|
Objection 1: It seems that the priest should deny the body of
Christ to the sinner seeking it. For Christ's precept is not to be
set aside for the sake of avoiding scandal or on account of infamy to
anyone. But (Mt. 7:6) our Lord gave this command: "Give not
that which is holy to dogs." Now it is especially casting holy things
to dogs to give this sacrament to sinners. Therefore, neither on
account of avoiding scandal or infamy should this sacrament be
administered to the sinner who asks for it.
Objection 2: Further, one must choose the lesser of two evils.
But it seems to be the lesser evil if the sinner incur infamy; or if
an unconsecrated host be given to him; than for him to sin mortally by
receiving the body of Christ. Consequently, it seems that the course
to be adopted is either that the sinner seeking the body of Christ be
exposed to infamy, or that an unconsecrated host be given to him.
Objection 3: Further, the body of Christ is sometimes given to
those suspected of crime in order to put them to proof. Because we
read in the Decretals: "It often happens that thefts are perpetrated
in monasteries of monks; wherefore we command that when the brethren
have to exonerate themselves of such acts, that the abbot shall
celebrate Mass, or someone else deputed by him, in the presence of
the community; and so, when the Mass is over, all shall communicate
under these words: 'May the body of Christ prove thee today.'"
And further on: "If any evil deed be imputed to a bishop or priest,
for each charge he must say Mass and communicate, and show that he is
innocent of each act imputed." But secret sinners must not be
disclosed, for, once the blush of shame is set aside, they will
indulge the more in sin, as Augustine says (De Verbis. Dom.;
cf. Serm. lxxxii). Consequently, Christ's body is not to be
given to occult sinners, even if they ask for it.
On the contrary, on Ps. 21:30: "All the fat ones of the
earth have eaten and have adored," Augustine says: "Let not the
dispenser hinder the fat ones of the earth," i.e. sinners, "from
eating at the table of the Lord."
I answer that, A distinction must be made among sinners: some are
secret; others are notorious, either from evidence of the fact, as
public usurers, or public robbers, or from being denounced as evil men
by some ecclesiastical or civil tribunal. Therefore Holy Communion
ought not to be given to open sinners when they ask for it. Hence
Cyprian writes to someone (Ep. lxi): "You were so kind as to
consider that I ought to be consulted regarding actors, end that
magician who continues to practice his disgraceful arts among you; as
to whether I thought that Holy Communion ought to be given to such
with the other Christians. I think that it is beseeming neither the
Divine majesty, nor Christian discipline, for the Church's modesty
and honor to be defiled by such shameful and infamous contagion."
But if they be not open sinners, but occult, the Holy Communion
should not be denied them if they ask for it. For since every
Christian, from the fact that he is baptized, is admitted to the
Lord's table, he may not be robbed of his right, except from some
open cause. Hence on 1 Cor. 5:11, "If he who is called a
brother among you," etc., Augustine's gloss remarks: "We cannot
inhibit any person from Communion, except he has openly confessed, or
has been named and convicted by some ecclesiastical or lay tribunal."
Nevertheless a priest who has knowledge of the crime can privately warn
the secret sinner, or warn all openly in public, from approaching the
Lord's table, until they have repented of their sins and have been
reconciled to the Church; because after repentance and
reconciliation, Communion must not be refused even to public sinners,
especially in the hour of death. Hence in the (3rd) Council of
Carthage (Can. xxxv) we read: "Reconciliation is not to be
denied to stage-players or actors, or others of the sort, or to
apostates, after their conversion to God."
Reply to Objection 1: Holy things are forbidden to be given to
dogs, that is, to notorious sinners: whereas hidden deeds may not be
published, but are to be left to the Divine judgment.
Reply to Objection 2: Although it is worse for the secret sinner to
sin mortally in taking the body of Christ, rather than be defamed,
nevertheless for the priest administering the body of Christ it is
worse to commit mortal sin by unjustly defaming the hidden sinner than
that the sinner should sin mortally; because no one ought to commit
mortal sin in order to keep another out of mortal sin. Hence
Augustine says (Quaest. super Gen. 42): "It is a most
dangerous exchange, for us to do evil lest another perpetrate a greater
evil." But the secret sinner ought rather to prefer infamy than
approach the Lord's table unworthily.
Yet by no means should an unconsecrated host be given in place of a
consecrated one; because the priest by so doing, so far as he is
concerned, makes others, either the bystanders or the communicant,
commit idolatry by believing that it is a consecrated host; because,
as Augustine says on Ps. 98:5: "Let no one eat Christ's
flesh, except he first adore it." Hence in the Decretals (Extra,
De Celeb. Miss., Ch. De Homine) it is said: "Although he
who reputes himself unworthy of the Sacrament, through consciousness
of his sin, sins gravely, if he receive; still he seems to offend
more deeply who deceitfully has presumed to simulate it."
Reply to Objection 3: Those decrees were abolished by contrary
enactments of Roman Pontiffs: because Pope Stephen V writes as
follows: "The Sacred Canons do not allow of a confession being
extorted from any person by trial made by burning iron or boiling
water; it belongs to our government to judge of public crimes
committed, and that by means of confession made spontaneously, or by
proof of witnesses: but private and unknown crimes are to be left to
Him Who alone knows the hearts of the sons of men." And the same is
found in the Decretals (Extra, De Purgationibus, Ch. Ex
tuarum). Because in all such practices there seems to be a tempting
of God; hence such things cannot be done without sin. And it would
seem graver still if anyone were to incur judgment of death through this
sacrament, which was instituted as a means of salvation.
Consequently, the body of Christ should never be given to anyone
suspected of crime, as by way of examination.
|
|