\ 127. THE THEORY OF RATRAMNUS. 549
His opponents appealed chiefly to St. Augustin, who made a distinction between the historical and the eucharistic body of Christ, and between a false material and a true spiritual fruition of his body and blood. In a letter to the monk Frudegard, who quoted several passages of Augustin, Kadbert tried to ex plain them in his sense. For no divine of the Latin church dared openly to contradict the authority of the great African teacher.
§ 127. The Theory of Ratramnus.
The chief opponent of transubstautiation was RATRAMNUS,1 a contemporary monk at Corbie, and a' man of considerable lite rary reputation. He was the first to give the symbolical theory a scientific expression. At the request of King Charles the Bald he wrote a eucharistic tract against Radbert, his superior, but did not name him.2 He answered two questions, whether the consecrated elements are called body and blood of Christ
dabo caro me a est, non alia quam, pro mundi vita1 (Joan. VI. 52). Ac deinde, 1 Qui manducat meam carnem, et bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet et ego in tllo' (ver. 57). Unde miror quid vclint uno quidam diccrc, non in re esse veritatem carnis Christi vcl sanguinis ; sed in sacramcnto virtutem carnis et non earn em • virtutem sanguinis et non sanguinem; figuram ct non veritatem, umbram et non corpus, cum hie species accipit veritatem et figuram, veterum hostiarum corpus. Unde vcritas cum porrigerct discipulis panem, ' Hoc est corpus meum,'' et non aliud quam, ' quod pro vobis tradetur ;' et earn calicem, 'Hie est calix Novi Testamenti, qui pro multis fffundctnr in remissionem peccatorum.' Necdurn itaque eratfusus, et tamen ipse porrigctur in calice sanguis, qui fnndendns er<it. Erat quidem jam in calice, qui adhuc tamen fundendus erat in prctium; et idco ipse idemque sanguis jam erat in calice. qui et in corpore sici/t et corpus vel caro in pane. Erat autem integer Christus et corpus C/irixti ' coram oculis omnium positum; necnon et sanguis in corpore, sicut et adhuc hodie intcgerrimum ext et manet, qui vcrc dabafur eis ad comedendum, et ad bidendum, in remissionem peccatorum, quam in Christo"
1 In the middle ages and during the Ileformation he was known by a writing error under the name of Bertram.
2 De Corpore ct Sanguine Domini, in Migne 121, col. 103-170, to which is added the Dissertation of Boileau, 171-222. The tract of Ratramnns, together with "Rullinger's tract on the same subject and the personal influence of Rid ley, Peter Martyr, and Bncer, produced a change in Archbishop Cranmer, who was successively a believer in transubstantiation, consubstantiation, and a sym bolic presence. See SchafF, Creeds of Christendom, I. 601.
550 FOURTH PERIOD. A. D. 590-1049.
after a sacramental manner (in mysterio), or in the literal sense; and whether the eucharistic body is identical with the historical body which died and rose again. He denied this identity which Radbert had strongly asserted; and herein lies the gist of the difference. He concluded that the elements remain in reality as well as for the sensual perception what they were before the consecration, and that they are the body and blood of Christ only in a spiritual sense to the faith of believers.1 He calls the consecrated bread and wine figures and pledges of the body and blood of Christ. They are visible tokens of the Lord's death, that, remembering his passion, we may become partakers of its effect. He appealed to the discourse in the sixth chapter of John, as well as Radbert; but, like Augustin, his chief autho rity, he found the key to the whole chapter in verse 63, which points from the letter to the spirit and from the carnal to the spiritual understanding.2 The souls of believers are nourished in the communion by the Word of God (the Logos), which dwells in the natural body of Christ, and which dwells after an invisible manner in the sacrament. Unbelievers cannot receive Christ, as they lack the spiritual organ. He refers to the ana logy of baptism, which is justly called a fount of life. Viewed by the senses, it is simply a fluid element; but by the consecra tion of the priest the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit is added to it, so that what properly is corruptible water becomes figuratively or in mystery a healing virtue.3
1 Cap. 88 (col. 164) : " Quapropter corpus et sanguis, quod in ecclesia geritur, dijfert ab illo corpore et sanguine, quod in Christi corpore per resurrectionem jam glorificatum cognoscitur. Et hoc corpus pignus est et species, illud vero ipsa veritas.'' — " Videmus itaque multa differentia separarl mysterium sanguinis et corporis Christi, quod nunc a fidelibus sumitur in ecclesia, et illud, quod natum est de Maria Virgine, quod passum, quod sepultum, quod resurrexit, quod ad codos ascendit, quod ad dexteram Patris sedet." Cap. 89, col. 165.
* Cap. 78-83 (col. 160-162).
8 Cap. 17 and 18 (col. 135 sq.) : " Consideremus sacri fontem baptismatis, qui fons vitse non immerito nuncupatur. . . . Si consideretur solummodo, quod corporeus aspicit sensus, elementum fluidum conspicitur. . . Sed accessit Sancti Spiritus per sacerdotis consecrationem virtus et efficax facia est non solum corpora, verum ctiam animas diluere. . . . Igitur in proprietate humor corruptibilis, in mysterio vero virtus sana-