held at Vercelli in September of the same year; and as he did not appear,^725 he was condemned a
second time without a hearing, and the book of Ratramnus on the eucharist was burned. "If we are
still in the figure," asked one member indignantly (probably Peter Damiani), "when shall we have
the thing?" A Synod of Paris in October, 1050 or 1051, is said to have confirmed this judgment
and threatened Berengar and his friends with the severest punishment, even death; but it is uncertain
whether such a Synod was held.^726
After a short interval of silence, he was tried before a Synod of Tours in 1054 under Leo
IX.,^727 but escaped condemnation through the aid of Hildebrand who presided as papal representative,
listened calmly to his arguments and was perfectly satisfied with his admission that the consecrated
bread and wine are (in a spiritual sense) the body and blood of Christ.^728 At the same time he was
invited by Hildebrand to accompany him to Rome for a final settlement.
Confiding in this powerful advocate, Berengar appeared before a Lateran council held in
1059, under Nicolas II., but was bitterly disappointed. The assembled one hundred and thirteen
bishops, whom he compares to "wild beasts," would not listen to his notion of a spiritual communion,
and insisted on a sensuous participation of the body and blood of Christ. The violent and bigoted
Cardinal Humbert, in the name of the Synod, forced on him a formula of recantation which cuts
off all spiritual interpretation and teaches a literal mastication of Christ’s body.^729 Berengar was
weak enough from fear of death to accept this confession on his knees, and to throw his books into
the fire.^730 "Human wickedness," he says, "extorted from human weakness a different confession,
but a change of conviction can be effected only by the agency of Almighty God." He would rather
trust to the mercy of God than the charity of his enemies, and found comfort in the pardon granted
to Aaron and to St. Peter.
(^725) He was prevented by a violent act of King Henry I. of France, who committed him to prison and seized his property.
(^726) Berengar makes no mention of this Synod. Lessing, Gieseler and Baur (II. 178) doubt whether it was held. Neander,
Sudendorf, Robertson and Hefele (IV. 753 sqq.) credit the report of Durandus, but correct his dates.
(^727) This seems to be the correct date, instead of 1055 under Victor II., according to Lanfranc’s account. The difference
involves the veracity of Berengar, who assigns the Synod to the pontificate of Leo IX.; but it is safer to assume, with Leasing,
Sudendorf (p. 45), and Hefele (IV. 778), that Lanfranc, after a lapse of ten or more years had forgotten the correct date.
(^728) "Panis atque vinum altaris post consecrationem sunt corpus Christi et sanguis." De S. Coena, p. 52. Berengar meant
a real, though uncorporeal presence. He admitted a conversion of the elements in the sense of consecration, but without change
of substance. Hildebrand was willing to leave this an open question. See below.
(^729) "Ego Berengarius, indignus diaconus ... anathematizo omnem haeresim, praecipue eam de qua hactenus infamatus
sum, quae astruere conatur, panem et vinum, quae in altari ponuntur, post consecrationem solummodo sacramentum, et non
verum et sanguinem Domini nostri I. Ch. esse nec possesensualiterin solo sacramento [non solum sacramento, sed, in veritate]
manibus sacerdotum tractari, velfrangi, aut fideliumdentibus atteri," etc. So Lanfranc reports the creed in De Corp. et Sang.
Dom., c.2 (Migne, vol. 150, p. 410); comp. Berengar, De S. Coena, p. 68. Gieseler calls this creed "truly Capernaitic." Hergenröther
(I. 703) admits that it sounds very hard, but may be defended by similar language of Chrysostom. Luther expressed his faith in
the real presence almost as strongly when be instructed Melanchthon to insist, in his conference with Bucer, 1534, that Christ’s
body was literally eaten and torn with the teeth ("gegessen und mit den Zähnen zerbissen"). See his letters to Jonas and
Melanchthon in Briefe, ed. De Wette, Bd. IV. 569 and 572. But I doubt whether any Lutheran divine would endorse such
language now.
(^730) Lanfranc charges him with downright perjury. But according to his own report, Berengar did not sign the formula,
nor was he required to do so. De S. Coena, p. 25 sq.; comp. p. 59 sq.