[De Coena Domini, plana et perspicua tractatio; (Geneva: Oliva Robert Stephan, 1559)]
Theodore Beza, born on June 24, 1519, in Vézelay, France, was a distinguished theologian, scholar, and reformer of the Protestant Reformation. Educated under the humanist Melchior Wolmar, Beza initially pursued law but later embraced the Reformed faith, leading to his exile from France. In 1548, he settled in Geneva, where he became a close associate of John Calvin. Beza's contributions were manifold. He served as a professor of Greek at the Academy of Lausanne and later at the Geneva Academy, where he succeeded Calvin as the chair of theology. His leadership extended to the Company of Pastors in Geneva, where he played a pivotal role in shaping Reformed theology and church governance. A prolific writer, Beza authored several significant works. His De jure magistratuum (1574) defended the rights of magistrates against tyranny, and his editions of the Greek New Testament were instrumental in biblical scholarship. Beza also penned a biography of Calvin and contributed to the Genevan Psalter, enhancing the liturgical life of the Reformed churches. Throughout his life, Beza was actively involved in theological debates, notably defending the doctrine of predestination and engaging in dialogues with Lutheran theologians. His efforts were crucial in consolidating the Reformed tradition during a period of religious upheaval. Beza passed away on October 13, 1605, in Geneva, leaving behind a legacy as a steadfast guardian of Reformed orthodoxy and a key figure in the Protestant Reformation.
Table of Contents:
<aside>
</aside>
Almost the entire controversy depends upon the correct explanation of this word. Thus Westphalus claims that the verb “IS” must be taken properly, that is, substantively; but we affirm that bread is said metonymically to be that which it truly represents to us by the Lord’s institution. We furthermore add that there is great power in this metonymy, whereby indeed is declared how great is the truth of this sacramental signification, lest anyone should think that we establish a vain and, as it were, pictorial image of Christ and His passion. Rather, on the contrary, it is established that these symbols are no less truly delivered into our hands by the ministers than it is true that Christ offers to us, though placed on earth, His true body and true blood which are and remain in heaven—that is, He offers Himself with all His gifts to be communicated and enjoyed through faith, unto eternal life.
This position, which in no way detracts from the truth of Christ’s body nor of the Sacraments, which leaves no place for absurdity, which highly commends God’s omnipotence, which most agrees with the nature of faith, and which finally lifts us up to heaven—yet Westphalus with his advocates does not hesitate to attack it as if we were saying that bread and wine simply and nakedly signify the Lord’s body like mere images, when everywhere we emphasize the power of sacramental signification. If he does not understand this, what intemperance is this in the man to condemn as heresy, to exterminate beyond the bounds of the world, to deliver to the magistrate’s sword, to banish beyond the Scythians, those whose position he has never understood? But if he does understand, what manner of religion and conscience is this? But to the matter at hand.
To confirm this metonymy, we cite various and almost infinite passages, not to the same end, but some indeed to show that the word “IS” is not always used properly and substantively, as they say. From this we conclude that we do not rashly inquire how this word should be explained in this saying of Christ which we are discussing, since various and multiple significations of it occur in the sacred writings. But we produce others in which a precisely similar metonymy is used.
What does Westphalus say to these? First, he selects some, omits the rest, saying they have been refuted a thousand times. How truly he speaks this, we do not refuse to let judgment be made from his books and our responses. Then he proceeds to refute certain passages.
1. The Holy Spirit Example:
First indeed he treats this passage: “The Holy Spirit was not yet given.” What then, he says: Yet the verb “IS” is not here taken for “signifies.” As if we explain this passage of John in this way, and as if Westphalus himself does not acquiesce in the interpretation which Calvin brings to this passage. As if, finally, we had cited this passage to show that “IS” is taken for “signifies,” and not rather to prove that those who oppose their little word “IS” to all arguments conclude nothing, since it is not always taken substantively, and therefore one ought to estimate its signification from the very nature of the matter under discussion.
2. The Church as Christ’s Body: