The Catechism of the Council of Trent/Part 2: The Holy Eucharist

by the Council of Trent

On the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

OF all the sacred mysteries bequeathed to us by our Lord, as unfailing sources of grace, there is none that can be compared to the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist; for no crime, therefore, is there reserved by God a more terrible vengeance than for the sacrilegious abuse of this adorable Sacrament, which is replete with holiness itself. ^[1] The Apostle, illumined with wisdom from above, clearly saw and emphatically announced these awful consequences, when having declared the enormity of their guilt, " who discern not the body of the Lord," he immediately added, " therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep." ^[2] That the faithful, there fore, deeply impressed with the divine honour due to this heavenly Sacrament, may derive from its participation, abundant fruit of grace, and escape the just anger of God, the pastor will explain with indefatigable diligence, all those things which seem best calculated to display its majesty.

Following the example of St. Paul, who declares to the Corinthians what he had received from the Lord, the pastor will begin by explaining to the faithful the circumstances of its institution: these he will find thus clearly recorded by the Evangelist our Lord, who "having loved his own, loved them to the end," ^[3] to give them some admirable and divine pledge of this his love, aware that the hour was come when he should pass out of this world to the Father, by an effect of wisdom which transcends the order of nature, devised a means of being always present with his own. Having celebrated the feast of the pas chal lamb with his disciples, that the figure might give way to the reality, the shadow to the substance, " Jesus took bread, and giving thanks to God, blessed and brake, and gave to his disciples, and said, take ye and eat: This is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me: and taking the chalice also after he had supped, he said, this chalice is the New Testament in my blood: this do, as often as you shall drink it in commemoration of me." ^[4]

Satisfied that language could supply no one word sufficiently comprehensive to give full expression to the dignity and excellence of this Sacrament, sacred writers have endeavoured to express it by a variety of appellations. It is sometimes called " The Eucharist," a word which may be translated, " the good grace," or " the thanksgiving:" the propriety of the one appears from two considerations: the Eucharist gives a foretaste of eternal life, of which it is written: " The grace of God is life ever lasting:" ^[5] it also contains Christ our Lord, the true grace, and the source of all heavenly gifts. The other translation is no less appropriate, for when we offer this most spotless victim, we render to God a homage of infinite value, in return for all the benefits which we have received from his bounty, particularly for the inestimable treasure of grace bestowed on us in this Sacrament. The word " thanksgiving," also accords with the conduct of our Lord, when instituting this mystery: "Taking bread, he brake it, and gave thanks" ^[6] David too, contemplating the grandeur of this mystery, says, " He hath made a remembrance of his wonderful works, being a merciful and gracious Lord: he hath given food to them that fear him;" ^[7] but he had premised these words of thanksgiving: " His work is praise and magnificence." ^[8]

It is also frequently called "The Sacrifice," of which we shall treat more at large in the subsequent part of this exposition. It is also called " Communion," a word borrowed from the Apostle, when he says: " The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread which we break, is it not the participation of the body of the Lord?" ^[9] " This Sacrament," to use the words of Damascene, " unites us to Christ, and renders us partakers of his flesh, and of his divinity, reconciles us to each other in the same Christ, and consolidates us as it were into one body." ^[10] Hence it is also called the Sacrament of peace and charity; giving us to understand how unworthy the name of Christians are they who indulge in enmity; and that hatred, discord, and strife are to be banished the society of the faithful, as their worst enemies; an obligation which becomes still more imperative when we reflect that in the daily oblation of the sacred mysteries, we profess to study with watchful solicitude, to preserve peace and charity inviolate. Sacred writers also frequently call it " The Viaticum," as well because it is the spiritual food by which we are supported during our mortal pilgrimage: as also, because it prepares for us a passage to eternal happiness and everlasting glory. Hence, in accordance with the ancient practice of the Church, none of the faithful are suffered to depart this life without being previously fortified with this living bread from heaven. The name of "The Supper," has also been sometimes given to this Sacrament by the most ancient Fathers, in imitation of the Apostle, ^[11] because it was instituted by our Lord at the saving mystery of The Last Supper. ^[12] This circumstance, which regards the time of its institution, does not however, justify the inference that the Eucharist is to be consecrated or received by persons not fasting: the salutary practice of consecrating and receiving it fasting, introduced, as ancient writers record, by the Apostles, has always been observed in the Church. ^[13]

Having thus premised an explanation of the names by which this Sacrament is distinguished, the pastor will teach that it has all the qualities of a true Sacrament, and is one of the seven which have been at all times recognised and revered by the Catholic Church. Immediately after the consecration of the chalice, it is called "a mystery of faith;" and to omit an almost innumerable host of sacred writers, vouchers of the same doctrine, that the holy Eucharist is a Sacrament is demonstrated by the very nature of a Sacrament. It has sensible and outward signs: it signifies and produces grace in the soul; and all doubt as to its institution by Christ is removed by the Apostle and the Evangelists. These circumstances, combining as they do to establish the truth of the Sacrament, supersede the necessity of pressing the matter by further argument. ^[14]

That in the Eucharist there are many things to which sacred writers have occasionally given the name ol Sacrament, the pastor will particularly observe: sometimes its consecration, sometimes its reception, frequently the body and blood of our Lord which are contained in it, are called the Sacrament; because, as St. Augustine observes, this Sacrament consists of two things, the visible species of the elements, and the invisible flesh and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. ^[15] We also say that this Sacrament is to be adored, ^[16] meaning of course, the body and blood of our Lord. But all these, it is obvious, obtain the name of Sacrament in its less strict sense: the species of bread and wine, strictly speaking, constitute the Sacrament.

The great points of difference between this and the other Sacraments are easily understood; the other Sacraments are perfected by the use of their matter, that is, by their administration; baptism, for instance, becomes a Sacrament when the ablution has been performed: the Eucharist is constituted a Sacrament by the sole consecration of the elements, and when preserved in a pyxis, or deposited in a tabernacle, under either species, it ceases not to be a Sacrament. In the material elements of which the other Sacraments are composed, no change takes place; in baptism, for instance, the water, in confirmation, the chrism, lose not in their administration, the nature of water and of oil; whilst in the Eucharist, that which before consecration was bread and wine, becomes, after consecration, really and substantially the body and blood of our Lord.

But although in the Eucharist the sacramental matter consists of two elements, that is, of bread and wine, yet, guided by the authority of the Church, we profess that they are elements, not of two, but of one Sacrament. This is proved by the very number of the Sacraments, which, according to the doctrine of apostolic tradition, and the definitions of the Councils of Lateran, ^[17] Florence, ^[18] and Trent, ^[19] is confined to seven. It also follows from the nature of the Holy Eucharist; the grace which it imparts renders us one mystic body; and to accord with what it accomplishes, the Eucharist must constitute but one Sacrament one, not by consisting of one element, but by signifying one thing. Of this the analogy which exists between this our spiritual food, and the food of the body, furnishes an illustration. Meat and drink, although two different things, are used only for one object, the sustenance of the body; so should the two different species of the Sacrament, to signify the food of the soul, be significant of one thing only, and constitute therefore but one Sacrament. The justness of this analogy is sustained by these words of our Lord: " My flesh is meat in deed, and my blood is drink indeed." ^[20]

What the Sacrament of the Eucharist signifies, the pastor will also carefully explain, that on beholding the sacred mysteries, the faithful may also, at the same time, feed their souls on the contemplation of heavenly things. This Sacrament, then, is significant of three things the passion of Christ, a thing past divine grace, a thing present and eternal glory, a thing future. It is significant of the passion of Christ: " This do," says our Lord, "for a commemoration of me." ^[21] "As often," says the Apostle, " as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he come." ^[22] It is significant of divine grace, which is infused, on receiving this sacrament, to nurture and preserve the soul. ^[23] As by Baptism, we are begotten to newness of life, and by Confirmation, are strengthened to resist Satan, and to profess openly the name of Christ; so, by the Sacrament of the Eucharist, are we spiritually nurtured and supported. It is also significant of eternal glory, which, according to the divine promises, is reserved for us in our celestial country. These three things, distinguished as they are by different times, past, present, and future, the Holy Eucharist, although consisting of different species, marks as significantly as if they were but one.

To consecrate the Sacrament validly, to instruct the faithful in that of which it is the symbol, and to kindle in their souls an ardent desire of possessing the invaluable treasure which it signifies, it is of vital importance that the pastor make himself acquainted with its matter. The matter of this Sacrament is two-fold, consisting of wheaten bread, arid of wine pressed from the grape, mixed with a little water. The first element, then, (of the latter we shall treat hereafter) is bread: as the Evan gelists, Matthew, ^[24] Mark, ^[25] and Luke, ^[26] testify: " Christ our Lord," say they, " took bread into his hands, blessed, and brake it, saying, THIS is MY BODY;" and according to St. John, he deno minated himself bread in these words: "I am the living bread that came down from heaven." ^[27]

As, however, there are different sorts of bread, composed of different materials, such as wheat, barley, pease, or made in dif ferent manners, such as leavened and unleavened; it is to be observed that, with regard to the former, the sacramental mat ter, according to the words of our Lord, should consist of wheaten bread; for when we simply say bread, we mean, ac cording to common usage, " wheaten bread." ^[28] This is also dis tinctly declared by a figure of the Holy Eucharist in the Old Testament: the Lord commanded that the loaves of proposition, which prefigured this Sacrament, should be made of " fine flour." ^[29]

As, therefore, wheaten bread alone is the proper matter of this Sacrament, a doctrine handed down by Apostolic tradition, and confirmed by the authority of the Catholic Church; it may also be inferred from the circumstances in which the Eucharist was instituted, that this wheaten bread should be unleavened. It was consecrated and instituted by our Lord, on the first day of unleavened bread, a time when the Jews were prohibited by the law, to have leavened bread in their houses. ^[30] Should the words of the Evangelist St. John, who says that all this was done before the Passover, be objected, the objection is one of easy solution: by " the day before the Pasch," ^[31] St. John under stands the same day, which the other Evangelists designate " the first day of unleavened bread." He had for object, prin cipally, to mark the natural day, which does not commence until sunrise; and the first natural day of the Pasch, therefore, being Friday, " the day before the Pasch" means Thursday, on the evening of which the festival of unleavened bread be gan, and on which our Lord celebrated the Pasch and insti tuted the Holy Eucharist. Hence, St. Chrysostome understands the first day of unleavened bread to be the day, on the evening of which the unleavened bread was to be eaten. ^[32] The peculiar propriety of the consecration of unleavened bread, to express that integrity and purity of heart, with which the faithful should approach this Sacrament, we learn from these words of the Apostle: " Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened; for Christ our Pasch is sacrificed. Therefore, let us feast not with the old leaven, not with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." ^[33]

This property of the bread, however, is not to be considered so essential as that its absence must render the Sacrament null: both sorts, leavened and unleavened, are called by the common name, and have each the nature and properties, of bread. ^[34] No one, however, should on his own individual authority, have the temerity to depart from the laudable rite, observed in the Church to which he belongs; and such departure is the less warrantable in priests of the Latin Church, commanded, as they are, by authority of the supreme Pontiff, to celebrate the sacred mysteries with unleavened bread only. ^[35] With regard to the first element of this Sacrament, this exposition will be found sufficiently comprehensive. We may, however, observe in addition, that the quantity of bread to be used is not determined, depending as it does upon the number of communicants, a matter which cannot be defined.

We come next to treat of the second element of this Sacrament, which forms part of its matter, and consists of wine, pressed from the grape, mingled with a little water. That our Lord made use of wine, in the institution of this Sacrament, has been at all times the doctrine of the Catholic Church. He himself said: " I will not drink, henceforth, of this fruit of the vine, until that day." ^[36] On these words of our Lord, St. Chrysostome observes: " Of the fruit of the vine, which certainly produces wine, not water; as if he had it in view, even at so early a period, to crush by the evidence of these words, the heresy which asserted that water alone is to be used in these mysteries." ^[37] With the wine used in the sacred mysteries, the Church of God, however, has always mingled water because, as we know on the authority of councils and the testimony of St. Cyprian, our Lord himself did so; ^[38] and also because this admixture renews the recollection of the blood and water which issued from his sacred side. The word water we also find used in the Apocalypse, to signify the people, ^[39] and, therefore, water mixed with wine signifies the union of the faithful with Christ their head. This rite, derived from apostolic tradition, the Catholic Church has at all times observed. The propriety of mingling water with the wine rests, it is true, on authority so grave, that to omit the practice would be to incur the guilt of mortal sin; however, its sole omission would be insufficient to render the Sacrament null. But care must be taken not only to mingle water with the wine, but also to mingle it in small quantity; for in the opinion of ecclesiastical writers, the water is changed into wine. Hence, these words of Pope Honorius: " A pernicious abuse has prevailed, for a long time, amongst you, of using in the holy sacrifice a greater quantity of water than of wine; whereas in accordance with the rational practice of the Universal Church, the wine should be used in much greater quantity than the water." ^[40] We have now treated of the only two elements of this Sacrament; and although some dared to do otherwise, many decrees of the Church justly enact that no celebrant offer any thing but bread and wine. ^[41]

We now come to consider the aptitude of these two elements to declare those things of which they are the sensible signs, In the first place, they signify Christ, the true life of the world; for our Lord himself has said: " My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." ^[42] As, therefore, the body of our Lord Jesus Christ nourishes to eternal life those who receive it with purity and holiness, with great propriety is this Sacrament composed principally of those elements which sustain life; thus giving the faithful to understand that the soul is nurtured with grace by a participation of the precious body and blood of Christ. These elements serve also to prove the dogma of the real presence. Seeing, as we do, that bread and wine are every day changed by the power of nature, into human flesh and blood, we are, by the obvious analogy of the fact, the more readily induced to believe that the substance of the bread and wine is changed, by the celestial benediction, into the real body and blood of Christ. ^[43] This admirable change also contributes to illustrate what takes place in the soul. As the bread and wine, although invisibly, are really and substantially changed into the body and blood of Christ, so are we, although interiorly and invisibly, yet really renewed to life, receiving in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the true life. Moreover, the body of the Church, although one, and undivided, consists of the union of many members, and of this mysterious union nothing is more strikingly illustrative than bread and wine. Bread is made from many grains, wine is pressed from many grapes, and thus are we too, although many, closely united by this mysterious bond of union, and made as it were one body.

The form The form to be used in the consecration of the bread, we now come to explain; not, however, with a view that the faithful should be taught these mysteries, unless necessity require it, (a knowledge of them is obligatory on ecclesiastics alone) but to obviate the possibility of mistakes on the part of the celebrant, through ignorance of the form; mistakes, were they to occur, as discreditable to the minister, as derogatory to the dignity of the divine mysteries. From the Evangelists Matthew and Luke, and also from the Apostle, we learn that the form of the Sacrament consists in these words: " THIS IS MY BODY." We read that when they had supped, " Jesus took bread, and blessed and brake and gave to his disciples, saying: take and eat, THIS is MY BODY;" ^[44] and this form of consecration, made use of by Jesus Christ, has been uniformly and inviolably observed in the Catholic Church. The testimonies of the Fathers in proof of its legitimacy, may be here omitted; to enumerate them would prove an endless task. The decree of the Council of Florence to the same effect, because of easy access to all, it is also unnecessary to cite. The necessity of every other proof is superseded by these words of the Saviour: " This do for a commemoration of me." ^[45] This command of our Lord embraces not only what he did, but also what he said, and has more immediate reference to his own words uttered not less for the purpose of effecting, than of signifying what they effected. ^[46] That these words constitute the form is easily proved from reason alone. The form of a Sacrament is that which signifies what is accomplished in the Sacrament: what is accomplished in the Eucharist, that is the conversion of the bread into the true body of our Lord, the words " this is my body," signify and declare; they therefore constitute the form. The words of the Evangelist, " he blessed," go to support this reasoning. They are equivalent to saying: " taking bread, he blessed it, saying, this is my body." ^[47] The words, " take and eat," it is true, precede the words " this is my body," but they evidently express the use, not the consecration oi the matter, and cannot, therefore constitute the form. But although not necessary to the consecration of the Sacrament, they are not, however, on any account, to be omitted. The conjunction " for," has also u place amongst the words of consecration; otherwise it would follow that if the Sacrament were not to be administered to any one, it should not, or even could not be consecrated; whereas, that the priest by pronouncing the words of our Lord, according to the institution and practice of the Church, truly consecrates the proper matter of the Sacrament, although it should after wards happen never to be administered, admits not the least shadow of doubt.

The form of the consecration of the wine, the other element of this Sacrament, is, for the reasons assigned with regard to the bread, necessary to be accurately known, and clearly understood by the priest. It is firmly to be believed that the form of consecrating the chalice is comprehended in these words: " THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU, AND FOR MANY TO THE REMISSION OF SINS." ^[48] These words are for the most part taken from Scripture. Some of them, however, have been preserved in the Church by apostolic tradition. The words "this is the chalice" are taken from St. Luke, ^[49] and are also mentioned by the Apostle. ^[50] The words that immediately follow. " of my blood, or my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for you, and for many to the remission of sins," are taken in part from St. Luke, ^[51] and in part from St. Matthew. ^[52] The words " and eternal," and also the words "the mystery of faith," have been transmitted to us by holy tradition, the interpreter and guardian of Catholic unity. Of the legitimacy of this form we cannot entertain a shadow of doubt, if we attend to what has been already said of the form used in the consecration of the bread. The form to be used in the consecration of this element, should, confessedly, consist of words signifying that the substance of the wine is changed into the blood of our Lord: this the words already cited clearly declare; and therefore, they alone exclusively constitute the form.

They also express certain admirable fruits produced by the blood of Christ, which was shed on Calvary, fruits which be long in a special manner to this Sacrament. Of these one is admission into the eternal inheritance to which we have acquired a right by " the new and everlasting testament:" ^[53] another is admission to righteousness by " the mystery of faith," for "God hath proposed" Jesus "to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to the showing of his justice, that he himself may be just, and the justifier of him, who is of the faith of Jesus Christ:" ^[54] a third is the remission of sin. ^[55]

But as the words of consecration are replete with mysteries, and are most appropriate in their application to our present subject, they demand a more minute consideration. When, there fore, it is said: " This is the chalice of my blood," ^[56] these words are to be understood to mean: "This is my blood which is contained in this chalice." The mention of "the chalice," at the moment of its consecration, to be the drink of the faithful, is peculiarly appropriate: without its mention as the vessel in which it is contained, the words: " This is my blood," would not seem sufficiently to designate this supernatural species of drink. Next follow the words: "of the New Testament;" they are added to give us to understand, that the blood of the Saviour is not now given figuratively, as in the Old Law, of which we read in the Apostle, that without blood a Testament is not dedicated; ^[57] but really and truly given, a prerogative peculiar to the New Testament. Hence the Apostle says: " There fore, Christ is the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of his death, they who. are called may receive the promise of eternal inheritance." ^[58] The word "eternal" refers to the eternal inheritance, our title to which has been purchased by Christ the Lord, the eternal Testator. The words " mystery of faith," which are added, exclude not the reality, but signify that what lies concealed under the veil of mystery, and is far removed from the ken of mortal eye, is to be believed with the certainty of faith. Here, however, these words bear an import entirely different from that which they have when applied to baptism. Here, the mystery of faith consists in this, that we see by faith the blood of Christ, veiled under the species of wine; but baptism is properly called by us " the Sacrament," by the Greeks, "the mystery of faith," because it comprises the entire profession of the faith of Christ. There is also an other reason why the blood of our Lord is called " the mystery of faith." In its belief human reason experiences the greatest difficulties, because faith proposes to us to believe that the Son of God, God and man, suffered death for our redemption, a death signified by the Sacrament of his blood. His passion, therefore, is more appropriately commemorated here, in the words, "which shall be shed for the remission of sins," than at the consecration of his body. The separate consecration of the blood places before our eyes, in more vivid colours, his passion, crucifixion, and death. The additional words, "for you and for many," are taken, some from St. Matthew, ^[59] some from St. Luke, ^[60] and under the guidance of the Spirit of God, combined together by the Catholic Church. They serve emphatically to designate the fruit and advantages of his passion. Looking to the efficacy of the passion, we believe that the redeemer shed his blood for the salvation of all men; but looking to the advantages, which mankind derive from its efficacy, we find, at once, that they are not extended to the whole, but to a large proportion of the human race. When, therefore, our Lord said: " for you," he meant either those who were present, or those whom he had chosen from amongst the Jews, amongst whom were, with the exception of Judas, all his disciples with whom he then conversed; but when he adds, " for many," he would include the remainder of the elect from amongst the Jews and Gentiles. With great propriety there fore, were the words, for all, omitted, because here the fruit of the passion is alone spoken of, and to the elect only did his passion bring the fruit of salvation. This the words of the Apostle declare, when he says, that Christ was offered once, to take away the sins of many; ^[61] and the same truth is conveyed in these words of our Lord recorded by St. John: "I pray for them, I pray not for the world; but for them whom thou hast given me, because they are thine." ^[62] The words of consecration also convey many other truths; truths, however, which the pastor by the daily meditation and study of divine things, and aided by grace from above, will not find it difficult to discover.

To return to those things, of which the faithful are on no account to be suffered to remain ignorant, the pastor, aware of the awful denunciation of the Apostle against those who discern not the body of the Lord, ^[63] will first of all impress on the minds of the faithful, the necessity of detaching, as much as possible, their minds and understandings from the dominion of the senses, for were they, with regard to this sublime mystery, to constitute the senses the only tribunal to which they are to appeal, the awful consequence must be, their precipitation into the extreme of impiety. Consulting the sight, the touch, the smell, the taste, and finding nothing but the appearances of bread and wine, the senses must naturally lead them to think, that this Sacrament contains nothing more than bread and wine. Their minds, therefore, are as much as possible to be withdrawn from subjection to the senses, and excited to the contemplation of the stupendous power of God.

The words The Catholic Church, then, firmly believes, and openly professes that in this Sacrament, the words of consecration accomplish three things; first, that the true and real body of Christ, the same that was born of the Virgin, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven, is rendered present in the Holy Eucharist; ^[64] secondly, that however repugnant it may appear to the dictate of the senses, no substance of the elements remains in the Sacrament; ^[65] and thirdly, a natural consequence from the two preceding, and one which the words of consecration also express, that the accidents which present themselves to the eyes, or other senses, exist in a wonderful and ineffable manner without a subject. The accidents of bread and wine we see; but they inhere in no substance, and exist independently of any. The substance of the bread and wine is so changed into the body and blood of our Lord, that they, altogether, cease to be the substance of bread and wine.

To proceed in order, the pastor will begin with the first, and give his best attention to show, how clear and explicit are the words of our Saviour, which establish the real presence of his body in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. When our Lord says: "This is my body, this is my blood," ^[66] no man however ignorant, unless he labours under some obliquity of intellect, can mistake his meaning; particularly if he recollect, that the words " body" and " blood" refer to his human nature, the real assumption of which by the Son of God no Catholic can doubt. To use the admirable words of St. Hilary, a man not less eminent for piety than learning: "When our Lord himself declares, as our faith teaches us, that his flesh is meat indeed, what room can remain for doubt?" ^[67] The pastor will also adduce another passage from Scripture in proof of this sublime truth: having recorded the consecration of bread and wine by our Lord, and also the administration of the sacred mysteries to the Apostles, by the hands of the Saviour, the Apostle adds: " But let a man prove himself, and so eat of that bread and drink of the chalice, for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." ^[68] If, as heresy asserts, the Sacrament presents nothing to our veneration but a memorial and sign of the passion of Christ, why exhort the faithful, in language so energetic to prove themselves? The answer is obvious: by the heavy denunciation contained in the words "judgment," the Apostle marks the enormity of his guilt, who receives unworthily and distinguishes not from common food the body of the Lord, concealed beneath the eucharistic veil. The preceding words of the Apostle develope more fully his meaning: " The chalice of benediction," says he, " which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? and the bread which we break, is it not the participation of the body of the Lord?" ^[69] words which prove to demonstration the real presence of Jesus Christ in the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist.

These passages of Scripture, are, therefore, to be expounded by the pastor, and he will emphatically press upon the attention of the faithful, that their meaning, in itself obvious, is placed beyond all doubt by the uniform interpretation and authority of the Holy Catholic Church. That such has been at all times the doctrine of the Church, may be ascertained in a two-fold manner; by consulting the Fathers who flourished in the early ages of the Church and in each succeeding century, who are the most unexceptionable witnesses of her doctrine, and all of whom teach in the clearest terms, and with the most entire unanimity, the dogma of the real presence; and also by appealing to the Councils of the Church, convened on this important subject. To adduce the individual testimony of each Father would prove an endless task enough, that we cite, or rather point out a few, whose testimony will afford a sufficient criterion by which to judge of the rest. Let St. Ambrose first declare his faith: in his book on " the Initiated" he says, that the same true body . of our Lord, which was assumed of the Virgin, is received in this Sacrament; a truth which he declares is to be believed with the certainty of faith; and in another place he distinctly tells us, that before consecration it is bread, but after consecration it is the flesh of Christ. ^[70] St. Chrysostome, another witness of equal fidelity and weight, professes and proclaims this mysterious truth, particularly in his sixtieth homily on those who receive the sacred mysteries unworthily; and also in his forty-fourth and forty-fifth homilies on St. John: "Let us," says he, "obey, not contradict God, although what he says may seem contrary to our reason and our sight: his words cannot deceive, our senses are easily deceived." ^[71] With the doctrine thus taught by St. Chrysostome, that uniformly taught by St. Augustine fully accords, particularly when in his explanation of the thirty-third Psalm, he says: "To carry himself in his own hands, is impossible to man, and peculiar to Christ alone; he was carried in his own hands, when giving his body to be eaten, he said, This is my body." ^[72] To pass by Justin and Irenaeus, St. Cyril, in his fourth book on St. John, declares in such express terms, that the body of our Lord is contained in this Sacrament, that no sophistry can distort, no captious interpretations obscure his meaning. Should the pastor wish for additional testimonies of the Fathers, he will find it easy to add the Hilaries, the Jeromes, the Denises, the Damascenes, and a host of other illustrious names, whose sentiments on this most important subject he will find collected by the labour and industry of men eminent for piety and learning. ^[73]

Another means of ascertaining the belief of the Church on matters of faith, is the condemnation of the contrary doctrine. That the belief of the real presence was that of the universal Church of God, unanimously professed by all her children, is demonstrated by a well authenticated fact. When in the eleventh century, Berengarius presumed to deny this dogma, asserting that the Eucharist was only a sign, the innovation was immediately condemned by the unanimous voice of the Christian world. The Council of Vercelli, convened by authority of Leo IX., denounced the heresy, and Berengarius himself retracted and anathematized his error. Relapsing, however, into the same infatuation and impiety, he was condemned by three different Councils, convened, one at Tours, the other two at Rome: of the two latter, one was summoned by Nicholas II., the other by Gregory VII. The general Council of Lateran held under Innocent III., further ratified the sentence; and the faith of the Catholic Church, on this point of doctrine, was more fully declared and more firmly established in the Councils of Florence and Trent.

If, then, the pastor carefully explain these particulars, his labours will be blessed with the effect of strengthening the weak, and administering joy and consolation to the pious; (of those who, blinded by error, hate nothing more than the light of truth, we waive all mention) and this two-fold effect will be more securely attained, as the faithful cannot doubt that this dogma is numbered amongst the articles of faith. Believing and confessing as they do, that the power of God is supreme, they must also believe that his omnipotence can accomplish the great work which we admire and adore in the Sacrament of the Eucharist; and again, believing as they do, the Holy Catholic Church, they must necessarily believe that the doctrine expounded by us, is that which was revealed by the Son of God.

But nothing contributes more to light up in the pious soul that spiritual joy, of which we have spoken; nothing is more fertile of spiritual fruit, than the contemplation of the exalted dignity of this most august Sacrament. From it we learn how great must be the perfection of the gospel dispensation, under which we enjoy the reality of that, which under the Mosaic Law was only shadowed by types and figures. Hence St. Denis, with a wisdom more than human, says that our Church is a mean between the synagogue and the heavenly Jerusalem, and participates of the nature of both. ^[74] The perfection of the Holy Catholic Church, and her exalted glory, removed only by one degree from heaven, the faithful cannot sufficiently admire. In common with the inhabitants of heaven, we, too, possess Christ, God and man, present with us; but they, and in this they are raised a degree above us, are admitted to the actual enjoyment of the beatific vision; whilst we, with a firm and unwavering faith, offer the tribute of our homage to the Divine Majesty present with us, not, it is true, in a manner visible to mortal eye, but hidden by a miracle of power, under the veil of the sacred mysteries. How admirably does not this Sacrament, also, display to us the infinite love of Jesus Christ to man! It became the goodness of the Saviour not to withdraw from us that nature which he assumed for our sake, but to desire, as far as possible, to dwell permanently amongst us, at all times strictly verifying the words: " My delight is to be with the children of men." ^[75]

Here the pastor will also explain to the faithful, that in this Sacrament are contained not only the true body of Christ, and all the constituents of a true body, but also Christ whole and entire - that the word Christ designates the man-God, that is to say, one Person in whom are united the divine and human natures - that the holy Eucharist, therefore, contains both, and whatever is included in the idea of both, the divinity and humanity whole and entire, the soul, the body and blood of Christ with all their component parts all of which faith teaches us are contained in the Sacrament. In heaven the whole humanity is united to the divinity in one hypostasis, or person, and it were impious, therefore, to suppose that the body of Christ, which is contain ed in the Sacrament, is separated from his divinity. ^[76]

The pastor, however, will not fail to observe, that in the Sacrament all are not contained after the same manner, or by the same efficacy: some things, we say, the efficacy of consecration accomplishes; for as the words of consecration effectuate what they signify, sacred writers usually say, that whatever the form expresses, is contained in the Sacrament by virtue of the Sacrament; and hence, could we suppose any one thing to be entirely separated from the rest, the Sacrament, in their opinion, would be found to contain solely what the form expresses. But, some things are contained in the Sacrament, because united to those which are expressed in the form; for instance, the words " This is my body," which comprise the form used to consecrate the bread, signify the body of the Lord, and hence, the body of the Lord is contained in the Eucharist, by virtue of the Sacrament. As, however, to the body are united his blood, his soul, his divinity, they too must be found to coexist in the Sacrament; not, however, by virtue of the consecration, but by virtue of the union that subsists between them and his body; and this theologians express by the word " concomitance." Hence it is clear that Christ, whole and entire, is contained in the Sacrament; for when two things are actually united, where one is, the other must also be. Hence it also follows, that Christ, whole and entire, is contained under either species, so that as under the species of bread, are contained not only the body, but also the blood and Christ entire, so in like manner, under the species of wine are contained not only the blood, but also the body and Christ entire. These are matters on which the faithful cannot entertain a doubt. Wisely, however, was it ordained that two distinct consecrations should take place: they represent in a more lively manner, the passion of our Lord, in which his blood was separated from his body; and hence, in the form of consecration we commemorate the effusion of his blood. The sacrament is to be used by us as the food and nourishment of our souls; and it was most accordant with this its use, that it should be instituted as meat and drink, which obviously constitute the proper food of man.

The pastor will also inform the faithful, that Christ, whole and entire, is contained not only under either species, but also in each particle of either species: "Each," says St. Augustine, " receives Christ the Lord entire in each particle: he is not diminished by being given to many, but gives himself whole and entire to each." ^[77] This is also an obvious inference from the narrative of the Evangelists: it is not to be supposed that the bread used at the Last Supper was consecrated by our Lord in separate parts, applying the form particularly to each, but that all the sacramental bread then used, was consecrated in sufficient quantity to be distributed amongst the Apostles, at the same time and with the same form. That the consecration of the chalice also, was performed in the same manner, is obvious from these words of the Saviour: " Take and divide it amongst you." ^[78]

What has hitherto been said is intended to enable the pastor to show, that the body and blood of Christ are really and truly contained in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. That the substance of the bread and wine does not continue to exist in the Sacrament after consecration, is the next subject of instruction which is to engage his attention; a truth which, although well calculated to excite our profound admiration, is yet a necessary consequence from what has been already established. If, after consecration, the body of Christ is really and truly present under the species of bread and wine, not having been there before, it must have become so by change of place - by creation - or by transubstantiation. It cannot be rendered present by change of place, because it would then cease to be in heaven, for whatever is moved must necessarily cease to occupy the place from which it is moved. Still less can we suppose it to be rendered present by creation, an idea which the mind instantly rejects. In order that the body of our Lord be present in the Sacrament, it remains, therefore, that it be rendered present by transubstantiation, and of course, that the substance of the bread entirely cease to exist. Hence our predecessors in the faith, the Fathers of the general Council of Lateran, ^[79] and of Florence, ^[80] confirmed by solemn decrees the truth of this Article. In the Council of Trent it was still more fully denned in these words: " If any one shall say, that in the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine remains, together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema." ^[81] The doctrine thus defined is a natural inference from the words of Scripture. When instituting this Sacrament, our Lord himself said: " this is my body:" ^[82] the word "this," expresses the entire substance of the thing present; and therefore, if the substance of the bread remained, our Lord could not have said: " This is my body." In St. John he also says: "The bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world:" ^[83] the bread which he promises to give, he here declares to be " his flesh." A little after he adds: " Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you:" ^[84] and again, " My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." ^[85] When, there fore, in terms so clear and so explicit, he thus calls his flesh " meat indeed," and his blood " drink indeed," he gives us sufficiently to understand, that the substance of the bread and wine - no longer exists in the Sacrament. Whoever turns over the Fro pages of the Holy Fathers will easily perceive, that, on the doctrine of Transubstantiation, they have been at all times unanimous. St. Ambrose says: " You say, perhaps, this bread is them. no other than what is used for common food: before consecration it is indeed bread; but, no sooner are the words of consecration pronounced, than from bread it becomes the flesh of Christ." ^[86] To prove this position more clearly, he elucidates it by a variety of comparisons and examples. In another place, when explaining these words of the Psalmist: "Whatsoever the Lord pleased he hath done in heaven and on earth," ^[87] he says: " Although the species of bread and wine are visible, yet faith tells us that after consecration, the body and blood of Christ are alone there." ^[88] Explaining the same doctrine almost in the same words, St. Hilary says, that although externally it appear bread and wine, yet in reality it is the body and blood of the Lord. ^[89]

Here the pastor will not omit to observe to the faithful, that we should not at all be surprised, if even after consecration, the Eucharist is sometimes called bread: it is so called because it has the appearance and still retains the natural quality of bread, which is to support and nourish the body. That such phraseology is in perfect accordance with the style of the Holy Scriptures, which call things by what they appear to be, is evident from the words of Genesis, which say, that Abraham saw three men, when, in reality, he saw three angels; ^[90] and the two angels also, who appeared to the Apostles after the ascension of our Lord, are, called not angels, but men. ^[91]

To explain this mystery in a proper manner is extremely difficult. On the manner of this admirable conversion, the pastor, however, will endeavour to instruct those who are more advanced in the knowledge and contemplation of divine things: those who are yet weak may, it were to be apprehended, be overwhelmed by its greatness. This conversion, then, is so effectuated that the whole substance of the bread and wine is changed by the power of God, into the whole substance of the body of Christ, and the whole substance of the wine, into the whole substance of his blood, and this, without any change in our Lord himself: he is neither begotten, nor changed, nor in creased, but remains entirely and substantially the same. This sublime mystery St. Ambrose thus declares: " You see how efficacious are the words of Christ; if, then, the word of the Lord Jesus is so powerful as to summon creation into existence, shall it not require a less exercise of power, to make that sub sist, which already has existence, and to change it into another thing?" ^[92] Many other Fathers, whose authority is too grave to be questioned, have written to the same effect: "We faithfully confess," says St. Augustine, " that before consecration it is bread and wine, the produce of nature; but after consecration it is the body and blood of Christ, consecrated by the blessing." ^[93] " The body," says Damascene, "is truly united to the divinity, the body assumed of the virgin; not that the body thus assumed descends from heaven, but that the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ." ^[94] This admirable change, as the Council of Trent teaches, the Catholic Church most appropriately expresses by the word " transubstantiation." ^[95] When, in the natural order, the form of a being is changed, that change inay be properly termed "a transformation;" in like manner, when, in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole substance of one thing passes into the whole substance of another, the change our predecessors in the faith wisely and appropriately called " transubstantiation." But according to the admonition so frequently repeated by the Holy Fathers, the faithful are to be admonished against the danger ol gratifying a prurient curiosity, by searching into the manner in which this change is effected. It mocks the powers of conception, nor can we find any example of it in natural transmutations, nor even in the wide range of creation. The change itself is the object not of our comprehension, but of our humble faith; and the manner of that change forbids the temerity of a too curious inquiry. ^[96]

The same salutary caution should also be observed by the pastor, with regard to the mysterious manner in which the body of our Lord is contained whole and entire under the least particle of the bread. ^[97] Such inscrutable mysteries should scarcely ever become matter of disquisition. Should Christian charity, however, require a departure from this salutary rule, the pastor will recollect first to prepare and fortify his hearers, by reminding them, that "no word shall be impossible with God." ^[98]

The pastor will next teach, that our Lord is not in the Sacrament as in a place: place regards things, only inasmuch as they have magnitude; and we do not say that Christ is in the Sacrament inasmuch as he is great or small, terms which belong to quantity, but inasmuch as he is a substance. The substance of the bread is changed into the substance of Christ, not into magnitude or quantity; and substance, it will be acknowledged, is contained in a small as well as in a large space. The substance of air, for instance, whether in a large or in a small quantity, and that of water whether confined in a vessel, or flowing in a river, must necessarily be the same. As, then, the body of our Lord succeeds to the substance of the bread, we must confess it to be in the Sacrament after the same manner, as the bread was before consecration: whether the substance of the bread was present in greater or less quantity is a matter of entire indifference.

We now come to the third effect produced by the words of consecration, the existence of the species of bread and wine in the Sacrament without a subject, an effect as stupendous as it is admirable. What has been said in explanation of the two preceding points, must facilitate the exposition of this mysterious truth. We have already proved that the body and blood of our Lord are really and truly contained in the Sacrament, to the entire exclusion of the substance of the bread and wine: the accidents cannot inhere in the body and blood of Christ: they must, therefore, contrary to the physical laws, subsist of them selves, inhering in no subject. This has been, at all times, the doctrine of the Catholic Church; and the same authorities by which we have already proved, that the substance of the bread and wine ceases to exist in the Eucharist, go to establish its truth. ^[99] But it becomes the piety of the faithful, omitting subtle disquisitions, to revere and adore in the simplicity of faith, the majesty of this august Sacrament; and with sentiments of gratitude and admiration, to recognise the wisdom of God in the institution of the holy mysteries, under the species of bread and wine. To eat human flesh, or to drink human blood, is most revolting to human nature, and, therefore, has God in his infinite wisdom, established the administration of the body and blood of Christ, under the forms of bread and wine, the ordinary and agreeable food of man. From its administration under these forms, also flow two other important advantages: it obviates the calumnious reproaches of the unbeliever, to which a manducation of the body and blood of our Lord, under human form, must be exposed; whilst, by receiving him under a form in which he is impervious to the senses, our faith is augmented, "which," as St. Gregory observes, "has no merit in those things, which fall under the jurisdiction of reason." ^[100] But what has been hitherto said on this subject, demands much prudent precaution in its exposition; and in this the pastor will be guided by the capacity of his hearers, by times and circumstances.

With regard to the salutary effects of this Sacrament, these, because most necessary to be known by all, the pastor will ex pound to all, indiscriminately and without reserve. ^[101] What we have said at such length on this subject, is to be made known to the faithful, principally with a view to make them sensible of the advantages which flow from its participation, advantages too numerous and important to be expressed in words, and amongst which the pastor must be content to select one or two points for explanation, to show the superabundant graces with which the holy mysteries abound. To this end it will be found conducive, to premise an explanation of the nature and efficacy of the other Sacraments, and then compare the Eucharist to the living fountain, the other Sacraments to so many rivulets. With great truth is the Holy Eucharist called the fountain of all grace, containing as it does, after an admirable manner, the source of all gifts and graces, the author of all the Sacraments, Christ our Lord, from whom as from their source, they derive all their goodness and perfection. This comparison, therefore, serves to show how great are the treasures of grace, which are derived from this Sacrament.

It will also be found expedient to -consider attentively the nature of bread and wine, the symbols of this sacrament: what bread and wine are to the body, the Eucharist is, in a superior order, to the health and joy of the soul. It is not, like bread and wine, changed into our substance; but, in some measure, changes us into its own nature, and to it we may apply these words of St. Augustine: " I am the food of the grown; grow and thou shalt partake of this food; nor shall thou change me into thee, as thou dost thy corporal food, but thou shalt be changed into me." ^[102] If then "grace and truth come by Jesus Christ," ^[103] these spiritual treasures must be poured into that soul, which receives with purity and holiness, him who says of him self: " He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me and I in him." ^[104] Those who piously and religiously receive this Sacrament, receive, no doubt, the Son of God into their souls, and are united, as living members, to his body; for it is written: "He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me;" ^[105] and also: " The bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world." ^[106] Explaining these words of the Saviour, St. Cyril says: "The Eternal Word, uniting him self to his own flesh, imparted to it a vivifying power; it be came him, therefore, to unite himself to us after a wonderful manner, through his sacred flesh and precious blood, which we receive in the bread and wine, consecrated by his vivifying benediction." ^[107]

But when it is said, that this Sacrament imparts grace, it is not intended to mean that, to receive this Sacrament with advantage, it is unnecessary to be previously in the state of grace, Natural food can be of no use to a person who is already dead, and in like manner the sacred mysteries can avail him nothing, who lives not in Spirit. Hence this Sacrament has been instituted under the forms of bread and wine, to signify, that the object of its institution is not to recall to life a dead soul, but to preserve life to a living one. We say that this Sacrament imparts grace, because even the first grace, which all should have before they presume to approach this Sacrament, lest they " eat and drink judgment to themselves," ^[108] is given to none unless they desire to receive the Holy Eucharist, which is the end of all the Sacraments, the symbol of ecclesiastical unity, to which he who does not belong, cannot receive divine grace. Again, as the body is not only supported but increased by natural food, from which we derive new pleasure every day; so also the life of the soul is not only sustained but invigorated by feasting on the Eucharistic banquet, which imparts to it an increasing zest for heavenly things. With strictest truth and propriety, therefore, do we say that this Sacrament, which may be well compared to manna, "having in it all that is delicious, and the sweetness of every taste," imparts grace to the soul. ^[109]

That the Holy Eucharist remits lighter offences, or, as they are commonly called, venial sins, cannot be matter of doubt. whatever losses the soul sustains by falling into some slight offences, through the violence of passion, these the Eucharist, which cancels lesser sins, repairs in the same manner, not to depart from the illustration already adduced, that natural food, as we know from experience, gradually repairs the daily waste caused by the vital heat of the system. Of this heavenly Sacrament justly, therefore, has St. Ambrose said: "This daily bread is taken as a remedy for daily infirmity." ^[110] This, however, is to be understood of venial imperfections only.

The Holy Eucharist is also an antidote against the contagion of sin, and a shield against the violent assaults of temptation. ^[111] It is, as it were, a heavenly medicine, which secures the soul contagion against the easy approach of virulent and deadly infection. St. Cyprian records that when, in the early ages of the Church, Christians were hurried in multitudes by tyrants, to torments and death, because they professed the name of Christ, they received from the hand of the bishop, the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord, lest, perhaps overcome by excess of torments, they should yield in the saving conflict. ^[112] It also represses the licentious desires of the flesh, and keeps them in due subjection to the spirit: in proportion as it inflames the soul with the fire of charity, in the same proportion does it necessarily extinguish the fire of concupiscence. Finally, to narrow within the compass of a few words all the advantages and blessings which emanate from this Sacrament, the Holy Eucharist facilitates to an extraordinary degree, the attainment of eternal life: "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood," says the Redeemer, " hath everlasting life, and I will raise him up on the last day." ^[113] The grace which it imparts, brings peace and tranquillity to the soul; and when the hour shall have arrived in which he is to take his departure from this mortal life, like another Elias, who in the strength of his miraculous repast, walked to Horeb the mount of God, 6 the Christian, invigorated by the strengthening influence of this heavenly food, shall wing his way to the mansions of everlasting glory and never-ending bliss. All these important particulars the pastor will be able fully to expound to the faithful, if he but dilate on the sixth chapter of St. John, in which are developed the manifold effects of this Sacrament; or if, glancing through the life and actions of our Lord, he shows that if they who received him beneath their roof during his mortal life, ^[114] or were restored to health by touching his vesture, or even the hem of his garment, ^[115] were justly deemed happy, how much more happy we, into whose souls, resplendent as he is with unfading glory, he, disdains not to enter, to heal all our spiritual wounds, to enrich us with his choicest gifts, and to unite us to himself!

But to excite the faithful to emulate better gifts, ^[116] the pastor will also point out who they are who derive these inestimable blessings from a participation of the holy mysteries, reminding them that Christians may communicate differently and with different effects. Hence our predecessors in the faith, as we read in the Council of Trent, ^[117] distinguished three classes of communicants Some receive the Sacrament only: such are those sinners who dread not to approach the holy mysteries with polluted lips and depraved hearts, who, as the Apostle says, " eat and drink unworthily." ^[118] Of this class of communicants St. Augustine says: " He who dwells not in Christ, and in whom Christ does not dwell, most certainly eats not spiritually his flesh, although carnally and visibly he press with his teeth the Sacrament of his flesh and blood." ^[119] Not only, therefore, do those who receive the Holy Eucharist with these dispositions, obtain no fruit from its participation, but, as the Apostle says, " they eat and drink judgment to themselves." ^[120] Others are said to receive the Holy Eucharist in spirit only: they are those who, inflamed with a lively " faith that worketh by charity," ^[121] participate in desire, of this celestial food, from which they receive, if not the entire, at least very considerable fruit. Lastly, there are some who receive the Holy Eucharist both spiritually and sacramentally, those who, according to the advice of the Apostle, having first proved themselves, ^[122] approach this divine banquet, adorned with the nuptial garment, ^[123] and derive from it all those superabundant graces which we have already mentioned. Those, therefore, who, having it in their power to receive, with due preparation, the Sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord, are yet satisfied with a spiritual communion only, manifestly deprive themselves of a heavenly treasure of inestimable value. We now come to point out the manner in which the faithful should be previously prepared for sacramental communion. To demonstrate the necessity of this previous preparation, the example or the Saviour is to be proposed to the faithful. Before he gave to his Apostles the Sacrament of his body and blood, although they were already clean, he washed their feet, to declare that we must use extreme diligence to bring with us to its participation the greatest integrity and innocence of soul. In the next place, the faithful are to understand that as he who approaches thus prepared and disposed, is adorned with the most ample gifts of heavenly grace, so on the contrary, he who approaches without this preparation and without these dispositions, not only derives from it no advantage, but plunges his own soul into the most unutterable misery. It is the property of the best and most salutary medicine, if seasonably applied, to be productive of the greatest benefit, but if unseasonably, to prove most pernicious and destructive. It cannot, therefore, excite our surprise, that the great and exalted gifts of God, when received into a soul properly predisposed, are of the greatest assistance towards the attainment of salvation; whilst to those who receive them without these necessary dispositions, they bring with them eternal death. Of this, the Ark of the Lord affords a convincing illustration: the people of Israel possessed nothing more precious; it was to them the source of innumerable blessings from God; but, when borne off by the Philistines, it brought on them a most destructive plague and the heaviest calamities, heightened, as they were, by eternal dis grace. ^[124] Food when received into a healthy stomach nourishes and supports the body; but the same food, when received into a stomach replete with peccant humours, generates malignant disease. ^[125]

The first preparation, then, which the faithful should make, is to distinguish table from table, this sacred table from profane tables, ^[126] this celestial bread from common bread. This we do when we firmly believe, that the Eucharist really and truly contains the body and blood of the Lord, of him whom the angels adore in heaven, "at whose nod the pillars of heaven fear and tremble," ^[127] of whose glory the heavens and the earth are full. ^[128] This is to discern the body of the Lord, in accordance with the admonition of the Apostle, ^[129] venerating rather, the greatness of the mystery, than too curiously investigating its truth by idle

Second, disquisjtion. Another very necessary preparation is to ask ourselves, if we are at peace with, if we sincerely and from the heart love our neighbour. " If, therefore, thou offerest thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest, that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy offering before the altar, and go first to be reconciled to thy brother, and then coming thou shalt offer thy gift." ^[130] We should in the next place, carefully examine our consciences, lest perhaps they be defiled by mortal guilt, which sincere repentance alone can efface. This severe scrutiny is necessary in order to cleanse the soul from its defilement, by applying to it the salutary medicine of contrition and confession. The Council of Trent has defined, that no one conscious of mortal sin, and having an opportunity of recurring to a confessor, however contrite he may deem himself, is to approach the Holy Eucharist, until he has been purified by sacramental confession. ^[131] We should also reflect in the silence of our own hearts, how unworthy we are that God should bestow on us this divine gift, and with the Centurion, of whom our Lord declared, that he found not " so great faith in Israel," we should exclaim: " Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof." ^[132] We should also put the question to ourselves, whether we can truly say with Peter: " Lord, thou knowest that I love thee;" ^[133] and should recollect, that he who sat down at the marriage feast without a nuptial garment, was cast into exterior darkness, and condemned to eternal torments. ^[134]

Our preparation should not, however, be confined to the soul: it should also extend to the body. We are to approach the Holy Eucharist fasting, having neither eaten nor drunk, at least from the preceding midnight. ^[135] The dignity of so great a Sacrament also demands, that married persons abstain from the marriage-debt, for some days previous to communion, an observance recommended by the example of David, who, when about to receive the show-bread from the hands of the priest, declared, that he and his servants had been " clean from women for three days." ^[136] These particulars contain a summary of the principal things to be observed by the faithful, preparatory to receiving the sacred mysteries; and to these heads may be reduced, whatever other preparations piety will suggest to the devout communicant. ^[137]

But that none may be deterred by the difficulty of the prepa- ration from approaching the Holy Eucharist, the faithful are frequently to be reminded that they are all bound to receive this Sacrament; and that the Church has decreed that whoever neglects to approach the holy communion once a year, at Easter, subjects himself to sentence of excommunication. ^[138] However, let not the faithful imagine that it is enough to receive the body of the Lord once a year only, in obedience to the decree of the Church: they should approach oftener; but whether monthly, weekly, or daily, cannot be decided by any fixed universal rule. St. Augustine, however, lays down a most certain rule applicable to all "Live," says he, " in such a manner as to be able to receive every day." ^[139] It will therefore be the duty of the pastor frequently to admonish the faithful, that as they deem it necessary to afford daily nutriment to the body, they should also feel solicitous to feed and nourish the soul every day with this heavenly food. The soul stands not less in need of spiritual, than the body of corporal food. Here it will be found most useful to recapitulate the inestimable advantages which, as we have already shown, flow from sacramental communion, and the manna also which was a figure of this Sacrament, and of which the Israelites had occasion to partake every day, may be used as a further illustration. ^[140] The Fathers, who earnestly recommended the frequent participation of this Sacrament, may be adduced as additional authority to enforce the necessity of frequent communion; and the words, " thou sinnest daily, receive daily," convey the sentiments not alone of St. Augustine, but of all the Fathers who have written on the subject. ^[141]

That there was a time when the faithful approached the Holy Communion every day, we learn from the Acts of the Apostles. All who then professed the faith of Christ, burned with such pure and ardent charity, that devoting themselves, as they did unceasingly, to prayer and other works of piety, ^[142] they were found prepared to communicate daily. This devout practice, which seems to have been interrupted for a time, was again partially revived by Pope Anacletus, a most holy martyr, who commanded, that all the ministers who assisted at the holy sacrifice, should communicate, an ordinance, as the Pontiff declares, of Apostolic institution. ^[143] It was also for a long time the practice of the Church, that, as soon as the sacrifice was ended, the priest, turning to the congregation, invited the faithful to the holy table in these words: " Come, brethren, and receive the communion;" and those who were prepared, advanced to receive the holy mysteries with hearts animated by the most fervent devotion. ^[144] But subsequently, when charity and devotion declined amongst Christians, and the faithful very seldom approached the holy communion, it was decreed by Pope Fabian, that all should communicate thrice every year, at Christmas, at Easter, and at Pentecost, a decree which was afterwards con firmed by many Councils, particularly by the first of Agath. ^[145] Such, at length, was the decay of piety, that not only was this holy and salutary practice unobserved, but communion was deferred for years. The Council of Lateran, therefore, decreed that all the faithful should communicate, at least, once a year, at Easter, and that the omission should be chastised by exclusion from the society of the faithful. ^[146] But although this law, sanctioned, as it is, by the authority of God and of his Church, regards all the faithful, the pastor, however, will teach that it does not extend to persons who have not arrived at the years of discretion, because they are incapable of discerning the Holy Eucharist from common food, and cannot bring with them to this Sacrament, the piety and devotion which it demands. To extend the precept to them would appear inconsistent with the institution of this Sacrament by our Lord: "Take," says he, " and eat," ^[147] words which cannot apply to infants, who are evidently incapable of taking and eating. In some places, it is true, an ancient practice prevailed of giving the Holy Eucharist even to infants; ^[148] but, for the reasons already assigned, and for other reasons most consonant to Christian piety, this practice has been long discontinued by authority of the same Church. With regard to the age at which children should be admitted to communion, this the parents and confessor can best determine: to them it belongs to ascertain whether the children have acquired a competent knowledge of this admirable Sacrament, and desire to taste this bread of angels.

From persons labouring under actual insanity the Sacrament should also be withheld. However, according to the decree of the Council of Carthage, it may be administered to them at the close of life, provided they had evinced, previously to their insanity, a sincerely pious desire of being admitted to its participation, and if no danger arising from the state of the stomach or other inconvenience or indignity, is to be apprehended. ^[149]

As to the rite to be observed in the administration of this Sacrament, the pastor will teach that the law of the Church interdiets its administration under both kinds to any but to the officiating priest, unless by special permission of the Church. Christ, it is true, as has been explained by the Council of Trent, ^[150] instituted and administered to his Apostles, at his last supper, this great Sacrament under both kinds; but it does not follow of necessity, that by doing so he established a law rendering its administration to the faithful under both species imperative. Speaking of this sacrament he himself frequently mentions it under one kind only: " If," says he, " any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever, and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world," and, " He that eateth this bread shall live for ever." ^[151] The Church, no doubt, was influenced by numerous and cogent reasons, not only to approve but confirm by solemn decree, the general practice of communicating under one species. In the first place, the greatest caution was necessary to avoid accident or indignity, which must become almost inevitable, if the chalice were administered in a crowded assemblage. In the next place, the Holy Eucharist should be at all times in readiness for the sick, and if the species of wine remained long unconsumed, it were to be apprehended that it may become vapid. Besides, there are many who cannot bear the taste or smell of wine; lest, therefore, what is intended for the nutriment of the soul should prove noxious to the health of the body, the Church, in her wisdom, has sanctioned its administration under the species of bread alone. We may also observe that in many places wine is extremely scarce, nor can it be brought from distant countries without incurring very heavy expense, and encountering very tedious and difficult journeys. Finally, a circumstance which principally influenced the Church in establishing this practice, means were to be devised to crush the heresy which denied that Christ, whole and entire, is contained under either species, and asserted that the body is contained under the species of bread without the blood, and the blood under the species of wine without the body. This object was attained by communion under the species of bread alone, which places, as it were, sensibly before our eyes, the truth of the Catholic faith. Those who have writ ten expressly on this subject, will, if it appear necessary, furnish the pastor with additional reasons for the practice of the Catholic Church in the administration of the Holy Eucharist. To omit nothing doctrinal on so important a subject, we now come to speak of the minister of the sacrament, a point, however, on which scarcely any one is ignorant. The pastor then will teach, that to priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer the Holy Eucharist. That the unvarying practice of the Church has also been, that the faithful receive the Sacrament from the hand of the priest, and that the priest communicate himself, has been explained by the Council of Trent;" ^[152] and the same holy Council has shown that this practice is always to be scrupulously adhered to, stamped, as it is, with the authoritative impress of Apostolic tradition, and sanctioned by the illustrious example of our Lord himself, who, with his own hands, consecrated and gave to his disciples, his most sacred body. ^[153]

To consult as much as possible, for the dignity of this so august a Sacrament, not only is its administration confined exclusively to the priestly order, but the Church has also, by an express law, prohibited any but those who are consecrated to religion, unless in case of necessity, to touch the sacred vessels, tho linen, or other immediate necessaries for consecration. Priests and people may hence learn what piety and holiness they should possess who consecrate, administer, or receive the Holy of Holies. The Eucharist, however, as was observed with regard to the other Sacraments, whether administered by holy or unholy hands, is equally valid. It is of faith that the efficacy of the Sacraments does not depend on *he merit of the minister, but on the virtue and power of our Lord Jesus Christ.

With regard to the Eucharist as a Sacrament, these are the principal points which demanded explanation. Its nature as a sacrifice we now come to explain, that pastors may know what are the principal instructions to be communicated to the faithful regarding this mystery, on Sundays and holidays, in compliance with the decree of the Council of Trent. ^[154] Not only is this Sacrament a treasure of heavenly riches, which if we turn to good account will purchase for us the favour and friendship of heaven; but it also possesses the peculiar and extraordinary value, that in it we are enabled to make some suitable return to God for the inestimable benefits bestowed on us by his bounty. If duly and legitimately offered, this victim is most grateful and most acceptable to God. If the sacrifices of the old law, of which it is written: "Sacrifices and oblations thou wouldst not:" ^[155] and also, " If thou hadst desired sacrifice, I would, in deed, have given it: with burnt-offering thou wilt not be delighted," ^[156] were so acceptable in his sight that, as the Scripture testifies, from them " he smelt a sweet savour," ^[157] that is to say, they were grateful and acceptable to him; what have we not to hope from the efficacy of a sacrifice in which is immolated and offered no less a victim than he, of whom a voice from heaven twice proclaimed: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." ^[158] This mystery, therefore, the pastor will carefully explain to the people, that when assembled at its celebration, they may learn to make it the subject of attentive and devout meditation.

He will teach, in the first place, that the Eucharist was instituted by our Lord for two great purposes, to be the celestial food of the soul, preserving and supporting spiritual life, and to give to the Church a perpetual sacrifice, by which sin may be expiated, and our heavenly Father, whom our crimes have often grievously offended, may be turned from wrath to mercy, from the severity of just vengeance to the exercise of benignant clemency. Of this the paschal lamb, which was offered and eaten by the Israelites as a sacrament and sacrifice, was a lively figure. ^[159] Nor could our divine Lord, when about to offer himself to his eternal Father on the altar of the cross, have given a more illustrious proof of his unbounded love for us, than by bequeathing to us a visible sacrifice, by which the bloody sacrifice, which, a little after, was to be offered once on the cross, was to be renewed, and its memory celebrated daily throughout the universal Church even to the consummation of time, to the great advantage of her children.

The difference between the Eucharist as a sacrament and sacrifice is very great, and is two-fold: as a sacrament it is perfected by consecration, as a sacrifice all its efficacy consists in its oblation. When deposited in a tabernacle, or borne to the sick, it is, therefore, a sacrament, not a sacrifice. As a sacrament, it is also to the worthy receiver a source of merit, and brings with it all those advantages which we have already mentioned; as a sacrifice it is not only a source of merit, but also of satisfaction. As, in his passion, our Lord merited and satisfied for us, so in the oblation of this sacrifice, which is a bond of Christian unity, Christians merit the fruit of his passion, and satisfy for sin.

With regard to the institution of this sacrifice, the Council of Trent has obviated all doubt on the subject, by declaring that it was instituted by our Lord at his last supper, whilst it destituted, nounces anathema against all who assert that in it is not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice; or that to offer means nothing more than that Christ gives himself to be our spiritual food. ^[160] That sacrifice is due to God alone, the holy Council also states in the clearest terms. ^[161] The solemn sacrifice of the Mass is, it is true, sometimes offered to honour the memory of the Saints; but it is never offered to them, but to Him alone who has crowned them with unfading glory. Never does the officiating minister say: " I offer sacrifice to thee, Peter, or to thee, Paul;" but whilst he offers sacrifice to God alone, he renders him thanks for the signal victories won by the martyrs, and implores their patronage, " that they whose memory we celebrate on earth, may vouchsafe to intercede for us in heaven." ^[162] The doctrine of the Catholic Church with regard to this sacrifice, she received from our Lord, when at his last supper, committing to his Apostles the sacred mysteries, he said: " This do, for a commemoration of me." ^[163] He then, as the holy Synod has defined, ordained them priests, and commanded them and their successors in the ministry, to immolate and offer in sacrifice his precious body and blood. ^[164] Of this the words of the Apostle to the Corinthians also afford sufficient evidence: "You cannot," says he, "drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils." ^[165] As then, by the " table of devils," we understand the altar upon which sacrifice was offered to them; so by "the table of the Lord," to bring the words of the Apostle to an apposite conclusion, should be understood the altar on which sacrifice was offered to the Lord.

Should we look for figures and prophecies of this sacrifice in the Old Testament, we find, in the first place, that its institution was clearly foretold by Malachy in these words: "From the rising of the sun, even to the going down thereof, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts." ^[166] This saving victim was also foretold, as well before as after the promulgation of the Mosaic law, by a variety of sacrifices; for this alone, as the perfection and completion of all, comprises all the advantages which were typified by the other sacrifices. In none of the sacrifices of the old law, however, do we discover a more lively image of the Eucharistic sacrifice than in that of Melchisedech. ^[167] Our Lord himself, at his last Supper, offered to his Eternal father his precious body and blood under the appearances of bread and wine, at the same time declaring himself, " a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." ^[168]

We, therefore, confess that the sacrifice of the Mass is one and the same sacrifice with that of the cross: the victim is one and the same, Christ Jesus, who offered himself, once only, a bloody sacrifice on the altar of the cross. The bloody and unbloody victim is still one and the same, and the oblation of the cross is daily renewed in the eucharistic sacrifice, in obedience to the command of our Lord: " This do, for a commemoration of me." ^[169] The priest is also the same, Christ our Lord: the ministers who offer this sacrifice, consecrate the holy mysteries not in their own but in the person of Christ. This the words of consecration declare: the priest does not say: " This is the body of Christ," but, " This is my body;" and thus invested with the character of Christ, he changes the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of his real body and blood. ^[170] That the holy sacrifice of the Mass, therefore, is not only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, or a commemoration of the sacrifice of the cross; but also a sacrifice of propitiation, by which God is appeased and rendered propitious, the pastor will teach as a dogma defined by the unerring authority of a general Council of the Church. ^[171] If, therefore, with pure hearts and a lively faith, and with a sincere sorrow for past transgressions, we immolate and offer in sacrifice this most holy victim, we shall, no doubt, receive from the Lord " mercy and grace in seasonable aid." ^[172] So acceptable to God is the sweet odour of this sacrifice, that through its oblation he pardons our sins, bestowing on us the gifts of grace and of repentance. This is the solemn prayer of the Church: as often as the commemoration of this victim is celebrated, so often is the work of our salvation promoted, and the plenteous fruits cf that bloody victim flow in upon us abundantly, through this unbloody sacrifice.

The pastor will also teach, that such is the efficacy of this sacrifice, that its benefits extend not only to the celebrant and communicant, but also to all the faithful whether living or numbered amongst those who have died in the Lord, but whose sins have not yet been fully expiated. According to apostolic tradition the most authentic, it is not less available when offered for them than when offered in atonement for the sins, in alleviation of the punishments, the satisfactions, the calamities, or for the relief of the necessities, of the living. ^[173] It is hence easy to perceive, that the mass, whenever and wherever offered, because conducive to the common interests and salvation of all, is to be considered common to all the faithful.

This great sacrifice is celebrated with many solemn rites and ceremonies: of these rites and ceremonies let none be deemed useless or superfluous: all oh the contrary tend to display the majesty of this august sacrifice, and to excite the faithful, by the celebration of these saving mysteries, to the contemplation of the divine things which lie concealed in the eucharistic sacrifice. On these rites and ceremonies we shall not enter at large: they require a more lengthened exposition than is compatible with the nature of the present work; and the pastor has it in his power to consult on the subject, a variety of treatises composed by men eminent alike for piety and learning. What has been said will, with the divine assistance, be found sufficient to explain the principal things which regard the Holy Eucharist both as a sacrament and sacrifice.

1. Dionys. de Eccl. Hier. c. 6. et de consec. dist. c. 2. nihil in.
2. 1 Cor xi 30
3. John xiii. 1.
4. Matth. xxvi.2G. Mark xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi. 24. De Euch, insti tutione vide Trid. Sess. 13, c. 2, de Euch. Leo serm. 7, de Pass. c. 3, Luseb. Emiss hom. 4, ct habetur de consec. dist 2. 1. quin corpus.
5. Rom. vi. 23.
6. Mark xxvi. 26. xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi 24.
7. Psalm ex. 4, 5.
8. Psalm ex. 3. Chrysost. horn. 24 in 1 ad Cor. ad heec verba, Calix benedictionis. Cypr. lib. de lapsis. Ambr. lib. 5. de Sacr. c. 3. D. Th. p. 3, q. 73, a. 4.
9. 1 Cor. x. 16.
10. Damasc. lib. 4. de fid. orthod. c. 4. Vid. Iren. lib. 5, c. 7, Chrys. horn. 44 et 45 in Joan. Cyrill. in lib. 7. in Joan. c. 13. Cyrill. Hier. Catech. 4, Aug. Tract. 26, in Joan. Trid. se.5S. 13. de Euchar. in proef Concil. Nicoen. 21, Cart 4, c. 77 er 26, q 6, passim.
11. 1 Cor. xi. 20.
12. Cypr. de coma. Domini.
13. Aug. Epist. 188, c. 6.
14. Aug. lib. 3. de Trinit. cap. 4, et 1. 20, contra Faust, cap. 13, Ambr. lib. 1. de sacrara. cap. 2. Trid. sess. 13. de Euch. c. 5. D. Thorn. 3. p. q. 73. art. 1.
15. De Catec. erud. lib. 5. c. 16. August, hie ad sensum potius quam ad verba ci-latus; sed lege hac de materia librum Lanfranci contra Berengarium: constat. 23, tantum capitibus: vide de consecr. dist. 2. lere tola.
16. Trid. sess. 15, de Euch. cap. 5. et can. 6.
17. Ex Conciliis oitatis I.ateranense generale sub Innocent II. Non numeral qui lem distincte septem Sarramenta, sed ex variis Canonilt. satis clare colligimtur
18. Florent. in tloct. de sacrem.
19. Trid. sess 7, can. 1.
20. John vi. 56.
21. Luke xxii. 19.
22. 1 Cor. xi. 26.
23. Tertul. de Resur. carnis, c. 8.
24. Matt. xxvi. 26.
25. Mark xiv. 22.
26. Luke xxii. 19.
27. John vi. 41. Vide de consecr. dist. 2. c. 1. et 2. et 55. ubi habes de hac matena decreta Alexandr. Pap. in 1. Epist. ad omnes Orthodoxos et Cypr. lib. 2. Epist. 3. et Ambr. 1. 4. de Sacram. c. 4. vide etiam Iren. 1. 4. c. 34. et 1. 5. c. 2.
28. D. Th. 3 p. 9. 74. c. 3.
29. Lev. xxiv. 5.
30. Matt, xxv i. 17. Mark xiv. 12. Luke xxii. 7. Vide 1. 3. decretal, tit. de cele- lirat. Missamm, c. ult. ubi habes auctoritatam Honorii Fap. 3.
31. John xiii. 1.
32. In Math. hom. 83.
33. 1 Cor. v. 7, 8.
34. Concil Florent sess. ult.
35. Lib. 2. decret. de celebr. miss. c. final.
36. Matt. xxvi. 29. Mark xiv. 25
37. Hom. 83. in Matth.
38. Cyp. lib. ]. epist. 3. Trid. sess. 22. de sacrif. miss. c. 7. et can. 9.
39. Apoc. xvii. 15.
40. Habetur 1. 3. Decretal, de eel. miss. c. 13.
41. Vid. de consecr. dist. 2. c. 1. 2. et seq.
42. John vi. 56.
43. Damas. 1. 4. de fid. orthod. c. 14.
44. Matt. xxvi. 26. Mark xiv. 22. Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi. 24.
45. Luke xxii. 19. In decret. de sacrarn. item Trid. sess. 13. c. 1.
46. Quod ad Patres attinet, vid. Amb. 1. 4. de sacram. c. 4. et 5. Chrys. horn, de prodit. Judse. Aug. 1. 3. de Trinit. c. 4. Iren. ]. 4. contr. haer. c. 34. Orig. lib. 8. ooritr. Celsum. Hesich. 1. G. in Levit. c. 22. Cyril. Alex, epist ad Calosorum epis- eop. Tertul. 1. 4. contr. Marc, in Hiear. epist. 1.
47. Matt. xxvi. 26.
48. Decretal. 1. 3. de celeb, raise, c. 6.
49. Luke xxii. 20.
50. 1 Cor. xi. 25.
51. Luke xxii. 20.
52. Matt. xxvi. 28.
53. Heb. x. 20. xiii. 20.
54. Rom. iii. 25, 26.
55. Heb, ix. 12.
56. Decret. 1. 3. de eel. Miss. c. 8.
57. Heb. ix. 18.
58. Heb. ix. 15.
59. Matt. xxvi. 28.
60. Luke xxii. 20.
61. Heb. ix. 26
62. John xvii. 9.
63. 1 Cor. xi. 29.
64. Vide Dionys. de Eccl. Hierarch. c. 3, Ignat. Epist. ad Smyr. Just. Apol. 2, Iren. 1. 4, c. 34, et 1. 5. c. 2. Trid. Sess. 13, c. 1, de Euch.
65. Cypr. de coena domini Euse. Emiss. hom. 5. de Pasch. Cyril. Hycros. Catech. 1. 3 et 4, Ambr. 1. 4, de Sacram. c. 4, Chrysost. hom. 83. in Matt, et 60, ad pop. Antiocli.
66. Matt. xxvi. 28. Mark xiv. 22, 24. Luke xxii. 19.
67. S. Hilar. 1. 8, de Trinitat. super ilia verba velut unura
68. Cor. xi. 28, 29.
69. 1 Cor. x. 16.
70. Lib. 4, de Sacr. c. 4, et de iis qui myster. init. c. 9. vide et de consec. dist 2 plurim. in locis.
71. tet. Chrys. ad popul. Antioch. homil. 60 et 61.
72. Divus Augustinus in Psalm xxxiii. Cone. 1, a medio ad finem usque. Cyril, lib. 4, in Joan. c. 33, et 14, et lib. 1, c. 13. Inst. Apolog. 2, sub finem ad Antonium Pium.
73. Iren. lib. 5, contra heraetic. et lib. 5, in Joan. c. 34. Dionys. Ecclee. Hier. . 3, Hilar. lib. 8. de Trinit. Hieron. epist ad I~Vj<nascen. Damas. lib. 4, de orthod. fid. c. 14.
74. De Eccl. Hierar. c. 3. p. 1.
75. Prov. viii. 31.
76. Vide de consec. dist. 2, raultis in locis, item Amb. de iis qui myst. init, c. 9, D T. p, 3. q. 76, art 1.
77. August, de consec. dist, 2. c, singulis.
78. Luke xxii. 17.
79. Lateran. Concil. c. 1.
80. Flor. in epist. Eugenii IV. data ad Arm, et a Concilio approbate
81. Trid. BCSS. 13, can. 4.
82. Matt. xxvi. 26. Mark xiv 22. Luke xxi. 18. 1 Cor. xi. 24.
83. John vi. 52.
84. John vi. 54.
85. John vi. 56.
86. Lib. 4, de sacr. c. 4. et c. 5, c. 4.
87. Ps. cxxxiv. 6.
88. De consec. disk 2. c. omnia.
89. Hilar. de Triri. lib 8, et de consec. dist. 2. cap. 28.
90. Gen. xviii. 2.
91. Acts i. 10. vid. D. Thorn. 3, p. q. 75, art. 3 et 4.
92. D. Ambr. lib. 4. de sacr c. 4
93. Citatur de consec. dist. 2, can. JNos. auteni.
94. Lib. 4, de orthod. fid. c. 14.
95. Trid. sess. 13, c. 4, et can. 2, et de consec. distinct. 2, r. panis.
96. Eccl. iii. 22.
97. D. Thom. 3, p. q. 76, Trid. sess. 13, c. 3. et can. 3. et Florent. in decret. Eugen.
98. Luke i. 37.
99. Vid. de ameer, dirt. 2, e. No* aalem et Decretal. lib. 1, tit. de Caleb. MB*, c. earn Matt, et D. Th. 3, p. q. 75. a. 3, et q. 77. a. 1.
100. Hom. 26 et q. 75, a. 1.
101. Trid. 13. e. 3. et can. 5. Iiw. lib. 4, c. 14, Cyril lib. 4. in Joan, c, 11 et 14, Chrysost. born. 45, in Joan. D. Thom. 3, p. q. 79.
102. Lib. 7. Conf c. 10. Vid. Arabr. lib. 5. de sacr. c. 4 et Crys. horu. 45. in Joan.
103. John i. 17.
104. John vi. 57.
105. John vi 58.
106. John vi. 52.
107. Lib. 4. in Joan, c. 12, 14. et ep. 10. ad Nestor.
108. 1 Cor. xi. 29.
109. Wisd. xvi. 20.
110. Lib. 4. de Sacram. c. 6. et lib. c. 4. Innocent. Til lib. 4. de myst. Miss. c, 44. Cvrill. lib. 4. in Joan, c. 17. et lib. 3. c. 36. Inter opera D. Bernard! habetur cujusdam senno doniirn, qui incipit: PAN EM ANGELORUM, et singular-is est de Euchar. videatur, et D. Thorn. 3. p. q. 79.
111. Aug. tract. 26. in Joan.
112. Lib. l.Epist. 2. ad Cornel.
113. John vi. 55. Vul Chrys. de sacerdotic, dial. c. D. Thom. 3. p. q. 79. art. 2. 6 3 Kings xix. 8
114. Luke xix. 9.
115. Matt. xiv. 36 and ix. 20.
116. 1 Cor. xii. 31.
117. De corisecr. dist. 2. can. 46 sess. 13. cap. 8.
118. 1 Cor. xi. 29.
119. In Joan, tract. 16. et contra Donat. lib. 5. c. 8.
120. 1 Cor. xi. 29.
121. Gal. v. 6.
122. 1 Cor. xi. 28.
123. Matt. xxii. 11
124. 1 Kings v. toto.
125. De preeparatione ad Euch. requisite vide Trid, sens. 13. c. 7. et can. 11. Basil, q. 172. regul. brev. et serm. 2. de hapt. Cyprian, toto fere lib. de Lapsis, agendo do Pcenit. Aug. serni. 1. de Temj. Chrys. horn. 44, 45, 46. in Joan, et in Matt. horn. 83
126. 1 Cor. x. 21.
127. Job xxvi. 11.
128. Isa. vi. 3
129. 1 Cor. xi. 29.
130. Matt v. 24, 25.
131. Sess. 13. can. 11. Chrys. horn. 30, in Genes, et 20. in Matth. Cypr. in lib. de Lapsis.
132. Matt. viii. 8. 10.
133. John xxi. 15.
134. Matt. xxii. 12, 13.
135. Vid. Aug. epist. 118. e. 6. etlib. l.ad inquis. Januarii c. 6.
136. 1 Kings xxi. 3 4, 5.
137. Greg, in responsione 10. ad interrog. Aug. et hab. 33. q. 4, c. 7. Aug. serm. 2. de temp, et 2, 4.
138. Concil. Lat c. 28. et habetur lib. 5. Decret. tit. de Pcenit. et remiss, cap. omnis utriusque sexus.Trid. sess. 13, 9.
139. St. Aug. de verbis Domini, ser. 28, qui desumptus est ex. Arab. lib. 5. de sacram. c. 4.
140. Exod. xvi. 21, 22.
141. Ad frequentem communionem hortantur Auguatin. de verbis Domini serm. 28. sed hie sermo cum nonsit August, sed Ambr. lib. 5. de sacram c. 4. rejectus est in appendicem tomi 10. item vide eundem Aug. Epist. 118. c. 3. item, Ignat. ad Kphes. satis ante finem. Basil. Epist. ad Cajsar. patr. Ambr. lib. 3. de sacr. c. 4. Chrysost. hom. 61. ad pop. Antioch. Cypr. de Ora. Dominica ad hffic verba, panem nostram quot Hieron. Epist. 28, ad Lucin. vers. finem. Cyril, c. 3. in Joan. c. 37. vide etiarn de consecr. dist. 2. per multa capita hac de re.
142. Acts ii. 42. 46.
143. De consec. dist 2, c. 10.
144. De quotidiana communione vide Dionys. de Eccles. Hierarch. c. 3, parte 2, Hieron. Epist. 28, ad Luein.Greg. lib. 2, dialog, c. 23. Item vide lib. de Eccl dog- mat, c. 53, et citatur de consec. dist. 2, c. 13.
145. Fab. decret habes de cons. dist. 2. c. 16. et ib. citatur Concil. Agathensc c. 18. c. saeculares.
146. Citat. lib. 5. deer. tit. de peen. et remiss, c. omnes utriusque sexus.
147. Matt. xxvi. 26.
148. Cypr. de Lapsis post med.
149. Cone. Cath. 4. 76.
150. Sess>. 21. decem. sub utraque specie can. 1. 2. 3.
151. John vi. 52. 59. Unius tantum speciei usum suflicere ad perfectam commu- nionem colliges ex Tertull. lib. 2. ad uxorem. Cypr. de Lapsis. Orig. horn. 13. in Exod. Basil, epist. ad Caesar, patr. Aug. ep. 86. Hier. in Apol. ad Pammach. Chrysost. torn. 41. operis imperf. in Matth.
152. Sess. 13, c. 10.
153. Matt. xxvi. 26. Matt. xiv. 23
154. Seas. 22. princip. c. 8
155. Ps. xxxix. 7.
156. Ps. 1. 18.
157. Gen viii. 21 .
158. Matt viii. 17.
159. Deut. 16.
160. Vid..Trid. de Sacrif Missse c. 1. 3. Dionys. lib. 17, de Eccles. c. 3. T^nat. epist ad Smyrn. Tort lib. de Orat Iren. lib. 4. c. 32. Aug. lib. 10. de Civit. D;-"; , e. 10. et lib. 17. c. 20. et i; b. 18. c. 35. et lib. 10. c. 13. et lib. 22. c. 8. et alibi pnssim. Vide etiam. Sess. 22.: e sacrifin. Missas, c. 1. et can. 1 anil 2.
161. Trid. Synod, sess. 21. c. 3.
162. Aug. contra Faust, lib. 20. c. 21.
163. Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi. 24.
164. Conc. Trid. sess. 22. c. 1.
165. I Cor. x. 21.
166. Malach. i. 11.
167. Gen. xiv. 18.
168. Heb. vii. 17. Ps. cix. 4.
169. Luke xxii. 19. 1 Cor. xi. 24.
170. Chrys. horn. 2. in 2. ad Timoth. et horn, de prod. Judse. Ambr. lib. 4. de Sa- cram. c. 4.
171. Trident, sess. 22. de sacrif Missee, c. 2. et can. 3.
172. Hebr. iv. 16.
173. Trid. Synod, sess. 22. cap. 206,