The eucharistic body and the church; the seventh argument: the grace of predestination and mortal sin

Loserth pp. 137.12–141.31

¶1137.12–138.8

137Et ista sentencia tangitur in decretis, De Consecracione, d. IIª. Quia passus, ubi Augustinus dicit quod Christus in eucaristia commendavit corpus suum quod eciam fecit nosmet ipsos. Nec aliter digne accipimus quoad beatitudinem, nisi simus predestinati ad corpus eius, ut vivamus in eternum (ut exponit Augustinus super Joh. in omelia). Glosa ergo sic distinguit: Non, inquit, fecit nos corpus suum quod natum est de virgine et sumitur in altari, sed corpus suum spirituale quod est ecclesia. Et illa unio est pure res huius sacramenti (ut dicam alibi). Videtur tamen planius dicendum et modo loquendi sanctorum conformius quod idem est corpus in numero quod est ecclesia, et corpus in sacramento ac natum de virgine, cum sit ipse Christus. Aliter tamen est Christus ipsum corpus quia personaliter, et aliter christianus quia sacramentaliter, unus proprie et alius participative; et sic credo ego propheciam Christi intelligi 138Matth. XXIV°, 5: Multi venient in nomine meo, dicentes quia ego sum Christus, et multos seducent. Non enim reor aliquem christianum vel pseudoapostolum dicere quod ipse est Christus personaliter, sed sacramentaliter per incorporacionem in corpus Christi misticum; nam Ephesiorum V°, 27, scribitur: Dico autem sacramentum magnum in Christo et ecclesia. Illa autem pretensio solum nuncupative ecclesiasticorum seducit plurimos.

And this teaching is touched on in the decrees, De consecratione, distinction 2, Quia passus, where Augustine says that "Christ in the eucharist commended his body, which he also made [to be] ourselves." Nor do we receive worthily, as regards blessedness, unless we are predestinate to his body, so that we may live for ever (as Augustine expounds on John, in a homily).¹ The gloss, therefore, distinguishes thus: "He did not," it says, "make us his body which was born of the virgin and is taken at the altar, but his spiritual body, which is the church." And that union is purely the reality of this sacrament (as I shall say elsewhere).² Yet it seems that one should say more plainly, and more in conformity with the saints’ manner of speaking, that it is the same body in number which is the church, and the body in the sacrament and [the body] born of the virgin, since it is Christ himself. Yet Christ is that body in one way, because personally, and a Christian in another, because sacramentally: the one properly and the other participatively;³ and so I believe Christ’s prophecy is to be understood, 138Matthew 24:5: "Many will come in my name saying, I am Christ. And they will seduce many." For I do not think that any Christian or false apostle says that he is Christ personally, but sacramentally, through incorporation into the mystical body of Christ; for in Ephesians 5:32 it is written: "But I speak of a great sacrament in Christ and the church." And that pretension of those who are clergy only in name seduces very many.⁴

¶2138.9–138.16

138Septimo et ultimo arguitur contra dicta de gracia predestinacionis que est insolubile ligamentum membrorum ecclesie. Mirum namque videtur multis quomodo aliquod accidens absolutum non potest perdi, quomodo ipsum stat cum mortali, et quomodo ipsa semper rectificat verum dominium, sic quod verum dominium stet cum mortali sicut stat cum prescito ad tempus iustificacio.

Seventhly and lastly, it is argued against what was said of the grace of predestination, which is the indissoluble bond of the members of the church. For it seems a marvel to many how any absolute accident cannot be lost, how it stands with mortal [sin], and how it always rectifies true lordship, so that true lordship would stand with mortal [sin], as justification stands for a time with a foreknown [man].⁵

¶3138.17–138.23

138Hic dicitur quod quicunque posuerit sentenciam doctoris profundi in correlario XXIIIⁱ cap., libri primi, scilicet quod Deus non potest quicquam noviter diligere vel odire nec vicissim aliquid odire vel diligere plus vel minus. Quicunque, inquam illud concesserit habet ponere graciam predestinacionis ad sensum expositum.

Here the answer is that whoever has posited the teaching of the profound doctor in the corollary of the twenty-third chapter of the first book, namely that God cannot newly love or hate anything, nor in turn hate or love anything more or less: whoever, I say, has granted that, has to posit the grace of predestination in the sense expounded.⁶

¶4138.24–141.31

138Unde non credo quemquam posse falsificare hoc fundamentum, quia indubie si est falsum est summe hereticum. Nam dato quod Deus quemquam predestinavit, sicut oportet ex fide scripture concedere Rom. VIII°, 30, de quadruplici gradu assimilacionis membrorum ecclesie, scilicet vocacione, predestinacione, 139iustificacione et glorificacione, patet quod est dare correspondenter ad predestinacionem Dei eternam unam predestinacionem passivam que incepit sicut incepit esse, quod iste est predestinatus. Et illa predestinacio cum sit precipuum donum Dei gratissime datum, cum nemo potest mereri suam predestinacionem, eo quod non potest inesse nisi insit primo instanti predestinati, ideo patet ex communi sermone dicto de gracia quod illa predestinacio est gracia precipua, sed dicitur ad aliquid, sicut sciencia, meritum et multa talia que vocantur qualitates. Nulla enim qualitas est res absoluta, potens per se existere, et sic conceditur quod non potest perdi, cum sit fundamentum glorificacioni vel beatitudini, que nec eciam potest perdi. Nam si alterum istorum perditur, ipsum fuit, et si unquam fuit, cum non potest esse accidenter predestinacio vel beatitudo, ipsum semper erit, et per consequens, non perditur, ideo si perditur, non perditur; et patet ad primum mirum. Quo ad secundum dicitur, cum nemo dubitat quin multi predestinati peccarunt mortaliter, tam peccato originali quam actuali, ut patet de David, Petro et Paulo, et predestinacio non potest perdi iuxta dicta, manifestum est quod gracia predestinacionis stat cum peccato mortali, verumptamen repugnat peccato in spiritum sanctum, sicut gracia presciti secundum presentem iusticiam repugnat dampnacioni, licet aggregatum ex illa gracia et presciencia inferat necessario dampnacionem (ut patet XXXIIIª q. quarta, Vasis ire, et capitulo sequenti ex testimonio Augustini). Unde concedendum est quod Deus infinitum plus diligit Petrum quoad mores eciam dum negat eum, quam diligit Scarioth dum est 140in gracia, quia cum necessario semper eque diligit, semper diligit Petrum ad beatitudinem, cum scit eum finaliter converti, Scarioth autem semper diligit ad penam perpetuam, cum eternaliter videt omnia preterita vel futura sibi presencia, ut hic supponitur. Et patet quod gracia predestinacionis quam quidam vocant graciam prevenientem est quantumlibet melior quam gracia nude secundum presentem iusticiam quam quidam vocant graciam comitantem. Sed optima est gracia qua homo finaliter perseverat, que ducit ad confirmacionem et gloriam quam quidam vocant graciam consumantem. Et iste gracie sunt naturarum disparium, cum preter bonitatem supernaturalem dicunt relacionem ad mercedem. Nec est negandum quin prescitus habet graciam prevenientem, concomitantem et eciam consumantem opus aliquod bonum, sicut predestinatus habet graciam secundum presentem iusticiam. Sed sic contendens equivocat gratis eciam in signis nec effugiet, volens concordare in principiis fidei de modo diligendi Dei et methaphisica de quiditate gratie, quin proporcionaliter ut Deus diligit hominem est ipse gratus Deo, et proporcionaliter habet graciam, non quod illa gracia sit res, que posset per se existere, ut grosse et heretice concepit Pelagius, sed quod gracia sit qualitas spiritualis vel denominacio qua quis est formaliter gratus Deo. Et patet quod homo potest esse episcopus, dominus et minister ecclesie, eciam prescitus, existens in gracia secundum presentem iusticiam, sed homo non est cum hoc membrum sancte matris ecclesie. Unde sicut heres parvulus caret dominio, dum tamen tempore suo sit 141dominus omnium, sic predestinatus in mortali caret dominio, dum tamen alio tempore habet dominium, cum Deus eternaliter vult quod illud habeat pro suo tempore. Et si queratur, quare repugnat dominium in predestinato peccante mortaliter, dicitur quod ipse est tunc expers iusticie et cuiuscunque virtutis moralis, et per consequens, expers dominii quod oportet fundari in iusticia morali. Habet tamen iusticiam naturalem ad membra et omne quod placet Deo ut habeat, sicut et habet prescitus, et supra hoc habet iusticiam in predestinacione fundatam quam ad tempus obscurat piaculo. Unde non audeo dicere quod omnis peccans mortaliter non sit tunc membrum ecclesie, sicut videtur decretum dicere De Consecracione, d. I, Ecclesia, quia tunc esset tanta vel maior ambiguitas de prelatis, utrum sint membra ecclesie, sicut est de eis, ponendo solum predestinatos esse membra ecclesie, quia suspicionem probabilem habemus de mortali, qualem non habemus quod prepositi sunt presciti, et periret obediencia prelatis, cum non sic debemus honorare membra diaboli nec dare eis elemosinam, cum scimus quod egenis membris Christi est debita; sic enim vacaret beneficium intrusoris cotidie tam de iure quam de facto, et sic contra testimonia sanctorum nimis perturbaretur ecclesia. Alia autem sunt dubia concernencia ecclesiam que patent alibi, ut quod Christus existens humanitus fons vivus plenus gracie est quantumlibet melior moraliter quam totum residuum corpus ecclesie, cum gracia unionis sit alterius racionis quam gracia posteris derivata.

Hence I do not believe that anyone can falsify this foundation, for without doubt, if it is false, it is supremely heretical. For, granted that God has predestined anyone, as must be granted from the faith of scripture, Romans 8:30, concerning the fourfold degree of the assimilation of the members of the church, namely calling, predestination, 139justification and glorification, it is clear that one must grant, corresponding to God’s eternal predestination, a passive predestination, which began as it began to be [true] that this man is predestinate.⁷ And since that predestination is God’s chief gift, most freely given, since no one can merit his own predestination, because it cannot be in [him] unless it is in [him] at the first instant of the predestinate [person], therefore it is clear from the common account given of grace that that predestination is a chief grace; but it is said relatively, like knowledge, merit and many such things that are called qualities. For no quality is an absolute thing able to exist by itself; and so it is granted that it cannot be lost, since it is the foundation of glorification or blessedness, which also cannot be lost. For if either of them is lost, it has been; and if it ever has been, since predestination or blessedness cannot be so accidentally, it will always be, and consequently it is not lost: therefore, if it is lost, it is not lost; and the answer to the first marvel is clear.⁸ As to the second, the answer is: since no one doubts that many predestinate [persons] have sinned mortally, by original as well as by actual sin, as is clear of David, Peter and Paul, and predestination cannot be lost, according to what has been said, it is manifest that the grace of predestination stands with mortal sin; yet it is repugnant to the sin against the Holy Spirit, just as the grace of a foreknown [man] according to present justice is repugnant to damnation, although the aggregate of that grace and foreknowledge necessarily implies damnation (as is clear in [Causa] 23, question 4, Vasis ire, and in the following chapter, from the testimony of Augustine).⁹ Hence it must be granted that God loves Peter infinitely more, even as to conduct, even while he denies him, than he loves Iscariot while he is 140in grace; for since he necessarily always loves equally, he always loves Peter to blessedness, since he knows that he will finally be converted, but Iscariot he always loves to perpetual punishment, since he eternally sees all things past or future as present to him, as is supposed here.¹⁰ And it is clear that the grace of predestination, which some call prevenient grace, is better to any degree whatever than grace merely according to present justice, which some call accompanying grace. But best is the grace by which a man finally perseveres, which leads to confirmation and glory, which some call consummating grace. And these graces are of disparate natures, since besides supernatural goodness they denote a relation to the reward.¹¹ Nor is it to be denied that a foreknown [man] has prevenient grace, concomitant grace, and also grace consummating some good work, just as a predestinate [man] has grace according to present justice. But one who contends thus equivocates gratuitously, even in the signs, and will not escape, if he will agree with the principles of faith on God’s manner of loving and with metaphysics on the quiddity of grace, [from granting] that in proportion as God loves a man he is pleasing to God, and in proportion he has grace: not that that grace is a thing that could exist by itself, as Pelagius grossly and heretically conceived, but that grace is a spiritual quality or naming by which someone is formally pleasing to God.¹² And it is clear that a man can be a bishop, lord and minister of the church, even [one] foreknown, existing in grace according to present justice; but with this the man is not a member of holy mother church. Hence, just as a little heir lacks lordship, though in his own time he is to be 141lord of all, so a predestinate [man] in mortal [sin] lacks lordship, though at another time he has lordship, since God eternally wills that he have it for his time.¹³ And if it is asked why lordship is repugnant to a predestinate [man] sinning mortally, the answer is that he is then without justice and every moral virtue, and consequently without lordship, which must be founded in moral justice. Yet he has natural justice towards [his] members, and everything that it pleases God that he should have, as a foreknown [man] also has; and above this he has a justice founded in predestination, which for a time he obscures by sin.¹⁴ Hence I do not dare to say that no one sinning mortally is then a member of the church, as the decree seems to say, De consecratione, distinction 1, Ecclesia; for then there would be as great or greater ambiguity about prelates, whether they are members of the church, as there is about them on positing that only the predestinate are members of the church, since we have a probable suspicion of mortal [sin], such as we do not have that superiors are foreknown; and obedience to prelates would perish, since we ought not so to honour the members of the devil, nor give them alms, since we know that [alms] are due to the needy members of Christ; for so the benefice of an intruder would be vacant daily, as much by right as in fact, and so, against the testimonies of the saints, the church would be too much disturbed.¹⁵ And there are other doubts concerning the church which are clear elsewhere, such as that Christ, existing as man a living fountain full of grace, is better morally to any degree whatever than the whole remaining body of the church, since the grace of union is of another kind than the grace derived to those who come after.¹⁶

Notes

1 Loserth (137.13): Decretum III, De cons. D.2 c.36, Quia passus (the form is ours); not found in Augustine; perhaps collected by Bede on 1 Cor. 10 from Augustine, In Iohannem tract. 26–27; see Friedberg’s note 455. B margin, later hand, Unio Christi cum ecclesia est res pure sacramenti (137.13). Quod eciam fecit nosmet ipsos: "which he also made [to be] ourselves", as printed. Super Joh. in omelia: In Ioh. tract. 26 (PL 35:1612–1615). The canon is inscribed Item Augustinus (PL 187:1746C–1747A); Wyclif’s wording follows Friedberg’s text.
2 Glosa: the ordinary gloss on this canon, v. quod etiam fecit: non ergo fecit nos corpus suum quod natum est de Virgine, & sumitur in altari … sed fecit nos Christus corpus suum spirituale, scilicet ecclesiam fidelium (glossed Decretum, 1588), quoted closely. Res … sacramenti: the reality of the sacrament (what it signifies), against the sign. Ut dicam alibi: De eucharistia c. 5 (126: panem et vinum figurare unionem ecclesie cum Christo qui est res huius sacramenti).
3 B margins Christianus sacramentaliter et participative and Corpus est Christus personaliter (Loserth’s line numbers 137.21 and 137.26, as the OCR gives them). Planius: against the gloss, Wyclif holds one body in number (church, sacrament, body born of the virgin), distinguished by mode: Christ personally, the Christian sacramentally.
4 A lacks Matth. XXIV and leaves a gap (138.1); A lacks V (138.6); A, wrongly, ecclesiasticorum sacramentorum (138.8). Matt. 24:5 as DR, less its "For" (Wyclif lacks enim; dicentes quia is recitative). The Ephesians words are 5:32 (printed 27): Vulgate Sacramentum hoc magnum est, ego autem dico in Christo et in Ecclesia, DR "This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church"; Wyclif’s reordered Latin translated. Solum nuncupative ecclesiasticorum: we take ecclesiastici as the clergy (the glossary, CONTEXTUAL), the false apostles of the prophecy; "those who belong to the church only in name" is possible.
5 A margin VII. obieccio (138.9); B margin, another hand, Gracia predestinacionis non potest perdi. Stat cum mortali (138.12). At 138.13 B reads ipsa non and A₁ ipsum; Loserth prefers A’s ipsa (the grace). A and B iustificato for Loserth’s iustificacio (138.16); the print is translated. Accidens absolutum: an accident that is a thing in its own right, not a relation. The three marvels are answered at 139.17, 139.20 ff. and 140.22 ff.
6 A margin Responsio, utrum predestinacio stat in eodem cum mortali (138.17). The manuscripts read XXXII; Loserth prints XXIIIi (an ordinal genitive) and refers to p. 79 above, naming the doctor profundus as Bradwardine (138.18): De causa Dei I, corollary to ch. 23 (Loserth’s identification; the place is not independently checked).
7 A margin De predestinacione (138.24). Rom. 8:30 is cited, not quoted; Wyclif’s list puts calling before predestination, where the verse has "whom he predestinated, them he also called" (DR). Predestinacio passiva: predestination as it is in the creature. Incepit sicut incepit esse, quod iste est predestinatus: we take esse with the quod clause, "began to be [true] that"; doubtful.
8 B principium domini for precipuum donum (139.5); A nisi nisi (139.7). Dicitur ad aliquid: it is said relatively (in the category of relation), like knowledge and merit, which are called qualities though they are not absolute things. The proof that it cannot be lost: what is lost must have been, and what has been predestination or blessedness was not so by accident, so it will always be; hence "if it is lost, it is not lost". The stray X before Quo ad secundum (139.20) is not Wyclif’s and is not translated.
9 A repungnat (139.27); A A₁ lack patet (139.28). The text reads XXXIIIª q. quarta; Loserth’s reference is Decretum II, C.23 q.4 c.23, Vasis ire (139.29; the form is ours): the print’s XXXIIIª is given as 23 in the English, following Loserth’s own reference. Capitulo sequenti: the next canon, or the next chapter of this treatise; we leave it open. Aggregatum … inferat: the grace together with foreknowledge implies damnation, the grace alone does not.
10 Loserth (140.1): cf. Hus, De ecclesia (Opp. I, 200). B ad peccatum (140.2). Quoad mores eciam: "even as to conduct", as printed: the love follows the predestined end, not the present conduct; doubtful. Scarioth: Judas Iscariot.
11 A margin Nota de gracia triplici; B margin, another hand, Gracia predestinacionis preveniens (140.4); B margins comitantem (140.10), Consumantem (140.16). Quantumlibet melior: better to any degree one pleases. Comitantem, then concomitantem (140.17): "accompanying", "concomitant", kept apart as printed. Dicunt relacionem ad mercedem: denote a relation to the reward.
12 A margin Quid est gracia; B lacks ut deus — habet (140.21). Equivocat gratis eciam in signis: we take gratis as the adverb, "gratuitously", with a play on gracia and gratus; "equivocates on 'grace'" would want gracia; doubtful. Nec effugiet … quin: will not escape [granting] that. Gratus Deo: pleasing to God. Denominacio: a naming taken from a relation to God’s love.
13 B et prescitus (140.28); B lacks tempore — alio (140.31). Heres parvulus … dominus omnium: Gal. 4:1, "As long as the heir is a child, he differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all" (DR). In mortali: in mortal sin. The stray Y before Et si queratur (141.5) is not Wyclif’s and is not translated; A margin Nota (141.5).
14 Iusticiam naturalem ad membra: we take membra as the bodily members (natural justice in their ordering), which even the foreknown keeps, not the members of the church; doubtful. Piaculo: by sin. Et omne quod placet Deo ut habeat: we take it as a second object of habet; it may also depend on ad ("natural justice towards [his] members and towards everything that it pleases God that he should have"); doubtful.
15 A margin Utrum omnis peccans mortaliter non sit tunc membrum ecclesie; B margin Episcopus in mortali non est protunc membrum ecclesie (141.15). Loserth (141.13): Decretum III, De cons. D.1 c.8, Ecclesia (the form is ours). A has an erasure, suspi … bilem (141.18–19). The argument: if mortal sin excluded from membership, doubt about prelates would be greater than on the predestinate-only definition, since mortal sin is often probably suspected and foreknowledge is not; obedience and alms would fail, and every intruder’s benefice would fall vacant daily. Tam de iure quam de facto: by right (law) as well as in fact.
16 B lacks cum (141.30). Fons vivus plenus gracie: cf. John 1:14 (cited by sense). Gracia unionis: the grace of the hypostatic union, of another kind (alterius racionis, untagged here) than the grace derived to posteris, "those who come after", the members.

How the Latin of this chapter was established

Plate readings; page · reading · note):
- 137: Consecracione
- 137: IIª
- 137: cum
- 137: Christus
- 138: Christus
- 138: Christi
- 138: ∅ (print: Illa autem pretensio; no a)
- 138: pretensio (print has pretensio) [NW]
- 138: ∅ (of is the English side-note)
- 138: XXIIIⁱ (leaf zoom: dotted superscript i after XXIII)
- 138: membrorum
- 140: gracia
- 141: Christi
- 141: intrusoris (print has intrusoris) [NW]
- 141: Christus
Not Wyclif’s text, not translated: p. 139.20 X (before Quo ad secundum), p. 141.5 Y (before Et si queratur), alinea letters left in the Latin. OCR scars, translated as corrected: p. 139 eracia (read gracia); p. 140 nnahter (read finaliter). Printed references corrected in the English (modern references, card): 138.6 V°, 27 → Eph. 5:32; 139.29 XXXIIIª → C.23 (Loserth’s own reference). Doubts: p. 140.18 gratis; p. 139.30 quoad mores.