Lectio 6 Lecture 6 Institutio calicis Institution of the chalice 11:25 Similiter et calicem, postquam coenavit, dicens: hic calix novum testamentum est in meo sanguine: hoc facite quotiescumque bibetis, in meam commemorationem. [n. 672] 11:25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: this chalice is the new testament in my blood. Do this, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. [n. 672] 11:26 Quotiescumque enim manducabitis panem hunc, et calicem bibetis, mortem Domini annuntiabitis donec veniat. [n. 686] 11:26 For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he comes. [n. 686] 672. Postquam Apostolus posuit institutionem huius sacramenti quantum ad consecrationem corporis, hic ponit institutionem eius quantum ad sanguinis consecrationem. Et 672. After setting forth the institution of this sacrament as to the consecration of the body, the Apostle now sets forth its institution as to the consecration of the blood. primo ponit ordinem institutionis; First, he presents the order of institution; secundo verba, cum dicit hic calix, et cetera. second, the words, at this chalice. 673. Ordo autem attenditur quantum ad duo. 673. The order is considered with respect to two things. Primo ad concomitantiam utriusque speciei, cum dicit similiter et calicem. Utrumque enim est de perfectione huius sacramenti, tum propter perfectionem refectionis, tum propter repraesentationem passionis, tum propter efficientiam salutis animae et corporis, ut supra dictum est. First, the co-presence of both species, when he says, in like manner also the chalice. For both are required for the perfection of this sacrament, both for the perfection of nourishment and on account of its representing the passion, and as its effecting the salvation of the soul and of the body, as has been stated above. Sed si prius consecratur in hoc sacramento corpus Christi, et postea sanguis, videtur sequi quod ante consecrationem sanguinis, corpus Christi in hoc sacramento sit exsangue: quod quidam inconveniens reputantes dixerunt, quod duae formae se expectant in efficiendo, ita scilicet quod prima forma consecrationis corporis non consequitur suum effectum, antequam perficiatur forma consecrationis sanguinis; sicut etiam dictum est, quod verba quae proferuntur in consecratione corporis, non consequuntur suum effectum usque ad finem prolationis verborum. But if the body of Christ is consecrated first in this sacrament and the blood later, it seems to follow that before the consecration of the blood, the body of Christ is without blood in the sacrament. Some who considered this unfitting have said that the two forms await each other in effecting, so that, namely, the first form of the consecration of the body does not achieve its effect before the form of consecration of the blood is completed; just as it was said that the words pronounced in consecrating the body do not achieve their effect until the end of the pronunciation of the words. Sed hoc non est simile. Nam significatio verborum quibus consecratur corpus Christi, non completur nisi in termino prolationis eorum. Et quia verba sacramentalia significando efficiunt, ideo non possunt habere effectum ante terminum prolationis. Tunc autem habent plenam significationem, etiam antequam proferantur verba consecrationis sanguinis, et ideo necesse est quod etiam tunc habeant suum effectum. Alioquin sacerdos peccaret statim, post verba consecrationis, proponens hostiam non consecratam populo adorandam, nisi iam esset corpus Christi, quia induceret populum ad idololatriam. But this is not similar. For the signification of the words by which the body of Christ is consecrated is not completed except at the end of the pronouncing of the words. And because sacramental words produce their effect by signifying, they cannot have effect before the end of their pronunciation. At that time they have full signification, even before the words of the consecration of the blood are begun. Therefore, it is necessary that even then they have their effect. Otherwise the priest would sin immediately after the words of consecration by showing an unconsecrated host to the people to be adored, unless the body of Christ were already there; because he would be inducing the people to idolatry. Est ergo dicendum, quod ante consecrationem sanguinis est in hoc sacramento corpus Christi, non sine sanguine. Therefore, it must be said that before the consecration of the blood the body of Christ is in this sacrament not without his blood. 674. Sciendum est enim quod in hoc sacramento dupliciter aliquid est. Uno modo ex vi consecrationis, illud scilicet in quod terminatur conversio panis et vini, sicut per formam consecrationis significatur, et sic sub specie panis est corpus Christi. 674. For it should be noted that in this sacrament something is present in two ways: in one way in virtue of the consecration, that, namely, into which the conversion of the bread and wine is terminated, as is signified by the form of consecration; and in this way under the appearance of bread the body of Christ is present. Alio modo est aliquid in hoc sacramento ex reali concomitantia, sicut divinitas Verbi est in hoc sacramento propter indissolubilem unionem ipsius ad corpus Christi, licet nullo modo substantia panis in divinitatem convertatur. Et similiter est ibi anima, quae coniuncta est realiter ipsi corpori. Si vero in triduo mortis Christi, fuisset corpus Christi ab aliquo apostolorum consecratum, non fuisset ibi anima quae tunc realiter erat a corpore separata. In another way something is present in this sacrament by real concomitance, as the divinity of the Word is present in this sacrament on account of its indissoluble union with the body of Christ, although the substance of bread is in no way converted into the divinity. Likewise, the soul is there, which is really joined to the body. But if at any time during the three days of Christ’s death, the body of Christ had been consecrated by any of the apostles, the soul would not have been there, because it was really separated from the body. Et idem dicendum est de sanguine. Nam sub speciebus panis ex vi consecrationis est corpus Christi, in quod substantia panis convertitur. Sanguis autem est ibi ex reali concomitantia, quia tunc realiter sanguis Christi non est ab eius corpore separatus. Et, eadem ratione, sub specie vini est sanguis Christi ex vi consecrationis, corpus autem ex reali concomitantia, ita quod sub utraque specie est totus Christus. Si vero tempore passionis quando sanguis Christi erat ex corpore effusus, fuisset hoc sacramentum ab aliquo apostolorum perfectum, sub panis specie fuisset solum corpus Christi exsangue, sub speciebus autem vini fuisset solus sanguis Christi. The same is true of the blood. For under the appearances of bread in virtue of the consecration is present Christ’s body, into which the substance of bread is converted. But the blood is there by real concomitance, because then the blood of Christ is not really separated from the body. And for the same reason under the appearance of wine the blood of Christ is present in virtue of the consecration, but the body by real concomitance, so that the whole Christ is under both species. But if during the time of the passion, when the blood of Christ had been drained from his body, this sacrament had been celebrated by any of the apostles, there would have been under the appearances of bread only the body of Christ without the blood; under the appearances of wine would there have been only the blood of Christ. 675. Secundo, attenditur ordo per comparationem ad cibos materiales, qui praecesserant, ubi subdit postquam coenavit, quod videtur signanter addidisse. 675. The second order considered is to the material foods which had preceded when he says, after he had supped. This is a significant phrase. Nam Christus corpus suum tradidit inter coenam. Unde Matth. XXVI, 26 dicitur, quod coenantibus illis accepit Iesus panem, et cetera. Sed sanguinem dedit expresse post coenam. Unde et Lc. XXII, 20 dicitur similiter et calicem postquam coenavit, dicens, et cetera. Cuius ratio est, quia corpus Christi repraesentat mysterium Incarnationis, quae facta est adhuc legalibus observantiis statum habentibus, inter quas praecipua erat coena agni paschalis. Sed sanguis Christi in sacramento directe repraesentat passionem, per quam est effusus et per quam sunt terminata omnia legalia. Unde Hebr. IX, 12 dicitur, quod per proprium sanguinem introivit semel in sancta, aeterna redemptione inventa. For Christ gave his body during the meal, as it is said: as they were eating, Jesus took bread (Matt 26:26). But he gave his blood expressly after the meal, as it is said: and likewise the cup after supper (Luke 22:20). The reason for this is that the body of Christ represents the mystery of the Incarnation, which occurred while the observance of the law was still in vogue. Among these observances the most important was the meal of the paschal lamb. But the blood of Christ in the sacrament directly represents the passion, through which it was poured out and through which all observances of the law came to an end; hence it is said: he went once for all into the holy place, taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption (Heb 9:12). 676. Deinde ponit verba, dicens hic calix, et cetera. Et 676. Then he presents the words, saying, this chalice. primo demonstrat veritatem huius sacramenti; First, he demonstrates the truth of this sacrament; secundo iniungit usum, ibi hoc facite, et cetera. second, he enjoins its use, at do this. 677. Quantum ergo ad primum, dicit hic calix, et cetera. Quod quidem dupliciter sumi potest. Uno modo metonymice, ut scilicet ponatur continens pro contento, quasi dicat: contentum in hoc calice; quod convenientius ponitur in consecratione vini, quod ratione suae humiditatis indiget aliis terminis contineri, quam in consecratione panis, qui ratione suae siccitatis, propriis terminis continetur. 677. In regard to the first he says, this chalice. This can be taken in two ways: in one way as metonymy, where the container is put for the content. As if to say: contained in this cup, which is more fittingly used in the consecration of the wine, which by reason of its wetness needs to be contained by other boundaries than in the consecration of the bread, which by reason of its dryness is contained within its own boundaries. Alio modo potest accipi metaphorice, ut sit sensus: sicut calix inebriat et perturbat, ita et passio. Unde Matth. XX, 22 dicit: potestis bibere calicem, quem ego bibiturus sum? Et Matth. XXVI, 39: transeat a me calix iste. In another way it can be taken metaphorically, so that the sense would be: just as the cup intoxicates and confuses, so also the passion. Hence: are you able to drink the cup I am to drink? (Matt 20:22); let this cup pass from me (Matt 26:39). Est ergo sensus hic calix, id est, contentum in hoc calice, vel haec mea passio, est novum testamentum in meo sanguine. The sense, therefore, is this: this chalice, i.e., what is contained in this cup, or this my passion, is the new testament in my blood. 678. Unde considerandum est, quod testamentum dupliciter sumitur in Scripturis. 678. Hence it should be noted that testament is taken in two senses in the Scriptures. Uno modo communiter pro quolibet pacto, quod quidem testibus confirmatur, et sic considerandum est, quod Deus dupliciter pactum iniit cum humano genere. Uno modo promittendo bona temporalia et a malis temporalibus liberando: et hoc vocatur Vetus Testamentum, vel pactum. Alio modo promittendo bona spiritualia et a malis oppositis liberando: et hoc vocatur Testamentum Novum. Unde dicitur Ier. XXXI, 31: feriam domui Israel et domui Iuda foedus novum, non secundum pactum quod pepigi cum patribus vestris, ut educerem eos de terra Aegypti, sed hoc erit pactum: dabo legem meam in visceribus eorum, et ero eis in Deum. In one way for any pact which is confirmed by witnesses; and so it must be supposed that God entered into a pact with the human race in two ways: in one way by promising temporal goods and by freeing from temporal evils; and this is called the Old Testament or pact. In another way by promising spiritual goods and by freeing from opposite evils, and this is called the New Testament. Hence it is said: I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers, when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. But this will be the testament: I will put my law within them and I will be their God (Jer 31:31). Est autem considerandum quod apud antiquos erat consuetudo ut alicuius victimae sanguinem funderent ad confirmationem pacti. Unde Gen. XXXI, 54 legitur, quod postquam inierunt enim foedus Laban et Iacob, immolatis victimis in monte, vocavit fratres suos. Unde et Ex. XXIV, 8 legitur, quod Moyses sumptum sanguinem respersit in populum, et ait: hic est sanguis foederis, quod pepigit Dominus vobiscum. Sicut ergo Vetus Testamentum seu pactum confirmatum est sanguine figurali taurorum, ita Novum Testamentum seu pactum confirmatum est in sanguine Christi, qui per passionem est effusus. Et in hoc calice sacramentum taliter continetur. But it should be noted that in antiquity the custom was that they would pour out the blood of some victim to confirm a pact. Hence it is read that after Laban and Jacob made a pact, victims were sacrificed on the mountain and called his kinsmen (Gen 31:54). Hence, too, its says that Moses took the blood and threw it upon the people and said: behold, the blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with you (Exod 24:8). Therefore, just as the Old Testament or pact was confirmed by the figural blood of bulls, so the New Testament or pact was confirmed in Christ’s blood, which was poured out in the passion. And in the cup the sacrament is so contained. 679. Alio modo testamentum accipitur magis stricte pro dispositione haereditatis percipiendae, quam necesse est secundum leges certo numero testium confirmare. Non autem testamentum sic acceptum confirmatur nisi per mortem, quia, ut Apostolus dicit Hebr. IX, 17, testamentum in mortuis confirmatum est, alioquin nondum valet, dum vivit qui testatus est. 679. In another way testament is taken more strictly for the disposition of an inheritance to be received and which must be confirmed by a certain number of witnesses. Such a covenant, however, is not confirmed except by death, because, as the Apostle says: for a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive (Heb 9:17). Deus autem primo quidem dispositionem fecerat de aeterna haereditate percipienda, sed sub figura temporalium bonorum, quod pertinet ad Vetus Testamentum; sed postmodum fecit Novum Testamentum, expresse promittens haereditatem aeternam, quod quidem confirmatum est per sanguinem mortis Christi. Et ideo Dominus de hoc dicit hic calix novum testamentum est in meo sanguine; quasi dicat: per id quod in calice continetur commemoratur novum testamentum per Christi sanguinem confirmatum. God, first of all, made disposition of eternal rewards to be received, but under the figure of temporal goods which pertain to the Old Covenant. But later he made a New Covenant, expressly promising an eternal inheritance, which was confirmed by the blood of Christ’s death. And therefore, the Lord says of this: this chalice is the new testament in my blood. As if to say: through that which is contained in the cup is commemorated the new covenant confirmed by the blood of Christ. 680. Est autem advertendum quod eadem verba quae hic Apostolus ponit, habentur Lc. XXII, 20, nisi quod ibi additur: qui pro vobis effundetur. Lucas enim discipulus fuit Pauli et eum in conscriptione Evangelii est secutus. Sed Matth. XXVI, 28 dicitur hic est enim sanguis meus novi testamenti, qui pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Eadem verba ponuntur in Mc. XIV, v. 24. 680. But it should be noted that the same words the Apostle gives here are found in Luke, except that Luke adds: which shall be shed for you (Luke 22:20). For Luke was a disciple of Paul and followed him in writing his Gospel. But it is also said: this is my blood of the new covenant which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28). The same words appear in Mark (Mark 14:24). Dicunt ergo quidam, quod quaecumque formae horum verborum proferantur, quae sunt scripta in canone sufficere ad consecrationem. Therefore, some say that whichever forms of these words written in the canon are said, they suffice for consecration. Probabilius autem dici videtur quod illis solis verbis perficitur consecratio, quibus Ecclesia utitur ex traditione apostolorum structa. Evangelistae enim verba Domini recitare intenderunt quantum pertinet ad rationem historiae, non autem secundum quod ordinantur ad consecrationem sacramentorum, quas in occulto habebant in primitiva Ecclesia, propter infideles. Unde Dionysius dicit in ultimo cap. Ecclesiasticae hierarchiae: perfectivas invocationes non est fas in Scripturis exponere, neque mysticum ipsarum ante factas in ipsis ex Deo virtutes ex occulto in communi adducere. But it seems more probable to say that consecration is accomplished only by those words which the Church structured on the apostles’ uses. For the evangelists intended to recite the Lord’s words as part of his history, but not as they are ordained to consecration of the sacrament, which they held in secret in the early Church on account of unbelievers. Hence Dionysius says in Ecclesiastical Hierarchy: it is not permitted to explain openly in writing the perfective invocations in the Scriptures or to bring to light their secret meaning. 681. Sed circa ista verba quibus Ecclesia utitur in consecratione sanguinis, quidam opinantur quod non omnia sint de necessitate formae sed solum quod dicitur hic est calix sanguinis mei, non autem residuum quod sequitur: novi et aeterni testamenti, mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. 681. But in regard to the words the Church uses in the consecration of the blood, some believe that not all are necessary for the form, but only that this is the cup of my blood but not of the new and eternal covenant, a mystery of faith, which will be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins. Sed hoc non videtur convenienter dici. Nam totum illud quod sequitur est quaedam determinatio praedicati. Unde et ad eiusdem locutionis sententiam seu significationem pertinet. Et quia, ut saepe dictum est, formae sacramentorum significando efficiunt, totum pertinet ad vim effectivam formae. But it does not seem fitting to say this. For all that follows is a determination of the predicate. Hence, it pertains to the meaning or signification of the same statement; and because, as has often been said, the forms of the sacraments effect by signifying, and totality pertains to the effective power of the sacrament. Nec obstat ratio quam inducunt, quia in consecratione corporis sufficit quod dicitur hoc est corpus meum, quia sanguis seorsum consecratus, specialiter repraesentat passionem Christi, per quam eius sanguis separatus est a corpore. Nor is there any merit in the reason they adduce, because in the consecration of the body it is enough to say, this is my body (1 Cor 11:24), because the blood separately consecrated especially represents the passion of Christ, through which his blood was separated from the body. 682. Et ideo in consecratione sanguinis oportuit exprimere Christi passionis virtutem, quae attenditur, primo quidem, respectu nostrae culpae quam Christi passio abolet, secundum illud Apoc. I, 5: lavit nos a peccatis nostris in sanguine suo, et, quantum ad hoc, dicit qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Effusus est siquidem sanguis in remissionem peccatorum, non solum pro multis, sed etiam pro omnibus, secundum illud I Io. II, 2: ipse est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris, non pro nostris autem tantum, sed etiam pro totius mundi. Sed quia quidam se reddunt indignos ad recipiendum talem effectum, quantum ad efficaciam dicitur esse effusus pro multis, in quibus habet effectum passio Christi. Dicit autem signanter pro vobis et pro multis, quia hoc sacramentum valet in remissionem peccatorum sumentibus per modum sacramenti, quod notatur signanter, cum dicitur pro vobis, quibus dixerat accipite. Valet etiam per modum sacrificii multis non sumentibus, pro quibus offertur; quod significatur cum dicitur: et pro multis. 682. Therefore, in the consecration of the blood it was necessary to express the power of Christ’s passion, which is looked at, first of all, with respect to our guilt, which the passion of Christ abolishes: he washed us from our sins in his blood (Rev 1:5). In regard to this he says, which will be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins. The blood was indeed shed for the remission of sins, not only for many but for all: he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ourselves only but also for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). But because some make themselves unworthy to receive such an effect, as far as its efficacy is concerned, it is said to have been shed for many, in which the passion of Christ has an effect. But he expressly says, for you and for many, because this sacrament can produce remission of sin for those who receive it after the manner of a sacrament, which is clearly signified when it is said: for you, to whom he had said take. Or for those who receive it after the manner of sacrifice for many not receiving, for whom it is offered; which is signified when it is said: and for many. Secundo, virtus eius consideratur per comparationem ad vitam iustitiae, quam facit per fidem, secundum illud Rom. III, 24: iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius, per redemptionem quae est in Christo Iesu, quem proposuit propitiationem per fidem in sanguine ipsius. Et quantum ad hoc, dicit: mysterium, id est occultum fidei, quia scilicet fides passionis Christi erat occulta in omnibus sacrificiis Veteris Testamenti, sicut veritas in signo. Hoc autem Ecclesia habet ex traditione apostolorum, cum in canone Scripturae non inveniatur. Second, its power is considered with respect to the life of justice it effects through faith: they are justified by his grace as a gift through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood to be received by faith (Rom 3:24). As to this he says: the mystery, i.e., the sacrament of faith, namely, because faith in the passion of Christ was hidden in all the sacrifices of the Old Covenant, as the truth in a figure. But the Church has this from the tradition of the apostles, since it is not found in the canon of Scripture.