Greco-Christian stream·Opera Omnia Sancti Thomae (Complete Works of Thomas Aquinas)·Summa Theologiae·Tertia Pars·Q74. The matter of this sacrament
Source context
- Theme
- the physical elements (bread and wine) appointed as proper matter for the Eucharistic sacrament
- Soul-faculty
- Consciousness Soul
Steiner
- GA 112, 1909-07-07Steiner identifies the sacrament of communion as a primary vehicle through which matter is raised toward spirit under the Christ-impulse, treating the physical elements of the Eucharist as genuinely spiritually charged substances rather than merely symbolic ones.
- GA 343, 1921-10-10Steiner notes that consecration transforms the original condition of matter, implying that the physical substances used in sacramental acts are not inert but capable of spiritual reconfiguration through the priestly act.
- GA 204, 1921-04-24Steiner addresses the difficulty the isolated intellect faces in comprehending how Christ can be contained in the sacraments of the altar, indicating that the real presence in sacramental matter is a supra-rational, spiritually cognizable fact.
Cross-tradition
- Jewish Temple theology (shewbread / lechem hapanim)The designation of specific physical elements — bread as sacred offering — as the proper material for divine encounter shows structural cross-tradition congruence with the Temple institution of shewbread, where particular physical substances mediated the divine presence.
- Aristotelian hylomorphismAquinas's analysis of bread and wine as appropriate Eucharistic matter draws on Aristotelian hylomorphism, treating these substances as possessing the right formal and material constitution to receive the sacramental form; the distinction between matter and form in sacramental theology directly parallels the philosophical distinction between hyle and morphe.
Q74. The matter of this sacrament
Article 1
[III.q.74.a.1.arg.1] It seems that the matter of this sacrament is not bread and wine. Because this sacrament ought to represent Christ's Passion more fully than did the sacraments of the Old Law. But the flesh of animals, which was the matter of the sacraments under the Old Law, shows forth Christ's Passion more fully than bread and wine. Therefore the matter of this sacrament ought rather to be the flesh of animals than bread and wine.
[III.q.74.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod sancti orationes nostras non cognoscant. Isai., lxiii, 16: Tu pater noster, et Abraham nescivit nos, et Israel ignoravit nos, Glossa dicit quod « mortui etiam sancti nesciunt quid agant vivi, etiam eorum filii; » et sumitur ab Augustino, in lib. De cura pro mortuis agenda, cap. xiii, col. 604, t. 6, ubi hanc auctoritatem inducit; et sunt hæc verba Augustini ibidem: « Si tanti patriarchæ quid erga populum ex his procreatum ageretur, ignoaverunt; quomodo mortui vivorum rebus atque actibus cognoscendis adjuvandisque miscentur? » Ergo sancti orationes nostras cognoscere non possunt.
[III.q.74.a.1.arg.2] Further, this sacrament is to be celebrated in every place. But in many lands bread is not to be found, and in many places wine is not to be found. Therefore bread and wine are not a suitable matter for this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, IV Reg., xxii, 20, dicitur ad Josiam regem: Idcirco, scilicet quod flevisti coram me, colligam te ad patres tuos..., ut non videant oculi tui omnia mala quæ inducturus sum super locum istum. Sed in hoc nullo modo per mortem Josiae subventum fuisset, si post mortem quid genti suæ eveniret, cognosceret. Ergo sancti mortui actus nostros non cognoscunt; et ita non intelligunt nostras orationes.
[III.q.74.a.1.arg.3] Further, this sacrament is for both hale and weak. But to some weak persons wine is hurtful. Therefore it seems that wine ought not to be the matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, quanto aliquis est in charitate perfectior, tanto magis proximo in periculis subvenit. Sed sancti in carne viventes proximis, et maxime sibi conjunctis, in periculis consulunt, et manifeste auxiliantur. Cum ergo post mortem sint multo majoris charitatis, si facta nostra cognoscerent, multo amplius suis charis et conjunctis consulerent et auxiliarentur in necessitatibus, quod facere non videntur. Ergo non videtur quod actus nostros et orationes nostras cognoscant.
[III.q.74.a.1.sc] Pope Alexander I says (Ep. ad omnes orth. i): "In oblations of the sacraments only bread and wine mixed with water are to be offered."
[III.q.74.a.1.sc] Sed contra, Super illud Job, xiv: Sive nobiles fuerint filii ejus, sive ignobiles, non intelligit, dicit Gregorius, XII lib. Moral., cap. xxI, col. 999, t. 1: « Hoc de animabus sanctis sentiendum non est, quia quæ intus omnipotentis Dei claritatem vident, nullo modo credendum est quia foris sit aliquid quod ignorent. » Ergo ipsi orationes nostras cognoscunt. Præterea, Gregorius, in II Dialog., cap. xxxv, a med., dicit: « Animæ videnti Creatorem angusta est omnis creatura; quantumlibet enim pârum de luce Creatoris aspexerit, breve fit ei omne quod creatum est. » Sed hoc maxime impedire videtur quod animæ sanctorum orationes et alia quæ circa nos aguntur, cognoscant, quia a nobis distant. Cum ergo distantia non impediat illa, ut ex prædicta auctoritate patet, videtur quod animæ sanctorum cognoscant orationes nostras, et ea quæ hic aguntur. Præterea, si ea quæ circa nos aguntur, non cognoscerent, nec pro nobis orarent, quia defectus nostros ignorarent. Sed hic est error Vigilantii, ut Hieronymus dicit in Epistola contra eum, inter princ. et med. Ergo sancti ea quæ circa nos aguntur, cognoscunt.
[III.q.74.a.1.co] Some have fallen into various errors about the matter of this sacrament. Some, known as the Artotyrytae, as Augustine says (De Haeres. xxviii), "offer bread and cheese in this sacrament, contending that oblations were celebrated by men in the first ages, from fruits of the earth and sheep." Others, called Cataphrygae and Pepuziani, "are reputed to have made their Eucharistic bread with infants' blood drawn from tiny punctures over the entire body, and mixed with flour." Others, styled Aquarii, under guise of sobriety, offer nothing but water in this sacrament.
Now all these and similar errors are excluded by the fact that Christ instituted this sacrament under the species of bread and wine, as is evident from Matthew 26. Consequently, bread and wine are the proper matter of this sacrament. And the reasonableness of this is seen first, in the use of this sacrament, which is eating: for, as water is used in the sacrament of Baptism for the purpose of spiritual cleansing, since bodily cleansing is commonly done with water; so bread and wine, wherewith men are commonly fed, are employed in this sacrament for the use of spiritual eating.
Secondly, in relation to Christ's Passion, in which the blood was separated from the body. And therefore in this sacrament, which is the memorial of our Lord's Passion, the bread is received apart as the sacrament of the body, and the wine as the sacrament of the blood.
Thirdly, as to the effect, considered in each of the partakers. For, as Ambrose (Mag. Sent. iv, D, xi) says on 1 Corinthians 11:20, this sacrament "avails for the defense of soul and body"; and therefore "Christ's body is offered" under the species of bread "for the health of the body, and the blood" under the species of wine "for the health of the soul," according to Leviticus 17:14: "The life of the animal [Vulgate: 'of all flesh'] is in the blood."
Fourthly, as to the effect with regard to the whole Church, which is made up of many believers, just "as bread is composed of many grains, and wine flows from many grapes," as the gloss observes on 1 Corinthians 10:17: "We being many are . . . one body," etc.
[III.q.74.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod divina essentia est sufficiens medium cognoscendi omnia; quod patet ex hoc quod Deus videndo suam esssentiam omnia intuetur. Non tamen sequitur quod quicumque essentiam Dei vident, omnia cognoscant, sed solum qui essentiam Dei comprehendunt; sicut nec in principio aliquo cognito consequens est omnia cognosci quæ ex principio consequuntur, nisi tota virtus principii comprehendatur. Unde cum animæ sanctorum divinam essentiam non comprehendant, non est consequens ut omnia cognoscant quæ per essentiam divinam cognosci possunt. Unde etiam de quibusdam inferiores angeli a superioribus edocentur, quamvis omnes essentiam divinam videant. Sed unusquisque beatus tantum de aliis rebus necessarium est ut in essentia divina videat, quantum perfectio suæ beatitudinis requirit. Hoc enim ad perfectionem beatitudinis requiritur ut homo habeat quicquid velit, nec aliquid inordinate velit. Hoc autem recta voluntate quilibet vult, ut ea quæ ad ipsum pertinent, cognoscat. Unde cum nulla rectitudo sanctis desit, volunt cognoscere ea quæ ad ipsos pertinent; et ideo oportet quod illa in Verbo cognoscant. Hoc autem ad eorum gloriam pertinet quod auxilium indigentibus præstent ad salutem; sic enim Dei cooperatores efficiuntur, « quo nihil est divinius, » ut ait Dionysius, III cap. Cælest. hierar., § 2, col. 166, t. 1. Unde patet quod sancti habent cognitionem eorum quæ ad hoc requiruntur. Et sic manifestum est quod in Verbo cognoscunt vota, et devotiones, et orationes hominum qui ad eorum auxilium confugiunt.
[III.q.74.a.1.ad.1] Although the flesh of slaughtered animals represents the Passion more forcibly, nevertheless it is less suitable for the common use of this sacrament, and for denoting the unity of the Church.
[III.q.74.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod verbum Augustini intelligendum est de cognitione naturali animarum separatarum; quae quidem cognitio in sanctis viris non est obtenebrata, sicut est in peccatoribus: non autem loquitur de cognitione quæ est in Verbo, quam constat Abraham eo tempore quo hæc dicta sunt per Isaiam, non habuisse; cum ante Christi passionem nullus ad visionem Dei pervenerit.
[III.q.74.a.1.ad.2] Although wheat and wine are not produced in every country, yet they can easily be conveyed to every land, that is, as much as is needful for the use of this sacrament: at the same time one is not to be consecrated when the other is lacking, because it would not be a complete sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod sancti, licet post hanc vitam cognoscant ea quæ hic geruntur, non tamen credendum est quod afficiantur doloribus, cognitis adversitatibus eorum quos in hoc sæculo dilexerunt; ita enim repleti sunt gaudio beatitudinis, quod dolor in eis locum non invenit. Unde si cognoscant suorum infortunia post mortem, nihilominus dolori eorum consulitur, si ante hujusmodi infortunia de hoc sæculo subtrahantur. Sed forte animæ non glorificatæ dolorem aliquem sentirent, si incommoda charorum suorum perciperent: et quia anima Josiæ, non statim glorificata fuit a corpore egressa, quantum ad hoc, ex hac ratione Augustinus, lib. De cura pro mort. gerenda, cap. xIII, xIV et xv, col. 604, t. 6, conclusere nititur quod animæ mortuorum cognitionem non habeant de factis viventium.
[III.q.74.a.1.ad.3] Wine taken in small quantity cannot do the sick much harm: yet if there be fear of harm, it is not necessary for all who take Christ's body to partake also of His blood, as will be stated later (80, 12).
[III.q.74.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod animæ sanctorum habent voluntatem plenarie conformem divinæ voluntati etiam in volito. Et ideo quamvis affectum charitatis ad proximum retineant, non tamen eis aliter auxilium ferunt quam secundum divinam justitiam vident esse dispositum. Et tamen credendum est quod multum proximos juvent pro eis apud Deum intercedendo.
Article 2
[III.q.74.a.2.arg.1] It seems that a determinate quantity of bread and wine is required for the matter of this sacrament. Because the effects of grace are no less set in order than those of nature. But, "there is a limit set by nature upon all existing things, and a reckoning of size and development" (De Anima ii). Consequently, in this sacrament, which is called "Eucharist," that is, "a good grace," a determinate quantity of the bread and wine is required.
[III.q.74.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod non debeamus sanctos interpellare ad orandum pro nobis. Nullus enim amicos alicujus interpellat ad orandum pro se, nisi quatenus credit apud eos se facilius gratiam obtinere posse. Sed Deus est in infinitum magis misericors quolibet sancto; et sic voluntas ejus facilius inclinatur ad nos exaudiendum quam voluntas alicujus sancti. Ergo videtur superfluum constituere sanctos mediatores inter nos et Deum, ut ipsi pro nobis intercedant.
[III.q.74.a.2.arg.2] Further, Christ gave no power to the ministers of the Church regarding matters which involve derision of the faith and of His sacraments, according to 2 Corinthians 10:8: "Of our power which the Lord hath given us unto edification, and not for your destruction." But it would lead to mockery of this sacrament if the priest were to wish to consecrate all the bread which is sold in the market and all the wine in the cellar. Therefore he cannot do this.
[III.q.74.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, si eos ad orandum pro nobis interpellare debeamus, hoc non est nisi quia scimus eorum orationem Deo esse acceptam. Sed quanto aliquis est sanctior inter sanctos, tanto ejus oratio est magis Deo accepta. Ergo semper deberemus superiores sanctos pro nobis intercessores constituere ad Deum, et nunquam minores.
[III.q.74.a.2.arg.3] Further, if anyone be baptized in the sea, the entire sea-water is not sanctified by the form of baptism, but only the water wherewith the body of the baptized is cleansed. Therefore, neither in this sacrament can a superfluous quantity of bread be consecrated.
[III.q.74.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, Christus, etiam secundum quod homo, dicitur Sanctus sanctorum; et ei, secundum quod est homo, orare competit. Sed nunquam Christum ad orandum pro nobis interpellamus. Ergo nec alios sanctos interpellare debemus.
[III.q.74.a.2.sc] Much is opposed to little, and great to small. But there is no quantity, however small, of the bread and wine which cannot be consecrated. Therefore, neither is there any quantity, however great, which cannot be consecrated.
[III.q.74.a.2.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Job, v, 1: Voca, si est qui tibi respondeat, et ad aliquem sanctorum convertere. «Vocare autem nostrum est, » ut Gregorius dicit ibidem, lib. V Moral., cap. xliii, col. 723, t.4, «humili Deum prece deposcere.» Ergo cum volumus Deum orare, debemus ad sanctos converti ut pro nobis Deum orent. Præterea, sancti qui sunt in patria, magis sunt accepti Deo quam in statu viæ. Sed sanctos qui sunt in via, constituerere debemus intercessores pro nobis ad Deum exemplo Apostoli, qui dicebat Rom., xv, 30: Obsecro vos, fratres, per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, et per charitatem sancti Spiritus, ut adjuvetis me in orationibus vestris pro me ad Deum. Ergo nos multo fortius petere debemus a sanctis qui sunt in patria, ut nos juvent orationibus suis ad Deum. Præterea, ad hoc est communis consuetudo Ecclesiæ quæ in litaniis sanctorum orationem petit.
[III.q.74.a.2.co] Some have maintained that the priest could not consecrate an immense quantity of bread and wine, for instance, all the bread in the market or all the wine in a cask. But this does not appear to be true, because in all things containing matter, the reason for the determination of the matter is drawn from its disposition to an end, just as the matter of a saw is iron, so as to adapt it for cutting. But the end of this sacrament is the use of the faithful. Consequently, the quantity of the matter of this sacrament must be determined by comparison with the use of the faithful. But this cannot be determined by comparison with the use of the faithful who are actually present; otherwise the parish priest having few parishioners could not consecrate many hosts. It remains, then, for the matter of this sacrament to be determined in reference to the number of the faithful absolutely. But the number of the faithful is not a determinate one. Hence it cannot be said that the quantity of the matter of this sacrament is restricted.
[III.q.74.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod «iste ordo est divinitus institutus in rebus, » secundum Dionysium, cap v Eccles. hierarch., § 4, col. 503, t. 4, « ut per media ultima reducantur in Deum.» Unde cum sancti qui sunt in patria, sint Deo propinquis-simi, hoc divinæ legis ordo requirit ut nos, qui manentes in corpore peregrina-mur a Domino, in eum per sanctos medios reducamur: quod quidem contingit dum per eos divina bonitas in nos suum effectum infundit. Et quia reditus noster ad Deum respondere debet processui bonitatum ipsius in nos, sicut mediantibus sanctorum suffragiis Dei beneficia in nos deveniunt, ita oportet nos in Deum reduci, ut iterato beneficia ejus sumamus, mediantibus sanctis. Et inde est quod eos intercessores pro nobis ad Deum constitutum, et quasi mediatores, dum ab eis petimus quod pro nobis orent.
[III.q.74.a.2.ad.1] The matter of every natural object has its determinate quantity by comparison with its determinate form. But the number of the faithful, for whose use this sacrament is ordained, is not a determinate one. Consequently there is no comparison.
[III.q.74.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod sicut non est propter defectum divinæ potentiae quod mediantibus secundis causis agentibus operatur, sed est ad complementum ordinis universi, ut ejus bonitas multiplicius diffundatur in res, dum res ab eo non solum suscipiunt bonitates proprias, sed insuper quod aliis causa bonitatis existant; ita etiam non est propter defectum misericordiæ ipsius quod oporteat ejus clementiam per orationes sanctorum pulsare; sed est ad hoc ut ordo prædictus servetur in rebus.
[III.q.74.a.2.ad.2] The power of the Church's ministers is ordained for two purposes: first for the proper effect, and secondly for the end of the effect. But the second does not take away the first. Hence, if the priest intends to consecrate the body of Christ for an evil purpose, for instance, to make mockery of it, or to administer poison through it, he commits sin by his evil intention, nevertheless, on account of the power committed to him, he accomplishes the sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod quamvis sancti superiores sint magis Deo accepti quam inferiores, utile tamen est etiam minores sanctos interdum orare. Ethocpropter quinque rationes: primo ex hoc quod quandoque aliquis habet majorem devotionem ad minorem sanctum quam ad sanctum majorem; ex devotione autem maxime dependet orationis effectus; secundo propter fastidium tollendum, quia assiduitas unius rei fastidium parit: per hoc autem quod diversos sanctos oramus, quasi in singulis novus fervor devotionis excitatur; tertio quia quibusdam sanctis datum est in aliquibus specialibus causis præcipue patrocinari, sicut sancto Antonio ad ignem infernalem; quarto ut omnibus honor debitus exhibatur a nobis; quinto quia plurium orationibus quando impetratur quod unius oratione non impetraretur.
[III.q.74.a.2.ad.3] The sacrament of Baptism is perfected in the use of the matter: and therefore no more of the water is hallowed than what is used. But this sacrament is wrought in the consecration of the matter. Consequently there is no parallel.
[III.q.74.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod oratio est actus quidam. Actus autem sunt particularium suppositorum. Et ideo, si diceremus: « Christe ora pro nobis, » nisi aliquid adderemus, videretur hoc ad personam Christi referri; et ita videretur esse consonum vel errori Nestorii, qui distinxit in Christo personam filii hominis a persona Filii Dei; vel errori Arii, qui posuit personam Filii minorem Patre. Unde ad hos errores evitandos Ecclesia non dicit, « Christe, ora pro nobis; » sed: « Christe, audi nos, » vel: « Miserere nobis. »
Article 3
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.1] It seems that wheaten bread is not requisite for the matter of this sacrament, because this sacrament is a reminder of our Lord's Passion. But barley bread seems to be more in keeping with the Passion than wheaten bread, as being more bitter, and because Christ used it to feed the multitudes upon the mountain, as narrated in John 6. Therefore wheaten bread is not the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.1] Ad tertium sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod orationes sanctorum pro nobis ad Deum fusæ non semper exaudiantur. Si enim semper exaudirentur, maxime exaudirentur sancti de his quæ ad eos pertinent. Sed de his non exaudiuntur; unde dicitur Apoc., vi, 11, quod martyribus petentibus vindictam de his qui habitant in terra, dictum est ut requiescerent adhuc tempus modicum donec impleretur numerus fratrum suorum. Ergo multo minus exaudiuntur de his quæ ad alios pertinent.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.2] Further, in natural things the shape is a sign of species. But some cereals resemble wheat, such as spelt and maize, from which in some localities bread is made for the use of this sacrament. Therefore wheaten bread is not the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Jerem., xv, 1, dicitur: Si steterit Moyses et Samuel coram me, non est anima mea ad populum istum. Ergo sancti non semper exaudiuntur cum pro nobis orant ad Deum.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.3] Further, mixing dissolves species. But wheaten flour is hardly to be found unmixed with some other species of grain, except in the instance of specially selected grain. Therefore it does not seem that wheaten bread is the proper matter for this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.3] 3. Præterea, sancti in patria æquales angelis Dei dicuntur, ut patet Matth., xxii. Sed angeli non semper exaudiuntur in suis orationibus quas fundunt ad Deum; quod patet ex hoc quod habetur Dan., x, 12, ubi dicitur: Ego veni propter sermones tuos, princeps autem regni Persarum restitit mihi viginti et uno diebus. Non autem venerat in adjutorium Danieli angelus qui loquebatur, nisi a Deo liberationem petendo: et tamen est impedita orationis ejus impletio. Ergo nec etiam alii sancti pro nobis orantes apud Deum semper exaudiuntur.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.4] Further, what is corrupted appears to be of another species. But some make the sacrament from bread which is corrupted, and which no longer seems to be wheaten bread. Therefore, it seems that such bread is not the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.arg.4] 4. Præterea, quicumque oratione impetrat aliquid, quodammodo meretur illud. Sed sancti qui sunt in patria, non sunt in statu merendi. Ergo non possunt suis orationibus aliquid impetrare nobis apud Deum.
[III.q.74.a.3.sc] Christ is contained in this sacrament, and He compares Himself to a grain of wheat, saying (John 12:24): "Unless the grain of wheat falling into the ground die, itself remaineth alone." Therefore bread from corn, i.e. wheaten bread, is the matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.sc] Sed contra est quod habetur II Machab., ult., 14: Hic est qui multum orat pro populo, et universa sancta civitate, Jeremias propheta Dei; et quod ejus oratio sit exaudita, patet per hoc quod sequitur, quod extendit Jeremiæ dexteram et dedit Judæ gladium, dicens: Accipe sanctum gladium munus a Deo etc. Præterea, Hieronymus ait in Epist. contra Vigilantium, inter princ. et med.: « Dicis in libello tuo quod dum vivimus, mutuo pro nobis orare possumus; postquam autem mortui fuerimus, nullius sit pro alio exaudienda oratio. » Et hoc postea improbat dicens sic: « Si apostoli et martyres adhuc in corpore constituti possunt orare pro cæteris, quando pro se adhuc debent esse solliciti, quanto magis post coronas, victorias, et triumphos? » Præterea, ad hoc est consuetudo Ecclesiæ quæ frequenter petit ut sanctorum orationibus adjuvetur.
[III.q.74.a.3.co] As stated above (Article 1), for the use of the sacraments such matter is adopted as is commonly made use of among men. Now among other breads wheaten bread is more commonly used by men; since other breads seem to be employed when this fails. And consequently Christ is believed to have instituted this sacrament under this species of bread. Moreover this bread strengthens man, and so it denotes more suitably the effect of this sacrament. Consequently, the proper matter for this sacrament is wheaten bread.
[III.q.74.a.3.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod sancti dicuntur dupliciter orare pro nobis; uno modo oratione expressa, dum votis suis aures divinæ clementiæ pro nobis pulsant; alio modo oratione interpretativa, scilicet per eorum merita quæ in conspectu Dei existentia non solum eis cedunt ad gloriam, sed sunt nobis etiam suffragia et orationes quædam, sicut etiam sanguis Christi pro nobis effusus dicitur veniam petere. Utroque autem modo sanctorum orationes sunt, quantum est in eis, efficaces ad impetrandum quod petunt. Sed ex parte nostra potest esse defectus, quod non consequamur fructum orationum ipsorum, secundum quod pro nobis orare dicuntur ex hoc quod merita eorum nobis proficiunt. Sed secundum quod orant pro nobis, votis suis aliquid nobis postulando, semper exaudiuntur, quia non volunt nisi quod Deus vult, nec petunt nisi quod volunt fieri. Quod autem Deus vult, semper impletur. Nisi loquamur de voluntate antecedente, secundum quam vult omnes homines salvos fieri, quæ non semper impletur. Unde nec est mirum, si etiam quod sancti volunt per hunc modum voluntatis interdum non impletur.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.1] Barley bread serves to denote the hardness of the Old Law; both on account of the hardness of the bread, and because, as Augustine says (83): "The flour within the barley, wrapped up as it is within a most tenacious fibre, denotes either the Law itself, which was given in such manner as to be vested in bodily sacraments; or else it denotes the people themselves, who were not yet despoiled of carnal desires, which clung to their hearts like fibre." But this sacrament belongs to Christ's "sweet yoke," and to the truth already manifested, and to a spiritual people. Consequently barley bread would not be a suitable matter for this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod illa oratio martyrum non est aliud quam eorum desiderium de obtinenda stola corporis et societate sanctorum qui salvandi sunt, et consensus quo consentiunt divinæ justitiæ punienti malos. Unde Apocal., vi, super illud: Usquequo, Domine, etc. dicit Glossa ordin., col. 722, t. 2: « Desiderant majus gaudium, et consortium sanctorum, et justitiæ Dei consentiunt. »
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.2] A begetter begets a thing like to itself in species. yet there is some unlikeness as to the accidents, owing either to the matter, or to weakness within the generative power. And therefore, if there be any cereals which can be grown from the seed of the wheat (as wild wheat from wheat seed grown in bad ground), the bread made from such grain can be the matter of this sacrament: and this does not obtain either in barley, or in spelt, or even in maize, which is of all grains the one most resembling the wheat grain. But the resemblance as to shape in such seems to denote closeness of species rather than identity; just as the resemblance in shape between the dog and the wolf goes to show that they are allied but not of the same species. Hence from such grains, which cannot in any way be generated from wheat grain, bread cannot be made such as to be the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod Dominus loquitur ibi de Moyse et Samuele secundum statum quo fuerunt in hac vita; ipsi enim leguntur pro populo orantes iræ Dei restitisse: et tamen si in illo tempore fuissent, non potuissent orationibus Deum placare ad populum, propter populi illius malitiam. Et hic est illius litteræ intellectus.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.3] A moderate mixing does not alter the species, because that little is as it were absorbed by the greater. Consequently, then, if a small quantity of another grain be mixed with a much greater quantity of wheat, bread may be made therefrom so as to be the proper matter of this sacrament; but if the mixing be notable, for instance, half and half; or nearly so, then such mixing alters the species; consequently, bread made therefrom will not be the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod ista pu-gna bonorum angelorum non intelligitur ex hoc quod apud Deum contrarias orationes funderent, sed quia contraria merita ex diversis partibus ad divinum examen referebant, divinam sententiam expectantes. Et hoc est quod Gregorius, XVII Moral., cap. xii, col. 20, t. 2, exponens prædicta verba Danielis, dicit: « Sublimes spiritus gentibus principantes nequaquam pro injuste agentibus decertant, sed eorum facta juste judicantes examinant: cumque uniuscujusque gentis vel culpa vel justitia ad supernæ curiae concilium ducitur, ejusdem gentis præpositus vel obtinuisse in certamine, vel non obtinuisse perhibetur. Quorum tamen omnium una victoria est sui super se opificis voluntas summa, quam dum semper aspiciunt, quod obtinere non valent nunquam volunt: » unde nec petunt. Ex quo etiam patet quod orationes eorum semper exaudiuntur.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.4] Sometimes there is such corruption of the bread that the species of bread is lost, as when the continuity of its parts is destroyed, and the taste, color, and other accidents are changed; hence the body of Christ may not be made from such matter. But sometimes there is not such corruption as to alter the species, but merely disposition towards corruption, which a slight change in the savor betrays, and from such bread the body of Christ may be made: but he who does so, sins from irreverence towards the sacrament. And because starch comes of corrupted wheat, it does not seem as if the body of Christ could be made of the bread made therefrom, although some hold the contrary.
[III.q.74.a.3.ad.4] Ad quartum dicendum, quod licet sancti non sint in statu merendi sibi postquam sunt in patria, sunt tamen in statu merendi aliis, vel potius ex merito pracedenti alios juvandi; hoc enim apud Deum viventes meruerunt ut orationes eorum exaudirentur post mortem. Vel dicendum, quod oratio ex alio me- RETUR, et ex alio impetrat. Meritum enim consistit in quadam adæquatione actus ad finem propter quem est, qui ei quasi merces redditur; sed orationis impetratio nititur liberalitati ejus qui rogatur: propter quod quando ex liberalitate ejus qui rogatur, impetrat oratio quod non meruit vel ille qui rogat, vel ille pro quo rogatur. Et ita, quamvis sancti non sint in statu merendi, tamen non sequitur quod non sint in statu impetrandi.
Article 4
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.1] It seems that this sacrament ought not to be made of unleavened bread. because in this sacrament we ought to imitate Christ's institution. But Christ appears to have instituted this sacrament in fermented bread, because, as we have read in Exodus 12, the Jews, according to the Law, began to use unleavened bread on the day of the Passover which is celebrated on the fourteenth day of the moon; and Christ instituted this sacrament at the supper which He celebrated "before the festival day of the Pasch" (John 13:1-4). Therefore we ought likewise to celebrate this sacrament with fermented bread.
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod suffragia quæ a vivis pro mortuis fiunt, facientibus non prosint. Quia si aliquis pro altero debitum solveret, secundum humanam justitiam ipse a debito proprio non absolveretur. Ergo per hoc quod aliquis suffragia faciens debitum solvit pro illo pro quo facit, ex hoc a debito proprio non absolvitur.
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.2] Further, legal observances ought not to be continued in the time of grace. But the use of unleavened bread was a ceremony of the Law, as is clear from Exodus 12. Therefore we ought not to use unfermented bread in this sacrament of grace.
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, unusquisque quod facit facere debet meliori modo quo potest. Sed melius est juvare duos quam unum. Si ergo qui per suffragia debitum mortui solvit, a proprio debito liberatur, videtur quod nunquam deberet aliquis pro seipso satisfacere, sed semper pro alio.
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.3] Further, as stated above (65, 1; 73, 3), the Eucharist is the sacrament of charity just as Baptism is the sacrament of faith. But the fervor of charity is signified by fermented bread, as is declared by the gloss on Matthew 13:33: "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven," etc. Therefore this sacrament ought to be made of leavened bread.
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, si satisfactio alicujus pro alio satisfacientis æqualiter prodesset sibi ut ei pro quo satisfacit, eadem ratione æqualiter valebit et tertio, si pro eodem satisfaciat simul, et similiter quarto, et sic deinceps. Ergo unus una satisfactione posset pro omnibus satisfacere, quod est absurdum.
[III.q.74.a.4.arg.4] Further, leavened or unleavened are mere accidents of bread, which do not vary the species. But in the matter for the sacrament of Baptism no difference is observed regarding the variation of the accidents, as to whether it be salt or fresh, warm or cold water. Therefore neither ought any distinction to be observed, as to whether the bread be unleavened or leavened.
[III.q.74.a.4.sc] According to the Decretals (Extra, De Celebr. Miss.), a priest is punished "for presuming to celebrate, using fermented bread and a wooden cup."
[III.q.74.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur in psal. xxxiv, 13: Oratio mea in sinu meo convertetur. Ergo eadem ratione et suffragia quæ pro aliis fiunt, satisfacientibus prosunt. Præterea, Damascenus dicit in Serm. de his qui in fide dormierunt, § 18, col. 263, t. 2: « Quemadmodum unguento, vel alio oleo sancto circumlinire volens infirmum, primo ille, » scilicet liniens, « participat unctionem, et sic postea perungit laborantem; sic et quicumque pro proximi salute agonizat, primum sibi prodest, deinde proximo; » et sic habetur propositum.
[III.q.74.a.4.co] Two things may be considered touching the matter of this sacrament namely, what is necessary, and what is suitable. It is necessary that the bread be wheaten, without which the sacrament is not valid, as stated above (Article 3). It is not, however, necessary for the sacrament that the bread be unleavened or leavened, since it can be celebrated in either.
But it is suitable that every priest observe the rite of his Church in the celebration of the sacrament. Now in this matter there are various customs of the Churches: for, Gregory says: "The Roman Church offers unleavened bread, because our Lord took flesh without union of sexes: but the Greek Churches offer leavened bread, because the Word of the Father was clothed with flesh; as leaven is mixed with the flour." Hence, as a priest sins by celebrating with fermented bread in the Latin Church, so a Greek priest celebrating with unfermented bread in a church of the Greeks would also sin, as perverting the rite of his Church. Nevertheless the custom of celebrating with unleavened bread is more reasonable. First, on account of Christ's institution: for He instituted this sacrament "on the first day of the Azymes" (Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7), on which day there ought to be nothing fermented in the houses of the Jews, as is stated in Exodus 12:15-19. Secondly, because bread is properly the sacrament of Christ's body, which was conceived without corruption, rather than of His Godhead, as will be seen later (76, 1, ad 1). Thirdly, because this is more in keeping with the sincerity of the faithful, which is required in the use of this sacrament, according to 1 Corinthians 5:7: "Christ our Pasch is sacrificed: therefore let us feast . . . with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."
However, this custom of the Greeks is not unreasonable both on account of its signification, to which Gregory refers, and in detestation of the heresy of the Nazarenes, who mixed up legal observances with the Gospel.
[III.q.74.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod opus suffragii quod pro altero fit, potest considerari dupliciter: uno modo ut est expiativum pœnæ per modum cujusdam recompensationis, quæ in satisfactione attenditur: et hoc modo opus suffragii, quod computatur quasi ejus pro quo fit, ita absolvit eum a debito pœnæ quod non absolvit facientem a debito pœnæ propriæ, quia in tali recompensatione consideratur æqualitas justitiæ; opus autem istud satisfactorium ita potest adæquari uni reatui quod alteri non adæquetur. Reatus enim duorum pecatorum majorem satisfactionem requirunt quam reatus unius. Alio modo potest considerari in quantum est meritorium vitæ æternæ, quod habet in quantum procedit a radice charitatis; et secundum hoc non solum prodest ei pro quo fit, sed facienti magis. Et per hoc patet solutio ad objecta. Primæ enim rationes procedebant de opere suffragii, secundum quod est satisfactorium, sed aliæ, secundum quod est meritorium.
[III.q.74.a.4.ad.1] As we read in Exodus 12, the paschal solemnity began on the evening of the fourteenth day of the moon. So, then, after immolating the Paschal Lamb, Christ instituted this sacrament: hence this day is said by John to precede the day of the Pasch, while the other three Evangelists call it "the first day of the Azymes," when fermented bread was not found in the houses of the Jews, as stated above. Fuller mention was made of this in the treatise on our Lord's Passion (46, 9, ad 1).
[III.q.74.a.4.ad.2] Those who celebrate the sacrament with unleavened bread do not intend to follow the ceremonial of the Law, but to conform to Christ's institution; so they are not Judaizing; otherwise those celebrating in fermented bread would be Judaizing, because the Jews offered up fermented bread for the first-fruits.
[III.q.74.a.4.ad.3] Leaven denotes charity on account of one single effect, because it makes the bread more savory and larger; but it also signifies corruption from its very nature.
[III.q.74.a.4.ad.4] Since whatever is fermented partakes of corruption, this sacrament may not be made from corrupt bread, as stated above (3, ad 4); consequently, there is a wider difference between unleavened and leavened bread than between warm and cold baptismal water: because there might be such corruption of fermented bread that it could not be validly used for the sacrament.
Article 5
[III.q.74.a.5.arg.1] It seems that wine of the grape is not the proper matter of this sacrament. Because, as water is the matter of Baptism, so is wine the matter of this sacrament. But Baptism can be conferred with any kind of water. Therefore this sacrament can be celebrated in any kind of wine, such as of pomegranates, or of mulberries; since vines do not grow in some countries.
[III.q.74.a.5.arg.1] Ad quintum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod suffragia prosint existentibus in inferno, per hoc quod habetur II Machab., xii, 40, ubi dicitur quod invenerunt sub tunicis interfectorum donaria idolorum, a quibus lex prohibebat Judæos; et tamen post subditur quod Judas duodecim millia drachmas argenti misit Jerosolymam offerri pro peccatis mortuorum. Constat autem illos peccasse mortaliter, contra legem agentes, et ita in peccato mortali decessisse, et sic ad inferos esse translatos. Ergo existentibus in inferno suffragia prosunt.
[III.q.74.a.5.arg.2] Further, vinegar is a kind of wine drawn from the grape, as Isidore says (Etym. xx). But this sacrament cannot be celebrated with vinegar. Therefore, it seems that wine from the grape is not the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.5.arg.2] 2. Præterea, in Litt. IV, dist. xLV, habetur ex verbis Augustini, in Enchir., cap. cx, col. 283, t. 6, quod « quibus prosunt suffragia, aut ad hoc prosunt ut sit plena remissio, aut certe ut tolerabilior sit eorum damnatio. » Sed solum qui in inferno sunt, damnati esse dicuntur. Ergo etiam existentibus in inferno suffragia prosunt.
[III.q.74.a.5.arg.3] Further, just as the clarified wine is drawn from grapes, so also are the juice of unripe grapes and must. But it does not appear that this sacrament may be made from such, according to what we read in the Sixth Council (Trull., Can. 28): "We have learned that in some churches the priests add grapes to the sacrifice of the oblation; and so they dispense both together to the people. Consequently we give order that no priest shall do this in future." And Pope Julius I rebukes some priests "who offer wine pressed from the grape in the sacrament of the Lord's chalice." Consequently, it seems that wine from the grape is not the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.5.arg.3] 3. Præterea, Dionysius, ult. cap. Eccl. hierar., § 6, col. 562, t. 1, dicit: « Si hic justorum orationes, et secundum hanc vitam, quanto magis post mortem in illis qui digni sunt sacris orationibus, operantur tantummodo? » ex quo potest accipi quod suffragia magis prosunt mortuis quam vivis. Sed vivis prosunt etiam in peccato mortali existentibus, cum quotidie oret Ecclesia pro peccato-ribus, ut convertantur ad Deum. Ergo etiam mortuis in peccato mortali existentibus suffragia valent.
[III.q.74.a.5.sc] As our Lord compared Himself to the grain of wheat, so also He compared Himself to the vine, saying (John 15:1): "I am the true vine." But only bread from wheat is the matter of this sacrament, as stated above (Article 3). Therefore, only wine from the grape is the proper matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.5.sc] Sed contra est quod dicit Dionysius, vii cap. Eccl. hierarch., § 7, col. 563, 1: « Summus sacerdos pro immundis non orat, quia in hoc averteretur a divino ordine; » et consequenter ibidem dicit quod « pro peccatoribus non orat remissionem quia non audiretur pro illis. » Ergo suffragia existentibus in inferno non valent. Præterea, Gregorius dicit in XXXIV lib. Moral., cap. xix, col. 739, t. 2: « Eadem causa est cur non oretur tunc, » scilicet post diem judicii, « pro hominibus aterno igne damnatis quae nunc causa est ut non oretur pro diabolo et angelis ejus aeterno supplicio deputatis; quæ nunc etiam causa est ut non orent sancti pro hominibus infidelibus impiisque defunctis, quia de eis utique quos aeterno deputatos supplicio jam noverunt, ante illum judicis justi conspectum orationis suæ meritum cessari refugiunt. » Ergo suffragia in inferno positis non valent. Præterea, in Littera, IV, dist. xlv, habetur ex verbis Augustini, Serm. clxxii, § 2, col. 937, t. 5: « Qui sine fide quæ per dilectionem operatur ejusque sacramentis, de corporibus exeunt, frustra illis a suis hujusmodi impenduntur officia. » Sed omnes damnati sunt hujusmodi. Ergo eis suffragia non prosunt.
[III.q.74.a.5.co] This sacrament can only be performed with wine from the grape. First of all on account of Christ's institution, since He instituted this sacrament in wine from the grape, as is evident from His own words, in instituting this sacrament (Matthew 26:29): "I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine." Secondly, because, as stated above (Article 3), that is adopted as the matter of the sacraments which is properly and universally considered as such. Now that is properly called wine, which is drawn from the grape, whereas other liquors are called wine from resemblance to the wine of the grape. Thirdly, because the wine from the grape is more in keeping with the effect of this sacrament, which is spiritual; because it is written (Psalm 103:15): "That wine may cheer the heart of man."
[III.q.74.a.5.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod circa damnatos fuit triplex opinio: quidam enim dixerunt, in hoc distinguendum esse dupliciter: uno modo quantum ad tempus, dicentes quod post diem judicii nullus in inferno existens aliquo suffragio juvabitur, sed ante diem judicii aliqui juvantur suffragiis Ecclesiae. Alio modo distinguuent quantum ad personas in inferno detentas, inter quas aliquos dicebant esse valde malos, qui scilicet sine fide et sacramentis decesserunt; et talibus, quia de Ecclesia non fuerunt nec merito nec numero, suffragia Ecclesiae prodesse non possunt; alii vero sunt non valde mali, qui scilicet de Ecclesiae fuerunt numero, et fidem habentes et sacramentis imbuti, et aliqua opera de genere bonorum facientes; et talibus suffragia Ecclesiae prodesse debent. Sed occurrebat eis quædam dubitatio eos perturbans, quia scilicet videbatur ex hoc sequi, cum pœna inferni sit finita secundum intensionem, quamvis duratione infinita existat, quod multiplicatis suffragiis, pœna illa totaliter auferretur, quod est error Origenis, lib I Periarch., cap. vi, § 3, col. 169, t. 1. Et ideo hoc inconveniens evadere multipliciter voluerunt. Præpositivus enim dixit quod tantum possunt suffragia pro damnatis multiplicari quod a tota pœna reddantur immunes, non quidem simpliciter, ut Origenes posuit, sed ad tempus, scilicet usque ad diem judicii; tunc enim animæ iterato corporibus conjunctæ in pœnas inferni sine spe veniæ retrudentur. Sedista opinio videtur divinæ providentiae repugnare, quæ nihil in rebus inordinatum relinquit. Culpa autem non potest ordinari nisi per pœnam. Unde non potest esse ut pœna tollatur nisi prius culpa expietur. Et ideo cum culpa continue maneat in damnatis, eorum pœna nulla tenus interrumpitur. Et ideo Porretani alium modum invenerunt, dicentes quod hoc modo proceditur in diminutione pœnarum per suffragia, sicut proceditur in divisione linearum; quæ cum sint finitæ, tamen in infinitum dividi possunt, et nunquam per divisionem consumuntur, dum fit subtractio non secundum eamdem quantitatem, sed secundum eamdem proportionem; velut si primo auferatur pars quarta totius, et secundo pars quarta illius quartæ, et iterum quarta illius quartæ et sic deinceps in infinitum. Et similiter dicunt quod per primum suffragium diminuitur aliquota pars pœnæ, et per secundum pars aliqua remanentis diminuitur secundum eamdem proportionem. Sed iste modus multipliciter defectivus est: primo quia infinita divisio, quæ congruit continuæ quantitati non videtur posse ad quantitatem spiritualem transferri; secundo quia non est aliqua ratio quare secundum suffragium minus de pœna diminuat quam primum, si sit æqualis valoris; tertio quia pœna diminuui non potest nisi diminuatur et culpa, sicut nec auferri, nisi ea ablata: quarto quia in divisione lineæ tandem pervenitur ad hoc quod non est sensibile; corpus enim sensibile non est in infinitum divisibile: et sequeretur quod post multa suffragia pœna remanens propter sui parvitatem non sentiretur; et ita non esset pœna. Et ideo alii alium invenerunt modum. Altissiodorensis enim, lib. IV Sent., tract. xiv, qu. 1, dixit quod suffragia prosunt damnatis, non quidem per diminutionem pœnæ, vel per interruptionem, sed per confortationem patientis; sicut si homo portaret grave onus, et faciem suam perfunderet aqua: sic enim confortaretur ad melius portandum, cum tamen onus suum in nullo levius fieret. Sed hoc iterum esse non potest, quia aliquis plus vel minus æterno igne gravatur, ut Gregorius dicit, lib. IX Moral., cap. Lv, § 98, col. 943, t. 4, secundum meritum culpæ; et inde est quod eodem igne quidam plus, quidam minus cruciantur. Unde cum culpa damnati immutata remaneat, non potest esse quod levius pœnam ferat. Estnihilominus et prædicta opinio præsumptuosa, utpote sanc-torum dictis contraria, et vana, nulla auctoritate fulta; et est irrationabilis, tum quia damnati in inferno sunt extra vinculum charitatis, secundum quam opera vivorum continuantur defunctis; tum quia totaliter ad vitæ terminum pervenerunt, recipientes ultimam pro meritis retributionem, sicut et sancti qui sunt in patria; quod enim adhuc restat de pœna vel gloria corporis, hoc eis rationem viatoris non præbet; cum gloria essentialiter et radicaliter consistat in anima, et similiter miseria damnatorum. Et ideo non potest eorum pœna diminui, sicut nec gloria sanctorum augeri quantum ad præmium essentiale. Sed tamen modus qui a quibusdam ponitur, quod suffragia prosunt damnatis, posset aliquo modo sustineri, ut si dicatur quod non prosunt neque quantum ad diminutionem pœnæ, vel interruptionem, neque quantum ad diminutionem sensus pœnæ; sed quia hujusmodi suffragiis eis aliqua materia doloris subtrahitur, quæ eis esse posset, si ita se abjectos conspicerent, quod pro eis nulla cura haberetur; quæ materia doloris eis subtrahitur, dum suffragia pro eis fiunt. Sed istud etiam non potest esse secundum legem communem, quia, ut Augustinus dicit, in lib. De cura pro mortuis agenda, cap. xiii, col. 605, t. 6, quod præcipue de damnatis est verum, « ibi sunt spiritus defunctorum, ubi non vident quæcumque aguntur, aut eveniunt in ista vita hominibus; » et ita non cognoscunt quando pro eis suffragia fiunt, nisi supra communem legem hoc remedium divinitus detur aliquibus damnatorum, quod est verbum omnino incertum. Unde tutius est simpliciter dicere quod suffragia non prosunt damnatis, nec pro eis Ecclesia orare intendit, sicut ex inductis auctoritatibus apparet.
[III.q.74.a.5.ad.1] Such liquors are called wine, not properly but only from their resemblance thereto. But genuine wine can be conveyed to such countries wherein the grape-vine does not flourish, in a quantity sufficient for this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.5.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod donaria idolarum non fuerunt inventa apud illos mortuos, ut ex eis signum accipi posset quod in reverentiam idolorum ea deferrent, sed ea acceperunt ut victores, quia eis jure belli debebantur. Et tamen per avaritiam venialiter peccaverunt; unde non fuerunt in inferno damnati; et sic suffragia eis prodesse poterant. Vel dicendum, secundum quosdam, quod in ipsa pugna videntes sibi periculum imminere, de peccato pœnituerunt, secundum illud psal. Lxxvii, 34: Cum occideret eos, quærebant eum; et hoc probabiliter potest aestimari, et ideo pro eis fuit oblatio facta.
[III.q.74.a.5.ad.2] Wine becomes vinegar by corruption; hence there is no returning from vinegar to wine, as is said in Metaph. viii. And consequently, just as this sacrament may not be made from bread which is utterly corrupt, so neither can it be made from vinegar. It can, however, be made from wine which is turning sour, just as from bread turning corrupt, although he who does so sins, as stated above (Article 3).
[III.q.74.a.5.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod in verbis illis damnatio large accipitur pro qua-cumque punitione; ut sic includat etiam pœnam purgatorii, quæ per suffragia quando totaliter expiatur quando autem non, sed diminuitur.
[III.q.74.a.5.ad.3] The juice of unripe grapes is at the stage of incomplete generation, and therefore it has not yet the species of wine: on which account it may not be used for this sacrament. Must, however, has already the species of wine, for its sweetness ["Aut dulcis musti Vulcano decoquit humorem"; Virgil, Georg. i, 295] indicates fermentation which is "the result of its natural heat" (Meteor. iv); consequently this sacrament can be made from must. Nevertheless entire grapes ought not to be mixed with this sacrament, because then there would be something else besides wine. It is furthermore forbidden to offer must in the chalice, as soon as it has been squeezed from the grape, since this is unbecoming owing to the impurity of the must. But in case of necessity it may be done: for it is said by the same Pope Julius, in the passage quoted in the argument: "If necessary, let the grape be pressed into the chalice."
[III.q.74.a.5.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod quantum ad hoc magis acceptatur suffragium pro mortuo quam pro vivo, quia magis indiget, cum non possit sibi auxiliari, sicut vivus potest; sed quantum ad hoc vivus est melioris conditionis, quia potest transferri de statu culpæ mortalis in statum gratiae, quod de mortuis dici non potest. Et ideo non est eadem causa pro mortuis et pro vivis.
Article 6
[III.q.74.a.6.arg.1] It seems that water ought not to be mixed with the wine, since Christ's sacrifice was foreshadowed by that of Melchisedech, who (Genesis 14:18) is related to have offered up bread and wine only. Consequently it seems that water should not be added in this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.6.arg.1] Ad sextum sic proceditur. 4. Videtur quod nec etiam existentibus in purgatorio, quia purgatorium pars quædam inferni est. Sed in inferno nulla est redemptio; et psalm. vi, 6, dicitur: In inferno autem quis confitebitur tibi? Ergo suffragia his qui sunt in purgatorio non prosunt.
[III.q.74.a.6.arg.2] Further, the various sacraments have their respective matters. But water is the matter of Baptism. Therefore it should not be employed as the matter of this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.6.arg.2] 2. Præterea, pœna purgatorii est pœna finita. Si ergo per suffragia aliquid de pœna dimittitur, tantum poterunt multiplicari suffragia quod tota toletur; et ita peccatum remanebit totaliter impunitum, quod videtur divinæ justitiæ repugnare.
[III.q.74.a.6.arg.3] Further, bread and wine are the matter of this sacrament. But nothing is added to the bread. Therefore neither should anything be added to the wine.
[III.q.74.a.6.arg.3] 3. Præterea, ad hoc animæ sunt in purgatorio ut ibi purgatæ, puræ ad regnum perveniant. Sed nihil potest purgari, nisi aliquid circa ipsum fiat. Ergo suffragia facta per vivos pœna purgatorii non diminunt.
[III.q.74.a.6.sc] Pope Alexander I writes (Ep. 1 ad omnes orth.): "In the sacramental oblations which in mass are offered to the Lord, only bread and wine mixed with water are to be offered in sacrifice."
[III.q.74.a.6.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur in Littera, IV, dist. xLV, ex verbis Augustini in Ench., c. cx, col. 283, t. 6: « Suffragia prosunt his qui sunt mediocriter boni vel mali. » Sed tales sunt qui in purgatorio detinen-tur. Ergo, etc. Præterea, Dionysius dicit in vii cap. Eccles. hierarch., § 7, col. 562, t. 4, quod « divinus sacerdos pro mortuis orans, pro illis orat qui sancte vixerunt, et tamen aliquas maculas habuerunt ex infirmitate humana contractas. » Sed tales in purgatorio detinentur. Ergo, etc.
[III.q.74.a.6.co] Water ought to be mingled with the wine which is offered in this sacrament. First of all on account of its institution: for it is believed with probability that our Lord instituted this sacrament in wine tempered with water according to the custom of that country: hence it is written (Proverbs 9:5): "Drink the wine which I have mixed for you." Secondly, because it harmonizes with the representation of our Lord's Passion: hence Pope Alexander I says (Ep. 1 ad omnes orth.): "In the Lord's chalice neither wine only nor water only ought to be offered, but both mixed because we read that both flowed from His side in the Passion." Thirdly, because this is adapted for signifying the effect of this sacrament, since as Pope Julius says (Concil. Bracarens iii, Can. 1): "We see that the people are signified by the water, but Christ's blood by the wine. Therefore when water is mixed with the wine in the chalice, the people is made one with Christ." Fourthly, because this is appropriate to the fourth effect of this sacrament, which is the entering into everlasting life: hence Ambrose says (De Sacram. v): "The water flows into the chalice, and springs forth unto everlasting life."
[III.q.74.a.6.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod pœna purgatorii est in supplementum satisfactionis quæ non fuerat plene in corpore consummata. Et ideo quia, sicut ex dictis patet, opera unius possunt valere alteri ad satisfactionem, sive vivus, sive mortuus fuerit, non est dubium quin suffragia per vivos facta existentibus in purgatorio prosint.
[III.q.74.a.6.ad.1] As Ambrose says (De Sacram. v), just as Christ's sacrifice is denoted by the offering of Melchisedech, so likewise it is signified by the water which flowed from the rock in the desert, according to 1 Corinthians 10:4: "But they drank of the spiritual rock which came after them."
[III.q.74.a.6.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod auctoritas illa loquitur de inferno damnatorum, in quo nulla est redemptio, quantum ad illos qui sunt finaliter tali pœnæ addicti. Vel dicendum, secundum Damascenum, in Sermone de dormientibus, ubi supr., § 13, etc., col. 255, t. 2, quod hujusmodi auctoritates sunt exponendæ secundum causas inferiores, id est, secundum exigentiam meritorum eorum qui pœnis deputantur; sed secundum divinam misericordiam, quæ vincithumana merita, ad preces justorum aliquando aliter disponitur quam sententia prædictarum auctoritatum contineat. « Deus » autem « mutat sententiam, sed non consilium » ut dicit Gregorius, l. XX Mor., cap. xxxii, § 63, col. 175, t. 2. Unde etiam Damascenus, loc. cit., ponit ad hoc exempla de Ninivitis, Achab et Ezechia, in quibus apparet quod sententia contra eos lata divinitus fuit per divinam misericordiam commutata.
[III.q.74.a.6.ad.2] In Baptism water is used for the purpose of ablution: but in this sacrament it is used by way of refreshment, according to Psalm 22:3: "He hath brought me up on the water of refreshment."
[III.q.74.a.6.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod non est inconveniens, si multiplicatis suffragiis, pœna existentium in purgatorio annihiletur: non tamen sequitur quod peccata remaneant impunita, quia pœna unius pro altero suscepta alteri computatur.
[III.q.74.a.6.ad.3] Bread is made of water and flour; and therefore, since water is mixed with the wine, neither is without water.
[III.q.74.a.6.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod purgatio animæ per pœnas purgatorii non est aliud quam expiatio reatus impedientis a perceptione gloriæ. Et quia per pœnam quam unus sustinet pro alio, potest reatus alterius expiari, ut dictum est, non est inconveniens si per unius satisfactionem alius purgetur.
Article 7
[III.q.74.a.7.arg.1] It seems that the mixing with water is essential to this sacrament. Because Cyprian says to Cecilius (Ep. lxiii): "Thus the Lord's chalice is not water only and wine only, but both must be mixed together: in the same way as neither the Lord's body be of flour only, except both," i.e. the flour and the water "be united as one." But the admixture of water with the flour is necessary for this sacrament. Consequently, for the like reason, so is the mixing of water with the wine.
[III.q.74.a.7.arg.1] Ad septimum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod suffragia valeant pueris in limbo existentibus, quia ibi non detinentur nisi pro peccato alieno. Ergo maxime decens est ut ipsi juventur suffragiis alienis.
[III.q.74.a.7.arg.2] Further, at our Lord's Passion, of which this is the memorial, water as well as blood flowed from His side. But wine, which is the sacrament of the blood, is necessary for this sacrament. For the same reason, therefore, so is water.
[III.q.74.a.7.arg.2] 2. Præterea, in Littera, IV, dist. xLV, habetur ex verbis Augustini in Enchir., cap. cx, col. 283, t. 6, quod « Ecclesiæ suffragia pro non valde malis propitiationes sunt. » Sed pueri non computantur inter valde malos, cum sit mitissima eorum pœna. Ergo suffragia Ecclesiæ eos juvent.
[III.q.74.a.7.arg.3] Further, if water were not essential to this sacrament, it would not matter in the least what kind of water was used; and so water distilled from roses, or any other kind might be employed; which is contrary to the usage of the Church. Consequently water is essential to this sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.7.sc] Cyprian says (Ep. lxiii): "If any of our predecessors, out of ignorance or simplicity, has not kept this usage," i.e. of mixing water with the wine, "one may pardon his simplicity"; which would not be the case if water were essential to the sacrament, as the wine or the bread. Therefore the mingling of water with the wine is not essential to the sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.7.sc] Sed contra est quod habetur in Littera, loc. cit., ab Augustino, Serm. clxxii, § 2, col. 937, t. 5, quod « suffragia non pro-sunt illis qui sine fide operante per dilectionem hinc exierunt. » Sed pueri hoc modo exierunt. Ergo suffragia eis non prosunt.
[III.q.74.a.7.co] Judgment concerning a sign is to be drawn from the thing signified. Now the adding of water to the wine is for the purpose of signifying the sharing of this sacrament by the faithful, in this respect that by the mixing of the water with the wine is signified the union of the people with Christ, as stated (6). Moreover, the flowing of water from the side of Christ hanging on the cross refers to the same, because by the water is denoted the cleansing from sins, which was the effect of Christ's Passion. Now it was observed above (73, 1, ad 3), that this sacrament is completed in the consecration of the matter: while the usage of the faithful is not essential to the sacrament, but only a consequence thereof. Consequently, then, the adding of water is not essential to the sacrament.
[III.q.74.a.7.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod pueri non baptizati non detinentur in limbo, nisi quia deficiunt a statu gratiae. Unde cum per opera vivorum, mortuorum status mutari non possit, maxime quantum ad meritum essentialis præmii vel pœnæ, suffragia vivorum pueris existentibus in limbo prodesse non possunt.
[III.q.74.a.7.ad.1] Cyprian's expression is to be taken in the same sense in which we say that a thing cannot be, which cannot be suitably. And so the comparison refers to what ought to be done, not to what is essential to be done; since water is of the essence of bread, but not of the essence of wine.
[III.q.74.a.7.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod quamvis peccatum originale sit hujusmodi quod pro eo possit aliquis ab alio juvari, tamen animæ puerorum in limbo existentes sunt in tali statu quod juvari non possint, quia post hanc vitam non est tempus gratiam acquirendi.
[III.q.74.a.7.ad.2] The shedding of the blood belonged directly to Christ's Passion: for it is natural for blood to flow from a wounded human body. But the flowing of the water was not necessary for the Passion; but merely to show its effect, which is to wash away sins, and to refresh us from the heat of concupiscence. And therefore the water is not offered apart from the wine in this sacrament, as the wine is offered apart from the bread; but the water is offered mixed with the wine to show that the wine belongs of itself to this sacrament, as of its very essence; but the water as something added to the wine.
[III.q.74.a.7.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod Augustinus loquitur de non valde malis, qui tamen baptizati sunt: quod patet ex hoc quod præmittitur: « Cum ergo sacrificia sive altaris, sive quarumcumque eleemosynarum pro baptizatis omnibus offeruntur, etc. »
[III.q.74.a.7.ad.3] Since the mixing of water with the wine is not necessary for the sacrament, it does not matter, as to the essence of the sacrament, what kind of water is added to the wine, whether natural water, or artificial, as rose-water, although, as to the propriety of the sacrament, he would sin who mixes any other than natural and true water, because true water flowed from the side of Christ hanging on the cross, and not phlegm, as some have said, in order to show that Christ's body was truly composed of the four elements; as by the flowing blood, it was shown to be composed of the four humors, as Pope Innocent III says in a certain Decree. But because the mixing of water with flour is essential to this sacrament, as making the composition of bread, if rose-water, or any other liquor besides true water, be mixed with the flour, the sacrament would not be valid, because it would not be true bread.
Article 8
[III.q.74.a.8.arg.1] It seems that water ought to be added in great quantity, because as blood flowed sensibly from Christ's side, so did water: hence it is written (John 19:35): "He that saw it, hath given testimony." But water could not be sensibly present in this sacrament except it were used in great quantity. Consequently it seems that water ought to be added in great quantity.
[III.q.74.a.8.arg.1] Ad octavum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod aliquo modo prosint sanctis existentibus in patria, per hoc quod habetur in collecta missæ: « Sicut sanctis tuis prosunt ad gloriam, » scilicet sacramenta, « ita nobis proficiant ad medelam. » Sed inter alia suffragia præcipuum est sacramentum altaris. Ergo suffragia prosunt sanctis qui sunt in patria.
[III.q.74.a.8.arg.2] Further, a little water mixed with much wine is corrupted. But what is corrupted no longer exists. Therefore, it is the same thing to add a little water in this sacrament as to add none. But it is not lawful to add none. Therefore, neither is it lawful to add a little.
[III.q.74.a.8.arg.2] 2. Præterea, sacramenta efficiunt quod figurant. Sed tertia pars hostiæ, scilicet in calicem missa, significat eos qui beatam vitam in patria ducunt. Ergo suffragia Ecclesiæ prosunt sanctis existentibus in patria.
[III.q.74.a.8.arg.3] Further, if it sufficed to add a little, then as a consequence it would suffice to throw one drop of water into an entire cask. But this seems ridiculous. Therefore it does not suffice for a small quantity to be added.
[III.q.74.a.8.arg.3] 3. Præterea, sancti non solum gaudent in patria de propriis bonis, sed etiam de bonis alienis: unde Lucæ, xv, 10, dicitur: Gaudium est angelis Dei super uno peccatore poenitentiam agente. Ergo ex bonis operibus viventium, sanctorum qui sunt in patria gaudium crescit; et ita etiam eis nostra suffragia prosunt.
[III.q.74.a.8.sc] It is said in the Decretals (Extra, De Celeb. Miss.): "The pernicious abuse has prevailed in your country of adding water in greater quantity than the wine, in the sacrifice, where according to the reasonable custom of the entire Church more wine than water ought to be employed."
[III.q.74.a.8.sc] Sed contra est quod in Littera, IV, dist. xlv, habetur ex verbis Augustini, Serm. clix, c. 1, col. 868, t. 5: « Injuria est in Ecclesia pro martyre orare, cujus nos debemus orationibus commendari. » Præterea, ejus est juvari cujus est indigere. Sed sancti in patria sunt absque omni indigentia. Ergo per suffragia Ecclesiæ non juvantur.
[III.q.74.a.8.co] There is a threefold opinion regarding the water added to the wine, as Pope Innocent III says in a certain Decretal. For some say that the water remains by itself when the wine is changed into blood: but such an opinion cannot stand, because in the sacrament of the altar after the consecration there is nothing else save the body and the blood of Christ. Because, as Ambrose says in De Officiis (De Mysteriis ix): "Before the blessing it is another species that is named, after the blessing the Body is signified; otherwise it would not be adored with adoration of latria." And therefore others have said that as the wine is changed into blood, so the water is changed into the water which flowed from Christ's side. But this cannot be maintained reasonably, because according to this the water would be consecrated apart from the wine, as the wine is from the bread.
And therefore as he (Innocent III, Decretals, Extra, De Celeb. Miss.) says, the more probable opinion is that which holds that the water is changed into wine, and the wine into blood. Now, this could not be done unless so little water was used that it would be changed into wine. Consequently, it is always safer to add little water, especially if the wine be weak, because the sacrament could not be celebrated if there were such addition of water as to destroy the species of the wine. Hence Pope Julius I reprehends some who "keep throughout the year a linen cloth steeped in must, and at the time of sacrifice wash a part of it with water, and so make the offering."
[III.q.74.a.8.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod suffragium de sui ratione importat quamdam auxiliactionem, quæ non competit ei qui defectum non patitur. Nulli enim juvari competit nisi ei qui indigens est. Unde cum sancti qui sunt in patria, sint ab omni indigentia immunes, inebriati ab ubertate domus Dei, psal. xxxv, eis juvari per suffragia non competit.
[III.q.74.a.8.ad.1] For the signification of this sacrament it suffices for the water to be appreciable by sense when it is mixed with the wine: but it is not necessary for it to be sensible after the mingling.
[III.q.74.a.8.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod hujusmodi locutiones non sunt sic intelligendæ, quasi sancti in gloria proficiant quantum ad se, quod eorum festa recolimus, sed quia nobis proficit, qui eorum gloriam solemnius celebramus; sicut ex hoc quod Deum cognoscimus vel laudamus, et sic quodammodo ejus gloria in nobis crescit, nihil Deo, sed nobis accrescit.
[III.q.74.a.8.ad.2] If no water were added, the signification would be utterly excluded: but when the water is changed into wine, it is signified that the people is incorporated with Christ.
[III.q.74.a.8.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod quamvis sacramenta efficiant quod figurant, non tamen illum effectum suum ponunt circa omne id quod figurant: alias cum figurent Christum, in ipso Christo aliquid efficerent, quod est absurdum; sed efficiunt circa suscipientem sacramentum ex virtute ejus quod per sacramentum significatur; et sic non sequitur quod sacrificia pro fidelibus defunctis oblata, sanctis prosint, sed quod ex meritis sanctorum, quæ recoluntur vel significantur in sacramento, prosint aliis pro quibus offeruntur.
[III.q.74.a.8.ad.3] If water were added to a cask, it would not suffice for the signification of this sacrament, but the water must be added to the wine at the actual celebration of the sacrament.
The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas AquinasSecond and Revised Edition, 1920Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican ProvinceOnline Edition Copyright © 2009 by Kevin Knight Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol.Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii.APPROBATIO ORDINISNihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L.Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis AngliæMARIÆ IMMACULATÆ - SEDI SAPIENTIÆ
[III.q.74.a.8.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod quamvis sancti qui sunt in patria, de bonis nostris omnibus gaudeant, non tamen sequitur quod multiplicatis nostris gaudiiis, eorum gaudium augmentetur formaliter, sed materialiter tantum, quia omnis passio formaliter augetur secundum rationem objecti sui. Ratio autem gaudendi in sanctis, de quibuscumque gaudent, est ipse Deus, de quo non possunt magis et minus gaudere, quia sic essentiale eorum praemium variaretur, quod consistit in hoc quod de Deo gaudeant. Unde ex hoc quod bona multiplicantur de quibus gaudendi ratio eis Deus est non sequitur quod intensius gaudeant, sed quod de pluribus gaudeant. Et ideo non sequitur quod operibus nostris juventur.
JSON: /api/sources/opera-omnia-aquinas/summa-theologiae/tertia-pars/q074.json