Dist. 11, Part 1, Dubia
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 11
DUBIA CIRCA LITTERAM MAGISTRI.
Dub. I
In parte ista sunt dubitationes circa litteram, et primo de hoc quod dicit Magister: Mysterium fidei credi salubriter potest, investigari salubriter non potest. Videtur enim secundum hoc, quod omnes peccent graviter, qui disputant de his quae ad fidem spectant.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod facienda est vis tam in hoc quod dicit mysterium fidei, quam in verbo investigandi. Mysterium enim secretum est, et illud non est investigandum, ut homo velit ratione comprehendere, quod Dominus voluit occultare; et qui aliter facit peccat et praesumtuosus est, dum se elevat ad id, ad quod non potest pertingere1. Qui autem disputat de fide non ad mysterii investigationem, sed potius ad defensionem, ille non facit contra hoc quod dicit Augustinus et Magister2.
Dub. II
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit, quod haec concedenda est: Illud quod erat panis vel vinum, post consecrationem est corpus Christi. Videtur enim falsum dicere, quia quod est relativum identitatis3; sed ibi nihil manet commune: ergo talis locutio est falsa. — Praeterea, quaero: pro quo supponit, cum dicitur: quod erat panis? Aut pro supposito panis, aut Christi. Si pro supposito panis: contra: isti nunquam convenit praedicatum. Si pro supposito corporis: ergo implicatio est falsa, quia corpus Christi nunquam fuit panis.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod proprie loquendo — cum hoc relativum quod sit relativum identitatis, et suppositum non sit idem cum praedicato — quod simpliciter loquendo, proprie falsa est; nec Magister4 dicit concedendam secundum opinionem suam. Si autem legatur a Sanctis, exponendam esse credo. Unde cum Augustinus5 dicit, quod «corpus Christi dicimus illud quod ex fructibus terrae collectum» etc; dicendum, quod illud dictum est quantum ad signum exterius, et secundum metaphoram est intelligendum illud, secundum quod signum pro signato ponitur; et vocatur hic corpus Christi Sacramentum corporis Christi6.
Dub. III
Item quaeritur: quid est quod dicit Gregorius, in ipsa immolationis hora caelos aperiri? Videtur enim male dicere, quia, si aperiuntur; quaero, ad quid? Si ut descendat, videtur falsum, quia potest descendere sine apertione caelorum. Et iterum, ad quid descendit, si panis convertitur7 in corpus suum hic inferius? Si dicas, hoc dictum tropice; quaero, quo tropo?
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod panis iste, qui in altari conficitur, est panis caelestis; caelum autem dicitur aperiri, quando vehemens fit influentia de supernis. Quoniam igitur immolationis hora nobis panis caelestis et supersubstantialis tribuitur; hinc est, quod Gregorius caelos dicit aperiri; sicut in eius nativitate dicitur, quod «per totum mundum
melliflui facti sunt caeli8, quia datus est nobis ille qui dulcior est super mel et favum.»
Dub. IV
Item quaeritur de hoc quod dicit: In caelum rapitur, ministerio Angelorum consociandum corpori Christi. Videtur enim falsum dicere, quia illud corpus sumitur a sacerdote, ergo non rapitur ministerio. — Item quomodo consociatur corpori Christi, cum idem sit corpus? — Item, quaeritur: quomodo intelligitur illud quod scribitur in canone9: Iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui? quid est quod perfertur? et quis est Angelus, qui perfert?
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod sicut praedicta verba circa confectionem figurative et secundum tropum intelligenda sunt, sic et ista. Unde sicut manus Angelorum non intelliguntur corporaliter, sic nec rapi hoc Sacramentum intelligendum est localiter vel corporaliter; similiter nec consociari situaliter. Sed hoc intelligendum est, quod sicut Angeli intelliguntur Deo offerre orationes nostras et petitiones, similiter et desideria — non propter ignorantiam Dei, sed propter commoditatem nostram, quia suis sanctis affectibus puris nos adiuvant et merita nostra in conspectu Dei replicant, ut ex eorum puritate sancta et affectione ferventi ratione dignitatis nuntii sint acceptabilia — sic intelligendum est offerre sacrificia, quia sacris mysteriis assistentes una nobiscum precantur, ut nostra munera sint accepta, et una nobiscum reverentur sanctissimum corpus Christi, sicut in caelo. Ideo dicuntur in caelum rapere et consociare quantum ad hoc, quod reputant honore dignum in altari, ut in caelo. Per hunc etiam modum intelligenda est oratio canonis: quia, sicut exponit Innocentius10, Angelus ille magni consilii est Christus; per manus illius oramus sacrificium perferri, id est ipsius meritis et precibus nostrum sacrificium Deo acceptari. Unde ipse est pontifex et advocatus noster et apparet continue vultui Dei ad interpellandum pro nobis. Et sic patent quaesita.
DOUBTS CONCERNING THE TEXT OF THE MASTER.
Doubt I
In this section there are doubts concerning the text, and first about this, that the Master says: The mystery of faith can be believed wholesomely, but cannot be investigated wholesomely. For it seems, according to this, that all sin gravely who dispute about those things which pertain to faith.
I respond: It must be said that emphasis is to be placed both on this, that he says mystery of faith, and on the word investigating. For a mystery is something secret, and that is not to be investigated, such that a man should wish to comprehend by reason what the Lord willed to conceal; and one who does otherwise sins and is presumptuous, while he raises himself up to that which he cannot reach1. But one who disputes about the faith not for the investigation of the mystery, but rather for its defense, he does not act against this which Augustine and the Master say2.
Doubt II
Likewise it is asked about this, that he says that this proposition is to be conceded: That which was bread or wine, after the consecration is the body of Christ. For it seems to be said falsely, because which is a relative of identity3; but there nothing common remains: therefore such a locution is false. — Moreover, I ask: for what does it supposit, when it is said: that which was bread? Either for the supposit bread, or Christ. If for the supposit bread: on the contrary, the predicate never belongs to it. If for the supposit of the body: therefore the implication is false, because the body of Christ was never bread.
I respond: It must be said that, properly speaking — since this relative which is a relative of identity, and the supposit is not the same as the predicate — that, simply speaking, it is properly false; nor does the Master4 say it is to be conceded according to his own opinion. But if it is read by the Saints, I believe it is to be expounded. Hence when Augustine5 says that «we call the body of Christ that which is gathered out of the fruits of the earth» etc.; it must be said that that statement is made as to the exterior sign, and is to be understood according to metaphor, in that the sign is put for the signified; and here the body of Christ is called the Sacrament of the body of Christ6.
Doubt III
Likewise it is asked: what is it that Gregory says, that in the very hour of the immolation the heavens are opened? For it seems to be said badly, because, if they are opened; I ask, for what? If in order that it may descend, it seems false, because it can descend without the opening of the heavens. And again, for what does it descend, if the bread is converted7 into his body here below? If you say this is said tropically; I ask, by what trope?
I respond: It must be said that this bread, which is confected on the altar, is heavenly bread; and the heaven is said to be opened, when a vehement influence comes from on high. Since therefore in the hour of the immolation heavenly and supersubstantial bread is bestowed on us; hence it is that Gregory says the heavens are opened; just as at his nativity it is said that «throughout the whole world
the heavens were made to flow with honey8, because there has been given to us that one who is sweeter than honey and the honeycomb.»
Doubt IV
Likewise it is asked about this, that he says: It is caught up into heaven, by the ministry of the Angels, to be associated with the body of Christ. For it seems to be said falsely, because that body is taken by the priest, therefore it is not caught up by ministry. — Likewise, how is it associated with the body of Christ, since it is the same body? — Likewise, it is asked: how is that understood which is written in the canon9: Bid these things to be carried up by the hands of thy holy Angel? What is it that is carried up? and who is the Angel, who carries up?
I respond: It must be said that, just as the aforesaid words concerning the confection are to be understood figuratively and according to trope, so also these. Hence, just as the hands of the Angels are not understood corporeally, so neither is the catching-up of this Sacrament to be understood locally or corporeally; likewise neither the association in place. But this is to be understood, that just as the Angels are understood to offer to God our prayers and petitions, likewise also our desires — not on account of God's ignorance, but on account of our advantage, because by their holy pure affections they help us and lay our merits again before the sight of God, so that from their holy purity and fervent affection, by reason of the dignity of the messenger, they may be acceptable — so it is to be understood that they offer sacrifices, because, assisting at the sacred mysteries together with us, they pray that our gifts may be accepted, and together with us they revere the most holy body of Christ, as in heaven. Therefore they are said to catch up into heaven and to associate, as to this, that they reckon worthy of honor on the altar what is so in heaven. By this manner also is to be understood the prayer of the canon: because, as Innocent expounds10, that Angel of great counsel is Christ; through his hands we pray that the sacrifice be carried up, that is, that by his merits and prayers our sacrifice be accepted by God. Hence he himself is our pontiff and advocate and appears continually to the face of God to intercede for us. And thus the things asked are made clear.
- 1Prov. 25, 27: Qui scrutator est maiestatis opprimetur a gloria.Proverbs 25:27: He who is a searcher of majesty shall be overwhelmed by glory.
- 2Algerus, l. de Sacram. c. 9, verba, de quibus agit hoc dubium (lit. Magistri, c. 2.), attribuit Augustino «in libro Sententiarum Prosperi», in quo tamen ea non invenimus. — Cfr. supra d. 10. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. in fine. — Idem dub. solvit S. Thom., Petr. a Tar. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit.Alger, On the Sacraments, book 1, c. 9, attributes the words with which this doubt deals (the Master's text, c. 2) to Augustine «in the book of the Sentences of Prosper,» in which, however, we do not find them. — Cf. above, d. 10, p. II, a. 2, q. 1, at the end. — The same doubt is resolved by St. Thomas, Peter of Tarentaise, and Richard of Mediavilla, here on the text.
- 3Petr. Hispan., Summul. tr. de Relativis: Relativum substantiae est quod refert eandem rem in numero cum suo antecedente, ut qui, ille. Item relativorum substantiae quaedam sunt relativa diversitatis, ut alius; et est illud quod refert eandem rem in numero et supponit pro alia, ut Socrates currit, et alius disputat. Quaedam vero sunt relativa substantiae identitatis, ut qui, ille, idem; unde relativum substantiae identitatis est quod refert et supponit pro eodem in numero, pro quo supponit suum antecedens, ut Socrates currit, qui disputat; ibi hoc relativum qui refert et supponit pro Socrate etc. — De minori cfr. supra q. 2.Peter of Spain, Summulae, treatise On Relatives: «A relative of substance is that which refers the same thing in number as its antecedent, as who, that one. Likewise, of relatives of substance some are relatives of diversity, as other; and it is that which refers the same thing in number and supposits for another, as Socrates runs, and another disputes. But some are relatives of substantial identity, as who, that one, the same; whence a relative of substantial identity is that which refers and supposits for the same in number, for which its antecedent supposits, as Socrates runs, who disputes; there this relative who refers and supposits for Socrates» etc. — On the minor, cf. above, q. 2.
- 4Hic in lit. c. 2. Cfr. supra q. 6.Here in the text, c. 2. Cf. above, q. 6.
- 5Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 2.See here the Master's text, c. 2.
- 6Cfr. supra d. 10. p. I. dub. 3. et 4. — Aliquanto inferius pro Christi codd. F G I corporis Christi.Cf. above, d. 10, p. I, doubts 3 and 4. — A little below, for Christi codices F, G, I read corporis Christi ("of the body of Christ").
- 7Ita codd. H Z, cod. K convertatur, cod. L convertetur, alii cum ed. I converteretur, Vat. legit scilicet ut panis converteretur. Mox pro hic inferius permulti codd. hic et inferius. Subinde ante quo tropo cum codd. F G H L omisimus in.Thus codices H, Z; codex K reads convertatur, codex L convertetur, others with the first edition converteretur, the Vatican edition reads scilicet ut panis converteretur ("namely that the bread should be converted"). Just after, for hic inferius very many codices read hic et inferius. Then, before quo tropo, with codices F, G, H, L we have omitted in.
- 8Gregor., Libro Responsal., in festo Nativ. Domini, 1. Nocturn. resp. lect. 2. — Seq. text. Scripturae est Ps. 18, 11. — Idem dub. solvit Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 10. m. 5. a. 1. § 1; B. Albert., hic a. 9; S. Thom., Petr. a Tar. et Richard. a Med., hic circa lit. — Locis citt. solvitur etiam dub. seq.Gregory, Book of Responsories, on the feast of the Nativity of the Lord, 1st Nocturn, responsory, lesson 2. — The following text of Scripture is Ps. 18:11. — The same doubt is resolved by Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 10, m. 5, a. 1, § 1; Blessed Albert, here a. 9; St. Thomas, Peter of Tarentaise, and Richard of Mediavilla, here on the text. — At the cited places the following doubt is also resolved.
- 9Missalis Romani, post consecrationem. — Superius post ministerio codd. R S T supplent Angelorum, cod. U angelico. Paulo inferius ex codd. F G H L P Q V supplevimus quod perfertur.Of the Roman Missal, after the consecration. — Above, after ministerio codices R, S, T supply Angelorum, codex U angelico ("angelic"). A little below, from codices F, G, H, L, P, Q, V we have supplied quod perfertur ("that which is carried up").
- 10Libr. V. de Sacro Altaris mysterio, c. 5; sed aliam interpretationem ibi affert dicens: Salvo tamen occulto caelestis oraculi sacramento, possunt haec verba, licet simplicius, tamen securius, sic intelligi: Iube haec, vota fidelium videlicet et preces, perferri per manus sancti Angeli, hoc est per ministerium etc.On the Sacred Mystery of the Altar, book V, c. 5; but he brings forward there another interpretation, saying: Yet, with the hidden sacrament of the heavenly oracle preserved, these words can, though more simply, yet more safely, be understood thus: Bid these things, namely the vows and prayers of the faithful, to be carried up by the hands of the holy Angel, that is, through the ministry, etc.