To this the response is given according to Augustine, that to believe is to eat: whence: "Why do you prepare your tooth and stomach? Only believe, and you have eaten." According to this, therefore, it must be noted that there is spiritual eating and there is sacramental eating: spiritual eating is through faith and charity, sacramental eating is under the Sacrament. Without sacramental eating there can be salvation, nor is it of necessity, as far as the institution of the Sacrament is concerned: spiritual eating is of necessity.
92. But objections are raised: 1. Concerning baptized infants, who are saved yet have never eaten either sacramentally or spiritually.
2. Likewise, he adds to the eating of the flesh the drinking of the blood, therefore without the drinking of the blood no one is saved: but only priests receive the blood: therefore they alone are saved.
I respond: It must be said that, as has been stated, the effect of eating is twofold, namely incorporation and conservation. No one is saved unless he is a member of Christ, and unless he is preserved by Christ: hence no one is saved without the effect of eating: therefore eating is said to be necessary.
But because in little ones, by divine generosity, there can be the effect of eating without eating: therefore they are saved even without any eating whatsoever. In adults, however, there cannot be incorporation or conservation without spiritual eating, which is through faith and charity, but there can be without sacramental eating. Therefore the former is necessary for adults, but sacramental eating, although it is not of necessity, nevertheless confers great benefit, because by the power of the Sacrament every good is increased in us.
2. As for the objection raised concerning flesh and blood, Augustine explains it of spiritual food and drink: hence "he wishes food and drink to be understood as the fellowship of the body and members, which is the holy Church in his predestined and called saints and faithful," outside of which no one is saved.
93. Question IV. Likewise, inquiry is made concerning the benefit: He who eats my flesh, etc.
1. For many eat who nevertheless die and are damned, as Judas.
2. Likewise, just as the Son lives on account of the living Father, so it is said in the text that we live on account of the Son: but the Son does not live by eating: therefore by equal reasoning neither do we: or if we eat the Son, why does he himself not eat the Father?
I respond: It must be said to the first that a twofold heresy arose from this word: one which said that from the moment anyone eats the body of Christ, he cannot be damned, provided he ate as a believer. But this is manifestly irrational on account of Judas.
Others said that whoever once ate worthily would never afterward be damned: and this is manifestly false, because, as can be proved through Scripture, many were good in the Church who were afterward damned.
Therefore it must be understood in the catholic sense: he who eats, namely worthily, and does not depart from that worthiness, will live forever.
2. To the other objection it must be said that the comparison is not entirely similar, although it is adduced as a likeness. For the Son is said to live on account of the Father, because he has life from the Father and because he remains in the Father, but not because he is made better by participation in the Father: but we live through the Son, because from him we have life, and by the Son remaining in us and by participation in him we are made better. Therefore, because he does not remain in us except through eating, we eat so that we may live and be made better.
94. Question V. Likewise, inquiry is made concerning the dignity of this eating. For he says that those eating this bread will not die, as those eating manna.
Contra: He either understands this of spiritual life or of bodily life. If of spiritual life, he says nothing, because the holy fathers who ate manna did not die spiritually. If of bodily life, likewise: because he who eats this bread does not live bodily, but dies.
If you say that those who ate manna unworthily died a spiritual death, and he calls these their fathers; likewise those who eat the body of Christ unworthily die a spiritual death; 1 Corinthians 11: He who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
Therefore it is asked: what is it to eat unworthily, and why does one who eats unworthily sin?
I respond: It must be said that this food is set above that food by reason of giving life in two ways: first, because that food could not give life except through this one which it signified; therefore it is said of the just that they all ate the same spiritual food, 1 Corinthians 10; but those who had their eye only on that food died spiritually, because they tasted it only in a carnal manner. So Augustine responds.
In another way it can be said that manna was ordained for the preservation of bodily life, but this bread for the preservation of spiritual life. And the Lord means to say that that bread only sustained bodily life for a time, but this bread sustains spiritual life forever in those who receive it worthily; and therefore it is more worthy than that one.
But those who receive unworthily sin, and the bread is turned into poison for them, and these are those who bear the sting of mortal sin. The reason why they sin is contempt, because they bring so great a guest into so vile a lodging.
But how it is received worthily, Augustine teaches: "Bring innocence," he says, "to the altar; if there be daily sins, at least let them not be deadly. Before you approach the altar, let it be said: Forgive us our debts, etc. Then approach with confidence: it is bread, not poison."
95. He said these things in the Synagogue, etc. Above was set forth the confirmation of the instruction on account of the Jews' disputing; here is set forth the explanation on account of the disciples' scandal; and it proceeds in this order. First, the murmuring of the disciples is indicated; second, on account of the murmuring, the explanation of the doctrine; third, the reason for murmuring is given; fourth, the falling away of the unbelieving; fifth, the confirmation of the believing; sixth, the discernment among the confirmed.
(Verse 60). The murmuring of the disciples arose from this: that he had said his flesh was given to be eaten, and that without this there was no salvation. On account of which he says: He said these things teaching in the Synagogue, in Capernaum, that is, publicly, and therefore many were enraged; below, chapter 18: "I have always taught in the Synagogue."
96. (Vers. 61.). Many therefore of his disciples, hearing, namely what had just been said about the eating of flesh, said: This is a hard saying, that is, cruel and inhuman, to eat human flesh: who can hear it? They do not say believe, but hear, on account of the horror: therefore they could not hear, because their ears were heavy, according to that passage in Isaiah chapter six: "Make the heart of this people blind and make heavy their ears," etc.
97. (Vers. 62.). But Jesus knowing etc. Here the second point is touched upon, namely the explanation of the doctrine on account of the murmuring: and although the murmuring was in secret, yet it did not escape the Lord: whence he says: But Jesus knowing in himself that his disciples murmured about this: he knew this not by report, but in himself: below in chapter sixteen: "The disciples said: Now we know that you know all things, and it is not necessary for anyone to question you." Knowing therefore the murmuring and wishing to cut it off, he explains that what he had said is not to be understood carnally, but spiritually. He shows therefore that it is not to be understood carnally, both because it would be false, and because it would be useless. Therefore he said to them: Does this scandalize you, namely what I said about the eating of my flesh, because you believe carnally that it is to be divided into pieces: just as the Pharisees, in Matthew chapter fifteen: "Do you know that the Pharisees, having heard this word, were scandalized"? And this is false: whence he adds: