Dist. 8, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 1
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/8/q/bon-sent-IV-d8-p1-a2-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On the institution of the Sacrament of the eucharist.*

As to the second article, the question that follows concerns the institution of the Sacrament of the eucharist. And about this three things are asked.

First it is asked whether it ought to have been instituted from the beginning.

Second, granting that it was [instituted] in the law of the Gospel, it is asked when: whether before the passion, or after.

Third it is asked about the manner and order of instituting it.

### Question I. *Whether the Sacrament of the eucharist ought to have been instituted from the beginning.*

That it ought to have been instituted from the beginning, it seems:

1. Because this Sacrament is a viaticum, since it furnishes nourishment to one journeying: therefore it ought to have been instituted then, when men began to journey toward the homeland; but this happened immediately after the fall: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, this Sacrament is the Sacrament of the union of Christ's mystical body: therefore it ought to have been instituted then, when the mystical body existed; but this was from the beginning: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, the Sacrament of matrimony did not cease on account of the fall, but rather what had been [established] as a duty became a remedy; but the eating of the tree of life was given to man, as Augustine says, as a Sacrament: therefore it ought not to have ceased, but that he should eat sacramentally. But he ought not to eat a tree that would give bodily life, since he was bound to bodily death: therefore [he ought to eat] the tree of life that would give spiritual life; but this is the eucharist: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, just as penance is against mortal [sin], so the eucharist is against venial [sins]; but from the beginning venial sin has run its course, as has mortal: therefore by parity of reasoning the eucharist [should be] together with penance.

**On the contrary:** 1. This Sacrament is in the highest degree the container of grace, whence also it takes its name: therefore it ought to have been instituted only in the time of the law of grace.

2. Likewise, this Sacrament is the container, according to truth, of the body of Christ, which he drew from the Virgin: therefore it could not have existed before this body existed: therefore [it belongs] only to the new testament.

> **Conclusion.** The Sacrament of the eucharist befits only the state of grace.

**I respond:** It must be said that this Sacrament befitted only the law of grace, both on account of the thing contained, which is the true body of Christ, and on account of its efficacy, which is the bond of charity, which in the new law had to appear and abound, but in earlier [times] to be possessed imperfectly; so that there might be a gradation in the world, just as in a single man.

*To the first.* To that, then, which is objected concerning the viaticum, it must be said that it does not hold: because [men] needed to have some sustenance, not perfect food; and so some figure, not the thing itself.

*To the second.* To that which is objected, that it is the sign of the mystical body; it must be said that it is not only the sign of it, but rather of the true body of Christ, and it is the sign of that more immediately; and therefore, although the mystical body of Christ began from Abel, yet the proper body of Christ did not, and therefore neither did this Sacrament.

*To the third.* To the third it must be said that matrimony, as to its duty, was fitting for every state, but as to its remedy not. But the bodily eating of that tree was fitting for the state of immortality, the spiritual eating of this tree for every state, but the sacramental [eating] after the nativity and fruit of this tree.

*To the fourth.* For the eating of it is also according to the assumed humanity, which he laid down for us as a price and now lays down as food, in John the sixth: *The bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.* To that which is objected concerning the eucharist, that it is a remedy against venial [sins]; it must be said that this reasoning fails in three ways: first, because venial sickness is not as dangerous as mortal; second indeed, because through penance venial [sin] could have a remedy, as could mortal; third, because that Sacrament is not principally ordained against venial [sins], as will be seen below.