Christ met with his disciples for a Last Supper.基督見了他的弟子們為最後的晚餐。 After solemn ritual acts he spoke of the bread as his body and the wine as his blood of the new Covenant.經過莊嚴的祭祀行為，他也談到了這個麵包，因為他的身體和葡萄酒，因為他的血液中的新的盟約。 In the earliest written account, that of Saint Paul to the Corinthians, and in Luke, it is recorded that the disciples were instructed to continue the rite in remembrance of their Lord's death.在最早的書面帳戶，也就是聖保羅向哥林多前書，並在路加，這是記錄在案的門徒們被指示繼續祭悼念他們的主的死因。
Interpretations of the meaning of the Eucharist vary.表述的含義聖體聖事而異。 Some Christian writers of the 2d century held that the Eucharist consists of two realities, an earthly and a heavenly. In the Middle Ages, the doctrine of transubstantiation was developed; it has remained the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic church.有些基督徒作家的二維世紀認為，聖體聖事的連續兩個現實，一個人間和天堂， 在中世紀時代，中庸陷於變體說是發達國家，它至今仍是官方學說的羅馬天主教會。
According to this position, the substance, or inner reality, of the bread and wine are changed into the substance of the body and blood of Christ, but the accidents, or external qualities known through the senses (color, weight, taste), remain unchanged. 根據這一立場，物質，或內在現實，麵包和酒都變成了物質的身體和血液基督的，但事故，或外在的素質已知透過感官（顏色，重量，口味） ，依然不變。
| BELIEVE 相信 Religious 宗教 Information 資訊 Source 源 web-site 網址： |
| Our List of 1,000 Religious Subjects 我們所列出的1000名宗教科目 |
| E-mail 電子郵箱 |
Protestant positions range from the Lutheran view of consubstantiation, which holds that Christ is present along with the unchanged reality of the bread and wine, to the symbolic interpretation of the Eucharist as a simple memorial of Christ's death (per Zwingli). 新教職位從路德的看法consubstantiation ，認為基督是目前隨不變的現實，麵包和酒，以象徵性的解釋，聖體聖事視為一個簡單的紀念基督的死亡（每zwingli ） 。
[from Charles W Ranson] [由查爾斯瓦特ranson ]
Bibliography
參考書目
WR Crockett,
Eucharist (1989); GD Kilpatrick, The Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy (1984); JM
Powers, Eucharistic Theology (1967).西鐵， Crockett ，聖體聖事（ 1989年）
;钆基爾帕特里克，聖體聖事在聖經和教會禮儀（ 1984年） ; jm權力，聖體聖事的神學（ 1967 ） 。
Transubstantiation, in Christian theology, is the dogma that in the Eucharist the bread and wine to be administered become, upon consecration, the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ, even though the external manifestations of the bread and wine - shape, color, flavor, and odor - remain.陷於變體說，在基督教神學，是教條，在聖體麵包和葡萄酒將成為經管後， consecration ，實際的身體與血的耶穌基督，儘管外部表現形式的麵包和酒-形狀，顏色，味道和氣味-仍然存在。 It is thus opposed to other doctrines, such as the Lutheran doctrine that the body and blood of Christ coexist in and with the bread and wine, which remain unchanged.因此，它是反對其他學說，如路德學說認為，人體和血液基督的並存，以及與麵包和酒，保持不變。
The term transubstantiation was adopted into the phraseology of the church in 1215, when it was employed by the Fourth Lateran Council.任期陷於變體說，是通過進入言詞上的教堂在12時15分，當它是受僱於第四lateran會。 The dogma was reconfirmed (1551) by the Council of Trent, as follows: "If any one shall say that, in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist, there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; and shall deny that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the species of bread and wine alone remaining, which conversion the Catholic Church most fittingly calls Transubstantiation, let him be anathema" (Session 13, Canon 2).該教條被確認（ 1551 ） ，由理事會遄，內容如下： "如果任何人不得說，在最神聖的聖體聖體中，都存在著物質的麵包和酒，加上身體和血液我們的主耶穌基督;並應否認美妙和奇異的轉化，整個物質的麵包進入身體，以及整個物質的酒，進入血液循環，其中的物種，麵包和葡萄酒，僅剩下的，而轉換天主教教會最恰當來電陷於變體說，讓他被詛咒" （ 13屆會議上，佳能2 ） 。
In his encyclical Mysterium Fidei (Mystery of Faith, 1965), Pope Paul VI restated the traditional teaching to correct the views of some modern Roman Catholic theologians that the change consists merely in a new religious finality ("transfinalization") or significance ("transignification"), resulting in either case in little more than a symbolic divine presence.在他的通諭神秘信（神秘的信仰， 1965年） ，保祿六世重申了傳統教學以正確的意見，又不乏現代的羅馬天主教神學家認為，改變選區只在一個新的宗教終局（ " transfinalization " ）或意義（ " transignification " ） ，因而在這兩種情況下，在略多於一個象徵性的神的存在。
Transubstantiation is a doctrine not only of the Roman Catholic church but also of the Orthodox church.陷於變體說是一個學說不僅對羅馬天主教教會，而且對東正教。 At the Synod of Jerusalem (1672), the doctrine was confirmed as essential to the faith of the entire Orthodox church.在主教的耶路撒冷（ 1672 ） ，這個學說被確認為必要的信念，整個東正教。 The dogma was repudiated by the Church of England.該教條被推翻，由英國教會。
The reference in this phrase is to the presence of Christ in the sacrament of Holy Communion.提到的這句話，是向在場的基督在聖潔的共融。 In the more general sense it is not objectionable, for all Christians can agree that Christ is really present by the Holy Spirit when they gather in his name.在更廣泛的意義上講，它是不會令人反感的，為所有基督信徒，可同意基督是真的，目前由聖靈時，他們聚集在他的名字。 Theologically, however, the word "real" indicates a particular form or understanding of the presence in terms of realist philosophy. theologically ，不過， "真正的" ，表明某種特定形式或理解的存在而言，現實主義哲學。 On this view, the so-called substance of Christ's body is a reality apart from its "accidents" or specific physical manifestations.按照這種觀點，即所謂的物質的基督身體的是一種現實，除了它的"意外"或具體實物表現形式。 It is this substance which is supposed to be present in or under the accidents of bread and wine, and in replacement of (or, as Luther would say, in conjunction with) their own substance.正是這種物質，它應該是存在於下或意外的麵包和酒，並在更換（或者，正如路德會說，要結合） ，他們自己的物質。 There is, however, no scriptural basis for this interpretation, and in Reformation theology it is rejected and replaced by a more biblical conception of the presence.有，但是，沒有聖經依據這一解釋，並在改革神學，它是拒絕了，取而代之的是一個更加聖經觀存在。
GW
Bromiley毛重羅米立
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary)
（ Elwell宣布了福音字典）
Consubstantiation is a teaching used to explain the Christian experience and conviction that Christ is truly present with his people in their celebration of the Eucharist. consubstantiation是一個教學可用來解釋基督徒的經驗和信念，即基督是真正的，目前與他的人民在他們慶祝聖體聖事。 Consubstantiation was developed in the Lutheran wing of the Protestant Reformation during the 16th century. The idea appears in Martin Luther's own writings; the word itself was first employed by his younger contemporary, Melanchthon. consubstantiation開發路德翼新教改革，在16世紀。 構思出現在馬丁路德的自己的著作;一詞本身是首次受聘於他的年輕當代，梅蘭希頓。
Consubstantiation rests on the same philosophical assumptions as the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, which it opposed. consubstantiation落在同一的哲學假設作為中世紀學說陷於變體說，它反對的。 Both doctrines depend on Aristotle's teaching that matter consists of accidents, which can be perceived by the senses, and substance, which the mind grasps and which constitutes essential reality.這兩個學說依賴於亞里士多德的教學此事組成的意外，可以預見，由理智，物質，精神抓手，並構成了必不可少的現實。 Both agree that, in the Eucharist, the accidents of the bread and wine remain unchanged.雙方均同意，在聖體中，意外的麵包和葡萄酒保持不變。 Unlike the doctrine of transubstantiation, however, that of consubstantiation asserts that the substance of the bread and wine is also unchanged, the ubiquitous body of Christ coexisting "in, with, and under" the substance of the bread, and the blood of Christ in, with, and under the wine, by the power of the Word of God.不像學說陷於變體說，不過，這對consubstantiation斷言，該物質的麵包和酒也不變，無處不在基督的身體共存" ，並根據"物質的麵包，以及血液基督教會， ，而根據酒，由電力的上帝的話。
Luther illustrated consubstantiation by the analogy of iron put into fire: Iron and fire are united in red-hot iron; yet the two substances remain unchanged.路德說明consubstantiation所比喻的鐵投入消防：鐵與火，是美國在紅鐵水，但兩種物質保持不變。
Charles P. Price查爾斯頁價格
Transubstantiation is the theory accepted by Rome as a dogma in 1215, in an attempt to explain the statements of Christ: "This is my body" and "This is my blood" (Mark 14:22, 24) as applied to the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper.陷於變體說是理論接受羅馬城內，作為教條，在12時15分，在試圖解釋報表基督說： "這是我的身體" ， "這是我的血" （馬克14時22分， 24 ）適用於麵包和葡萄酒的主的晚餐。 It is insisted that the "is" must be taken with the strictest literalism.這是堅持說"是"必須採取最嚴格的literalism 。 But to our senses the bread and wine seem to remain exactly as they were even when consecrated.但我們很理智，麵包和葡萄酒似乎完全相同，因為他們即使consecrated 。 There is no perceptible miracle of transformation.有沒有感覺到奇蹟的轉型。 The explanation is found in terms of a distinction between the socalled substance (or true reality) and the accidents (the specific, perceptible characteristics).有關的解釋是，發現無論在區分所謂的物質（即真正的現實）和意外（具體，可感知特性） 。 The latter remain, but the former, ie, the substance of bread and wine, is changed into that of the body and blood of Christ.後者依然存在，但前者，即物質的麵包和酒，是改變成表示，在該機構和血液裡的喊聲。 This carries with it many serious consequences.這一帶有許多嚴重的後果。
If Christ is substantially present, it is natural that the elements should be adored.如果基督是大幅出席，這是很自然的要素應該崇拜。 It can also be claimed that he is received by all who communicate, whether rightly to salvation or wrongly to perdition.它也可以聲稱他是受到大家歡迎的人溝通，是否正確，以救贖或錯墜入萬劫不復之地。 There also arises the idea of a propitiatory immolation of Christ for the temporal penalties of sin, with all the associated scandals of private masses.也有因構思一個propitiatory自焚的基督為顳懲罰罪惡的，所有與此有關的醜聞私人群眾。 The weaknesses of the theory are obvious.弱點理論是顯而易見的。 It is not scriptural.這不是聖經。 On sharper analysis it does not even explain the dominical statements.對銳利的分析，它甚至不解釋dominical報表。 It contradicts the true biblical account of Christ's presence.它違背了聖經的真實帳戶基督的存在。 It has no secure patristic backing.它沒有任何安全教父後盾。 It stands or falls with a particular philosophical understanding.它還是屬於一個特定的哲學理解。 It destroys the true nature of a sacrament.它破壞了真正性質從樓上掉了。 And it certainly perverts its proper use and gives rise to dangerous superstitions inimical to evangelical faith.它當然變態的正確使用方法並產生危險的迷信，不利於福音派信仰。
GW Bromiley毛重羅米立
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary) （ Elwell宣布了福音字典）
Bibliography
參考書目
J Calvin,
Institutes 4.18; T Cranmer, The True and Catholic Doctrine of the Lord's Supper;
N Dimock, Doctrine of the Lord's Supper; TWH Griffith, The Principles of
Theology, j卡爾文學院4.18和t克蘭默，真正的和天主教教義的主的晚餐氮dimock
，中庸主的晚餐;東華格里菲斯，原則神學
In this article we shall consider:在這篇文章中，我們應考慮：
the fact of the Real Presence, which is, indeed, the central dogma;實際上，真正存在的，這主要是因為事實上，中央教條;
the several allied dogmas grouped about it, namely:幾個專職教條歸類一下，即：
Totality of Presence,總體性的存在，
Transubstantiation,陷於變體說，
Permanence of Presence and the Adorableness of the Eucharist;持久性的存在和adorableness的聖體聖事;
the speculations of reason, so far as speculative investigation regarding the august mystery under its various aspects is permissible, and so far as it is desirable to illumine it by the light of philosophy.該揣測的原因，至今為止，作為投機性的調查就八月謎下，其各方面的，是允許的，而且直至目前為止，因為這是可取去照亮它由輕的哲學。
I. THE REAL PRESENCE AS A FACT一，真正的存在是一個事實
According to the teaching of theology a revealed fact can be proved solely by recurrence to the sources of faith, viz.根據教學的神學啟示事實可以證明完全是由復發的根源信念，即。 Scripture and Tradition, with which is also bound up the infallible magisterium of the Church.經文和傳統，其中也必然加快犯錯magisterium的教會。
A. Proof from Scripture答：證明從經文
This may be adduced both from the words of promise (John 6:26 sqq.) and, especially, from the words of Institution as recorded in the Synoptics and St. Paul (1 Corinthians 11:23 sqq.).這可能是引證無論從字的諾言（約翰6時26 sqq ） ，特別是從字的機構作為記錄在synoptics和聖保羅（哥林多前書11時23 sqq ） 。
The words of promise (John 6)字的諾言（約翰6 ）
By the miracles of the loaves and fishes and the walking upon the waters, on the previous day, Christ not only prepared His hearers for the sublime discourse containing the promise of the Eucharist, but also proved to them that He possessed, as Almighty God-man, a power superior to and independent of the laws of nature, and could, therefore, provide such a supernatural food, none other, in fact, than His own Flesh and Blood.由奇蹟的麵包和魚和散步後，水域，就在前一天，基督不僅編寫了他的hearers為崇高話語載有承諾的聖體聖事，但也證明他們說，他擁有的，因為全能的上帝-對於男性來說，權力凌駕和獨立的自然規律，並可能，因此，提供這樣一個超自然的食物，沒有其他，事實上，比他自己的親骨肉。 This discourse was delivered at Capharnaum (John 6:26-72), and is divided into two distinct parts, about the relation of which Catholic exegetes vary in opinion.這一話語被發表在capharnaum （約翰福音6:26-72 ） ，並分成兩個不同的部分，大約有關係，其中天主教exegetes各有不同的看法。 Nothing hinders our interpreting the first part [John 6:26-48 (51)] metaphorically and understanding by "bread of heaven" Christ Himself as the object of faith, to be received in a figurative sense as a spiritual food by the mouth of faith.什麼阻礙了我們解讀第一部分[約翰6:26-48 （ 51 ） ]比喻和了解， "麵包的天堂， "基督自己為對象的信念，將收到的一個形象化的責任感，作為精神食品的嘴信仰。 Such a figurative explanation of the second part of the discourse (John 6:52-72), however, is not only unusual but absolutely impossible, as even Protestant exegetes (Delitzsch, Kostlin, Keil, Kahnis, and others) readily concede.這種形象化的解釋，第二部分的話語（約翰福音6:52-72 ） ，但是，不僅是不同尋常的，但絕不是不可能的，因為即使是新教exegetes （ delitzsch ， kostlin ， Keil公司， kahnis ，及其他）輕易讓步的。 First of all the whole structure of the discourse of promise demands a literal interpretation of the words: "eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood".首先對整個架構的話語承諾要求的字面解釋的話： "吃了肉的人子，並喝他的血" 。 For Christ mentions a threefold food in His address, the manna of the past (John 6:31, 32, 49,, 59), the heavenly bread of the present (John 6:32 sq.), and the Bread of Life of the future (John 6:27, 52).為基督提到了三倍，食物在他的講話中，甘露的過去（約翰6時31分， 32 ， 49 ， 59歲） ，在天上的麵包的本（約翰6時32平方） ，以及麵包的生活未來（約翰6時27分， 52 ） 。 Corresponding to the three kinds of food and the three periods, there are as many dispensers - Moses dispensing the manna, the Father nourishing man's faith in the Son of God made flesh, finally Christ giving His own-Flesh and Blood.相對應的三種食物和三個時期，有多達掌櫃-摩西配甘露，父親養人的信仰上帝的兒子取得了肉體，最後基督讓他自己的血肉和血液。 Although the manna, a type of the Eucharist, was indeed eaten with the mouth, it could not, being a transitory food, ward off death.雖然甘露，一類的聖體聖事，確實是吃與口耳相傳，它不能作為一個過渡性的食物，抵禦死亡。 The second food, that offered by the Heavenly Father, is the bread of heaven, which He dispenses hic et nunc to the Jews for their spiritual nourishment, inasmuch as by reason of the Incarnation He holds up His Son to them as the object of their faith.第二食物，所給予的天父，是麵包的天堂，而他免除這裡等很快向猶太人為自己的精神食糧，因為理由的化身，他擁有了自己的兒子，以他們為對象的其信仰。 If, however, the third kind of food, which Christ Himself promises to give only at a future time, is a new refection, differing from the last-named food of faith, it can be none other than His true Flesh and Blood, to be really eaten and drunk in Holy Communion.但是，如果第三類食品，其中基督自己的諾言，讓只有在將來某個時間，是一個新的refection ，不同的，從最後命名為食物的信念，它可以莫過於他的真實血肉，以真的吃和酒後在聖餐。 This is why Christ was so ready to use the realistic expression "to chew" (John 6:54, 56, 58: trogein) when speaking of this, His Bread of Life, in addition to the phrase, "to eat" (John 6:51, 53: phagein).這就是為什麼基督被這麼願意用現實的表達"來啃" （約翰6時54分， 56 ， 58 ： trogein ）時，談到這一點，他的麵包的生活，除了這句話， "吃" （約翰福音6時51分， 53 ： phagein ） 。 Cardinal Bellarmine (De Euchar., I, 3), moreover, calls attention to the fact, and rightly so, that if in Christ's mind the manna was a figure of the Eucharist, the latter must have been something more than merely blessed bread, as otherwise the prototype would not substantially excel the type.紅衣主教bellarmine （德奧伊夏爾。來說，我和3 ） ，此外，呼籲注意這樣一個事實，這樣做是正確的，即如果在基督內的記甘露是一個數字的聖體聖事，而後者必須是被一些更不僅僅是有福了麵包，否則，原型不會大幅超越型。 The same holds true of the other figures of the Eucharist, as the bread and wine offered by Melchisedech, the loaves of proposition (panes propositionis), the paschal lamb.同樣如此，其他數字的聖體聖事，因為麵包和葡萄酒所提供的melchisedech ，麵包的命題（小版張propositionis ） ，逾越節的羔羊。 The impossibility of a figurative interpretation is brought home more forcibly by an analysis of the following text: "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed" (John 6:54-56).不可能一個形象化的詮釋，是帶回家更強行通過分析以下文字： "除非你吃的肉人子，並喝他的血液中，你不能有生命在你，他說， eateth我的肉體和drinketh我的血液，祂所永恆的生命：我會提高他在最後一天，因為我的肉是肉實在：我的血是酒後確實" （約翰福音6:54-56 ） 。 It is true that even among the Semites, and in Scripture itself, the phrase, "to eat some one's flesh", has a figurative meaning, namely, "to persecute, to bitterly hate some one".這是事實即使在閃米特人，並在經文本身，短語， "吃飯，有的一個人的肉" ，有一個形象化的含義，即"來迫害，痛恨某些之一" 。 If, then, the words of Jesus are to be taken figuratively, it would appear that Christ had promised to His enemies eternal life and a glorious resurrection in recompense for the injuries and persecutions directed against Him.如果，那麼，換句話說耶穌的是將要採取的形象，這樣看來，基督已承諾為他的敵人，永恆的生命和光榮的復活賠償，為受傷和迫害，是針對他。 The other phrase, "to drink some one's blood", in Scripture, especially, has no other figurative meaning than that of dire chastisement (cf. Isaiah 49:26; Apocalypse 16:6); but, in the present text, this interpretation is just as impossible here as in the phrase, "to eat some one's flesh".另一句， "喝自己的血" ，在經文中，特別是，沒有別的比喻的含義比可怕的責罰（參見以賽亞書49:26 ;啟示16時06分） ，但在目前的文本中，這個釋義正如美國不可能在這裡，因為在這句話， "吃了一些自己的肉" 。 Consequently, eating and drinking are to be understood of the actual partaking of Christ in person, hence literally.因此，大吃大喝，是可以理解的實際partaking基督的人，因此，從字面上來看。
This interpretation agrees perfectly with the conduct of the hearers and the attitude of Christ regarding their doubts and objections.這個解釋完全同意與進行了hearers和基督的處世態度對於他們的疑慮和反對。 Again, the murmuring of the Jews is the clearest evidence that they had understood the preceding words of Jesus literally (John 6:53).再次，傅修海的猶太人是最清楚的證據表明，他們已經了解了前面的耶穌從字面上來看（約翰6時53分） 。 Yet far from repudiating this construction as a gross misunderstanding, Christ repeated them in a most solemn manner, in John (6:54 sqq.).然而，到目前為止，從批判，這方面的建設作為一個總的誤解，基督重複他們在一個最隆重的方式，在約翰（ 6時54 sqq ） 。 In consequence, many of His Disciples were scandalized and said: "This saying is hard, and who can hear it?"因此，他的許多弟子被scandalized並說： "這句話是肯努力，誰可以聽到這種說法" ？ (John 6:61); but instead of retracting what He had said, Christ rather reproached them for their want of faith, by alluding to His sublimer origin and His future Ascension into heaven. （約翰福音6:61 ） ，而不是收回他所說的，基督，而不是責備他們，為他們想的信念，暗指他sublimer原產地和他的未來升騰到天堂。 And without further ado He allowed these Disciples to go their way (John 6:62 sqq.).並沒有進一步的ADO的，他讓這些弟子，以自行其是（約翰6:62 sqq ） 。 Finally He turned to His twelve Apostles with the question: "Will you also go away?最後他轉身對他的十二使徒同一個問題： "你還走嗎？
Then Peter stepped forth and with humble faith replied: "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God" (John 6:68 sqq.).然後彼得加強了與謙虛真誠地回答道： "上帝，給誰，我們向何處去？祢關於永生的話，而且我們相信，有眾所周知的，這祢基督，是神的兒子" （約翰福音6 ： 68 sqq ） 。 The entire scene of the discourse and murmurings against it proves that the Zwinglian and Anglican interpretation of the passage, "It is the spirit that quickeneth", etc., in the sense of a glossing over or retractation, is wholly inadmissible.整個現場的話語和murmurings反對它證明了zwinglian和英國聖公會的詮釋通過， "這是精神quickeneth "等，在感覺到一個粉飾或收回講話，是完全不可接受的。 For in spite of these words the Disciples severed their connection with Jesus, while the Twelve accepted with simple faith a mystery which as yet they did not understand.為，儘管這些話門徒切斷他們涉嫌與耶穌，而12個地接受了簡單的信念是一個謎，其中作為，但他們不明白。 Nor did Christ say: "My flesh is spirit", ie to be understood in a figurative sense, but: "My words are spirit and life".也沒有基督說： "我的肉體是精神" ，即應理解在一個形象化的常識，但說： "我的話是精神和生命" 。 There are two views regarding the sense in which this text is to be interpreted.有兩種觀點，就感覺在這個文本加以解釋。 Many of the Fathers declare that the true Flesh of Jesus (sarx) is not to be understood as separated from His Divinity (spiritus), and hence not in a cannibalistic sense, but as belonging entirely to the supernatural economy.許多父親申報的真實血肉的耶穌（扎爾克斯） ，是不是可以理解為脫離他的神性（ spiritus ） ，因此，不能在吃常識，但屬於完全超自然的經濟體系。 The second and more scientific explanation asserts that in the Scriptural opposition of "flesh and blood" to "spirit", the former always signifies carnal-mindedness, the latter mental perception illumined by faith, so that it was the intention of Jesus in this passage to give prominence to the fact that the sublime mystery of the Eucharist can be grasped in the light of supernatural faith alone, whereas it cannot be understood by the carnal-minded, who are weighed down under the burden of sin.第二個，也是更科學的解釋說，在聖經反對的"血肉" ，以"精神" ，前者總是意味肉慾的態度，但後者的心理認知照亮信念，使該條例的原意，耶穌在這段話要凸顯一個事實，即崇高而神秘的聖體聖事的，可以把握的，根據超自然信仰單，而它不能被理解，由肉慾志同道合的人，拖累下，負擔罪惡的。 Under such circumstances it is not to be wondered at that the Fathers and several Ecumenical councils (Ephesus, 431; Nicæa, 787) adopted the literal sense of the words, though it was not dogmatically defined (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, c. i).在這種情況下，這是不容質疑時表示，父親和幾個合一議會（伸出手， 431名; nicæa ， 787 ）通過字面意義上的，換言之，儘管它不是教條的定義（參見理事會遄， sess第二十一，長一） 。 If it be true that a few Catholic theologians (as Cajetan, Ruardus Tapper, Johann Hessel, and the elder Jansenius) preferred the figurative interpretation, it was merely for controversial reasons, because in their perplexity they imagined that otherwise the claims of the Hussite and Protestant Utraquists for the partaking of the Chalice by the laity could not be answered by argument from Scripture.如果屬實，這幾個天主教神學家（如cajetan ， ruardus tapper ，約翰黑塞爾，和老jansenius ）傾向於形象化解釋，它僅僅是為具爭議性的原因，因為在他們的困惑，他們想到，否則索賠的胡斯派和新教utraquists為partaking的chalice由俗人不能回答的說法，從經文。 (Cf. Patrizi, "De Christo pane vitæ", Rome, 1851; Schmitt, "Die Verheissung der Eucharistie bei den Vütern", 2 vols., Würzburg, 1900-03.) （參見柏德， "德christo窗格vitæ " ，羅馬， 1851年;施密特， "死verheissung明鏡eucharistie鼻書齋vütern " ， 2卷，維爾茨堡， 1900年至1903年） 。
The words of Institution話機構
The Church's Magna Charta, however, are the words of Institution, "This is my body - this is my blood", whose literal meaning she has uninterruptedly adhered to from the earliest times.教堂的大憲章，但是，是的話，機構， "這是我的身體-這是我的血" ，其字面意思，她不斷堅持從最早的時候。 The Real Presence is evinced, positively, by showing the necessity of the literal sense of these words, and negatively, by refuting the figurative interpretations.真正的存在是明證，積極，所顯示的必要性字面意義上的這些話，是負面的，由批駁形象化表述。 As regards the first, the very existence of four distinct narratives of the Last Supper, divided usually into the Petrine (Matthew 26:26 sqq.; Mark 14:22 sqq.) and the double Pauline accounts (Luke 22:19 sq.; 1 Corinthians 11:24 sq.), favors the literal interpretation.至於第一，極存在四個顯著敘述了最後的晚餐，通常劃分到petrine （馬太26:26 sqq ;馬克來自sqq ） ，並雙倍寶蓮帳戶（盧克22時19平方;哥林多前書11:24平方） ，人情案的字面解釋。 In spite of their striking unanimity as regards essentials, the Petrine account is simpler and clearer, whereas Pauline is richer in additional details and more involved in its citation of the words that refer to the Chalice.儘管其在醒目一致至於必需品， petrine帳戶是簡單和清晰，而寶蓮是豐富，提供更多的細節和更多地參與其引用的話是指以chalice 。 It is but natural and justifiable to expect that, when four different narrators in different countries and at different times relate the words of Institution to different circles of readers, the occurrence of an unusual figure of speech, as, for instance, that bread is a sign of Christ's Body, would, somewhere or other, betray itself, either in the difference of word-setting, or in the unequivocal expression of the meaning really intended, or at least in the addition of some such mark as: "He spoke, however, of the sign of His Body."它只不過是自然和合理的期待，當4個不同的敘述者，在不同國家和在不同時期涉及的話院校不同圈子的讀者，出現一個不尋常的人物的講話，因為，例如，麵包，是一個簽署的基督身體，將某處或其他，出賣本身，無論是在差異構詞設定，或在毫不含糊地表達意思真的打算，或者說至少在另外一些諸如標註為： "他在發言中提出，然而，在標誌他的身體" 。 But nowhere do we discover the slightest ground for a figurative interpretation.但行不通，我們發現有絲毫的，為建立一個形象化的詮釋。 If, then, natural, literal interpretation were false, the Scriptural record alone would have to be considered as the cause of a pernicious error in faith and of the grievous crime of rendering Divine homage to bread (artolatria) - a supposition little in harmony with the character of the four Sacred Writers or with the inspiration of the Sacred Text.如果，那麼，自然，從字面上解釋是假的，聖經記錄單將被視為事業的一個惡毒的錯誤信念和對他人犯罪的渲染神來祭祀麵包（ artolatria ） -假設小和諧性格的四個神聖的作家，或與靈感的神聖文本。 Moreover, we must not omit the important circumstance, that one of the four narrators has interpreted his own account literally.此外，我們絕不能省略重要的情況下，其中的4個講解員的解釋，他自己的帳戶從字面上來看。 This is St. Paul (1 Corinthians 11:27 sq.), who, in the most vigorous language, brands the unworthy recipient as "guilty of body and of the blood of the Lord".這是聖保羅（ 1哥林多前書11:27平方） ，因為他們在最嚴厲的語言，品牌卑微的收件人為"有罪的身體和血液中的主" 。 There can be no question of a grievous offense against Christ Himself unless we suppose that the true Body and the true Blood of Christ are really present in the Eucharist.不可能有任何的問題，嚴重妨害基督本人除非我們再假設真實身體和真實的鮮血，基督是真的，目前在聖體聖事。 Further, if we attend only to the words themselves their natural sense is so forceful and clear that Luther wrote to the Christians of Strasburg in 1524: "I am caught, I cannot escape, the text is too forcible" (De Wette, II, 577).進一步，如果我們參加，只是向自己的話，他們自然的感覺是如此有力且明確表示，路德寫信給基督徒的strasburg在1524年時說： "我被捕的，我也不能倖免，該文本是太強迫" （德wette ，二， 577 ） 。 The necessity of the natural sense is not based upon the absurd assumption that Christ could not in general have resorted to use of figures, but upon the evident requirement of the case, which demand that He did not, in a matter of such paramount importance, have recourse to meaningless and deceptive metaphors.有必要的自然常識，是不是基於荒唐的假設基督不能在一般訴諸使用的數字，但經自明規定的情況下，其中的需求，他不，在短短的這種至高無上的重要性，求助於無意義性和欺騙性的隱喻。 For figures enhance the clearness of speech only when the figurative meaning is obvious, either from the nature of the case (eg from a reference to a statue of Lincoln, by saying: "This is Lincoln") or from the usages of common parlance (eg in the case of this synecdoche: "This glass is wine"), Now, neither from the nature of the case nor in common parlance is bread an apt or possible symbol of the human body.數字提高晴空的講話只有當形象化的意義是顯而易見的，無論是從案件的性質（例如，從一個參考一雕像，林肯說： "這完全是林肯" ） ，還是從用法常見用語（例如，在案件提喻本說： "這杯子是酒" ） ，現在，無論是從案件的性質，也沒有共同的用語是麵包的論題，或可能出現的象徵人體。 Were one to say of a piece of bread: "This is Napoleon", he would not be using a figure, but uttering nonsense.其中一個說的一塊麵包說： "這是拿破崙" ，他不會用一個數字，但諱莫如深，簡直是一派胡言。 There is but one means of rendering a symbol improperly so called clear and intelligible, namely, by, conventionally settling beforehand what it is to signify, as, for instance, if one were to say: "Let us imagine these two pieces of bread before us to be Socrates and Plato".有的只是一個手段，使一個象徵不當所謂明確和理解，即通過，常規解決事前究竟是什麼標誌，因為，舉例來說，如果一個人說： "讓我們想像這兩塊麵包才我們要為蘇格拉底和柏拉圖的" 。 Christ, however, instead of informing His Apostles that he intended to use such a figure, told them rather the contrary in the discourse containing the promise: "the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world" (John 6:52), Such language, of course, could be used only by a God-man; so that belief in the Real Presence necessarily presupposes belief in the true Divinity of Christ, The foregoing rules would of themselves establish the natural meaning with certainty, even if the words of Institution, "This is my body - this is my blood", stood alone, But in the original text corpus (body) and sanguis (blood) are followed by significant appositional additions, the Body being designated as "given for you" and the Blood as "shed for you [many]"; hence the Body given to the Apostles was the self same Body that was crucified on Good Friday, and the Chalice drunk by them, the self same Blood that was shed on the Cross for our sins, Therefore the above-mentioned appositional phrases directly exclude every possibility of a figurative interpretation.基督的，不過，不是告訴他的門徒說，他打算利用這樣一個數字，告訴他們，而不是相反，在話語含有許諾說： "麵包，我會給予，是我的肉體，為生活的世界" （約翰6時52分） ，如語言，當然可以只用了一個神人，所以這種信念，在現實存在一定的先決條件的信念，在真正的基督的神，前述規則，將自己建立的自然與意義確定性，即使字的機構， "這是我的身體-這是我的血" ，孤家寡人，而且在原來的文本語料庫（機構）和血（血） ，其次是顯著的a ppositional增補時，身體被指定為"給你" ，以及血液作為"大棚為你[許多] " ，因此，身體向使徒是自我同一機構，被釘在十字架上週五良好，並chalice喝醉了，由他們來說，自我相同的血緣，這是大棚在十字架上為我們的罪，因此，上面提到的appositional短語直接排除一切可能性，一個形象化的詮釋。
We reach the same conclusion from a consideration of the concomitant circumstances, taking into account both the hearers and the Institutor, Those who heard the words of Institution were not learned Rationalists, possessed of the critical equipment that would enable them, as philologists and logicians, to analyze an obscure and mysterious phraseology; they were simple, uneducated fishermen, from the ordinary ranks of the people, who with childlike naïveté hung upon the words of their Master and with deep faith accepted whatever He proposed to them, This childlike disposition had to be reckoned with by Christ, particularly on the eve of His Passion and Death, when He made His last will and testament and spoke as a dying father to His deeply afflicted children.我們得出同樣的結論，從審議該並存的情況下，考慮到既hearers和institutor ，那些聽到的話院校均沒有學會理性，具備了最關鍵的設備，這將使它們，因為語文學家和logicians ，分析一個晦澀和神秘的說法，他們被簡單的，沒有受過教育的漁民，從普通級別的人，與一個小孩子naïveté後，洪的話來說自己的主人，並與篤信接受的，無論他建議對他們來說，這一個小孩子處置不得不不可忽視的，由基督的，尤其是對即將到來的，他的激情和死亡，當他取得了他的最後遺囑，並作了發言，作為一個垂死的父親，他深感困擾的兒童。 In such a moment of awful solemnity, the only appropriate mode of speech would be one which, stripped of unintelligible figures, made use of words corresponding exactly to the meaning to be conveyed.在這樣一個時刻，可怕的嚴肅性，唯一適當的方式演講會是其中一項，剝奪了不知所云的數字，用字相應的完全一致，因此該意思轉達。 It must be remembered, also, that Christ as omniscient God-man, must have foreseen the shameful error into which He would have led His Apostles and His Church by adopting an unheard-of metaphor; for the Church down to the present day appeals to the words of Christ in her teaching and practice.我們必須緊記，同時，以基督為無所不知神人，就必須有預見可恥的誤差成，其中，他將帶領他的門徒和他的教會所採取的一項奇聞的隱喻;對於教會下降至現今的呼籲有關基督的話，在她的教學與實踐結合起來。 If then she practices idolatry by the adoration of mere bread and wine, this crime must be laid to the charge of the God-man Himself.如果當時她的做法偶像崇拜所崇拜的僅僅是麵包和酒，這種犯罪，要重點向負責神人自己。 Besides this, Christ intended to institute the Eucharist as a most holy sacrament, to be solemnly celebrated in the Church even to the end of time.此外，基督打算研究所聖體聖事的一個最神聖的聖事，要隆重慶祝了，在教會甚至到了最後的時間。 But the content and the constituent parts of a sacrament had to be stated with such clearness of terminology as to exclude categorically every error in liturgy and worship.但其內容和組成部分，從樓上掉了，以說明這種清晰的術語，以排除斷然每誤差在禮拜儀式和禮拜。 As may be gathered from the words of consecration of the Chalice, Christ established the New Testament in His Blood, just as the Old Testament had been established in the typical blood of animals (cf. Exodus 24:8; Hebrews 9:11 sqq.).可能蒐集到的話consecration的chalice ，基督建立了新的佐證了他的血液裡，正如舊約已建立了典型的血動物（參見出埃及記24:8 ;希伯來9時11 sqq 。 ） 。 With the true instinct of justice, jurists prescribe that in all debatable points the words of a will must be taken in their natural, literal sense; for they are led by the correct conviction, that every testator of sound mind, in drawing up his last will and testament, is deeply concerned to have it done in language at once clear and unencumbered by meaningless metaphors.與真正的本能，司法，法學家明，在所有有爭議的點字一個將要採取的，其自然風貌，字面意義，因為他們是由正確的信念，即每立遺囑人的心智健全，政府在擬定他的過去遺囑中，是深為關注，以它做的，在語言上一旦明確，不受無謂的隱喻。 Now, Christ, according to the literal purport of His testament, has left us as a precious legacy, not mere bread and wine, but His Body and Blood.現在，基督，按照字面旨趣他的遺囑，給我們留下了一個寶貴的遺產，而不是單純的麵包和酒，但他的身體和血液。 Are we justified, then, in contradicting Him to His face and exclaiming: "No, this is not your Body, but mere bread, the sign of your Body!"我們是合理的，那麼，在矛盾的，他以他的臉，並大叫： "不，這不是你的身體，但僅僅是麵包，標誌你的身體" ！
The refutation of the so-called Sacramentarians, a name given by Luther to those who opposed the Real Presence, evinces as clearly the impossibility of a figurative meaning.該駁斥了所謂sacramentarians ，這個名字賦予路德向那些反對的真實存在，證明作為顯然是不可能的一個形象化的意義。 Once the manifest literal sense is abandoned, occasion is given to interminable controversies about the meaning of an enigma which Christ supposedly offered His followers for solution.一旦表現出字面意義上是被遺棄的，當時是考慮到無休止的爭論，大約意思是一個謎，其中基督理應給予他的追隨者解決之道。 There were no limits to the dispute in the sixteenth century, for at that time Christopher Rasperger wrote a whole book on some 200 different interpretations: "Ducentæ verborum, 'Hoc est corpus meum' interpretationes" (Ingolstadt, 1577).有沒有限度，以爭端，在16世紀，當時克里斯托弗rasperger寫了一整本書對約200名不同的解釋： " ducentæ verborum ， '專案預計參加語料庫meum ' interpretationes " （ Ingolstadt中， 1577 ） 。 In this connection we must restrict ourselves to an examination of the most current and widely known distortions of the literal sense, which were the butt of Luther's bitter ridicule even as early as 1527.在這方面，我們必須限制自己，以考試的最電流和廣為人知扭曲的字面意義上說，其中槍托路德的慘痛的嘲笑，甚至早在1527年。 The first group of interpreters, with Zwingli, discovers a figure in the copula est and renders it: "This signifies (est = significat) my Body".第一組的口譯員，與zwingli ，發現一個數字，在Copula的預測，並使得它說： "這意味著（東岸= significat ）我的身體" 。 In proof of this interpretation, examples are quoted from scripture, as: "The seven kine are seven years" (Genesis 41:26) or: "Sara and Agar are the two covenants" (Galatians 4:24), Waiving the question whether the verb "to be" (esse, einai) of itself can ever be used as the "copula in a figurative relation" (Weiss) or express the "relation of identity in a metaphorical connection" (Heinrici), which most logicians deny, the fundamental principles of logic firmly establish this truth, that all propositions may be divided into two great categories, of which the first and most comprehensive denominates a thing as it is in itself (eg "Man is a rational being"), whereas the second designates a thing according as it is used as a sign of something else (eg, "This picture is my father").在證明這一點的解釋，例如引述經文為： "七凱恩斯是七年" （創41:26 ） ，或者： "薩拉和瓊脂是兩個人權公約" （加拉太4時24分） ，免收問題是否動詞" ，以" （本質， einai ）的本身都不能被利用為" Copula的一種形象化的關係" （魏斯）或表述"的關係，身份，在一個隱喻性聯繫" （海因裡西） ，其中最logicians否認的，基本原則的邏輯，牢固樹立了這個真理，即所有的主張，可分為兩個大類，其中第一和最全面的denominates一件事情，因為這是在自己（如： "人是一種理性的" ） ，而第二指定事據，因為它是用來作為標誌的東西，別人（例如， "這張照片是我爸爸" ） 。 To determine whether a speaker intends the second manner of expression, there are four criteria, whose joint concurrence alone will allow the verb "to be" to have the meaning of "signify".以確定是否議長打算第二個方式表達，有4個標準，其聯合競合，僅將允許動詞" ，以"有所指的"標誌" 。 Abstracting from the three criteria, mentioned above, which have reference either to the nature of the case, or to the usages of common parlance, or to some convention previously agreed upon, there remains a fourth and last of decisive significance, namely: when a complete substance is predicated of another complete substance, there can exist no logical relation of identity between them, but only the relation of similarity, inasmuch as the first is an image, sign, symbol, of the other.文摘從三個標準，如上所述，其中有借鑒，以案件的性質，或用法常見的用語，或者一些公約以前商定後，就仍然是一個第四和最後決定性的意義，即：當一個完整的物質前提是另一個完整的物質，就不可能存在任何邏輯關係，身份關係，但只有關係的相似性，因為第一次是一個圖像，標誌，符號，至於其他的。 Now this last-named criterion is inapplicable to the Scriptural examples brought forward by the Zwinglians, and especially so in regard to their interpretation of the words of Institution; for the words are not: "This bread is my Body", but indefinitely: "This is my Body".現在這個最後的命名標準，是適用於聖經的例子，提出了由zwinglians ，尤其是在涉及他們的解釋的話，機構，為這些話並不是說： "這麵包是我的身體" ，而是無限期地說： "這是我的身體" 。 In the history of the Zwinglian conception of the Lord's Supper, certain "sacramental expressions" (locutiones sacramentales) of the Sacred Text, regarded as parallelisms of the words of Institution, have attracted considerable attention.在歷史上的zwinglian觀主的晚餐，某些"聖意向書" （ locutiones sacramentales ）的神聖文本中，被視為並行的話院校，已引起相當大的注意。 The first is to be found in I Cor.首先是被發現在I肺心病。 10:4: "And the rock was [signified] Christ", Yet it is evident that, if the subject rock is taken in its material sense, the metaphor, according to the fourth criterion just mentioned, is as apparent as in the analogous phrase "Christ is the vine". 10時04分： "和岩石[標誌著]基督" ，但很顯然，假如受岩石所採取的是在物質意義上說，隱喻，根據第四項準則剛才所說，是由於明顯的，因為在類似"基督是畏縮" 。 If, however, the word rock in this passage is stripped of all that is material, it may be understood in a spiritual sense, because the Apostle himself is speaking of that "spiritual rock" (petra spiritalis), which in the Person of the Word in an invisible manner ever accompanied the Israelites in their journeyings and supplied them with a spiritual fountain of waters.但是，如果這個詞岩這段話是剝奪所有這是物質的，它可以被理解，在精神意義上的，因為使徒自己是講"精神搖滾" （佩特拉spiritalis ） ，它在人的字在無形地永遠伴隨著以色列人在其journeyings ，並提供他們一種精神噴泉的水域。 According to this explanation the copula would here retain its meaning "to be".根據這一解釋，本田將在這裡保留它的意思是"能" 。 A nearer approach to a parallel with the words of Institution is found apparently in the so-called "sacramental expressions": "Hoc est pactum meum" (Genesis 17:10), and "est enim Phase Domini" (Exodus 12:11).較近期內方式，以同向平行的話，機構是發現顯然是在所謂的"聖事表達" ： "專案預計參加合同meum " （創17:10 ） ，和"無害單一相多米尼" （出埃及記12時11分） 。 It is well known how Zwingli by a clever manipulation of the latter phrase succeeded in one day in winning over to his interpretation the entire Catholic population of Zurich.這是人所共知的，如何zwingli由一個聰明的操縱生硬成功地在一天中贏得超過他的解釋，整個天主教人口的蘇黎世。 And yet it is clear that no parallelism can be discerned between the aforesaid expressions and the words of Institution; no real parallelism, because there is question of entirely different matters.然而，很明顯，沒有排比可以分辨與上述表現形式和字的機構，沒有真正的並行性，因為有問題，完全是兩回事。 Not even a verbal parallelism can be pointed out, since in both texts of the Old Testament the subject is a ceremony (circumcision in the first case, and the rite of the paschal lamb in the second), while the predicate involves a mere abstraction (covenant, Passover of the Lord).甚至不是一個口頭排比，可以指出的，因為在兩種文本的舊約聖經的主題是一個儀式（包皮環切術，在第一種情況下，與祭的逾越節羔羊，在第二次） ，而上游涉及一個純粹抽象（盟約，逾越節的主） 。 A more weighty consideration is this, that on closer investigation the copula est will be found to retain its proper meaning of "is" rather than "signifies".一個較具份量的考慮是，仔細調查了Copula的預測會被發現，以保持其適當"的涵義是" ，而不是"標誌" 。 For just as the circumcision not only signified the nature or object of the Divine covenant, but really was such, so the rite of the Paschal lamb was really the Passover (Phase) or Pasch, instead of its mere representation.為正如包皮環切術，不僅標誌著性質或對象的神聖盟約，但真的是這樣的，因此，成年禮的逾越節羔羊，真的是逾越節（第一期） ，或pasch ，而不是僅僅代表。 It is true that in certain Anglican circles it was formerly the custom to appeal to the supposed poverty of the Aramaic tongue, which was spoken by Christ in the company of His Apostles; for it was maintained that no word could be found in this language corresponding to the concept "to signify".這是事實，在某些聖公會圈子，它的前身是風俗呼籲假定貧困的阿拉姆語母語，這是講基督在該公司他的門徒，因為它仍是堅持認為，沒有任何字眼可以找到這種語言對應該概念" ，以象徵" 。 Yet, even prescinding from the fact that in the Aramaic tongue the copula est is usually omitted and that such an omission rather makes for its strict meaning of "to be", Cardinal Wiseman (Horæ Syriacæ, Rome, 1828, pp. 3-73) succeeded in producing no less than forty Syriac expressions conveying the meaning of "to signify" and thus effectually exploded the myth of the Semitic tongue's limited vocabulary.然而，即便prescinding從事實，即在阿拉姆語母語的Copula的預測通常是省略，並表示，這種疏忽，而使得其嚴格意義上的"必須" ，樞機懷斯曼（ horæ syriacæ ，羅馬， 1828年，第3-73 ）成功地製造了不少於四十敘利亞文表情傳達的意思" ，以象徵" ，從而有效地爆炸了神話閃舌頭有限的詞彙。
A second group of Sacramentarians, with Œcolampadius, shifted the diligently sought-for metaphor to the concept contained in the predicate corpus, giving to the latter the sense of "signum corporis", so that the words of Institution were to be rendered: "This is a sign [symbol, image, type] of my Body".第二組sacramentarians ， œcolampadius ，轉向孜孜以求為隱喻概念包含在始發語料庫，給後者意義上的" Signum的corporis " ，所以說的話都是事業單位應使說： "這是一個標誌[符號，圖像，型]我的身體" 。 Essentially tallying with the Zwinglian interpretation, this new meaning is equally untenable.基本上清點與zwinglian解釋，這個新的內涵，同樣是站不住腳的。 In all the languages of the world the expression "my body" designates a person's natural body, not the mere sign or symbol of that body.在所有世界的語言表達， "我的身體" ，指定一個人的自然體，而不是僅僅標誌或符號，即身體。 True it is that the Scriptural words "Body of Christ" not infrequently have the meaning of "Church", which is called the mystical Body of Christ, a figure easily and always discernible as such from the text or context (cf. Colossians 1:24).真正的，那就是聖經的話： "基督的身體" ，不偶爾有所指的"教會" ，這是所謂的神秘的基督的身體，這個數字容易，永遠可以辨別的，因為這種從文本或背景（參見歌羅西書1 ： 24 ） 。 This mystical sense, however, is impossible in the words of Institution, for the simple reason that Christ did not give the Apostles His Church to eat, but His Body, and that "body and blood", by reason of their real and logical association, cannot be separated from one another, and hence are all the less susceptible of a figurative use.這個神秘的感覺，不過，是不可能在這個字的機構，原因很簡單，即基督沒有給他的使徒教會吃飯，但他的身體，並表示， "身體和鮮血" ，因為其實質和邏輯協會，不能分割，其中，因此都是不易一個形象化的使用。 The case would be different if the reading were: "This is the bread of my Body, the wine of my Blood".情況會有所不同，如果讀的是： "這是麵包的我的身體，酒，我的血" 。 In order to prove at least this much, that the contents of the Chalice are merely wine and, consequently, a mere sign of the Blood, Protestants have recourse to the text of St. Matthew, who relates that Christ, after the completion of the Last Supper, declared: "I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine [genimen vitis]" (Matthew 26:29).為了證明至少有這麼多的，即內容的chalice只是葡萄酒，因此，僅僅簽署的血液，新教徒訴諸文聖馬太，他表示，基督，完成後，該最後的晚餐，宣布： "我不會喝酒，從今以後這個果實的藤蔓[ genimen葡萄] " （馬太26:29 ） 。 It is to be noted that St. Luke (22:18 sqq.), who is chronologically more exact, places these words of Christ before his account of the Institution, and that the true Blood of Christ may with right still be called (consecrated) wine, on the one hand, because the Blood was partaken of after the manner in which wine is drunk and, on the other, because the Blood continues to exist under the outward appearances of the wine.這是值得注意的是聖路加（ 22時18分sqq ） ，他們是在時間上更確切的說，地方的這些基督的話之前，他的戶口該機構的，並認為真正的血液基督的，可與權利仍然被稱為（ consecrated ）美酒，一方面，因為血液是partaken後以何種方式在酒是喝醉了，另一方面，因為血液將繼續存在下外觀的酒。 In its multifarious wanderings from the old beaten path being consistently forced with the denial of Christ's Divinity to abandon faith in the Real Presence, also, modern criticism seeks to account for the text along other lines.在其五花八門的wanderings從因循守舊，不思進取，始終被強迫與否定基督的神性放棄信仰，在現實的存在，同時，現代批評旨在佔文沿其他路線。 With utter arbitrariness, doubting whether the words of Institution originated from the mouth of Christ, it traces them to St. Paul as their author, in whose ardent soul something original supposedly mingled with his subjective reflections on the value attached to "Body" and on the "repetition of the Eucharistic banquet".以極大的隨意性，懷疑的話院校源自口基督的，它的痕跡，他們在聖保羅，因為他們的作者，在他們殷切的靈魂，一些原來理應相互交融，其主觀思考的價值，重視"身體"與對"重複的聖體聖事的宴會" 。 From this troubled fountain-head the words of Institution first found their way into the Gospel of St, Luke and then, by way of addition, were woven into the texts of St. Matthew and St. Mark.從這個多災多難的噴泉頭的話，機構先發現他們自己的方式來福音聖，盧克，然後透過另外，被編入文本的聖馬修和聖馬克。 It stands to reason that the latter assertion is nothing more than a wholly unwarrantable conjecture, which may be passed over as gratuitously as it was advanced.這是合乎道理的，後者斷言完全是一個全unwarrantable猜想，這可能是通過以上為無償，因為它是先進的。 It is, moreover, essentially untrue that the value attached to the Sacrifice and the repetition of the Lord's Supper are mere reflections of St. Paul, since Christ attached a sacrificial value to His Death (cf. Mark 10:45) and celebrated His Eucharistic Supper in connection with the Jewish Passover, which itself had to be repeated every year.而且，基本上是不真實的表示，價值附著在犧牲和重複主的晚餐，只是思考的聖保羅，因為基督是重視祭祀的價值在其死亡後（參見馬克10:45 ） ，並慶祝他的聖體聖事晚飯涉嫌與猶太逾越節的，其本身就已經被反复年年 As regards the interpretation of the words of Institution, there are at present three modern explanations contending for supremacy - the symbolical, the parabolical, and the eschatological.至於一詞的解釋的機構，目前有三種現代的解釋，爭創優勢-具有象徵意義， p arabolical和e schatological。 According to the symbolical interpretation, corpus is supposed to designate the Church as the mystical Body and sanguis the New Testament.根據這項具有象徵意義的詮釋，語料庫是指定教會了神秘的身體和血，新約聖經。 We have already rejected this last meaning as impossible.我們已經拒絕了這最後的涵義是不可能的。 For is it the Church that is eaten and the New Testament that is drunk?為的是它教會就是吃和新約聖經是喝醉了嗎？ Did St. Paul brand the partaking of the Church and of the New Testament as a heinous offense committed against the Body and Blood of Christ?當時聖保祿品牌partaking的教會和新約聖經作為一個十惡不赦的罪，對人體和血液基督？ The case is not much better in regard to the parabolical interpretation, which would discern in the pouring out of the wine a mere parable of the shedding of the Blood on the Cross.案件並非好得多至於以parabolical解釋，這將看出，在澆注出來的葡萄酒只佔寓言卸下的血在十字架上。 This again is a purely arbitrary explanation, an invention, unsupported by any objective foundation.這又是一個純粹的任意解釋，一項發明，沒有任何客觀基礎。 Then, too, it would follow from analogy, that the breaking of the bread was a parable of the slaying of Christ's Body, a meaning utterly inconceivable.屆時，也將跟進，從比喻，即打破了麵包的是一個寓言：殺害基督身體的意思，完全不可想像的。 Rising as it were out of a dense fog and laboring to take on a definite form, the incomplete eschatological explanation would make the Eucharist a mere anticipation of the future heavenly banquet.上升的，因為這都是出於一種迷霧和勞動承擔一定的形式，不完整eschatological解釋將使聖體聖事只是預期未來天朝宴會。 Supposing the truth of the Real Presence, this consideration might be open to discussion, inasmuch as the partaking of the Bread of Angels is really the foretaste of eternal beatitude and the anticipated transformation of earth into heaven.假設真理的真實存在，這樣的考慮或許值得商榷，因為該partaking的麵包天使真的是預示著永恆beatitude及預期轉化成地球上的天堂。 But as implying mere symbolical anticipation of heaven and a meaningless manipulation of unconsecrated bread and wine the eschatological interpretation is diametrically opposed to the text and finds not the slightest support in the life and character of Christ.但由於暗示僅僅具有象徵意義，預計到天堂和毫無意義的操縱unconsecrated麵包和葡萄酒eschatological解釋是截然相反的，以文字稿和認定，沒有絲毫的支持，在生活和性格的喊聲。
B. Proof from Tradition乙證明從傳統
As for the cogency of the argument from tradition, this historical fact is of decided significance, namely, that the dogma of the Real Presence remained, properly speaking, unmolested down to the time of the heretic Berengarius of Tours (d. 1088), and so could claim even at that time the uninterrupted possession of ten centuries.對於中肯的說法，從傳統，這一歷史事實是決定意義，即這教條的真實存在，依然存在，妥善地說， unmolested回落到時間的邪教berengarius旅行團（四1088 ） ，所以可以聲稱即使在那個時候不間斷地藏十幾個世紀。 In the course of the dogma's history there arose in general three great Eucharistic controversies, the first of which, begun by Paschasius Radbertus, in the ninth century, scarcely extended beyond the limits of his audience and concerned itself solely with the philosophical question, whether the Eucharistic Body of Christ is identical with the natural Body He had in Palestine and now has in heaven.在這個過程中的教條的歷史，因而產生了在一般三個偉大聖體聖事的爭議，其中第一項，一開始paschasius拉得伯土，在第九世紀，幾乎超出了限度，他的觀眾和關注純粹的哲學問題，有否聖體聖事的基督的身體是一致的，與天然的身體，他在巴勒斯坦和現在已經在天上。 Such a numerical identity could well have been denied by Ratramnus, Rabanus Maurus, Ratherius, Lanfranc, and others, since even nowadays a true, though accidental, distinction between the sacramental and the natural condition of Christ's Body must be rigorously maintained.這樣一個數值身份很可能已被剝奪，由ratramnus ，巴努毛如斯， ratherius ，朗弗朗，和其他人，因為即使現在一個真正的，雖然偶然的，區分聖事和自然條件的基督身體必須嚴格保持下去。 The first occasion for an official procedure on the part of the Church was offered when Berengarius of Tours, influenced by the writings of Scotus Eriugena (d. about 884), the first opponent of the Real Presence, rejected both the latter truth and that of Transubstantiation.第一次進行正式程序對部分教會開辦的時候， berengarius的旅行團，受著作scotus eriugena （四約884 ） ，第一次對方的真實存在，否定了後兩個真理，即陷於變體說。 He repaired, however, the public scandal he had given by a sincere retractation made in the presence of Pope Gregory VII at a synod held in Rome in 1079, and died reconciled to the Church.他修理，不過，公眾的醜聞，他所給予的真誠收回取得了在場的羅馬教皇格雷戈里七，在主教在羅馬舉行的1079個，死亡調和送到教堂。 The third and the sharpest controversy was that opened by the Reformation in the sixteenth century, in regard to which it must be remarked that Luther was the only one among the Reformers who still clung to the old Catholic doctrine, and, though subjecting it to manifold misrepresentations, defended it most tenaciously.第三和尖銳爭議的是，開幕式由改造，在16世紀中，關於它必須表示，路德是唯一一位改革者，他們仍醉心於舊天主教教義，而且，雖然受它形失實的陳述，辯護，它最頑強。 He was diametrically opposed by Zwingli of Zurich, who, as was seen above, reduced the Eucharist to an empty, meaningless symbol.他是截然相反的，由zwingli蘇黎世，他作為被視為以上，減少了聖體聖事，以一個空洞的，毫無意義的象徵。 Having gained over to his views such friendly contemporary partisans as Carlstadt, Bucer, and Œcolampadius, he later on secured influential allies in the Arminians, Mennonites, Socinians, and Anglicans, and even today the rationalistic conception of the doctrine of the Lord's Supper does not differ substantially from that of the Zwinglians.分清了給他的意見，這種友好當代黨派作為carlstadt ，布策爾，並œcolampadius ，後來他就擔保有影響力的盟友，在arminians ，門諾教派， socinians ，並教教徒，即使在今天的理性主義觀，中庸主的晚餐並不很大差別，從表示，在該zwinglians 。 In the meantime, at Geneva, Calvin was cleverly seeking to bring about a compromise between the extremes of the Lutheran literal and the Zwinglian figurative interpretations, by suggesting instead of the substantial presence in one case or the merely symbolical in the other, a certain mean, ie "dynamic", presence, which consists essentially in this, that at the moment of reception, the efficacy of Christ's Body and Blood is communicated from heaven to the souls of the predestined and spiritually nourishes them.在此同時，在日內瓦，卡爾文被巧妙地尋求實現一個折衷兩個極端之間路德直譯和zwinglian形象化表述，暗示而不是大量存在，在一個案例中，或僅僅是象徵意義，在另一方面，在一定意味著，即"動態" ，在場的，其中主要是在這方面，目前的接待，效能的基督身體和血液，是溝通從天上到心靈的命中註定和精神滋養。 Thanks to Melanchthon's pernicious and dishonest double-dealing, this attractive intermediary position of Calvin made such an impression even in Lutheran circles that it was not until the Formula of Concord in 1577 that the "crypto-Calvinistic venom" was successfully rejected from the body of Lutheran doctrine.感謝梅蘭希頓的流毒和不誠實的兩面派，這具吸引力的中介地位卡爾文提出這樣一個印象，即使在路德教會人士表示，只是到了一級方程式的康科德在1577年說， "隱calvinistic蛇毒" ，成功地拒絕了，從身體的路德教會的教義。 The Council of Trent met these widely divergent errors of the Reformation with the dogmatic definition, that the God-man is "truly, really, and substantially" present under the appearances of bread and wine, purposely intending thereby to oppose the expression vere to Zwingli's signum, realiter to Œcolampadius's figura, and essentialiter to Calvin's virtus (Sess. XIII, can. i).安理會的遄達會見了這些大相徑庭的錯誤，改革與教條式的定義，即神人，是"真的，真的，並大幅度" ，目前下露面的麵包和酒，故意不打算從而反對表達真正地向zwingli的Signum的， realiter以œcolampadius的figura ， essentialiter以卡爾文的virtus （ sess.十三，可我） 。 And this teaching of the Council of Trent has ever been and is now the unwavering position of the whole of Catholic Christendom.這種教學安理會的遄達從未有人，並正以堅定的立場與整個天主教基督教。
As regards the doctrine of the Fathers, it is not possible in the present article to multiply patristic texts, which are usually characterized by wonderful beauty and clearness.至於學說的父親，是不可能在目前的文章以倍數計教父的內容，它們通常是由奇妙的美麗和潔淨度。 Suffice it to say that, besides the Didache (ix, x, xiv), the most ancient Fathers, as Ignatius (Ad. Smyrn., vii; Ad. Ephes., xx; Ad. Philad., iv), Justin (Apol., I, lxvi), Irenæus (Adv. Hær., IV, xvii, 5; IV, xviii, 4; V, ii, 2), Tertullian (De resurrect. carn., viii; De pudic., ix; De orat., xix; De bapt., xvi), and Cyprian (De orat. dom., xviii; De lapsis, xvi), attest without the slightest shadow of a misunderstanding what is the faith of the Church, while later patristic theology bears witness to the dogma in terms that approach exaggeration, as Gregory of Nyssa (Orat. catech., xxxvii), Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. myst., iv, 2 sqq.), and especially the Doctor of the Eucharist, Chrysostom [Hom.可以說，除了didache （第九，第十，第十四條） ，最古老的父親，作為伊格（ ad. smyrn ，七;專案。 ephes ，某某;專案。 philad ，四） ，賈斯汀（ apol ，我lxvi ） ， irenæus （ adv. hær ，四，第十七章， 5條;四，十八， 4 ;五，二， 2 ） ，戴爾都良（德復活。 carn ，第八節;德pudic ，第九;德orat ，第19條;德bapt ，十六） ，塞浦路斯（德orat 。 DOM的，第十八;德lapsis ，第十六章） ，證明了，沒有絲毫的陰影，一場誤會什麼是信仰的教堂，而後來教父神學熊證人向教條而言，這種做法毫不誇張地說，作為格雷戈里的nyssa （ orat. catech ，三十七） ，西里爾耶路撒冷（ catech.神秘島，四， 2 sqq ） ，尤其是醫生的聖體聖事，金口[磡。 lxxxii (lxxxiii), in Matt., 1 sqq.; Hom. lxxxii （ lxxxiii ） ，在馬特， 1 sqq ;磡。 xlvi, in Joan., 2 sqq.; Hom.四十六，在鄧務滋女士， 2 sqq ;磡。 xxiv, in I Cor., 1 sqq.; Hom.二十四，在I肺心病， 1 sqq ;磡。 ix, de pœnit., 1], to whom may be added the Latin Fathers, Hilary (De Trinit., VIII, iv, 13) and Ambrose (De myst., viii, 49; ix, 51 sq.).九，德pœnit ， 1 ] ，可能會被加上了拉丁語父親，希拉里（德trinit ，八，四， 13 ） ，劉漢銓（德神秘島，八， 49個;第九， 51平方） 。 Concerning the Syriac Fathers see Th.關於敘利亞文的父親見次。 Lamy "De Syrorum fide in re eucharisticâ" (Louvain, 1859).拉米在"德syrorum真正的轉口eucharisticâ " （魯汶， 1859 ） 。
The position held by St. Augustine is at present the subject of a spirited controversy, since the adversaries of the Church rather confidently maintain that he favored their side of the question in that he was an out-and-out "Symbolist".所任職位的聖奧古斯丁是目前主題一個意氣風發爭議，但由於對手的教會，而不是信心十足地認為，他更傾向於自己一方的問題，在這方面他是一個地地道道的"象徵" 。 In the opinion of Loofs ("Dogmengeschichte", 4th ed., Halle, 1906, p. 409), St. Augustine never gives, the "reception of the true Body and Blood of Christ" a thought; and this view Ad.在民意的loofs （ " dogmengeschichte " ，第四版，哈雷， 1906年，頁409 ） ，聖奧古斯丁絕不放棄的， "接待的真正身體和血的基督"的思路;這查看廣告。 Harnack (Dogmengeschichte, 3rd ed., Freiburg, 1897, III, 148) emphasizes when he declares that St. Augustine "undoubtedly was one in this respect with the so-called pre-Reformation and with Zwingli".的Harnack （ dogmengeschichte ，第3版，弗賴堡， 1897年，三， 148 ）強調，當他宣稱，聖奧古斯丁的" ，無疑是其中一個，在這方面同所謂的學前教育改革與zwingli " 。 Against this rather hasty conclusion Catholics first of all advance the undoubted fact that Augustine demanded that Divine worship should be rendered to the Eucharistic Flesh (In Ps. xxxiii, enarr., i, 10), and declared that at the Last Supper "Christ held and carried Himself in His own hands" (In Ps. xcviii, n. 9).針對此，而不是草率的結論天主教徒首先，大家事先毫無疑問的事實，奧古斯丁要求神崇拜，應該給予聖體肉（在PS 。三十三， enarr 。來說，我10 ） ，並宣稱，在最後的晚餐"基督舉行並進行了本人在自己的手中" （在PS 。 xcviii ， 12月31日9 ） 。 They insist, and rightly so, that it is not fair to separate this great Doctor's teaching concerning the Eucharist from his doctrine of the Holy Sacrifice, since he clearly and unmistakably asserts that the true Body and Blood are offered in the Holy Mass. The variety of extreme views just mentioned requires that an attempt be made at a reasonable and unbiased explanation, whose verification is to be sought for and found in the acknowledged fact that a gradual process of development took place in the mind of St. Augustine.他們堅持，這是正確的話，那是不公平的，以單獨的這個偉大的醫生對他的教誨有關聖體聖事，從他的學說的神聖犧牲，因為他明確無誤地宣稱，真正的身體和血者在神聖麻省品種極端的意見，剛才提到的要求，試圖作出一個合理和公正的解釋，聯合國的核查，是為了尋求和發現，在承認這樣一個事實，即漸進的發展過程，發生在他心中的聖奧古斯丁。 No one will deny that certain expressions occur in Augustine as forcibly realistic as those of Tertullian and Cyprian or of his intimate literary friends, Ambrose, Optatus of Mileve, Hilary, and Chrysostom.沒有人會否認某些詞句出現在奧古斯丁作為強行切實可行，因為這些戴爾都良和塞浦路斯或他的體內文學的朋友，劉漢銓， optatus的mileve ，希拉里，並金口。 On the other hand, it is beyond question that, owing to the determining influence of Origen and the Platonic philosophy, which, as is well known, attached but slight value to visible matter and the sensible phenomena of the world, Augustine did not refer what was properly real (res) in the Blessed Sacrament to the Flesh of Christ (caro), but transferred it to the quickening principle (spiritus), ie to the effects produced by a worthy Communion.在另一方面，這是毫無疑問的是，由於決定性的影響淵源和柏拉圖哲學，其中，因為是眾所周知的，但附加價值輕微，以有形此事，並有理智的現象世界，奧古斯丁沒有提到什麼是恰當的實數（第） ，在聖體，以耶穌的身體（卡羅） ，但它轉移到加快原則（ spiritus ） ，即所產生的效果由一個值得共融。 A logical consequence of this was that he allowed to caro, as the vehicle and antitype of res, not indeed a mere symbolical worth, but at best a transitory, intermediary, and subordinate worth (signum), and placed the Flesh and Blood of Christ, present under the appearances (figuræ) of bread and wine, in too decided an opposition to His natural, historical Body.合乎邏輯的後果，這是他讓卡羅，由於車輛和antitype定案，而不是確實是一個純粹的象徵性價值，但充其量只是一個過渡，中介和下級總值（ Signum的） ，並置於血肉聯繫的基督，目前下露面（ figuræ ）的麵包和酒，在太決定反對他的自然，歷史的機構。 Since Augustine was a strenuous defender of personal co-operation and effort in the work of salvation and an enemy to mere mechanical activity and superstitious routine, he omitted insisting upon a lively faith in the real personality of Jesus in the Eucharist, and called attention to the spiritual efficiency of the Flesh of Christ instead.由於奧古斯丁是一個艱苦的維護者個人的合作和努力，在各項工作中的救亡和敵人，而非一般機械活動和迷信例行公事，但他沒有堅持一個生動的信仰在現實人格的耶穌在聖體聖事，並呼籲注意精神文明效率耶穌的身體。 His mental vision was fixed, not so much upon the saving caro, as upon the spiritus, which alone possessed worth.他的精神視野是固定的，而不是這麼多後，節省卡羅，因為當spiritus ，其中僅擁有價值。 Nevertheless a turning-point occurred in his life.然而一個轉折點發生在他的生命。 The conflict with Pelagianism and the diligent perusal of Chrysostom freed him from the bondage of Platonism, and he thenceforth attached to caro a separate, individual value independent of that of spiritus, going so far, in fact, as to maintain too strongly that the Communion of children was absolutely necessary to salvation.衝突與佩拉糾學派和勤於閱讀金口釋放了他的枷鎖柏拉圖的，他此後的重視卡羅一個單獨的，個體價值獨立的，即spiritus ，竟然有那麼遠，其實，以維持太強烈認為共融兒童是絕對必要的，以救贖。 If, moreover, the reader finds in some of the other Fathers difficulties, obscurities, and a certain inaccuracy of expression, this may be explained on three general grounds:此外，如果讀者發現，在其他一些困難的父親， obscurities ，一定不準確的表達，這也許可以解釋三個理由：
because of the peace and security there is in their possession of the Church's truth, whence resulted a certain want of accuracy in their terminology; because of the strictness with which the Discipline of the Secret, expressly concerned with the Holy Eucharist, was maintained in the East until the end of the fifth, in the West down to the middle of the sixth century; because of the preference of many Fathers for the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, which was especially in vogue in the Alexandrian School (Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Cyril), but which found a salutary counterpoise in the emphasis laid on the literal interpretation by the School of Antioch (Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret).由於對那裡的和平與安全是其擁有的該教會的真理，何時會有造成一定要準確，在他們的術語;由於嚴加與紀律的秘密，明文關注聖體聖事，一直維持在東到年底第五，在西部地區到中東的第六個世紀，由於偏愛的很多父親為寓言的解釋經文，這是特別盛行，在亞歷山大學校（克萊門特的亞歷山德里亞，淵源，西里爾） ，但其中發現了一種良性counterpoise在重訂就字面解釋，由學校安提（西奧多的摩普綏提亞， theodoret ） 。 Since, however, the allegorical sense of the Alexandrians did not exclude the literal, but rather supposed it as a working basis, the realistic phraseology of Clement (Pæd., I, vi), of Origen (Contra Celsum VIII, xiii 32; Hom. ix, in Levit., x) and of Cyril (in Matt., xxvi, xxvii; Contra Nestor., IV, 5) concerning the Real Presence is readily accounted for.但是，由於該寓言意義上的alexandrians不排除字面，而是假定它作為一項工作的基礎上，實事求是用語，克萊門特（ pæd. ，我，六）的淵源（矛盾celsum八，十三，第32條;磡第九，在levit ， x ）和的西里爾（馬特，二十六，二十七;矛盾斯托爾，四，五）關於真實的存在是很容易交代。 (For the solution of patristic difficulties, see Pohle, "Dogmatik", 3rd ed., Paderborn, 1908, III, 209 sqq.) （為解決教父困難，見pohle ， " dogmatik " ，第3版，帕德博恩， 1908年，三， 209 sqq ） 。
The argument from tradition is supplemented and completed by the argument from prescription, which traces the constant belief in the dogma of the Real Presence through the Middle Ages back to the early Apostolic Church, and thus proves the anti-Eucharistic heresies to have been capricious novelties and violent ruptures of the true faith as handed down from the beginning.論據從傳統的補充，並完成了該說法，從處方，其中的痕跡，不斷的信仰是在教條的真實存在，通過中世紀回到剛才提到的使徒教會，從而證明了反聖體聖事的歪理邪說一直反复無常新奇和暴力破裂的真信仰作為傳世從一開始的。 Passing over the interval that has elapsed since the Reformation, as this period receives its entire character from the Council of Trent, we have for the time of the Reformation the important testimony of Luther (Wider etliche Rottengeister, 1532) for the fact that the whole of Christendom then believed in the Real Presence.擦身而過的區間表示，至今已改造，因為這一時期得到其整個性格從安理會的遄達，我們已為當時的改革重要的證詞路德（更廣泛etliche rottengeister ，第1532 ）的事實，那就是整的基督教則認為，在現實的存在。 And this firm, universal belief can be traced back uninterruptedly to Berengarius of Tours (d. 1088), in fact - omitting the sole exception of Scotus Eriugena - to Paschasius Radbertus (831).這堅定的，普遍的信仰，可以追溯到不間斷向berengarius旅行團（四1088 ） ，其實-省略唯一例外的s cotuse riugena- pa schasius拉得伯土（ 8 3 1）。 On these grounds, therefore, we may proudly maintain that the Church has been in legitimate possession of this dogma for fully eleven centuries.基於這些理由，因此，我們可以自豪地認為，教會一直在合法擁有的這個教條，為全面十一世紀。 When Photius started the Greek Schism in 869, he took over to his Church the inalienable treasure of the Catholic Eucharist, a treasure which the Greeks, in the negotiations for reunion at Lyons in 1274 and at Florence in 1439, could show to be still intact, and which they vigorously defended in the schismatical Synod of Jerusalem (1672) against the sordid machinations of the Calvinistic-minded Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople (1629).當photius開始對希臘裂，在869 ，他接過來，他教會不可剝奪的瑰寶，天主教聖體聖事，珍惜這希臘人，在談判中團聚，在里昂，在1274年，並於佛羅倫斯，在1439 ，可以查看被依然完好無損，他們大力辯護，在schismatical主教的耶路撒冷（ 1672 ）對齷齪的陰謀詭計的calvinistic志同道合西里爾lucar ，牧的君士坦丁堡（ 1629 ） 。 From this it follows conclusively that the Catholic dogma must be much older than the Eastern Schism under Photius.從這一點如下設想，天主教教條，要老得多，比東部裂下photius 。 In fact, even the Nestorians and Monophysites, who broke away from Rome in the fifth century, have, as is evident from their their literature and liturgical books, preserved their faith in the Eucharist as unwaveringly as the Greeks, and this in spite of the dogmatic difficulties which, on account of their denial of the hypostatic union, stood in the way of a clear and correct notion of the Real Presence.其實，就連nestorians和monophysites ，他們衝破了羅馬，在第五世紀，有作為，是顯而易見的，由他們自己的文學和禮儀書籍，保存自己的信仰在聖體聖事，毫不動搖地為希臘人，這儘管對教條式的困難，就到他們的否認了本質的聯盟，站在路的一個明確和正確的概念，真正的存在。 Therefore the Catholic dogma is at least as old as Nestorianism (AD 431).因此，天主教教條的是，至少年紀景教（公元431 ） 。 But is it not of even greater antiquity?但是，是不是更古老？ To decide this question one has only to examine the oldest Liturgies of the Mass, whose essential elements date back to the time of the Apostles (see articles on the various liturgies), to visit the Roman Catacombs, where Christ is shown as present in the Eucharistic food under the symbol of a fish (see EARLY SYMBOLS OF THE EUCHARIST), to decipher the famous Inscription of Abercius of the second century, which, though composed under the influence of the Discipline of the Secret, plainly attests the faith of that age.決定這個問題，只要看看歷史最悠久的liturgies的傳播，其基本要素可以追溯到當時的使徒（見文章，對各種liturgies ） ，參觀了羅馬窟裡，而基督顯示，目前在聖體聖事的食物下象徵魚（見早期符號的聖體聖事） ，以判斷當時著名的題詞abercius的公元二世紀，其中，雖然產生的影響下紀律的秘密，顯然證明了信仰的年齡。 And thus the argument from prescription carries us back to the dim and distant past and thence to the time of the Apostles, who in turn could have received their faith in the Real Presence from no one but Christ Himself.因此，從爭論的處方進行使我們倒退到暗淡和遙遠的過去，並從那裡來的時候，使徒們，他們又可以得到他們的信仰，在現實的存在，從沒有人，但基督自己。
II.二。 THE TOTALITY OF THE REAL PRESENCE全部真實的存在
In order to forestall at the very outset, the unworthy notion, that in the Eucharist we receive merely the Body and merely the Blood of Christ but not Christ in His entirety, the Council of Trent defined the Real Presence to be such as to include with Christ's Body and His Soul and Divinity as well.為了避免在一開始，卑微的概念，即在聖體聖事，我們只是得到身體和純粹的血，基督，而不是基督在他的全部內容，安理會的遄達界定真正的存在，這樣，以包括與基督的身體與他的靈魂和神性，以及。 A strictly logical conclusion from the words of promise: "he that eateth me the same also shall live by me", this Totality of Presence was also the constant property of tradition, which characterized the partaking of separated parts of the Savior as a sarcophagy (flesh-eating) altogether derogatory to God.嚴格的合乎邏輯的結論，從字的諾言： "他說， eateth我一樣，也將生活由我" ，這是整體的存在，也不斷財產的傳統，特點partaking失散零件的救世主，作為一個sarcophagy （俗稱食肉）總共貶至神。 Although the separation of the Body, Blood, Soul, and Logos, is, absolutely speaking, within the almighty power of God, yet then actual inseparability is firmly established by the dogma of the indissolubility of the hypostatic union of Christ's Divinity and Humanity.雖然分離的身體，血液，靈魂和標誌，是絕對地說，在全能的上帝的力量，但當時實際的不可分離性，是牢固確立了由教條的indissolubility的本質聯盟基督的神性和人性。 In case the Apostles had celebrated the Lord's Supper during the triduum mortis (the time during which Christ's Body was in the tomb), when a real separation took place between the constitutive elements of Christ, there would have been really present in the Sacred Host only, the bloodless, inanimate Body of Christ as it lay in tomb, and in the Chalice only the Blood separated from His Body and absorbed by the earth as it was shed, both the Body and the Blood, however, hypostatically united to His Divinity, while His Soul, which sojourned in Limbo, would have remained entirely excluded from the Eucharistic presence.在案件使徒們慶祝了主的晚餐期間triduum mortis （時間，在基督的屍體是在墓穴中） ，當一個真正的分離之間發生構成要件的基督，本來就不會有真正目前，在神聖的主辦單位只，不流血，無生命基督的身體，因為它臥在墓穴中，並在chalice只有血液分離，從他的身體和吸納由地球，因為這是大棚，無論是身體和血液，但是， hypostatically團結，以他的神性，而他的靈魂，其中sojourned在蓮步，一直處於完全排除在聖體聖事的存在。 This unreal, though not impossible, hypothesis, is well calculated to throw light upon the essential difference designated by the Council of Trent (Sess, XIII, c. iii), between the meanings of the words ex vi verborum and per concomitantiam.這個虛幻的，但不是不可能的，假設的，是好計算，以揭示後，本質上的區別指定由理事會的遄達（ sess ，十三，丙三） ，與意義的話當然六verborum和每concomitantiam 。 By virtue of the words of consecration, or ex vi verborum, that only is made present which is expressed by the words of Institution, namely the Body and the Blood of Christ.憑藉話consecration ，或前六verborum ，這不僅是取得了目前的是表達的話，機構，即身體和血液裡的喊聲。 But by reason of a natural concomitance (per concomitantiam), there becomes simultaneously present all that which is physically inseparable from the parts just named, and which must, from a natural connection with them, always be their accompaniment.