FIFTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 73, Art. 5]

Whether the Institution of This Sacrament Was Appropriate?

Objection 1: It seems that the institution of this sacrament was not

appropriate, because as the Philosopher says (De Gener. ii): "We are

nourished by the things from whence we spring." But by Baptism, which

is spiritual regeneration, we receive our spiritual being, as

Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. ii). Therefore we are also nourished by

Baptism. Consequently there was no need to institute this sacrament

as spiritual nourishment.

Obj. 2: Further, men are united with Christ through this sacrament as

the members with the head. But Christ is the Head of all men, even of

those who have existed from the beginning of the world, as stated

above (Q. 8, AA. 3, 6). Therefore the institution of this sacrament

should not have been postponed till the Lord's supper.

Obj. 3: Further, this sacrament is called the memorial of our Lord's

Passion, according to Matt. 26 (Luke 22:19): "Do this for a

commemoration of Me." But a commemoration is of things past.

Therefore, this sacrament should not have been instituted before

Christ's Passion.

Obj. 4: Further, a man is prepared by Baptism for the Eucharist,

which ought to be given only to the baptized. But Baptism was

instituted by Christ after His Passion and Resurrection, as is

evident from Matt. 28:19. Therefore, this sacrament was not suitably

instituted before Christ's Passion.

_On the contrary,_ This sacrament was instituted by Christ, of Whom

it is said (Mk. 7:37) that "He did all things well."

_I answer that,_ This sacrament was appropriately instituted at the

supper, when Christ conversed with His disciples for the last time.

First of all, because of what is contained in the sacrament: for

Christ is Himself contained in the Eucharist sacramentally.

Consequently, when Christ was going to leave His disciples in His

proper species, He left Himself with them under the sacramental

species; as the Emperor's image is set up to be reverenced in his

absence. Hence Eusebius says: "Since He was going to withdraw His

assumed body from their eyes, and bear it away to the stars, it was

needful that on the day of the supper He should consecrate the

sacrament of His body and blood for our sakes, in order that what was

once offered up for our ransom should be fittingly worshiped in a

mystery."

Secondly, because without faith in the Passion there could never be

any salvation, according to Rom. 3:25: "Whom God hath proposed to be

a propitiation, through faith in His blood." It was necessary

accordingly that there should be at all times among men something to

show forth our Lord's Passion; the chief sacrament of which in the

old Law was the Paschal Lamb. Hence the Apostle says (1 Cor. 5:7):

"Christ our Pasch is sacrificed." But its successor under the New

Testament is the sacrament of the Eucharist, which is a remembrance

of the Passion now past, just as the other was figurative of the

Passion to come. And so it was fitting that when the hour of the

Passion was come, Christ should institute a new Sacrament after

celebrating the old, as Pope Leo I says (Serm. lviii).

Thirdly, because last words, chiefly such as are spoken by departing

friends, are committed most deeply to memory; since then especially

affection for friends is more enkindled, and the things which affect

us most are impressed the deepest in the soul. Consequently, since,

as Pope Alexander I says, "among sacrifices there can be none greater

than the body and blood of Christ, nor any more powerful oblation";

our Lord instituted this sacrament at His last parting with His

disciples, in order that it might be held in the greater veneration.

And this is what Augustine says (Respons. ad Januar. i): "In order to

commend more earnestly the death of this mystery, our Saviour willed

this last act to be fixed in the hearts and memories of the disciples

whom He was about to quit for the Passion."

Reply Obj. 1: We are nourished from the same things of which we are

made, but they do not come to us in the same way; for those out of

which we are made come to us through generation, while the same, as

nourishing us, come to us through being eaten. Hence, as we are

new-born in Christ through Baptism, so through the Eucharist we eat

Christ.

Reply Obj. 2: The Eucharist is the perfect sacrament of our Lord's

Passion, as containing Christ crucified; consequently it could not be

instituted before the Incarnation; but then there was room for only

such sacraments as were prefigurative of the Lord's Passion.

Reply Obj. 3: This sacrament was instituted during the supper, so as

in the future to be a memorial of our Lord's Passion as accomplished.

Hence He said expressively: "As often as ye shall do these things"

[*Cf. Canon of the Mass], speaking of the future.

Reply Obj. 4: The institution responds to the order of intention. But

the sacrament of the Eucharist, although after Baptism in the

receiving, is yet previous to it in intention; and therefore it

behooved to be instituted first. Or else it can be said that Baptism

was already instituted in Christ's Baptism; hence some were already

baptized with Christ's Baptism, as we read in John 3:22.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 518 / 654 题