Dist. 9, Art. 2, Q. 3
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 9
Quaestio III. Utrum peccator sumendo corpus Christi semper mortaliter peccet.
Tertio quaeritur, utrum peccator sumendo corpus Christi semper mortaliter peccet. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Quia inter dignum et indignum nihil est medium; sed nullus peccator accedit digne: ergo omnis peccator accedit indigne; et omnis talis peccat1: ergo peccator semper peccat sumendo.
2. Item, omnis qui accedit, tenetur se ipsum praeparare, quia dicit Apostolus primae ad Corinthios undecimo2: Probet autem se ipsum homo; sed si praeparat se, facit quod in se est; et si hoc, tunc Deus facit quod in se est, et tunc non est peccator: ergo si est peccator et accedit, non se praeparavit, ergo omnis talis peccat.
3. Item, omnis accipiens Sacramentum et non rem ficte accedit3: sed omnis peccator manens in peccato mortali, qui accipit Sacramentum, accipit illud sine re: ergo ficte accedit. Sed qui ficte accedit peccat mortaliter: ergo etc.
4. Item, sicut dicitur in Glossa, primae ad Corinthios undecimo4: « Indigne manducat qui accedit infidelis vel indevotus »; sed omnis peccator est indevotus, quia caritas facit devotum, qua caret peccator: ergo omnis peccator indigne accedit.
5. Item, si peccator, qui habet peccati mortalis conscientiam, peccat mortaliter accedendo; aut ergo quia habet peccatum, aut quia conscientiam. Non quia conscientiam, quia hoc non est malum cognoscere suum peccatum: ergo quia habet peccatum; et sic semper mortaliter peccat.
6. Item, qui peccat et ignorat minus est dispositus ad medicinam — unde Ambrosius5 dicit, quod « peccat gravissime qui ignorat » — si ergo peccat qui accedit cum peccato ignoranter, multo fortius qui accedit cum peccato scienter.
7. Item, iustus credens, se esse in peccato mortali, peccat, si accedat; sed iustus est magis dispositus quam quilibet peccator: ergo multo magis peccat peccator.
Contra: 1. Si omnis peccator damnabiliter manducat, cum nullus sciat, se esse iustum6, omnis homo exponit se discrimini sumendo.
2. Item, Apostolus7: Nihil mihi conscius sum, sed non in hoc iustificatus sum; sed non tenetur homo amplius se disponere, quam quod non habeat remorsum conscientiae: ergo si per hoc non est iustificatus, et qui accedit non iustificatus peccat; tunc quilibet sumendo peccat.
Conclusio. Qui minus sufficienter, scilicet tantum secundum probabilitatem, se praeparat ad sumendam eucharistiam non mortaliter peccat.
Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam dicendum, quod in hoc Sacramento tenetur percipiens
se praeparare, quia Deus venit ad habitandum in homine. Praeparatio autem non semper est sufficiens; sed haec est sufficiens, quando inimicus Domini expellitur de hospitio per veram examinationem et contritionem sive iudicium poenitentiae. Rursus, quia divina Maiestas summa se dignatione humiliat, et divina Bonitas offert gratiam; debet homo cum metu reverentiae et cum dilectione accedere, ad hoc quod digne manducet. Digne igitur manducare est sufficienter se praeparare, scilicet peccati omnis expulsione, reverentia et dilectione.
Quidam igitur sunt, qui se sufficienter praeparant secundum veritatem; quidam autem non sufficienter secundum veritatem, sufficienter tamen secundum probabilitatem; quidam autem neutro modo se praeparant, immo contemnunt. Qui ergo sufficienter se praeparat8 manducat digne; qui se nullo modo parat manducat indigne; qui autem minus sufficienter se parat, scilicet secundum probabilitatem potius quam secundum veritatem, non manducat digne, quia non se praeparavit sufficienter; nec indigne, quia se praeparat probabiliter; talis, quamvis non recipiat gratiam, non tamen incurrit offensam.
1. Et sic patet illud quod obiicit de digne et indigne sumente: quia est ibi medium, quamvis non sit medium inter dignum et indignum.
2. 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de praeparatione, dicendum, quod nullus tenetur ad hoc sufficienter praeparare se, quia nullus potest scire, utrum hoc faciat; sed quod se praeparet secundum sufficiens dictamen conscientiae; et in hoc contentus debet esse probabilitate.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de indevoto, dicendum, quod indevotus ibi dicitur contrarie, qui accedit cum peccandi proposito, sicut ibi patet in Glossa9.
5. 6. Ad illud quod obiicitur de eo qui habet conscientiam peccati; dicendum, quod non dicitur quis peccare, quia recognoscit peccatum suum, sed quia cognoscit peccatum et de illo non poenitet et cum illo accedit; hoc autem non potest esse sine contemptu; secus est, quando ignorat. — Similiter patet sequens, quod ignorans minus est dispositus, ceteris paribus; sed ignorans proponens poenitere et volens sciente10, qui vult in culpa persistere, non minus, sed magis est dispositus; unde ignorantia peccati non excusat ratione ignorantiae, sed ratione probabilitatis, quod sit in gratia.
7. Ad ultimum dicendum, quod iustus ex tali conscientia reddit se magis inhabilem, non propter culpam, sed propter conscientiam erroneam, quae quidem, quamdiu persistit, obligat, ut non recipiat, propter hoc quod non potest cum hac conscientia recipere, quin contemnat11.
---
Question III. Whether a sinner always sins mortally by receiving the body of Christ.
Thirdly it is asked whether a sinner always sins mortally by receiving the body of Christ. And it seems that he does:
1. Because between the worthy and the unworthy there is no middle ground; but no sinner approaches worthily: therefore every sinner approaches unworthily; and every such one sins1: therefore a sinner always sins in receiving.
2. Likewise, everyone who approaches is bound to prepare himself, because the Apostle says in First Corinthians, chapter eleven2: But let a man prove himself; but if he prepares himself, he does what is in him; and if so, then God does what is in Him, and then he is not a sinner: therefore if he is a sinner and approaches, he has not prepared himself, and so every such one sins.
3. Likewise, everyone who receives the Sacrament and not the reality approaches feignedly3: but every sinner remaining in mortal sin, who receives the Sacrament, receives it without the reality: therefore he approaches feignedly. But whoever approaches feignedly sins mortally: therefore etc.
4. Likewise, as is said in the Gloss on First Corinthians, chapter eleven4: « He eats unworthily who approaches unbelieving or undevout »; but every sinner is undevout, because charity makes one devout, which the sinner lacks: therefore every sinner approaches unworthily.
5. Likewise, if the sinner who has awareness of mortal sin sins mortally by approaching, then it is either because he has the sin, or because he has the awareness. Not because of the awareness, because it is not evil to know one's own sin: therefore because he has the sin; and thus he always sins mortally.
6. Likewise, he who sins and is ignorant is less disposed for the medicine — whence Ambrose5 says that « he sins most gravely who is ignorant » — if therefore he sins who approaches with sin ignorantly, much more strongly does he who approaches with sin knowingly.
7. Likewise, a just man believing himself to be in mortal sin sins if he approaches; but the just man is more disposed than any sinner whatever: therefore much more does the sinner sin.
On the contrary: 1. If every sinner eats damnably, since no one knows that he is just6, every man exposes himself to peril by receiving.
2. Likewise, the Apostle7: I am conscious of nothing against myself, but I am not hereby justified; but a man is not bound to dispose himself further than that he have no remorse of conscience: therefore if by this he is not justified, then he too who approaches unjustified sins; and so anyone whatever sins by receiving.
Conclusion. He who prepares himself less than sufficiently — namely, only according to probability — for receiving the Eucharist does not sin mortally.
I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing it must be said that in this Sacrament the recipient is bound
to prepare himself, because God comes to dwell in man. But the preparation is not always sufficient; rather, this preparation is sufficient when the enemy of the Lord is expelled from the dwelling through true examination and contrition, that is, the judgment of penance. Again, because the divine Majesty humbles itself with the highest condescension, and the divine Goodness offers grace, a man ought to approach with fear of reverence and with love, so that he may eat worthily. To eat worthily, therefore, is to prepare oneself sufficiently, namely by the expulsion of all sin, by reverence, and by love.
There are therefore some who prepare themselves sufficiently according to truth; some, however, not sufficiently according to truth, yet sufficiently according to probability; and some who prepare themselves in neither way, but rather hold it in contempt. He, therefore, who prepares himself sufficiently8 eats worthily; he who prepares himself in no way eats unworthily; but he who prepares himself less than sufficiently, namely according to probability rather than according to truth, does not eat worthily, because he has not prepared himself sufficiently; nor unworthily, because he prepares himself probably; and such a one, although he does not receive grace, nevertheless does not incur offense.
1. And thus is made clear that which is objected concerning him who eats worthily and unworthily: because there is a middle there, although there is no middle between the worthy and the unworthy.
2, 3. To that which is objected concerning preparation, it must be said that no one is bound to prepare himself sufficiently for this, because no one can know whether he does so; but rather to prepare himself according to the sufficient dictate of conscience; and in this he ought to be content with probability.
4. To that which is objected concerning the undevout, it must be said that the undevout is there spoken of in the contrary sense, that is, of one who approaches with the intention of sinning, as is clear there in the Gloss9.
5, 6. To that which is objected concerning the one who has awareness of sin, it must be said that one is not said to sin because he recognizes his own sin, but because he knows the sin and does not repent of it and approaches with it; but this cannot be without contempt; it is otherwise when he is ignorant. — Likewise what follows is clear, that the ignorant man is less disposed, all else being equal; but the ignorant man intending to repent and willing knowingly10, who wishes to persist in fault, is not less but more disposed; whence ignorance of sin does not excuse by reason of ignorance, but by reason of probability that one is in grace.
7. To the last it must be said that the just man, from such awareness, renders himself the more unfit, not on account of fault, but on account of erroneous conscience, which indeed, as long as it persists, binds him not to receive, for this reason: that he cannot receive with this conscience without contempt11.
---
- 1Vide quaest. praeced.See the preceding question.
- 2Vers. 28, super quam Glossa apud Petr. Lombard. dicit: Id est examinet, purget se ipsum.Verse 28, on which the Gloss in Peter Lombard says: That is, let him examine, let him purge himself.
- 3Cfr. supra d. 4. p. 1. a. 2. q. 2. seq. — Minor ostensa est supra q. 1. — Ante accipiens edd. et plures codd. omittunt omnis.Cf. above, d. 4, p. 1, a. 2, q. 2 and following. — The minor was shown above in q. 1. — Before accipiens the editions and several codices omit omnis.
- 4Vers. 27. Verba Glossae vide infra dub. 5. Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 11. m. 2. a. 2. § 2. hanc etiam Glossam refert: Si desit fides vel caritas, iudicium sibi manducat et bibit.Verse 27. For the words of the Gloss see below, dub. 5. Alexander of Hales, Summa, p. IV, q. 11, m. 2, a. 2, § 2, also cites this Gloss: If faith or charity be lacking, he eats and drinks judgment to himself.
- 5In Glossa super Rom. 2, 4, collecta ex iis quae habentur in Comment. ad hunc loc. olim Ambrosio attributo. Cfr. tom. II. pag. 526, nota 1.In the Gloss on Romans 2:4, gathered from what is found in the Commentary on this passage formerly attributed to Ambrose. Cf. vol. II, p. 526, note 1.
- 6Eccle. 9, 1: Nescit homo, utrum amore, an odio dignus sit. — In cod. H additur certitudinaliter.Ecclesiastes 9:1: Man knows not whether he be worthy of love or of hatred. — In codex H is added with certainty.
- 7Epist. I. Cor. 4, 4, in quem locum Petr. Lombard. hanc refert Glossam: Id est, in nullo me remordet conscientia... non ideo me iustum puto, quia potest esse quod nescio.First Epistle to the Corinthians 4:4, on which passage Peter Lombard cites this Gloss: That is, my conscience reproaches me in nothing... I do not on that account think myself just, because it may be something I do not know.
- 8Plures codd. parat, et etiam inferius pluries edd. et codd. dissentiunt in usu utriusque verbi.Several codices read parat, and likewise further below the editions and codices several times disagree in the use of either word.
- 9Vide infra dub. 5.See below, dub. 5.
- 10Vat. poenitere, et volens scire (pauci codd. scienter, cod. A consciente), qui non.The Vatican edition reads poenitere, et volens scire (a few codices scienter, codex A consciente), qui non.
- 11Cfr. II. Sent. d. 39. a. 1. q. 3. — Vide scholion ad 1. huius articuli quaest.Cf. II Sentences, d. 39, a. 1, q. 3. — See the scholion on q. 1 of this article. ---