Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book III: On the Truth of the Body of the Lord, from Reason
Chapter 1: The Question Is Proposed: Whether It Can Come About That the Body of Christ Be Made Present in the Eucharist
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. IV, De Sacramento Eucharistiae, Book III: On the Truth of the Body of the Lord in the Eucharist (from Reason). 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).
From the word of God and the opinions of the ancient Fathers we have thus far disputed the controversy on the truth of the body of the Lord in the Sacrament of the altar; now, for the full explanation of this most weighty question, we shall suppose that nothing certain can be gathered from the word of God alone, or from the opinions of the Fathers (although we have most plainly taught the contrary in the two preceding books), and we shall investigate, with reason aided by various principles of faith, what at length a wise and pious man ought to hold on this matter. Now the whole question will be cut into two parts. For first we shall ask whether God could really exhibit the body and blood of the Lord present in the species of bread and wine. Then, whether He willed it.
On the first question John Wyclif, in Thomas Waldensis, volume 2, chapters 72 and 73, and his disciple John Calvin, openly deny that this can be done. For although, to avoid odium, Calvin speaks thus, Book 4 of the Institutes, chapter 17, section 24: “It is not asked what God could do, but what He willed”; yet a little below he says thus: “Why,” he says, “should not God make the same flesh occupy several and diverse places, so that it be contained in no place, so that it lack manner and species? Madman, why dost thou demand of the power of God that He make flesh at once to be and not to be flesh?” And below, section 29, he answers the arguments by which the Catholics prove that it can be done, that one body be in two places, or not occupy a place. Similar things Peter Martyr has, in his book against Gardiner, objections 10, 11, 12, and 106; and Theodore Beza in his book On the Supper of the Lord against Westphal. The Catholics, on the contrary, certainly believe that this could be done.
Now there are three difficulties in which we dissent from the adversaries. One, whether one body can be placed at once in diverse places. Another, whether a body can be somewhere without occupying a place; and these are with us against the Sacramentarians alone, not against the Lutherans. The third is also against the Lutherans, concerning the manner in which the body of the Lord begins to be in the Eucharist, where transubstantiation will be treated.
That we may therefore dispute the question of the power of God in this mystery against the Sacramentarians, and explain the whole matter in order, first we shall investigate what is the certain rule for knowing what God can do. Secondly, we shall prove that God can make one body be at once in diverse places. Thirdly, we shall solve the objections of the adversaries. Fourthly, we shall prove that God can make one body remain indivisibly, so that it does not fill a place. Fifthly, we shall solve the objections.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT PHIMUM. Proponitur quaestio : An possit fieri , ut corpus Christi praesens constituatur in Eu¬ charistia. Ex verbo Dei, et veterum Patrum senten¬ tiis disputavimus hactenus controversiam de veritate corporis Domini in Sacramento altaris: nunc ad plenam qucestionis hujus gravissima explicationem fingemus, non posse ex solo verbo Dei, aut Patrum senten¬ tiis quidquam certi colligi (tametsi contra¬ rium duobus superioribus libris apertissime docuerimus) ac investigabimus ratione adjuta variis principiis fidei, quid tandem de hac re sentiendum sit homini sapienti, et pio. Seca¬ bitur autem quastio tota in partes duas. Pri¬ mum enim quaremus, an potuerit Deus reipsa praesens exhibere corpus et sangui¬ nem Domini in specie panis et vini. Deinde an voluerit. De prima quaestione Joanncs Wiclefus apud Thomam Waldensem, tom. ir. cap. 72. et 73. et ejus discipulus Joanncs Calvinus aperte negant id posse fieri. Nam etiamsi ad invidiam declinandam Calvinus sic loquitur lib. iv. Institut. cap. 17. § 24. « Non qua- ritur quid Deus potuerit, sed quid voluerit. » Tamen paulo infra sic ait : « Cur (inquit) non faciat Deus, ut caro eadem plura, diver- saque occupet loca, ut nullo loco conti¬ neatur; ut modo, et specie carcat? Insane, quid a Dei potentia postulas, ut carnem faciat simul esse, et non esse carnem. » Et infra, §29. respondet ad argumenta, quibus Catholici probant fieri posse, ut unum corpus sit in duobus locis, vel non occypct locum. Similia habet Petrus Martyr libro contra Gardinenm , object. 10, 11, et 12 et 10G. Et Theodorus Beza in libro de coena Domini contra Wcstphalum. Catholici contra certo credunt, id fieri potuisse. Tres autem sunt difficultates, in quibus adversariis dissentimus. Uha, an possitunum corpus poni simul in diversis locis. Altera, an possit corpus alicubi esse non occupando locum; et lue sunt nobis cum solis Sacra- mentariis, non autem cum Lutheranis. Ter¬ tia est etiam cum Lutheranis de modo, quo corpus Domini incipiat esse in Eu¬ charistia, ubi de . transubstantiationc tracta¬ bitur. Ut igitur quaestionem de potentia Dei in hoc mysterio contra Sacramentarios dispu¬ temus, et ordine rem totam explicemus, piimo investigabimus, qua) sit certa regula cognoscendi quid Deus possit. Secundo pro¬ babimus posse Deum facere, ut unum corpus simul sit in diversis locis. Tertio solvemus objectiones adversariorum. Quarto probabi¬ mus posse Deum facere, ut unum corpus indivisibiliter maneat, ita ut locum non re¬ pleat. Quinto sclvemus objectiones.