Transubstantiation, Real Presence陷於變體說,真實的存在

General Information 一般資料

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 Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
Other interpretations of the Eucharist were emphasized at the time of the Reformation.其他解釋的聖體聖事的人強調,在時間的改革。

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 ) 。


General Information 一般資料

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。

Transubstantiation, Real Presence陷於變體說,真實的存在

Advanced Information 先進的信息

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 consubstantiation

General Information 一般資料

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


Advanced Information 先進的信息

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

The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist真正存在的基督聖體聖事

Catholic Information 天主教資訊

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,


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。


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。


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.而是因為一種自然concomitance (每concomitantiam ) ,因此成為同時,目前所有的,是身體不可分割的部分,剛剛任命的,並且必須從自然方面結合起來,始終是他們伴奏。 Now, the glorified Christ, Who "dieth now no more" (Romans 6:9) has an animate Body through whose veins courses His life's Blood under the vivifying influence of soul.現在,歌頌基督的人" dieth現在不會再有" (羅馬書6時09分)有一個動畫機構通過其靜脈課程,他的生命的血液下生機影響力的靈魂。 Consequently, together with His Body and Blood and Soul, His whole Humanity also, and, by virtue of the hypostatic union, His Divinity, ie Christ whole and entire, must be present.因此,再加上他的身體和血液和靈魂,他的整個人類也,並憑藉這個本質的聯盟,他的神性,即基督整個全,必須在場。 Hence Christ is present in the sacrament with His Flesh and Blood, Body and Soul, Humanity and Divinity.因此,基督是目前在聖與他的血肉,身體與靈魂,人性和神性。

This general and fundamental principle, which entirely abstracts from the duality of the species, must, nevertheless, be extended to each of the species of bread and wine.這個一般和基本原則,這完全是文摘從偶的物種,必須儘管如此,擴展到每個品種的麵包和酒。 For we do not receive in the Sacred Host one part of Christ and in the Chalice the other, as though our reception of the totality depended upon our partaking of both forms; on the contrary, under the appearance of bread alone, as well as under the appearance of wine alone, we receive Christ whole and entire (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, can. iii).因為我們不接受,在神聖的東道主之一的一部分,基督和在chalice另外,好像我們接待的全部取決於我們partaking的兩種形式;反過來說,根據外觀單靠麵包,並且根據外觀的葡萄酒單,我們收到基督整體整(參見理事會遄, sess第十三,可以第三節) 。 This, the only reasonable conception, finds its Scriptural verification in the fact, that St. Paul (1 Corinthians 11:27, 29) attaches the same guilt "of the body and the blood of the Lord" to the unworthy "eating or drinking", understood in a disjunctive sense, as he does to "eating and drinking", understood in a copulative sense.對此,唯一合理的概念,認定其聖經核查事實,即聖保祿(哥林多前書11:27 , 29 )重視同罪責"的身體和血液中的上帝" ,到卑微的"吃或喝" ,相互理解,在一個轉折意義上說,就要像他那樣,以"大吃大喝" ,相互理解,在一個並列常識。 The traditional foundation for this is to be found in the testimony of the Fathers and of the Church's liturgy, according to which the glorified Savior can be present on our altars only in His totality and integrity, and not divided into parts or distorted to the form of a monstrosity.傳統的基礎,這是值得發現的證詞,父親和該教會的禮儀中,其中顯示歌頌救星,可現在我們的神壇,只有在他的總體性和完整性,而不是分成部分,或者說扭曲的形式一個怪物。 It follows, therefore, that supreme adoration is separately due to the Sacred Host and to the consecrated contents of the Chalice.因此,因此,最高人民法院崇拜,是分別因神聖所在,並給consecrated內容的chalice 。 On this last truth are based especially the permissibility and intrinsic propriety of Communion only under one kind for the laity and for priests not celebrating Mass (see COMMUNION UNDER BOTH KINDS).就最後這一點真理,是基於尤其是允許性和內在的正當性共融的,只有在一類為俗人和牧師沒有慶祝質量(見共融下兩種) 。 But in particularizing upon the dogma, we are naturally led to the further truth, that, at least after the actual division of either Species into parts, Christ is present in each part in His full and entire essence.但在particularizing當教條,我們自然導致進一步的真理,即,至少在以後的具體分工,無論是品種的部分,基督是,目前在每一個部分,在充分肯定和整個本質。 If the Sacred Host be broken into pieces or if the consecrated Chalice be drunk in small quantities, Christ in His entirety is present in each particle and in each drop.如果神聖東道國必須分割成塊,或如果consecrated chalice喝醉了,在小批量,基督在他的全部內容,是當前在每個粒子,並在每下降。 By the restrictive clause, separatione factâ the Council of Trent (Sess. XIII, can. iii) rightly raised this truth to the dignity of a dogma.由限制性條款, separatione factâ安理會的遄達( sess.十三,可以第三節)正確地提出了這個真理,以尊嚴的教條。 While from Scripture we may only judge it improbable that Christ consecrated separately each particle of the bread He had broken, we know with certainty, on the other hand, that He blessed the entire contents of the Chalice and then gave it to His disciples to be partaken of distributively (cf. Matthew 26:27 sq.; Mark 14:23).而從經文中,我們只可以判斷它難以琢磨的是基督consecrated分開,每個粒子的麵包,他打破了,我們肯定地知道,在另一方面,他祝福所有內容的chalice然後再去給他的弟子也被partaken的distributively (參見馬修26:27平方米;馬克14時23分) 。 It is only on the basis of the Tridentine dogma that we can understand how Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. myst. v, n. 21) obliged communicants to observe the most scrupulous care in conveying the Sacred Host to their mouths, so that not even "a crumb, more precious than gold or jewels", might fall from their hands to the ground; how Cæsarius of Arles taught that there is "just as much in the small fragment as in the whole"; how the different liturgies assert the abiding integrity of the "indivisible Lamb", in spite of the "division of the Host"; and, finally, how in actual practice the faithful partook of the broken particles of the Sacred Host and drank in common from the same cup.這是只有在此基礎上的德律但丁的教條,我們可以了解如何西里爾耶路撒冷( catech.神秘島。五, 12月21日)不得不communicants遵守最嚴格認真的關懷傳達的神聖所在,以自己的嘴巴,使連"膠粉,更為珍貴,比黃金或寶藏" ,可能屬於從他們手中到地面;如何cæsarius的阿爾勒教授說,有"正如許多小片段,因為在整個" ;有何不同liturgies都聲稱其守法完整的"不可分割的羔羊" ,雖然實施了"科所在" ,以及最後如何在實踐中忠實partook的破碎顆粒的神聖所在,並喝了,在共同來自同一杯。

While the three foregoing theses contain dogmas of faith, there is a fourth proposition which is merely a theological conclusion, namely, that even before the actual division of the Species, Christ is present wholly and entirely in each particle of the still unbroken Host and in each drop of the collective contents of the Chalice.而前述三個論斷包含教條的信仰,還有第四命題,而只是一個神學結論,即,即使在具體分工種,基督是當前全,而且完全在每個粒子的仍是綿延不絕的東道國,並在每次一滴集體內容的chalice 。 For were not Christ present in His entire Personality in every single particle of the Eucharistic Species even before their division took place, we should be forced to conclude that it is the process of dividing which brings about the Totality of Presence, whereas according to the teaching of the Church the operative cause of the Real and Total Presence is to be found in Transubstantiation alone.對於沒有基督的,目前在他的整個人格,每一個單粒子的聖體聖事的物種,甚至前部發生,我們應該被迫作出結論,認為它是個過程的劃分,實現了總體性的存在,而根據教學該教會的執行造成了真正的和完全的存在就是要找到陷於變體說。 No doubt this last conclusion directs the attention of philosophical and scientific inquiry to a mode of existence peculiar to the Eucharistic Body, which is contrary to the ordinary laws of experience.毫無疑問,這個問題的最後結論,指示注意哲學和科學探究一個模式存在的特有的聖體聖事的身體,這是違反一般規律的經驗。 It is, indeed, one of those sublime mysteries, concerning which speculative theology attempts to offer various solutions [see below under (5)].它確實是,其中一人的崇高之謎,其中涉及投機神學的嘗試,提供不同的解決方案[見下文( 5 ) ] 。


Before proving dogmatically the fact of the substantial change here under consideration, we must first outline its history and nature.前教條主義地證明事實的重大變動,這裡正在審議的,我們必須先概述其歷史與自然的統一。

(a) The scientific development of the concept of Transubstantiation can hardly be said to be a product of the Greeks, who did not get beyond its more general notes; rather, it is the remarkable contribution of the Latin theologians, who were stimulated to work it out in complete logical form by the three Eucharistic controversies mentioned above, The term transubstantiation seems to have been first used by Hildebert of Tours (about 1079). (一)科學理念的發展陷於變體說,很難說是一個產品的希臘人,他們不應該超越它較一般債券;相反,這是了不起的貢獻的拉丁語神學家,人激工作出完整的邏輯形式,由三位聖體聖事的爭議,如上所述,任期陷於變體說,似乎已先用伊爾德貝旅行團(約1079 ) 。 His encouraging example was soon followed by other theologians, as Stephen of Autun (d. 1139), Gaufred (1188), and Peter of Blois (d. about 1200), whereupon several ecumenical councils also adopted this significant expression, as the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215), and the Council of Lyons (1274), in the profession of faith of the Greek Emperor Michael Palæologus.他的令人鼓舞的例子是很快,其次是其他神學家,斯蒂芬的歐坦(四1139 ) , gaufred ( 1188 ) ,和彼得的blois (四約1200 ) ,在這種情況下幾合一議會還通過了這項重大的表達,作為第四屆理事會該lateran ( 1215年) ,以及安理會的里昂( 1274 ) ,在法律界的信仰希臘皇帝邁克爾palæologus 。 The Council of Trent (Sess. XIII, cap. iv; can. ii) not only accepted as an inheritance of faith the truth contained in the idea, but authoritatively confirmed the "aptitude of the term" to express most strikingly the legitimately developed doctrinal concept.安理會的遄達( sess.第十三章第四節;可以第二節) ,不僅接受了作為遺產的信仰真理包含在這一想法,但權威地證實了"性向任期" ,以表達最引人注目的合法開發理論概念。 In a closer logical analysis of Transubstantiation, we find the first and fundamental notion to be that of conversion, which may be defined as "the transition of one thing into another in some aspect of being".在一個緊密的邏輯分析陷於變體說,我們發現的第一和基本的概念,以這樣的轉換,可被定義為"過渡期的一件事成另一種在某些方面正" 。 As is immediately evident, conversion (conversio) is something more than mere change (mutatio).由於是立即顯而易見的,轉換(轉換) ,是遠遠超乎改變(突變) 。 Whereas in mere changes one of the two extremes may be expressed negatively, as, eg, in the change of day and night, conversion requires two positive extremes, which are related to each other as thing to thing, and must have, besides, such an intimate connection with each other, that the last extreme (terminus ad quem) begins to be only as the first (terminus a quo) ceases to be, as, eg, in the conversion of water into wine at Cana.而僅僅在變化,其中的兩個極端,可能是表示否定的,因為,例如,在變化的日夜奮戰,轉換需要兩個積極極端,是與對方的事,以事,而且必須有,而且這些親密的聯繫,互相切磋,這在過去極端(總站終止) ,開始只是作為第一個(總站一現狀)不再被作為,例如,在轉換的水變成酒,在社區。 A third element is usually required, known as the commune tertium, which, even after conversion has taken place, either physically or at least logically unites one extreme to the other; for in every true conversion the following condition must be fulfilled: "What was formerly A, is now B."第三個因素是時間通常需要,被稱為公社tertium ,其中,即使轉換後,已經發生了,無論是身體或至少在邏輯上團結起一個極端變成另一個極端,因為在每一個真正的轉換下列條件的,必須要完成的: "什麼是以前,現在乙" A very important question suggests itself as to whether the definition should further postulate the previous non-existence of the last extreme, for it seems strange that an existing terminus a quo, A, should be converted into an already existing terminus ad quem, B. If the act of conversion is not to become a mere process of substitution, as in sleight-of-hand performances, the terminus ad quem must unquestionably in some manner newly exist, just as the terminus a quo must in some manner really cease to exist.一個很重要的問題提出了自己的定義是否要進一步設以前根本不存在的最後一個極端的,因為它似乎是奇怪的是一個現有總站一現狀,應轉換成一個已經存在的總站終止,乙如果該法的轉換是不流於形式,浮過程中的替代性,因為在花招-的第一手表演,總站終止必須無疑是在一些新的方式存在,正如總站一現狀,必須以某種方式真的不復存在。 Yet as the disappearance of the latter is not attributable to annihilation properly so called, so there is no need of postulating creation, strictly so called, to explain the former's coming into existence.但由於失踪的,後者是不可歸於湮滅妥善所謂的,所以沒有必要的假定成立,所以嚴格要求,說明前者的未來存在。 The idea of conversion is amply realized if the following condition is fulfilled, viz., that a thing which already existed in substance, acquires an altogether new and previously non-existing mode of being.的思想轉化是充分意識到,如果滿足下列條件,即,在某件已經存在於物質,獲得一個全新的和以前不存在的模式。 Thus in the resurrection of the dead, the dust of the human bodies will be truly converted into the bodies of the risen by their previously existing souls, just as at death they had been truly converted into corpses by the departure of the souls.因此,在死中復活,粉塵對人體的將是真正轉化的屍體復活,他們先前已經存在的靈魂,正如死亡,他們已真正轉化為具屍體,由離境的靈魂。 This much as regards the general notion of conversion.這大大至於一般概念轉換。 Transubstantiation, however, is not a conversion simply so called, but a substantial conversion (conversio substantialis), inasmuch as one thing is substantially or essentially converted into another.陷於變體說,然而,並不是一個簡單的轉換,使所謂的,而且是一項具有實質的轉換(轉換substantialis ) ,因為有一件事是大幅或基本上改裝成另一種。 Thus from the concept of Transubstantiation is excluded every sort of merely accidental conversion, whether it be purely natural (eg the metamorphosis of insects) or supernatural (eg the Transfiguration of Christ on Mount Tabor).因此,從概念陷於變體說,是排除各種只是偶然的轉換,無論是純粹自然(如變態的昆蟲)或超自然(如變形基督山二等) 。 Finally, Transubstantiation differs from every other substantial conversion in this, that only the substance is converted into another - the accidents remaining the same - just as would be the case if wood were miraculously converted into iron, the substance of the iron remaining hidden under the external appearance of the wood.最後,陷於變體說不同於其他實質性的轉換,在此,只有物質轉化成另一種-意外,其餘相同-正如會的情況,如果木材被奇蹟般地轉化為鐵,該物質的鐵,其餘隱患下外觀的木材。

The application of the foregoing to the Eucharist is an easy matter.適用前述以聖體聖事是一件容易的事。 First of all the notion of conversion is verified in the Eucharist, not only in general, but in all its essential details.首先是所有的概念轉換,驗證了在聖體聖事,而不是只作籠統,但在其所有必要的細節。 For we have the two extremes of conversion, namely, bread and wine as the terminus a quo, and the Body and Blood of Christ as the terminus ad quem.因為我們有兩個極端的轉換,即,麵包和酒為總站一現狀,身體和血液以基督為中心總站終止。 Furthermore, the intimate connection between the cessation of one extreme and the appearance of the other seems to be preserved by the fact, that both events are the results, not of two independent processes, as, eg annihilation and creation, but of one single act, since, according to the purpose of the Almighty, the substance of the bread and wine departs in order to make room for the Body and Blood of Christ.此外,親密的關係,停止一個極端的外觀和其他似乎是保存了一個事實,即這兩項活動是結果,而不是兩個獨立的過程,因為,例如,毀滅和創造的,而是由一個單一的行為,因為,根據我的目的是萬能的,物質的麵包和酒離開,以使空間,讓身體和血液裡的喊聲。 Lastly, we have the commune tertium in the unchanged appearances of bread and wine, under which appearances the pre-existent Christ assumes a new, sacramental mode of being, and without which His Body and Blood could not be partaken of by men.最後,我們必須公社tertium在不變外表的麵包和酒,下露面前存在的基督假定一個新的,聖事的方式,並沒有這些,他的身體和血液不能partaken的男性。 That the consequence of Transubstantiation, as a conversion of the total substance, is the transition of the entire substance of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, is the express doctrine of the Church (Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, can. ii).這後果陷於變體說,作為一個轉換的總物質的,是過渡時期的整個物質的麵包和酒進入人體和血液基督的,是明確的教義,教會(理事會的遄達, sess第十三可以第二節) 。 Thus were condemned as contrary to faith the antiquated view of Durandus, that only the substantial form (forma substantialis) of the bread underwent conversion, while the primary matter (materia prima) remained, and, especially, Luther's doctrine of Consubstantiation, ie the coexistence of the substance of the bread with the true Body of Christ.因此被指責為違背信念,過時的觀點durandus可以說,只有大量表格(表格substantialis )的麵包進行了轉換,而首要的事(本草綱目表面)依然存在,特別是,路德的學說consubstantiation ,即共存該物質的麵包與真正基督的身體。 Thus, too, the theory of Impanation advocated by Osiander and certain Berengarians, and according to which a hypostatic union is supposed to take place between the substance of the bread and the God-man (impanatio = Deus panis factus), is authoritatively rejected.因此,太,理論impanation倡導的osiander和某些berengarians ,並根據這一條本質的聯盟是採取地方之間物質的麵包和神人( impanatio = deus潘尼斯factus ) ,是權威性的拒絕。 So the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation sets up a mighty bulwark around the dogma of the Real Presence and constitutes in itself a distinct doctrinal article, which is not involved in that of the Real Presence, though the doctrine of the Real Presence is necessarily contained in that of Transubstantiation.所以天主教的教義陷於變體說,建立了一支強大的堡壘周圍教條的真實存在,並構成本身就是一個鮮明的理論性文章,這是不涉及這部分的真實存在,雖然教義的真正的存在是必然包含在這對陷於變體說。 It was for this very reason that Pius VI, in his dogmatic Bull "Auctorem fidei" (1794) against the Jansenistic pseudo Synod of Pistoia (1786), protested most vigorously against suppressing this "scholastic question", as the synod had advised pastors to do.正是出於這個原因,比約六,在他的教條式的牛市" , auctorem信" ( 1794 )對jansenistic偽主教的皮斯托亞( 1786 ) ,抗議最大力打擊壓制這種"學業問題" ,作為主教已告知牧人,以做的。

(b) In the mind of the Church, Transubstantiation has been so intimately bound up with the Real Presence, that both dogmas have been handed down together from generation to generation, though we cannot entirely ignore a dogmatico-historical development. (二)在他心中的教會,陷於變體說已如此密切相連,與實際存在的,雙方的教條,已被移送一起,由一代又一代,雖然我們不能完全忽略一個dogmatico歷史的發展。 The total conversion of the substance of bread is expressed clearly in the words of Institution: "This is my body".總轉化的實質是麵包表達清楚的話,學會說: "這是我的身體" 。 These words form, not a theoretical, but a practical proposition, whose essence consists in this, that the objective identity between subject and predicate is effected and verified only after the words have all been uttered, not unlike the pronouncement of a king to a subaltern: "You are a major", or, "You are a captain", which would immediately cause the promotion of the officer to a higher command.這些話的形式,不是一個理論,而是一個實踐命題,其實質構成,在這方面,該計劃的目的身份之間的主體與上游的影響,並驗證後,才話都已說過,而不是像公判大會一景一subaltern說: "你是一個主要的" ,或者"你是一位船長" ,就立刻會引起促進有關人員到一個更高的指揮。 When, therefore, He Who is All Truth and All Power said of the bread: "This is my body", the bread became, through the utterance of these words, the Body of Christ; consequently, on the completion of the sentence the substance of bread was no longer present, but the Body of Christ under the outward appearance of bread.當,所以他的人,是一切真理和一切權力說,在麵包說: "這是我的身體" ,麵包成了,透過話語的這些話,是基督的身體;因此,對完成該句的實質麵包不再出席,但基督的身體下外表的麵包。 Hence the bread must have become the Body of Christ, ie the former must have been converted into the latter.因此,麵包必須成為基督的身體,即前者必須是被轉換成後者。 The words of Institution were at the same time the words of Transubstantiation.話機構均在同一時間內的話陷於變體說。 Indeed the actual manner in which the absence of the bread and the presence of the Body of Christ is effected, is not read into the words of Institution but strictly and exegetically deduced from them.事實上,實際地而沒有麵包和存在的基督的身體的影響是,是不是讀入的話,事業單位,但嚴格和exegetically推斷,從他們。 The Calvinists, therefore, are perfectly right when they reject the Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation as a fiction, with no foundation in Scripture.該calvinists ,因此是完全正確的,當他們拒絕路德學說consubstantiation作為一種虛構,沒有任何基礎的經文。 For had Christ intended to assert the coexistence of His Body with the Substance of the bread, He would have expressed a simple identity between hoc and corpus by means of the copula est, but would have resorted to some such expression as: "This bread contains my body", or, "In this bread is my Body."為基督曾打算斷言共存的他的身體與物質的麵包,他會表達了一個簡單的身份之間的責,並通過語料庫手段,對Copula的預測,但將訴諸一些這樣的表達: "這麵包含有我的身體" ,或者"在這個麵包是我的身體" 。 Had He desired to constitute bread the sacramental receptacle of His Body, He would have had to state this expressly, for neither from the nature of the case nor according to common parlance can a piece of bread be made to signify the receptacle of a human body.如果他想要的,以構成麵包的聖貯的他的身體,他將不得不向這個國家明文規定,既不是從案件的性質,也沒有根據的共同用語,可以一塊麵包作,以顯示貯人體。 On the other hand, the synecdoche is plain in the case of the Chalice: "This is my blood", ie the contents of the Chalice are my blood, and hence no longer wine.在另一方面,提喻是平原,在有關案件的chalice : "這是我的血" ,即內容的chalice是我的血液,因此不再葡萄酒。

Regarding tradition, the earliest witnesses, as Tertullian and Cyprian, could hardly have given any particular consideration to the genetic relation of the natural elements of bread and wine to the Body and Blood of Christ, or to the manner in which the former were converted into the latter; for even Augustine was deprived of a clear conception of Transubstantiation, so long as he was held in the bonds of Platonism.對於傳統文化中,最早的證人,戴爾都良和塞浦路斯,很難獲得任何特別考慮到遺傳關係自然因素的麵包和葡萄酒的身體和血液基督的,或以何種方式在前者將被轉換成後者;奧古斯丁甚至被剝奪了明確概念陷於變體說,只要他被關押在債券的柏拉圖主義。 On the other hand, complete clearness on the subject had been attained by writers as early as Cyril of Jerusalem, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Gregory of Nyssa, Chrysostom, and Cyril of Alexandria in the East, and by Ambrose and the later Latin writers in the West.在另一方面,完整清晰,對課題已達到的作家,早在西里爾的耶路撒冷, theodoret的cyrrhus ,格雷戈里的nyssa ,金口,西里爾的亞歷山德里亞,在東部,以及由劉漢銓及後來拉美作家在西。 Eventually the West became the classic home of scientific perfection in the difficult doctrine of Transubstantiation.最終,西方成為經典之家科學完善,在困難的學說陷於變體說。 The claims of the learned work of the Anglican Dr. Pusey (The Doctrine of the Real Presence as contained in the Fathers, Oxford, 1855), who denied the cogency of the patristic argument for Transubstantiation, have been met and thoroughly answered by Cardinal Franzelin (De Euchar., Rome, 1887, xiv).索賠的工作,學到的聖公會博士pusey (中庸真正的駐留載於父親,牛津, 1855年) ,他否認了中肯的教父的說法,為陷於變體說,已經得到滿足,並深刻回答了由紅衣主教franzelin (德奧伊夏爾,羅馬, 1887年,十四) 。 The argument from tradition is strikingly confirmed by the ancient liturgies, whose beautiful prayers express the idea of conversion in the clearest manner.論據從傳統是驚人地證實了古代liturgies ,其美好的禱告,表達的思想轉化最清楚的方式。 Many examples may be found in Renaudot, "Liturgiæ orient."很多例子可以發現,在勒諾多, " liturgiæ東方" 。 (2nd ed., 1847); Assemani, "Codex liturg." (第二版, 1847年) ; assemani , "食品法典委員會liturg " 。 (13 vols., Rome 1749-66); Denzinger, "Ritus Orientalium" (2 vols., Würzburg, 1864), Concerning the Adduction Theory of the Scotists and the Production Theory of the Thomists, see Pohle, "Dogmatik" (3rd ed., Paderborn, 1908), III, 237 sqq. ( 13卷,羅馬, 1749年至1766年) ;登青格" ,用法orientalium " ( 2卷,維爾茨堡, 1864 ) ,有關收理論的scotists和生產理論的thomists ,見pohle , " dogmatik " (第3次版,帕德博恩, 1908年) ,第三章, 237 sqq 。


Since Luther arbitrarily restricted Real Presence to the moment of reception (in usu, non extra), the Council of Trent (Sess. XIII, can. iv) by a special canon emphasized the fact, that after the Consecration Christ is truly present and, consequently, does not make His Presence dependent upon the act of eating or drinking.由於路德任意限制真實存在的時刻接收(在烏蘇,非額外) ,安理會的遄達( sess.十三,可第四節) ,由佳能公司特別強調,事實上,那之後consecration基督是真正的,目前,因此,不作他的存在取決於該法進食或飲水。 On the contrary, He continues His Eucharistic Presence even in the consecrated Hosts and Sacred particles that remain on the altar or in the ciborium after the distribution of Holy Communion.與此相反,他繼續他的聖體聖事的存在,即使是在consecrated主機和神聖的粒子仍留在該祭壇上,還是在ciborium分派後的聖餐。 In the deposit of faith the Presence and the Permanence of Presence are so closely allied, that in the mind of the Church both continue on as an undivided whole.在存款信仰的存在和持久性的存在是如此緊密的同盟,即在他心中的教會雙方繼續就作為不可分割的整體。 And rightly so; for just as Christ promised His Flesh and blood as meat and drink, ie as something permanent (cf. John 6:50 sqq.), so, when He said: "Take ye, and eat. This is my body", the Apostles received from the hand of the Lord His Sacred Body, which was already objectively present and did not first become so in the act of partaking.這樣做是正確的;正如耶穌答應他的血肉,因為肉類和飲料,即作為永久(參見約翰6時50 sqq ) ,所以,當他說: "採取曄,吃,這是我的身體" ,使徒們收到了來自另一方面的主神聖的身體,這是已經客觀地,目前,並沒有第一次變得那麼在該法中的partaking 。 This non-dependence of the Real Presence upon the actual reception is manifested very clearly in the case of the Chalice, when Christ said: "Drink ye all of this. For [enim] this is my Blood."這個非依賴性的真實存在後,實際接待的是體現得很清楚,在有關案件的chalice ,當耶穌說: "酒後葉所有這一切都為[單一]這是我的血" 。 Here the act of drinking is evidently neither the cause nor the conditio sine qua non for the presence of Christ's Blood.此法的飲用水是很明顯,無論是事業,也不是必要條件,為在場的基督的血。

Much as he disliked it, even Calvin had to acknowledge the evident force of the argument from tradition (Instit. IV, xvii, sect. 739).儘管他不喜歡它,甚至卡爾文不得不承認自明力的論據,從傳統( instit.四,第十七章,第一節739 ) 。 Not only have the Fathers, and among them Chrysostom with special vigor, defended in theory the permanence of the Real Presence, but the constant practice of the Church has also established its truth.不僅有父親,而其中與金口特別振奮精神,捍衛了理論上的持久性部分的真實存在,但不斷的實踐中,教會還建立了它的真相。 In the early days of the Church the faithful frequently carried the Blessed Eucharist with them to their homes (cf. Tertullian, "Ad uxor.", II, v; Cyprian, "De lapsis", xxvi) or upon long journeys (Ambrose, De excessu fratris, I, 43, 46), while the deacons were accustomed to take the Blessed Sacrament to those who did not attend Divine service (cf. Justin, Apol., I, n. 67), as well as to the martyrs, the incarcerated, and the infirm (cf. Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., VI, xliv).在早期的教會信徒頻繁進行了得天獨厚聖體聖事與他們自己的家園(參見戴爾都良, "專案uxor " ,第二,第五;塞浦路斯, "德lapsis " , 26 )或經長途跋涉(劉漢銓,德excessu fratris ,我, 43 , 46 ) ,而執事習慣於採取有福聖餐向那些沒有參加過神聖的服務(參見官, apol 。辦理,我12月31日67 ) ,以及為烈士,嵌頓,和體弱者(參見尤西比烏斯,歷史。 eccl ,六, XLIV )號決議。 The deacons were also obliged to transfer the particles that remained to specially prepared repositories called Pastophoria (cf. Apostolic Constitutions, VIII, xiii).長老也不得不轉移粒子仍特意準備存放所謂pastophoria (參見使徒憲法,八,十三) 。 Furthermore, it was customary as early as the fourth century to celebrate the Mass of the Presanctifed (cf. Synod of Laodicea, can. xlix), in which were received the Sacred Hosts that had been consecrated one or more days previously.另外,有人習慣,因為早在公元4世紀,以慶祝大眾的presanctifed (參見主教的勞迪西亞,可以的。 XLIX )號決定,其中共收到神聖的主機已被consecrated一天或多天以前。 In the Latin Church the celebration of the Mass of the Presanctified is nowadays restricted to Good Friday, whereas, ever since the Trullan Synod (692), the Greeks celebrate it during the whole of Lent, except on Saturdays, Sundays, and the feast of the Annunciation (25 March).在拉丁美洲教會慶祝群眾的presanctified是現今限於良好週五,而,自從trullan主教( 692 ) ,希臘人慶祝它在整個封齋期,除星期六,星期日,節日該annunciation ( 3月25日) 。 A deeper reason for the permanence of Presence is found in the fact, that some time elapses between the confection and the reception of the sacrament, ie between the Consecration and the Communion, whereas in the case of the other sacraments both the confection and the reception take place at the same instant.更深刻的原因的長期存在,是在發現事實,即一些時間之間,蜜餞,並接收了聖體,即與consecration和共融,而在案件的其他聖禮都蜜餞及酒會發生在同一時刻。 Baptism, for instance, lasts only as long as the baptismal action or ablution with water, and is, therefore, a transitory sacrament; on the contrary, the Eucharist, and the Eucharist alone, constitutes a permanent sacrament (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, cap. iii).洗禮,舉例來說,只有只要把洗禮的行動,或洗盥水,然後,所以,一個過渡聖餐;反過來說,聖體聖事和聖體聖事的,僅構成一個常設聖餐(參見理事會的遄達, sess第十三章第三節) 。 The permanence of Presence, however, is limited to an interval of time of which the beginning is determined by the instant of Consecration and the end by the corruption of the Eucharistic Species.持久性的存在,但僅限於一個區間的時候,其中一開始是由瞬間consecration和落腳點,是由腐敗的聖體聖事的物種。 If the Host has become moldy or the contents of the Chalice sour, Christ has discontinued His Presence therein.如果東道國已成為發霉或其內容的chalice酸溜溜的,基督已經中止他的存在。 Since in the process of corruption those elementary substances return which correspond to the peculiar nature of the changed accidents, the law of the indestructibility of matter, notwithstanding the miracle of the Eucharistic conversion, remains in force without any interruption.由於在這一過程中的腐敗現象,這些元素的物質回報,其中對應特有的性質變化了意外,在法律的indestructibility的事,儘管奇蹟的聖體聖事的轉換,仍然有效,沒有任何中斷。

The Adorableness of the Eucharist is the practical consequence of its permanence.該adorableness的聖體聖事是實際的後果,其耐久性。 According to a well known principle of Christology, the same worship of latria (cultus latriæ) as is due to the Triune God is due also to the Divine Word, the God-man Christ, and in fact, by reason of the hypostatic union, to the Humanity of Christ and its individual component parts, as, eg, His Sacred Heart.根據一個眾所周知的原則christology ,同時崇拜latria ( cultus latriæ ) ,這是由於該三位一體神,是因為還向神聖的字眼,神人耶穌,而事實上,因她的本質聯盟向人類的基督和其個別組成部分,因為,例如,他的聖心。 Now, identically the same Lord Christ is truly present in the Eucharist as is present in heaven; consequently He is to be adored in the Blessed Sacrament, and just so long as He remains present under the appearances of bread and wine, namely, from the moment of Transubstantiation to the moment in which the species are decomposed (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, can. vi).現在,相同的,同時主耶穌是真正的,目前在聖體聖事是,目前在天上;因此,他是被崇拜,在聖體,公正,只要他仍是目前下露面的麵包和酒,即從時刻陷於變體說,以目前在該物種分解(參見理事會遄, sess第十三,可以第六節) 。 In the absence of Scriptural proof, the Church finds a warrant for, and a propriety in, rendering Divine worship to the Blessed Sacrament in the most ancient and constant tradition, though of course a distinction must be made between the dogmatic principle and the varying discipline regarding the outward form of worship.在沒有證據證明聖經,教會認定手令,並正當性,使神崇拜在聖體最古老和不斷的傳統,雖然當然是一個必須加以區分的教條式的原則和紀律不一至於離港形式的崇拜。 While even the East recognized the unchangeable principle from the earliest ages, and, in fact, as late as the schismatical Synod of Jerusalem in 1672, the West has furthermore shown an untiring activity in establishing and investing with more and more solemnity, homage and devotion to the Blessed Eucharist.而連東承認千古不變的原則,從最早的年齡限制,並在事實上,正如已故作為schismatical主教在耶路撒冷,在1672年,西方此外表現出了不懈的活動,在建立和投資,越來越多的嚴肅性,敬意與虔誠向有福了聖體聖事。 In the early Church, the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament was restricted chiefly to Mass and Communion, just as it is today among the Orientals and the Greeks.在早期教會,朝拜聖體受到限制,主要是向大眾和共融,正如它是今日各東方人和希臘人。 Even in his time Cyril of Jerusalem insisted just as strongly as did Ambrose and Augustine on an attitude of adoration and homage during Holy Communion (cf. Ambrose, De Sp. Sancto, III, ii, 79; Augustine, In Ps. xcviii, n. 9).即使在他的時候西里爾耶路撒冷的堅持,正如強烈像劉漢銓和奧古斯丁對態度的崇拜和敬意,在聖餐(參見劉漢銓,德藻sancto ,三,二, 79個;奧古斯丁,在PS 。 xcviii , n 9段) 。 In the West the way was opened to a more and more exalted veneration of the Blessed Eucharist when the faithful were allowed to Communicate even outside of the liturgical service.在西方的方式開啟更為崇高的敬仰的有福了聖體聖事的時候,信徒們被允許進行溝通,甚至外面的禮儀服務。 After the Berengarian controversy, the Blessed Sacrament was in the eleventh and twelfth centuries elevated for the express purpose of repairing by its adoration the blasphemies of heretics and, strengthening the imperiled faith of Catholics.後berengarian爭議,但在聖體是在第十一屆和第十二屆百年高架為目的的修復其朝拜了blasphemies的異端,並加強危及信仰的天主教徒。 In the thirteenth century were introduced, for the greater glorification of the Most Holy, the "theophoric processions" (circumgestatio), and also the feast of Corpus Christi, instituted under Urban IV at the solicitation of St. Juliana of Liège.在13世紀相繼出台,為進一步美化最聖潔的, " theophoric遊行" ( circumgestatio ) ,同時,也是對盛宴的科珀斯克里斯蒂,根據市第四次徵集的聖juliana列。 In honor of the feast, sublime hymns, such as the "Pange Lingua" of St. Thomas Aquinas, were composed.為紀念這個節日,崇高的讚美詩,如" pange語言"的聖托馬斯阿奎那,分別組成。 In the fourteenth century the practice of the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament arose.在14世紀的實踐中的論斷,在聖體出來了。 The custom of the annual Corpus Christi procession was warmly defended and recommended by the Council of Trent (Sess. XIII, cap. v).風俗每年科珀斯克里斯蒂遊行的熱烈辯護,並建議由安理會的遄達( sess.第十三章第五節) 。 A new impetus was given to the adoration of the Eucharist through the visits to the Blessed Sacrament (Visitatio SS. Sacramenti), introduced by St. Alphonsus Liguori; in later times the numerous orders and congregations devoted to Perpetual Adoration, the institution in many dioceses of the devotion of "Perpetual Prayer", the holding of International Eucharistic Congresses, eg that of London in September, 1908, have all contributed to keep alive faith in Him Who has said: "behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" (Matthew 28:20).新的動力,給了朝拜聖體聖事,通過參觀聖( visitatio的SS 。 sacramenti ) ,介紹了聖阿方liguori在稍後的時間了無數的訂單和教友專門永恆的崇拜,該機構在許多教區該奉獻的"永恆的祈禱" ,舉行國際聖體大會,如認為倫敦9月, 1908年,都有助於永葆他的信任,他說: "看哪,我與你同所有的日子,甚至到了圓滿的世界" (馬太28:20 ) 。


The principal aim of speculative theology with regard to the Eucharist, should be to discuss philosophically, and seek a logical solution of, three apparent contradictions, namely:主要目的的投機性神學方面的聖體聖事,應該是要討論哲學,並尋求合理的解決辦法的,三個明顯的矛盾,即:

(a) the continued existence of the Eucharistic Species, or the outward appearances of bread and wine, without their natural underlying subject (accidentia sine subjecto); (一)繼續存在的聖體聖事的物種,或外觀的麵包和酒,沒有他們的背後自然學科( accidentia正弦subjecto ) ;

(b) the spatially uncircumscribed, spiritual mode of existence of Christ's Eucharistic Body (existentia corporis ad modum spiritus); (二)在空間上uncircumscribed ,精神模式存在於基督的聖體聖事的機構( existentia corporis專案modum spiritus ) ;

(c) the simultaneous existence of Christ in heaven and in many places on earth (multilocatio). (三)同時存在,在基督升天,而且在許多地方,在地球上( multilocatio ) 。

(a) The study of the first problem, viz. (一)有關研究的第一個問題,即。 whether or not the accidents of bread and wine continue their existence without their proper substance, must be based upon the clearly established truth of Transubstantiation, in consequence of which the entire substance of the bread and the entire substance of the wine are converted respectively into the Body and Blood of Christ in such a way that "only the appearances of bread and wine remain" (Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, can. ii: manentibus dumtaxat speciebus panis et vini).還是不意外的麵包和酒繼續他們的存在,沒有了應有的物質,必須基於明確的既定事實真相陷於變體說,在後果,而整個物質的麵包和整個物質的酒,會被轉換,分別進入身體與血的基督教會以這樣一種方式"中,只有外表的麵包和葡萄酒保持" (理事會的遄達, sess第十三,可以第二節: manentibus dumtaxat speciebus潘尼斯等vini ) 。 Accordingly, the continuance of the appearances without the substance of bread and wine as their connatural substratum is just the reverse of Transubstantiation.因此,連續性的外表,沒有實質內容的麵包和葡萄酒作為他們connatural下層是剛剛扭轉陷於變體說。 If it be further asked, whether these appearances have any subject at all in which they inhere, we must answer with St. Thomas Aquinas (III:77:1), that the idea is to be rejected as unbecoming, as though the Body of Christ, in addition to its own accidents, should also assume those of bread and wine.如果進一步問,究竟這些外表有任何問題,在所有的來信,他們在固有,我們必須回答與聖托馬斯阿奎那(三: 77:1 ) ,這種想法是要予以拒絕不雅觀,因為雖然體基督的,除了自身的意外,也應當承擔這些麵包和酒。 The most that may be said is, that from the Eucharistic Body proceeds a miraculous sustaining power, which supports the appearances bereft of their natural substances and preserves them from collapse.最可能說的是,說,從聖體聖事的機構收益神奇的底氣,它支持露面束手無策,他們的天然物質,並保留了他們從崩潰。 The position of the Church in this regard may be readily determined from the Council of Constance (1414-1418).立場與教會在這方面,可隨時確定從安理會的人Constance ( 1414至1418年) 。 In its eighth session, approved in 1418 by Martin V, this synod condemned the following articles of Wyclif:在其第八屆會議上,批准了在1418年由馬丁五,本主教譴責下列條款wyclif :

"Substantia panis materialis et similiter substantia vini materialis remanent in Sacramento altaris", ie the material substance of bread and likewise the material substance of wine remain in the Sacrament of the Altar; "Accidentia panis non manent sine subjecto", ie the accidents of the bread do not remain without a subject. " substantia潘尼斯materialis等similiter substantia vini materialis剩磁在薩克拉門托altaris " ,即物質文明物質的麵包和同樣材料的實質葡萄酒留在聖事的祭壇上" ; accidentia潘尼斯非manent正弦subjecto " ,即事故的麵包不仍然沒有一個主題。

The first of these articles contains an open denial of Transubstantiation.上述第一條包含一個公開否認陷於變體說。 The second, so far as the text is concerned, might be considered as merely a different wording of the first, were it not that the history of the council shows that Wyclif had directly opposed the Scholastic doctrine of "accidents without a subject" as absurd and even heretical (cf, De Augustinis, De re sacramentariâ, Rome, 1889, II, 573 sqq.), Hence it was the intention of the council to condemn the second article, not merely as a conclusion of the first, but as a distinct and independent proposition; wherefore we may gather the Church's teaching on the subject from the contradictory proposition; "Accidentia panis manent sine subjecto," ie the accidents of bread do remain without a subject.第二,相對於文而言,可被視為僅僅是一個不同的措辭第一,如果不是被認為安理會歷史表明wyclif直接反對學術上的理論, "如果沒有意外的一個主題"一樣荒謬甚至異端(比照,德奧古斯蒂尼斯,德重sacramentariâ ,羅馬, 1889年第一,二, 573 sqq ) ,因此這是安理會打算譴責第二篇文章,而不是僅僅作為一種結論的第一,但作為一個獨特和獨立命題;哪,我們可以蒐集教會的教學主題,從相互矛盾的命題" ; accidentia潘尼斯manent正弦subjecto " ,即事故的麵包做的仍然是一個課題。 Such, at least, was the opinion of contemporary theologians regarding the matter; and the Roman Catechism, referring to the above-mentioned canon of the Council of Trent, tersely, explains: "The accidents of bread and wine inhere in no substance, but continue existing by themselves."這樣的,至少是輿論的當代神學家就此事;與羅馬講授,是指上文提到的佳能安理會的遄達,簡短,又解釋說: "事故的麵包和酒的固有在沒有實質內容,但繼續存在的本身" 。 This being the case, some theologians in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, who inclined to Cartesianism, as E, Maignan, Drouin, and Vitasse, displayed but little theological penetration when they asserted that the Eucharistic appearances were optical illusions, phantasmagoria, and make-believe accidents, ascribing to Divine omnipotence an immediate influence upon the five senses, whereby a mere subjective impression of what seemed to be the accidents of bread and wine was created.在這種情況下,一些神學家,在十七世紀和十八世紀,他們傾向於cartesianism ,隨著電子商務,邁尼昂,喬,並vitasse ,展示,但很少神學滲透時,他們聲稱,聖體聖事的外表被光學的幻想, phantasmagoria ,化妝相信意外,指稱,以神聖的全能的一個直接的影響後,五感,而只是主觀的印象似乎是意外的麵包和葡萄酒製造。 Since Descartes (d. 1650) places the essence of corporeal substance in its actual extension and recognizes only modal accidents metaphysically united to their substance, it is clear, according to his theory, that together with the conversion of the substance of bread and wine, the accidents must also be converted and thereby made to disappear.自笛卡兒(四1650 )學位的本質是有形的物質,其實際的延伸和只承認模態意外形而上學的團結,以自己的物質,它是明確的,按照他的理論,即連同改建該物質的麵包和酒,意外還必須被轉換,從而取得消失。 If the eye nevertheless seems to behold bread and wine, this is to be attributed to an optical illusion alone.如果眼睛,但似乎看哪麵包和酒,這是要歸功於一種光學幻象。 But it is clear at first blush, that no doubt can be entertained as to the physical reality, or in fact, as to the identity of the accidents before and after Transubstantiation, This physical, and not merely optical, continuance of the Eucharistic accidents was repeatedly insisted upon by the Fathers, and with such excessive rigor that the notion of Transubstantiation seemed to be in danger.但很明顯,在乍看之下,這毫無疑問,可受理,以物理現實中,還是在事實上,以身分意外之前和之後陷於變體說,這身體,而不是僅僅光學,連續性的聖體聖事是意外一再堅持後,由父親,有了這種過度的嚴謹性這一概念的陷於變體說似乎是處於危險之中。 Especially against the Monophysites, who based on the Eucharistic conversion an a pari argument in behalf of the supposed conversion of the Humanity of Christ into His Divinity, did the Fathers retort by concluding from the continuance of the unconverted Eucharistic accidents to the unconverted Human Nature of Christ.尤其是對monophysites ,人的基礎上,聖體聖事的轉換一個A並行的論點代表假定轉換的人性基督進他的神性,有沒有父親的反駁所總結,從連續性的未聖體聖事的意外向未人性基督。 Both philosophical and theological arguments were also advanced against the Cartesians, as, for instance, the infallible testimony of the senses, the necessity of the commune tertium to complete the idea of Transubstantiation [see above, (3)], the idea of the Sacrament of the Altar as the visible sign of Christ's invisible Body, the physical signification of Communion as a real partaking of food and drink the striking expression "breaking of bread" (fractio panis), which supposes the divisible reality of the accidents, etc. For all these reasons, theologians consider the physical reality of the accidents as an incontrovertible truth, which cannot without temerity be called in question.無論哲學和神學的論據,也帶來了先進的反對cartesians ,因為,舉例來說,不會犯錯誤的證詞感官的,有必要公社tertium完成的想法陷於變體說[見上文, ( 3 ) ] ,重新認識了聖餐該神龕,作為可視性標誌基督的隱形機構,對物理意義的共融,作為一個真正的partaking的食品和飲料醒目的"破麵包" ( fractio潘尼斯) ,其中假設可分現實的意外等,為所有這些原因,神學家認為物理現實的意外,作為一個無可爭辯的事實,這是不能未經竟然受到質疑。 As regards the philosophical possibility of the accidents existing without their substance, the older school drew a fine distinction between modal and absolute accidents, By the modal accidents were understood such as could not, being mere modes, be separated from their substance without involving a metaphysical contradiction, eg the form and motion of a body.至於哲學的可能性意外現有未經其實質內容時,舊學校提請罰款區分模態和絕對意外時,由模態意外被理解,如不能,僅僅模式,分開其實質內容沒有涉及形而上矛盾的,例如形式與運動的一個機構。 Those accidents were designated absolute, whose objective reality was adequately distinct from the reality of their substance, in such a way that no intrinsic repugnance was involved in their separability, as, eg, the quantity of a body.這些事故分別指定絕對的,其目的實際上是充分有別於現實,他們的物質,在這樣一種方式,沒有內在的厭惡是參與他們的可分離性,因為,例如,有關數量一個機構。 Aristotle, himself taught (Metaphys., VI, 3rd ed. of Bekker, p. 1029, a. 13), that quantity was not a corporeal substance, but only a phenomenon of substance.亞里士多德,自己教( metaphys. ,第六章,第3版的。 bekker ,頁1029 ,甲13 ) ,這一數量是不是有形的物質,但只有一種現象的實質。 Modern philosophy, on the other hand, has endeavored since the time of John Locke, to reject altogether from the realm of ideas the concept of substance as something imaginary, and to rest satisfied with qualities alone as the excitants of sensation, a view of the material world which the so-called psychology of association and actuality is trying to carry out in its various details.現代哲學,但另一方面,竭力以來的時候,約翰洛克,拒絕完全退出境界的思想觀念,物質的東西虛數,並休息滿意素質單獨作為excitants的轟動效應,以期對物質世界,其中有所謂的心理學協會和現狀是試圖進行在其各項細節。 The Catholic Church does not feel called upon to follow up the ephemeral vagaries of these new philosophical systems, but bases her doctrine on the everlasting philosophy of sound reason, which rightly distinguishes between the thing in itself and its characteristic qualities (color, form, size, etc.).天主教會感到身體不適,呼籲跟進短暫變幻莫測的這些新的哲學體系,但基地,她的學說永恆的哲學健全的原因,正確區分這件事本身及其特點素質(色彩,形式,尺寸等) 。 Though the "thing in itself" may even remain imperceptible to the senses and therefore be designated in the language of Kant as a noumenon, or in the language of Spencer, the Unknowable, yet we cannot escape the necessity of seeking beneath the appearances the thing which appears, beneath the colour that which is colored beneath the form that which has form, ie the substratum or subject which sustains the phenomena.儘管此次"事情本身" ,甚至可能留在潛移默化中,以感官,並因此被指定在語文康德作為一個本體,或在語言中的斯潘塞,不可知,但我們無法逃避的必要性尋求下方外表的東西看來,在下方的顏色表示,這是有色下方表格,其中有形式,即下層或課題,持續推動的現象。 The older philosophy designated the appearances by the name of accidents, the subject of the appearances, by that of substance.舊哲學指定露面的名字意外時,受到的露面中,由該物質。 It matters little what the terms are, provided the things signified by them are rightly understood.它事項很少有什麼條件,提供了的東西,標誌著他們是正確的理解。 What is particularly important regarding material substances and their accidental qualities, is the necessity of proceeding cautiously in this discussion, since in the domain of natural philosophy the greatest uncertainty reigns even at the present day concerning the nature of matter, one system pulling down what another has reared, as is proved in the latest theories of atomism and energy, of ions and electrons.什麼是特別重要的方面,材料物質及其偶然的素質,是必須的程序謹慎地在這方面的討論,因為在域的自然哲學,最不明朗的時期,甚至在現今的有關性質的事,是一個體系,拉低什麼另一個養,為的是證明了在最新的理論的原子論和能源的離子和電子。

The old theology tried with St. Thomas Aquinas (III:77) to prove the possibility of absolute accidents on the principles of the Aristotelean-Scholastic hylomorphism, ie the system which teaches that the essential constitution of bodies consists in the substantial union of materia prima and forma substantialis.舊神學試圖與聖托馬斯阿奎那(三: 77 ) ,以證明的可能性絕對意外,對原則的aristotelean -學術形質,即系統理論,基本憲法的機構存在於一個龐大聯盟本草綱目表面和形式上substantialis 。 Some theologians of today would seek to come to an understanding with modern science, which bases all natural processes upon the very fruitful theory of energy, by trying with Leibniz to explain the Eucharistic accidentia sine subjecto according to the dynamism of natural philosophy.某些神學家的今天,將尋求達成一項諒解與現代科學,基地所有自然進程後,非常富有成果的理論,能源,試圖與萊布尼茨解釋聖體聖事的accidentia正弦subjecto據活力的自然哲學。 Assuming, according to this system, a real distinction between force and its manifestations, between energy and its effects, it may be seen that under the influence of the First Cause the energy (substance) necessary for the essence of bread is withdrawn by virtue of conversion, while the effects of energy (accidents) in a miraculous manner continue.假設,根據這個系統,一個真實的區分隊及其表現方式,能源與它的效應,可以看出的影響下,第一個原因的能量(物質)所必需的本質,麵包是撤回憑藉轉化率,而影響能源(意外) ,在神奇地繼續下去。 For the rest it may be said, that it is far from the Church's intention to restrict the Catholic's investigation regarding the doctrine of the Blessed Sacrament to any particular view of natural philosophy or even to require him to establish its truth on the principles of medieval physics; all that the Church demands is, that those theories of material substances be rejected which not only contradict the teaching of the Church, but also are repugnant to experience and sound reason, as Pantheism, Hylozoism, Monism, Absolute Idealism, Cartesianism, etc.對於剩下的,可以說,這是迄今從教會的意圖,限制天主教的調查對於教義的聖體,以任何特定的看法自然哲學,或什至要求他,以確定其對真理的原則中世紀物理學;所有的教會的要求是,這些理論的材料物質被拒絕,這不僅違背了教學的教會,但也有令人憎惡的,以經驗和完善的理由,正如泛神論, hylozoism ,一元論的,絕對的唯心論, cartesianism等。

(b) The second problem arises from the Totality of Presence, which means that Christ in His entirety is present in the whole of the Host and in each smallest part thereof, as the spiritual soul is present in the human body [see above, (2)]. (二)第二個問題是因全部在場,這意味著基督在他的全部內容,是目前在整個東道國並且在每一個最小的一部分時,作為精神的靈魂是存在於人體的[見上文( 2 ) ] 。 The difficulty reaches its climax when we consider that there is no question here of the Soul or the Divinity of Christ, but of His Body, which, with its head, trunk, and members, has assumed a mode of existence spiritual and independent of space, a mode of existence, indeed, concerning which neither experience nor any system of philosophy can have the least inkling.難以達到高潮的時候,我們認為這是毫無疑問這裡的靈魂或神性的基督,但他身體的,它與它的頭部,軀幹,和成員,擺出一付模式存在的精神和獨立的空間一種模式存在,而事實上,關於這既不經驗,也沒有任何制度的哲學可以有至少端倪。 That the idea of conversion of corporeal matter into a spirit can in no way be entertained, is clear from the material substance of the Eucharistic Body itself.這一構想的轉換是有形的物質精神絕不能被受理,是明確的,從材料的實質聖體聖事體本身。 Even the above-mentioned separability of quantity from substance gives us no clue to the solution, since according to the best founded opinions not only the substance of Christ's Body, but by His own wise arrangement, its corporeal quantity, ie its full size, with its complete organization of integral members and limbs, is present within the diminutive limits of the Host and in each portion thereof.即使是上面提到的可分離性,數量,從物質,使我們沒有任何線索,以解決問題,因為根據最佳創立的意見不僅是物質的基督身體的,而是由他自己的明智的安排下,其體量,即它的全尺寸,同其完整的組織積分委員及四肢,是目前內微小的界限所在,並在每一個部分。 Later theologians (as Rossignol, Legrand) resorted to the unseemly explanation, according to which Christ is present in diminished form and stature, a sort of miniature body; while others (as Oswald, Fernandez, Casajoana) assumed with no better sense of fitness the mutual compenetration of the members of Christ's Body to within the narrow compass of the point of a pin.後來的神學家(如rossignol , legrand )訴諸以得體的解釋,根據該基督是目前在縮水的形式和地位,是一種微型機構,而其他(如2012年,費爾南德斯,卡薩霍阿納)假設,沒有較強的體格相互compenetration的成員是基督的身體內部的狹隘指南針的點一針。 The vagaries of the Cartesians, however, went beyond all bounds.變幻無常的cartesians ,但是,超越了所有的界限。 Descartes had already, in a letter to P. Mesland (ed. Emery, Paris, 1811), expressed the opinion, that the identity of Christ's Eucharistic with His Heavenly Body was preserved by the identity of His Soul, which animated all the Eucharistic Bodies.笛卡兒已,在寫給頁mesland (編輯emery ,巴黎, 1811 ) ,表示看法,即身份基督的聖體聖事與他在天上的屍體被保存的身份,他的靈魂,其中動畫所有聖體聖事的機構。 On this basis, the geometrician Varignon suggested a true multiplication of the Eucharistic Bodies upon earth, which were supposed to be most faithful, though greatly reduced, miniature copies of the prototype, the Heavenly Body of Christ.在此基礎上,幾何瓦里尼翁建議一個真正的乘法的聖體聖事的機構,一經地球,它被認為是最忠實,雖然大大降低了,微型份的原型,天朝基督的身體。 Nor does the modern theory of n-dimensions throw any light upon the subject; for the Body of Christ is not invisible or impalpable to us because it occupies the fourth dimension, but because it transcends and is wholly independent of space.也沒有現代理論的n維投擲任何光後,該問題;為基督的身體,是不是無形或觸及到美,因為它佔據第四層面,而是因為它超越了,是完全獨立的空間。 Such a mode of existence, it is clear, does not come within the scope of physics and mechanics, but belongs to a higher, supernatural order, even as does the Resurrection from the sealed tomb, the passing in and out through closed doors, the Transfiguration of the future glorified risen Body.這種模式的存在,很明顯,這並不屬於這個範圍,物理和力學,但屬於一個更高的,超自然的秩序,甚至作為是否復活,從墓室密封,合格和通過閉門造車,變形的未來歌頌上升身體。 What explanation may, then, be given of the fact?作何解釋,可能的話,考慮的一個事實?

The simplest treatment of the subject was that offered by the Schoolmen, especially St. Thomas (III:76:4), They reduced the mode of being to the mode of becoming, ie they traced back the mode of existence peculiar to the Eucharistic Body to the Transubstantiation; for a thing has to so "be" as it was in "becoming", Since ex vi verborum the immediate result is the presence of the Body of Christ, its quantity, present merely per concomitantiam, must follow the mode of existence peculiar to its substance, and, like the latter, must exist without division and extension, ie entirely in the whole Host and entirely in each part thereof.最簡單的治療對象是所提供的各項schoolmen ,尤其是聖托馬斯(三: 76:4 ) ,但它們也降低了模式正在向模式成為的,即它們追溯到模式存在特有的聖體聖事體向陷於變體說,因為事情已到如此" , "因為它是在"能成為" ,因為前六verborum立即結果是在場的基督的身體,其數量,目前僅百分之concomitantiam ,必須遵循的模式存在特有的,其實質內容,並像後者,一定要同時存在,而不分區及擴建工程,即完全在整個主機完全可以在每一個部分。 In other words, the Body of Christ is present in the sacrament, not after the manner of "quantity" (per modum quantitatis), but of "substance" (per modum substantiæ), Later Scholasticism (Bellarmine, Francisco Suárez, Billuart, and others) tried to improve upon this explanation along other lines by distinguishing between internal and external quantity.或者換句話說,基督的身體,是目前在聖餐,而不是後地"量"的(每modum quantitatis ) ,但對"物質" (每modum substantiæ ) ,後來經院( bellarmine ,弗朗西斯科蘇亞雷斯billuart ,其他人)試圖改善這種解釋,對其他線路通過區分內部和外部的數量。 By internal quantity (quantitas interna seu in actu primo) is understood that entity, by virtue of which a corporeal substance merely possesses "aptitudinal extension", ie the "capability" of being extended in tri-dimensionaI space.由國內數量(關於量國際您在工會之一)是理解的實體,憑藉一個是有形的物質,只是擁有"智能擴展" ,即"能力"的延伸,在三dimensionai空間。 External quantity, on the other hand (quantitas externa seu in actu secundo), is the same entity, but in so far as it follows its natural tendency to occupy space and actually extends itself in the three dimensions.對外數量,但另一方面(關於量externa您在工會secundo ) ,是同一個實體,但至目前為止,因為它遵循其自然趨勢,佔據空間和延伸,其實本身在三個方面。 While aptitudinal extension or internal quantity is so bound up with the essences of bodies that its separability from them involves a metaphysical contradiction, external quantity is, on the other hand, only a natural consequence and effect, which can be so suspended and withheld by the First Cause, that the corporeal substance, retaining its internal quantity, does not extend itself into space.而智能延期或內部的數量是如此勢必與本質的機構,其可分性,由他們涉及到形而上的矛盾,外部數量,但另一方面,只有一個自然的後果和影響,這可以使緩刑,並扣壓了由第一個原因,這是有形的物質,仍保留其在國內的數量,並沒有擴大自己送入太空。 At all events, however plausibly reason may seem to explain the matter, it is nevertheless face to face with a great mystery.在所有比賽中,但振振有辭,理由似乎是解釋此事,但它是面對一個偉大的奧秘。

(c) The third and last question has to do with the multilocation of Christ in heaven and upon thousands of altars throughout the world. (三)第三個也是最後一個問題,難道與multilocation基督升天後,數以千計的神壇整個世界。 Since in the natural order of events each body is restricted to one position in space (unilocatio), so that before the law proof of an alibi immediately frees a person from the suspicion of crime, multilocation without further question belongs to the supernatural order.因為在自然秩序的事件,每一個機構,是僅限於一個位置,在空間( unilocatio ) ,因此在法律面前證明不在場,立即釋放一個人從涉嫌犯罪的, multilocation沒有進一步的問題是屬於超自然秩序。 First of all, no intrinsic repugnance can be shown in the concept of multilocation.首先,沒有內在的反感,可以表現在觀念multilocation 。 For if the objection be raised, that no being can exist separated from itself or show forth local distances between its various selves, the sophism is readily detected; for multilocation does not multiply the individual object, but only its external relation to and presence in space.如果異議被提出,沒有被可以存在脫離本身還是顯示了地方之間的距離,其各個守土有責,詭辯,是很容易發現; multilocation並不乘以個別對象,但只是其對外的關係,並在空間。 Philosophy distinguishes two modes of presence in creatures:哲學區分了兩種模式存在的動物:

the circumscriptive, and該circumscriptive ,

the definitive.具有權威性的。

The first, the only mode of presence proper to bodies, is that by virtue of which an object is confined to a determinate portion of space in such wise that its various parts (atoms, molecules, electrons) also occupy their corresponding positions in that space.第一,唯一的方式存在恰當的機構,就是憑藉這一個對象,是局限在一個確定的部分空間,在這種明智的,其各部分(原子,分子,電子) ,也佔據了相應的位置在這空間。 The second mode of presence, that properly belonging to a spiritual being, requires the substance of a thing to exist in its entirety in the whole of the space, as well as whole and entire in each part of that space.第二個模式的存在,即妥善屬於一種精神,需要物質的東西,存在於一個整體在整個空間,以及整體和整個每一部分的空間。 The latter is the soul's mode of presence in the human body.後者是靈魂的方式存在於人體。 The distinction made between these two modes of presence is important, inasmuch as in the Eucharist both kinds are found in combination.之間的區別這兩種方式的存在是重要的,因為在聖體聖事的兩種發現的組合。 For, in the first place, there is verified a continuous definitive multilocation, called also replication, which consists in this, that the Body of Christ is totally present in each part of the continuous and as yet unbroken Host and also totally present throughout the whole Host, just as the human soul is present in the body.為,擺在首位,有驗證連續確切multilocation ,所謂還複製,它在這方面,即基督的身體是完全存在於每一個部分的連續和仍未間斷的東道國也徹底,目前在整個東道國,正如人的靈魂是存在於人體。 And precisely this latter analogy from nature gives us an insight into the possibility of the Eucharistic miracle.和正是這後一種比喻來自大自然給了我們一個啟示可能把聖體聖事的奇蹟。 For if, as has been seen above, Divine omnipotence can in a supernatural manner impart to a body such a spiritual, unextended, spatially uncircumscribed mode of presence, which is natural to the soul as regards the human body, one may well surmise the possibility of Christ's Eucharistic Body being present in its entirety in the whole Host, and whole and entire in each part thereof.如果,正如已經看到上述情況,神全能,可以在一個超自然的方式傳授給一個機構,這樣的精神,未擴展,在空間上uncircumscribed模式的存在,這是自然的靈魂,至於人體,可以推測的可能性基督的聖體聖事的機構,目前正將其全部,在整個東道主,對整個整個每一部分。

There is, moreover, the discontinuous multilocation, whereby Christ is present not only in one Host, but in numberless separate Hosts, whether in the ciborium or upon all the altars throughout the world.有,而且,間斷multilocation ,而基督是,目前不僅在一個東道國,但在無數獨立的主持人,無論是在ciborium或致函所有神壇整個世界。 The intrinsic possibility of discontinuous multilocation seems to be based upon the non-repugnance of continuous multilocation.內在的可能性間斷multilocation似乎是基於非厭惡連續multilocation 。 For the chief difficulty of the latter appears to be that the same Christ is present in two different parts, A and B, of the continuous Host, it being immaterial whether we consider the distant parts A and B joined by the continuous line AB or not.對於行政的難度,後者似乎是說,同一基督,是目前在兩個不同的部分, A和B ,連續主辦,它是不重要的,我們是否考慮遙遠的A和B部分加入了由連續線上訴與否。 The marvel does not substantially increase, if by reason of the breaking of the Host, the two parts A and B are now completely separated from each other.這個奇蹟並沒有大幅增加,如果由原因打破了東道主,這兩個A和B部分,現在完全分開,從對方的經驗。 Nor does it matter how great the distance between the parts may be.也不是不管你多麼偉大,它們之間的距離零件可能。 Whether or not the fragments of a Host are distant one inch or a thousand miles from one another is altogether immaterial in this consideration; we need not wonder, then, if Catholics adore their Eucharistic Lord at one and the same time in New York, London, and Paris.不論該片段的主機是遙遠的一英寸或千里,從一個又是完全無關重要,在這樣的考慮,我們不必懷疑,那麼,如果天主教徒崇拜他們的聖體聖事的主,在同一個時間,在紐約,倫敦,和巴黎。 Finally, mention must be made of mixed multilocation, since Christ with His natural dimensions reigns in heaven, whence he does not depart, and at the same time dwells with His Sacramental Presence in numberless places throughout the world.最後,還必須提到了混合multilocation ,因為基督與他的自然層面籠罩在天上,何時會有,他不離開,並在同一時間,整篇都與他的聖事,在無數地方,在整個世界。 This third case would be in perfect accordance with the two foregoing, were we per impossible permitted to imagine that Christ were present under the appearances of bread exactly as He is in heaven and that He had relinquished His natural mode of existence.這第三個案例,將在完善兩國根據前述情況,我們也不可能每准許想像基督人出席下露面的麵包,正是因為他是在天上,他曾放棄他的自然的方式存在。 This, however, would be but one more marvel of God's omnipotence.不過,這會,但多一個奇蹟上帝的全能。 Hence no contradiction is noticeable in the fact, that Christ retains His natural dimensional relations in heaven and at the same time takes up His abode upon the altars of earth.因此,沒有任何矛盾,是明顯的事實,即基督保留其天然的立體關係,在天堂與在同一時間內佔據了他的居留權後,神壇的地球。

There is, furthermore, a fourth kind of multilocation, which, however, has not been realized in the Eucharist, but would be, if Christ's Body were present in its natural mode of existence both in heaven and on earth.因此,此外,第四個種multilocation ,卻一直無法落實,在聖體聖事,但將是,如果基督身體的人出席,在其自然的方式存在,無論是在天上,地下。 Such a miracle might be assumed to have occurred in the conversion of St. Paul before the gates of Damascus, when Christ in person him: "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?"這樣的一個奇蹟,可以假定都發生在轉換聖保祿前,蓋茨在大馬士革,當基督教的人said.to他說: "掃羅,掃羅,為什麼persecutest你我" ? So too the bilocation of saints, sometimes read of in the pages of hagiography, as, eg, in the case of St. Alphonsus Liguori, cannot be arbitrarily cast aside as untrustworthy.所以太了bilocation的聖人,有時候看的,在頁面的hagiography ,作為約束,例如在案件聖阿方liguori ,不能隨意棄之如不可信。 The Thomists and some later theologians, it is true, reject this kind of multilocation as intrinsically impossible and declare bilocation to be nothing more than an "apparition" without corporeal presence.該thomists和一些後來的神學家,這是事實,拒絕這種multilocation作為本質上是不可能的,並宣布bilocation將只是一個" apparition "沒有有形的存在。 But Cardinal De Lugo is of opinion, and justly so, that to deny its possibility might reflect unfavorably upon the Eucharistic multilocation itself.但樞機主教德盧戈是見仁見智,公正,所以,即否定其可能性,可能反映出不利後,聖體聖事的multilocation本身。 If there were question of the vagaries of many Nominalists, as, eg, that a bilocated person could be living in Paris and at the same time dying in London, hating in Paris and at the same time loving in London, the impossibility would be as plain as day, since an individual, remaining such as he is, cannot be the subject of contrary propositions, since they exclude one another.如果有問題的變幻莫測的許多nominalists ,因為,例如,在某bilocated人可住在巴黎,並在同一時間內死亡,在倫敦,恨在巴黎和在同一時間,愛在倫敦,是不可能的,將作為中原為一天,由於個人,其餘如他的地方,不能得到解決,有待相反的主張,因為他們排斥另一種。 The case assumes a different aspect, when wholly external contrary propositions, relating to position in space, are used in reference to the bilocated individual.如此假設的一個不同方面,當全外部相反的主張,有關立場,在太空中,用得其所在參考了bilocated個人。 In such a bilocation, which leaves the principle of contradiction intact, it would be hard to discover an intrinsic impossibility.在這樣一個bilocation ,樹葉的原則,矛盾原封不動,便不難發現,一個內在不可能的事。

Publication information Written by J. Pohle.出版信息寫了J. pohle 。 Transcribed by Charles Sweeney, SJ.轉錄由查爾斯Sweeney ) ,律政司司長。 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume V. Published 1909.天主教百科全書,體積訴公佈1909年。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特Appleton還公司。 Nihil Obstat, May 1, 1909. nihil obstat , 1909年5月1日。 Remy Lafort, Censor.人頭馬lafort ,檢查員。 Imprimatur. imprimatur 。 +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰米farley ,大主教紐約

Consubstantiation consubstantiation

Catholic Information 天主教資訊

This heretical doctrine is an attempt to hold the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist without admitting Transubstantiation.這個邪教學說,是美國企圖以掌握真實存在的基督聖體聖事不必承認陷於變體說。 According to it, the substance of Christ's Body exists together with the substance of bread, and in like manner the substance of His Blood together with the substance of wine.根據該原則,實質的基督身體的存在,再加上物質的麵包,並以同樣方式的實質內容,他的血液與物質的葡萄酒。 Hence the word Consubstantiation.因此字consubstantiation 。 How the two substances can coexist is variously explained.如何把這兩種物質可以共存有各種解釋。 The most subtle theory is that, just as God the Son took to Himself a human body without in any way destroying its substance, so does He in the Blessed Sacrament assume the nature of bread.最微妙的理論則認為,正如上帝的兒子,走上自己是一個對人體無任何方式摧毀其實質內容,那麼他在聖體假設性質的麵包。 Hence the theory is also called "Impanation", a term founded on the analogy of Incarnation.因此,該理論也被稱為" impanation " ,這是一個長遠的基礎上的比喻化身。

The subject cannot be treated adequately except in connection with the general doctrine of the Holy Eucharist.此事不能充分治療,除涉嫌與一般學說的聖體聖事。 Here it will be sufficient to trace briefly the history of the heresy.這裡不僅將有足夠的追查簡要歷史的異端。 In the earliest ages of the Church Christ's words, "This is my body", were understood by the faithful in their simple, natural sense.在最早的年齡教會基督的話說, "這是我的身體" ,被理解,忠實於自己的簡單,自然常識。 In the course of time discussion arose as to whether they were to be taken literally or figuratively; and when it was settled that they were to be taken literally in the sense that Christ is really and truly present, the question of the manner of this presence began to be agitated.在這個過程中的時間討論,是由於它們是否真的被字面或比喻;時,事情獲得解決,他們將要採取的字面意義上說,基督是實實在在地,目前,這個問題的方式,這種駐留開始被激動。 The controversy from the ninth to the twelfth century, after which time the doctrine of Transubstantiation, which teaches that Christ is present in the Eucharist by the change of the entire substance of bread and wine into His Body and Blood, was fully indicated as Catholic dogma.爭議,從第九至十二世紀後,其中的時間學說陷於變體說,它教導我們,基督是目前在聖體聖事所改變的整個物質的麵包和酒到他的身體和血液,是充分表明,作為天主教教條。 In its first phase it turned on the question whether the Body was the historical body of Christ, the very body which was born, crucified, and risen.在第一階段,它把對問題的機構是否是歷史基督的身體,非常的機構誕生了,釘在十字架上,並增加了。 This is maintained by Paschasius Radbert and denied by Ratramnus in the middle of the ninth century.這是保持paschasius radbert並否認ratramnus在中東的第九世紀。 What concerns us here more closely is the next stage of the controversy, when Berengarius (1000-1088) denied, if not the Real Presence, at least any change of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the Body and Blood.我們關心這裡更加緊密,是下一階段的爭議,當berengarius ( 1000至1088年)否認,如果不是真正的存在,至少要改變任何實質的麵包和酒進入實質的身體和血液。 He maintained that "the consecrated Bread, retaining its substance, is the Body of Christ, that is, not losing anything which it was, but assuming something which it was not" (panis sacratus in altari, salvâ suâ substantiâ, est corpus Christi, non amittens quod erat sed assumens quod non erat-Cf. Martène and Durand, "Thesaurus Novus Anecd.", IV, col 105).他堅持認為: " consecrated麵包,保留它的實質,是基督的身體,也就是沒有失去什麼,它是的,但假設的東西,它不是" (潘尼斯sacratus在altari , salvâ suâ substantiâ ,預計參加科珀斯克里斯蒂,非amittens和erat的SED assumens和非erat -比照martène和迪朗, "詞庫新聞anecd " ,四,中校105 ) 。 It is clear that he rejected Transubstantiation; but what sort of presence he admitted would seem to have varied at different periods of his long career.這是明確表示,他拒絕陷於變體說,但什麼樣的存在,他也承認,似乎有各種不同的,在不同的歷史時期,他的長期事業。 His opinions were condemned at various councils held at Rome (1050, 1059, 1078, 1079), Vercelli (1050), Poitiers (1074), though both Pope Alexander II and St. Gregory VII treated him with marked consideration.他的意見被譴責,在各種議會在羅馬舉行( 1050 , 1059名, 1078 , 1079 ) , Vercelli的( 1050 ) ,普瓦捷( 1074 ) ,儘管這兩個教皇亞歷山大二世和聖格雷戈里第七給予顯著的考慮。 His principal opponents If were Lanfranc, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury (De Corpore et Sanguine Domini adversus Berengarium Turonensem), Durandus of Troarn, Guitmundus of Aversa, and Hugh of Langres.他的主要對手,如果被朗弗朗,事後坎特伯雷大主教(德corpore等樂觀多米尼相反方向berengarium turonensem ) , durandus的特羅阿恩, guitmundus的aversa ,休的langres 。 Although it cannot be said that Berengarius found many adherents during his lifetime, yet his heresy did not die with him.雖然不能說berengarius發現其中有許多追隨者在他的一生中,但他的異端邪說,沒有死亡與他的。 It was maintained by Wyclif (Trialog, IV, 6, 10) and Luther (Walch, XX 1228), and is the view of the High Church party among the Anglicans at the present time.這是保持wyclif ( trialog ,四,六, 10 )和路德(瓦爾希,某某1228 ) ,是鑑於對高教會了黨在聖公會在目前這個時間。 Besides the councils above-mentioned, it was condemned by the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Council of Constance, (1418 -- "The substance of the material bread and in like manner the substance of the material wine remain in the Sacrament of the altar", and the first of the condemned propositions of Wyclif), and the Council of Trent (1551).除了議會上面提到的,它譴責第四lateran會( 1215年) ,理事會的人Constance , ( 1418 -"實質的物質食糧,在喜歡的方式實質的物質葡萄酒留在聖走下神壇" ,並第一次的譴責命題wyclif ) ,以及安理會的遄達( 1551 ) 。

Berengarius and his modern followers have appealed chiefly to reason and the Fathers in support of their opinions. berengarius和他的現代追隨者們呼籲,最主要的原因與父親支持他們的意見。 That Transubstantiation is not contrary to reason, and was at least implicitly taught by the Fathers, is shown in the article TRANSUBSTANTIATION.即陷於變體說是不違背常理,並至少含蓄地教,由父親,是顯示在文章中陷於變體說。 In the discussions of the Father about the two natures in the one Person the analogy between the Incarnation and the Eucharist was frequently referred to, this led to the expression of views favoring Impanation.在討論中的父親約兩個性質,在一個人的比喻之間的化身和聖體聖事是經常提到的,這導致了表達意見的偏袒impanation 。 But after the definitive victory of St. Cyril's doctrine, the analogy was seen to be deceptive.但是,當最終的勝利,聖西里爾的學說,比喻被認為是騙人的。 (See Batiffol, Etudes d'histoire, etc., 2nd series, p. 319 sqq.) The great Schoolmen unanimously rejected Consubstantiation, but they differed in their reasons for doing so. (見batiffol ,練習曲-虛擬現實等,第二系列,第3 19頁s qq) 。偉大s choolmen一致拒絕c onsubstantiation,但他們不同於在他們這樣做的原因。 Albertus Magnus, St. Thomas, and St. Bonaventure, maintained that the words, "This is my body", disproved it; while Alexander of Hales, Scotus, Durandus, Occam, and Pierre d'Ailly declared that it was not inconsistent with Scripture, and could only be disproved by the authority of the Fathers and the teaching of the Church (Turmel, Hist. de la théol. posit., I, 313 sqq.). : Albertus思,聖托馬斯,聖文德,堅持認為,換句話說, "這是我的身體" ,反證了它,而亞歷山大的hales , scotus , durandus ,的Occam ,和Pierre -阿伊宣布,它在不抵觸經文中,並只可反證,由權威的父親和教學的教會( turmel ,歷史。 de的香格里拉théol 。陽性。來說,我和313 sqq ) 。 This line of argument has been a stumbling block to Anglican writers, who have quoted some of the Schoolmen in support of their erroneous opinions on the Eucharist; eg Pusey, "The Doctrine of the Real Presence" (1855).按照這種說法已成為絆腳石英國國教的作家,他所引述的部分的schoolmen支持他們的錯誤意見,對聖體聖事;例如pusey , "中庸真正的存在" ( 1855 ) 。

Publication information Written by TB Scannell.出版信息寫結核病Scannell先生。 Transcribed by Dan Clouse.轉錄由丹clouse 。 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IV.天主教百科全書,第四卷。 Published 1908. 1908年出版。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特Appleton還公司。 Nihil Obstat. nihil obstat 。 Remy Lafort, Censor.人頭馬lafort ,檢查員。 Imprimatur. imprimatur 。 +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰米farley ,大主教紐約


In addition to the works mentioned, see HARPER, Peace through the Truth, (London, 1866), I; FRANZELIN, De SS Euch.除上述提及的作品,見哈珀,通過和平的真相, (倫敦, 1866年)的時候,我; franzelin ,德五euch 。 (Rome, 1873), thes. (羅馬, 1873年) , thes 。 xiv; SCWANE, Dogmengeschichte (Freiburg im Br., 1882), III; VERNET in Dict.第十四; scwane , dogmengeschichte (弗賴堡的IM溴, 1882年) ,三;弗內特在字典。 de théol.德théol 。 cath.蛋白酶。 sv Bérénguer de Tours; STREBER in Kirchenlex, sv Consubstantatio; HEDLEY, The Holy Eucharist (1907); WAGGETT, The Holy Eucharist (Anglican, London, 1906); GORE, The Body of Christ (London, 1907). sv bérénguer德賞streber在kirchenlex , sv consubstantatio ;赫德利,聖體聖事( 1907年) ; waggett ,聖體聖事(聖公會,倫敦, 1906年) ;戈爾,基督的身體(倫敦, 1907年) 。

Additional Comments補充意見

Transubstantiation is a central belief of the Roman Catholic Church.陷於變體說是一個中心信仰羅馬天主教教堂。 Catholics might find possible bias in the articles included above, which each might be construed as containing a Protestant tendency.天主教徒可能會發現可能偏向條款列入以上,其中每一個可能被視為含有一個新教徒的傾向。

We (editors of BELIEVE), who happen to be Protestant, feel that the above articles accurately present the facts and general modern scholastic attitudes toward transubstantiation.我們(編輯相信) ,他碰巧被新教,認為上述條款如實反映事實和一般現代學術態度陷於變體說。 Catholics are taught that there is compelling Scriptural and Patristic Tradition proof for supporting the premise of transubstantiation.天主教徒都告訴我們,有令人信服的聖經和教父的傳統證據支持的前提下陷於變體說。 They therefore may take exception with some of the statements made.因此,他們可能會採取例外與部分所作的發言。 We hope to soon locate a Catholic scholar's article on the subject to add to this presentation.我們希望能盡快找到一個天主教學者的文章就這個問題向他們加入到這份陳述。

The subject is an example of probably around 30 different important Christian subjects where individuals can apply their own preconceptions and assumptions to arrive at their own conclusions.主題就是一個例子,大概30個左右的不同重要基督教科目時,個人可以申請自己的成見和假設,得出自己的結論。 Catholics choose to believe that the bread "actually turns bloody" in the process of eating it, although they agree that there are NO outward signs of it. There is no possible way to argue against such a claim! If you had a dream or a nightmare last night, no one has any possible way of arguing that you did not, because it was a personal experience that cannot be confirmed or disputed by anyone else. So, if Catholics are right about the "becoming bloody" viewpoint, no critic could ever "prove" them wrong but also, they could never "prove" that they are right.天主教徒選擇相信麵包" ,但事實上輪流血腥"在這個過程中的吃,但他們同意,有沒有離港的跡象,它有沒有可能來反對這種索賠!如果你有一個夢,或噩夢昨晚,沒有人有任何可能的方式,認為你沒有,因為這是一個個人經驗,無法確認或有爭議的,由其他人,所以,如果天主教徒都說得對, "成為血腥"的角度來看,並沒有影評人可以往"證明"他們是錯誤的,而且,他們可從來沒有"證明"說,他們是正確的。

Luther, and Calvin, and others, each felt that this was an illogical conclusion, and, more specifically, that the Bible does not clearly support the "bloody" interpretation. Some Protestants came to conclude that the bread was "merely symbolic" of the Lord, while others (following Luther) felt it really became the Lord, but in a non-bloody way.路德,卡爾文和其他人,每個不滿,認為這是一個符合邏輯的結論,而且,更具體地說,即聖經沒有明確支持"血腥"的解釋, 一些新教徒來到得出結論認為,麵包是"純粹的象徵"的主,而其他人(以下路德)認為,它真的成了上帝,但在一個不流血的方式。

No one can either "prove" or "disprove" any of these viewpoints either. 沒有人可以"證明"或"反證"上述任何一種觀點。

It is a subject on which there can never be agreement! Each group has applied their own preconceptions and assumptions and decided on a specific conclusion/interpretation. Since the Bible does not include sufficient details to tell that one or another is more correct, they each should be considered "equally correct" (personal opinion), and therefore totally valid FOR THAT GROUP. 這是一個議題,這點大家都不會同意!各組已申請自己的成見和假設,並決定對一個具體的結論/口譯, 因為聖經沒有包括足夠的細節看出一個或另一個是比較正確的話,他們每人應被視為"同樣正確"的 (個人意見) ,因此完全適用於該集團。 Therefore, we see no cause or basis to criticize Catholics for their conclusion regarding Transubstantiation.因此,我們看不到有任何原因或基礎,以批評天主教徒,為他們的結論就陷於變體說。 But we also see no cause or basis to criticize Zwingli et al for a purely symbolic understanding.但我們也看到,沒有任何原因或依據批評zwingli等人,為一個純粹的象徵性的理解。

Our Church feels that such arguments are pretty much irrelevant. What REALLY is important is how the Eucharist is perceived by and affects the specific person that partakes in it. If a person simply eats it, as a mundane piece of bread, it has no merit, in ANY Church!我們的教會認為,這種論調是非常不重要。 才是真正重要的是如何聖體聖事是所察覺 ,並影響特定人士表示,參與大,因為如果一個人根本吃它,作為一個世俗的一塊麵包,它沒有任何好處在任何教會! However, if the person's heart is deeply affected by the Rite (the REAL desire of the Lord), then it is valid, no matter what the opinions on interpretation might be.但是,如果人的心是深深受到了成年禮(真實願望主)的話,那就是有效的,無論有什麼意見,對解釋可能。

We have a rather different thought to offer up on the subject!我們有一個相當不同的思路提供了關於這一主題! Modern science has proven that there are an unbelievable number of atoms in even a small amount of any liquid or solid (Avogadro's number).現代科學已經證明,有一個令人難以置信的數量的原子,甚至少量的任何液體或固體(阿伏伽德羅的號碼) 。 If there is a cup of coffee on your desk, or a glass of pop, or a Ritz cracker, or a candy bar, there are something like 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms in it.如果有一個喝咖啡對你的案頭,還是玻璃的流行音樂,還是麗嘉裂解,或是糖果酒吧,有一些像100000000000000000000000原子中的。 When Jesus Lived, He breathed!當耶穌住了,他吹了! Every breath He exhaled had water vapor in it and carbon dioxide, atoms and molecules that HAD BEEN PART OF HIS BODY.每呼氣他呼出了水汽在它和二氧化碳,原子和分子已被他的部分身體。 A number of years back, I studied this subject carefully.數年前,我在研究這個課題小心。 The winds of the world distribute such air, including those molecules, all around the world, within a couple years.風的世界散佈這些空氣,包括那些分子,在世界各地,一對夫婦年。 As a wheat plant is growing in Kansas, it takes in carbon dioxide and water vapor from the air, which then become part of that plant!作為小麥的植物是生長在堪薩斯州,它的二氧化碳和水蒸氣,從空中,然後成為部分,即植物! The point here is that some of those molecules had actually been part of the Body of Jesus 2000 years earlier!這一點在此指出的是某些人的分子已實際身體的一部分耶穌2000年早些時候! I did the math on this, and was amazed!我本來數學就這個問題,感到十分詫異! Every mouthful of that coffee certainly contains around a MILLION atoms that had once physically been part of the Body of Jesus!每一口咖啡,當然包含約100萬原子曾一度身體被身體的一部分耶穌! Similar for crackers or candy bars!類似餅乾或糖塊!

This is really an entirely different subject, but it certainly is an established fact.這實在是一個完全不同的問題,但毫無疑問,這是一個既定的事實。 I see it as sort of affecting such arguments regarding the Nature of the Eucharist.我看這是排序的影響這種論調對於大自然的聖體聖事。 If someone wanted to think that the million atoms that ACTUALLY had been part of the Body of Jesus were "bloody", I cannot really argue against that, because some/most of those atoms certainly had been His blood and His flesh.如果有人要以為這是萬原子實際上已被部分的是耶穌的身體被"血腥" ,我真的不能反駁這點,因為有些/大多數這些原子當然一直是他的血和肉。 However, if a different person would choose to look at that coffee as more "symbolic", well that is also sort of true!但是,如果一個不同的人會選擇看那個咖啡隨著越來越多的"象徵性" ,那麼這也是一種真!

This is brought up to try to show that "arguments" on "human important perceptions" are probably not really very important.這是帶來了嘗試表明, "論據" , "人重要的看法: "也許不是真的很重要。 Also, that you might look at EVERY piece of bread, and meat, and vegetable, and every glass of any liquid, in a new light!另外,你可能看每一塊麵包,肉類,蔬菜,都被玻璃的任何液體,在新的光芒! With the proper mind-set, I believe, one could see that EVERY bite of food and every sip of liquid is arguably "of Christ" in a VERY direct way!與適當的心理定勢,我相信,人們可以看到,每一口食物都SIP的液體可以說是"基督"的一個非常直接的方式! Instead of just sucking down a Pepsi, look at it for a moment, and contemplate these facts.而不是只吸了百事可樂,看它一會兒,沉思了這些事實。 I have a VERY large number of "religious experiences" in this way!我有一個非常大的數目, "宗教經驗" ,這種方式!

Some Christians might get upset over the molecule discussion above.有些基督徒可能獲得超過底價分子從以上討論。 NO, it is NOT meant as any replacement for Faith perceptions of the Eucharist!不,這是不是意味著作為任何更換為信仰的看法,聖體聖事! It is NOT to imply that Faith perceptions are incorrect or incomplete.這是不是意味著信仰的看法是不正確或不完整。 Just the reverse!剛剛扭轉! Our small Church encourages all Members to spend a few seconds contemplating the wafer or bread about to be taken in the Eucharist Rite, in order to realize, in ADDITION to the Faith importance as described by their Church, the ACTUAL FACT that they are looking at and about to ingest ACTUAL PHYSICAL PARTS of the Body of Jesus!我們的小教堂鼓勵所有成員花了幾秒鐘繼續研究晶圓片麵包或即將採取的聖體聖事禮儀,為了實現好,除了信仰的重要性,形容他們的教會,但事實上,他們正在尋找在即將攝取的實際身體部分的耶穌! Personally, I often get a shiver, in realizing just how intimately Jesus is to me in that Rite!以我個人而言,往往得到顫栗,在實現公正,如何關係密切,耶穌是我在這成年禮! We hope that is also true among the Congregation!我們希望,也確實之間眾!

Newer Additional Comments (Nov 2005) by the Editor of BELIEVE.新的補充意見( 2005年11月)所編輯的相信。

I sometimes wonder how Members of the Clergy might act if they were to interact with Jesus Himself, without realizing it!有時我什至懷疑有多少成員神職人員可能採取行動,如果他們能夠順利與耶穌本人,沒有實現它! Several Lutheran Ministers have behaved to us in extremely poor ways on this subject!幾個路德部長們不乖,我們在極其惡劣的方式就此事! And after an initial mean-spirited e-mail that accuses BELIEVE of being an adversary of Lutheranism, often with amazingly harsh language, I have always assured them that BELIEVE is NOT "against Lutheranism" and in fact always wants to improve any of the 1300 class=qxt>This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文

Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在
usually asking for their assistance in improving this particular presentation.經過初步的意思昂揚的電子郵件指控,相信會被敵方的路德教,往往是令人驚訝的苛刻語言,我總是對他們保證,相信她是不是"對路德教" ,並在事實上總是要改善的任何1300主題演講中認為,這可能不準確或不完整的,而且通常要求他們協助改善這種特別介紹。 A Lutheran Minister just reacted to that request by saying that he didn't see any reason that he should have to do our research! 1路德部長只是做出了自然反應這一請求,他說,他不認為有任何理由認為他應該做我們的研究! OK!確定! That's fine, but without any cooperation from Lutheran Ministry, it is hard for a non-Lutheran (a Non-Denominational Protestant Pastor) to truly learn Lutheran attitudes.這很好,但沒有任何合作,由香港信義部,這是很難一個非路德(非教派新教牧師) ,以真正了解路德的態度。

I will attempt to describe the issue, as best I understand it.我將嘗試描述此問題,我要盡自己的理解。

As far as we can find from research, the word Consubstantiation has absolutely no other usage other than to supposedly describe the Lutheran belief regarding the Eucharist.據我們能夠找到從科研,字consubstantiation已絕對沒有其他的用途以外,以假定形容路德信仰有關聖體聖事。 However, Lutheran Clergy seem to go ballistic regarding the very existence of the word!然而,路德派牧師,似乎去彈道就存在的字眼! Now, if the "definition" of the word Consubstantiation is inaccurate, I could easily see why Lutherans would want to correct it.現在,只要把兩岸"定義"這個詞consubstantiation是不準確的話,我可以很容易看到為什麼lutherans將要糾正它。 But that has never been their interest, in dozens of Lutheran Clergy who have complained about the above (scholar-written) articles.但從來沒有自己的利益,在幾十個路德派牧師的人都抱怨以上(學者撰寫)的文章。 They always are intensely outraged (and most very clearly express extreme outrage!) at the very word itself!他們往往是在激烈憤怒(和大部分很清楚的表示極端的憤慨! ) ,在很一詞本身! In every case, I have calmly tried to ask why, and none have ever responded to that question.在任何情況下,我曾冷靜地試圖要問為什麼,並沒有以往回應這個問題。

That attitude COULD make sense, IF the word Consubstantiation had some second meaning, a usage where the meaning is clearly different from Lutheran belief regarding the Eucharist.這種態度可以理解,如果單詞consubstantiation了一些的第二個意義,而使用的含義顯然是不同信仰路德教關於聖體聖事。 No Lutheran Clergy has never indicated that there is any other such usage.沒有路德會神職人員從來沒有表示有任何其他這種用法。

This then seems REALLY confusing to me!這就好像真的混淆了我! At this point in each communication, I usually refer to the word "mousepad", which, as far as I know, only has a single usage, that little area on which a computer mouse moves around.在這一點上,在每一個溝通,我通常是指用" mousepad " ,其中,據我所知,只有一個單一的用法,即小面積上電腦鼠標動作左右。 If someone became intensely emotionally irritated by the word "mousepad", I would wonder why.如果有人成為緊鑼密鼓惱怒情緒一詞由" mousepad "時,我會想知道為什麼。 With no other know usage, WHATEVER the definition of that word is, it MUST have something to do with a mouse and moving it around!不知道其他的用途,無論定義這個詞的是,它必須也要與鼠標移動它靠近! So even if a definition was considered inaccurate, doesn't it make more sense to attempt to refine the definition to being more correct than to become abusive and mean-spirited because the word mousepad was used?因此,即使一個定義被認為是不準確的,沒有它,使更多的責任感,以試圖重新定義,以更正確的,比成為辱罵,並指一種昂揚的精神狀態,因為這個詞mousepad用?

In my interactions with Lutheran Ministers on this one subject, I have started to wonder how well they have their acts together!在我的互動與路德部長們就這一個議題,我已經開始懷疑有多少,以及他們自己的行為,共同發展! Some have insisted that, yes, Luther described this view, but later abandoned it, and yes, Melanchthon first used that word but also later refuted it completely.有些人堅持說,是的,路德形容這種看法,但後來放棄了它,是的,梅蘭希頓首次使用這個詞,但後來也駁斥它完全。 Does this mean that Lutheran beliefs today are not compatible with what Luther had believed as he initiated the Protestant Reformation?這是否意味著路德信仰今天不兼容什麼路德曾經相信,因為他倡導了新教改革嗎? (seems like a fair question). (好像一個公平的問題) 。 Other Lutheran Clergy have "announced" to me that Luther had never used such a word (which is true!) and that it first was used around 60 years later, around 1590.其他路德會神職人員" ,宣布"我認為路德從來沒有用了這樣一個詞(這是真的! ) ,並認為它首先是用大約60年後的今天,第1590左右。 Yet other Lutheran Clergy insist that the word Consubstantiation was used (either 100 or 200 years) before Luther, and some of those claims say that Scotus first used it.不過,其他路德派牧師堅持說,字consubstantiation用(無論是100還是200年)之前,路德,和某些人的債權說scotus首次使用它。 But none have ever provided BELIEVE with actual texts of any of these things, and instead only refer to MODERN Lutheran texts.但還沒有提供任何時候都相信,以實際文本的任何這些東西,而不是只指現代路德文本。 The standards of BELIEVE are such that that is not good enough!該標準的,相信這樣的說明,這是不足夠的! If we are to dump the work of a highly respected Christian scholar (our included texts), we would need REALLY good evidence and documentation!如果我們要傾倒的工作,一位德高望重的基督教學者(包括我國文本) ,我們需要真正好的證據和文件!

Even if someone used that specific word prior to Luther, that does not necessarily mean that it did or didn't mean the same thing.甚至如果有人利用這特定的單詞之前,路德,這並不一定意味著它還是並不意味著同一件事。 The word "mouse" has been around for thousands of years, but never referred to any part of a computer until twenty years ago!用"鼠標"已經千百年來,但從未提及任何部分的電腦,直到二十年前! Should we read a Shakespeare mention of a mouse with outrage, in not properly also referring to the computer?我們應該閱讀莎士比亞提的鼠標與憤慨,在沒有妥善亦指電腦嗎?

In any case, all we want are actual facts.在任何情況下,所有我們希望是客觀事實。 Except for these aberrant Lutheran Clergy Members, we actually strongly support the Lutheran Church and wish to improve BELIEVE to better present their beliefs.除了這些異常路德派牧師的成員來說,我們確實強烈支持路德教會,並希望改善相信,以更好地介紹他們的信仰。 But, regarding this one word, Consubstantiation, they seem to immediately get angry and vengeful and go into attack-mode, without (yet) ever providing actual evidence (not counting recent articles of their peers) which is what we actually need.但是,對於這一個字, consubstantiation ,他們似乎馬上讓憤怒和報復,並進入攻擊模式,但無(但)以往任何時候都提供實際的證據(不包括近期文章的同儕) ,而這正是我們真正需要的人。 For example, if Scotus actually used the term Consubstantiation, we would just need the name of the book and the page number, so we could research the context in which the word was used.舉例來說,如果scotus實際利用任期consubstantiation ,我們只需要的名義,這本書和頁碼,所以我們可以研究的上下文中使用該詞。

This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文

Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在