of wisdom." ' Macarius the Elder, a gifted representative of the earlier Greek mysticism (f 390), belongs to tlie same symbolical school ; he calls bread and wine the antitype of the body and blood of Christ, and seems to know only a spiritual eating of the flesh of the Lord." Theodoret, who was acknowledged orthodox by the council of Chalcedon, teaches indeed a transformation {fiera^dXKeiv) of the eucharistic elements by virtue of the priestly consecration, and an adoration of them, which certainly sounds quite Romish, but in the same connection expressly rejects the idea of an absorption of the elements in the body of the Lord, as an error akin to the Monophysite. " The mystical emblems of the body and blood of Christ," says he, "continue in their original essence and form, they are visible and tangible as they were before [the consecration] ; ^ but the contemplation of the spirit and of faith sees in them that which they have become, and they are adored also as that which they are to believers." * ' Epist. viii. c. 4 (or Ep. 141 ia the older editions) : Tpwyo,uev yap uvtou rriv adpKa Kol trlfofxiv avTov rh al/xa, itoivtavol yivSfievot ZiaTrj^ iravBpco-n-qaeui koi rrjs aladrtTrji ^orjs rod Xoyov Ka\ ttjs crocpi as . Sapwo yap koI alfia Travrav avTov rrjv fivffTiKi}p iirtSr] ij.lav [i. c, a spiritual incarnation, Or His internal com- ing to the soul, as distinct from His historical incarnation] ^vo/xaae Ka\ tV e'/c irpaK- riKrls Koi (pvaiKris Koi 6io\oyiKris ffvvfaTSiuav 5t 5 a<r/co\ iav, hi ijs rpttpirai i^ivxh /caJ Trpbs roiv oi'Twi' Qetupiav TrapaaKevd^^erai. Kal toOto iari rh iit rov prirov Icrus STjAov/iiei'o;'. This passage, overlooked by Klose, Ebrard, and Kahnis, but noticed by Riickert and more fully by Steitz (1. c. p. 127 ff.), in favor of the symbolical view, is the principal one in Basil on the Eucharist, and must regulate the interpretation of the less important allusions in his other writings. - Horn, xxv-ii. 17, and other passages. Steitz (1. c. p. 142 ff.) enters more fuUy into the views of this monk of the Egyptian desert. ^ Dial. ii. Opera ed. Hal. torn. iv. p. 126, where the orthodox man says against the Eranist: Ta ixvariKa. av^L^oKa . . . /x^yn 4ir\ tt)? Trpor/pas over las ical rov ffXV l^'^T OS KO-l rov eioovs, ical bpara icrri koI otttoi, oJa Kal irporepop 7iV. * UpoaKvyelrai ws tKeTya uvra airtp TianveTai. Tliese words certainly prove that TOL. II.— 32 4y8 THIRD PERIOD. A.D. 311-590. Similar language occurs in an epistle to tlie monk Csesarius ascribed to Chrysostom, but perhaps not genuine ; ' in Ephraim of Antioch, cited by Pbotius ; and even in the Roman bisliop Gelasius at the end of the fifth century (492-496). The latter says expressly, in bis work against Eutyches and Xestorius : " The sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, which we receive, is a divine thing, because by it we are made partakers