the greatest dialectician of his age, but used dialectics only in support of church authority and
tradition, and thus prepared the way for orthodox scholasticism. He assailed Berengar in a treatise
of twenty-three chapters on the eucharist, written after 1063, in epistolary form, and advocated the
doctrine of transubstantiation (without using the term) with its consequences.^746 He describes the
change as a miraculous and incomprehensible change of the substance of bread and wine into the
very body and blood of Christ.^747 He also teaches (what Radbert had not done expressly) that even
unworthy communicants (indigne sumentes) receive the same sacramental substance as believers,
though with opposite effect.^748
Among the less distinguished writers on the Eucharist must be mentioned Adelmann,
Durandus, and Guitmund, who defended the catholic doctrine against Berengar. Guitmund (a pupil
of Lanfranc, and archbishop of Aversa in Apulia) reports that the Berengarians differed, some
holding only a symbolical presence, others (with Berengar) a real, but latent presence, or a sort of
impanation, but all denied a change of substance. This change he regards as the main thing which
nourishes piety. "What can be more salutary," he asks," than such a faith? Purely receiving into
itself the pure and simple Christ alone, in the consciousness of possessing so glorious a gift, it
guards with the greater vigilance against sin; it glows with a more earnest longing after all
righteousness; it strives every day to escape from the world ... and to embrace in unclouded vision
the fountain of life itself."^749
From this time on, transubstantiation may be regarded as a dogma of the Latin church. It
was defended by the orthodox schoolmen, and oecumenically sanctioned under Pope Innocent III.
in 1215.
With the triumph of transubstantiation is closely connected the withdrawal of the communion
cup from the laity, which gradually spread in the twelfth century,^750 and the adoration of the presence
of Christ in the consecrated elements, which dates from the eleventh century, was enjoined by
Honorius III. in 1217, and gave rise to the Corpus Christi festival appointed by Urban IV., in 1264.
The withdrawal of the cup had its origin partly in considerations of expediency, but chiefly in the
superstitious solicitude to guard against profanation by spilling the blood of Christ. The schoolmen
defended the practice by the doctrine that the whole Christ is present in either kind.^751 It strengthened
(^746) On the different editions and the date of the book (between 1063 and 1069), see Sudendorf p. 39 sqq.
(^747) De Corp. et Sang. Dom., c. 18 (in Migne, T. 150, col. 430): "Credimus terrenas substantias, quae in mensa Dominica
per sacerdale mysterium divinitus sanctificantur, ineffabiliter, incomprehensibiliter, mirabiliter, operante superna potentia,
converti in essentiam Dominici corporis, reservatis ipsarum rerum speciebus, et quibusdam aliis qualitatibus, ne percipientes
cruda et cruenta horrerent, et ut credentes fidei praemia ampliora perciperent, ipso tamen Dominico corpore existente in
coelestibus ad dexteram Patris, immortali, inviolato, integro, incontaminato, illaeso: ut vere dici posset, et ipsum corpus, quod
de Virgine sumptum est, nos sumere, et tamen non ipsum.’’
(^748) Cap 20 (col. 436): "Est quidem et peccatori bus et indigne sumentibus vera Christi caro, verusque sanguis, sed
essentia, non salubri efficentia."
(^749) Neander, III. 529 sq., from Guitmund’s De Corp. et Sang. Christi veritate in eucharistia. It was written about 1076,
according to Sudendorf, p. 52 sqq.
(^750) In place of the older custom of administering the bread dipped in wine, especially to infants and sick persons. In the
Greek church, where infant communion still prevails, both elements are delivered in a golden spoon; but the priest receives
each element separately as in the Roman church.
(^751) Anselm was the first to teach "in utraque, specie totum Christum sumi." See J. J. de Lith, De Adoratione Panis
consecrati, et Interdictione sacri Calicis in Eucharistia, 1753; Spittler,Gesch. des Kelchs im Abendmahl, 1780; Gieseler, I.
480 sqq., notes.