Dissertation on the Most August Sacrament of the Lord's Body and Blood

In General. Chapter I.

A 2

The origin of the name Eucharist.

original: "Calix benedictionis cui benedicimus, nonne communicatio Sanguinis Christi est?" The Greek text uses the phrase "which we bless," The author is highlighting a grammatical point: the blessing is directed at the object (the wine) rather than being a general prayer to God. from which words it is clear that this blessing is not directed toward God—as our adversaries A common term in Counter-Reformation texts for Protestant reformers. would have it—but is to be understood as referring to the underlying material of the bread and wine. For we invoke the blessing of Almighty God upon the bread and wine, so that He may be present to change them into the body and blood of the Lord when the words of consecration are lawfully pronounced. This is just as Christ himself did on the night before he suffered: he took the bread and the chalice into his holy and venerable hands, and giving thanks, he blessed them. He both gave thanks to God the Father and applied a blessing to the offered gifts, asking for their change and consecration by God the Father, to be performed by the power granted to him.

Therefore, by using this title i.e., "Eucharist" or "Blessing." we follow the authority of Holy Scripture, the examples of our ancestors, and finally, reason itself. For "Eucharist" (meaning "thanksgiving") and "Eulogia" original: ευλογία, meaning "blessing" or "praise." pertain most especially to this Sacrament, even though they are distinct from the consecration itself, as is clear from the words of Consecration and as the Council of Trent well teaches in Session 13, Chapter 1.

Our adversaries, however, without the example of the Fathers (who wrote specifically about the distinction of this mystery from a common meal), and indeed without reason or certain scriptural authority, call it "the supper" original: coena. For there is no place in the Holy Scriptures where this Sacrament is called by that name, just as the eating of the Paschal Lamb is not; rather, only that meal which was usually joined to the eating of the lamb in the Old Testament and to the receiving of the Holy Eucharist in the New Testament is so named. These three things The Passover meal, the common communal meal (Agape), and the Sacrament of the Eucharist. must be clearly distinguished.

Furthermore, if the venerable Sacrament were received in the morning or at midday, it would by that logic have to be called "breakfast" original: ientaculum or "lunch" original: prandium, which no sensible person would say. Although Christ may have dined before [instituting the Sacrament], he did not do so to set an example for us; rather, it was because it was necessary to fulfill the old Sacraments before instituting this new one. For this reason, the Church is to be praised, not blamed, for not imitating Christ’s action in this matter, because he did not do it for that purpose. Instead, the Church feeds only those who are fasting with this heavenly food—unless necessity occasionally suggests otherwise—out of a greater reverence for the Sacrament itself. This is well noted by Saint Augustine in Letter 118, where he teaches that this practice is held by Apostolic tradition. Therefore, those "Judaizing" heretics The author accuses his opponents of "Judaizing" because he views their lack of ritual fasting as a return to old, non-sacramental ways of eating. are rightly to be rebuked, as they admit people to the table even after they have eaten well and dined, without any regard for religion or honor. Indeed, their irreverence is all the more blameworthy because their communion...