Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of the Eucharist · Book III: On the Truth of the Body of the Lord, from Reason
Chapter 14: The Fourth Error Is Refuted
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).
Now the fourth error, concerning the form of the bread, is most inept, nor rests on any other foundation than unskillfulness. For the authors of that error thought that bread is a thing merely artificial, because it is made by the hands and art of men, and therefore that the form of the bread is nothing but that external and accidental figure which we see to remain in the Sacrament. But bread is not a thing merely artificial, nor can it be made by human art alone, as are benches, garments, buildings; but it is a natural thing, and is made by the natural action of natural agents applied by men. Just as also frogs, scorpions, bees, lime, glass, and some other things can be made by human art, which nevertheless are natural and have a substantial form, because for producing them are employed natural agents, or causes.
Moreover, that the substantial form of the bread — which we have already shown to be in the bread besides the external figure — does not remain in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, can easily be proved. For either it would remain with its matter, or without it; and if without it, either it would inform the matter of the Lord's body, or it would remain without informing, separated from all matter. If the first, then no conversion would be made, and this opinion would coincide with the first. If the second, then the bread would not become the body of the Lord, but on the contrary the body of the Lord would become bread, and the Eucharist would be formally bread, not a body, and the Lord would not have said, the bread being taken, This is my body, but, His body being shown, would have said, This is my bread: for from the form each thing receives its being and its name. If the third, a miracle hitherto unheard-of would be made in vain, that an essential and yet corporeal form should remain without matter. For to what purpose that miracle? For the external accidents indeed usefully remain in the Eucharist to veil the body of the Lord; but that invisible form would remain without any cause.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XIV. Refellitur quartus error. Jam vero quartus error de forma panis, ineptissimus est, nec alio fundamento nititur, nisi imperitia}. Existimabant enim auctores ejus erroris, panem rem esse mere artificio¬ sam, quia manibus, et arte hominum fit, et proinde formam panis nihil esse, nisi figu¬ ram illam externam, etaccidentariam, quam in Sacramento remanere videmus. At panis non est res mere artificiosa, nec sola arte humana fieri potest, ut fiunt scamma, vestes, sedificia ; sed res est naturalis, et actione naturali agentium naturalium ab hominibus applicatorum conficitur . Quemadmodum etiam rana}, scorpiones, apes, calx, vitrum, et alia nonnulla humana arte fieri possunt, quai tamen naturalia sunt , ct formam sub¬ stantialem habent, eo quod ad ea produ¬ cenda adhibeantur agentia, seu causae natu¬ rales. Porro formam substantialem panis, quam esse in pane praeter figuram externam, jam ostendimus, in Sacramento Eucharistiae non remanere, facile probari potest . Nam aut cum materia sua maneret, aut sine illa ; ct si absque illa, aut informaret materiam cor¬ poris Domini, aut sine informatione, et se¬ parata a materia omni maneret. Si primum, tunc nulla fieret conversio, et coincideret ha}c sententia cum prima. Si secundum, tunc non panis fieret corpus Domini, sed e contrario corpus Domini fieret panis, et Eu¬ charistia formaliter esset panis, non corpus, et Dominus non dixisset accepto pane : Hoc est corpus meum , sed ostenso corpore dixis¬ set, Hic est panis meus : a forma enim res unaquseque accipit esse, et nomen. Si ter¬ tium, frustra fieret miraculum hactenus inau¬ ditum, ut forma essentialis, ct tamen corpo¬ ralis sine materia maneret . Quorsum enim istud miraculum ? Nam accidentia quidem externa utiliter manent in Eucharistia ad ve¬ landum corpus Domini ; at ista forma invi¬ sibilis sine ulla causa maneret.