White Robed Monks of St. Benedict

Why Berengarius had difficulties with the Churches teaching on the Eucharist

The church rarely produces dogmatic pronouncements on a theological matter unless it is forced to by circumstances. Usually it is only then that the church, either through a council or the teaching of the pope, produces some definitive statement. Berengarius of Tours provoked just such a reaction by his apparent denial of the traditional belief of the church in the Eucharist. He was forced to sign various recantations, and one form of recantation, taken in 1079 at a Council in Rome has found its way into collections of church teaching. What exactly he denied is not clear but he seems to have accepted the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist alongside the presence of Bread and Wine. There is no certainty here but there is little doubt that he denied a presence of Christ which replaced the bread and wine.

This doctrine was to be called Transubstantiation, a doctrine which says that there was a change of the substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Hildebert of Lavardin who may have been taught by Berengarius first used this word. Though often recommended by church teaching, no council or pope has ever insisted on using this particular word. The Council of Trent says that the change is fittingly and properly called by this word. In Chapter 4 of the decree on the Eucharist, we are told that "through the consecration of the bread and wine, there happens a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood."

See article on Berengarius in the Catholic Dictionary. New Advent Site

Berengarius's chief opponent was Lanfranc Archbishop of Canterbury. See Article on Lanfrance in the Catholic Dictionary. New Advent Site Lanfranc attacked Berengarius as a heretic. Between Lanfranc in the 11th Century and the Council of Trent in the 16th century, there is the work of Thomas Aquinas who is concerned to clarify what it is the church believes. Berengarius as is often the case with heretics had fallen into his error, because he had lost sight of the original meaning of certain theological words used by the Fathers of the church. Words can lose their meaning as the context in which they were used is forgotten . So Berengarius when he found the sacrament described as a figure, sign or token, thought that these words in some way denied that the Christ was truly there.

Thomas explains that there is a difference between what is there and how it is there. The first is Christ's body and blood. The second is the sacrament that makes his body and blood present. So in thinking about the reality of the sacrament, we look at the body of Christ but the meaning of the sacrament is not just in the reality but in the form that the sacrament takes. So bread and wine are used which have meanings in themselves. There might be other ways in which the body and blood of Jesus could have become present. These other ways would have been different sacraments with a different set of symbolic meanings but the reality would have been the same. So it is possible to talk of the sacrament as a sign, token, or type without denying the reality of Christ in the sacrament.