2151 2. Ἐραν. Εἰς καιρὸν τὸν περὶ τῶν θείων μυστηρίων ἐκίνησας λόγον· ἐντεῦθέν σοι γὰρ δείξω τοῦ δεσποτικοῦ σώματος τὴν εἰς ἑτέραν φύσιν μεταβολήν. Ἀπόκριναι τοίνυν πρὸς τὰς ἐμὰς ἐρωτήσεις.—
Ὀρθ. Ἀποκρινοῦμαι.—
Ὀρθ. Οὐ χρὴ σαφῶς εἰπεῖν· εἰκὸς γάρ τινας ἀμυήτους
παρεῖναι.—
Ἐραν. Αἰνιγματωδῶς ἡ ἀπόκρισις ἔστω.—
Ὀρθ. Τὴν ἐκ τοιῶνδε σπερμάτων τροφήν.—
Ἐραν. Τὸ δὲ ἕτερον σύμβολον πῶς ὀνομάζομεν;—
Ὀρθ. Κοινὸν καὶ τοῦτο ὄνομα, πόματος εἶδος σημαῖνον.—
Ἐραν. Μετὰ δέ γε τὸν ἁγιασμὸν πῶς ταῦτα προσαγορεύεις;—
Ὀρθ. Σῶμα Χριστοῦ καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ.—
Ἐραν. Καὶ πιστεύεις γε σώματος Χριστοῦ μεταλαμβάνειν καὶ
αἵματος;—
Ὀρθ. Οὕτω πιστεύω.—
Ἐραν. Ὥσπερ τοίνυν τὰ σύμβολα
τοῦ δεσποτικοῦ σώματός τε καὶ αἵματος ἄλλα μέν εἰσι πρὸ τῆς ἱερατικῆς ἐπικλήσεως,
μετὰ δέ γε τὴν ἐπίκλησιν μεταβάλλεται καὶ ἕτερα γίνεται, οὕτω τὸ δεσποτικὸν σῶμα
μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν μετεβλήθη τὴν θείαν.—
Ὀρθ. Ἑάλως αἷς ὕφηνας ἄρκυσιν.
Οὐδὲ γὰρ μετὰ τὸν ἁγιασμὸν τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα τῆς οἰκείας ἐξίσταται φύσεως·
μένει γὰρ ἐπὶ τῆς προτέρας οὐσίας καὶ τοῦ σχήματος καὶ τοῦ εἴδους, καὶ ὁρατά ἐστι
καὶ ἁπτά, οἷα καὶ πρότερον ἦν· νοεῖται δὲ ἅπερ ἐγένετο, καὶ πιστεύεται καὶ
προσκυνεῖται, ὡς ἐκεῖνα ὄντα ἅπερ πιστεύεται. (M. J. Rouët de Journel, Enchiridion Patristicum, EDITIO QUARTA ET QUINTA [Friburgi Brisgoviae:
Herder & Co., 1922], 678–79)
Latin
translation:
2151 Eran. Opportune de divinis mysteriis intulisti sermonem; nam inde
tibi ostendam corpus Domini in aliam mutari naturam. Responde igitur ad meas
interrogationes. — Orth. Respondebo. — Eran. Quomodo appellas donum quod offertur ante sacerdotis 457invocationem?
— Orth. Aperte dicendum non est; verisimile est enim
adesse aliquos mysteriis non initiatos. — Eran.
Respondeatur aenigmatice. — Orth.
Cibum ex talibus seminibus. — Eran.
Alterum vero symbolum quomodo vocamus? — Orth.
Commune quoque hoc nomen est, potus speciem significans. — Eran. Post sanctificationem vero, quomodo haec appellas? — Orth. Corpus Christi et sanguinem Christi.
— Eran. Et credis te corpus Christi
et sanguinem recipere? — Orth. Ita
credo. — Eran. Sicut ergo symbola
dominici corporis et sanguinis alia sunt ante sacerdotis invocationem, post
invocationem vero mutantur et alia fiunt: ita dominicum corpus post ascensionem
in divinam substantiam mutatum est. — Orth.
Retibus quae ipse texuisti captus es. Neque enim symbola mystica post
sanctificationem recedunt a sua natura; manent enim in priore substantia et
figura et forma, et conspici tangique possunt sicut prius; intelleguntur autem
ea esse quae facta sunt, et creduntur et adorantur, ut quae illa sint quae
creduntur. (M. J. Rouët de Journel, Enchiridion
Patristicum: Translation, Editio Quarta et Quinta [Friburgi Brisgoviae:
Herder & Co., 1922], 678–79)
Translation by
Jurgens :
2151
Beggar: You have opportunely introduced a word about the divine
mysteries, for directly I will prove to you that the body of the Master is
changed into another nature. Do but answer my questions!
True Believer: I will answer.
Beggar: What do you call the gift that is presented, prior to the
priestly invocation
True Believer: It is not proper to divulge this; for it is probable
that some of the uninitiate are present.
Beggar: You can answer it enigmatically.
#
True Believer: Food from certain seeds.
Beggar: And how do we call the other token?
True Believer: It is a common name, signifying a species of
beverage.
Beggar: And after the consecration how do you address them?
True Believer: Body of Christ and Blood of Christ.
Beggar: And do you believe you receive the Body of Christ and His
Blood?
True Believer: That is what I do believe.
Beggar: Well then, just as the tokens of the Body and Blood of the
Master are one thing before the priestly invocation, and after this epiclesis
are changed and become something else, so too after the assumption [of flesh]
the body of the Master is changed into the divine essence.
True Believer: You are hoist with your own petard! For after the
consecration the mystical tokens do not retire from their own nature; for they
remain with their former essence and outward appearance and shape, and they are
visible and tangible just as they were before. They are understood, however, to
be what they have become; and by faith they are believed; and they are adored
as that which they are believed to be. (William A. Jurgens, The
Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 vols. [Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical
Press, 1979], 243-44)
Here is a more recent translation (with additional text for
context) from Gerard H. Ettlinger:
Eranistes. You moved the discussion to the divine mysteries at the
perfect time, for I shall use them to show you the transformation of the Lord’s
body into another nature. So please answer my questions.
Orthodox. I shall.
Eranistes. Before the priestly invocation, what do you call the
gift that is offered?
Orthodox. We must not speak clearly, for there may be uninitiated
people nearby.
Eranistes. Make the answer obscure.
[152] Orthodox. Food from certain seeds.
Eranistes. And what do we call the other symbol?
Orthodox. This is also a common name signifying a form of drink.
Eranistes. But after the consecration what do you call them?
Orthodox. Christ’s body and blood.
Eranistes. And do you really believe that you share in Christ’s
body and blood?
Orthodox. I believe this.
Eranistes. Then, just as the symbols of the Lord’s body and blood
are one thing before the priestly invocation, but are transformed and become
something else after the invocation, so the Lord’s body was transformed into
the divine substance after the assumption.
Orthodox. You have been caught in your own net. For the sacramental
symbols do not lose their own nature after the consecration, because they
remain in their former substance, shape, and form, and are visible and
tangible, just as they were before. But they are understood to be what they
became, and they are the object of faith and worship, because they are what
they are believed to be. Compare the image with the original, therefore, and
you will see the similarity; for the type must be like the reality. And that body,
in fact, keeps its prior form, as well as the shape, limitation, and, in
general, the substance of the body. But after the resurrection it became
immortal and beyond corruption, was judged worthy of a seat at the right hand,
and is adored by all creation, since it is and is called the body of the Lord
of nature.
Eranistes. And yet the sacramental symbol changes its former
designation, since it is no longer called by the name it had before, but is
called a body. So even the reality must be called God, not a body.
Orthodox. I think you do not understand. For it is called, not only
a body, but also bread of life. The Lord called it this, and we name this very
body a body that is divine and life-giving, a body that belongs to the master
and Lord; and in this way we teach that it is the body, not of some ordinary
human being, but [153] of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is God and a human being,
both eternal and temporal. “For Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and
forever.” (Theodoret of Cyrus, “Immutable: Dialogue Two,” in Eranistes [trans. Gerard H. Ettlinger; The Fathers of the Church 106 [Washington,
D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2003], 4132-33)
Another important Eucharistic text in Theordoret’s corpus is
the following, which sheds light on what he meant in the above much-debated
passage:
Orthodox. Do you know that the Lord called his own body bread?
Eranistes. I do.
Orthodox. And [do you know] that in another place, he called his
flesh wheat?
Eranistes. I know this too. For I heard him say, “The hour has come
for the Son of Man to be glorified,” and, “Unless the grain of wheat falls into
the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.”
Orthodox. In handing down the mysteries, then, he called the bread
body and the mixture blood.
Eranistes. That is correct.
Orthodox. But with respect to nature the body would properly be
called body and the blood would properly be called blood.
Eranistes. I agree.
Orthodox. But our savior exchanged the names and gave the name of
the symbol to the body and the name of the body to the symbol; in the same way
he called himself a vine and named the symbol blood.
Eranistes. What you have said is true, but I would like to learn
the reason for the exchange of names.
Orthodox. Those who have been initiated into the sacred [mysteries]
see the point clearly. For he wanted those who share in the sacred mysteries
not to give attention to the nature of the offerings, but to believe, because
of the exchange of names, in the transformation brought about by grace. For in
calling what was a body by nature wheat and bread and by naming [himself] a
vine, [79] he has honored the visible symbols with the name of “body” and
“blood,” not by changing the nature, but by adding grace to the nature. (Theodoret
of Cyrus, “Immutable: Dialogue One,” in Eranistes
[trans. Gerard H. Ettlinger;
The Fathers of the Church 106 [Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of
America Press, 2003], 46–47)