Is the Eucharist a sacrifice "before" it is a meal?

The following is from a series of comments made on a post on the Pray Tell Blog.  The comments have been edited slightly to keep the conversation focused on the matter of the Eucharist as a sacrifice "before" (my language) it is a meal.

Gerard Flynn: The offering, made by the community, of the body and blood of the Lord, to God, which takes places after the institution narrative, constitutes the sacrifice of the mass. It is the kernel of that which allows the mass to be called a sacrifice.

Jeffrey Pinyan: Certainly — it’s what makes the Mass a sacrifice. It’s what makes the Eucharist a sacrifice to God before It is a banquet for us.

Gerard Flynn: There is no basis for your claim that the eucharist is a sacrifice before it is a banquet. Your use of the word ‘before’ is ambiguous since, on the one hand, it may simply be an indication that X is anterior to Y. However, on the other hand, it may be interpreted in a qualitative, rather than in a temporal sense. In either case, it is unhelpful.

Jeffrey Pinyan: I don’t think that my claim is baseless or unhelpful. Chronologically speaking, the Eucharist is offered to (and received by) God as a sacrifice in the anaphora, and only after the anaphora is the Eucharist offered to (and received by) us as a communal banquet. Qualitatively speaking (from the Catholic perspective), does not the Eucharist as a communion meal derive its sign value and its efficacy from the very fact that it is a sacrifice? It’s not just Jesus’ favorite or last meal, or a meal to remember Him by. It is a sacrificial meal, not just of His Body and Blood, but of the Body which He gave and the Blood which He poured out. The Eucharist, being in the forms of bread and wine, is clearly meant to be received by us, to be eaten. I lament that western Catholics generally lost sight of that for centuries. But I think it is easier to lose sight of the Eucharist as being a sacrifice which we offer to God, and I would lament the loss of this understanding.

Gerard Flynn: If you simply mean that the eucharist is a sacrifice before it is a meal, in an anterior sense, the point is so trite and inocuous that it doesn’t deserve to have any cyber ink spilt over it.

Jeffrey Pinyan: I think it’s worth noting that such an important part of the anaphora, the offering of the Eucharist to God, can be missed if we’re not paying attention. It’s what makes the Mass a sacrifice and not just a factory for producing Communion. It’s hard to miss the Communion Rite, but it’s easy to miss the offering in the anaphora.

Gerald Flynn: Furthermore, to claim that God receives the sacrifice before the eucharist is consumed is to conflate and confuse the two spheres of human existence (time) and divine existence (eternity). It is anthropomorphic nonsense to speak of anteriority in this context.

Jeffrey Pinyan: Then keep the perspective temporal — we offer it to God before we presume to receive it ourselves. Or, you could say that God gets the first-fruits of the Eucharist.

At this point, Tom Poelker replied to my "qualitatively" point from my second response, which I'll repeat here:

Jeffrey Pinyan: Qualitatively speaking (from the Catholic perspective), does not the Eucharist as a communion meal derive its sign value and its efficacy from the very fact that it is a sacrifice? It’s not just Jesus’ favorite or last meal, or a meal to remember Him by. It is a sacrificial meal, not just of His Body and Blood, but of the Body which He gave and the Blood which He poured out.

Tom Poelker: Could someone better versed in Scripture and history than I please check this? Was not the Eucharist celebrated as a meal long before it was cited as a sacrifice? Was not the Eucharist valued as a memorial meal before it was valued as a sacrifice? If I am remembering this correctly,then it is impossible that “the Eucharist as a communion meal derive its sign value and its efficacy from the very fact that it is a sacrifice.”

Jeffrey Pinyan: The first Eucharist anticipated, or pre-presented, the sacrifice of the Cross. Christ called the bread His body “which IS given” and the wine His blood “which IS [being] poured out”. Our liturgical texts use the future tense because of the Clementine Vulgate, I think, but the Greek uses present passive participles.

Tom Poelker: Why are you not addressing the original perceptions of the Eucharist instead of repeating the later theological thoughts about it? This is exactly what I was trying to get away from, in seeking more information about what is known from Paul and Luke and the writings of the next generation or two. When did this looking back and connecting it to sacrifice begin, if I am correct that it is not the earliest frame of reference?

At this point, I decided to provide some scriptural starting points from which Tom and I could continue our discussion.

Jeffrey Pinyan: Tom, earlier, you had asked: “Was not the Eucharist celebrated as a meal long before it was cited as a sacrifice? Was not the Eucharist valued as a memorial meal before it was valued as a sacrifice?” Is the core of the matter whether Christians considered the Eucharist a sacrifice offered to God, or whether they considered the Eucharist to be sacrificial?

Here are some verses which I think display a first-or-second-generation perception of sacrifice in the (first) Eucharist.

“This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Mt 26:28)

“This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.” (Mk 14:24)

“This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me. … This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Lk 22:19-20)

“Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.” (1 Cor 5:7)

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor 10:16)

“This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me. … This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. ” (1 Cor 11:24-26)

“We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat.” (Heb 13:10)

[Christians quickly (at least by Justin Martyr's time) saw the Eucharist as the fulfillment of Mal 1:11. That seems to say something about the nature of the Eucharist as an offering/sacrifice to God.]

Then I provided commentary on those verses.

Jeffrey Pinyan: Jesus says the bread is His body “which is (given) for” us; He refers to His blood as the “blood of the covenant”, or to the cup as “the new covenant in my blood.”

His institution of the Eucharist is marked by sacrificial language (especially when you consider the verb tense in the Greek) — the bread and wine become present manifestations of His future Passion. The “covenant” language evokes Exodus 24: “And Moses took the blood and threw it upon the people, and said, ‘Behold the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you …’” The blood comes from a sacrifice; my apologies if this point is trite or inocuous.

When Jesus says that we should “do this in remembrance” of Him, part of the “this” is the making present of the covenant-sacrifice by means of bread and wine. And it is not only being made present to us, but to the Father as well. This is why Paul can say that we participate in Christ’s body and blood via the bread and cup, and how we “proclaim the Lord’s death” by celebrating the Eucharist (and specifically by eating it).

The eating then brings us the “pasch” imagery. Jesus is our pasch, our Passover Lamb. Not only did the Israelites sacrifice a lamb and then eat it, but they smeared its blood on their doorposts, in effect “showing” the sacrifice to God. The Passover was at once a meal and a sacrifice, inextricably linked: if you sacrificed it but did not eat it, you were not following the commandment (and who knows if you would have ended up dead?); if you ate the meal without sacrificing the lamb (and smearing its blood), the meal was not a covenant meal at all.

So the Passover’s efficacy as a meal was rooted in it being a sacrifice, while its efficacy as a sacrifice was only realized if it was eaten as a meal.

Finally, the obscure mention of “an altar” from which Christians have a right to eat (I do not think I am out of bounds to say that) in Hebrews 13 implies a sacrifice offered on that altar, the fruits of which are consumed by those offering.

Take the Aquinas Pledge!

Composed by Russ Renter at Crossing the Tiber 

Please feel free to copy, paste and post this.

I, as a Catholic who has agreed to accept and obey all the teachings of the Catholic Church, will commit to learning all God wishes to teach me regarding the Most Blessed Sacrament, the Holy Eucharist. As an integral aspect of this pledge, I will seek to grow in my understanding of what the Eucharist is and what place it has in my spiritual life.

I hereby pledge to make Christ in the Eucharist the source and summit of my faith and to meditate on the mystery of his Body and Blood offered to me in the appearances of bread and wine.

I hereby pledge to study the history of the early Christians and the writings of the Church Fathers to gain an appreciation for the role of the Eucharist in the life and growth of Christendom.

I hereby pledge to study the lives of the saints who have made the Eucharist the center of their lives and to ask their intercession that I too will grow in Eucharistic amazement and wonder.

I hereby pledge to never receive Christ's body and blood unless I am in a state of grace, meaning: I harbor no mortal sin as I approach the altar to receive Him. As a part of this pledge, I resolve to confess my sins to a priest at least once a month in order to be fully receptive to all the grace Jesus has for me.

I hereby pledge to make extra visits to my parish when possible to worship Him in adoration/exposition and/or to spend time before the Blessed Sacrament reposed in the Tabernacle.

I hereby pledge to share my understanding and love of the Eucharist with other Catholics and non-Catholics who may be interested in hearing why we wish to live Eucharistically centered lives.

I hereby pledge to live a life pleasing to God in profound gratitude for this most ineffable gift He has left His Church.

Contemplating Mary as a model for offering the Eucharist

What follows is an excerpt from Praying the Mass: The Prayers of the Priest chapter 6, "The Eucharistic Prayer", pp. 180-181.

---

In addition to Jesus Himself, we have been given another model to imitate in the Eucharistic offering. While Jesus is the model par excellence, especially for ordained priests, His mother is an excellent model for the lay faithful to look to.

Our contemplation of Mary as a model for offering the Eucharist begins at the foot of the cross, where St. John tells us she stood. (cf. John 19:25) A 13th century hymn about the sorrows of Mary at the Passion of her Son, Stabat Mater, opens with Mary “At the Cross, her station keeping.” [Footnote: One of the priest's prayers before Mass is a prayer to the Blessed Virgin Mary which asks her to stand by the priest as she stood by the cross on Calvary.]

In the Offertory, the priest is presented with gifts from God, and in the Eucharistic Prayer they are offered to God. Mary experienced this first-hand: she received the Word as a “gift” from God and offered Him back to God on the cross. This theme occurs in some papal documents from the past few centuries, such as Pope Leo XIII’s 1894 encyclical on the Rosary:

As we contemplate [Jesus] in the last and most piteous of those [Sorrowful] Mysteries [of the Rosary], there stood by the Cross of Jesus His Mother, who, in a miracle of charity, so that she might receive us as her sons, offered generously to Divine Justice her own Son, and died in her heart with Him, stabbed with the sword of sorrow. (Iucunda Semper Expectatione 3)

The role of Mary in offering Christ to the Father was also described in Ven. Pope Pius XII’s encyclical on the Mystical Body of Christ:

It was [Mary], the second Eve, who, free from all sin, original or personal, and always more intimately united with her Son, offered Him on Golgotha to the Eternal Father... (Mystici Corporis Christi 110)

More recently, Ven. Pope John Paul II reflected on Marian aspects of the Eucharist at the end of his encyclical on the Eucharist and the Church:

Mary, throughout her life at Christ’s side and not only on Calvary, made her own the sacrificial dimension of the Eucharist. … In her daily preparation for Calvary, Mary experienced a kind of “anticipated Eucharist” – one might say a “spiritual communion” – of desire and of oblation, which would culminate in her union with her Son in his passion… (Ecclesia de Eucharistia 56)

Mary does not represent the priest at the crucifixion, for Jesus is the priest, victim, and altar of His sacrifice; so what role does that leave for her? Mary is a figure of the Church (cf. Catechism 967, 972), so in her is represented all the faithful who offer the sacrifice with the priest. She joined her suffering with that of her Son (cf. Luke 2:34-35); she offered Him, even as He offered Himself. Thus Mary is a surpassing model for the lay faithful at Mass, she who inaugurated the exercise of the common priesthood by assisting at the first “Mass” on Calvary.

From The Prayers of the Priest: "Mixing the Wine with Water"

This prayer from the Mass is said quietly by the deacon or priest during the Preparation of the Gifts, while he prepares the chalice by pouring in some wine and then adding a few drops of water:

Per huius aquæ et vini mystérium
eius efficiámur divinitátis consórtes,
qui humanitátis nostræ fíeri dignátus est párticeps.

By the mystery of this water and wine              2 Macc. 15:39; John 19:34
may we come to share in the divinity of Christ          Rom. 5:2; 2 Pet. 1:4
who humbled himself to share in our humanity.                       Phil. 2:8

The simple act of pouring water into wine, and the prayer accompanying it, is a synthesis of the whole Mass, of the whole Catholic faith, and of all salvation history.  In order to unearth the theological and doctrinal riches of this easily-overlooked rite, we should first examine the history of this prayer.

Do not be surprised that so much can be written about such a small prayer.  The rite and its prayer are of phenomenal significance, as they represent the totality of redemption, from the Incarnation to the Passion and beyond, to the Resurrection and our eventual sharing in the divine life of God in Heaven.

(Read the whole thing here.)

The Incarnation and the Consecration

So I'm reading Rev. Nicholas Gihr's The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as a primary source for Praying the Mass: The Prayers of the Priest.  On pages 530-534, he explains the Offertory prayer (in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, of course — this book is from 1917) invoking the Holy Spirit, the Veni Sanctificator.

Veni Sanctificator, omnipotens aeterne Deus,
et benedic + hoc sacrificium tuo sancto nomini praeparatum.

Come, O Sanctifier, almighty and eternal God,
and bless this sacrifice prepared for the glory of Your holy Name.

On page 532, he answers the question, "Why is the Holy Spirit invoked (in this prayer and in the epiclesis of other anaphoras) to change the bread and wine into the Eucharist?"  The answer is excellent, and the footnote I've included is too amazing to pass up!

The proximate reason lies in the analogy which the Consecration bears to the Incarnation.  The great similarity and manifold relation between the accomplishment of the Eucharist on the altar and the mystery of the Incarnation of the Son of God in the bosom of the Immaculate Virgin Mary are often commented on by the Fathers, and are expressed also in the liturgy.

The Incarnation is, in a manner, renewed and enlarged in the Eucharistic Consecration — and that at all times as well as in numberless places.*  In like manner and for the same reason is it that the miracles of the Incarnation and Consecration are ascribed to the efficacy of the Holy Ghost.  This happens because both mysteries, being works of divine favor and love, as well as works full of infinite purity and holiness, have a special resemblance to the peculiar character of the Holy Ghost, who is personal love and sanctity.  Therefore, although in reality all the three Divine Persons accomplish the act of Consecration, yet it is most frequently ascribed to the power of the Holy Ghost.  As it is said in the Creed, that the Son of God "became incarnate by the Holy Ghost, of the Virgin Mary," we also acknowledge that the Holy Ghost, by His creative power as "Lord and [Giver] of life," changes the inanimate elements of bread and wine into Christ's Body and Blood.

"How shall this be done," says the holy Virgin, "because I know not man?" The Archangel Gabriel, answering, said to her: "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee."

"And now you ask: How shall the bread become the Body of Christ, and the wine, mingled with water, become the Blood of Christ? And I also answer you: The Holy Ghost shall overshadow each and shall effect that which is beyond language and conception." (St. John Damascene, De fide orthod., IV, 13)

---

* St. Chrysostom compares (De beato Philog. hom. 6) altar and crib, remarking that on them the Body of Christ reposes no longer wrapped in swaddling bands, but wholly reclothed by the Holy Ghost.

An instrument customary in the Greek liturgy and known by the name of star (aster, asteriskos) also reminds us of the Incarnation. It consists of two intersecting arcs turned downwards. Assuredly the asterisk serves, in the first place, as a protecting cover for the Eucharistic Bread, that — especially after the Consecration — it may not be touched by the velum spread over it; at the same time it symbolizes by its appearance the star that stood over the place where the Child Jesus lay. When, therefore, the priest has incensed the asterisk, and placed it on the discus under the veil, he says: "and a star came and stood over the place where the child was."

Sacrificial language in the documents of Vatican II

It might surprise you how much Vatican II speaks of Jesus as the "Divine Victim" and how often it referred to the Eucharist as the "(Holy) Sacrifice of the Mass".

"Taking part in the Eucharistic sacrifice, which is the fount and apex of the whole Christian life, [the faithful] offer the Divine Victim to God, and offer themselves along with It." (Lumen Gentium 11)

"[Bishops] are the original ministers of confirmation, dispensers of sacred Orders and the moderators of penitential discipline, and they earnestly exhort and instruct their people to carry out with faith and reverence their part in the liturgy and especially in the holy sacrifice of the Mass." (Lumen Gentium 26)

"[Priests] exercise their sacred function especially in the Eucharistic worship or the celebration of the Mass by which acting in the person of Christ and proclaiming His Mystery they unite the prayers of the faithful with the sacrifice of their Head and renew and apply in the sacrifice of the Mass until the coming of the Lord the only sacrifice of the New Testament namely that of Christ offering Himself once for all a spotless Victim  to the Father." (Lumen Gentium 28)

"After this manner the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross, where she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, grieving exceedingly with her only begotten Son, uniting herself with a maternal heart with His sacrifice, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this Victim which she herself had brought forth." (Lumen Gentium 58)

"[Members of religious communities] should celebrate the sacred liturgy, especially the holy sacrifice of the Mass, with both lips and heart as the Church desires and so nourish their spiritual life from this richest of sources." (Perfectae Caritatis 6)

"So priests must instruct their people to offer to God the Father the Divine Victim in the Sacrifice of the Mass, and to join to it the offering of their own lives." (Presbyterorum Ordinis 5)

"Priests act especially in the person of Christ as ministers of holy things, particularly in the Sacrifice of the Mass, the sacrifice of Christ who gave himself for the sanctification of men." (Presbyterorum Ordinis 13)

"To accomplish so great a work, Christ is always present in His Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, not only in the person of His minister, 'the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross', but especially under the eucharistic species." (Sacrosanctum Concilium 7)

"This is why we ask the Lord in the sacrifice of the Mass that, 'receiving the offering of the spiritual victim,' he may fashion us for himself 'as an eternal gift'." (Sacrosanctum Concilium 12)

"[The faithful] should be instructed by God's word and be nourished at the table of the Lord's body; they should give thanks to God; by offering the Immaculate Victim, not only through the hands of the priest, but also with him, they should learn also to offer themselves; through Christ the Mediator, they should be drawn day by day into ever more perfect union with God and with each other, so that finally God may be all in all." (Sacrosanctum Concilium 48)

"For this reason the sacred Council, having in mind those Masses which are celebrated with the assistance of the faithful, especially on Sundays and feasts of obligation, has made the following decrees in order that the sacrifice of the Mass, even in the ritual forms of its celebration, may become pastorally efficacious to the fullest degree." (Sacrosanctum Concilium 49)

"Before offering Himself up as a spotless victim  upon the altar, Christ prayed to His Father for all who believe in Him." (Unitatis Redintegratio 2)

Why do we eat the Body and Blood of our Lord?

This is an answer of mine from the Catholic Answers Forum.

---

What is the initial reason why we would want to consume the blood and body of our beloved Christ?

Hmm... what is the initial reason? I would say because the Lord Himself commanded it. (cf. John 6:29-58; Matt 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-25)

Why did He command it? Or, more deeply, why was it under the signs of bread and wine that Jesus commanded us to receive His Body and Blood? Why would He have us consume His Body and Blood? Well, God knows... but He had been preparing Israel for it for centuries.

Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of the Most High God (long before Israel existed and had priests), offered God a thanksgiving offering of bread and wine, and he blessed Abram. (cf. Gen 14:18-20) And the letter to the Hebrews tells us that Melchizedek was a foreshadowing of Christ. (cf. Heb 7) Melchizedek's name means "king of righteousness", and Salem (shalom) means "peace".

God later tested Abraham, asking him to offer his only beloved son as a holocaust on a mountain. As they went up the mountain -- Isaac carrying the wood for his own sacrificial death on his back -- he asked his father where the lamb for the sacrifice was, and Abraham replied that God would provide Himself the lamb. God did provide an animal for sacrifice in place of Isaac... but it was a ram, with its head caught in a thicket of thorns. (cf. Gen 22)

When God delivered Israel from captivity in Egypt, He instituted a ritual sacrificial meal for them, by which each family was to acquire a spotless, unblemished lamb, to kill it without breaking its bones and to spread its blood upon the doorposts of their homes; the angel of God's wrath, seeing the blood, would pass over them. The family was also to eat the flesh of the lamb. But this was not God's lamb... (cf. Exo 12-13)

In time, another ritual was instituted for Israel, the Yom Kippur ("day of atonement") ritual. Two lambs or goats were chosen, one to be slaughtered in sacrifice, and the other to have the sins of all of Israel placed upon its head and to be sent out into the wilderness to die. This was the "scapegoat", the one who receives the blame and punishment for the sins of others. (cf. Lev 16)

On the shores of the Jordan, John the Baptist called out to all who would hear him, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29) He was speaking of Jesus, the only beloved Son of God. (cf. Matt 3:17) Pilate found Jesus to be without fault or blemish. (cf. John 18:38) At His crucifixion, our Lord was crowned with thorns and carried the wood for his own sacrificial death on his back. (cf. John 19:2, 17) His bones were not broken. (cf. John 19:31-36)

St. Paul says that "Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed." (1 Cor 5:7)  ["Paschal" means "Passover"]

St. Paul asks, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (1 Cor 10:16)

St. Peter says that we "were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot." (1 Pet 1:18-19)

St. John saw in Heaven "a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain." (Rev 5:6)

The angels in Heaven say "Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb." (Rev 19:9)

(And why do we drink His blood? Israel was forbidden to consume blood, since the life is in the blood. (cf. Gen 9:4; Lev 17:10-14) That was to prepare them for the only blood they should consume, the Blood of Him Who has eternal life.)

Protestant perception of the "Lord's Supper"

This post comes from a thread on the Coming Home Network International forums.

One poster, "Pange Lingua" (Michael), wrote:

I think that Baptist minister is probably much closer to Catholicism than he would ever venture to suspect. If all of these things [the bread and wine for the "Lord's Supper"] are meant to be mere symbols, then it shouldn't make a great deal of difference how they're dispensed or how they're dispensed with. If his heart tells him there's something more to it ... then the little disposable cups he probably uses in his own services begins to become suspect. How the leftover grape juice is poured down the drain begins to become suspect. What happens to the rest of that loaf of French bread he's using starts to matter - and the little kids running up to grab a hunk after the service - well, that starts to matter too.

I think the simple realization that things matter is a huge part of the journey.

Sometimes the journey home has to start at home as well, within the Church. Last year some noise had to be made in my own parish because it was discovered that the chalice was being cleaned improperly, with the remnants of the precious blood being poured down the drain. Perhaps we needed a sensitive Baptist to help us out. Perhaps he'll be able to within not too many years.

Another poster, Steven Barrett, responded:

I knew I was in a deep "cultural hole" and ready for some steady teasin' at the Baptist church we used to attend and I was a sexton for, on the day I refused to vacuum up the little pieces of remaining communion bread.

"I'm NOT sucking up the Lord!" sez I. They couldn't believe I was that respectful for the communion they allowed to fall on their rugs, which were no doubt ground down a few times ... and you wouldn't want to know how they treated their Bibles, which in a Baptist Church are more important than their portions of Communion.

Here is my response:

---

Imagine if a wife threw out the bouquet of roses her husband gave her 10 minutes later. She'd explain, of course, that the roses were a symbol of her husband's love for her, and she received them and so spiritually/symbolically received his love, and now the flowers had served their purpose and, really, they were only ever just flowers: the husband's attachment of his love to them didn't change them in reality, just in perception, and now the perception (as far as the wife is concerned) is gone, the actual love having been acknowledged.

But no wife does that (do they?!). Yes, even wives with no belief in the Eucharist or Jesus Christ at all keep roses, ordinary flowers that serve as mere symbols of love (romantic, erotic, etc.), around longer than many Christian communities keep their "Lord's Supper" around after it has been received.

Merry Christmas - Today's Collect

Being familiar with the Roman Missal in both Latin and English, as well as in both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms, often provides me with a little bonus when I pay close attention to the prayers of the Mass.

The Collect (commonly referred to as the "opening prayer") of the Mass of Christmas during the day sounded familiar to me.  The English translation I heard had to do with God wonderfully creating man and then even more wonderfully restoring him in Christ, and asking that as Jesus shared our weakness, so too we might share His glory.  While the translation could have been better (and is elsewhere during the Mass!) it caused me to recollect another prayer.  But first, the Latin text of the Collect:

Deus, qui humanae substantiae dignitatem
et mirabiliter condidisti, et mirabilius reformasti,
da, quaesumus, nobis eius divinitatis esse consortes,
qui humanitatis nostrae fieri dignatus est particeps.

This is very similar to the prayer over the water and wine during the Offertory in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, some of which (the bolded part) is retained in the Ordinary Form:

Deus, qui humánæ substántiæ dignitátem
mirabíliter condidísti et mirabílius reformásti:
da nobis, per hujus aquæ et vini mystérium,
ejus divinitátis esse consórtes,
qui humanitátis nostræ fíeri dignátus est párticeps,
Jesus Christus, Fílius tuus, Dóminus noster:
Qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitáte Spíritus Sancti Deus:
per ómnia sæcula sæculórum. Amen.

The prayer is about how God wonderfully created man and even more wonderfully restored him (in Christ), and how the mingling of the water in the wine represents Christ sharing our humanity as a pledge that we will share His divinity.  St. Peter wrote about that!  The latter half of this Collect was translated better (not having to do with "weakness" and "glory" but, accurately, with "humanity" and "divinity") during the Offertory:  "By the mystery of this water and wine, may we come to share in the divinity of Christ, who humbled himself to share in our humanity."

As for the mingling of water and wine, the inimitable Fr. Z offers this commentary:

The Christmas Collect was adapted for the preparation of the chalice by the priest during every Mass. Before the priest raises the chalice upwards in offering, he mingles with the wine a very small quantity of water, just drops. The mingling of water and wine underscores three things.

First, it reveals how the Divine Son humbly accepted human nature.

Second, it shows how we will be transformed by Him in the life to come. Indeed, we who are baptized into Christ and who receive the Eucharist are already being transformed, like drops of water in His wine. In the mingling of the water and wine, the water loses itself, becoming what the wine is (though in God’s transforming embrace we do not "lose" ourselves, but rather find ourselves more perfectly!). "O admirabile commercium! O marvelous exchange!" as the Church sings at Vespers and Lauds on Christmas Octave. As Fathers of the Church expressed it the Son of God became the Son of Man so that we might become the sons of God. This "holy exchange" is the heart of Holy Mass. Bread and wine are given to us by God and we, in turn, collect them, work them, give them back to God who transforms them through the power of the Holy Spirit into the Real Presence of Christ (Body, Blood, soul and divinity). In turn the species of the Eucharist transform us, making us also into acceptable offerings to God. In this marvelous exchange earthly and temporal things mysteriously, sacramentally, become vehicles of the eternal.

Third, the mixing of those few (human) drops into the (divine) wine in the chalice (an image of sacrifice and oblation) reveals how lay people must unite their prayers and sacrifices to what the priest offers at the altar: "Pray brethren that my sacrifice and yours be acceptable to God the almighty Father." There is a distinction made regarding the way in which the priest and the people offer their sacrifices. The people offer good and acceptable sacrifice to God from their "baptismal priesthood", as members of Christ, who is High Priest. But the priest makes a very different kind of sacrifice, as alter Christus… another Christ. So, the people at Mass must unite their good offerings to those of the priest. The mingling of the water and wine is a good moment to make a conscious effort to do precisely that.

The Catholic Church and Closed Communion

(11/26 edit: I left out perhaps the most obvious meaning of "Communion", which I have now included below.)

The Catholic Church, unlike many other Christian communities, has a discipline known as "closed communion." This means that (other than very exceptional cases), only members of the Catholic Church may partake of Holy Communion (that is, receive the Holy Eucharist).  Some non-Catholics are very confused by this policy. They see it as exclusive: "Why aren't all invited to the table or the Lord? Did Jesus exclude anyone?" They see it as divisive between Christians: "We allow non-[XYZ]'s to receive the Lord's Supper, so why don't Catholics?" Some are deeply hurt by not being able to receive Communion.

To explain this discipline, we must describe accurately what the Eucharist is and what Holy Communion means to the Church.

Regardless of what a person thinks the Eucharist is, no matter what a person thinks he is eating when he receives Holy Communion in a Catholic church, he is receiving the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord and Savior. He is not receiving bread or wine, nor a "symbol". If this blessed gift is received unworthily, he adds sin (unworthy reception) to sin (which made his reception unworthy in the first place). Furthermore, this is not just a "meal" or "banquet." This is the Marriage Supper of the Lamb under the veil of a sacrament; this is the consumption of a sacrificial offering.

This Marriage Supper, this mystical wedding banquet, is for those who are "wedded" to Christ in His Church.  In other words, receiving Holy Communion means that you are in communion with Christ and His Church.  That naturally excludes those who are not Christian at all, the unbaptized.  Just as St. Paul wrote that the "fathers" of Israel "all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same supernatural food and all drank the same supernatural drink" (1 Cor 10:2-4), so those who are baptized into Christ receive a supernatural food and drink.  It was only the Israelites (those of the older covenant) who partook of that supernatural food and drink; likewise, it is only the Church (those of the new covenant, not just one nation) who partake of this supernatural food and drink.

It also excludes those who are Christians but are separated (or "estranged," you could say) from the Bride of Christ, which is the Catholic Church, whether by mortal sin or by not holding the Catholic faith.  Faith is a matter of fidelity to God; the Church is faithful to her spouse, Christ, and so her members too must be faithful, believing that Catholic faith.

Catholic doctrine is that the Eucharist is a true sacrifice offered to God. (Numerically, it is the same sacrifice as that of Christ on the cross, with only the manner of the offering being different: the Eucharist is unbloody. Likewise, the Body which is received in the sacrament is numerically identical to that which was conceived in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary and died on Calvary.)  Let me repeat: the Eucharist is a sacrifice; receiving Holy Communion is partaking in a sacrificial meal. As St. Paul asked, "Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in the sacrificial offerings?" (1 Cor 9:13) "Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar?" (1 Cor 10:18)  You are partaking in a sacrificial offering at an altar.

If, as some Protestants believe, the Mass is a satanic and pagan corruption of true worship of God, and the Eucharist is a satanic and pagan sacrifice, then the Eucharist would be being offered "to demons and not to God" (1 Cor 10:20), and anyone who receives Holy Communion at Mass is partaking of the "table of demons." (1 Cor 10:21)  What did St. Paul say about that? "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons." (1 Cor 10:21)

Regardless of whether the Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist is true (and of course, I believe that it is), Catholics believe they are offering a sacrifice to God and are then partaking of that offering. If they are right, and you want to receive it too, why aren't you Catholic?! And if they are wrong, and it is a pagan offering and a fellowship with demons, why would you want to receive it?!

Liturgical Spirituality: The Baptismal Priesthood and the Mass (Part III)

The Unique Contribution of the Bread and Wine

← Part II: Spiritual Sacrifices United to Bread and Wine

While the faithful are called to unite their spiritual sacrifices to the bread and wine on the altar, this contribution is the duty of the faithful and does not make up the matter of the Eucharist, which is strictly bread and wine.  There is no Eucharist without these elements, prefigured by Melchizedek and chosen by Christ.  We offer ourselves spiritually, whereas we offer the bread and wine physically.  The bread and wine are a necessary component of the Mass, and they provide a unique contribution.  Quoting from Pope John Paul II's letter Dominicae Cenae once more:

All who participate with faith in the Eucharist become aware that it is a "sacrifice," that is to say, a "consecrated Offering." For the bread and wine presented at the altar and accompanied by the devotion and the spiritual sacrifices of the participants are finally consecrated, so as to become truly, really and substantially Christ's own body that is given up and His blood that is shed. Thus, by virtue of the consecration, the species of bread and wine re-present in a sacramental, unbloody manner the bloody propitiatory sacrifice offered by Him on the cross to His Father for the salvation of the world. Indeed, He alone, giving Himself as a propitiatory Victim in an act of supreme surrender and immolation, has reconciled humanity with the Father, solely through His sacrifice, "having cancelled the bond which stood against us."

To this sacrifice, which is renewed in a sacramental form on the altar, the offerings of bread and wine, united with the devotion of the faithful, nevertheless bring their unique contribution, since by means of the consecration by the priest they become sacred species. This is made clear by the way in which the priest acts during the Eucharistic Prayer, especially at the consecration, and when the celebration of the holy Sacrifice and participation in it are accompanied by awareness that "the Teacher is here and is calling for you."

During the Offertory, the priest asks God to be pleased with the offering of bread and wine, which are natural and imperfect (although they are the best we have to offer).  God accepts them as fitting matter for the Eucharist and changes their substance in the Eucharistic Prayer:  they become supernatural and perfect.

Because of what the bread and wine will become (once consecrated) the union of our spiritual sacrifices to the bread and wine during the Offertory is a sign of our participation in Christ and His sacrifice.  The bread and wine already have a physical likeness to Christ's sacrifice, since they are the same elements He used, and the same elements that were offered centuries before Him by Melchizedek.  When we join our spiritual sacrifices to them in the Offertory, each of us gives them (to our own degree) a spiritual likeness to Christ's sacrifice.  In the Eucharistic Prayer, this likeness is perfected as they receive a substantial likeness to Christ's sacrifice.

What began as our gift to God, bread and wine, becomes His gift back to us, the Eucharist.  But this gift to us is not meant simply for our nourishment, as the Eucharistic Prayer makes clear immediately following the consecration:  the Body and Blood of our Lord, under the species (appearances) of bread and wine, are then offered back to God as the perfect sacrifice.  Only after this offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass do we partake in the sacred banquet of Holy Communion.

The final part of this essay revisits the idea of joining our sacrifices to the offering at the altar, now that the offering is no longer bread and wine, but the very Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord.

Liturgical Spirituality: The Baptismal Priesthood and the Mass (Part II)

Spiritual Sacrifices United to Bread and Wine

← Part I: The Function of the Baptismal Priesthood at Mass

An external act that represents an internal reality is an empty show unless that internal reality is truly present. Imagine a man giving his wife a bouquet of roses, a gesture that is generally recognized as a display of love, without actually caring about her at all. The roses are real, the wife's reaction is real, but there is something missing: the intention. This analogy is apropos for the Offertory of the Mass, when bread and wine are brought to the priest. This external act, often carried out by members of the congregation, is not a mere functional procedure; it is representative of so much more.

The bread and wine were once, in the earlier days of the Church, the product of the community. They were presented along with other donations and material offerings. With the passage of time, the bread and wine were "regularized," and the offerings tended more and more towards monetary donations. Our monetary support finances the bread and wine, so they are still the "product of the community." But these physical offerings are not the only thing the faithful present to the priest at this time. Now, as then, the bread and wine also represent all that we have to offer to God. This is how Pope John Paul II explained the significance of this rite in his 1980 letter to Bishops on the Eucharist, Dominicae Cenae:

Although all those who participate in the Eucharist do not confect the sacrifice as [the priest] does, they offer with him, by virtue of the common priesthood, their own spiritual sacrifices represented by the bread and wine from the moment of their presentation at the altar. For this liturgical action, which takes a solemn form in almost all liturgies, has a "spiritual value and meaning." The bread and wine become in a sense a symbol of all that the eucharistic assembly brings, on its own part, as an offering to God and offers spiritually.

The only sacrifice that is truly acceptable to God the Father is the Eucharist, which is the very Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.  But God looks on what we offer with fatherly affection.  The bread and wine presented to Him by the priest is deemed acceptable as the means by which He will give us the Eucharist; the bread and wine are gifts from God to begin with.  Because the bread and wine represent our spiritual sacrifices, these too are regarded with a similar love:  God knows what He will make of the bread and wine, and He knows what He will make of our meager sacrifices.

The bread and wine are blessed during the Offertory prayers; they are set aside to be consecrated in the Eucharistic Prayer, when they will be transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of Christ.  But in that brief time between the Offertory and Consecration, the bread and wine are sacramentals because of the prayer of the priest over them.  A sacramental, such as the bread or wine to be used in the Eucharistic Prayer, or a paten or chalice, is dedicated for a particular use when blessed.  This is not the same as the change that takes place in a sacrament (such as the Eucharist), where bread and wine change ontologically (that is, in their substance, their reality).  A sacrament involves a change of being, while a sacramental involves a change of purpose.

By uniting our spiritual sacrifices to the bread and wine in the Offertory, we "appropriate" those sacramentals, much in the same way we "appropriate" Holy Water (another sacramental) by being blessed with it, or we "appropriate" a blessing over a meal by praying it.  We join our spiritual sacrifices to the bread and wine (which represent, physically, those very sacrifices), imbuing them with a greater spiritual significance for each of us and for the Church as a whole.

In presenting the bread and wine (with our spiritual intentions) to God, we are like the good stewards in the parable of the talents: "Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more." (Matt. 25:20) The first five talents are the "good works ... prepared [by God] beforehand" for which we were "created in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:10; cf. 2 Cor. 9:8), whereas the second five talents are the "fruit[s] in every good work" that we carry out. (Col. 1:10; cf. John 15:1-8; Rom. 7:4)  As the Offertory prayers state (in the Latin and the accurate English translation), "through [God's] goodness we have received the bread we offer [Him]." The bread and wine we offer to God are the "five talents more", the fruit of investing the "five talents" which God gave us (seed and water and sunlight).

When we join our devotion to the bread and wine, we should be mindful of what will happen to the bread and wine:  it will be changed in substance to become the Eucharist.  The significance of our spiritual sacrifices bound up with the bread and wine will be made clear in the next two parts of this essay.

Part III: The Unique Contribution of the Bread and Wine →

Liturgical Spirituality: The Baptismal Priesthood and the Mass (Part I)

The Function of the Baptismal Priesthood at Mass

There are two ways that Christ's priesthood is exercised in the Church. One is the ministerial priesthood, whereby men are ordained as priests to offer the Eucharist, the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Altar. The other is the common priesthood, whereby every baptized Christian is called to offer spiritual sacrifices to God, ultimately offering Him their very selves.

The line between these two priesthoods, which "differ from one another in essence and not only in degree" (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 10), has been blurred or even erased in the minds of some Catholics today. Some denigrate the ministerial priesthood (or elevate the baptismal priesthood) to equate the two priesthoods, treating the ministerial priest as a mere representative of the congregation, instead of as the representative of Christ.  This is utterly opposed by Church teaching, as the documents of Vatican II make clear.

There is a serious lack of understanding concerning the baptismal priesthood and what it truly entails, especially in the context of the Mass. What must be understood is that the baptismal priesthood is an exercise of the apostolate of the laity, just as the ministerial priesthood is an exercise of the apostolate of the ordained. Of course, one must know, then, what the apostolate of the laity is!  It just so happens that there is a Vatican II document specifically about that, Apostolicam Actuositatem. In addition to that document, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, summarizes the lay apostolate in Part IV (paragraphs 30-38):

[T]he laity, by their very vocation, seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God. They live in the world, that is, in each and in all of the secular professions and occupations. They live in the ordinary circumstances of family and social life, from which the very web of their existence is woven. They are called there by God that by exercising their proper function and led by the spirit of the Gospel they may work for the sanctification of the world from within as a leaven. In this way they may make Christ known to others, especially by the testimony of a life resplendent in faith, hope and charity. Therefore, since they are tightly bound up in all types of temporal affairs it is their special task to order and to throw light upon these affairs in such a way that they may come into being and then continually increase according to Christ to the praise of the Creator and the Redeemer. (Lumen Gentium 31)

The word apostolate can be understood as "mission."  What is the "mission" of the laity?  We are called to live outside the walls of churches and monasteries and convents. We are called to bring the sanctifying presence of Christ into the world: that is why Mass ends with a dismissal, a missio, a mission. In our capacity as baptismal priests, we are called to make of the world (and our lives in it) an offering, a spiritual sacrifice to God, joined to the ministerial priest's sacrifice of the Eucharist.

Some people think (because they were taught so) that Vatican II opened the door to myriad liturgical activities performed by the laity; that's how they interpret the call to "active participation" (Sacrosanctum Concilium 14).  That is simply not the case.  In all the Council documents, there is but one sentence which speaks directly to the carrying out of liturgical functions by the laity:  "Finally, the hierarchy entrusts to the laity certain functions which are more closely connected with pastoral duties, such as the teaching of Christian doctrine, certain liturgical actions, and the care of souls." (Vatican II, Apostolicam Actuositatem 24)  While the extraordinary assistance of some laymen at Mass is appreciated in times of necessity, the exercise of the baptismal priesthood at Mass is not rooted in "a visible liturgical rite" (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei 93) but rather in the spiritual union of their own sacrifices with the bread and wine presented to the priest, culminating in the union of themselves to the Eucharist offered to the Father.

Part II of this essay will examine the uniting of spiritual sacrifices with the bread and wine in the Offertory.

Part II: Spiritual Sacrifices United to Bread and Wine →

Liturgical Spirituality: The Baptismal Priesthood and the Mass

I will soon be presenting a rough essay in four parts.  I recently had a wonderful conversation with a fellow Catholic on the exercising of the baptismal priesthood at Mass:  the joining of our spiritual sacrifices with the bread and wine (at the Offertory) and then with the Eucharist (after the Consecration).  There have been some minor epiphanies on both sides, and I will be presenting the substance of the conversation as a series of four posts:

Here's an outline of the parts of this series:

1. The Function of the Baptismal Priesthood in the Mass
2. Spiritual Sacrifices United to Bread and Wine
   
3. The Unique Contribution of the Bread and Wine
4. Spiritual Sacrifices United to the Eucharist
   

Eucharistic Adoration: Rev. McBrien vs. the Magisterium

Here's what Rev. Richard McBrien of Notre Dame (and the mis-named National Catholic Reporter) says:

Notwithstanding Pope Benedict XVI's personal endorsement of eucharistic adoration and the sporadic restoration of the practice in the archdiocese of Boston and elsewhere, it is difficult to speak favorably about the devotion today.  Now that most Catholics are literate and even well-educated, the Mass is in the language of the people (i.e, the vernacular), and its rituals are relatively easy to understand and follow, there is little or no need for extraneous eucharistic devotions. The Mass itself provides all that a Catholic needs sacramentally and spiritually.  Eucharistic adoration, perpetual or not, is a doctrinal, theological, and spiritual step backward, not forward.

And here's what an actual teacher of the Church, Cristoph Cardinal Schönborn says:

The prelate recalled the example of St. John Vianney, who instructed his parishioners to focus on the tabernacle in prayer, stating, "He is there, he is there!" ... Cardinal Schönborn urged, "Do everything possible, and the impossible, to allow the faithful and persons seeking God -- whom God awaits -- to have access to Jesus in the Eucharist: Don't close the doors of your churches, please!" ... "Let us leave our churches open!"

Card. Canizares: The future of humanity is in the liturgy

Father Z. provides his usual commentary, this time on an interview of Cardinal Canizares (prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments). Father Z. gently corrects a couple generalizations made by the Cardinal, but primarily offers a great analysis of how the Cardinal's words are related to Pope Benedict's ongoing reform and restoration of Catholic identity.

Who interviewed the Cardinal? LifeSiteNews, "a non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family." The interview is about the relationship between the Mass (and other liturgy) and the duty we have to love and respect human life.

"[T]here is no new humanity and there is no hope for man that is not grounded in God that would come from God and would return everything to God as His glory. The future of humanity is in the liturgy."

Corpus Christi: my pastor's homily

My pastor, Fr. Bob, gave an excellent pastoral homily today on several of the Church's (perhaps not-too-well-known) teachings concerning the Holy Eucharist. He started his homily by mentioning an encounter he had had a few weeks ago: an Episcopalian came up to him after Mass and said how happy he was to have been able to receive Communion in a Catholic church. My pastor was not going to press the issue, but the man kept speaking about other "changes" he was happy the Catholic Church had made, so my pastor felt he had to correct the man.

My pastor's homily was about the Church's teaching on who can receive Communion and what the proper preparation for receiving the Blessed Sacrament is. He mentioned fasting, prayer, reception of the sacrament of Reconciliation if necessary, and even the reading of Scripture (if not at least paying attention to what is proclaimed in the Liturgy of the Word).^* He also reminded us of Who the Eucharist is, how it is the center of our lives, the greatest gift we have received and the greatest gift we can offer back to the Father.

Please join me in offering a prayer of thanksgiving to God for my pastor, especially for the wonderful homily he gave his people this morning. (I hope he gives the homily at every Mass this weekend — a visiting priest usually says one of the four Masses each weekend.)

On a related note, the Prayer of the Faithful today was also wonderful. The intentions included prayers for the reverent celebration of the liturgy, for the lives of believers in Christ to be a witness to the world, for proper reverence and respect to be shown to the Most Holy Eucharist, for an increase of God's grace to those who live in places where the Mass cannot be celebrated often, and for the Lord to call to the priesthood more men by whose hands the Eucharist will come to us.

(And I got a compliment from a parishioner after Mass for my service: I was the reader today, and I did my best — the Spirit did the rest! — to proclaim the Scriptures clearly so that the congregation would understand their relation to this great feast day of the Church.)

Other homilies for Corpus Christi:

Fr. Philip Neri Powell, O.P.
Fr. Martin Fox
Fr. Daren J. Zehnle
Excerpts from Pope Benedict XVI

^* Fasting, prayer, penance, and Scripture are the four "preparations" I mention in my book, Praying the Mass: The Prayers of the People. I'd say I got it right, then! :)

Dry Liturgy

Fr. McNamara answered this question on ZENIT:

Q: Nowadays there seems to be a shift from the spirit of the liturgy to mechanical and ritualistic performance. Since our liturgy is so very dry, many Catholics in several parts of India are going to Protestant churches where the worship is spontaneous, meaningful and gives them a sense of involvement and satisfaction. Some of the questions put to you and your answers seem to be not appealing to the soul. Should we not think of promoting meaningful liturgy in the light of the local culture and its needs? -- P.J., Dindigul, India

Here's some of his answer:

...

I do not believe that it follows that an exact and precise liturgical celebration is thereby a soulless and mechanical ritual. Nor is a cavalier attitude toward rubrics an inevitable proof of authentic Christianity. There can be both good faith and hypocrisy behind both attitudes, but these are the failings of individual human beings that do not touch the heart of the question.

I strongly defend fidelity to liturgical norms because I believe that the faithful have a right to be able to participate in a recognizably Catholic liturgy, a liturgy that flows from Christ himself and is part of the great stream of the communion of saints.

While not doubting the sincerity of my correspondent, I must take exception to his way of characterizing Protestant worship with respect to Catholic liturgy. I believe that we are before a question that goes much deeper than external forms. The crux of the problem is not that our separated brethren have more exciting performances but that we have failed to teach our faithful basic Catholic doctrine on the Mass and the Eucharist.

...

Therefore if some of our Catholic faithful are migrating to Protestant groups, I don't think we should be blaming the liturgy but rather double our efforts to celebrate it properly and proclaim the truth of the great mystery of faith.

AMEN! Read the whole thing!

From Pope John Paul II's last Holy Thursday letter

"Mysterium fidei!" Every time he proclaims these words after consecrating the bread and wine, the priest expresses his ever-renewed amazement at the extraordinary miracle worked at his hands. It is a miracle which only the eyes of faith can perceive. The natural elements do not lose their external characteristics, since the "species" remain those of bread and wine; but their "substance", through the power of Christ's word and the action of the Holy Spirit, is changed into the substance of the body and blood of Christ. On the altar, then, Christ crucified and risen is "truly, really and substantially" present in the fullness of his humanity and divinity. What an eminently sacred reality! That is why the Church treats this mystery with such great reverence, and takes such care to ensure the observance of the liturgical norms intended to safeguard the sanctity of so great a sacrament. (Letter to Priests for Holy Thursday 2005, 6)

Pope Urban IV, Transiturus de hoc mundo (translation)

I'm compiling my resources on Eucharistic Adoration into a book (surprise, surprise). In doing so, I'm expanding the amount of information that I had in my notes and my presentation. To that end, I've decided to translate the fragments of Pope Urban IV's bull Transiturus de hoc mundo from August 11, 1264, with which he established the Feast of Corpus Christi.

The Latin text (below my translation) can be found in Denzinger 846-847.

Indeed, with regard to this sacrament, He said to the Apostles, “Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19), that the especial, unique, and manifest memorial of His most excellent love, with which He loved us, might be for us this supreme and august sacrament. Miraculous is the memorial ... in which the sign is renewed and the wonderful things are transformed, in which is contained all delight, in which certainly we obtain support of life and salvation. This is the saving memorial, in which we bring to mind the dear memory of our redemption, in which we are brought back from evil and built up in goodness, and attain an increase of virtues and graces, in which we most certainly approach the bodily presence of the Savior Himself.

Note, on the one hand how we are gathered together in spirit and mind with those others whose memory we celebrate, but we do not obtain thereby their real presence. [But] in this sacramental commemoration of Christ, Jesus Christ is truly present, albeit under another form, He is truly with us in His very own substance. Indeed, as He was about to ascend into Heaven, He said to the Apostles and to their followers: “Behold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world” (Matt. 28:20), comforting them by the gracious promise, that He would abide and be with them even in his bodily presence.

Transcending every fullness of bounty, exceeding all manner of love, He provides himself in this meal. O singular and admirable, O unique and extraordinary gift, whereby the Giver comes as gift, and the very same is given with the Giver inside. Therefore, He gives to us himself as sustenance, that, because man had been overcome by death [by food in Eden], even so He might be raised to life by food. A taste [of the food in Eden] mortally wounded man, and a taste [of this food] cured him. See this: because, whence the wound was sprung [from a tree (in the garden)], so came the cure [from a tree (the cross)], and whence death crept in, thence life came forth. Of the former tasting it is written accordingly: “In whatsoever day you eat [of it], you shall die to the death” (Gen. 2:17); of the latter [tasting], it reads truly: “If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever.” (John 6:52)

Such an appropriate gift and fitting work of the Holy Spirit came forth, that the Eternal Word of God, who is the food and refreshment of [us] rational creatures, was made flesh, that He may be given as food for a rational creature, for flesh and body, that is, for man. This bread is received [as food], but it is not truly “devoured;” it is eaten, but it is not changed, because in the eating it is not transformed at all, but, if it is received worthily, the one who receives it is conformed to Him.

In institutione quidem huius sacramenti dixit ipse Apostolis: 'Hoc facite in meam commemorationem' (Lc 22, 19), ut praecipuum et insigne memoriale sui amoris eximii, quo nos dilexit, esset nobis hoc praecelsum et venerabile sacramentum. Memoriale, inquam, mirabile ..., in quo innovata sunt signa et mirabilia immutata, in quo habetur omne delectamentum ..., in quo utique vitae suffragium consequimur et salutis. Hoc est memoriale ... salvificum, in quo gratam redemptionis nostrae recensemus memoriam, in quo a malo retrahimur et in bono confortamur et ad virtutum et gratiarum proficimus incrementa, in quo profecto proficimus ipsius corporali praesentia Salvatoris.

Alia namque, quorum memoriam agimus, spiritu menteque complectimur, sed non propter hoc realem eorum praesentiam obtinemus. In hac vero sacramentali Christi commemoratione Iesus Christus praesens sub alia quidem forma, in propria vero substantia est nobiscum. Adscensurus enim in caelum dixit Apostolis et eorum sequacibus: 'Ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi' (Mt 28,20), benigna ipsos promissione confortans, quod remaneret et esset cum eis etiam praesentia corporali.

Transcendens omnem plenitudinem largitatis, omnem modum dilectionis excedens, attribuit se in cibum. O singularis et admiranda liberalitas, ubi donator venit in donum, et datum est idem penitus cum datore! ... Dedit igitur nobis se in pabulum, ut, quia per mortem homo corruerat, et per cibum relevaretur ad vitam. ... Gustus sauciavit, et gustus sanavit. Vide, quia, unde vulnus est ortum, prodiit et medela, et, unde mors subiit, exinde vita evenit. De illo siquidem gustu dicitur: 'Quacumque die comederis, morte morieris' (Gen 2, 17); de isto vero legitur: 'Si quis comederit ex hoc pane, vivet in aeternum' (Jo 6, 52). ...

Decens quoque liberalitas exstitit et conveniens operatio, ut Verbum Dei aeternum, quod rationabilis creaturae cibus est et refectio, factum caro, se rationabili creaturae carni et corpori, homini videlicet, in edulium largiretur. ... Hic panis sumitur, sed vere non consumitur; manducatur, sed non transmutatur, quia in edentem minime transformatur, sed, si digne recipitur, sibi recipiens conformatur.