A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

Guitmond Arch-bishop of Averse.

SOME time after Berenger's Recantation in the Council of Rome, Guitmond Arch-bishop of * 1.1 Averse, formerly a Monk of the Monastery of S. Leufroy in Normandy, compos'd three Books against Berenger in the nature of a Dialogue; wherein Roger, to whom these Books were dedicated, is made to propose the Objections of Berenger and his Followers. After he had given a Character of the Temper and the Errors of Berenger, and mention'd his Con∣demnation in the Council of Verceil in his first Book, he then proceeds to tell us, That all the Berengarians hold, that the Bread and Wine are not substantially chang'd in the Sacrament of the Eucharist; but that they do not all agree in their Sentiments. For some believe, That the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST are not at all in this Sacrament, which they pretend to be only a Sign and a Figure. Others assert, That the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST are really there, but that they are conceal'd, and that we might re∣ceive them there is made a kind of Impanation; the most subtil Opinion which they say Be∣renger ever found out. Others, who were not thorough-pac'd Berengarians, but only shock'd by the Arguments of that Heretick, imagin'd the Bread and Wine are chang'd in part, and in part remain the same. Lastly, There were others who believe that the Bread and Wine are entirely chang'd; but that when unworthy Persons approach this Sacrament, it return'd to its first Substance of Bread and Wine. Guitmond undertakes to refute all these Opinions; and in the first place oppugns the two former, which were properly the Berengarian's Opi∣nions, by shewing that there was a real Change made of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST. He proves first, That it was not impossible for God to effect this Change. Secondly, That the Body of JESUS CHRIST might very well be touch'd, broken, bruis'd and eaten, and yet not be passible, corruptible or mortal; and that when the Host is divided into several parts, yet the Body of JESUS CHRIST is not divided, but remains whole and entire, and the same under each Wafer; and such as is in a thousand distinct Places in the Hands of a thousand Priests, who say Mass in different Places, and yet this very Body is still in Heaven. That we ought not to wonder that this Change is not indeed perceptible by our Senses; but that we are not always to credit their Evidence, and that Faith is enough to persuade us of this Miracle. That 'tis indeed difficult to conceive, but easy to believe it, since nothing is impossible to God, who has produced Things more wonderful. And that we see Changes altogether as surprizing, such as the Change of Nothing into this visible World, the Change of Accidents into other Accidents, the Change of Substances into other Substances, together with the Change of their Accidents: If these Changes are possible, why should the Change of one Substance into another, with∣out the Change of the Accidents, be counted impossible?

In the Second Book, Guitmond answers an Objection made by Berenger, which Roger proposes to him in these Words:

Berenger says, The Flesh of JESUS CHRIST is in∣corruptible, but the Sacraments of the Altar are corruptible if they be kept too long.

To this Guitmond replies, That tho' the Consecrated Bread seems to be corrupted to the Appre∣hension of corrupted Men, yet in reality it is not chang'd at all; and that it does not appear alter'd, unless as a Punishment of the Infidelity and Negligence of Men: That it cannot be gnawn by Mice, and other Vermine; and if at any time it appears to be so, 'tis only to pu∣nish the Negligence, or to try the Faith of Men. Nor will he admit that the Fire can con∣sume these Mysteries; and he says, That with Veneration they commit it to this most pure Element, to be carry'd up into Heaven. Lastly he affirms, That though the Eucharist may serve for Nourishment, yet it does not turn to Excrement; and as to that Objection which might be made, That supposing a Man should eat nothing for some considerable time but conse∣crated Bread, he would nevertheless have occasion to go to Stool. He answers, That 'tis a Mat∣ter of Fact, that has never been experienc'd, and that it could never enter into the Heart of any Catholick to try such an Experiment: That if any of Berenger's Party thought fit to do it, one should not trouble one's Head much about what became of the Mass of those Infidels, which committed so great a Crime; Because, says he, we do not believe, That the Bread and Wine are necessarily chang'd into the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST, unless among those who have the Faith to believe this Mystery, and that the Words of JESUS CHRIST are efficacious. That Lastly, If any of them should order a Catholick Priest to consecrate one or more great Loaves to try the Experiment, it is to be believ'd that this Loaf would not be turn'd into Excrement; or rather that God would permit these Hereticks to be deceiv'd, by ordering some Angel or Spirit to convey away this consecrated Loaf, and to put an unconsecrated one in its stead. After he had thus solv'd the Objections drawn from Reason, he answers the Passages cited out of S. Augustin, and makes it appear in what Sense, and of what the Eucharist is a Sign.

In the last Book he produces a great many Passages of the Fathers, upon which he grounds the Doctrin of the real change of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST, and confirms it by the Testimony of the Romish Church, and by the Condem∣nations brought against Berenger. To conclude, he demonstrates that 'tis much greater, and more excellent to believe that we receive the real Body of JESUS CHRIST, than to imagine that we only receive the shadow and sign of it.

Afterwards he refutes in short their Opinion, who pretended that one part of the Bread and Wine was chang'd, and that the other remain'd still the same: And the Opinion of those who believ'd that the Bread and Wine re-assum'd their former Nature, when unworthy Persons approach'd thereto. Both of these Opinions were grounded upon this, That they could not conceive how the Wicked could be partakers of the Body of JESUS CHRIST. To solve this difficulty, Guitmond distinguishes between two sorts of Receiving, the one Corporeal, the other Spiritual: That the Just receive the Body of JESUS CHRIST both these ways; that the Wicked receive it only in the first sense, though they do really receive it. He adds, That if only part of the Consecrated Bread were chang'd into the Body of JESUS CHRIST upon the account of those who were unworthy to receive it, then no Man could assuredly say, This is the Body of JESUS CHRIST, because no Man ought to affirm confidently that he is worthy to receive it. Wherefore it would be rashness in the Priest to say, This is the Body of JESUS CHRIST, as well as in the People to answer, It is so. That besides, if a vicious Priest should Consecrate an Host which he ought to receive all himself, then there would be neither Change nor Consecra∣tion; and by this means it would be true to affirm, That the Wickedness of the Priest would disannul the Efficacy of the Words of JESUS CHRIST, and that the Belief of the Church which is persuaded, that the Words of our Saviour are alike Efficacious in Good and Bad Priests, would be absolutely false. Lastly, To refute the last Opinion, he observes that 'tis contrary to sound Sense and Reason to say, That the incorruptible Body of JESUS CHRIST is chang'd in corruptible Creatures; and he concludes all by saying that, since the Sacrifice of the Eucharist, is not a bare representation of the Body of JESUS CHRIST, it does not contain it by an Impanation: That the Bread and Wine are not chang'd in part only; and that being once chang'd, they cannot return again to their former substance; and that it must be affirm'd, that all the Bread and Wine are substantially and perpetually chang'd into the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST.

There is likewise another small Tract of Guitmond, which is only a plain Exposition of Faith concerning the Mysteries of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Eucharist: It en∣larges chiefly on the former, and explains in what Sense the Son is the Wisdom, and the Holy Ghost the Love of the Father. Nor ought we to forget a Discourse belonging to the same Author, which he directs to William the First, King of England, by which he refuses a Bishoprick which that Prince had offer'd to him. These Tracts are to be met with in the Bibliotheca Patrum. Guitmond liv'd to about the Year 1080. The Seventy eighth Let∣ter of Ives of Chartres is directed to him, wherein that Author gives him the Character of a Religious and Learned Man. His Style is not very elegant, but pretty cogent; he argues very methodically without wandering from his Subject.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Guitmond Arch bishop of Averse.