Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book II: On the Real Presence, from the Testimonies of the Fathers
Chapter 30: The Testimony of Eusebius of Emesa (or Faustus of Riez, or Caesarius of Arles)
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).
Let the last in this fifth age be for us Eusebius of Emesa, or whoever was the author of that most celebrated sermon On the Body of the Lord, which begins: “The greatness of the heavenly benefits.” This sermon is indeed cited under the name of Eusebius of Emesa by Paschasius of Corbie, who flourished nearly 800 years ago; yet it is certain that it is not of that Greek Eusebius of Emesa whom Jerome mentions in his Catalogue of Illustrious Men. For in this very sermon he mentions the Pelagian heresy, which arose after the death of that Greek Eusebius of Emesa. And besides, the author of this sermon was without doubt a Latin, not a Greek; and, as is gathered from his homilies to the monks and from his homily on Saint Maximus, he was Abbot of the Monastery of Lérins. Wherefore some not without cause suspect that the author of all those homilies is Faustus the Gaul, who, Gennadius being witness, from Abbot of Lérins was made Bishop of Riez, and flourished toward the end of the fifth century. Others, however, think that those homilies are of blessed Caesarius, who, Trithemius being witness, from Abbot of Lérins was made Bishop of Arles.
Whoever at length he was, he is a notable author even by the testimony of the adversaries; and he teaches these things of the Eucharist. First, that nothing is to be doubted concerning the truth of the body of the Lord in the Eucharist: “Let all ambiguity of unbelief depart,” he says, “since He who is the author of the gift is Himself the witness of the truth.” And below: “To know and receive the sacrifice of the true body, let the very power of the Consecrator strengthen thee.”
Secondly he teaches that the senses are not to be believed: “Truly the one and perfect victim is to be estimated by faith, not by species; not to be judged by the exterior sight, but by the interior affection.”
Thirdly he teaches that the bread is truly and really changed into flesh: “The invisible Priest,” he says, “by His word, by a secret power, changes the visible creatures into the substance of His body and blood.” So he. And then he proves that this is to be believed by examples of like things, because at the command of the same God the heights of the heavens, the depths of the floods, the vast spaces of the earth, and so forth, suddenly stood forth from nothing.
Fourthly he teaches that the whole body of Christ is in any part of the Sacrament: “Which body,” he says, “the priest dispensing, is as much in the small as it is established to be in the whole; and when the Church of the faithful receives it, as it is full in all, so it is proved to be entire in each.” So he. Where, if he spoke of bread, he would not say that it is as much in the small as in the great, or in the whole; and if he spoke of the body of Christ as it is in heaven, and is apprehended only by faith by the minds of the faithful, he would not say that it is dispensed by the priest.
Fifthly he teaches that after consecration there is no longer bread: “When,” he says, “the creatures to be blessed by the heavenly words are placed on the sacred altars, before they are consecrated by the invocation of the most high Godhead, the substance is there of bread and wine; but after the words of Christ, it is the body and blood of Christ. But what wonder if He, who could create those things by His word, can convert the things created? Nay, it now seems the lesser miracle, if He who is acknowledged to have founded out of nothing can now change what is founded into something better. Ask what can be difficult to Him for whom it was easy to raise up visible and invisible things at the command of His will.”
Now from this author the adversaries produce one testimony. For this author compares the change of the bread into the body of Christ with that change which is made in us through justification; which change certainly is not substantial, but accidental, as all confess.
But this same thing favors us most of all. For this author does not prove that a substantial change is made in the Eucharist from another substantial change, but proves that a substantial change in the Eucharist is not impossible, from another change—accidental indeed, but true and real, and more difficult and marvelous than the substantial change of the bread into the body of Christ. For the justification of the wicked is a true and real change of the soul from sin to grace, and is more marvelous than the very creation of heaven and earth, as Augustine testifies, tract 72 on John. And at the same time he shows that it is no wonder if we say the bread is changed, when no change appears outwardly; for in us too no change appears outwardly, when nevertheless within, in the soul, the greatest change is made. But let us hear the words of Eusebius: “That it may not seem to thee new and impossible that earthly and mortal things are changed into the substance of Christ, ask thyself, who art now regenerated in Christ. Lately, alien from life, a stranger to mercy, inwardly dead, thou wast an exile from the way of salvation; suddenly initiated in the laws of Christ, and renewed by the saving mysteries, thou didst pass into the body of the Church, not by living, but by believing; and from a son of perdition thou didst deserve, by a hidden purity, to become an adopted son of God; remaining in a visible measure, thou wast made greater than thyself invisibly,” and so forth.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXX. <a* Testimonium Eusebii Emisseni, seu Fausti Rhegiensis, seu Cxsarii Arelatensis. Postremus in hac setate quinta sit nobis Eusebius Emissenus , seu quicumque fuit auctor ejus celeberrimi sermonis de corpore Domini, qui incipit : « Magnitudo coelestium beneficiorum. » Citatur quidem hic sermo nomine Eusebii Emisseni a Paschasio Cor- beiensi, qui ante annos ferine 800. floruit : tamen certum est, non esse illius Eusebii Emisseni Greeci, cujus meminit Hieronymus in Catalogo virorum illustrium. Meminit enim in hoc ipso sermone hseresis Pelagiame, qua; exorta est post mortem Eusebii illius Emis¬ seni Gra;ci. Et praeterea auctor hujus sermo¬ nis sine dubitatione Latinusfuit, non Graecus : et ut ex ejus homiliis ad Monachos, et ex ho- milia de S. Maximo, colligitur, Abbas fuit Monasterii Lirinensis. Quare nonnulli non sine causa suspicantur auctorem omnium illarum homiliarum esse Faustum Gallum, qui teste Gcnnadio, ex Abbate Lirinensi Epi¬ scopus Rhegiensis factus est, et floruit ad finem IV. saeculi. Alii tamen existimant eas homilias esse B. Caesarii, qui teste Trithe- mio ex Abbate Lirinensi Episcopus Arela¬ tensis factus est. Quicumque tandem fuerit, insignis auctor est etiam adversariorum testimonio : ac* de Eucharistia haec docet. Primo nihil esse am¬ bigendum de veritate corporis Domini in Eucharistia : « Recedat, inquit, omne infide¬ litatis ambiguum, quandoquidem qui auctor est muneris, ipse testis est veritatis. » Et in¬ fra : « Ad cognoscendum, et percipiendum sacrificium veri corporis, ipsa te roboret po¬ tentia consecrantis. » Secundo docet, non esse credendum sen¬ sibus : « Yere, inquit, unica, et perfecta hostia fide aestimanda, non specie, nec exte¬ riori censenda visu, sed interiori affectu. » Tertio docet, vere, et realiter mutari pa¬ nem in carnem : « Invisibilis, inquit, sacer¬ dos visibiles creaturas in substantiam cor¬ poris, et sanguinis verbo suo secreta pote¬ state commutat. » ITaec ille. Ac deinde pro¬ bat, id esse credendum exemplis rerum simi¬ lium, quia eodem jubente Deo repente ex nihilo substiterunt excelsa coelorum , pro¬ funda fluctuum, vasta terrarum etc. Quarto docet, corpus Christi totum esse in qualibet parte Sacramenti : « Quod corpus, inquit, sacerdote dispensante tantum est in exiguo, quantum esse constat in toto, quod cum Ecclesia fidelium sumit, sicut plenum in universis, ita integrum esse probatur in singulis. » HcCC ille. Ubi si loqueretur de pane, non diceret, tantum esso in exiguo, quantum in magno, sive in toto : et si loque¬ retur de corpore Christi, ut est in coelo, et I 24 UBER II. fide solum a fidelibus mentibus apprehendi¬ tur, non diceret, dispensari a sacerdote. Quinto docet, post consecrationem non esse amplius panem : « Quando, ait, bene¬ dicenda} verbis coelestibus creaturae sacris altaribus imponuntur, antequam invocatione summi numinis consecrentur, substantia illic est panis, et vini ; post verba autem Christi, corpus et sanguis est Christi ; quid mirum autem si ea, qua} verbo creare potuit, possit creata convertere ? Imo jam minoris vide¬ tur miraculi, si id quod ex nihilo agnoscitur condidisse, jam conditum in inclius valeat commutare. Require quid ei possit esse dif¬ ficile, cui facile fuit visibilia, et invisibilia voluntatis imperio suscitare. » Porro ex hoc auctore unum proferunt te¬ stimonium adversarii. Confert enim hic auctor mutationem panis in corpus Christi, cum ea mutatione, qua} sit in nobis per justificatio¬ nem : qua} sane mutatio non est substantia¬ lis, sed accidentalis, ut omnes fatentur. Atqui hoc ipsum nobis maxime favet. Iste enim auctor non probat mutationem sub¬ stantialem fieri in Eucharistia ex alia sub¬ stantiali mutatione , sed probat non esse impossibilem mutationem substantialem in Eucharistia ex alia mutatione, accidentali quidem, sed vera, ac reali, et magis difficili, ac mirabili, quam sit mutatio substantialis panis in corpus Christi. Justificatio enim impii, et vera ac realis mutatio est anima} a peccato ad gratiam : et mirabilior est, quam ipsa creatio coeli et terra}, ut Augustinus te¬ statur tract. 72. in Joan. Et simul ostendit, non esse mirum, si dicamus panem mutari, cum nulla exterius appareat mutatio : nam etiam in nobis nulla mutatio apparet exte¬ rius, cum tamen interius in anima maxima mutatio fiat. Sed verba Eusebii audiamus : (t Ut tibi novum, et impossibile non debeat videri, quod in Christi substantiam terrena et mortalia commutantur, teipsum, qui jam in Christo es regeneratus, interroga. Dudum alienus a vita, peregrinus a misericordia, a salutis via intrinsecus mortuus exulabas, su¬ bito initiatus Christi legibus, et salutaribus mysteriis innovatus in corpus Ecclesiae non vivendo, sed credendo transisti, et de filio perditionis adoptivus Dei filius fieri occulta puritate meruisti, in mensura visibili perma¬ nens, major factus es teipso invisibiliter etc. »