Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It seems that the sinner does not sin in receiving Christ's body sacramentally, because Christ has no greater dignity under the sacramental species than under His own. But sinners did not sin when they touched Christ's body under its proper species; nay, rather they obtained forgiveness of their sins, as we read in Lk. 7 of the woman who was a sinner; while it is written (Mt. 14:36) that "as many as touched the hem of His garment were healed." Therefore, they do not sin, but rather obtain salvation, by receiving the body of Christ.

Objection 2: Further, this sacrament, like the others, is a spiritual medicine. But medicine is given to the sick for their recovery, according to Mt. 9:12: "They that are in health need not a physician." Now they that are spiritually sick or infirm are sinners. Therefore this sacrament can be received by them without sin.

Objection 3: Further, this sacrament is one of our greatest gifts, since it contains Christ. But according to Augustine (De Lib. Arb. ii), the greatest gifts are those "which no one can abuse." Now no one sins except by abusing something. Therefore no sinner sins by receiving this sacrament.

Objection 4: Further, as this sacrament is perceived by taste and touch, so also is it by sight. Consequently, if the sinner sins by receiving the sacrament, it seems that he would sin by beholding it, which is manifestly untrue, since the Church exposes this sacrament to be seen and adored by all. Therefore the sinner does not sin by eating this sacrament.

Objection 5: Further, it happens sometimes that the sinner is unconscious of his sin. Yet such a one does not seem to sin by receiving the body of Christ, for according to this all who receive it would sin, as exposing themselves to danger, since the Apostle says (1 Cor. 4:4): "I am not conscious to myself of anything, yet I am not hereby justified." Therefore, the sinner, if he receive this sacrament, does not appear to be guilty of sin.

On the contrary, The Apostle says (1 Cor. 11:29): "He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself." Now the gloss says on this passage: "He eats and drinks unworthily who is in sin, or who handles it irreverently." Therefore, if anyone, while in mortal sin, receives this sacrament, he purchases damnation, by sinning mortally.

I answer that, In this sacrament, as in the others, that which is a sacrament is a sign of the reality of the sacrament. Now there is a twofold reality of this sacrament, as stated above (Question 73, Article 6): one which is signified and contained, namely, Christ Himself; while the other is signified but not contained, namely, Christ's mystical body, which is the fellowship of the saints. Therefore, whoever receives this sacrament, expresses thereby that he is made one with Christ, and incorporated in His members; and this is done by living faith, which no one has who is in mortal sin. And therefore it is manifest that whoever receives this sacrament while in mortal sin, is guilty of lying to this sacrament, and consequently of sacrilege, because he profanes the sacrament: and therefore he sins mortally.

Reply to Objection 1: When Christ appeared under His proper species, He did not give Himself to be touched by men as a sign of spiritual union with Himself, as He gives Himself to be received in this sacrament. And therefore sinners in touching Him under His proper species did not incur the sin of lying to Godlike things, as sinners do in receiving this sacrament.

Furthermore, Christ still bore the likeness of the body of sin; consequently He fittingly allowed Himself to be touched by sinners. But as soon as the body of sin was taken away by the glory of the Resurrection, he forbade the woman to touch Him, for her faith in Him was defective, according to Jn. 20:17: "Do not touch Me, for I am not yet ascended to My Father," i.e. "in your heart," as Augustine explains (Tract. cxxi in Joan.). And therefore sinners, who lack living faith regarding Christ are not allowed to touch this sacrament.

Reply to Objection 2: Every medicine does not suit every stage of sickness; because the tonic given to those who are recovering from fever would be hurtful to them if given while yet in their feverish condition. So likewise Baptism and Penance are as purgative medicines, given to take away the fever of sin; whereas this sacrament is a medicine given to strengthen, and it ought not to be given except to them who are quit of sin.

Reply to Objection 3: By the greatest gifts Augustine understands the soul's virtues, "which no one uses to evil purpose," as though they were principles of evil. Nevertheless sometimes a man makes a bad use of them, as objects of an evil use, as is seen in those who are proud of their virtues. So likewise this sacrament, so far as the sacrament is concerned, is not the principle of an evil use, but the object thereof. Hence Augustine says (Tract. lxii in Joan.): "Many receive Christ's body unworthily; whence we are taught what need there is to beware of receiving a good thing evilly . . . For behold, of a good thing, received evilly, evil is wrought": just as on the other hand, in the Apostle's case, "good was wrought through evil well received," namely, by bearing patiently the sting of Satan.

Reply to Objection 4: Christ's body is not received by being seen, but only its sacrament, because sight does not penetrate to the substance of Christ's body, but only to the sacramental species, as stated above (Question 76, Article 7). But he who eats, receives not only the sacramental species, but likewise Christ Himself Who is under them. Consequently, no one is forbidden to behold Christ's body, when once he has received Christ's sacrament, namely, Baptism: whereas the non-baptized are not to be allowed even to see this sacrament, as is clear from Dionysius (Eccl. Hier. vii). But only those are to be allowed to share in the eating who are united with Christ not merely sacramentally, but likewise really.

Reply to Objection 5: The fact of a man being unconscious of his sin can come about in two ways. First of all through his own fault, either because through ignorance of the law (which ignorance does not excuse him), he thinks something not to be sinful which is a sin, as for example if one guilty of fornication were to deem simple fornication not to be a mortal sin; or because he neglects to examine his conscience, which is opposed to what the Apostle says (1 Cor. 11:28): "Let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice." And in this way nevertheless the sinner who receives Christ's body commits sin, although unconscious thereof, because the very ignorance is a sin on his part.

Secondly, it may happen without fault on his part, as, for instance, when he has sorrowed over his sin, but is not sufficiently contrite: and in such a case he does not sin in receiving the body of Christ, because a man cannot know for certain whether he is truly contrite. It suffices, however, if he find in himself the marks of contrition, for instance, if he "grieve over past sins," and "propose to avoid them in the future" . But if he be ignorant that what he did was a sinful act, through ignorance of the fact, which excuses, for instance, if a man approach a woman whom he believed to be his wife whereas she was not, he is not to be called a sinner on that account; in the same way if he has utterly forgotten his sin, general contrition suffices for blotting it out, as will be said hereafter (XP, Question 2, Article 3, ad 2); hence he is no longer to be called a sinner.

Articulus 4

Argumentum 1

Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod peccator sumens corpus christi sacramentaliter non peccet. Non enim est maioris dignitatis christus sub specie sacramenti quam sub specie propria. Sed peccatores tangentes corpus christi in substantia propria non peccabant, quin immo veniam peccatorum consequebantur, sicut legitur Luc. VII de muliere peccatrice; et Matth. XIV dicitur, quicumque tetigerunt fimbriam vestimenti eius, salvi facti sunt.

Ergo non peccant, sed magis salutem consequuntur, sacramentum corporis christi sumendo.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, hoc sacramentum, sicut et alia, est quaedam spiritualis medicina. Sed medicina datur infirmis ad salutem, secundum illud Matth. IX, non est opus valentibus medicus, sed male habentibus.

Infirmi autem vel male habentes spiritualiter sunt peccatores.

Ergo hoc sacramentum sumi potest absque culpa.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, hoc sacramentum, cum in se christum contineat, est de maximis bonis. Maxima autem bona sunt, secundum Augustinum, in libro de Lib. Arbit., quibus nullus male potest uti.

Nullus autem peccat nisi per abusum alicuius rei.

Ergo nullus peccator sumens hoc sacramentum peccat.

Argumentum 4

Praeterea, sicut hoc sacramentum sentitur gustu et tactu, ita et visu. Si ergo peccator peccet ex eo quod sumit hoc sacramentum gustu et tactu, videtur quod etiam peccaret videndo. Quod patet esse falsum, cum ecclesia omnibus hoc sacramentum videndum et adorandum proponat. Ergo peccator non peccat ex hoc quod manducat hoc sacramentum.

Argumentum 5

Praeterea, contingit quandoque quod aliquis peccator non habet conscientiam sui peccati. Nec tamen talis peccare videtur corpus christi sumendo, quia, secundum hoc, omnes peccarent qui sumunt, quasi periculo se exponentes; cum apostolus dicit, I Cor. IV, nihil mihi conscius sum, sed non in hoc iustificatus sum.

Non ergo videtur quod peccatori cedat in culpam si hoc sacramentum sumat.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod apostolus dicit, I Cor. XI, qui manducat et bibit indigne, iudicium sibi manducat et bibit.

Dicit autem Glossa ibidem, indigne manducat et bibit qui in crimine est, vel irreverenter tractat.

Ergo qui est in peccato mortali, si hoc sacramentum accipiat, damnationem acquirit, mortaliter peccans.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod in hoc sacramento, sicut in aliis, id quod est sacramentum est signum eius quod est res sacramenti.

Duplex autem est res huius sacramenti, sicut supra dictum est, una quidem quae est significata et contenta, scilicet ipse christus; alia autem est significata et non contenta, scilicet corpus christi mysticum, quod est societas sanctorum. Quicumque ergo hoc sacramentum sumit, ex hoc ipso significat se esse christo unitum et membris eius incorporatum. Quod quidem fit per fidem formatam, quam nullus habet cum peccato mortali. Et ideo manifestum est quod quicumque cum peccato mortali hoc sacramentum sumit, falsitatem in hoc sacramento committit. Et ideo incurrit sacrilegium, tanquam sacramenti violator. Et propter hoc mortaliter peccat.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod christus in propria specie apparens non exhibebat se tangendum hominibus in signum spiritualis unionis ad ipsum, sicut exhibetur sumendus in hoc sacramento.

Et ideo peccatores eum in propria specie tangentes non incurrebant crimen falsitatis circa divina, sicut peccatores sumentes hoc sacramentum.

Et praeterea christus adhuc gerebat similitudinem carnis peccati, et ideo convenienter se peccatoribus tangendum exhibebat.

Sed, remota similitudine carnis peccati per gloriam resurrectionis se tangi prohibuit a muliere, quae defectum fidei circa ipsum patiebatur, secundum illud Ioan. XX, noli me tangere, nondum enim ascendi ad patrem meum, scilicet in corde tuo, ut Augustinus exponit.

Et ideo peccatores, qui defectum fidei patiuntur formatae circa ipsum, repelluntur a contactu huius sacramenti.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod non quaelibet medicina competit secundum quemlibet statum. Nam medicina quae datur iam liberatis a febre ad confortationem, noceret si daretur adhuc febricitantibus. Ita etiam baptismus et poenitentia sunt medicinae purgativae, quae dantur ad tollendam febrem peccati.

Hoc autem sacramentum est medicina confortativa, quae non debet dari nisi liberatis a peccato.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod maxima bona ibi intelligit Augustinus virtutes animae, quibus nullus male utitur quasi principiis mali usus.

Utitur tamen eis aliquis male quasi obiectis mali usus, ut patet in his qui de virtutibus superbiunt. Ita et hoc sacramentum, quantum est ex se, non est principium mali usus, sed obiectum.

Unde Augustinus dicit, multi indigne accipiunt corpus domini, per quod docemur quam cavendum sit male accipere bonum. Ecce enim, factum est malum dum male accipitur bonum, sicut e contra apostolo factum est bonum cum bene accipitur malum, scilicet cum stimulus Satanae patienter portatur.

Ad 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod per visum non accipitur ipsum corpus christi, sed solum sacramentum eius, quia scilicet non pertingit visus ad substantiam corporis christi, sed solum ad species sacramentales, ut supra dictum est.

Sed ille qui manducat, non solum sumit species sacramentales, sed etiam christum, qui est sub eis.

Et ideo a visione corporis christi nullus prohibetur qui sit sacramentum christi consecutus, scilicet baptismum, nonbaptizati autem non sunt admittendi etiam ad inspectionem huius sacramenti, ut patet per dionysium, in libro eccles. Hier..

Sed ad manducationem non sunt admittendi nisi soli illi qui non solum sacramentaliter, sed etiam realiter sunt christo coniuncti.

Ad 5

Ad quintum dicendum quod hoc quod non habet aliquis conscientiam sui peccati, potest contingere dupliciter. Uno modo, per culpam suam, vel quia per ignorantiam iuris, quae non excusat, reputat non esse peccatum quod est peccatum, puta si aliquis fornicator reputaret simplicem fornicationem non esse peccatum mortale; vel quia negligens est in examinatione sui ipsius, contra id quod apostolus dicit, I Cor. XI, probet autem seipsum homo, et sic de pane illo edat et de calice bibat.

Et sic nihilominus peccat peccator sumens corpus christi, licet non habeat conscientiam peccati, quia ipsa ignorantia est ei peccatum.

Alio modo potest contingere sine culpa ipsius, puta, cum doluit de peccato, sed non est sufficienter contritus. Et in tali casu non peccat sumendo corpus christi, quia homo per certitudinem scire non potest utrum sit vere contritus. Sufficit tamen si in se signa contritionis inveniat, puta ut doleat de praeteritis et proponat cavere de futuris.

Si vero ignorat hoc quod fecit esse actum peccati propter ignorantiam facti, quae excusat, puta si accessit ad non suam quam credebat esse suam, non est ex hoc dicendus peccator.

Similiter etiam, si totaliter est peccatum oblitus, sufficit ad eius deletionem generalis contritio, ut infra dicetur.

Unde iam non est dicendus peccator.