The Holy Eucharist And The Law of Fasting And Abstinence

 

To My Readers: This week, John Gregory writes about the excellence of the Most Holy Eucharist, as well as the importance of fasting and abstinence in the life of a Traditionalist Catholic. Please continue your prayers for John's health and pray for his family. I am humbled that a sick man went out of his way to write a guest post for me. Anyone who has derived any good from my blog should remember and pray for all my guest posters (past and present) who help me keep it going; and most especially, in his time of need, extra prayers for John Gregory.

Please feel free to comment as usual. John may or may not be able to respond. I will respond, as always, but it may take me longer to do so this week.

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

The Holy Eucharist And The Law of Fasting And Abstinence

By John Gregory

And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterwards he was hungry. . . . And behold angels came and ministered to him (Matthew 4: 2, 11). 

 

IMPORTANCE OF INSTRUCTION ON THE EUCHARIST 

 

As of all the sacred mysteries bequeathed to us by our Lord and Saviour as most infallible instruments of divine grace, there is none comparable to the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist; so, for no crime is there a heavier punishment to be feared from God than for the unholy or irreligious use by the faithful of that which is full of holiness, or rather which contains the very author and source of holiness.  This the Apostle wisely saw, and has openly admonished us of it.  For when he had declared the enormity of their guilt who discerned not the body of the Lord, he immediately subjoined: Therefore, are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep (1 Corinthians 11: 30). 

 

In order that the faithful, therefore, aware of the divine honors due to this heavenly Sacrament, may derive therefrom abundant fruit of grace and escape the most just anger of God, pastors should explain with the greatest diligence all those things which may seem calculated more fully to display its majesty. 

 

Institution of the Eucharist 

 

In this matter it will be necessary that pastors, following the example of the Apostle Paul, who professes to have delivered to the Corinthians what he had received from the Lord, First of all, explain to the faithful the institution of this Sacrament. 

 

That its institution was as follows, is clearly inferred from the Evangelist.  Our Lord, having loved his own, loved them to the end (John 13: 1).  As a divine and admirable pledge of this love, knowing that the hour had now come that He should pass from the world to the Father, that He might not ever at any period be absent from His own, He accomplished with inexplicable wisdom that which surpasses all the order and condition of nature.  For having kept the supper of the Paschal lamb with His disciples, that the figure might yield to the reality, the shadow to the substance, He took bread, and giving thanks unto God, He blessed, and brake, and gave to the disciples, and said: “Take ye and eat, this is my body which shall be delivered for you; this do for a commemoration of me.”  In like manner also, He took the chalice after he had supped, saying: “This chalice is the New Testament in my blood; this do, as often as you shall drink it, in commemoration of me.” (Matthew 26: 26; Mark 14: 22; Luke 22: 19; 1 Corinthians 11: 24). 

 

Meaning of the Word “Eucharist” 

 

Wherefore sacred writers, seeing that it was not at all possible that they should manifest by one term the dignity and excellence of this admirable Sacrament, endeavored to express it by many words. 

 

For sometimes they call it Eucharist, which word we may render either by good grace, or by thanksgiving.  And rightly, indeed, is it to be called good grace, as well because it first signifies eternal life, concerning which it has been written: The grace of God is eternal life (Romans 6: 23); and also because it contains Christ the Lord, who is true grace and the fountain of all favors. 

 

No less aptly do we interpret it thanksgiving; inasmuch as when we immolate this purest victim, we give daily unbounded thanks to God for all His kindnesses towards us, and above all for so excellent a gift of His grace, which He grants to us in this Sacrament.  This same name, also, is fully in keeping with those things which we read were done by Christ the Lord at the institution of this mystery.  For taking bread he brake it, and gave thanks (Luke 22: 19; 1 Corinthians 11: 24).  David also, when contemplating the greatness of this mystery, before he pronounced that song: he hath made a remembrance of his wonderful works, being a merciful and gracious Lord, he hath given food to them that fear him, thought that he should first make this act of thanksgiving: “His work is praise and magnificence (Psalm 110: 3). 

 

OTHER NAMES OF THIS SACRAMENT 

 

Frequently, also, it is called Sacrifice.  Concerning this mystery there will be occasion to speak more at length presently. 

 

It is called, moreover, Communion, the term being evidently borrowed from that passage of the Apostle where we read: The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?  And the bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord (1 Corinthians 10: 16).  For, as Damascene has explained, this Sacrament unites us to Christ, renders us partakers of His flesh and Divinity, reconciles and unites us to one another in the same Christ, and forms us, as it were, into one body. 

 

Whence it came to pass, that it was called also the Sacrament of peace and love.  We can understand then how unworthy they are of the name of Christian who cherish enmities, and how hatred, dissensions and discord should be entirely put away, as the most destructive bane of the faithful, especially since by the daily Sacrifice of our religion, we profess to preserve nothing with more anxious care, than peace and love. 

 

It is also frequently called the Viaticum by sacred writers, both because it is spiritual food by which we are sustained in our pilgrimage through this life, and also because it paves our way to eternal glory and happiness.  Wherefore, according to an ancient usage of the Catholic Church, we see that none of the faithful are permitted to die without this Sacrament. 

 

The most ancient Fathers, following the authority of the Apostle (1 Corinthians 11: 20), have sometimes also called the Holy Eucharist by the name of Supper, because it was instituted by Christ the Lord at the salutary mystery of the Last Supper. 

 

It is not, however, lawful to consecrate or partake of the Eucharist after eating or drinking, because, according to a custom wisely introduced by the Apostles, as ancient writers have recorded, and which has ever been retained and preserved, Communion is received only by persons who are fasting. (Saint Augustine traces this precept to an Apostolic ordinance in his letter to Januarius in the year 400). 

 

The Eucharist is a Sacrament Properly So Called 

 

The meaning of the name having been explained, it will be necessary to show that this is a true Sacrament, and one of those seven which the holy Church has ever revered and venerated religiously.  For when the consecration of the chalice is effected, it is called a mystery of faith. 

 

Besides, to omit the almost endless testimonies of sacred writers, who have invariably thought that this was to be numbered among the real Sacraments, the same thing is proved from the very principle and nature of a Sacrament.  For there are in it signs that are external and subject to the senses.  In the next place it signifies and produces grace.  Moreover, neither the Evangelists not the Apostle leave room for doubt regarding its institution by Christ.  Since all these things concur to establish the fact of the Sacrament, there is obviously no need of any other argument. 

 

IN WHAT RESPECT THE EUCHARIST IS A SACRAMENT 

 

But pastors should carefully observe that in this mystery there are many things to which sacred writers have from time to time attributed to the name of Sacrament.  For, sometimes, both the consecration and the Communion; nay, frequently also the body and blood itself of our Lord, which is contained in the Eucharist, used to be called a Sacrament.  Thus Saint Augustine says that this Sacrament consists of two things,—the visible species of the elements, and the invisible flesh and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.  And it is in the same sense that we say that this Sacrament is to be adored, meaning the body and blood of our Lord.  

 

Now it is plain that all these are less properly called Sacraments.  The species of bread and wine themselves are truly and strictly designated by this name.  

 

HOW THE EUCHARIST DIFFERS FROM ALL THE OTHER SACRAMENTS 

 

How much this Sacrament differs from all the others is easily inferred.  For all the other Sacraments are completed by the use of the material, that is, while they are being administered to some one.  Thus Baptism attains the nature of a Sacrament when the individual is actually being washed in the water.  For the perfecting of the Eucharist on the other hand, the consecration of the material itself suffices, since neither (species) ceases to be a Sacrament, though kept in the pyx. 

 

Again in perfecting the other Sacraments there is no change of the matter and element into another nature.  The water of Baptism, or the oil of Confirmation, when those Sacraments are being administered, do not lose their former nature of water and oil; but in the Eucharist, that which was bread and wine before consecration, after consecration is truly the substance of the body and blood of the Lord. 

 

The Eucharist Is But One Sacrament 

 

But although there are two elements, as bread and wine, of which the entire Sacrament of the Eucharist is constituted, yet guided by the authority of the Church, we confess that this is not many Sacraments, but only one. 

 

Otherwise, there cannot be the exact number of seven Sacraments, as has ever been handed down, and as was decreed by the Councils of Lateran, Florence and Trent. 

 

Moreover, by virtue of the Sacrament, one mystical body is effected; hence, that the Sacrament itself may correspond to the thing which it effects, it must be one. 

 

It is one not because it is indivisible, but because it signifies a single thing.  For as food and drink, which are two different things, are employed only for one purpose, namely, that the vigor of the body may be recruited; so also it was but natural that there should be an analogy to them in the two different species of the Sacrament, which should signify the spiritual food by which souls are supported and refreshed.  Wherefore we have been assured by our Lord the Savior: My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. (John 6: 56) 

 

THE EUCHARIST SIGNIFIES THREE THINGS 

 

It must, therefore, be diligently explained what the Sacrament of the Eucharist signifies, that the faithful, beholding the sacred mysteries with their eyes, may also at the same time feed their souls with the contemplation of divine things.  Three things, then, are signified by this Sacrament.  The first is the Passion of Christ our Lord, a thing past; for He Himself said: Do this for a commemoration of me, (Luke 22: 19) and the Apostle says: As often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he come. (1 Corinthians 11: 26) 

 

It is also significant of divine and heavenly grace, which is imparted at the present time by this Sacrament to nurture and preserve the soul.  Just as in Baptism we are begotten unto newness of life and by Confirmation are strengthened to resist Satan and openly to profess the name of Christ, so by the Sacrament of the Eucharist are we nurtured and supported. 

 

It is, thirdly, a foreshadowing of future eternal joy and glory, which, according to God’s promises, we shall receive in our heavenly country. 

 

These three things, then, which are clearly distinguished by their reference to past, present and future times, are so well represented by the Eucharistic mysteries that the whole Sacrament, though consisting of different species, signifies the three as if it referred to one thing only. 

 

Constituent Parts of the Eucharist 

 

THE MATTER 

 

It is particularly incumbent on pastors to know the matter of this Sacrament, in order that they themselves may rightly consecrate it, and also that they may be able to instruct the faithful as to its significance, inflaming them with an earnest desire of that which it signifies.  

 

THE FIRST ELEMENT OF THE EUCHARIST IS BREAD 

 

The matter of this Sacrament is twofold.  The first element is wheaten bread, of which we shall now speak.  Of the second we shall treat hereafter.  As the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark and Luke testify, Christ the Lord took bread into His hands, blessed, and brake, saying: This is my body; (Matthew 26: 26, Mark 14: 22, Luke 22: 19) and, according to John, the same Savior called Himself bread in these words: I am the living bread, that came down from heaven. (John 6: 41) 

 

THE SACRAMENTAL BREAD MUST BE WHEATEN 

 

There are, however, various sorts of bread, either because they consist of different materials,—such as wheat, barley, pulse and other products, of the earth; or because they possess different qualities,—some being leavened, others altogether without leaven.  It is to be observed that, with regard to the former kinds, the words of the Savior show that the bread should be wheaten; for, according to common usage, when we simply say bread, we are sufficiently understood to mean wheaten bread.  This is also declared by a figure in the Old Testament, because the Lord commanded that the loaves of proposition, which signified this Sacrament, should be made of fine flour. [The loaves of proposition, of shew-breads, were twelve loaves of unleavened bread placed in the Holy of Holies and renewed every Saturday.  Their purpose was to show forth the gratitude of the twelve tribes to the Lord, their sustenance and strength.]  

 

THE SACRAMENTAL BREAD SHOULD BE UNLEAVENED 

 

But as wheaten bread alone is to be considered the proper matter for this Sacrament—a doctrine which has been handed down by Apostolic tradition and confirmed by the authority of the Catholic Church—so it may be easily inferred from the doings of Christ the Lord that this bread should be unleavened.  It was consecrated and instituted by Him on the first day of unleavened bread, on which it was not lawful for the Jews to have anything leavened in their houses. (Matthew 26: 17, Mark 14: 12, Luke 22: 7) 

 

Should the authority of John the Evangelist, (John 13: 1) who says that all this was done before the feast of the Passover, be objected to, the argument is one of easy solution. For by the day before the pasch John understands the same day which the other Evangelists designate as the first day of unleavened bread. He wished particularly to mark the natural day, which commences at sunrise; whereas they wanted to point out that our Lord celebrated the Pasch on Thursday evening just when the days of the unleavened bread were beginning.  Hence Saint Chrysostom also understands the first day of unleavened bread to be the day on the evening of which unleavened bread was to be eaten. 

 

The peculiar suitableness of the consecration of unleavened bread to express that integrity and purity of mind which the faithful should bring to this Sacrament we learn from these words of the Apostle: Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened.  For Christ our Passover is sacrificed.  Therefore, let us feast, not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. (1 Corinthians 5: 7) 

 

UNLEAVENED BREAT NOT ESSENTIAL 

 

This quality of the bread, however, is not to be deemed so essential that, if it be wanting, the Sacrament cannot exist; for both kinds are called by the one name and have the true and proper nature of bread.  No one, however, is at liberty on his own private authority, or rather presumption, to transgress the laudable rite of his Church.  And such departure is the less warrantable in priests of the Latin Church, expressly obliged as they are by the supreme Pontiffs, to consecrate the sacred mysteries with unleavened bread only. 

 

QUANTITY OF THE BREAD 

 

With regard to the first matter of this Sacrament, let this exposition suffice.  It is, however, to be observed, that the quantity of the matter to be consecrated is not defined, since we cannot define the exact number of those who can or ought to receive the sacred mysteries. 

 

THE SECOND ELEMENT OF THE EUCHARIST IS WINE 

 

It remains for us to treat of the other matter and element of this Sacrament, which is wine pressed from the fruit of the vine, with which is mingled a little water. 

 

That in the institution of this Sacrament our Lord and Savior made use of wine has been at all times the doctrine of the Catholic Church, for He Himself said: I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine until that day. (Matthew 26: 29; Mark 14: 25) On this passage Chrysostom observes: He says, “Of the fruit of the vine,” which certainly produced wine not water; as if he had it in view, even at so early a period, to uproot the heresy which asserted that in these mysteries water alone is to be used. 

 

WATER SHOULD BE MIXED WITH THE WINE 

 

With the wine, however, the Church of God has always mingled water.  First, because Christ the Lord did so, as is proved by the authority of Councils and the testimony of Saint Cyprian; next, because by this mixture is renewed the recollection of the blood and water that issued from His side.  Waters, also, as we read in the Apocalypse, (Apocalypse 17: 15) signify the people; and hence, water mixed with the wine signifies the union of the faithful with Christ their Head.  This rite, derived as it is from Apostolic tradition, the Catholic Church has always observed. 

 

But although there are reasons so grave for mingling water with the wine that it cannot be omitted without incurring the guilt of mortal sin, yet its omission does not render the Sacrament null. 

 

Again as in the sacred mysteries priests must be mindful to mingle water with wine, so, also, must they take care to mingle it in small quantity, for, in the opinion and judgment of ecclesiastical writers, that water is changed into wine.  Hence these words of Pope Honorius on the subject: A pernicious abuse has prevailed in your district of using in the sacrifice a greater quantity of water than of wine; whereas, according to the rational practice of the universal Church, the wine should be used in much greater quantity than the water. (The wine must be at least eight times more than the water to ensure validity, keeping in mind that often more than one drop is mingled with the wine. — J.G.) 

 

NO OTHER ELEMENTS PERTAIN TO THIS SACRAMENT 

 

These, then, are the only two elements of this Sacrament; and with reason has it been enacted by many decrees that, although there have been those who were not afraid to do so, it is unlawful to offer anything but bread and wine. 

 

PECULIAR FITNESS OF BREAD AND WINE 

 

We have now to consider the aptitude of these two symbols of bread and wine to represent those things of which we believe and confess they are the sensible signs. 

 

In the first place, then, they signify to us Christ, as the true life of men; for our Lord Himself says: My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. (John 6: 55) As, then, the body of Christ the Lord furnishes nourishment unto eternal life to those who receive this Sacrament with purity and holiness, rightly is the matter composed chiefly of those elements by which our present life is sustained, in order that the faithful may easily understand that the mind and soul are satiated by the Communion of the precious body and blood of Christ. 

 

These very elements serve also somewhat to suggest to men the truth of the Real Presence of the body and blood of the Lord in the Sacrament.  Observing, as we do, that bread and wine are every day changed by the power of nature into human flesh and blood, we are led to more easily by this analogy to believe that the substance of the bread and wine is changed, by the heavenly benediction, into the real flesh and real blood of Christ. 

 

This admirable change of the elements also helps to shadow forth what takes place in the soul.  Although no change of bread and wine appears externally, yet their substance is truly changed into the flesh and blood of Christ; so, in like manner, although in us nothing appears changed, yet we are renewed inwardly unto life, when we receive in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the true life. 

 

Moreover, the body of the Church, which is one, consists of many members, and of this union nothing is more strikingly illustrative than the elements of bread and wine; for bread is made from many grains and wine is pressed from many clusters of grapes.  Thus they signify that we, though many, are most closely bound together by the bond of this divine mystery and made, as it were, one body.  

 

Form of the Eucharist 

 

The form to be used in the consecration of the bread is next to be treated of, not, however, in order that the faithful should be taught these mysteries, unless necessity require it; for this knowledge is not needful for those who have not received Holy Orders.  The purpose (of his section) is to guard against most shameful mistakes on the part of priests, at the time of the consecration, due to ignorance of the form. 

 

FORM TO BE USED IN THE CONSECRATION OF THE BREAD 

 

We are then taught by the holy Evangelists, Matthew and Luke, and also by the Apostle, that the form consists of these words: This is my body; for it is written: Whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to his disciples, and said: Take and eat, This is my body. (Matthew 26: 26; Mark 14: 22; Luke 22: 19; 1 Corinthians 11: 24) 

 

This form of consecration having been observed by Christ the Lord has been always used by the Catholic Church.  The testimonies of the Fathers, the enumeration of which would be endless, and also the decree of the Council of Florence, which is well known and accessible to all, must here be omitted, especially as the knowledge which they convey may be obtained from these words of the Saviour: Do this for a commemoration of me. (Luke 22: 19) For what the Lord enjoined was not only what He had done, but also what he had said; and especially is this true, since the words were uttered not only to signify, but also to accomplish. 

 

That these words constitute the form is easily proved from reason also.  The form is that which signifies what is accomplished in this Sacrament; but as the preceding words signify and declare what takes place in the Eucharist, that is, the conversion of the bread into the true body of our Lord, it therefore follows that these very words constitute the form.  In this sense may be understood the words of the Evangelist: He blessed; for they seem equivalent to this: Taking bread, he blessed it, saying: “This is my body.” (Matthew 26: 26) 

 

NOT ALL THE WORDS USED ARE ESSENTIAL 

 

Although in the Evangelist the words, Take and eat, precede the words (This is my body), they evidently express the use only, not the consecration, of the matter.  Wherefore, while they are not necessary to the consecration of the Sacrament, they are by all means to be pronounced by the priest, as is also the conjunction for in the consecration of the body and blood.  But they are not necessary to the validity of the Sacrament, otherwise it would follow that, if this Sacrament were not to be administered to anyone, it should not, or indeed could not, be consecrated; whereas, no one can lawfully doubt that the priest, by pronouncing the words of our Lord according to the institution and practice of the Church, truly consecrates the proper matter of the bread, even though it should afterwards never be administered. 

 

FORM TO BE USED IN THE CONSECRATION OF THE WINE 

 

With regard to the consecration of the wine, which is the other element of this Sacrament, the priest, for the reason we have already assigned, ought of necessity to be will acquainted with, and well understand its form.  We are then firmly to believe that it consists in the following words: This is the chalice of my blood, of the new and eternal testament, the mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you and for many, to the remission of sins.  Of these words the greater part are taken from Scripture; but some have been preserved in the Church from Apostolic tradition. 

 

Thus the words, this is the chalice, are found in Saint Luke and in the Apostle; (Luke 22: 20; 1 Corinthians 11: 25) but the words that immediately follow, of my blood, or my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for you and for many to the remission of sins, are found partly in Saint Luke and partly in Saint Matthew. (Luke 22: 20; Matthew 26: 28) But the words, eternal, and the mystery of faith, have been taught us by holy tradition, the interpreter and keeper of Catholic truth. 

 

Concerning this form no one can doubt, if he here also attend to what has been already said about the form used in the consecration of the bread.  The form to be used (in the consecration) of this element, evidently consists of those words which signify that the substance of the wine is changed into the blood of our Lord.  Since, therefore, the words already cited clearly declare this, it is plain that no other words constitute the form. 

 

They moreover express certain admirable fruits of the blood shed in the Passion of our Lord, fruits which pertain in a most special manner to this Sacrament.  Of these, one is access to the eternal inheritance, which has come to us by right of the new and everlasting testament. Another is the access to righteousness by they mystery of faith; for God hath set forth Jesus to be a propitiator through faith in his blood, that he himself may be just, and the justifier of him, who is of the faith of Jesus Christ. (Romans 3: 25) A third effect is the remission of sins. (COT p. 213 – 226) 

 

Our goal is to get to heaven.  God did His part, and more, by giving us Himself, it almost seems blasphemous, had He not done so, to eat.  We must do our part.  This includes prayer, fasting, and almsdeeds.  If we look at Saint Luke 2: 37 we see that the prophetess Anna served God by prayer and fasting.  Fasting, when done for love of God is a form of worship, as is prayer.   

 

Conclusion 

To prayer let us unite fasting and almsdeeds.  Fasting is most intimately connected with prayer.  For the mind of one who is filled with food and drink is so borne down as not to be able to raise itself to the contemplation of God, or even to understand what prayer means. 

 

Almsdeeds have also an intimate connection with prayer.  For what claim has he to the virtue of charity, who, possessing the means of affording relief to those who depend on the assistance of others, refuses help to his neighbor and brother?  How can he, unless, while imploring the pardon of his sins, he at the same time humbly beg of God to grant him the virtue of charity?   

 

This triple remedy was, therefore, appointed by God to aid man in the attainment of salvation.  For by sin we offend God, wrong our neighbor, or injure ourselves.  The wrath of God we appease by pious prayer; our offences against man we redeem by almsdeeds; the stains of our own lives we wash away by fasting.  Each of these remedies, it is true, is applicable to every sort of sin; they are, however, peculiarly adapted to those three which we have just mentioned. (COT p. 500) 

 

Eucharistic Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us. 

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!