SEVENTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 80, Art. 7]

Whether the Seminal Loss That Occurs During Sleep Hinders Anyone from

Receiving This Sacrament?

Objection 1: It seems that seminal loss does not hinder anyone from

receiving the body of Christ: because no one is prevented from

receiving the body of Christ except on account of sin. But seminal

loss happens without sin: for Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii) that

"the same image that comes into the mind of a speaker may present

itself to the mind of the sleeper, so that the latter be unable to

distinguish the image from the reality, and is moved carnally and

with the result that usually follows such motions; and there is as

little sin in this as there is in speaking and therefore thinking

about such things." Consequently these motions do not prevent one

from receiving this sacrament.

Obj. 2: Further, Gregory says in a Letter to Augustine, Bishop of the

English (Regist. xi): "Those who pay the debt of marriage not from

lust, but from desire to have children, should be left to their own

judgment, as to whether they should enter the church and receive the

mystery of our Lord's body, after such intercourse: because they

ought not to be forbidden from receiving it, since they have passed

through the fire unscorched."

From this it is evident that seminal loss even of one awake, if it be

without sin, is no hindrance to receiving the body of Christ.

Consequently, much less is it in the case of one asleep.

Obj. 3: Further, these movements of the flesh seem to bring with them

only bodily uncleanness. But there are other bodily defilements which

according to the Law forbade entrance into the holy places, yet which

under the New Law do not prevent receiving this sacrament: as, for

instance, in the case of a woman after child-birth, or in her

periods, or suffering from issue of blood, as Gregory writes to

Augustine, Bishop of the English (Regist. xi). Therefore it seems

that neither do these movements of the flesh hinder a man from

receiving this sacrament.

Obj. 4: Further, venial sin is no hindrance to receiving the

sacrament, nor is mortal sin after repentance. But even supposing

that seminal loss arises from some foregoing sin, whether of

intemperance, or of bad thoughts, for the most part such sin is

venial; and if occasionally it be mortal, a man may repent of it by

morning and confess it. Consequently, it seems that he ought not to

be prevented from receiving this sacrament.

Obj. 5: Further, a sin against the Fifth Commandment is greater than

a sin against the Sixth. But if a man dream that he has broken the

Fifth or Seventh or any other Commandment, he is not on that account

debarred from receiving this sacrament. Therefore it seems that much

less should he be debarred through defilement resulting from a dream

against the Sixth Commandment.

_On the contrary,_ It is written (Lev. 15:16): "The man from whom the

seed of copulation goeth out . . . shall be unclean until evening."

But for the unclean there is no approaching to the sacraments.

Therefore, it seems that owing to such defilement of the flesh a man

is debarred from taking this which is the greatest of the sacraments.

_I answer that,_ There are two things to be weighed regarding the

aforesaid movements: one on account of which they necessarily prevent

a man from receiving this sacrament; the other, on account of which

they do so, not of necessity, but from a sense of propriety.

Mortal sin alone necessarily prevents anyone from partaking of this

sacrament: and although these movements during sleep, considered in

themselves, cannot be a mortal sin, nevertheless, owing to their

cause, they [sometimes] have mortal sin connected with them; which

cause, therefore, must be investigated. Sometimes they are due to an

external spiritual cause, viz. the deception of the demons, who can

stir up phantasms, as was stated in the First Part (I, Q. 111, A. 3),

through the apparition of which, these movements occasionally follow.

Sometimes they are due to an internal spiritual cause, such as

previous thoughts. At other times they arise from some internal

corporeal cause, as from abundance or weakness of nature, or even

from surfeit of meat or drink. Now every one of these three causes

can be without sin at all, or else with venial sin, or with mortal

sin. If it be without sin, or with venial sin, it does not

necessarily prevent the receiving of this sacrament, so as to make a

man guilty of the body and blood of the Lord: but should it be with

mortal sin, it prevents it of necessity.

For such illusions on the part of demons sometimes come from one's

not striving to receive fervently; and this can be either a mortal or

a venial sin. At other times it is due to malice alone on the part of

the demons who wish to keep men from receiving this sacrament. So we

read in the Conferences of the Fathers (Cassian, Collat. xxii) that

when a certain one always suffered thus on those feast-days on which

he had to receive Communion, his superiors, discovering that there

was no fault on his part, ruled that he was not to refrain from

communicating on that account, and the demoniacal illusion ceased.

In like fashion previous evil thoughts can sometimes be without any

sin whatever, as when one has to think of such things on account of

lecturing or debating; and if it be done without concupiscence and

delectation, the thoughts will not be unclean but honest; and yet

defilement can come of such thoughts, as is clear from the authority

of Augustine (Obj. 1). At other times such thoughts come of

concupiscence and delectation, and should there be consent, it will

be a mortal sin: otherwise it will be a venial sin.

In the same way too the corporeal cause can be without sin, as when

it arises from bodily debility, and hence some individuals suffer

seminal loss without sin even in their wakeful hours; or it can come

from the abundance of nature: for, just as blood can flow without

sin, so also can the semen which is superfluity of the blood,

according to the Philosopher (De Gener. Animal. i). But occasionally

it is with sin, as when it is due to excess of food or drink. And

this also can be either venial or mortal sin; although more

frequently the sin is mortal in the case of evil thoughts on account

of the proneness to consent, rather than in the case of consumption

of food and drink. Hence Gregory, writing to Augustine, Bishop of the

English (Regist. xi), says that one ought to refrain from Communion

when this arises from evil thoughts, but not when it arises from

excess of food or drink, especially if necessity call for Communion.

So, then, one must judge from its cause whether such bodily

defilement of necessity hinders the receiving of this sacrament.

At the same time a sense of decency forbids Communion on two

accounts. The first of these is always verified, viz. the bodily

defilement, with which, out of reverence for the sacrament, it is

unbecoming to approach the altar (and hence those who wish to touch

any sacred object, wash their hands): except perchance such

uncleanness be perpetual or of long standing, such as leprosy or

issue of blood, or anything else of the kind. The other reason is the

mental distraction which follows after the aforesaid movements,

especially when they take place with unclean imaginings. Now this

obstacle, which arises from a sense of decency, can be set aside

owing to any necessity, as Gregory says (Regist. xi): "As when

perchance either a festival day calls for it, or necessity compels

one to exercise the ministry because there is no other priest at

hand."

Reply Obj. 1: A person is hindered necessarily, only by mortal sin,

from receiving this sacrament: but from a sense of decency one may be

hindered through other causes, as stated above.

Reply Obj. 2: Conjugal intercourse, if it be without sin, (for

instance, if it be done for the sake of begetting offspring, or of

paying the marriage debt), does not prevent the receiving of this

sacrament for any other reason than do those movements in question

which happen without sin, as stated above; namely, on account of the

defilement to the body and distraction to the mind. On this account

Jerome expresses himself in the following terms in his commentary on

Matthew (Epist. xxviii, among St. Jerome's works): "If the loaves of

Proposition might not be eaten by them who had known their wives

carnally, how much less may this bread which has come down from

heaven be defiled and touched by them who shortly before have been in

conjugal embraces? It is not that we condemn marriages, but that at

the time when we are going to eat the flesh of the Lamb, we ought not

to indulge in carnal acts." But since this is to be understood in the

sense of decency, and not of necessity, Gregory says that such a

person "is to be left to his own judgment." "But if," as Gregory says

(Regist. xi), "it be not desire of begetting offspring, but lust that

prevails," then such a one should be forbidden to approach this

sacrament.

Reply Obj. 3: As Gregory says in his Letter quoted above to

Augustine, Bishop of the English, in the Old Testament some persons

were termed polluted figuratively, which the people of the New Law

understand spiritually. Hence such bodily uncleannesses, if perpetual

or of long standing, do not hinder the receiving of this saving

sacrament, as they prevented approaching those figurative sacraments;

but if they pass speedily, like the uncleanness of the aforesaid

movements, then from a sense of fittingness they hinder the receiving

of this sacrament during the day on which it happens. Hence it is

written (Deut. 23:10): "If there be among you any man, that is

defiled in a dream by night, he shall go forth out of the camp; and

he shall not return before he be washed with water in the evening."

Reply Obj. 4: Although the stain of guilt be taken away by contrition

and confession nevertheless the bodily defilement is not taken away,

nor the mental distraction which follows therefrom.

Reply Obj. 5: To dream of homicide brings no bodily uncleanness, nor

such distraction of mind as fornication, on account of its intense

delectation; still if the dream of homicide comes of a cause sinful

in itself, especially if it be mortal sin, then owing to its cause it

hinders the receiving of this sacrament.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 579 / 654 题