The Irish Ecclesiastical Record Monthly Sournal unùtr (Episcopal Sanction VOLUME LXVII JANUARY to JUNE 1946 FIFTH SERIES DUBLIN BROWNE AND NOLAN LIMITED. NASSAU STREET 104- ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD 288 1M fïïtflÏÏi “··<·. *—^· «* «. jgiÆ·· κ· «— - ». ». ** C·'1’· V ΡΒΐαΡ^: ~£11 H'd“'· ” · -t-" i- O.F.M.Cap. ‘-rac, in the Mass. Bv Hi« Grace tha Are) ■ ' .-. to .he t ris'-rnr ->/ Lite. By Ht:iec de;.: ..*L 1 he Α^ίΐίτιζΛ^ ijteii' Pri·.·^ Catholic Cnivorrity of 4. . Liturgy. Exc-tor: Catholic Κ^οπμ The Downside Review. I>JWÎiSRÎ(. Abbey" Bath The. Fatter Mathew Retort. 2 Card sl^t. Dubhn. The Irish Monthly. 3 Great Denmark Street, Dublin. The African Rosary. Kiileshandra, Co. Cavan. Africa. Kiitegan, O. WmWow. The Universo. Field House. Br..a:ns Tte Catholic Times. 173-5 fl,ve stro.-t, L Sacnd Sacred Heart Cc-Uei··. <’ ^· The fi-,€ British Catholic bi-^z. 34B North End Road. Ur-dcn- X u 2,7* iritA Diffrsl. Marlbwuush Street. Dublin. Afrioan Mûmenar^'. Biackrock Road, Cork. f7o>rrr M.-irihly. i’iac·-, Duhhn, f,?’*’*; MiTChaats 4>xay. Dv.bLn. ,_?* £"^· ite Cruea. ■ St- Coliinsbaft't». Nwvan. 5Lilult Dublin. t? concerning ‘thomist metaphysics and THE SACRAMENT-SACRIFICE Br Rev. J. BRODIE BROSNAN. MA.. O.B.E., P·1 · teta “XÎ'conÎiderâtion and f 'Xi,!Vf Λ • l>-.e Mas,-Svrilùv. Only an honest examination ο ί-ie pap-ΐ Hiiv1 be summarized under the heads : .‘a., rr.iixr'1 sacrament'; sacrificial immolation . our puesm ■ .^. u-r and the diilieulty of duly relating its function with Christ s ■ in Holy Mass. ■H /fe·.. ί SACRAMENT kînw that there arc seven sacraments. ■rn> by slating : Yet the paper ’ « ci-lf Ute areat sacrament. the arram nt ·>ι I’li-i-t ■« il1' uiniiy. ■ ■ TJfhierat.hic-n.ty^m.· ""M · r -.-O·: 'i.c’ . - · Our present study is concerned m»»'1 'J™ ‘ ■-•■.‘J»· vrs jx it is reprted in the saerament of the activiv} !'■·■ priesthood, lïti-.iic, mined .!>■ 3 ■?■■!' ■ :■ 'h·.· h-arued IVniiniiwi gives no char indi--id»‘’« ?’ \[trt ■>'■<*·.· i» -.:,his; which he attaches to the word ‘ sacrament- we -. ίΡΓ’« ft tw puzzle it out. and the puzzle increases as we ►ill ■f·'· ■ r ·'; ί · -1 ‘r r/.I.-.jmin m mr-d-na times to discover the folk sacramental eivctacXcr ■ .-hap< ϋ η ‘me u. ,:iv H.ut the thnjkfiaas, ia^ trtw*L' of secnfxi; or again in thei? mystiral-inynoktipn ,„.»1 hx>k.’ ■ r. Λ .r.. -- na’^rttM entirely the tm. γ-·γ- ; * ( titiN·· is „ 'V . .-ιϊ(<1 :.■>» .«s a .Srtirnwwto-n <»«« M» «« W> » Λ >....,·»·, , - - ■ vr.r.·.'· '· «'» ™* M ,he ifad 1 ^;,er toh. Stated ., ,^,>e „ „,.„Η * tab* ««« .wLn.hiçUO::’ Ί «K-t tiH-t. As they stan“-"7 rie. -aibiguity is a «nwkt· screen /ni^nterpromtjo®huh truth urfds-.h<-od. μηκο!·ί·ΐ’*< jK-ru-i-t **«>* eocnad ih*: «unI ’ sa«!FU»vfltaj, -ma» uu‘.J A.!yxander ; ",foment ' «tould not I»? ua·1*! m ωι '«a. tckc sense. t.'i-Λ ‘-lu >· . It w ***Φ* - » f.y a-j nt*· ‘V HiU ► Η' »>Φ· ' Ml 290 THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD ceremony of a religious nature. When discussions arose ar;·:, the Scholastics (say of baptism) as regards what properly con-tit.· the sacrament, a distinction was made between the sacrur-i < : tantum, sacramentum et res, and res tantum. The first was ti.· : outward rite, the second the character, and the third sacrani-r·. grace. As regards the sacraments this distinction has m<>rt · r survived. But as regards Holy Mass, it would be interc-ti!·learn where it may be found. No doubt St. Augustine .-ρ··ν the ‘ visible sacrament or sacred sign of the invisible mktii. · and St. Thomas states that the words of consecration hau r': Christ an instrumental power and ‘ operate sacramentalty. Augustines ‘sacred sign,’ from the context, can only nw ’ outer sacrifice. Clearly' the Mass is not the outer sacrifice ■. * Cross ; for the Council of Trent declares the Mass-niotlr ■in:*-’··· from the Cross-mode. Why, therefore, call the Mass the Sucrr.rn' of the Cross '! Catholics speak of the sacrifice of the Ma'- ano « deem it strange if asked : ‘ Have you been to the suerant nt Mass? Their terms ‘sacrifice of the Mass’ and "-ayran.· the Eucharist ’ seem trulv traditional. Is it surprisin'; n '■ " : tridentine theologians do not call the Mass a sacrament or a "y sacrifice ? Post-tridentinc theologians have always regam»·· priest s communion as intimately connected with the Ma—·'·11 ■■· indeed, later on, some, as Dr. J. Bellord, Renz and other*.1 the Mass just a sacrificial banquet and in the graphic went-· nite lather McNabb, O.P. transferred it to the* ' culinary d< ρ·>Γ ·· It is hardly credible therefore that post-tridentine 11·ι·Ί· ■■ the < traditional sacramental outlook ' of the Ma— I-ari it be that St. Thomas wished his word- to nitai1 *··*' SS i-* a-sacrament*saerifiec ? Though aware of their tra·*·■ the saints teaching, the great Dominican theologian- :u·-give no sufficient hint that such was the saint’s nwiiK·. rnday, St. Thomas says, was not an aptum '*?//·■'■■· ■' , consecrating of this sacrament. ' Ideo in die quo i}-.· pa"·'5’’ * . rtco dur, prout realiter gesta est. non celebratur <»■: -err:· sacrament! ’ : * yet the Body of Christ eonsec rated on j’ hho p"a-ï r7ierve,i h>r consumption, lest the thurvh be Ή’7” ; t-hi ’Tu* ° Passion bestowal on us bv this -aeran!· u’· ( . having admitted that the ôm-eerati-n i- ·’” r from th a■?’< - rib, ,. : «Λ*· ·■..)·. ■ · '!; · *-t.5 Th·· Sipii,- ,,κ/. --/J* Tl use » to b< 1| _ knottv problem ,i:·· i> grateful that Father Barden faces 1^ * nK:taphysieal ■••"I 'lation. His purpose is to solve s.sacrainental theory» ■'d>;hty; the great difliculty of th immolation in the "!·· ' Hie numerical identity of ie . grasp clearly w ' o.d the Mass/ Here it is Thus Father Barden ■ the active immolation of Xe^atively it is no Icrm negativelv and positive Thdr lM.tv,n says ' d.-ath on the part of the exeiu R is n(sL as la-iu r I ■ m t', «as a mau fidum, a? e ’ ,mtarv acceptance ot »η<·'·"Γ ■-■■··* 3. ( hrist s drath merely- * jiving or yirldmil “P ’ *’ ■! b h an ; a' t ot y?; th*r fHoph; ..ίώ>.... : ■ .uo fut pne- s ...1 ;jn art .. ' tak···* «·" immolation. . - ’ 1 : :1-. —s<.·τis·»! which i' taint. -Brri'.d Old.' out. Λ"·* t,.nve off< nmi- “ h. t.s's man’·· nc« X - -! .rj.i It !' !h< in!,s.V';V(.r Bardin-uy- 1 f> mm-r .1< u;.-<î ·■· '· .i:.i .-te-n. Thu> ϊ :^;. r.-b»tmgH ' B«..h B·.' >s· mm r ♦h· Air. t. -flllT:»* »n U’^‘ , « ntk. in"'1 292 THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD expression is stated to be twofold : the absolute or ' neces'arv ; natural expression at the blood-shedding and death on laivr. and the relative and sacramental or the ‘ double transubstan*;..'. where vi verborum the Body alone is present under the mubieau and the Blood alone under the species of wim-. Bt ' imrnolative priestly act is other than the transubstantia'i’.· . ' t.inst in His human nature elicited the transubstantiafn·· the instrument of the divinity, but He elicited His pri»'·*';· precisely as a secondary cause.’ Ihis explanation seems a modification of the oblatii>n-î:.<■" tae trench School; agreements and disagreements nvoi : ’ ■ mentioned., Now can it truly be that the ‘ inner essence «·; I...·· was Christ s act ol ‘ relating His Bodv and Blood out of Hb t ι·,,:· her redeem fallen man anti enable him to enter int<· d·' '· that (. hn.st ever had with the Fat lier : * That they all may b as t.um batheryin me, and I in thee : that they also ma} !ît ' us. ..John xvii. 21.) It was this same Purpose, may >'!-<· “'·· ·ηί1^ ^rist expressed ami accomplished on the ( r·" ■ mat I host expresses and accomplishes in the Mnss-Si« r)hv·· it is interesting to find the itrborum argument still n . ‘•,|U »I the leurif d Dondni, ;,J| j, I- at e · ■ L;animal Billot (and others, on the threefold ground: that " of hrJn/r’’ +«,t ‘utlc Blood from the Bodv under the X ■“··' ί!·····,!i -■............. ··· :'·· personally■ ?km swi Γ·<4ί'ΓΙΪ nb'd<.riam quae consecratur.': Γ- ■ »o 'heï-atheMn Η,<>.|ν1"';ι1>«,"ί,· ίΥ" “d,"ir ,'1,a' ( hn'' ,* s· : hapfwnir.ci but Hu-a ny th<-' betiding u> Ji’-ri th» (r>ss M-..u',d S.-.-U ' ··' ■r.l;r-.,d‘. s· ■ ■ ■ ™ ** ^presented but. misrepn' CONCERNING THOMIST METAPHYSICS :■■ -,■.. misrepresentation which seems also inherent in the saerament1- r.-rting’the different theories of thc^7^1Himselftan?His all *: ··. might be defined as His freely giving _ wbjeh will ■ Either unto immediately accomplishing .1-i^'s sacrificial ■ -'.· father’s Will and redeem the world : an.fly‘ . cf* that act . ion defined as His most reverent carrying o' d bv the i ;·- details according to the modi' and manJl· . . tb oblation A moment's consideration will rex ca Cross. In dation obtain in the Mass as well as c world ■·■ fi'ev- uc have rhe same Christ, redeeming.thesa^ ■·■· sunt· immutable supreme reveieait. Father. The b-ly the mode and manner decreed > but the active ’ d maimer of the Cross and Mass are <*' · Christ lost ■ i' <··::■ md the same. Lest we nun J · immolated on : >.".i-n over His Human Nature w^n.^”;ninjercd Christ. ' : · :· i' well to remember that no suffen g ([e(Tree. for the ’■·- <.ih.-b.-d His Human Nature only to father’s ‘1 in f'.-.e manner He allowed it a^COI_ ,7 freelv endured Hr n.-rniitted no bone to be bro 'in scpara‘ri'· uionii nt wherein He granted its gr _ s for three ; v.:.| body. Then taking ir f|/ therefrom. The ' di.... nor eonsequ.ntly with Ins dedmt «■ rcnce, seems ■: ■■ Τι .fui not expressly treat thi ·■ ■ ■ :■ indist.riminatel> but Γί.ί . · m'?:... .·.■■■■ i-t’-· p- ’ -Λ ■ Bef..r<· Iren · t ri UOliiii' IJd ’ _■ ; ",... . : • u.d o! ttir I ·· l,< - ■ X-:·' ·■ ■■ S·"·' Ϊ! *■ Μ '-Χ^Χ····^·*· μ ,.r . .,Λ^-η* ,TS "Tr. ,h.W; -".->■ ■““' ÎXÎ. ■ ·■■?■., t.. St. Th-n·.·»· « i in»" ,n ■I 294 THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD function is instrumental ; though permanent itself, its action : transient. Before proceeding, perhaps, if may be well to note that a pnr>" character is a free instrument, in the sense that it will functu-r: < by the sufficient intention and purpose of its possessor who a ·· use the proper matter and form. Using these any priest >ar. ■ his character into act; nor docs he require preventing gra··· valid sacrificial activity, as is evidenced bv the case of <·η· "■ celebrates sacrilegiously. I*ather Barden declares that our ‘ priestly character is analog:·· l ame. as i-hrist s ' : that it is ‘ only an analogous parti< ip·’· ' k Præs^y character of .Jesus ' : but he questions the stat· that the act of our priesthood is ' completely understood wL· · is recognized as an analogous particination in the priestly of Jesus.' It is to be regretted thal I-’alher Barden de s not spec·'' cisely what he means by 1 analogous.' Usually the wool -i-· agreement of likeness or proportion in things that z· different natures or otherwise diverse. He does mention disagreements when he says that our priestly character is minier.· distinct from Christ's and that its act 'cannot be numerical;} same as the ininiolative action of Jesus.' Their agreenivn?" invoked in his treatment of physical premotion as applied * ' ' w’hen really functioning in Christ's active sacrifice. What physical premotion ? Bather Bardens explanation is philosophical and ab-r ’ occasioning some ambiguitv So. ............... . sincere hope tl.a’ in the en correctly understoixl, mav one be allowed to put way . Existence is the actusλ· primus : tne the <·action of what *'■' (creatures, of course) is railed actus secundus.. PhvMtal pritia of the pipe is now in act. it this tua , 1' * 1,1 ' ,s ffb’ f'x.,,r·'·"· or formal 1···!· r-■im·'"*· m/Ct T* Pro,iuiin£ «η effe t which is named ri’t - < < transient. .......... lfie s> ..Tils !or a bn··: -T··’· ’ lather Barden, if one p-tenha ; ρπ·Μί·. ρ-··Λ.·Γ f l H' th· word * Λ ' f Γ the Pn«tly character m the intel·- CONCERNING THOMIST METAPHYSICS 2®s -for premotion ; - ?is inmiolative or sacrificial act itsclt. Il tyie actUJ! .--.iit·.· between the power and the inimo a i nr;cstly power causalis or physical promotion, by * uc . . over it as : J.,,S urtuallv raus« H»‘priestly art and dommat«o« It is not quite dear here whether tta· d°™ immediately to the premotion or to the pn · resemblance b th. aho« example, the players M-'^iUSTStysicaUy .■.·■·■ he would produce. lite act of .1 the note, -n nf from the premotion or air current "wu *uv«rallv m ’ purpose is the same and it domina es p action ' lotion in order to secure the formal act or n< · anti ’ >,rb fn.-se might be described as analogica ό len seems to teach ■ πΐ'> Imight be called analogous, l· ath character and that ’uhat similar analogy between our pries · „mv character is ' irixt, IL* suggests that the formal act o ou J r r. hut ab° nf the aciuS - i.tti .n not nv rt lv of the actus secundus farmali ** pripstiy ■ ........ of Ihri’ifs priestly power, i.e. t.ie t æ. wcn doubtless. ■* nr‘ :'ipiitr-^ in the causal net of < hrist s pries ί; :ii wt. Tims we actually participate i· P< dominating over : _ ie in act is possessing : : ti.<- human priest at the moment his charae e is numerically a-, t- v.-ry pri'-tly action of Jesus J^Her of J^us. but «hæh ' i. t'-.r· vhv-ical premotion of the Pr’ ·’ tion thereof, he is ^c\-/.su< .· Thou-h real and physical P"t‘cIlf,s3fne immolative .^0^ anj ·■:■ :.ι?Ίι·π>:ιΗΐι" in dominion user ■ j which is ‘ ···"·· »·■«- »««*’ *’f ■ act”of the Character <>i the < athc U ■ tt-ii. apprt)prmte- solve λ p Hoes not runt*11 fi<>wn here". ■ ■■ ---î ·■'■ ■■■.■■■■■ ' τ'·:· "■■■ '!.ar;.. t< r - priestly i. .™.t.r I hmt.ah' !^,>Tin|! in the m < ' ‘'.y llis t h·... the infur a*1 ^‘'’."'VhXeter it. < hrist 1- ni.im- Father Ban <* .·<■ phy-' P" f lAf^v.r... MUv «*««*«*- »<· 296 THE IRISH ECCLESIASTIC AL RECORD Bufc then Father Barden may mean bv Christ's priestlv chart ' ^\any °,n H1S hum«n intellect, but that the fulness of pr;.-i Lr+Vk”08 therein : or as St. Thomas puts it. ’ Christo r.< r · i , ί 1, d ere characterem : sed potestas sacerdotii ejus cn.p·’ at „C,',ra< ^ni.; sjcut id quod est plenum et perfectum.’1 1: .· spea ’ing ot Christ s active immolation Father Barden writes : ’ l· act still persists in the min(i and wiJ1 of chris(. jn }H.;1Vt r! s a e oi wetimhood in which His human nature ever nnm;'· the perpetual term of that priestly action.’ lhere can be no doubt that Christ exercises the fuHnes* ■·■ 1 priest hoc>d through His intellect and will, but the■re is mud:· ·: a out Christ s perpetual act of immolation and ■date of viihr : ,lta'en·. Father Barden's view must be iudgtd on hio immolation and afford deep and enlightening thouolJ-. ‘ icorx has already been discussed nor doi s its exist* i.··-. < r ’ existence as regards heaven seem to nerd further ;:n>i ·ϊ<:· discussion here. The point is that, on Father Barder.’- Ή. ’ rjU^ 4-’ Pcrmanenf and immutable aeiti.s *eeuiidn.·* ο:·'-· ins s priestly power: and the question is. can such ui·/-..' *■''■ Λ ?r ί Λ·?*?11 Premotion ? Is there physical prenv *t ion in i· i lrist s M)U1· which ever enjoved the beatific vi-i· i. r ·' pnvsieal promotion for acts of its intellect and will γ Tie uy-’ S peη·*·<: : ' ThZcJ proper intention and over th< du- n · ■' Giia-i ·Π ,en briefly explains : · Forma hiim< -;n-rnm. erm nkJ.r ;persuria Çhristi loquenti-. ut ditur in‘0.:-·: ■=_ Christi ‘ 311 Perlee-inm· >itl r;iIri,.r,*j ; _■:· ;j·.· ■■ one Χη ί.ο- maFTb‘- n?ted that th<· Latin admùs of mor· it were th *°n : sHcrammt the form 1- prone eV or hXWOr^ i,f Christ Himself .speikiusentimXhe ^'nOUnt C,i W i’rt’ «'I the per-on. i.e. by not i>.“ dk,./XX| r,‘ 1 ”Γ,'ί· ‘ 'ï.Û'. r- r. ■ · ! ” ■ what part tho · . ik l’O!rd is tliat. as it i·. not exp.? th·--· wnnU 4lJ>-*'.V·. ·* *’ i' n I· t»:u hij.g i,„ "1 ' "pr«’· ; a; - .-.-,·;ι.:. . Uî-î - . iir.r dm-n» ...n,"i± H«v «-«· i> n«.m f..r . . »· τι·..,.,.; of I hast, who is the that it must be ' ·- ·. ·> · . Pr,vstly charachr rhe ’■?■'· ; a"'·’“*· B will, how- ver, h- = U and iW B were freHv handed t- Ct ■ CONCERNING TIIOMIST METAPHYSICS -θ7 . r.uman priest before Christ will use it. This t|ie forrtl ... λπ priest shall have a proper intention an I . . . •l'ijænts pre-ordained bv Christ. ,, .u„ ροή­ ν -he Slipper. Christ, merely moment the words over bread and wine. At tne . re*%llv and • " of His Priesthood made Himself really Plt’!*.pai-tieulur • ■ if-rinir His sacrifice to God under the species o : Christ ; At Muss the human priest o«tKardly suV ... unctiy character he is the deputed an< a uJnce. when ■ -*>· minister whom Christ has willed to cnip oy. words of ‘•■.’i-ti.>ninu as subordinate and pronouncing. utilizes ' "Vi"iî. infallibly and instantaneously Chns ’ the fulness r c.f the subordinate priest in ord ..wii Priesthood on to these particular christ makes ■: ar.il so. under their particular ,SP^ ’ wholc sacrifice ■ ■' r-;dly present, really and truly . ‘1 for all men; : r ‘he Church, for the living and ‘ i.ere-according ' ruirticular way Christ is offering Hissai particular 'P-r-irtl intention of the subordinate ΡΓ *\* ’ e*c> Hence, ' · < purpost s. for a private favour, pc * · ordination, ■' thf human priest's authority iec< || js priest ' η. '. ·,··γ\utilizes the priestly ehara J*’ ’ i’!· pr-.per intention in his performem pre-ordained : tin- words (or prescribed forma, > nriesfs character, ■· '· Κ.-r then. utilizing this ^^L^rfXts and completes ·’ HniK. lt· instantnneouslv and infalh . . efficient and • ··; w.-rdiip bv these elements, «‘^^tituted this worship - Hv tl,c Will of His Father. Ci ξΐι thus be performed by '■ . ; Lai ...ituurdS H ^.ΐ.ψηι. η» ■’ i‘ I,ia> i, ■■·■ ■ iin.itt· prir st. Omitting further d I (Κ,ηη»χ·Η·<» with • - : b th.- hr.maa !·“λνιρμ hi. i(> 'I -s-u dfiee. how bv pronouncing ti th<. pro.ound ■i .·■: ■a’·»!.. ■*■· >■;*.... irs;i^ (J!il..n’i·■-' „)v f..r ttu· - ·■ -'··'·i'·ΰ M—i ,-th nor ·η· χΡ -'’·" b