begins," in which the instruction regarding the Faith is contained. |
| Ad quintum dicendum quod in hoc sacramento maior devotio requiritur quam in aliis sacramentis, propter hoc quod in hoc sacramento totus Christus continetur. Et etiam communior, quia in hoc sacramento requiritur devotio totius populi, pro quo sacrificium offertur, et non solum percipientium sacramentum, sicut in aliis sacramentis. Et ideo, sicut Cyprianus dicit, sacerdos, praefatione praemissa, parat fratrum mentes, dicendo, sursum corda, ut, dum respondet plebs, habemus ad dominum, admoneatur nihil aliud se cogitare quam Deum. | Reply to Objection 5: Greater devotion is required in this sacrament than in the others, for the reason that the entire Christ is contained therein. Moreover, this sacrament requires a more general devotion, i.e. on the part of the whole people, since for them it is offered; and not merely on the part of the recipients, as in the other sacraments. Hence Cyprian observes (De Orat. Domin. 31), "The priest, in saying the Preface, disposes the souls of the brethren by saying, 'Lift up your hearts,' and when the people answer---'We have lifted them up to the Lord,' let them remember that they are to think of nothing else but God." |
| Ad sextum dicendum quod in hoc sacramento, sicut dictum est, tanguntur ea quae pertinent ad totam Ecclesiam. Et ideo quaedam dicuntur a choro, quae pertinent ad populum. Quorum quaedam chorus totaliter prosequitur, quae scilicet toti populo inspirantur. Quaedam vero populus prosequitur, sacerdote inchoante, qui personam Dei gerit, in signum quod talia pervenerunt ad populum ex revelatione divina, sicut fides et gloria caelestis. Et ideo sacerdos inchoat symbolum fidei et gloria in excelsis Deo. Quaedam vero dicuntur per ministros, sicut doctrina novi et veteris testamenti, in signum quod per ministros a Deo missos est haec doctrina populis nuntiata. Quaedam vero sacerdos solus prosequitur, quae scilicet ad proprium officium sacerdotis pertinent, ut scilicet dona et preces offerat pro populo, sicut dicitur Heb. V. In his tamen quaedam dicit publice, quae scilicet pertinent et ad sacerdotem et ad populum, sicut sunt orationes communes. Quaedam vero pertinent ad solum sacerdotem, sicut oblatio et consecratio. Et ideo quae circa haec sunt dicenda occulte a sacerdote dicuntur. In utrisque tamen excitat attentionem populi, dicendo, dominus vobiscum; et expectat assensum dicentium, amen. Et ideo in his quae secreto dicuntur, publice praemittit, dominus vobiscum, et subiungit, per omnia saecula saeculorum. Vel secrete aliqua sacerdos dicit in signum quod, circa Christi passionem, discipuli non nisi occulte Christum confitebantur. |
Reply to Objection 6: As was said above (ad 3), those things are mentioned in this sacrament which belong to the entire Church; and consequently some things which refer to the people are sung by the choir, and same of these words are all sung by the choir, as though inspiring the entire people with them; and there are other words which the priest begins and the people take up, the priest then acting as in the person of God; to show that the things they denote have come to the people through Divine revelation, such as faith and heavenly glory; and therefore the priest intones the "Creed" and the "Gloria in excelsis Deo." Other words are uttered by the ministers, such as the doctrine of the Old and New Testament, as a sign that this doctrine was announced to the peoples through ministers sent by God. And there are other words which the priest alone recites, namely, such as belong to his personal office, "that he may offer up gifts and prayers for the people" (Heb. 5:1). Some of these, however, he says aloud, namely, such as are common to priest and people alike, such as the "common prayers"; other words, however, belong to the priest alone, such as the oblation and the consecration; consequently, the prayers that are said in connection with these have to be said by the priest in secret. Nevertheless, in both he calls the people to attention by saying: "The Lord be with you," and he waits for them to assent by saying "Amen." And therefore before the secret prayers he says aloud, "The Lord be with you," and he concludes, "For ever and ever." Or the priest secretly pronounces some of the words as a token that regarding Christ's Passion the disciples acknowledged Him only in secret. |
| Ad septimum dicendum quod efficacia verborum sacramentalium impediri potest per intentionem sacerdotis. Nec tamen est inconveniens quod a Deo petamus id quod certissime scimus ipsum facturum, sicut Christus, Ioan. XVII, petiit suam clarificationem. |
Reply to Objection 7: The efficacy of the sacramental words can be hindered by the priest's intention. Nor is there anything unbecoming in our asking of God for what we know He will do, just as Christ (Jn. 17:1,5) asked for His glorification. |
| Non tamen ibi videtur sacerdos orare ut consecratio impleatur, sed ut nobis fiat fructuosa, unde signanter dicit, ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat. Et hoc significant verba quae praemittit dicens, hanc oblationem facere digneris benedictam, secundum Augustinum, idest, per quam benedicimur, scilicet per gratiam; adscriptam, idest, per quam in caelo adscribimur; ratam, idest, per quam visceribus Christi censeamur; rationabilem, idest, per quam a bestiali sensu exuamur; acceptabilem, idest, ut, qui nobis ipsis displicemus, per hanc acceptabiles eius unico filio simus. | But the priest does not seem to pray there for the consecration to be fulfilled, but that it may be fruitful in our regard, hence he says expressively: "That it may become 'to us' the body and the blood." Again, the words preceding these have that meaning, when he says: "Vouchsafe to make this oblation blessed," i.e. according to Augustine (Paschasius, De Corp. et Sang. Dom. xii), "that we may receive a blessing," namely, through grace; "'enrolled,' i.e. that we may be enrolled in heaven; 'ratified,' i.e. that we may be incorporated in Christ; 'reasonable,' i.e. that we may be stripped of our animal sense; 'acceptable,' i.e. that we who in ourselves are displeasing, may, by its means, be made acceptable to His only Son." |
| Ad octavum dicendum quod, licet hoc sacrificium ex seipso praeferatur omnibus antiquis sacrificiis, tamen sacrificia antiquorum fuerunt Deo acceptissima ex eorum devotione. Petit ergo sacerdos ut hoc sacrificium acceptetur Deo ex devotione offerentium, sicut illa accepta fuerunt Deo. | Reply to Objection 8: Although this sacrament is of itself preferable to all ancient sacrifices, yet the sacrifices of the men of old were most acceptable to God on account of their devotion. Consequently the priest asks that this sacrifice may be accepted by God through the devotion of the offerers, just as the former sacrifices were accepted by Him. |
| Ad nonum dicendum quod sacerdos non petit quod species sacramentales deferantur in caelum; neque corpus Christi verum, quod ibi esse non desinit. Sed petit hoc pro corpore mystico, quod scilicet in hoc sacramento significatur, ut scilicet orationes et populi et sacerdotis Angelus assistens divinis mysteriis Deo repraesentet; secundum illud Apoc. VIII, ascendit fumus incensorum de oblationibus sanctorum de manu Angeli. Sublime autem altare Dei dicitur vel ipsa Ecclesia triumphans, in quam transferri petimus, vel ipse Deus, cuius participationem petimus; de hoc enim altari dicitur Exod. XX, non ascendes ad altare meum per gradus, idest, in Trinitate gradus non facies. Vel per Angelum intelligitur ipse Christus, qui est magni consilii Angelus, qui corpus suum mysticum Deo patri coniungit et Ecclesiae triumphanti. |
Reply to Objection 9: The priest does not pray that the sacramental species may be borne up to heaven; nor that Christ's true body may be borne thither, for it does not cease to be there; but he offers this prayer for Christ's mystical body, which is signified in this sacrament, that the angel standing by at the Divine mysteries may present to God the prayers of both priest and people, according to Apoc. 8:4: "And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God, from the hand of the angel." But God's "altar on high" means either the Church triumphant, unto which we pray to be translated, or else God Himself, in Whom we ask to share; because it is said of this altar (Ex. 20:26): "Thou shalt not go up by steps unto My altar, i.e. thou shalt make no steps towards the Trinity." Or else by the angel we are to understand Christ Himself, Who is the "Angel of great counsel" (Is. 9:6: Septuagint), Who unites His mystical body with God the Father and the Church triumphant. |
| Et propter hoc etiam Missa nominatur. Quia per Angelum sacerdos preces ad Deum mittit, sicut populus per sacerdotem. Vel quia Christus est hostia nobis missa. Unde et in fine Missae diaconus in festis diebus populum licentiat, dicens, ite, Missa est, scilicet hostia ad Deum per Angelum, ut scilicet sit Deo accepta. | And from this the mass derives its name [missa]; because the priest sends [mittit] his prayers up to God through the angel, as the people do through the priest. or else because Christ is the victim sent [missa] to us: accordingly the deacon on festival days "dismisses" the people at the end of the mass, by saying: "Ite, missa est," that is, the victim has been sent [missa est] to God through the angel, so that it may be accepted by God. |
Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
Article: 5 [ << | >> ]
| Ad quintum sic proceditur. Videtur quod ea quae in celebratione huius sacramenti aguntur, non sunt convenientia. Hoc enim sacramentum ad novum testamentum pertinet, ut ex forma ipsius apparet. In novo autem testamento non sunt observandae caeremoniae veteris testamenti. Ad quas pertinebat quod sacerdos et ministri aqua lavabantur quando accedebant ad offerendum, legitur enim Exod. XXX, lavabunt Aaron et filii eius manus suas ac pedes quando ingressuri sunt ad altare. Non est ergo conveniens quod sacerdos lavet manus suas inter Missarum solemnia. |
Objection 1: It seems that the actions performed in celebrating this mystery are not becoming. For, as is evident from its form, this sacrament belongs to the New Testament. But under the New Testament the ceremonies of the old are not to be observed, such as that the priests and ministers were purified with water when they drew nigh to offer up the sacrifice: for we read (Ex. 30:19,20): "Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and feet... when they are going into the tabernacle of the testimony... and when they are to come to the altar." Therefore it is not fitting that the priest should wash his hands when celebrating mass. |
| Praeterea, ibidem dominus mandavit quod sacerdos adoleret incensum suave fragrans super altare quod erat ante propitiatorium. Quod etiam pertinebat ad caeremoniam veteris testamenti. Inconvenienter ergo sacerdos in Missa thurificatione utitur. |
Objection 2: Further, (Ex. 30:7), the Lord commanded Aaron to "burn sweet-smelling incense" upon the altar which was "before the propitiatory": and the same action was part of the ceremonies of the Old Law. Therefore it is not fitting for the priest to use incense during mass. |
| Praeterea, ea quae in sacramentis Ecclesiae aguntur, non sunt iteranda. Inconvenienter ergo sacerdos iterat crucesignationes super hoc sacramentum. | Objection 3: Further, the ceremonies performed in the sacraments of the Church ought not to be repeated. Consequently it is not proper for the priest to repeat the sign of the cross many times over this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, apostolus dicit, Heb. VII, sine ulla contradictione, quod minus est a maiori benedicitur. Sed Christus, qui est in hoc sacramento post consecrationem, est multo maior sacerdote. Inconvenienter igitur sacerdos post consecrationem benedicit hoc sacramentum cruce signando. |
Objection 4: Further, the Apostle says (Heb. 7:7): "And without all contradiction, that which is less, is blessed by the better." But Christ, Who is in this sacrament after the consecration, is much greater than the priest. Therefore quite unseemingly the priest, after the consecration, blesses this sacrament, by signing it with the cross. |
| Praeterea, in sacramento Ecclesiae nihil debet fieri quod ridiculosum videatur. Videtur autem ridiculosum gesticulationes facere, ad quas pertinere videtur quod sacerdos quandoque brachia extendit, manus iungit, digitos complicat, et seipsum incurvat. Ergo hoc non debet fieri in hoc sacramento. | Objection 5: Further, nothing which appears ridiculous ought to be done in one of the Church's sacraments. But it seems ridiculous to perform gestures, e.g. for the priest to stretch out his arms at times, to join his hands, to join together his fingers, and to bow down. Consequently, such things ought not to be done in this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, ridiculosum etiam videtur quod sacerdos multoties se ad populum vertit, multoties etiam populum salutat. Non ergo debent haec fieri in celebratione huius sacramenti. | Objection 6: Further, it seems ridiculous for the priest to turn round frequently towards the people, and often to greet the people. Consequently, such things ought not to be done in the celebration of this sacrament. |
| Praeterea, apostolus, I Cor. I, pro inconvenienti habet quod Christus sit divisus. Sed post consecrationem Christus est in hoc sacramento. Inconvenienter igitur hostia frangitur a sacerdote. |
Objection 7: Further, the Apostle (1 Cor. 13) deems it improper for Christ to be divided. But Christ is in this sacrament after the consecration. Therefore it is not proper for the priest to divide the host. |
| Praeterea, ea quae in hoc sacramento aguntur, passionem Christi repraesentant. Sed in passione Christi corpus fuit divisum in locis quinque vulnerum. Ergo corpus Christi in quinque partes frangi debet, magis quam in tres. | Objection 8: Further, the ceremonies performed in this sacrament represent Christ's Passion. But during the Passion Christ's body was divided in the places of the five wounds. Therefore Christ's body ought to be broken into five parts rather than into three. |
| Praeterea, totum corpus Christi in hoc sacramento seorsum consecratur a sanguine. Inconvenienter igitur una pars eius sanguini miscetur. | Objection 9: Further, Christ's entire body is consecrated in this sacrament apart from the blood. Consequently, it is not proper for a particle of the body to be mixed with the blood. |
| Praeterea, sicut corpus Christi proponitur in hoc sacramento ut cibus, ita et sanguis Christi ut potus. Sed sumptioni corporis Christi non adiungitur in celebratione Missae alius corporalis cibus. Inconvenienter igitur sacerdos, post sumptionem sanguinis Christi, vinum non consecratum sumit. | Objection 10:: Further, just as, in this sacrament, Christ's body is set before us as food, so is His blood, as drink. But in receiving Christ's body no other bodily food is added in the celebration of the mass. Therefore, it is out of place for the priest, after taking Christ's blood, to receive other wine which is not consecrated. |
| Praeterea, veritas debet respondere figurae. Sed de agno paschali, qui fuit figura huius sacramenti, mandatur quod non remaneret ex eo quidquam usque mane. Inconvenienter ergo hostiae consecratae reservantur, et non statim sumuntur. | Objection 11:: Further, the truth ought to be conformable with the figure. But regarding the Paschal Lamb, which was a figure of this sacrament, it was commanded that nothing of it should "remain until the morning." It is improper therefore for consecrated hosts to be reserved, and not consumed at once. |
| Praeterea, sacerdos pluraliter loquitur audientibus, puta cum dicit, dominus vobiscum, et, gratias agamus. Sed inconveniens videtur pluraliter loqui uni soli, et maxime minori. Ergo inconveniens videtur quod sacerdos, uno tantum ministro praesente, celebret Missam. Sic igitur videtur quod inconvenienter aliqua agantur in celebratione huius sacramenti. | Objection 12:: Further, the priest addresses in the plural number those who are hearing mass, when he says, "The Lord be with you": and, "Let us return thanks." But it is out of keeping to address one individual in the plural number, especially an inferior. Consequently it seems unfitting for a priest to say mass with only a single server present. Therefore in the celebration of this sacrament it seems that some of the things done are out of place. |
| Sed in contrarium est Ecclesiae consuetudo, quae errare non potest, utpote spiritu sancto instructa. | On the contrary, The custom of the Church stands for these things: and the Church cannot err, since she is taught by the Holy Ghost. |
| Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, in sacramentis aliquid dupliciter significatur, scilicet verbis et factis, ad hoc quod sit perfectior significatio. Significantur autem verbis in celebratione huius sacramenti quaedam pertinentia ad passionem Christi, quae repraesentatur in hoc sacramento; vel etiam ad corpus mysticum, quod significatur in hoc sacramento; et quaedam pertinentia ad usum sacramenti, qui debet esse cum devotione et reverentia. Et ideo in celebratione huius mysterii quaedam aguntur ad repraesentandum passionem Christi; vel etiam dispositionem corporis mystici; et quaedam aguntur pertinentia ad devotionem et reverentiam usus huius sacramenti. |
I answer that, As was said above (Question [60], Article [6]), there is a twofold manner of signification in the sacraments, by words, and by actions, in order that the signification may thus be more perfect. Now, in the celebration of this sacrament words are used to signify things pertaining to Christ's Passion, which is represented in this sacrament; or again, pertaining to Christ's mystical body, which is signified therein; and again, things pertaining to the use of this sacrament, which use ought to be devout and reverent. Consequently, in the celebration of this mystery some things are done in order to represent Christ's Passion, or the disposing of His mystical body, and some others are done which pertain to the devotion and reverence due to this sacrament. |
| Ad primum ergo dicendum quod ablutio manuum fit in celebratione Missae propter reverentiam huius sacramenti. Et hoc dupliciter. Primo quidem, quia aliqua pretiosa tractare non consuevimus nisi manibus ablutis. Unde indecens videtur quod ad tantum sacramentum aliquis accedat manibus, etiam corporaliter, inquinatis. Secundo, propter significationem. Quia, ut Dionysius dicit, III cap. Eccles. Hier., extremitatum ablutio significat emundationem etiam a minimis peccatis, secundum illud Ioan. XIII, qui lotus est, non indiget nisi ut pedes lavet. Et talis emundatio requiritur ab eo qui accedit ad hoc sacramentum. Quod etiam significatur per confessionem quae fit ante introitum Missae. Et hoc idem significabat ablutio sacerdotum in veteri lege, ut ibidem Dionysius dicit. Nec tamen Ecclesia hoc servat tanquam caeremoniale veteris legis praeceptum, sed quasi ab Ecclesia institutum, sicut quiddam secundum se conveniens. Et ideo non eodem modo observatur sicut tunc. Praetermittitur enim pedum ablutio, et servatur ablutio manuum, quae potest fieri magis in promptu, et quae sufficit ad significandam perfectam munditiam. Cum enim manus sit organum organorum, ut dicitur in III de anima, omnia opera attribuuntur manibus. Unde et in Psalmo dicitur, lavabo inter innocentes manus meas. | Reply to Objection 1: The washing of the hands is done in the celebration of mass out of reverence for this sacrament; and this for two reasons: first, because we are not wont to handle precious objects except the hands be washed; hence it seems indecent for anyone to approach so great a sacrament with hands that are, even literally, unclean. Secondly, on account of its signification, because, as Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iii), the washing of the extremities of the limbs denotes cleansing from even the smallest sins, according to Jn. 13:10: "He that is washed needeth not but to wash his feet." And such cleansing is required of him who approaches this sacrament; and this is denoted by the confession which is made before the "Introit" of the mass. Moreover, this was signified by the washing of the priests under the Old Law, as Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iii). However, the Church observes this ceremony, not because it was prescribed under the Old Law, but because it is becoming in itself, and therefore instituted by the Church. Hence it is not observed in the same way as it was then: because the washing of the feet is omitted, and the washing of the hands is observed; for this can be done more readily, and suffices far denoting perfect cleansing. For, since the hand is the "organ of organs" (De Anima iii), all works are attributed to the hands: hence it is said in Ps. 25:6: "I will wash my hands among the innocent." |
| Ad secundum dicendum quod thurificatione non utimur quasi caeremoniali praecepto legis, sed sicut Ecclesiae statuto. Unde non eodem modo utimur sicut in veteri lege erat statutum. Pertinet autem ad duo. Primo quidem, ad reverentiam huius sacramenti, ut scilicet per bonum odorem depellatur si quid corporaliter pravi odoris in loco fuerit, quod posset provocare horrorem. Secundo, pertinet ad repraesentandum effectum gratiae, qua, sicut bono odore, Christus plenus fuit, secundum illud Gen. XXVII, ecce, odor filii mei sicut odor agri pleni; et a Christo derivatur ad fideles officio ministrorum, secundum illud II Cor. II, odorem notitiae suae spargit per nos in omni loco. Et ideo, undique thurificato altari, per quod Christus designatur, thurificantur omnes per ordinem. | Reply to Objection 2: We use incense, not as commanded by a ceremonial precept of the Law, but as prescribed by the Church; accordingly we do not use it in the same fashion as it was ordered under the Old Law. It has reference to two things: first, to the reverence due to this sacrament, i.e. in order by its good odor, to remove any disagreeable smell that may be about the place; secondly, it serves to show the effect of grace, wherewith Christ was filled as with a good odor, according to Gn. 27:27: "Behold, the odor of my son is like the odor of a ripe field"; and from Christ it spreads to the faithful by the work of His ministers, according to 2 Cor. 2:14: "He manifesteth the odor of his knowledge by us in every place"; and therefore when the altar which represents Christ, has been incensed on every side, then all are incensed in their proper order. |
| Ad tertium dicendum quod sacerdos in celebratione Missae utitur crucesignatione ad exprimendam passionem Christi, quae ad crucem est terminata. Est autem passio Christi quibusdam quasi gradibus peracta. Nam primo fuit Christi traditio, quae facta est a Deo, a Iuda, et a Iudaeis. Quod significat trina crucesignatio super illa verba, haec dona, haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata. | Reply to Objection 3: The priest, in celebrating the mass, makes use of the sign of the cross to signify Christ's Passion which was ended upon the cross. Now, Christ's Passion was accomplished in certain stages. First of all there was Christ's betrayal, which was the work of God, of Judas, and of the Jews; and this is signified by the triple sign of the cross at the words, "These gifts, these presents, these holy unspotted sacrifices." |
| Secundo fuit Christi venditio. Est autem venditus sacerdotibus, Scribis et Pharisaeis. Ad quod significandum fit iterum trina crucesignatio super illa verba, benedictam, adscriptam, ratam. Vel ad ostendendum pretium venditionis, scilicet triginta denarios. Additur autem et duplex super illa verba, ut nobis corpus et sanguis, etc., ad designandam personam Iudae venditoris et Christi venditi. | Secondly, there was the selling of Christ. Now he was sold to the Priests, to the Scribes, and to the Pharisees: and to signify this the threefold sign of the cross is repeated, at the words, "blessed, enrolled, ratified." Or again, to signify the price for which He was sold, viz. thirty pence. And a double cross is added at the words---"that it may become to us the Body and the Blood," etc., to signify the person of Judas the seller, and of Christ Who was sold. |
| Tertio autem fuit praesignatio passionis Christi facta in cena. Ad quod designandum, fiunt tertio duae cruces, una in consecratione corporis, alia in consecratione sanguinis, ubi utrobique dicitur benedixit. | Thirdly, there was the foreshadowing of the Passion at the last supper. To denote this, in the third place, two crosses are made, one in consecrating the body, the other in consecrating the blood; each time while saying, "He blessed." |
| Quarto autem fuit ipsa passio Christi. Unde, ad repraesentandum quinque plagas, fit quarto quintuplex crucesignatio super illa verba, hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam immaculatam, panem sanctum vitae aeternae, et calicem salutis perpetuae. | Fourthly, there was Christ's Passion itself. And so in order to represent His five wounds, in the fourth place, there is a fivefold signing of the cross at the words, "a pure Victim, a holy Victim, a spotless Victim, the holy bread of eternal life, and the cup of everlasting salvation." |
| Quinto, repraesentatur extensio corporis, et effusio sanguinis, et fructus passionis, per trinam crucesignationem quae fit super illis verbis, corpus et sanguinem sumpserimus, omni benedictione et cetera. | Fifthly, the outstretching of Christ's body, and the shedding of the blood, and the fruits of the Passion, are signified by the triple signing of the cross at the words, "as many as shall receive the body and blood, may be filled with every blessing," etc. |
| Sexto, repraesentatur triplex oratio quam fecit in cruce, unam pro persecutoribus, cum dixit, pater, ignosce illis; secundam pro liberatione a morte, cum dixit, Deus, Deus meus, ut quid dereliquisti me? Tertia pertinet ad adeptionem gloriae, cum dixit, pater, in manus tuas commendo spiritum meum. Et ad hoc significandum, fit trina crucesignatio super illa verba, sanctificas, vivificas, benedicis, et cetera. | Sixthly, Christ's threefold prayer upon the cross is represented; one for His persecutors when He said, "Father, forgive them"; the second for deliverance from death, when He cried, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" the third referring to His entrance into glory, when He said, "Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit"; and in order to denote these there is a triple signing with the cross made at the words, "Thou dost sanctify, quicken, bless." |
| Septimo, repraesentantur tres horae quibus pependit in cruce, scilicet a sexta hora usque ad nonam. Et ad hoc significandum, fit iterum trina crucesignatio ad illa verba, per ipsum, et cum ipso, et in ipso. | Seventhly, the three hours during which He hung upon the cross, that is, from the sixth to the ninth hour, are represented; in signification of which we make once more a triple sign of the cross at the words, "Through Him, and with Him, and in Him." |
| Octavo autem, repraesentatur separatio animae a corpore, per duas cruces subsequentes extra calicem factas. | Eighthly, the separation of His soul from the body is signified by the two subsequent crosses made over the chalice. |
| Nono autem, repraesentatur resurrectio tertia die facta, per tres cruces quae fiunt ad illa verba, pax domini sit semper vobiscum. | Ninthly, the resurrection on the third day is represented by the three crosses made at the words---"May the peace of the Lord be ever with you." |
| Potest autem brevius dici quod consecratio huius sacramenti, et acceptio sacrificii, et fructus eius, procedit ex virtute crucis Christi. Et ideo, ubicumque fit mentio de aliquo horum, sacerdos crucesignatione utitur. | In short, we may say that the consecration of this sacrament, and the acceptance of this sacrifice, and its fruits, proceed from the virtue of the cross of Christ, and therefore wherever mention is made of these, the priest makes use of the sign of the cross. |
| Ad quartum dicendum quod sacerdos post consecrationem non utitur crucesignatione ad benedicendum et consecrandum, sed solum ad commemorandum virtutem crucis et modum passionis Christi, ut ex dictis patet. | Reply to Objection 4: After the consecration, the priest makes the sign of the cross, not for the purpose of blessing and consecrating, but only for calling to mind the virtue of the cross, and the manner of Christ's suffering, as is evident from what has been said (ad 3). |
| Ad quintum dicendum quod ea quae sacerdos in Missa facit, non sunt ridiculosae gesticulationes, fiunt enim ad aliquid repraesentandum. Quod enim sacerdos brachia extendit post consecrationem, significat extensionem brachiorum Christi in cruce. Levat etiam manus orando, ad designandum quod oratio eius pro populo dirigitur ad Deum, secundum illud Thren. III, levemus corda nostra cum manibus ad Deum in caelum. Et Exod. XVII dicitur quod, cum levaret Moyses manus, vincebat Israel. Quod autem manus interdum iungit, et inclinat se, suppliciter et humiliter orans, designat humilitatem et obedientiam Christi, ex qua passus est. Digitos autem iungit post consecrationem, scilicet pollicem cum indice, quibus corpus Christi consecratum tetigerat, ut, si qua particula digitis adhaeserat, non dispergatur. Quod pertinet ad reverentiam sacramenti. | Reply to Objection 5: The actions performed by the priest in mass are not ridiculous gestures, since they are done so as to represent something else. The priest in extending his arms signifies the outstretching of Christ's arms upon the cross. He also lifts up his hands as he prays, to point out that his prayer is directed to God for the people, according to Lam. 3:41: "Let us lift up our hearts with our hands to the Lord in the heavens": and Ex. 17:11: "And when Moses lifted up his hands Israel overcame." That at times he joins his hands, and bows down, praying earnestly and humbly, denotes the humility and obedience of Christ, out of which He suffered. He closes his fingers, i.e. the thumb and first finger, after the consecration, because, with them, he had touched the consecrated body of Christ; so that if any particle cling to the fingers, it may not be scattered: and this belongs to the reverence for this sacrament. |
| Ad sextum dicendum quod quinquies se sacerdos vertit ad populum, ad designandum quod dominus die resurrectionis quinquies se manifestavit, ut supra dictum est in tractatu de resurrectione Christi. Salutat autem septies populum, scilicet quinque vicibus quando se convertit ad populum, et bis quando se non convertit, scilicet ante praefationem cum dicit, dominus vobiscum, et cum dicit, pax domini sit semper vobiscum, ad designandum septiformem gratiam spiritus sancti. Episcopus autem celebrans in festis in prima salutatione dicit, pax vobis, quod post resurrectionem dixit dominus, cuius personam repraesentat episcopus praecipue. |
Reply to Objection 6: Five times does the priest turn round towards the people, to denote that our Lord manifested Himself five times on the day of His Resurrection, as stated above in the treatise on Christ's Resurrection (Question [55], Article [3], Objection [3]). But the priest greets the people seven times, namely, five times, by turning round to the people, and twice without turning round, namely, when he says, "The Lord be with you" before the "Preface," and again when he says, "May the peace of the Lord be ever with you": and this is to denote the sevenfold grace of the Holy Ghost. But a bishop, when he celebrates on festival days, in his first greeting says, "Peace be to you," which was our Lord's greeting after Resurrection, Whose person the bishop chiefly represents. |
| Ad septimum dicendum quod fractio hostiae tria significat, primo quidem, ipsam divisionem corporis Christi, quae facta est in passione; secundo, distinctionem corporis mystici secundum diversos status; tertio, distributionem gratiarum procedentium ex passione Christi, ut Dionysius dicit, III cap. Eccles. Hier. Unde talis fractio non inducit divisionem Christi. | Reply to Objection 7: The breaking of the host denotes three things: first, the rending of Christ's body, which took place in the Passion; secondly, the distinction of His mystical body according to its various states; and thirdly, the distribution of the graces which flow from Christ's Passion, as Dionysius observes (Eccl. Hier. iii). Hence this breaking does not imply severance in Christ. |
Ad octavum dicendum quod, sicut Sergius Papa dicit, et habetur in decretis, de Consecr., dist. II, triforme est corpus domini. Pars oblata in calicem Missa corpus Christi quod iam resurrexit, demonstrat, scilicet ipsum Christum, et beatam virginem, vel si qui alii sancti cum corporibus sunt in gloria. Pars comesta ambulans adhuc super terram, quia scilicet viventes in terra sacramento uniuntur; et passionibus conteruntur, sicut panis comestus atteritur dentibus. Pars in altari usque ad finem Missae remanens est corpus Christi in sepulcro remanens, quia usque in finem saeculi corpora sanctorum in sepulcris erunt, quorum tamen animae sunt vel in Purgatorio vel in caelo. Hic tamen ritus non servatur modo, ut scilicet una pars servetur usque in finem Missae. Manet tamen eadem significatio partium. Quam quidam metrice expresserunt, dicentes,
|
Reply to Objection 8: As Pope Sergius says, and it is to be found in the Decretals (De Consecr., dist. ii), "the Lord's body is threefold; the part offered and put into the chalice signifies Christ's risen body," namely, Christ Himself, and the Blessed Virgin, and the other saints, if there be any, who are already in glory with their bodies. "The part consumed denotes those still walking upon earth," because while living upon earth they are united together by this sacrament; and are bruised by the passions, just as the bread eaten is bruised by the teeth. "The part reserved on the altar till the close of the mass, is His body hidden in the sepulchre, because the bodies of the saints will be in their graves until the end of the world": though their souls are either in purgatory, or in heaven. However, this rite of reserving one part on the altar till the close of the mass is no longer observed, on account of the danger; nevertheless, the same meaning of the parts continues, which some persons have expressed in verse, thus:
|
| Quidam tamen dicunt quod pars in calicem Missa significat eos qui vivunt in hoc mundo; pars autem extra calicem servata significat plene beatos quantum ad animam et corpus; pars autem comesta significat ceteros. | Others, however, say that the part put into the chalice denotes those still living in this world. while the part kept outside the chalice denotes those fully blessed both in soul and body; while the part consumed means the others. |
| Ad nonum dicendum quod per calicem duo possunt significari. Uno modo, ipsa passio, quae repraesentatur in hoc sacramento. Et secundum hoc, per partem in calicem missam significantur illi qui adhuc sunt participes passionum Christi. Alio modo, potest significari fruitio beata, quae etiam in hoc sacramento praefiguratur. Et ideo illi quorum corpora iam sunt in plena beatitudine, significantur per partem in calicem missam. Et est notandum quod pars in calicem missa non debet populo dari in supplementum communionis, quia panem intinctum non porrexit Christus nisi Iudae proditori. | Reply to Objection 9: Two things can be signified by the chalice: first, the Passion itself, which is represented in this sacrament, and according to this, by the part put into the chalice are denoted those who are still sharers of Christ's sufferings; secondly, the enjoyment of the Blessed can be signified, which is likewise foreshadowed in this sacrament; and therefore those whose bodies are already in full beatitude, are denoted by the part put into the chalice. And it is to be observed that the part put into the chalice ought not to be given to the people to supplement the communion, because Christ gave dipped bread only to Judas the betrayer. |
| Ad decimum dicendum quod vinum, ratione suae humiditatis, est ablutivum. Et ideo sumitur post perceptionem huius sacramenti, ad abluendum os, ne aliquae reliquiae remaneant, quod pertinet ad reverentiam sacramenti. Unde extra, de Celebrat. Miss., cap. ex parte, sacerdos vino os perfundere debet postquam totum percepit sacramentum, nisi cum eodem die Missam aliam debuerit celebrare, ne, si forte vinum perfusionis acciperet, celebrationem aliam impediret. Et eadem ratione perfundit vino digitos quibus corpus Christi tetigerat. | Reply to Objection 10:: Wine, by reason of its humidity, is capable of washing, consequently it is received in order to rinse the mouth after receiving this sacrament, lest any particles remain: and this belongs to reverence for the sacrament. Hence (Extra, De Celebratione missae, chap. Ex parte), it is said: "The priest should always cleanse his mouth with wine after receiving the entire sacrament of Eucharist: except when he has to celebrate another mass on the same day, lest from taking the ablution-wine he be prevented from celebrating again"; and it is for the same reason that wine is poured over the fingers with which he had touched the body of Christ. |
| Ad undecimum dicendum quod veritas quantum ad aliquid debet respondere figurae, quia scilicet non debet pars hostiae consecratae de qua sacerdos et ministri, vel etiam populus communicat, in crastinum reservari. Unde, ut habetur de Consecr., dist. II, Clemens Papa statuit, tanta holocausta in altario offerantur, quanta populo sufficere debeant. Quod si remanserint, in crastinum non reserventur, sed cum timore et tremore clericorum diligentia consumantur. Quia tamen hoc sacramentum quotidie sumendum est, non autem agnus paschalis quotidie sumebatur; ideo oportet alias hostias consecratas pro infirmis conservare. Unde in eadem distinctione legitur, presbyter Eucharistiam semper habeat paratam, ut, quando quis infirmatus fuerit, statim eum communicet, ne sine communione moriatur. | Reply to Objection 11:: The truth ought to be conformable with the figure, in some respect: namely, because a part of the host consecrated, of which the priest and ministers or even the people communicate, ought not to be reserved until the day following. Hence, as is laid down (De Consecr., dist. ii), Pope Clement I ordered that "as many hosts are to be offered on the altar as shall suffice for the people; should any be left over, they are not to be reserved until the morrow, but let the clergy carefully consume them with fear and trembling." Nevertheless, since this sacrament is to be received daily, whereas the Paschal Lamb was not, it is therefore necessary for other hosts to be reserved for the sick. Hence we read in the same distinction: "Let the priest always have the Eucharist ready, so that, when anyone fall sick, he may take Communion to him at once, lest he die without it." |
| Ad duodecimum dicendum quod in solemni celebratione Missae plures debent adesse. Unde Soter Papa dicit, ut habetur de Consecr., dist. I, hoc quoque statutum est, ut nullus presbyterorum Missarum solemnia celebrare praesumat, nisi, duobus praesentibus sibique respondentibus, ipse tertius habeatur, quia, cum pluraliter ab eo dicitur, dominus vobiscum, et illud in secretis, orate pro me, apertissime convenit ut ipsi respondeatur salutationi. Unde et, ad maiorem solemnitatem, ibidem statutum legitur quod episcopus cum pluribus Missarum solemnia peragat. In Missis tamen privatis sufficit unum habere ministrum, qui gerit personam totius populi Catholici, ex cuius persona sacerdoti pluraliter respondet. | Reply to Objection 12:: Several persons ought to be present at the solemn celebration of the mass. Hence Pope Soter says (De Consecr., dist. 1): "It has also been ordained, that no priest is to presume to celebrate solemn mass, unless two others be present answering him, while he himself makes the third; because when he says in the plural, 'The Lord be with you,' and again in the Secrets, 'Pray ye for me,' it is most becoming that they should answer his greeting." Hence it is for the sake of greater solemnity that we find it decreed (De Consecr. dist. 1) that a bishop is to solemnize mass with several assistants. Nevertheless, in private masses it suffices to have one server, who takes the place of the whole Catholic people, on whose behalf he makes answer in the plural to the priest. |
Index [<<� | >>]
Third Part [ << | >> ]
Question: 83 [ << | >> ]
Article: 6 [ << | >> ]
| Ad sextum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non possit sufficienter occurri defectibus qui circa celebrationem huius sacramenti occurrunt, statuta Ecclesiae observando. Contingit enim quandoque quod sacerdos, ante consecrationem vel post, moritur vel alienatur, vel aliqua alia infirmitate praepeditur ne sacramentum sumere possit et Missam perficere. Ergo videtur quod non possit impleri statutum Ecclesiae quo praecipitur quod sacerdos consecrans suo sacrificio communicet. | Objection 1: It seems that the defects occurring during the celebration of this sacrament cannot be sufficiently met by observing the statutes of the Church. For it sometimes happens that before or after the consecration the priest dies or goes mad, or is hindered by some other infirmity from receiving the sacrament and completing the mass. Consequently it seems impossible to observe the Church's statute, whereby the priest consecrating must communicate of his own sacrifice. |
| Praeterea, contingit quandoque quod sacerdos, ante consecrationem vel post, recolit se aliquid comedisse vel bibisse, vel alicui mortali peccato subiacere, vel etiam excommunicationi, cuius prius memoriam non habebat. Necesse est ergo quod ille qui est in tali articulo constitutus, peccet mortaliter contra statutum Ecclesiae faciens, sive sumat sive non sumat. | Objection 2: Further, it sometimes happens that, before the consecration, the priest remembers that he has eaten or drunk something, or that he is in mortal sin, or under excommunication, which he did not remember previously. Therefore, in such a dilemma a man must necessarily commit mortal sin by acting against the Church's statute, whether he receives or not. |
| Praeterea, contingit quandoque quod in calicem musca aut aranea vel aliquod animal venenosum cadit post consecrationem; vel etiam cognoscit sacerdos calici venenum esse immissum ab aliquo malevolo causa occidendi ipsum. In quo casu, si sumat, videtur peccare mortaliter, se occidendo vel Deum tentando. Similiter, si non sumat, peccat, contra statutum Ecclesiae faciens. Ergo videtur esse perplexus et subiectus necessitati peccandi. Quod est inconveniens. | Objection 3: Further, it sometimes happens that a fly or a spider, or some other poisonous creature falls into the chalice after the consecration. Or even that the priest comes to know that poison has been put in by some evilly disposed person in order to kill him. Now in this instance, if he takes it, he appears to sin by killing himself, or by tempting God: also in like manner if he does not take it, he sins by acting against the Church's statute. Consequently, he seems to be perplexed, and under necessity of sinning, which is not becoming. |
| Praeterea, contingit quod per negligentiam ministri aut aqua non ponitur in calice, aut etiam nec vinum, et hoc sacerdos advertit. Ergo in hoc etiam casu videtur esse perplexus, sive sumat corpus sine sanguine, quasi imperfectum faciens sacrificium; sive non sumens nec corpus nec sanguinem. | Objection 4: Further, it sometimes happens from the server's want of heed that water is not added to the chalice, or even the wine overlooked, and that the priest discovers this. Therefore he seems to be perplexed likewise in this case, whether he receives the body without the blood, thus making the sacrifice to be incomplete, or whether he receives neither the body nor the blood. |
| Praeterea, contingit quod sacerdos non recolit se dixisse verba consecrationis, vel etiam alia quae in consecratione huius sacramenti dicuntur. Videtur ergo peccare in hoc casu, sive reiteret verba super eandem materiam, quae forte iam dixerat; sive utatur pane et vino non consecratis quasi consecratis. | Objection 5: Further, it sometimes happens that the priest cannot remember having said the words of consecration, or other words which are uttered in the celebration of this sacrament. In this case he seems to sin, whether he repeats the words over the same matter, which words possibly he has said before, or whether he uses bread and wine which are not consecrated, as if they were consecrated. |
| Praeterea, contingit quandoque, propter frigus, quod sacerdoti dilabitur hostia in calicem, sive ante fractionem sive post. In hoc ergo casu non poterit sacerdos implere ritum Ecclesiae vel de ipsa fractione, vel etiam de hoc quod sola tertia pars mittatur in calicem. | Objection 6: Further, it sometimes comes to pass owing to the cold that the host will slip from the priest's hands into the chalice, either before or after the breaking. In this case then the priest will not be able to comply with the Church's rite, either as to the breaking, or else as to this, that only a third part is put into the chalice. |
| Praeterea, contingit quandoque quod per negligentiam sacerdotis sanguis Christi effunditur; vel etiam quod sacerdos sacramentum sumptum vomit; aut quod etiam hostiae consecratae tandiu conserventur quod putrefiant; vel etiam quod a muribus corrodantur; vel etiam qualitercumque perdantur. In quibus casibus non videtur posse huic sacramento debita reverentia exhiberi secundum Ecclesiae statuta. Non videtur ergo quod his defectibus seu periculis occurri possit, salvis Ecclesiae statutis. | Objection 7: Further, sometimes, too, it happens, owing to the priest's want of care, that Christ's blood is spilled, or that he vomits the sacrament received, or that the consecrated hosts are kept so long that they become corrupt, or that they are nibbled by mice, or lost in any manner whatsoever; in which cases it does not seem possible for due reverence to be shown towards this sacrament, as the Church's ordinances require. It does not seem then that such defects or dangers can be met by keeping to the Church's statutes. |
| Sed contra est quod, sicut Deus, sic Ecclesia non praecipit aliquid impossibile. | On the contrary, Just as God does not command an impossibility, so neither does the Church. |
| Respondeo dicendum quod periculis seu defectibus circa hoc sacramentum evenientibus dupliciter potest occurri. Uno modo, praeveniendo, ne scilicet periculum accidat. Alio modo, subsequendo, ut scilicet id quod accidit emendetur, vel adhibendo remedium, vel saltem per poenitentiam eius qui negligenter egit circa hoc sacramentum. | I answer that, Dangers or defects happening to this sacrament can be met in two ways: first, by preventing any such mishaps from occurring: secondly, by dealing with them in such a way, that what may have happened amiss is put right, either by employing a remedy, or at least by repentance on his part who has acted negligently regarding this sacrament. |
| Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, si sacerdos morte aut infirmitate gravi occupetur ante consecrationem corporis et sanguinis domini, non oportet ut per alium suppleatur. Si vero post incoeptam consecrationem hoc acciderit, puta consecrato corpore ante consecrationem sanguinis, vel etiam consecrato utroque, debet Missae celebritas per alium expleri. Unde, ut habetur in decretis, VII, qu. I, cap. nihil, in Toletano Concilio legitur, censuimus convenire ut, cum a sacerdotibus Missarum tempore sacra mysteria consecrantur, si aegritudinis accidit cuiuslibet eventus quo coeptum nequeat expleri mysterium, sit liberum episcopo vel presbytero alteri consecrationem exequi incoepti officii. Non enim aliud competit ad supplementum initiatis mysteriis quam aut incipientis aut subsequentis benedictione sint completa sacerdotis, quia nec perfecta videri possunt nisi perfecto ordine compleantur. Cum enim omnes simus unum in Christo, nihil contrarium diversitas personarum format, ubi efficaciam prosperitatis unitas fidei repraesentat. Nec tamen quod naturae languoris causa consulitur, in praesumptionis perniciem convertatur. Nullus, absque patenti proventu molestiae, minister vel sacerdos, cum coeperit, imperfecta officia praesumat omnino relinquere. Si quis hoc temerarie praesumpserit, excommunicationis sententiam sustinebit. | Reply to Objection 1: If the priest be stricken by death or grave sickness before the consecration of our Lord's body and blood, there is no need for it to be completed by another. But if this happens after the consecration is begun, for instance, when the body has been consecrated and before the consecration of the blood, or even after both have been consecrated, then the celebration of the mass ought to be finished by someone else. Hence, as is laid down (Decretal vii, q. 1), we read the following decree of the (Seventh) Council of Toledo: "We consider it to be fitting that when the sacred mysteries are consecrated by priests during the time of mass, if any sickness supervenes, in consequence of which they cannot finish the mystery begun, let it be free for the bishop or another priest to finish the consecration of the office thus begun. For nothing else is suitable for completing the mysteries commenced, unless the consecration be completed either by the priest who began it, or by the one who follows him: because they cannot be completed except they be performed in perfect order. For since we are all one in Christ, the change of persons makes no difference, since unity of faith insures the happy issue of the mystery. Yet let not the course we propose for cases of natural debility, be presumptuously abused: and let no minister or priest presume ever to leave the Divine offices unfinished, unless he be absolutely prevented from continuing. If anyone shall have rashly presumed to do so, he will incur sentence of excommunication." |
| Ad secundum dicendum quod, ubi difficultas occurrit, semper est accipiendum illud quod habet minus de periculo. Maxime autem periculosum circa hoc sacramentum est quod est contra perfectionem ipsius sacramenti, quia hoc est immane sacrilegium. Minus autem est illud quod pertinet ad qualitatem sumentis. Et ideo, si sacerdos, post consecrationem incoeptam, recordetur aliquid comedisse vel bibisse, nihilominus debet perficere sacrificium et sumere sacramentum. Similiter, si recordetur se peccatum aliquod commisisse, debet poenitere cum proposito confitendi et satisfaciendi, et sic non indigne, sed fructuose sumere sacramentum. Et eadem ratio est si se meminerit excommunicationi cuicumque subiacere. Debet enim assumere propositum absolutionem petendi, et sic per invisibilem pontificem, Iesum Christum, absolutionem consequitur quantum ad hunc actum, quod peragat divina mysteria. | Reply to Objection 2: Where difficulty arises, the less dangerous course should always be followed. But the greatest danger regarding this sacrament lies in whatever may prevent its completion, because this is a heinous sacrilege; while that danger is of less account which regards the condition of the receiver. Consequently, if after the consecration has been begun the priest remembers that he has eaten or drunk anything, he ought nevertheless to complete the sacrifice and receive the sacrament. Likewise, if he recalls a sin committed, he ought to make an act of contrition, with the firm purpose of confessing and making satisfaction for it: and thus he will not receive the sacrament unworthily, but with profit. The same applies if he calls to mind that he is under some excommunication; for he ought to make the resolution of humbly seeking absolution; and so he will receive absolution from the invisible High Priest Jesus Christ for his act of completing the Divine mysteries. |
| Si vero ante consecrationem alicuius praedictorum sit memor, tutius reputarem, maxime in casu manducationis et excommunicationis, quod Missam incoeptam desereret, nisi grave scandalum timeretur. | But if he calls to mind any of the above facts previous to the consecration, I should deem it safer for him to interrupt the mass begun, especially if he has broken his fast, or is under excommunication, unless grave scandal were to be feared. |
| Ad tertium dicendum quod, si musca vel aranea in calicem ante consecrationem ceciderit, aut etiam venenum deprehenderit esse immissum, debet effundi, et, abluto calice, denuo aliud vinum poni consecrandum. Si vero aliquid horum post consecrationem acciderit, debet animal caute capi, et diligenter lavari, et comburi, et ablutio, simul cum cineribus, in sacrarium mitti. Si vero venenum ibi adesse deprehenderit immissum, nullo modo debet sumere nec alii dare ne calix vitae vertatur in mortem, sed debet diligenter in aliquo vasculo ad hoc apto cum reliquiis conservari. Et, ne sacramentum remaneat imperfectum, debet vinum apponere in calice, et denuo resumere a consecratione sanguinis, et sacrificium perficere. | Reply to Objection 3: If a fly or a spider falls into the chalice before consecration, or if it be discovered that the wine is poisoned, it ought to be poured out, and after purifying the chalice, fresh wine should be served for consecration. But if anything of the sort happen after the consecration, the insect should be caught carefully and washed thoroughly, then burned, and the "ablution," together with the ashes, thrown into the sacrarium. If it be discovered that the wine has been poisoned, the priest should neither receive it nor administer it to others on any account, lest the life-giving chalice become one of death, but it ought to be kept in a suitable vessel with the relics: and in order that the sacrament may not remain incomplete, he ought to put other wine into the chalice, resume the mass from the consecration of the blood, and complete the sacrifice. |
| Ad quartum dicendum quod, si sacerdos, ante consecrationem sanguinis et post consecrationem corporis, percipiat aut vinum aut aquam non esse in calice, debet statim apponere et consecrare. Si vero hoc post consecrationis verba perceperit, quod aqua desit, debet nihilominus procedere, quia appositio aquae, ut supra dictum est, non est de necessitate sacramenti. Debet tamen puniri ille ex cuius negligentia hoc contingit. Nullo autem modo debet aqua vino iam consecrato misceri, quia sequeretur corruptio sacramenti pro aliqua parte, ut supra dictum est. Si vero percipiat post verba consecrationis quod vinum non fuerit positum in calice, si quidem hoc percipiat ante sumptionem corporis, debet, deposita aqua si ibi fuerit, imponere vinum cum aqua, et resumere a verbis consecrationis sanguinis. Si vero hoc perceperit post sumptionem corporis, debet apponere aliam hostiam iterum simul consecrandam cum sanguine. Quod ideo dico quia, si diceret sola verba consecrationis sanguinis, non servaretur debitus ordo consecrandi, et, sicut dicitur in praedicto capitulo Toletani Concilii, perfecta videri non possunt sacrificia nisi perfecto ordine compleantur. Si vero inciperet a consecratione sanguinis et repeteret omnia verba consequentia, non competerent nisi adesset hostia consecrata, cum in verbis illis occurrant quaedam dicenda et fienda non solum circa sanguinem, sed etiam circa corpus. Et debet in fine sumere hostiam iterum consecratam et sanguinem, non obstante etiam si prius sumpserit aquam quae erat in calice, quia praeceptum de perfectione sacramenti maioris est ponderis quam praeceptum quod hoc sacramentum a ieiunis sumatur, ut supra dictum est. |
Reply to Objection 4: If before the consecration of the blood, and after the consecration of the body the priest detect that either the wine or the water is absent, then he ought at once to add them and consecrate. But if after the words of consecration he discover that the water is absent, he ought notwithstanding to proceed straight on, because the addition of the water is not necessary for the sacrament, as stated above (Question [74], Article [7]): nevertheless the person responsible for the neglect ought to be punished. And on no account should water be mixed with the consecrated wine, because corruption of the sacrament would ensue in part, as was said above (Question [77], Article [8]). But if after the words of consecration the priest perceive that no wine has been put in the chalice, and if he detect it before receiving the body, then rejecting the water, he ought to pour in wine with water, and begin over again the consecrating words of the blood. But if he notice it after receiving the body, he ought to procure another host which must be consecrated together with the blood; and I say so for this reason, because if he were to say only the words of consecration of the blood, the proper order of consecrating would not be observed; and, as is laid down by the Council of Toledo, quoted above (ad 1), sacrifices cannot be perfect, except they be performed in perfect order. But if he were to begin from the consecration of the blood, and were to repeat all the words which follow, it would not suffice, unless there was a consecrated host present, since in those words there are things to be said and done not only regarding the blood, but also regarding the body; and at the close he ought once more to receive the consecrated host and blood, even if he had already taken the water which was in the chalice, because the precept of the completing this sacrament is of greater weight than the precept of receiving the sacrament while fasting, as stated above (Question [80], Article [8]). |
| Ad quintum dicendum quod, licet sacerdos non recolat se dixisse aliqua eorum quae dicere debuit, non tamen debet ex hoc mente perturbari. Non enim qui multa dicit, recolit omnium quae dixit, nisi forte in dicendo aliquid apprehenderit sub ratione iam dicti sic enim aliquid efficitur memorabile. Unde, si aliquis attente cogitet illud quod dicit, non tamen cogitet se dicere illud, non multum recolit postea se dixisse. Sic enim fit aliquid obiectum memoria, inquantum accipitur sub ratione praeteriti, sicut dicitur in libro de memoria. | Reply to Objection 5: Although the priest may not recollect having said some of the words he ought to say, he ought not to be disturbed mentally on that account; for a man who utters many words cannot recall to mind all that he has said; unless perchance in uttering them he adverts to something connected with the consecration; for so it is impressed on the memory. Hence, if a man pays attention to what he is saying, but without adverting to the fact that he is saying these particular words, he remembers soon after that he has said them; for, a thing is presented to the memory under the formality of the past (De Mem. et Remin. i). |
| Si tamen sacerdoti probabiliter constet se aliqua omisisse, si quidem non sunt de necessitate sacramenti, non aestimo quod propter hoc debeat resumere immutando ordinem sacrificii, sed debet ulterius procedere. Si vero certificetur se omisisse aliquid eorum quae sunt de necessitate sacramenti, scilicet formam consecrationis, cum forma sit de necessitate sacramenti sicut et materia, idem videtur faciendum quod dictum est in defectu materiae, ut scilicet resumatur a forma consecrationis, et cetera per ordinem reiterentur, ne mutetur ordo sacrificii. | But if it seem to the priest that he has probably omitted some of the words that are not necessary for the sacrament, I think that he ought not to repeat them on that account, changing the order of the sacrifice, but that he ought to proceed: but if he is certain that he has left out any of those that are necessary for the sacrament, namely, the form of the consecration, since the form of the consecration is necessary for the sacrament, just as the matter is, it seems that the same thing ought to be done as was stated above (ad 4) with regard to defect in the matter, namely, that he should begin again with the form of the consecration, and repeat the other things in order, lest the order of the sacrifice be altered. |
| Ad sextum dicendum quod fractio hostiae consecratae, et quod pars una sola mittatur in calicem, respicit corpus mysticum, sicut et admixtio aquae significat populum. Et ideo horum praetermissio non facit imperfectionem sacrificii, ut propter hoc sit necesse aliquid reiterare circa celebrationem huius sacramenti. | Reply to Objection 6: The breaking of the consecrated host, and the putting of only one part into the chalice, regards the mystical body, just as the mixing with water signifies the people, and therefore the omission of either of them causes no such imperfection in the sacrifice, as calls for repetition regarding the celebration of this sacrament. |
| Ad septimum dicendum quod, sicut legitur de Consecr., dist. II, ex decreto pii Papae, si per negligentiam aliquid stillaverit de sanguine in tabula quae terrae adhaeret, lingua lambetur et tabula radetur. Si vero non fuerit tabula, terra radetur, et igni comburetur, et cinis intra altare condetur. Et sacerdos quadraginta dies poeniteat. Si autem super altare stillaverit calix, sorbeat minister stillam. Et tribus diebus poeniteat. Si super linteum altaris, et ad aliud stilla pervenerit, quatuor diebus poeniteat. Si usque ad tertium, novem diebus poeniteat. Si usque ad quartum, viginti diebus poeniteat. Et linteamina quae stilla tetigit, tribus vicibus lavet minister, calice subtus posito, et aqua ablutionis sumatur et iuxta altare recondatur. Posset etiam sumi in potu a ministro, nisi propter abominationem dimitteretur. Quidam autem ulterius partem illam linteaminum incidunt et comburunt, et cinerem in altario vel sacrario reponunt. Subditur autem ibidem, ex poenitentiali Bedae presbyteri, si quis per ebrietatem vel voracitatem Eucharistiam evomuerit, quadraginta diebus poeniteat; clerici vel monachi, seu diaconi vel presbyteri, sexaginta diebus; episcopus nonaginta. Si autem infirmitatis causa evomuerit, septem diebus poeniteat. Et in eadem distinctione legitur, ex Concilio Aurelianensi, qui non bene custodierit sacrificium, et mus vel aliquod aliud animal in Ecclesia comederit, quadraginta diebus poeniteat. Qui autem perdiderit illud in Ecclesia, aut pars eius ceciderit et non inventa fuerit, triginta diebus poeniteat. Et eadem poenitentia videtur dignus sacerdos per cuius negligentiam hostiae consecratae putrefiunt. Praedictis autem diebus debet poenitens ieiunare et a communione cessare. Pensatis tamen conditionibus negotii et personae, potest minui vel addi ad poenitentiam praedictam. Hoc tamen observandum est, quod, ubicumque species integrae inveniuntur, sunt reverenter observandae, vel etiam sumendae, quia, manentibus speciebus, manet ibi corpus Christi, ut supra dictum est. Ea vero in quibus inveniuntur, comburenda sunt si commode fieri potest, cinere in sacrario recondito, sicut de rasura tabulae dictum est. |
Reply to Objection 7: According to the decree, De Consecr., dist. ii, quoting a decree of Pope Pius I, "If from neglect any of the blood falls upon a board which is fixed to the ground, let it be taken up with the tongue, and let the board be scraped. But if it be not a board, let the ground be scraped, and the scrapings burned, and the ashes buried inside the altar and let the priest do penance for forty days. But if a drop fall from the chalice on to the altar, let the minister suck up the drop, and do penance during three days; if it falls upon the altar cloth and penetrates to the second altar cloth, let him do four days' penance; if it penetrates to the third, let him do nine days' penance; if to the fourth, let him do twenty days' penance; and let the altar linens which the drop touched be washed three times by the priest, holding the chalice below, then let the water be taken and put away nigh to the altar." It might even be drunk by the minister, unless it might be rejected from nausea. Some persons go further, and cut out that part of the linen, which they burn, putting the ashes in the altar or down the sacrarium. And the Decretal continues with a quotation from the Penitential of Bede the Priest: "If, owing to drunkenness or gluttony, anyone vomits up the Eucharist, let him do forty days' penance, if he be a layman; but let clerics or monks, deacons and priests, do seventy days' penance; and let a bishop do ninety days'. But if they vomit from sickness, let them do penance for seven days." And in the same distinction, we read a decree of the (Fourth) Council of Arles: "They who do not keep proper custody over the sacrament, if a mouse or other animal consume it, must do forty days' penance: he who loses it in a church, or if a part fall and be not found, shall do thirty days' penance." And the priest seems to deserve the same penance, who from neglect allows the hosts to putrefy. And on those days the one doing penance ought to fast, and abstain from Communion. However, after weighing the circumstances of the fact and of the person, the said penances may be lessened or increased. But it must be observed that wherever the species are found to be entire, they must be preserved reverently, or consumed; because Christ's body is there so long as the species last, as stated above (Question [77], Articles [4],5). But if it can be done conveniently, the things in which they are found are to be burned, and the ashes put in the sacrarium, as was said of the scrapings of the altar-table, here above. |