« PreviousContinue »
stood spiritually and emblematically. The writings of Scotus have perished in the ruins of time, but those of Bertram still remain. Having first quoted a passage from Augustine's epistle to Boniface, he thus proceeds: “Since there is one body of the Lord, in which he suffered once, and one blood, which was shed for the salvation of the world—the sacraments have taken the names of those things, so that they are called the body and blood of Christ, on account of their similitude.” And again: “Let your wisdom consider, most illustrious prince, that even if the sacred scriptures are set aside, it is clearly proved by the words of the fathers that there is no small difference between the body which exists by mystery, and the body which suffered ; because the one is the proper body of the Saviour, nor in it is any figure ; but in the other, which exists in the mystery, there is the figure, not only of the proper body of Christ, but also of the people who believe in him.” And in another place he says, are taught by the Saviour, and also the apostle Paul, that that bread and that blood which is put upon the altar, is put there in the figure and memory of our Lord's death; that what is done in the past, he memory by the present, so that being mindful of his passion, we are made through that partakers of his divine promise, by which we are freed from death : knowing that when
may recall to
we shall come into the presence of Christ, we shall not need such instruments by which to be admonished of the things which his great kindness has done.”*
Nor did Bertram stand alone. Amalarius, who lived very early in the ninth century, writes thus: “Sacraments ought to have the similitude of the things of which they are the sacraments; wherefore the priest is like Christ, as the bread and wine are like the body of Christ.”I Again, the same writer says: “It is manifest that the mass is celebrated principally in remembrance of the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whose memory it is done.” So also Rabanus Maurus : “ As the material food externally nourishes the body, so the word of God in it nourishes and confirms the soul. The sacrament is one thing, the virtue of the sacrament another. The sacrament is received in the mouth, but the inner man is satiated by the virtue of the sacrament; for the sacrament is reduced to the nourishment of the body; but by the virtue of the sacrament, the dignity of eternal life is maintained.”$
While, however, we range Amalarius and Rabanus Maurus on the side of Bertram, we must
* Bertram, on the body and blood of the Lord. † AMALARIUS, bishop of Mentz, A.D. 812.
De Eccles. Off. Præf. § RABANUS MAURUS, head of the monastery of Fulda, A.D. 847, and afterwards archbishop of Mayence.
place another author of this century as decidedly against him. Haymo,* bishop of Halberstadt, writes thus : “So we believe and faithfully confess, and hold that that substance, namely, bread and wine, is substantially changed into another substance, by the operation of a divine virtue, i. e., the nature of bread and wine into flesh and blood.” And again : « The invisible priest changes his visible creatures into the substance of his own flesh and blood by a secret power.
In which body and blood of Christ, on account of the dread of those who receive it, the taste and form of bread and wine remain, but the nature and substance is altogether changed into the body and blood of Christ." From
passages we clearly see the progress which the doctrine of transubstantiation had already made,-decidedly maintained by one party, but still as decidedly opposed by another party and thus the matter remained for the ninth and tenth centuries. The doctrine openly canvassed, but no decision made. Radbert on one side, and Bertram on the other, being the avowed and selected champions of each party, may fairly represent the opinions of the day.
* HAYMO, pupil, together with Rabanus Maurus, of Alcuin, abbot of Hersfield, and afterwards bishop of Halberstadt, A.D. 853.
† Haymo, on the body and blood of Christ.
From this to the middle of the eleventh century, we hear little more of the controversy, the Christian world being occupied in the Crusades, and in the great schism between the Greek and Latin churches; the power of the Roman church increasing, and the ignorance of the dark ages now fairly set in; all authority in matters of faith left to the arbitrary decision of the pope ; and whether with or without evidence, for or against reason, the dictum of the priests, the faith of the people.
THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES.
The question of Christ's real presence in the bread and wine of the Eucharist again occupies the serious attention of the church: the dispute of Radbert and Bertram is revived, and in the beginning of the century, Berenger,* archdeacon of Angers, a man highly renowned, both on account of his extensive learning and the sanctity of his life, stood forth against the prevailing opinion, and stoutly maintained the absurdity and impiety of Radbert's doctrine.† He took the side of Johannes Scotus and Bertram, and persevered with noble resolution in teaching that the bread and wine of the Eucharist were not changed into the body and blood of our Saviour, but preserved their natural and essential qualities, and were no more than figures or external symbols of the body and blood of Christ. Thus he took a solitary position, and a dangerous one, as it soon turned out. Leo the Ninth, then pope, attacked this daring opposition to the popular doctrine with peculiar vehemence; and in two councils, one at Rome, the other at Vercelli, condemned publicly the
* BERENGER, born at Tours, in France, archdeacon of Angers, A.D. 1035; principally opposed to Lanfranc: died A.D. 1088.
+ Mosheim, vol. ii., p. 505.
the doctrine broached by Berenger, and committed to the flames the writings of Scotus, from which the doctrines emanated. Berenger himself was deposed from his office, deprived of all his revenues, and threatened with every evil, temporal and spiritual. For a considerable time, nothing could shake him; he remained firm in his opinions during the pontificate of Leo. But no sooner was this prelate succeeded by Gregory VII., than new persecutions awaited him ; and at last he was so overpowered by the threats of his enemies, that though his reason was unconvinced, he yet publicly abjured his former opinions; a confession was drawn up recanting his errors, and declaring, “that the bread and wine, after consecration, were not only a sacrament, but also the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; and that this body and blood were handled by the priests, and consumed by the faithful, not merely in a sacra