1 Cor 11:23-27 Douay translation.
“23 For I have received of the
Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night
in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said:
Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do
for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had
supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as
often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. 26 For as often as you
shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the
Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the
chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of
the Lord.”
“For I have received of the Lord
that which also I delivered unto you,” (1 Cor 11:23)
This word we have verbatim from 1 Cor 11 and it
has just been recited in today’s epistle. Since the whole feast today is about
this holy and glorious sacrament of the altar, so also shall be our sermon. And
we shall have many good ideas for the enlightenment of the mind and the
consolation of the soul and some moral advice for the correction of life. But
first the Virgin Mary is hailed.
For the declaration of this passage and the
introduction of the material to be preached it must be known that the entire
belief of the heart which we have of this holy sacrament and the verbal
expression which we make of the same ought all to be founded on holy
scriptures. So that our heart ought not extend itself more for believing nor
the mouth for speaking unless to the extent that we have it from holy
scriptures. The reason is because of the height and transcendental sublimity of
this sacrament, which exceeds all natural understanding and philosophical
science and all the powers of nature. So whoever wishes to believe of this holy
sacrament, or speak according to natural understanding, or philosophical
knowledge, or the powers of nature would err and fail in many ways. Just as someone
who would wish to count according to understanding how many palms or cubits
[measures of length] there are from here to heaven, or how many steps from the
east to the west, or how many grains of sand and drops of water there are, that
person would err and fall short. And so scripture says, Eccl 3, “Seek not the
things that are too high for you,” i.e. for the natural intellect, “and search
not into things above your ability,” namely philosophical knowledge, “but the
things that God has commanded thee,” (Sir 3:22), which is his mouth having two
lips, namely the two testaments. Above is the New Testament, below the Old
Testament. Therefore the Lord says, “If you will separate the precious from the
vile, you shall be as my mouth,” (Jer 15:19). “Think on them always,” (Jer
15:19).
So now, dismissing natural and philosophical
reasons, I shall accept proofs [auctoritates] only from sacred scripture,
because I do not want to say anything but what the Lord says in sacred
scripture. And then I shall be able to speak the theme: “For I have received of
the Lord,” not from a philosopher, nor from Virgil nor by natural genius, but
by the Lord, namely from sacred scripture, “that which also I delivered unto
you,” (1 Cor 11:23). The theme is clear. Among other wonders and secrets of
this sacrament there are five principal ones, which I shall now speak about to
you according to sacred scriptures.
First, is the substantial change [mutatio
substantialis],
Second, is the work of the priest [operatio
sacerdotalis],
Third, the sacramental indwelling [habitatio
sacramentalis],
Fourth, the sense perception [perceptio
sensualis],
Fifth, the usual reception. [receptio usualis].
In this are the heights and difficulties of this
sacrament. If it is said, “Whence do you have this brother.” The theme replies:
“For I have received of the Lord,” and now I shall give it to you.
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE
The first wonder and sublime secret of this holy
sacrifice is the change of substance. There is a double change, one is
accidental, the other substantial. Accidental change is when the accident or
quality changes in a creature, the substance remaining the same, as is the
change from whiteness into blackness, or from health to illness, or from hot
into cold, or from smallness into largeness like a child changes, but the
substance remains the same. Such changes are said to be “accidental.”
Substantial change is when not only the accidents but also the substance
changes, as if mud is changed into gold, or lead into silver. Not only
accidents are changed but also the substance. In this sacrament however only
substantial change happens and not accidental, because the substance of bread
and wine do not remain once the conversion is done, but their accidents remain.
In this sacrament two rules of philosophy fail.
First that which says that whenever substantial change happens accidental
change also happens. Reason, because accidents don’t migrate, that is, pass
from subject into subject, because if mud is changed into gold, even its
quality is changed. But in this sacrament it is the opposite. Because the
substance of bread by the power of words is changed into the body of Christ,
however the accidents are not, because the same whiteness and quantity and
roundness, smell and flavor remain as before. Now in this sacrament by
governing yourselves by the rules of philosophy, it is necessary to err and
fall short. When the change is accomplished, we adore, but we do not adore that
which we see, neither the whiteness nor the roundness, but Christ true God and
man contained within, as truly and really, as he was in the womb of the Virgin
or as he is in heaven. On this see St. Thomas III, q. 75, a. 1. For just as
soldiers adore the king behind the curtains, when he hears mass, although they
do not see him, so we adore Christ under those accidents as if existing beneath
the curtains.
A second rule of philosophy fails also in this
sacrament, which says that no substantial change is total, because there always
remains prime matter, which the Philosopher calls “hyle”. Because if mud is changed into gold, the
prime matter which is the term from which [terminus a quo, the mud], is the
same with that which is the term to which [terminus ad quem, the gold], because
the matter of all generable and corruptible things is the same. In this holy
sacrament these rules fail, because nothing remains of the matter, nor of the
substantial form of bread, because it entirely is changed into the body of
Christ. On this see St. Thomas III, q. 75, a. 5 & 6. So therefore it is
necessary that man not rule himself here with philosophical rules which are
lacking, but according to holy scriptures, in the Psalter, which says, “This is
the change,” namely the substantial, “of the right hand of the most High,” (Ps
76:11) Natural changes are from the left, but this [is], “of the right of the
most High.” And it follows,” You are the God that does wonders,” (Ps 76:15),
namely the aforesaid. It is the same for the change of wine in the chalice into
the blood of Christ.
Morally [using now the moral sense of scripture],
you have here the teaching that you ought to adore Christ in the consecrated
host without doubt and without condition. Some persons, presumptuous and
shameless, fall into error saying when they adore, “I adore you, if you are
Christ. [This deserves] Neither thanks nor gratitude [Nec grates, nec gratias]
because even a stick or stone or dog can adore in this way, with conditions. So
you should adore without condition. Reason, because condition includes doubt,
and God wishes to be adored firmly with a whole heart, spirit, will and
devotion. So David: “Bring up sacrifices, and come into his courts: adore the
Lord in his holy court,” (Ps 95:8-9). Note, “bring up sacrifices,” here he
speaks to the priests. “And come into his courts,” here he speaks to the
people. “Adore the Lord,” namely both priests and people. “In his holy court,”
i.e. in the heart, without doubt and without condition.
Should someone say, “If the priest did not say the
words, or if he had not been ordained he did not consecrate, therefore,” etc. I
reply that the priest alone shall be damned, and it is not a danger to you.
Thus you should adore without doubt, although you habitually have in your heart
this, that if you would know the opposite that you would not adore, and this
suffices. Nevertheless this ought not to be expressed in words, but you ought
simply to adore. See the first wonderful secret, which is, “For I have received
of the Lord,” in scripture, and “…I delivered unto you,” (1 Cor 11:23)
PRIESTLY WORK
The second wonder of this sacrament is the
priestly operation [operatio sacerdotalis]. The priest living here on earth has
the power to open the heavens and make the Son of the Virgin Mary descend onto
the altar into his hands. A great wonder is attributed to Moses, who made manna
come down from the air, as we read in Ex 16:13. And of Elijah who made fire
come down from the sphere of fire to burn the two squads of fifty soldiers, as
we read in 4 Kgs 1, (Cf vv. 9-12). This wonder is greater, because the priest
makes Christ descend not from the air, nor from the sphere of fire, nor from
the heaven of the moon, nor from the heaven of Mercury, nor from the heaven of
Venus, nor from the heaven of the sun, nor from the heaven of Mars, nor from
the heaven of Jupiter, nor from the heaven of Saturn, nor from the heaven of
the stars or firmament, nor from the crystalline heaven, but from the empyreal
heaven. Behold, the priestly operation.
You know that when the Virgin Mary, greeted by the
angel Gabriel, consenting, said, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord,” etc., (Lk
1:38), at the last word, the heaven was open and the Son of God descended into
her womb, and the angel and the Virgin adored him in the womb. Just as the
voice [literally, the mouth] of the Virgin opened up heaven, so also does the
voice of the priest, and more excellently. It shall not displease the Virgin
Mary if I speak the truth, because the Virgin in opening heaven had to say
eight words. [Ecce ancílla Domini : fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum.] First,
“Behold,” second “the handmaid,” etc. until she said the whole, and then the
heaven was open and she conceived. The priest says only five words [Hoc est
enim corpus meum], and when he says the last word, namely “meum” then heaven is
opened and Christ is in the host. Also the Virgin Mary opened heaven only once,
but the priest, every day, and at every mass.
Also in the womb of the Virgin it was a baby that descended, not as
large as an ant, and vulnerable and mortal. In the host he descends as large as
he is in heaven, as he was on the cross, neither vulnerable nor mortal but
glorious and invulnerable. Gregory: “Who of the faithful can have a doubt, in
that hour of sacrifice, at the voice of the priest the heavens are opened, in
that mystery of Jesus Christ the chorus of angels are present, the highest
associate with the least, earthly things are joined to heavenly, and the same
happens from visibles as well as invisibles,” (Gregory the Great, Dialogues IV,
c. 58), and it is found in [Gratian] De Consecratione, dist. II, canon. 73:
“What be the blood,” vers.: “Who of the faithful.” Note how ‘the heavens are
opened’ is understood like the telling of a secret. It is said. “He has opened
his heart to me,” not that it is wounded or divided, but because a secret is
revealed. So Delilah says of Sampson to the Philistines, “Now he hath opened
his heart to me,” (Judges 16:18). So of the Son of God who is hidden in the
empyreal heaven, when he descends into the consecrated host, that descent is
said to be the opening of the heavens. “This is the bread that came down from
heaven.” If anyone eats of this bread, “he shall live for ever,” (Jn 6:59).
If someone says that Christ descends from heaven
into the host, and so he departs from heaven, I reply that he does not leave
heaven. For this note two comparisons [similitudines]. First, with a house
having a hundred windows or even a thousand windows, in which the rays of the
sun enter, and nevertheless they do not depart from the heaven. So Christ, the
ray of God the Father, descends into each host, and nevertheless does not leave
heaven. Second, with my voice, which is in each of your ears. You see already
how many ears there are here. Now I believe that each of you has two, etc. and
in each of them is my voice, and nevertheless it doesn’t depart from me. If a
corruptible and transitory word can be in that way, how much more the eternal
Word about which John wrote: “In the beginning was the Word,” (Jn 1:1). Thus
David says, “The Lord is in his holy temple,” and at the same time, “the Lord’s
throne is in heaven,” (Ps 10:5). If the pregnant Virgin was the temple of God,
so also the consecrated host is pregnant. The temple of God can be said where
there are angels, as Gregory says, because a king does not travel alone, if we
would not have eyes half-blind nor ears plugged up we would see and perceive
them singing. Just as some saints, like St. Thomas Aquinas of the Order of
Preachers, who composed today’s [Divine] Office, in which we sing:
Panis angelicus
fit panis hominum;
Dat
panis coelicus
figuris
terminum:
O res
mirabilis!
Manducat
Dominum
Pauper,
servus et humilis
The Bread of
Angels
becomes the
bread of men;
The Bread of
heaven
ends all
prefigurations:
What wonder!
Consumes
him, the Lord,
a poor and
humble servant.
Morally [the moral sense of the passage], it is
clear how pure the priest ought to be, who has a judge and is surrounded by
angels, and his hand and fingers are filled with angels. If he is good, the
angels say, “O blessed one, you have a greater grace than we,” etc. If he be
evil, lustful, have a mistress [concubinarius], a gambler [lusor], the angels
say to Christ, “Lord do you want us to kill this traitor?” Christ responds, “I
do not wish the death of the sinner, but that he be converted and live,” (Cf Ez
18:23).
The next question which you already have strong in
your hearts is this: If the priest be a man of evil life, lustful etc, does
such a priest have that power of consecrating? For we all agree the good priest
does. I respond that both the good and the bad priests, by saying the words,
truly consecrate. For this, note the similarity between two pipes, gold and
wood, through which water from the same spring flows into the garden to water
the cabbages. Which cabbages will do better? Is it not just as beneficial from
the one [pipe] as from the other, from which comes the same water? For the
goodness of the cabbages is not from the virtue of the pipes, but from the
virtue of the water. So it is in our situation:
The spring from which the water of the whole world
and knowledge flows is Christ. “The word of God on high is the fountain of
wisdom,” (Sir 1:5). The pipes through which the water of consecration passes
are the priests. The hosts are the vegetables or cabbages from the land, [made]
of wheat, not from any other material. The gold pipe is the good and devout
priest, the wooden is the priest of bad life, who has a mistress, simoniacal,
raunchy [ribaldus], and yet each truly consecrates, not by the power of the priest,
but of Christ. Christ then, in the end, becomes the lord of the garden, who
after he has used the pipes, puts the gold pipe in a box in the treasury of
heaven. “If any man minister to me, let him follow me; and where I am, there
also shall my minister be,” (Jn 12:26). A pipe of rotten wood is thrown into
the fire to be burned in hell. So the Apostle [Paul]: “But let a man prove
himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he who
eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning
the body of the Lord,” (1 Cor 11:28). Where the Gloss says quoting Ambrose: “He
is so punished as if he had killed Christ with his own hands.” See this
priestly operation, and from where do you know this, brother? “For I have
received of the Lord,” etc., (1 Cor 11:23).
SACRAMENTAL INDWELLING
The third secret wonder of this sacrament is the
sacramental indwelling. O wonderful it is that the whole Christ dwells in such
a small quantity. You ask how is this possible? Again how is it possible that
when the host is broken, the whole Christ is not broken, moreover the whole
remains integral, even in each broken particle. Here all rules of philosophy
fail. Nevertheless for your consolation I will show you a comparison to the
eye, from your image howsoever large you may be, which is received whole in a
mirror. If there were a hundred thousand or even more mirrors in front of you,
your image would be in all of them. And if you break a mirror, nevertheless the
image is not broken, but in each of its fragments it remains integral. Shall
not God the Father be able to do the same with his image, who is Christ? Christ
is the image of the invisible God. (Cf 2 Cor 4:4, and Col 1:15). The host is a
mirror, someone said. Is it not like an image in a mirror, which is not
corporeal, and of Christ in the host, which has a real body? I say that always,
because the glorified body is more subtle than an image which is prevented from
entering the mirror by a little handkerchief [panno]. Nothing can impede a
glorified body; [it is] more subtle than light, than a voice, than even an
image. Therefore, once the words are pronounced, immediately the whole body is
in the host, like the image in the mirror.
Therefore of this consecrated host it can be said
“For she is the brightness of eternal light, and the unspotted mirror of God’s
majesty, and the image of his goodness,” (Wis 7:26). ” For she is the
brightness of eternal light,” with respect to the divinity which is there. For
which it must be known that by the power of the word alone it is there, namely
under the appearance of bread, the body of Christ, but from real concomitance
the soul is also there, because the body of Christ is there as a living body,
which is not without a soul, nor without blood.
If in the triduum [triduo, thee day duration of
Christ’s entombment] the Apostles had consecrated, only the dead body of Christ
would have been there, which was [its state] at that time. But now it is alive,
together with the soul and blood and divinity. By the power of the words only
the body is there, but concomitantly the soul is there with its excellences and
the divinity with all its perfections. Just as if some lord had invited a
certain great lord or prelate to dinner, and he had arrived with his
shield-bearers, by virtue of the words of invitation., only the lord himself or
the prelate was invited, but from concomitance or association the
shield-bearers were also there. Thus the priest by consecrating with the power
of the words, consecrates precisely only the body of Christ, but the soul,
blood and divinity follow him. Therefore think what you eat, when you receive
communion, because there is something greater there than all things corporeal,
namely the body of Christ, something there more excellent than spiritual
creatures, namely the soul of Christ, and divinity is also there, which is
above everything which God made or will make or can make.
And so the authority says, “For she is the
brightness of eternal light,” (Wis 7:26), namely with respect to divinity.
Therefore the host is round, which signifies the eternity of God. And “the
unspotted mirror,” (Wis 7:26), with respect to the soul. Therefore the host
ought to be most pure and white. “and the image of his goodness,” (Wis 7:26).
with respect to the body through which he accomplished his goodness in the work
of redemption.
Morally, we have here a teaching which if we wish
to receive communion in a dignified way, we have three, namely, the brightness
of eternal light through true belief without error and false opinion. Secondly,
the mirror unspotted through chastity. Third that we have the image of his
goodness through firm friendship, because just as Christ did not wish to take
revenge on his enemies, neither, out of your love of him, should you. Therefore
Christ, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of
God,” (Mt 5:9). Note “peacemakers” from its etymology, i.e. making peace, and
cursed is he who impedes peace about which it can be said, “Damned are the
warmongers, because they shall be called children of the devil.”
SENSE PERCEPTION
The fourth secret wonder is sense perception,
because the bodily senses seem to be deceived about the Eucharist, because one
thing is perceived, which is believed, because the eye does not see Christ, but
whiteness, nor is Christ heard, nor smelled. Why this? Christ well could have
made it that just as the image is seen in the mirror, also he would be seen in
the host, just as by many saints he has been seen there. But he did not want
this for two reasons. First out of necessity. Second out of usefulness.
Of necessity, because it is necessary to receive
communion, because just as all our evil comes to us from the eating of fruit,
about which it is said of the Virgin Mary, “Blessed is the fruit of your womb
Jesus Christ.” And it would be disgusting to visibly eat human flesh and drink
blood. But just as a doctor covers up the pills offered or the host, lest it be
distasteful to fastidious people, so Christ our physician, whose flesh is the
pill of our salvation, because otherwise we cannot be saved, unless through
communion, he hides [his flesh] lest it be seen, nor is the flavor of flesh
perceived, etc. See the necessity. About which the prophet Isaiah said, “And
they shall worship you,” in the consecrated host, “and shall make supplication
to you: only in you is God, and there is no God besides you. Verily you are a
hidden God, the God of Israel the savior.” (Isa 45:14). Note ” only in you is
God,” just this saying is exclusive, it excludes other sacraments, in which God
is not, unless figuratively. Only in this sacrament really and personally.
About this see St. Thomas III, q. 75, a. 1.
He does not say “similarly” but “verily”. “For my flesh is meat indeed:
and my blood is drink indeed,” (Jn 6:56), is so construed. That meat is truly
my flesh and that drink truly is my blood.
The second reason is from usefulness, for our
merit. The article about this sacrament is of especially great merit, because
of the difficulty of the senses, which judge the opposite from this which we
believe. If indeed you believe that the host be white, you have no credit
[grates] because your eyes can see it. But it is of merit to believe that
Christ is there whom you do not see. Gregory. Faith is without merit where
human reason provides experience. But it is of merit to believe because he says
that really. He is not able to lie nor deceive. Therefore we offer him great
honor by simply believing, saying: Lord although my intellect cannot grasp this
mystery, nevertheless I believe from what you day. He says: “Blessed are they
who have not seen and have believed,” (Jn 20:29). Many saints have seen Christ
in this sacrament.
REGULAR RECEPTION
The fifth secret wonder is regular reception.,
because he permits and wishes not only to be adored by us, but to be received
according to the use and custom of the church. Priests, well prepared, should
celebrate every day. Devout people, with good advice, every month. Others once
a year, namely by mandate during Easter, otherwise they will never be received
into heaven. The angels say:
O res
mirabilis!
Manducat
Dominum
Pauper,
servus et humilis
What wonder!
a poor and
humble servant
consumes
him, the Lord.
O what a great wonder is this. Why it was
instituted, what usefulness does it have? I say that he instituted this for two
reasons. First, for his honor. Second for our progress. It is an honor to the
victorious king to be received faithfully in the castle which he acquired by
conquest [quae bellando acquisivit]. And on the contrary it is a disgrace when
they are not permitted to enter it. About which John said, “He came unto his
own, and his own received him not,” (Jn 1:11). But indeed they let cattle, chickens,
and hens enter. The second reason is for our furtherance. If a king or a Pope
show great gratitude when well received, how much more will Christ the king and
Pope do likewise, from whose worthy reception Christians inestimably grow? David: “He has made a remembrance of his
wonderful works, being a merciful and gracious Lord: he has given food to them
that fear him ” (Ps. 110:4-5).