Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-24T16:09:59.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sign and Symbol: Sacramental Experience in Albert's De corpore domini.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Albert Marie Surmanski OP
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Original Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 97 , Issue 1070 , July 2016 , pp. 479 - 491
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 The Dominican Council. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For an analysis of Chauvet's critique of Aquinas’ theology, see Blankenhorn, Bernhard OP “The Instrumental Causality of the Sacraments: Thomas Aquinas and Louis-Marie Chauvet” Nova et Vetera 2006, 4 (2): pp. 255-94Google Scholar.

2 For a sustained theological reflection which is strongly Thomistic but also values insights from the study of sacrament as symbol, see O'Neill, Colman E. OP, Sacramental Realism, (Michael Glazier, Delaware: 1983)Google Scholar. Blankenhorn also suggests that some of Chauvet's insights could be complementary to Aquinas’ thought, “Instrumental Causality,” p. 293-4.

3 Augustine, De doctrina christiana, CCSL 32, ed. J. Martin, 1962, 1.2.11: “res…quae ad significandum aliquid adhibentur”; 2.1.5: “res praeter speciem, quam ingerit sensibus, aliud aliquid ex se faciens in cogitationem venire.”

4 ST III.60.4.ad.1; ST III.62.1.

5 See Vorgrimler, Herbert, Sacramental Theology (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992), p. 9-10Google Scholar.

6 Rahner, Karl, “On the Theology of the Symbol,” in Theological Investigations 4, trans. Smith, Kevin, (New York: Crossroads, 1982), p. 225Google Scholar.

7 Rahner, “Symbol,” 230. See, ST I.5.2, “unumquodque cognoscibile est, inquantum est actu.” Aquinas references Aristotle's Metaphysics IX as the source for this axiom.

8 Rahner notes, “Where…one rejects a ‘physical causality’ (of instrumental type), one soon finds oneself embarrassed.” Rahner, “Symbol,” 242 n 17. Note: Albert certainly has a causal understanding of the sacraments, speaking of them in De corpore domini as containing or giving grace (1.1.), but does not specify the precise way in which the sacraments act to do this. In his other works, Albert prefers to speak about the sacraments operating by means of dispostive causality, imparting an openness to grace. See Leeming, Bernard, Principles of Sacramental Theology. 2nd ed. (Westminster: Newman Press, 1960), p. 288-9.Google Scholar

9 As seen in the Christology of the Councils of Chalcedon and Constantinople III.

10 See for example, William R. Crockett, Eucharist: Symbol of Transformation, (New York: Pueblo, 1989), p. 87, 236.

11 Chauvet, Louis-Marie, Symbol and Sacrament: a sacramental reinterpretation of Christian existence, (Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press, 1995), p. 21Google Scholar.

12 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 84.

13 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 110.

14 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 118.

15 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 111.

16 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 393.

17 Albert, De corpore domini, in Opera Omnia 38, ed. Auguste Borgnet (Paris: L. Vives, 1899). Citations from the text will be in terms of distinction, tractate (when applicable) and chapter.

18 In favor of Albertine authorship, see Anzulewicz, Henryk,“The Systematic Theology of Albert the Great” in A Companion to Albert the Great: Theology, Philosophy and the Sciences, ed. Resnick, Irven (The Netherlands: Brill, 2013), p. 64Google Scholar; against Albertine authorship, see Fries, Albert, Der Doppeltraktat uber die Eucharistie unter dem Namen des Albertus Magnus, (Aschendorff: 1984)Google Scholar; Jorgen Vijgens, The Status of Eucharistic Accidents, “sine subjecto” (Berlin: Academie Verlag GmbH, 2013), p. 128.

19 Albert, De corpore domini, 6.2.1.

20 Albert, De corpore domini, 6.2.1.

21 Albert, De corpore domini, 6.2.1.

22 Neither would recognizing the distinctness of Christ's human nature suggest a real separation from the divine person through whom it has being.

23 Albert, De corpore domini, 6.1.2.

24 Albert, De corpore domini, 1.1.2.

25 This paper explores only the significance of bread and wine which become the body of Christ in De corpore domini. Albert also considers the significance and presence of Christ's sacrifice in relation to the Eucharist, but this is beyond the scope of the present paper. For this topic see Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald, “De sacrificio missae secundum S. Albertum Magnum,” in: Angelicum 9 (1932): 213-224Google Scholar.

26 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.1.2.

27 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.2.1.

28 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.2.1.

29 Here, Albert draws on Ambrose's De mysteriis, CSEL 73, ed. O. Faller, 1955, 8.45.

30 Albert, De corpore domini, 1.1.1.

31 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.1.2

32 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.1.9.

33 These three levels in Albert may have influenced by the De sacramentis of Hugh of St. Victor. Hugh reads the sacraments in a Trinitarian way in terms of creation, redemption and sanctification. He considers the sacramental elements in terms of the natural matter with its natural signification, the institution by Christ which specifically makes it signify something supernatural, and the grace itself which is signified and given. Hugh of St. Victor, De sacramentis, 9.2, PL 176.

34 Albert, De mysterio missae, in Opera Omnia 38, ed. Borgnet, Auguste (Paris: L. Vives, 1899)Google Scholar.

35 Albert, De sacramentis, in Opera Omnia Sancti Doctoris Alberti Magni. Ed. Colon. vol. 26, ed. Ohlmeyer, Albertus O. S. B. (Munster: Aschendorff, 1958) V.1.1 and 2Google Scholar.

36 Aquinas, ST III. 73.6; III.74.1.

37 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 356, 150.

38 This comparison is drawn from Chauvet's analysis of “The Symbol and the Body” It does not exhaust his reflection on the symbolic dimensions of the Eucharist. Among other connections, Chauvet also considers the way in which the Eucharist symbolically represents Christ's sacrifice, the moral obligations of Christians, and the way in which Christ is not visibly available to the Christian.

39 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 356.

40 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 356.

41 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 392.

42 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 361.

43 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 392.

44 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 397.

45 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 398.

46 Chauvet, Symbol, p. 120.

47 Albert does not simply allow any meaning at all to be read into the Mass. His theology of the Mass is known for his rejection of rememorative allegory, where the actions of the Mass are read as paralleling actions from the life of Christ. In this type of allegory for example, the priest speaking loudly after praying quietly could be interpreted as Christ returning to his preaching after having left Jerusalem for a time. See Wright, David F., “Albert the Great's Critique of Lothar of Segni (Innocent III) in the De Sacrificio Missae,” The Thomist 44 (1980) 584CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.1.6.

49 Augustine, Confessions, CCSL 27, ed L. Verheijen, 1981, 7.10.15-19 “Cresce et manducabis me. Nec tu me in te mutabis sicut cibum carnis tuae, sed tu mutaberis in me.”

50 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.1.5.

51 Albert, De corpore domini, 3.1.8.