 |
 |
Thank you for giving us the Latin text of this prayer. >One more haphazard remark -- there is a line from Aquinas's prayer before >approaching communion: "I come sick to the doctor of life, unclean to the >fountain of mercy." > >It's a wonderful prayer (an odd comment for a Quaker, I suppose, but there >you are). Since we like texts so much on this list, the full Latin text >runs thus: [. . .] >Da mihi, quaeso, dominici Corporis et Sanguinis >non solum suscipere sacramentum, >sed etiam rem et virtutem sacramenti. Aquinas here preserves a rather old-fashioned use of the term "sacramentum" which he himself did much to supersede. Before the 13th century it is a rather weak word, meaning no more than "symbol"; earlier writers regularly make statements to the effect that the Eucharist is "not merely a sacrament" [i.e. a symbol] but the real thing. A modern writer intending to affirm the reality of Christ's presence in the consecrated species would say that it was "not merely a symbol, but a sacrament". Besides "sacramentum", Aquinas distinguishes "rem" - the thing itself, that is, the body of Christ, as contrasted with the outward species of bread - and "virtutem sacramenti" - the power of the sacrament, its effect. The Anglican reformers would reduce these three concepts to two in Article xxix: "The wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as Saint Augustine saith) the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ; but rather, to their condemnation, do eat and drink the sign or Sacrament of so great a thing." Here again, "Sacrament" is used in a weak sense, equivalent to "sign". Aquinas would have said that the wicked did indeed receive the "rem", but would have agreed that they did not receive the "virtutem sacramenti" - that is, the reception would not have led to their salvation. Oriens. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%