§ 115. THE EUCHARIST. 719
minds of Albertus Magnus, Bonaventura, Thomas Aquinas, and other Schoolmen. Does a mouse, in eating the conse crated host, actually partake of its consecrated substance? Thomas argued in this way : the body and blood of Christ would not be withdrawn, if the consecrated host should be cast into the mire, for God allowed Christ's body even to be crucified. As for mice, they were not created to use the bread as a sacrament, and so they cannot eat Christ's body after a sacramental manner, sacramentaliter^ but only the accidents of the elements, per accidens, just as a man would eat who took the consecrated host but did not know it was consecrated.1 Bonaventura, quoting Innocent III., took the more reasonable view that the body of Christ is withdrawn under such circumstances. Peter the Lombard had said that an animal does not take the body of Christ in eating the bread. But what it does take and eat, God alone knows. Duns Scotus took up the similar question, what oc curs to an ass drinking the water consecrated for baptism and sensibly called it a subtilitas asinina, an asinine refine ment, for the virtue of ablution inhering in such water an ass could not drink.2 To the theory of transubstantiation, Rupert of Deutz has been referred to as an exception. John of Paris was deprived of his chair at the University of Paris for likening the union of Christ's body and the bread to the coexistence of the divine and human natures in Christ's person. He died, 1306, while his case was being tried at Rome. Ockam tentatively developed the theory of impanation whereby Christ's body and the bread are united in one substance, but he expressed his readiness to yield to the dogma of the Church.
this theological and metaphysical curiosity, see Th. Aq., 80. 3, Migne, 789, non tangit mus ipsum corpus Christi, secundum propriam speciem sed solum secundum species sacramentales . . . nee tamen animal brutum sacramentalitrr corpus Christi manducat quia non est natum uti eo ut sacramento, unde non sacramental iter sed per accidens corpus Christi manducat, etc. Alb. Magnus, In Sent., IV. 13. 38. Borgnet's ed., XXIX. 397, Bonaventura, Sent., IV. 13. 2. 1, Peltier's ed., V. 550. 2 Seeberg, p. 360.
720 THE MIDDLE AGES. A.D. 1049-1294.
The sacrificial aspect of the eucharist was no less fully developed. In Hugo of St. Victor we hear nothing of a repeti tion of the sacrifice on the cross. He speaks of the mass as being a transmission of our prayers, vows, and offerings — oblationes — to God.1 Peter the Lombard said the sacrifice on the altar is of a different nature from the sacrifice on the cross, nevertheless it is a true sacrifice. The later School men, following Alexander of Hales, laid stress on the sac rificial element. The eucharist is an unbloody but "real immolation " performed by the priest.
The altar represents the cross, the priest represents Christ in whose person and power he pronounces the words of con secration,2 and the celebration represents the passion on the cross. The priest's chief function is to consecrate the body and blood of Christ.3
The sacrifice may be offered daily, just as Ave stand daily in need of the fruits of Christ's death and as we pray for daily food. And because Christ was on the cross from nine till three o'clock, it is proper that it should be offered between those hours, at any rate during the daytime and not in the night, for Christ said, " I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: for the night cometh, when no man can work," John 9:4.
To the discussion of the twofold effect of the eucharist as a sacrament and as a sacrifice, the Schoolmen also give much attention. Like the other sacraments, the eucharist has the virtue of conferring grace of itself.4 Asa sacrament it inures to our nourishment and perfection in Christ; as a sacrifice to the removal of sins venial and mortal. As a sacrament it benefits those who partake; as a sacrifice its benefits accrue also to persons who do not partake, living and dead.5 For
JThe priest being the mediator. Summa, Migne, 176. 472.
2 Sacerdos gerit imaginem Christi, Th. Aq., III. 83. 1, Migne, IV. 830.
3Th. Aq., Supplem. 37. 5, Migne, IV. 1062.
4 Ex seipso virtntem habet gratiam conferendi. Th. Aq., III. 79. 1, Migne, IV. 774.
5Th. Aq., 79. 7, Supplem. III. 71. 10, Migne, IV. 782, 1246 sq.; Al. Magnus, I. 4, extended the benefits of the mass also to the glorified pro salute vivorum, pro requie defunctorum, pro gloria beatorum.