Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book II: On the Real Presence, from the Testimonies of the Fathers
Chapter 16: The Testimony of St. Gregory of Nyssa
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. IV, De Sacramento Eucharistiae, Book II: On the Truth of the Body of the Lord in the Eucharist, from the Testimonies of the Fathers. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Saint Gregory of Nyssa, the brother of Saint Basil, furnishes us a notable testimony; from which too could be understood what Basil held, if any doubt should arise on that matter. For it is established that Nyssen dissented from Basil in nothing that pertains to the faith. Therefore in his book On the Life of Moses, where he disputes of the manna of the Jews, and compares that food with the Eucharist, he speaks thus of the Eucharist: “It is a bread prepared for us without seed, without ploughing, without any human work. It, flowing down from above, is found on the earth. For the bread which came down from heaven, which is the true food, which is signified enigmatically by this history, is not a certain incorporeal thing; for in what manner will an incorporeal thing become food for the body? But a thing which is not incorporeal is altogether a body.” So he. Here we have two things which exclude all the expositions that could be feigned by the adversaries. For first Gregory says that the bread of the Eucharist is made without seed, without ploughing, without human work; which certainly does not belong to wheaten bread; he speaks, therefore, of the true body of Christ, to which all those things belong.
Secondly he says that this same bread is eaten by the body; therefore he does not speak of the body of the Lord as it is in heaven, and is received by faith alone, but of the true body, as it is in the Eucharist.
The same Gregory, in his Catechetical Oration, chapters 36 and 37, has many things expressly on the truth of this Sacrament, and this passage is cited by Euthymius in the Panoplia, part 2, title 21, and by Bessarion in his book On the Words of Consecration. Among other things he says, and often repeats, that the immortal body of Christ is joined through the Eucharist with our mortal body, and renders it like to itself, that is, brings it about that it rise at length glorious and immortal: “Just as,” he says, “a little leaven makes the whole mass like to itself, so also that body, which was made immortal by God, entering into our body, transfers and changes the whole into itself. For as the pestilential, mixed with the wholesome, makes it pernicious, so also the immortal body renders the whole into which it is received like in nature to the immortal.” And below: “It is joined to the bodies of the faithful, that by that conjunction with the immortal, man too may be made a partaker of immortality.” So he.
Secondly he asks how one body can be communicated to the whole world, and yet always remain whole; which question certainly would be most absurd if the body of Christ were eaten only in a sign; for no difficulty could be feigned in that matter: “It must be considered,” he says, “how it can come about that, since that one body is continually imparted throughout the whole world to so many thousands of the faithful, it becomes whole to each one through a part, and remains whole in itself.” So he.
Thirdly he answers the question, and says that the bread which is placed on the altar is converted into the flesh of Christ, and in that manner all who feed on that bread truly receive the flesh of Christ without any detriment to it; which is indeed a most acute and most true answer. For he means that, in order that we may have and eat the true flesh of Christ, there is no need that Christ descend from heaven, but that, He remaining safe and unharmed in heaven, the bread is daily turned into His body, and in that manner is eaten by many.
And that he does not speak of the change of the bread into flesh by signification alone, as the adversaries are wont to say, but of a true and real change, is clear, first, from the very question, which (as I said) would be inept if it were a matter of a change of signification. Secondly, it is clear from his own explanation; for he says that the bread is now changed into the flesh of the Lord by the power of His words, in the same manner in which, when He Himself lived on earth, the bread on which He fed was changed into His flesh. Thirdly it is clear, because he says this change is made by the divine power of the divine blessing; but no power was required to change a signification, since it is a thing merely voluntary. Now these are his words: “That divine body, receiving the nourishment of bread, was in a manner the same with that food (as we said), changed into the nature of His body.” And below: “For which reason we rightly believe that even now the bread sanctified by the word of God is changed into the body of God the Word.” And below: “And these things He grants by the power of the blessing, changing into it (the body of the Lord) the nature of the things that are seen (that is, of the bread and wine).” So he. Which are so plain that no one of the adversaries, so far as I know, dared either to answer these passages, or to object anything to us from this author.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XVI. Testimonium S. Gregorii Nysseni. S. Gregorius Nyssenus S. Basilii frater, insigne testimonium nobis pixebet : ex quo etiam intelligi posset, quid Basilius sensisset, si de ea re ulla dubitatio oriretur. Constat enim Nyssenum in iis, qua} ad fidem per¬ tinent, nulla in re a Basilio dissensisse. Igitur in lib. de vita Moysis , ubi disputat de manna Judaeorum, et eum cibum cum Eu¬ charistia confert, sic loquitur de Eucharistia : « Panis est absque semine, absque aratione, absque ullo humano opere nobis paratus. Is desuper defluens invenitur in terris. Panis enim qui de coelo descendit, qui verus cibus est, qui aenigmatice hac historia significatur, non incorporea qiuedam res est : quo enim pacto res incorporea corpori cibus fiet ? res autem quae incorporea non est, corpus om¬ nino est )). Haec ille. Hic duo habemus, quae excludunt omnes, quae fingi possent ab adversariis, expositiones. Nam primo Gre¬ gorius dicit, Panem Euchariristiee sine se¬ mine, sine aratione, sine opere humano fieri ; quod certe non convenit pani triticeo : lo¬ quitur igitur de vero corpore Christi, cui illa omnia conveniunt. Secundo dicit, eumdem panem corpore manducari : non ergo loquitur de corpore Domini, ut est in coelo, et sola fide sumitur, sed de vero corpore, ut est in Eucharistia. Idem Gregorius in oratione catechetica cap. xxxvi. et xxxvii. nmlta habet expresse de veritate hujus Sacramenti, et citatur hic locus ab Euthymio in Panoplia part. 2. titul. 21. et a Bessarione in lib. de verbis consecrationis. Inter alia dicit, et saipius re¬ petit, corpus Christi immortale conjungi per Eucharistiam cum nostro mortali corpore, et illud sibi simile reddere, id' est, efficere, ut gloriosum, et immortale aliquando resurgat: « Quemadmodum, inquit, parum fermenti totam massam sibi similem reddit : sic et corpus illud, quod a Deo factum est im¬ mortale, in nostrum corpus ingrediens totum in se transfert, atque commutat. Nam, ut pestiferum cum salubri commixtum illud ef¬ ficit perniciosum : sic et corpus immortale reddit totum illud, in quo susceptum est, Tome IV. natura} simile immortali». Et infra : «Fi¬ delium corporibus conjungitur, ut ea con¬ junctione cum immortali, homo etiam im¬ mortalitatis particeps fiat ». Ham ille. Secundo quaerit, quomodo possit unum corpus toti mundo communicari, et tamen semper integrum maneat : quae quidem quaestio absurdissima esset, si tantum in signo corpus Christi manducaretur; nulla enim difficultas in ea re fingi posset : « Con¬ siderandum est, inquit, quomodo fierit queat, ut cum unum illud corpus assidue per totum orbem terrarum tot fidelium millibus im¬ pertiatur, totum cujusque per partem evadat, et in seipso totum permaneat ». Haec ille. Tertio, respondet ad quaestionem, ac dicit panem qui ponitur in altari, converti in car¬ nem Christi, et eo modo omnes, qui eo pane vescuntur, vere sumere Christi carnem sino ullo ejus detrimento : quae sane est acutis¬ sima, et verissima responsio. Nam vult dicere, ut habeamus, et comedamus veram Christi carnem, non esse opus, ut Christus de ccelo descendat, sed manente illo salvo, et inco¬ lumi in cado, verti quotidie panem in corpus ejus, et eo modo a multis manducari. Quod autem non loquatur de mutatione panis in carnem per solam significationem, ut adversarii dicere solent, sed de vera, et reali mutatione, patet primo, ex ipsa quxe- stione, qua} (ut dixi) inepta esset, si de mu¬ tatione significationis ageretur. Secundo , patet ex ipsa ejus explicatione; dicit enim ita mutari nunc panem in carnem Domini vir¬ tute verborum ipsius, quemadmodum cum ipse in terris viveret, mutabatur panis, quo ipse vescebatur in carnem ipsius. Tertio patet, quia dicit hanc mutationem fieri divina virtute divinae benedictionis ; nulla autem virtus requirebatur ad mutandam significa¬ tionem, cum sit res mere voluntaria, llfec autem sunt verba ejus : «Divinum illud corpus panis nutrimentum accipiens, idem quodammodo erat cum illo cibo (ut diximus) in ejus corporis naturam immutato». Et infra : « Quam ob rem recte etiam nunc Dei verbo sanctificatum panem in Dei Verbi corpus credimus immutari » . Et infra : « lUec autem tribuit virtute benedictionis in illud (corpus Domini) rerum qua} videntur (id est panis, et vini, naturam mutans » . Itao ille. Qua} tam perspicua sunt, ut non fuerit ausus ullus adversariorum, quod sciam, vel ad haec loca respondere, vel aliquid ex hoc auctore nobis objicere. i LIBER II. m