Aquinas on the Eucharist - BONUS episode

Sep 18, 2023

Ask episode

Chapters

Transcript

Episode notes

AQUINAS ON THE EUCHARIST

QUESTION 73 INTRODUCTION Hey patreons of the Catholic Man Show, Karlo Broussard here. I’d like to welcome you to this course on Aquinas and the Eucharist where we’ll be looking at what Aquinas says about the Eucharist in his Summa Theologiae, tertia pars, questions 73-83. I’d like to thank Adam and David for this opportunity to share the course with you, which is a token of their appreciation for your support of the show—a support that I would strongly encourage you to continue in. I think you’re going to enjoy going through this course on the Eucharist because Aquinas has some great things to say about it. And, of course, it’s always to geek out on this stuff. I hope that you have as much fun as I will have teaching it. Aquinas divides his treatment of the Eucharist into seven major themes or aspects of the Sacrament and treats each with one or several different “Questions,” which are basically further subpoints to make about those major aspects. And each of these Questions are further divided into articles, or what Aquinas calls, “points of inquiry.” Each of the lessons for this course will ordinarily deal with a single question. But there will be times when we have to divide a question into two lessons in order to do justice to it. For example, Question 75 is so packed and dense that we’ll need two lessons to do it justice. The methodology that I’ll use is simpe: read the text and offer commentary as we go. Some things can be received upon an initial reading. Others, however, not so much. Sometimes there is a need for further commentary. And I’ll do my best to provide that for you. Also, my goal is to outline Aquinas’s thought in a way that easily digestible, giving summaries of the various arguments with premises and conclusions. I know it helps me to keep track of exactly what Aquinas is saying because it makes explicit what Aquinas often is saying implicitly. Now, before we begin diving into Question 73 in this lesson, it’s important that we look at Aquinas’s outline of the material that he will be going through on the Eucharist. Aquinas says there are seven major aspects of the Eucharist to consider:

The sacrament itself (Question 73)
Its matter (Questions 74-77)
Its form (Question 78)
Its effects (Question 79)
The use or receiving of the sacrament (Questions 80-81)
The minister (Question 82)
The rite of the sacrament (Question 83)

In this lesson, we’ll start with Question 73, which deals with the sacrament itself. It’s divided up into 6 articles, or as Aquinas puts it, “six points of inquiry.”

ARTICLE 1: Is the Eucharist a sacrament?

Commentary: What is a sacrament? A sense perceptible sign that effects what it signifies. So the question here is: Does the bread effect what it signifies, namely, the body and blood of Jesus?

Aquinas’s Answer: Yes

[An appeal to authority] “On the contrary, It is said in the Collect [*Postcommunion "pro vivis et defunctis"]: "May this Thy Sacrament not make us deserving of punishment." [Aquinas’s own reasoning] “I answer that, The Church's sacraments are ordained for helping man in the spiritual life. But the spiritual life is analogous to the corporeal, since corporeal things bear a resemblance to spiritual. Now it is clear that just as generation is required for corporeal life, since thereby man receives life; and growth, whereby man is brought to maturity: so likewise food is required for the preservation of life. Consequently, just as for the spiritual life there had to be Baptism, which is spiritual generation; and Confirmation, which is spiritual growth: so there needed to be the sacrament of the Eucharist, which is spiritual food.” Summary: Is the Eucharist a sacrament? Yes! What is the reason why the Eucharist is a sacrament? There is a need for the preservation of the spiritual life. A summary of Aquinas’s argument? P1: The purpose of the sacraments is to help man in the spiritual life. P2: The spiritual life patterns the corporeal life in generation, growth, and preservation of such life. C1: Therefore, there should be sacraments that correspond with generation, growth, and the preservation of such life. P3: There are sacraments that correspond to generation and growth—baptism and Confirmation respectively. C2: Therefore, there must be a sacrament that corresponds to the preservation of life—i.e., the Eucharist.

Reasons Given for Why the Eucharist is Not a Sacrament (Objections and Replies)

Intro

Each of the objections provides a reason why the Eucharist is thought not to be sacrament.
Each of the objections basically takes the form of a modus tollens argument:
- “If the Eucharist were a sacrament, then X. But not X. Therefore, the Eucharist is not a sacrament.”
  - g., If raining, then wet; not wet; therefore, not raining.

Reason #1: Confirmation and the Eucharist would be ordained to the same end of perfection, which can’t be.

“Objection 1.

It seems that the Eucharist is not a sacrament. For two sacraments ought not to be ordained for the same end, because every sacrament is efficacious in producing its effect.
Therefore, since both Confirmation and the Eucharist are ordained for perfection, as Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iv), it seems that the Eucharist is not a sacrament, since Confirmation is one, as stated above (III:65:1; III:72:1).”

Summary: P1: If the Eucharist were a sacrament, then it wouldn’t be ordained to the same end as Confirmation, i.e., perfection. P2: But the Eucharist is ordained to the same end as Confirmation, i.e., perfection. C1: Therefore, the Eucharist is not a sacrament. Reply: The objection runs on a vague understanding of “perfection” Reply to Objection 1. “Perfection is twofold . . .

The first lies within manhimself; and he attains it by growth: such perfection belongs to Confirmation.
The other is the perfection which comes to manfrom the addition of food, or clothing, or something of the kind; and such is the perfection befitting the Eucharist, which is the spiritual”

Summary: P1: The Eucharist would have the same identical end as Confirmation, and thus not be distinct from Confirmation, if and only if the perfection that the Eucharist achieves is identical to the perfection that Confirmation achieves. P2: But the perfection that the Eucharist achieves is not identical to the perfection that Confirmation achieves.

[Recall, perfection of Confirmation lies within man himself. The perfection of the Eucharist comes to man from the outside].

C1: Therefore, the Eucharist doesn’t have the exact same end as Confirmation and thus is distinct from it.

Reason #2: The species of bread and wine would produce Christ’s true body like water produces spiritual cleansing, which can’t be.

Commentary:

Note on “species”—The Latin word species means, “a seeing, view, look; a sight; an external appearance; a show or display.”
It’s in this sense that he’s using it. He’s not using it in the Aristotelian sense of a species that divides up a genera.

“Objection 2.

Further, in every sacrament of the New Law, that which comes visibly under our senses causes the invisible effect of the sacrament, just as cleansing with water causes the baptismal character and spiritual cleansing, as stated above (III:63:6; III:66:1,3,7).
But the species of bread and wine, which are the objects of our senses in this sacrament, neither produce Christ's true body, which is both reality and sacrament [res et sacramentum], nor His mystical body, which is the reality only in the Eucharist [res tantum].
- Commentary: Aquinas is drawing on scholastic threefold dimension of each of the sacraments: sacramentum tantum [sign only], res et sacramentum [reality and sign], and res tantum [the reality only, which basically refers to the primary and secondary effects].
- For the Eucharist, the sacramentum tantum [sign only] is the bread and win. The res et sacramentum [reality and sign] is the actual body and blood of Christ. The res tantum [reality only] is the union of members within the body of Christ, which is the primary effect. The secondary effect is spiritual refreshment.
Therefore, it seems that the Eucharist is not a sacrament of the New Law.”

Reply: The objection operates on a flawed assumption as to the nature of the sacrament of baptism and the cause of its spiritual efficacy “Reply to Objection 2.

The water of Baptism does not cause any spiritual effect by reason of the water, but by reason of the power of the Holy Ghost, which power is in the water.
- [evidence #1] Hence on John 5:4, "An angel of the Lord at certain times," etc.,
- [evidence #2] Chrysostom observes: "The water does not act simply as such upon the baptized, but when it receives the grace of the Holy Ghost, then it looses all sins."
But the true body of Christ bears the same relation to the species of the bread and wine, as the power of the Holy Ghost does to the water of Baptism:
hence the species of the bread and wine produce no effect except from the virtue of Christ's true body.”

Reason #3: The Eucharist would be perfected by the use of the matter instead of the consecration, which is absurd.

“Obection 3.

Further, sacraments of the New Law, as having matter, are perfected by the use of the matter, as Baptism is by ablution [ablutione—act of washing], and Confirmation by signing with chrism.
If, then, the Eucharist be a sacrament, it would be perfected by the use of the matter [the bread and wine], and not by its consecration.
But this is manifestly false, because the words spoken in the consecration of the matter are the form of this sacrament, as will be shown later on (III:78:1).
Therefore the Eucharist is not a sacrament.”

Reply: The Eucharist is unique in relation to the other sacraments such that the sacrament is completed by the words of consecration without the use of matter being applied to the recipient.

“A sacrament is so termed because it contains something sacred.
Now a thing can be styled sacred from two causes; either absolutely, or in relation to something else.
- The difference between the Eucharist and other sacraments having sensible matter is that whereas the Eucharist contains something which is sacred absolutely, namely, Christ's own body;
- the baptismal water contains something which is sacred in relation to something else, namely, the sanctifying power: and the same holds good of chrism and such like.
Consequently, the sacrament of the Eucharist is completed in the very consecration of the matter [the absolute option], whereas the other sacraments are completed in the application of the matter for the sanctifying of the individual [the “in relation to something else” option].
“And from this follows another difference.
- For, in the sacrament of the Eucharist, what is both reality and sacrament [the body of Christ] is in the matter itself. But what is reality only [the effect, in this case the secondary effect], namely, the grace bestowed, is in the recipient;
- whereas in Baptism both are in the recipient, namely, the character, which is both reality and sacrament, and the grace of pardon of sins, which is reality only. And the same holds good of the other sacraments.”

ARTICLE 2: Is the Eucharist one sacrament or several?

Aquinas’s Answer: One

[For his appeal to authority, he appeals to St. Paul] “On the contrary, The Apostle says (1 Cor. 10:17): "For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread": from which it is clear that the Eucharist is the sacrament of the Church's unity. But a sacrament bears the likeness of the reality whereof it is the sacrament. Therefore the Eucharist is one sacrament.” “I answer that, As stated in Metaph. v, a thing is said to be one, not only from being indivisible, or continuous, but also when it is complete;

[e.g.,] thus we speak of one house, and [e.g.,] one man.

A thing is one in perfection, when it is complete through the presence of all that is needed for its end;

g., as a man is complete by having all the members required for the operation of his soul, and
g., a house by having all the parts needful for dwelling therein.

And so this sacrament is said to be one.

Because it is ordained for spiritual refreshment, which is conformed to corporeal refreshment. [this is the end]

[He now moves to the articulate all that is needed for the end of spiritual refreshment—Christ’s body and blood] Now there are two things required for corporeal refreshment, namely, food, which is dry sustenance, and drink, which is wet sustenance. Consequently, two things concur for the integrity of this sacrament, to wit, spiritual food and spiritual drink, according to John: "My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed." Therefore, this sacrament is materially many [all that is needed for the end], but formally and perfectively one.” [because there is one end] SUMMARY: Is the Eucharist one or several? It is one! What is the reason why the Eucharist is one sacrament? Upon the consecration of bread and wine the sacrament has that which is necessary to make it complete and thereby perfect for spiritual nourishment—namely, Christ’s body and blood. A summary of Aquinas’s argument? P1: When a sacrament has that which is necessary for it to be complete and thereby perfect it is one. P2: The Eucharist requires both Christ’s body and blood to be complete for spiritual refreshment. P3: The Eucharist is both Christ’s body and blood. C1: Therefore, the Eucharist has that which is necessary for it to be complete and thereby perfect. C2: Therefore, the Eucharist is one.

Reasons Given Why the Eucharist is not One (Objections and Replies)

Introduction:

Each of the objections is a reason why the Eucharist is not one.
Unlike the previous article, not all of these objections take the form of a modus tollens.

Reason #1: The Collect of the Mass speaks of the Eucharist as a plurality of sacraments

“Objection 1.

It seems that the Eucharist is not one sacrament but several, because it is said in the Collect [*Postcommunion "pro vivis et defunctis"]: "May the sacraments which we have received purify us, O Lord": and this is said on account of our receiving the Eucharist.
Consequently the Eucharist is not one sacrament but several.”

Reply: There is a sense in which the Eucharist is many and yet in another sense in which it is one “Reply to Objection 1. The same Collect at first employs the plural: "May the sacraments which we have received purify us"; and afterwards the singular number: "May this sacrament of Thine not make us worthy of punishment": so as to show that this sacrament is in a measure [quodammodo—in a certain manner] several, yet simply one.”

Reason #2: There are many signs of the Eucharist (bread and wine).

“Objection 2.

Further, it is impossible for genera to be multiplied without the species being multiplied: thus it is impossible for one man to be many animals.
But, as stated above (Question [60], Article [1]), sign is the genus of sacrament.
Since, then, there are more signs than one, to wit, bread and wine, it seems to follow that here must be more sacraments than one.”

Reply: Materially many but formally one due to the single end of spiritual refreshment

Reason #3: The Eucharist involves a double consecration.

“Objection 3.

This sacrament is perfected in the consecration of the matter, as stated above (Article [1], ad 3).
But in this sacrament there is a double consecration of the matter.
Therefore, it is a twofold sacrament.”

Reply: Materially Many but not formally III. ARTICLE 3: Whether the Eucharist is necessary for salvation?

Aquinas’s Answer: No

“On the contrary, Augustine writes (Ad Bonifac. Contra Pelag. I): “Nor are you to suppose that children cannot possess life, who are deprived of the body and blood of Christ.” I answer that, Two things have to be considered in this sacrament, namely, the sacrament itself [the sign alone], and what is contained in it [this is going to refer to the reality of the sacrament below—the primary effect of the sacrament. We might think of “reality of Sacrament” to be Christ’s body. But for Aquinas, that’s the reality and the sacrament together—res et sacramentum]. Now it was stated above (Article [1], Objection [2]) that the reality of the sacrament [the primary effect of the sacrament] is the unity of the mystical body, without which there can be no salvation; for there is no entering into salvation outside the Church, just as in the time of the deluge there was none outside the Ark, which denotes the Church, according to 1 Pt. 3:20,21. And it has been said above (Question [68], Article [2]), that before receiving a sacrament, the reality of the sacrament can be had through the very desire of receiving the sacrament. ...