St. Augustine On The Eucharist

[Cure of Ars]

St. Augustine on the Eucharist with his own words.

“He received flesh from the flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation; and no one eateth that flesh, unless he hath first worshipped:” {Explanations of the Psalms, 99, 8}

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801099.htm

Thus He is both the Priest who offers and the Sacrifice offered. And He designed that there should be a daily sign of this in the sacrifice of the Church, which, being His body, learns to offer herself through Him. Of this true Sacrifice the ancient sacrifices of the saints were the various and numerous signs; and it was thus variously figured, just as one thing is signified by a variety of words, that there may be less weariness when we speak of it much. To this supreme and true sacrifice all false sacrifices have given place. {City of God Book 10 Chapter 20}

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/tocce...7&division=div2

The bread which you see on the altar is, sanctified by the word of God, the body of Christ; that chalice, or rather what is contained in the chalice, is, sanctified by the word of God, the blood of Christ. {Sermo 227;}

Christ bore Himself in His hands, when He offered His body saying: "this is my body." {Enarr. in Ps. 33 Sermo 1, 10;}

Eat Christ, then; though eaten He yet lives, for when slain He rose from the dead. Nor do we divide Him into parts when we eat Him: though inDouche this is done in the Sacrament, as the faithful well know when they eat the Flesh of Christ, for each receives his part, hence are those parts called graces. Yet though thus eaten in parts He remains whole and entire; eaten in parts in the Sacrament, He remains whole and entire in Heaven. {Mai 129, 1; cf. Sermon 131}

The very first heresy was formulated when men said: "this saying is hard and who can bear it [Jn 6:60]?" {Enarr. 1, 23 on Ps. 54}

[VeraMaria]

Thanks, that was cool!!

[mustbenothing]

We have heard the True Master, the Divine Redeemer, the human Savior, commending to us our Ransom, His Blood. For He spake to us of His Body and Blood; He called His Body Meat, His Blood Drink. The faithful recognize the Sacrament of the faithful. But the hearers what else do they but hear? When therefore commending such Meat and such Drink He said, "Except ye shall eat My Flesh and drink My Blood, ye shall have no life in you; " (and this that He said concerning life, who else said it but the Life Itself? But that man shall have death, not life, who shall think that the Life is false), His disciples were offended, not all of them inDouche, but very many, saying within themselves, "This is an hard saying, who can hear it? " But when the Lord knew this in Himself, and heard the murmurings of their thought, He answered them, thinking though uttering nothing, that they might understand that they were heard, and might cease to entertain such thoughts. What then did He answer? "Doth this offend you?" "What then if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before?" What meaneth this? "Doth this offend you ?" "Do ye imagine that I am about to make divisions of this My Body which ye see; and to cut up My Members, and give them to you? ‘ What then if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before ?’" Assuredly, He who could ascend Whole could not be consumed. So then He both gave us of His Body and Blood a healthful refreshment, and briefly solved so great a question as to His Own Entireness. Let them then who eat, eat on, and them that drink, drink; let them hunger and thirst; eat Life, drink Life. That eating, is to be refreshed; but thou art in such wise refreshed, as that that whereby thou art refreshed, faileth not. That drinking, what is it but to live? Eat Life, drink Life; thou shalt have life, and the Life is Entire. But then this shall be, that is, the Body and the Blood of Christ shall be each man’s Life; if what is taken in the Sacrament visibly is in the truth itself eaten spiritually, drunk spiritually. For we have heard the Lord Himself saying, "It is the Spirit That quickeneth, but the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken unto you, are Spirit and Life. But there are some of you," saith He, "that believe not." Such were they who said, "This is a hard saying, who can hear it?" It is hard, but only to the hard; that is, it is incredible, but only to the incredulous.

2. But in order to teach us that this very believing is matter of gift, not of desert, He saith, "As I have said unto you, no man cometh unto Me, except it were given him of My Father." Now as to where the Lord said this, if we call to mind the foregoing words of the Gospel, we shall find that He had said, "No man cometh unto Me, except the Father which hath sent Me draw him." He did not lead, but draw. This violence is done to the heart, not the body. Why then dost thou marvel? Believe, and thou comest; love, and thou art drawn. Do not suppose here any rough and uneasy violence; it is gentle, it is sweet; it is the very sweetness that draweth thee. Is not a sheep drawn, when fresh grass is shown to it in its hunger? Yet I imagine that it is not bodily driven on, but fast bound by desire. In such wise do thou come too to Christ; do not conceive of long journeyings; where thou believest, there thou comest. For unto Him, who is everywhere we come by love, not by sailing. But forasmuch as even in this kind of voyage, waves and tempests of divers temptations abound; believe on the Crucified; that thy faith may be able to ascend the Wood. Thou shalt not sink, but shalt be borne upon the Wood. Thus, even thus, amid the waves of this world did he sail, who said, "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

-Augustine, Sermon 131

[Dave]

Sorry, mustbenothing, but there's nothing in Augustine's sermon that goes against Catholic teaching. And yes, I've read it carefully. The parts you put in bold do NOT deny the Real Presence.

[gopherball33]

Assuredly, He who could ascend Whole could not be consumed.

I think this means that you cannot grab a piece of Jesus's arm and take a bite if he has ascended. You physically cannot do that. You can, however, eat the Consecrated Host, and through that you consume Jesus Christ. (any apologist correct me if i am wrong)

Edited September 17, 2003 by gopherball33

[Paladin D]

I think this means that you cannot grab a piece of Jesus's arm and take a bite if he has ascended. You physically cannot do that. You can, however, eat the Consecrated Host, and through that you consume Jesus Christ.  (any apologist correct me if i am wrong)

*Grabs Jesus' arm* Hold still... :lol:

[Dave]

bump

[jmjtina]

*Grabs Jesus' arm* Hold still... 

:lol:

[Cure of Ars]

I will explain your quote by Augustine and how it fits into Catholic theology. Please return the favor and explain what Augustine is taking about in the quotes I gave in the first post.

Assuredly, He who could ascend Whole could not be consumed.

Augustine is explaining that Jesus is not broken, destroyed, or broken down when we eat of the Eucharist. This is because Jesus has a glorified body and it cannot be damaged. We are not tearing him apart when we eat Jesus. This is why Augustine says the following before the above quoted line;

“Do ye imagine that I am about to make divisions of this My Body which ye see; and to cut up My Members, and give them to you? ‘”

I also think that you misunderstand what Augustine is saying by spiritually.

what is taken in the Sacrament visibly is in the truth itself eaten spiritually, drunk spiritually.

The problem with this is that you are thinking the word spirit means symbolic. The word spiritually can be used in this way with modern usage but it was not used this way in Augustine’s or Jesus’ time. Show me in the Bible where the word Spirit means symbolic? The Protestant Strong’s concordance doesn’t even use the word symbolic as a meaning for spirit (4151). So what does Augustine and Jesus refer to when he uses the word Spirit in John 6:62

“It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

We know that Jesus is not referring to his flesh because it does avail. It is how we are saved (i.e. Jesus’ flesh being crucified on a cross). Jesus is using the words spirit and flesh to mean supernatural/Divine vs. natural/human. Paul uses the words spirit and flesh in the same manner;

For those who live according to the flesh are concerned with the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the spirit with the things of the spirit. The concern of the flesh is death, but the concern of the spirit is life and peace. For the concern of the flesh is hostility toward God; it does not submit to the law of God, nor can it; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh; on the contrary, you are in the spirit, if only the Spirit of God dwells in you. Whoever does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. (Rom 8:7-9)

I am looking forward to your explanation of what Augustine is taking about in the quotes I gave in the first post. I can’t imagine Augustine being more explicit.

Christ bore Himself in His hands, when He offered His body saying: "this is my body." {Enarr. in Ps. 33 Sermo 1, 10;}

Edited September 20, 2003 by Cure of Ars

[mustbenothing]

(Dave) Sorry, mustbenothing, but there's nothing in Augustine's sermon that goes against Catholic teaching. And yes, I've read it carefully. The parts you put in bold do NOT deny the Real Presence.

(Me) Of course not! However, they do deny transubstantiation. Augustine argues that it is absurd to think we physically eat Christ for two reasons:

1. He surely did not mean by "This is My Body" that He was about to hand them pieces of Himself; and,

2. He has wholly ascended into Heaven, so cannot be physically consumed

Therefore, Augustine says, we partake of Christ spiritually. This denies transubstantiation. It is also the basic outline of Calvin's doctrine.

(gopherball33) I think this means that you cannot grab a piece of Jesus's arm and take a bite if he has ascended. You physically cannot do that. You can, however, eat the Consecrated Host, and through that you consume Jesus Christ. (any apologist correct me if i am wrong)

(Me) The doctrine of transubstantiation requires that we consume Christ physically. Augustine argues, on the other hand, that we eat His body and blood spiritually.

(Cure of Ars) I will explain your quote by Augustine and how it fits into Catholic theology. Please return the favor and explain what Augustine is taking about in the quotes I gave in the first post.

(Me) I'll include them at the bottom with as much commentary as I can see being useful, but I only recall one of the quotes as having held any force when it is understood that Augustine can believe Christ is really present, but transubstantiation be false.

(Cure of Ars) Assuredly, He who could ascend Whole could not be consumed.

Augustine is explaining that Jesus is not broken, destroyed, or broken down when we eat of the Eucharist. This is because Jesus has a glorified body and it cannot be damaged. We are not tearing him apart when we eat Jesus. This is why Augustine says the following before the above quoted line;

“Do ye imagine that I am about to make divisions of this My Body which ye see; and to cut up My Members, and give them to you? ‘”

(Me) I could definitely see how this would be an acceptable reading of the text, except for the logical flow of the argument. He proceeds from here to say that we eat Christ spiritually. What is relevant, then, is that:

(Cure of Ars) I also think that you misunderstand what Augustine is saying by spiritually.

what is taken in the Sacrament visibly is in the truth itself eaten spiritually, drunk spiritually.

The problem with this is that you are thinking the word spirit means symbolic. The word spiritually can be used in this way with modern usage but it was not used this way in Augustine’s or Jesus’ time. Show me in the Bible where the word Spirit means symbolic? The Protestant Strong’s concordance doesn’t even use the word symbolic as a meaning for spirit (4151). So what does Augustine and Jesus refer to when he uses the word Spirit in John 6:62

(Me) No, I'm not thinking it means "symbolically." I think it means that Christ is really present, but not physically present. We thus partake of Christ's body and blood spiritually, just as Calvin said. In the sacrament, bread and wine "is taken... visibly," but Christ "is in the truth itself eaten spiritually, drunk spiritually." Thus, we have the sign and the thing signified, just as I believe.

(Cure of Ars) “It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

We know that Jesus is not referring to his flesh because it does avail. It is how we are saved (i.e. Jesus’ flesh being crucified on a cross). Jesus is using the words spirit and flesh to mean supernatural/Divine vs. natural/human. Paul uses the words spirit and flesh in the same manner;

For those who live according to the flesh are concerned with the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the spirit with the things of the spirit. The concern of the flesh is death, but the concern of the spirit is life and peace. For the concern of the flesh is hostility toward God; it does not submit to the law of God, nor can it; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh; on the contrary, you are in the spirit, if only the Spirit of God dwells in you. Whoever does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. (Rom 8:7-9)

(Me) Sounds great! We don't partake of Christ physically, but spiritually! We are spiritually partaking through faith, not eating the physical substance of Christ's body. Therefore, transubstantiation is rejected.

(Cure of Ars) I am looking forward to your explanation of what Augustine is taking about in the quotes I gave in the first post. I can’t imagine Augustine being more explicit.

Christ bore Himself in His hands, when He offered His body saying: "this is my body." {Enarr. in Ps. 33 Sermo 1, 10;}

(Me) This is the quote I remembered as causing any kind of a question. I can't find this sermon online, and I can't find any Eucharistic reference of this sort in Augustine's exposition of the topic. Have a link?

Although, I will say that Calvin used similar language:

Commentary on Ephesians 5:31

"As Eve was formed out of the substance of her husband, and thus was a part of himself; so, if we are the true members of Christ, we share his substance, and by this intercourse unite into one body... Paul says that we are members of his flesh and of his bones. Do we wonder then, that in the Lord's Supper he holds out his body to be enjoyed by us, and to nourish us unto eternal life?"

(Cure of Ars) “He received flesh from the flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation; and no one eateth that flesh, unless he hath first worshipped:” {Explanations of the Psalms, 99, 8}

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801099.htm

(Me) The pastor at my church used this very kind of language.

(Cure of Ars) Thus He is both the Priest who offers and the Sacrifice offered. And He designed that there should be a daily sign of this in the sacrifice of the Church, which, being His body, learns to offer herself through Him. Of this true Sacrifice the ancient sacrifices of the saints were the various and numerous signs; and it was thus variously figured, just as one thing is signified by a variety of words, that there may be less weariness when we speak of it much. To this supreme and true sacrifice all false sacrifices have given place. {City of God Book 10 Chapter 20}

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/tocce...7&division=div2

(Me) I may just be missing something, but this seems to be talking more about the fact that He is the ultimate Passover Lamb, not specifically about Communion. But, I will certainly say that in Communion we eat the Lamb who was slain. I'm just not seeing what I need to reconcile here.

(Cure of Ars) The bread which you see on the altar is, sanctified by the word of God, the body of Christ; that chalice, or rather what is contained in the chalice, is, sanctified by the word of God, the blood of Christ. {Sermo 227;}

(Me) In the Lord's Supper, the Body and Blood of Christ is really offered to us. However, I would contend that Augustine believes that while Christ is given to us in the sacrament, it is spiritually, as I argued above.

(Cure of Ars) Eat Christ, then; though eaten He yet lives, for when slain He rose from the dead. Nor do we divide Him into parts when we eat Him: though inDouche this is done in the Sacrament, as the faithful well know when they eat the Flesh of Christ, for each receives his part, hence are those parts called graces. Yet though thus eaten in parts He remains whole and entire; eaten in parts in the Sacrament, He remains whole and entire in Heaven. {Mai 129, 1; cf. Sermon 131}

(Me) I originally intended my quotation of this sermon's context to be a general response. For, if one takes it to be indicative of Augustine's doctrine of the Eucharist, this actually opposes the view that Augustine affirmed transubstantiation.

(Cure of Ars) The very first heresy was formulated when men said: "this saying is hard and who can bear it [Jn 6:60]?" {Enarr. 1, 23 on Ps. 54}

(Me) I really don't see how this is an affirmation of transubstantiation ;)

[Dave]

(Dave) Sorry, mustbenothing, but there's nothing in Augustine's sermon that goes against Catholic teaching. And yes, I've read it carefully. The parts you put in bold do NOT deny the Real Presence.

(Me) Of course not!  However, they do deny transubstantiation.  Augustine argues that it is absurd to think we physically eat Christ for two reasons:

1. He surely did not mean by "This is My Body" that He was about to hand them pieces of Himself; and,

2. He has wholly ascended into Heaven, so cannot be physically consumed

Therefore, Augustine says, we partake of Christ spiritually.  This denies transubstantiation.  It is also the basic outline of Calvin's doctrine.

No, they don't deny transubstantiation either. You're reading stuff into Augustine's quotes that just aren't there. Reread what Cure of Ars wrote, please.

[Cure of Ars]

It is cool that you see the Eucharist as more than a symbol. I did not know Presbyterians believed this. Thanks for that. I learned something.

This whole issue is about context. What context do we use to read Augustine? If Augustine were Presbyterian, than I would agree that Calvin (or your pastor) would be a useful context to understand him with. If Augustine were Gnostic your interpretation of him would be right on. But in both cases a tradition is used that Augustine did not use. Lets understand Augustine’s words using the Bible. Now Jesus never said, “This is my Spirit” but “This is my body”. Jesus is risen with a body. So when he says body there is no need to believe that Jesus’ means something different. We can read him literally because he has a body. When Jesus uses the terms flesh and spirit in John 6 the clearest use would be the same as Paul’s usage.

Not to be rude but I don’t know how you can explain this away by saying that your pastor talks in like manner.

“He received flesh from the flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation; and no one eateth that flesh, unless he hath first worshipped:” {Explanations of the Psalms, 99, 8}

Augustine is not using flesh to be something that is spiritual. He is clearly making a point that he is talking in a physical manner. Jesus did not receive his spirit from Mary but he did receive his body from Mary. Jesus was not a ghost but “he walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation;” What more could he say to express that the flesh was not only spiritual but also physical? God bless

[BLAZEr]

Dude, my dear little Cure, you are sweet sweet sweet as honey. I could eat up your explanations like . . . well, like spiritual food.

And inDouche I think it might help mustbenothing to understand that when Augustine uses the word spiritual, he is also referring to Christ's spiritual body . . . i.e. after the resurrection. I'm sure theres an explanation here in the latin, but I'm not exactly sure . . . because, we must remember that Augustine was writing in Latin . . . so certainly the word he used might be something than the "spiritually" we get in translation.