Volume II, Treatise VIII, Chapter II

Adorable Wonders, that Faith Teaches Us, Concerning the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist

FaitH teaches us, that the words of consecration work many miracles, The first is, that as soon as the priest has pronounced over the host the words of consecration, the body of Jesus Christ is immediately present therein—the same body that was born of the sacred Virgin, the same that died upon the cross, that was raised~ again to life, and in fine, the same, that at present sits at the right hand of God the Father. That moreover, as soon as the priest has pronounced over the chalice the words of consecration, the precious blood of Jesus Christ is present therein also—that in a hundred thousand masses, for example, that are said throughout the extent of the whole church, in the space of an hour, God works this miracle at the moment that the priest finishes the words of consecration; that in all these masses, the body and blood of our Saviour, is effectually present, and whether we consecrate in one place or in another, he is always the same in all places..

The second wonder we are obliged to believe, is, that after the words of consecration, there remains neither bread nor wine, though it appears otherwise to our senses. When Jacob wished to obtain of his father Isaac the blessing he designed for Esau, he covered his hands with the skin of a kid, that he might the better resemble ‘his brother. It is indeed the voice of Jacob,” said the holy old man his father, ‘‘ but they are the hands of Esau.” (Genesis 27:22) The same happens here—what we touch with our hands, what is exposed to our senses to judge of, appears bread and wine; but the voice and word of faith assures us the contrary, and it muat supply the defects of our senses. As the manna which was the shadow and figure of this adorable sacrament, had the taste of all sorts of things, and yet was none of those things of which it had the taste, so this heavenly manna, of which we speak, has the taste of bread and wine, and yet is neither the one nor the other. Moreover in the matter of other sacraments, there happens no change at all; the water in baptism remains still water, and the oil in confirmation and extreme unction still remains oil. In this the matter is quite changed, and what appears bread and wine, is not so; the substance of bread, being changed into the body of Jesus Christ, and the substance of wine, being changed into his blood. But he, says St. Ambrose, that from nothing could create heaven and earth, cannot he with far greater reason make one thing out of another, and change one thing into another? Moreover do we not. daily see that the bread we eat, is ina short time changed into our own flesh, by the help of natural heat? Why may not then the all-powerful virtue of God, make a similar change in an instant? And to draw us out of one astonishment by another, is it not far more wonderful that God made himself man, without ceasing to be God; than that bread, ceasing to be bread, should be changed into flesh? Now the same divine power whereby the Son of God made himself man, here makes the bread and wine be changed into his body and blood, “for to God nothing is impossible.”” (Luke 1:37)

The third wonder that happens in this change is, that it is not made as other natural things are, wherein when one thing is changed into another there always remains something of the thing that is changed. For when earth is changed into gold or silver, for example, or water into crystal, the matter always remains the same, there is no change but of the form; just as when of a piece of clay or wax, there is made sometimes a lion, sometimes an eagle. But here, after the consecration, there remains in the host nothing of the substance of bread, or in the chalice, of the substance of wine; neither as to the form or the matter, but all the substance of the bread is changed into the body of Jesus Christ; and all the substance of the wine, into his blood? Hence the holy council of Trent, says, that the church, in order to express this entire conversion, properly calls it by the name of transubstantiation, that is to say, the changing of one substance into another. For as that change of form, which happens in natural generation, may very properly be called transformation; so here the entire change of the substance of bread and wine, which is converted into the substance of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, is very justly called transubstantiation.

So that in the Eucharist there remains nothing of the substance of bread nor of wine; there remains only the colour, smell, taste, and other accidents of bread and wine, which are called the sacramental species. And this is another wonder that appears in this august sacrament, that the accidents remain in it without subject or substance; it being, as all philosophy teaches, the property of accidents, to be inseparably attached to their substance. For is it not certain that whiteness cannot subsist of itself, without being attached to some substance? And is not the same to be said of taste and smell? But here, agreeably to an order, superior to the whole order of nature, the accidents of bread and wine are miraculously sustained, without being united to any thing; because the substance of bread and wine is no longer there to sustain them, as we have already said; and the body and blood of Jesus Christ, which succeed in place of bread and wine, cannot be the subject of these accidents; so that by means of a continued miracle God sustains them by themselves.

We are likewise obliged to believe that not only the body of Jesus Christ is under the species and accidents of bread and wine, but that Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is entirely there, and as he is in heaven. So that the blood of Jesus Christ, his sacred soul, and his divinity, are, conjointly with his body, in the host, under the appearance of bread; and his body, his soul, and his Divinity, are also, conjointly with his blood, in the chalice under the appearance of wine. But, as divines observe very well, all these things are not in the Eucharist after the same manner. For some are there by virtue of the words of consecration, and others by way of concomitance. Those that are there by virtue of the words of consecration, are those which are expressed by the same words; so that in this way, there is only the body of Jesus Christ in the host; and in the chalice only the blood of Jesus Christ; because the words of consecration properly produce only what they signify, and they signify nothing else than “this is my body, this is my blood.” The things which are in the Eucharist by way of concomitance, are those which are necessarily joined or united to that which is expressed by the words of consecration. For when divers things are necessarily joined together, it is necessary that where there is one, the other should be there also. Now, as the body of Jesus Christ is not at present separated from his blood, but is united with it, as well aa with his soul, and his Divinity; all these things, for this reason, are in the host with his body; and as his blood is not at present separated from his body, but is united with it, and with his soul and Divinity, so all these things are also, for the same reason, in the chalice. Divines, to make us the better understand this, say, that if in the three days that Jesus Christ remained in the sepulchre, St. Peter or any other of the apostles had consecrated, the soul of Jesus Christ would not have been in the Eucharist; because then it was not united with his body; and that there would have been there only his dead body, such as it was in the sepulchre, but united notwithstanding to the Divinity, from which it was never separated. In like manner, when Jesus Christ himself consecrated at his last supper, he was in the Eucharist true God and true man, but passible and mortal as he was then; instead of being as he is now in the Eucharist, living, glorious, resuscitated, immortal, and in a word, as he is in heaven.

But though it be true, that the blood of Jesus Christ is in the host, and his body in the chalice, yet it was fit there should be made two distinct consecrations, to represent more to the life, the passion of the Son of God, in which his blood was separated from his body, so as it is expressed by the words of the consecration of the chalice, which shall be shed for you and many others. Moreover the sacrament of the Eucharist, having been instituted for the nourishment of our souls, it was fit that as eating and drinking concur to the perfect nourishment of our bodies, so those two things should also concur to the spiritual nourishment of our souls, It is true that the church, for important reasons, permits the laity to communicate only under the species of bread;. but because in receiving the body of Jesus Christ in the host, they receive also his blood, his soul, and his Divinity, there is no doubt, that if they approach this sacrament with the same disposition, with which the priest communicates under both kinds, they will receive also the same abundance of graces. St. Hilary says, that as the manna, which was the figure of the Eucharist, had this property, that neither he that gathered more than another, had more, nor he who gathered less, had less of it; in like manner here, neither he who commu-. nicates under both species receives more, nor he who communicates under the species of bread only, receives less, but both receive equally alike.

There is still another wonder in this adorable sacrament, which is, that Jesus Christ is not only whole and entire in the host, and whole and entire in the chalice, but also, that in every particle of the host, and in the least species of wine, how little soever it may be, he is as entire a3 in the whole host, and as he is in heaven. This is a truth which the gospel teaches us. For Jesus Christ, in the last supper, did not consecrate separately each piece of bread, with which he communicated his apostles; he only consecrated at once such a quantity of bread, as was necessary to communicate all of them after it was divided: and the gospel, speaking of the consecration of the chalice, expressly takes notice, that Jesus Christ gave it to his apostles, saying to them, “take and divide it amongst you.” (Luke 22:17) But the body of Jesus Christ is not only whole and entire in each particle of the host, and in each particle of the species of wine, after the division of the host or species of wine: but before this division, he is also whole and entire in the whole host, and in each particle thereof; and entire in the whole species of wine, and in each particle of the species. This may be made clear, by some natural comparisons. The soul, for example, is entire in the whole body, and is also entire in each part of it; the sound which the voice makes, when any one speaks to you, is entire in your ears, and also entire in the ears of them that hear it with you. Again if you take a looking-glass, you will see yourself entirely represented in it, though the glass be far less than you; and if you break the looking-glass into many pieces, you will see yourself in each of these pieces, just as you before saw yourself in the whole looking-glass. The saints and holy doctors of the church make use of these examples, and many others of the same nature, to make us comprehend in some sort, these adorable mysteries; for though there is none of these examples which bears a perfect and entire parity to what we are explaining, yet they cease not to give us some light concerning it.

One thing, which is also very miraculous in this mystery, is that when we break the host or divide the chalice, it is not Christ that is broken or divided, he remains always whole and entire in each part, how little soever it be; it is the accidents of bread and wine that is divided; and in like manner, when one breaks the host in his mouth, it is not Christ that he breaks; it is only the accidents. O illusion of the senses! says St. Jerom, “the accidents with which you appear to our senses to be clothed, are broken, but you, O Lord, remain whole. It seems to our senses that we chew you between our teeth as bread, and yet we never do so to you. You remain always whole and entire without any division, without any corruption, in even the least particle that is.”—(C. iv. apud Euseb.) It is this the church also teaches by the hymn of the Blessed Sacrament; ‘he that receives it, does not bruise it, does not break it, does not divide it, he receives it whole and entire, he makes no division of the thing itself; he makes only a separation of the signs and accidents.”

All these things being such truths as are taught us by faith, we must believe them with submission, without embarrassing ourselves with curious researches. And for this effect we must always abide by this principle of St. Austin, “that God can do many things which surpass the reach of our reason and imagination.” (Tract. xii. sup. Joan.) For as the saints say very justly, the wonders of God would not be great, if we were able to conceive them; moreover the merit of faith consists in believing that which we can neither see, nor comprehend. Besides there is still in the mystery of the adorable sacrament, one thing which is not found in any other mystery. For in other mysteries, we firmly believe that which we see not; and this is very meritorious; because Jesus Christ himself says, ‘blessed are they that have not seen and believed.” (John 20:29) But here we believe the contrary of what we see. For according to what our senses tell us, it seems to us, that what we see is bread and wine; and yet we must believe that there ia neither bread nor wine in what we see. Our faith in this is like that of Abraham, of which St. Paul said, “that contrary to hope, he believed in the hope” (Romans 4:18) God had given him. Supernatural hope overcame in him, the natural diffidence he had reason to have. For he believed he should have a son; and hoped so, contrary to what he could reasonably expect in the course of nature; for his wife and himself being advanced in years, he could not naturally expect to have any. And when he was ready to sacrifice his son, in obedience to God’s commands, he ceased not yet to believe that God would keep the promise he had made him to multiply his posterity in the person of this son. It is in this manner that in this aderable sacrament, what our senses teach us, is entirely contrary to what we believe; and it is for this reason that our faith herein is also the more meritorious. ‘ You shall eat bread in the morning,” says the Lord to his people in Exodus, ‘and inthe evening you shall be satiated with flesh.”—(Exod. (xvi. 12.) By the morning this present life is. signified; and it is in this life that God gives himself to us under the species of bread and wine; but when the evening shall come, that is to say, when we shall be in glory, then we shall see the flesh of Jesus Christ, then we shall clearly know how, and in what manner he is under the sacramental species; the veil shall be withdrawn, and we shall see all things clearly as they are, and not under clouds, as we now do. I might, in confirmation of all I have said, relate here many well authenticated miracles, wherein history abounds; but I will content myself with relating only one, which is stated in the history of the order of the Jeromites, and happened to one of the religious of that order, named Peter of Cavanuclas, who was afterwards prior of Guadaloupe. This man being for a long time assaulted and molested with many doubts against faith, and, above all, concerning the blessed sacrament of the altar, his imagination always representing to him, that there, could be no blood in the host, it pleased God to deliver him from this temptation, in a most miraculous manner. Once upon a Saturday, as he said the mass of our blessed Lady, and after he had consecrated, and had inclined himself to say that prayer which begins with these words, ‘“we humbly beseech thee,” he saw on a sudden a thick cloud that descended from on high, and so covered the whole altar upon which he celebrated, that he could neither see the host nor the chalice. Surprised at so strange an occurrence, and seized with very great fear, he began to beg of God with tears, that he would deliver him from the danger he was in; and that he would let him know the cause of this prodigy. Presently the cloud vanished by little and little, and he felt quite astonished, because looking upon the altar he saw not the host he bad consecrated, and found the chalice uncovered and empty. He remained for some time like a dead man, and afterwards being come a little to himself, he began again to beg of God, with great oppression of heart, and great abundance of tears, if what had happened to him proceeded from any fault of his, that he would pardon him, and free him from the great perplexity and trouble he was in. Whilst he was in this disquiet of mind, he perceived the host in the air, upon a paten, and perceived that after it had been there for some time, it came and placed itself over the top of the chalice, and dropped into it so much blood, as there had been in it before; after which came the corporal, and of itself reposed upon the chalice, and the host returned to the same place upon the altar where he had put it. So many wonders, one after another, filled him with astonishment and admiration, and whilst he was in this state, not knowing what to do, he heard a voice that said to him, finish the sacrifice, and keep secret all that you have seen, and after this he was never disquieted or tormented with the like temptations as he had before.

All this was found after his death, written with his own hand, in a paper, in which he had written his general confession, that he might obey the command given him to keep the thing secret. For as to the person who served at the altar, he perceived nothing of what we have spoken of, nor heard the voice; he perceived only that the priest had shed many tears, and that he had been a longer time in saying mass than ordinarily he was wont to _be.— (Liv. ii. c. 8. de PHist. de lord. des Hier.)

About ReligiousBookshelf.com · A Supernerd Media project