Transubstantiation, Real Presence陷于变体 中文 - Zhong Wen

General Information一般资料

Christ met with his disciples for a Last Supper.基督会见了他的弟子们为最后的晚餐。After solemn ritual acts he spoke of the bread as his body and the wine as his blood of the new Covenant.经过隆重的仪式行为,他谈到了他的身体作为面包和作为他的新立约的血酒。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.在最早的书面帐户,圣保罗的科林蒂安,并在路加,据记载,门徒指示继续在他们的主的死亡纪念仪式。

Interpretations of the meaning of the Eucharist vary.圣体圣事的意义诠释有所不同。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.陷于开发基督教的教义作家的二维世纪举办的圣体由两个现实,有的一俗世和天堂。 中古在中世纪,它至今仍是天主教教义的罗马官员。

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. 根据这一立场,物质,或内在现实葡萄酒,面包,就变成物质的基督的身体和血,但事故,或品尝),外部通过感官品质闻名(颜色,重量,仍不变。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息来源
BELIEVE Religious Information Source相信宗教信息来源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects

我们2300 宗教科目名单
Other interpretations of the Eucharist were emphasized at the time of the Reformation.圣体的其他解释都强调,在时间的改革。

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). 新教位置范围从consubstantiation路德认为,其中认为基督是目前随着不变的现实和葡萄酒的面包,到茨温利)象征性的解释基督的圣体作为一个简单的纪念逝世(每。

[from Charles W Ranson][由查尔斯W兰森]

Bibliography 参考书目
WR Crockett, Eucharist (1989); GD Kilpatrick, The Eucharist in Bible and Liturgy (1984); JM Powers, Eucharistic Theology (1967).西铁克罗克特,圣体圣事(1989);广东基尔帕特里克,在圣经和礼​​仪(1984)圣体圣事; JM国,圣体圣事神学(1967)。


General Information一般资料

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.陷于变体,在基督教神学,是在圣体的面包和酒成为加以管理,在奉献中,实际的身体和耶稣的血教条,尽管面包和酒的外在表现 - 形状,颜色,味道和气味 - 依然存在。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,它是相对于其他学说如路德的学说,即基督的身体和血液中共存,并与面包和酒,保持不变。

The term transubstantiation was adopted into the phraseology of the church in 1215, when it was employed by the Fourth Lateran Council.这个词陷于被收养为教会的用语在1215年,当时的第四次拉特兰协会聘用。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).教条再次确认(1551)由遄达会,内容如下:“如果任何人不得说,在最神圣的圣体圣事,但仍然是我们的身体和血主的实质,面包和酒在一起耶稣基督,并否认面包进入人体精彩和奇异转换的实质内容的整体,对整个物质进入血液中的酒,酒单是种面包和剩余,而转换天主教最恰当呼吁陷于变体,让他被诅咒“(会话13,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.在他的通谕奥秘Fidei(神秘的信仰,1965年),教皇保罗六世重申了传统教学以正确的天主教神学家的意见,一些现代的罗马,这一变化只是在组成一个新的宗教终局(“transfinalization”)或意义(“transignification “),案件导致无论是在存在多一点象征性的神圣。

Transubstantiation is a doctrine not only of the Roman Catholic church but also of the Orthodox church.陷于变体是一种学说不仅是罗马天主教教堂,但在东正教教堂也。At the Synod of Jerusalem (1672), the doctrine was confirmed as essential to the faith of the entire Orthodox church.在耶路撒冷的主教(1672年),这个学说被确认为必不可少的整个信仰东正教教堂。The dogma was repudiated by the Church of England.教条是否定由英格兰教会。

Transubstantiation, Real Presence陷于变体,真实的存在

Advanced Information先进的信息

The reference in this phrase is to the presence of Christ in the sacrament of Holy Communion.这句话中提到的是基督教的圣餐圣事的存在。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.在更一般的意义上讲,它是不反感的,因为所有的基督徒都同意说,基督是真的被圣灵时,他们聚集在他的名字存在。Theologically, however, the word "real" indicates a particular form or understanding of the presence in terms of realist philosophy.神学,然而,这个词“真正”表示某种特定形式的现实主义哲学的条件或存在理解。On this view, the so-called substance of Christ's body is a reality apart from its "accidents" or specific physical manifestations.从这个角度来看,基督的身体,使所谓的物质是一种现实,除了它的“意外”或特定的物理表现。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.正是这一点应该是存在于或面包和酒,意外及更换(或如路德会说,联同)他们自己的实质内容。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,没有这种解释圣经的基础,在改革神学将被拒绝,并以圣经的存在更多的观念所取代。

GW Bromiley毛重罗米立
(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary) (Elwell宣布了福音字典)

Consubstantiation 圣体共在论

General Information一般资料

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是用来解释基督教的经验和信念,基督与他的人民是真正存在于他们对圣体圣事庆祝活动的教学。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发展于宗教改革路德永发在16 世纪自有想法出现在马丁路德的著作这个词本身最早梅兰希受雇于他的年轻当代。

Consubstantiation rests on the same philosophical assumptions as the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, which it opposed. Consubstantiation取决于以下作为陷于中世纪的学说,它反对同样的哲学假设。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.这两种学说取决于亚里士多德的教学方式,是由物质的意外,可通过感官感知,和实质,掌握它的精神和构成基本现实。 Both agree that, in the Eucharist, the accidents of the bread and wine remain unchanged.双方同意,在圣体的面包和酒的意外维持不变。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.不同的是变体学说,但是,断言,该物质是面包和酒也不变,无处不在的基督的身体共存“中,,并根据”面包的物质,和基督的血在consubstantiation ,,而根据由神的话语权力葡萄酒。

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.路德说明了把铁成火比喻consubstantiation:铁和火是烧红的铁团结,然而这两种物质保持不变。

Charles P. Price查尔斯P价格


Advanced Information先进的信息

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.陷于变体所接受的理论是罗马在1215年作为教条,试图解释基督的发言:“这是我的身体”,“这是我的血”(马克14时22分,24)适用于面包和葡萄酒主的晚餐。 It is insisted that the "is" must be taken with the strictest literalism.这是坚持说“是”必须采取最严格的写实主义。But to our senses the bread and wine seem to remain exactly as they were even when consecrated.但我们的面包和酒的感官似乎仍然正是因为他们甚至在神圣的。There is no perceptible miracle of transformation.有没有感觉到转型的奇迹。The explanation is found in terms of a distinction between the socalled substance (or true reality) and the accidents (the specific, perceptible characteristics).这个解释被发现在一间所谓的物质(或真正的现实)和意外(具体,可感知特性)的区别条款。The latter remain, but the former, ie, the substance of bread and wine, is changed into that of the body and blood of Christ.后者仍然存在,但前者,即物质的面包和酒,是进入人体和血液基督变了。This carries with it many serious consequences.这承载着许多严重的后果。

If Christ is substantially present, it is natural that the elements should be adored.如果基督是大大存在,它是很自然的元素应该被崇拜。It can also be claimed that he is received by all who communicate, whether rightly to salvation or wrongly to perdition.它也可以声称自己是谁收到的所有通信,是否正确或错误地得救灭亡。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.此外,还出现了一个基督为罪处罚和解的自焚的时间观念,与所有相关的私人群众丑闻。The weaknesses of the theory are obvious.这个理论的缺点是显而易见的。It is not scriptural.这不是圣经。On sharper analysis it does not even explain the dominical statements.更清晰的分析上它甚至不解释dominical发言。It contradicts the true biblical account of Christ's presence.它违背了基督的存在真正的圣经帐户。It has no secure patristic backing.它有没有安全教父后盾。It stands or falls with a particular philosophical understanding.它站立或某哲学理解的范围。It destroys the true nature of a sacrament.它破坏了一个圣礼的本质。And it certainly perverts its proper use and gives rise to dangerous superstitions inimical to evangelical faith.它当然变态的正确使用方法,并引起不利于福音派信仰危险的迷信。

GW Bromiley毛重罗米立

(Elwell Evangelical Dictionary)(Elwell宣布了福音字典)

Bibliography 参考书目
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卡尔文学院4.18和t克兰默,在主的晚餐真与天主教教义; ñ迪莫克,主的晚餐学说;东华格里菲斯,神学的原则,

The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist真实存在的基督在圣体

Catholic Information天主教新闻

In this article we shall consider:在这篇文章中,我们应考虑:

the fact of the Real Presence, which is, indeed, the central dogma;真实存在的,它确实是,中央教条的事实;

the several allied dogmas grouped about it, namely:关于它的一些盟国分组教条,即:

Totality of Presence,总体性的存在,


Permanence of Presence and the Adorableness of the Eucharist;持久性的存在和圣体的可爱;

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.理性的猜测,据有关调查,根据投机的各个方面八月谜是允许的,到目前为止,因为它是可取的照亮了哲学的光。


According to the teaching of theology a revealed fact can be proved solely by recurrence to the sources of faith, viz.根据神学教学一个发现实际上可以完全由复发的信仰,即来源证明。Scripture and Tradition, with which is also bound up the infallible magisterium of the Church.经文和传统,这也势必了犯错的教会训导。

A. Proof from Scripture答:从圣经的证明

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.).这可能是引用的话,从双方的承诺(约翰6时26 sqq。),特别是从制度与在该synoptics和圣保罗(哥林多前书11时23 sqq。)录得的话。

The words of promise (John 6)许字(约翰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.通过对面包和鱼和水后,走在前面的一天,奇迹,基督不仅准备了崇高的圣体含有承诺的话语,他的听众,而且还向他们证明,他拥有的,作为全能的神男人,一个权力优于和自然规律独立,并可能因此,提供这样一个超自然的食物,没有比他自己的肉体和血液等,事实上,。 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.这种话语被送到在capharnaum(约翰6:26-72),并分为两个不同的部分,其中约的关系在天主教exegetes意见各不相同。 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.没有什么阻碍了我们的第一部分解释[约翰6:26-48(51)],由基督自己比喻为信仰对象,将收到一个精神食粮在比喻的意义从口入的“天堂面包”的理解信心。 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.这种对话语(约翰6:52-72),但是,不仅是不寻常的,但绝对不可能的,因为即使(德里,Kostlin,Keil公司,Kahnis,和其他人)新教注释者轻易认输的第二部分形象化的解释。 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".所有的承诺话语整体结构的第一个要求对词语的字面解释:“吃人子的肉,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).因为基督在讲话中提到,过去(约翰6时31,32,49,59),本天上的面包(约翰6时32平方)甘露,和生命的面包食品三倍未来(约翰6:27,52)。 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.对应的三种食物和三个时期,有很多掌柜 - 摩西配药的甘露,滋润人的父亲在信神的儿子了肉,终于让自己的基督,血肉。Although the manna, a type of the Eucharist, was indeed eaten with the mouth, it could not, being a transitory food, ward off death.虽然甘露,一个类型的圣体,确实是用口食用,但它不能作为一个过渡性的食物,抵御死亡。 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.第二食品,即由天父所提供,是天上来的粮,而他​​dispenses嗝等孔培养板的犹太人为他们的精神食粮,因为由作为对象的化身,他握着他的儿子到他们的原因,因为他们的信心。 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,如果第三类的食物,基督自己的誓言,让在未来某一时间仅是一个新的恢复体力,从最后命名为不同信仰的食物,它可以比他的真实血肉让利,以真正在吃圣餐喝醉了。 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).这就是为什么基督所以准备用现实的表达“啃”(约翰福音6:54,56,58:trogein)在谈到这一点,他的生命之粮,除了这句话,“吃”(约翰6时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.红衣主教贝拉明(德Euchar。,我,3),此外,提醒人们注意这样一个事实,确实如此,如果在基督的心灵的甘露是圣体的数字,后者必须有更多的东西不仅仅是有福了面包,另有原型不会大幅擅长的类型。 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.同样持有圣体圣事的其他数字真实,因为由Melchisedech提供面包和酒,面包的命题(窗格propositionis),逾越节的羔羊。 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).一个形象化的解释是不可能更强行带回家由下列文本分析:“除了你吃人子的肉,喝他的血,那就不应该有你的生命,他不吃我的肉体和。喝我血的人有永生:我会在最后一天提出他为我的肉是肉事实上:。我的血真是可喝的“(约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".这是事实that即使在反犹主义,而在经文本身,这句话,“吃一些自己的肉”,有一个比喻的含义,即“迫害,要有人深恶痛绝”。 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,那么,耶稣的话要采取的形象,这样看来,基督已经答应他的敌人和一个永生的伤害,与他直接迫害补偿光荣的复活。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”的经文,尤其是没有别的比喻的意义比可怕的惩罚(参见以赛亚书49:26;启示录16:6),但是,在目前的文本,这种解释是一语中的,就像不可能在这里,“吃一些自己的肉”。 Consequently, eating and drinking are to be understood of the actual partaking of Christ in person, hence literally.因此,进食和饮水要在基督的人,因此从字面上理解partaking的实际。

This interpretation agrees perfectly with the conduct of the hearers and the attitude of Christ regarding their doubts and objections.这种解释完全同意与该听众的行为和态度方面的基督的疑虑和反对。Again, the murmuring of the Jews is the clearest evidence that they had understood the preceding words of Jesus literally (John 6:53).同样,淙淙的犹太人是最明显的证据,他们已经明白耶稣的话字面上前(约6:53)。 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,这远远否认建设作为重大误解,基督重复以最庄严的方式他们在约翰,(6:54 sqq。)。In consequence, many of His Disciples were scandalized and said: "This saying is hard, and who can hear it?"结果,他的弟子很多人震惊,并说:“呢?这很难说,谁可以听到它”(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. (约翰福音6:61),而不是收回他说的话,而不是责备他们的基督信仰要通过暗指他sublimer起源和他的阿森松岛到天堂的未来,他们。And without further ado He allowed these Disciples to go their way (John 6:62 sqq.).而如果没有进一步的ADO他让这些弟子各走各的路(约翰6:62 sqq。)。Finally He turned to His twelve Apostles with the question: "Will you also go away?最后,他转向他的十二使徒同一个问题:“你还走吗?

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.).彼得提出加强和谦虚的信念说:“?。主啊,我们该向谁去祢永生的话,我们相信并有已知的,那你是基督​​,是神​​的儿子”(约翰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.作者的话语和反对的怨言了整个场面证明,在走廊的Zwinglian和英国圣公会的解释,“这是精神,那叫”等,在一个以上或收回讲话掩饰某种意义上讲,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.对于这些话,尽管他们的门徒与耶稣切断连接,而12例接受了一个简单的信念神秘而尚未他们不明白。Nor did Christ say: "My flesh is spirit", ie to be understood in a figurative sense, but: "My words are spirit and life".也没有基督说:“我的肉体是精神”,即在一个比喻的意义上理解,但是:“我的话就是灵和生命”。There are two views regarding the sense in which this text is to be interpreted.有两种观点的意义就在此文字来解释。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.许多的父亲宣布说,耶稣的真正肉(扎尔克斯)是不被理解为脱离他的神(醑),因此在吃人的感觉,而是完全属于超自然的经济。 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,更科学的解释称,在“血肉”圣经反对“精神”,前者总是意味着肉体的态度,后者慧眼的信念照亮,因此它在这一段耶稣的意图以突出的崇高神秘的圣体,可以把握的超自然信仰的光照下单,而不能由肉体的头脑,谁是权衡下的罪恶包袱理解的事实。 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).在这种情况下是不是要问,在,父亲和几个(以弗所,431;尼西亚,787)合一议会通过了的话字面意义上说,虽然这不是教条定义(参见的遄达,sess会二十一。角一)。 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.如果这是真实的,一些天主教神学家(作为cajetan,Ruardus攻丝机,约翰赫塞尔,和老Jansenius)倾向于形象化的解释,它仅仅是有争议的原因,因为在他们的困惑,他们想到,否则胡斯和索赔在这项由俗人圣杯partaking的新教Utraquists不能回答,从经文的说法。 (Cf. Patrizi, "De Christo pane vitæ", Rome, 1851; Schmitt, "Die Verheissung der Eucharistie bei den Vütern", 2 vols., Würzburg, 1900-03.) (参见柏德,“德克里斯托窗格简历”,罗马,1851年,施密特,“模具Verheissung明镜Eucharistie北书斋Vütern”,2卷,维尔茨堡,1900年至1903年。。)

The words of Institution的话,机构

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.教会的大宪章,但是,是机构的话来说,“这是我的身体 - 这是我的血”,其字面意思,她不间断地坚持从最早的时候。The Real Presence is evinced, positively, by showing the necessity of the literal sense of these words, and negatively, by refuting the figurative interpretations.真正的存在是明证,积极,所显示的这些话的字面意义上的必要性,并驳斥了负面的形象化表述。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.至于第一,四个不同的叙述最后的晚餐的存在,通常分为伯多禄(马太26:26 sqq。马克14时22 sqq。)和双宝莲帐户(路加福音22时19分平方米;哥林多前书11:24平方米),有利于字面解释。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.他们一致同意在打击方面,尽管要领,伯多禄帐户是简单和清晰,而宝琳是更丰富的其他详细信息,并在其引用的话,就涉及更多的圣杯引用。 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."它不过是自然的和合理的期望,当四个不同国家和不同时期的不同叙述者涉及的话,机构的各界读者,一个不同寻常的人物的言论,例如,因为,发生,这饼是基督的身体符号,会在某处或其他,背叛自己,无论是在文字设置不同,或在意义明确的表达真正意图,或者至少是在一些这样的标记除了为:“他说话时,然而,他的身体的迹象。“ But nowhere do we discover the slightest ground for a figurative interpretation.但是,我们没有其他地方发现了一个形象化的解释丝毫理由。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,那么,自然,字面解释是假的,圣经的记录,仅会被视为一个致命错误的原因在信仰和神圣的渲染参拜面包(artolatria)视为严重犯罪 - 一个假设很少与和谐四个神圣的作家或与灵感的神圣文本字符。Moreover, we must not omit the important circumstance, that one of the four narrators has interpreted his own account literally.此外,我们绝不能忽略的重要的情况下,这四个叙述者人从字面上理解他自己的帐户。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".这是圣保罗(哥林多前书11时27分平方米),谁在最严厉的语言,品牌为“有罪的身体和血的主”不配收件人。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.可以有自己对基督的严重罪行没有问题,除非我们认为,真正的身体和血真正的基督圣体圣事是真的存在。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).此外,如果我们只参加对文字本身的自然的感觉是如此有力和明确的,路德写信给斯特拉斯堡的基督徒在1524年:“早上我起来,我不能逃脱,文本太长强行”(日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.对自然常识的必要性是基于荒谬的假设,即基督不能诉诸一般使用的数字,但根据案件的,这要求他并没有在一个如此重要的问题,明显的要求,求助于隐喻意义和欺骗性。 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.对于数字增强语音清晰度只有当比喻的意义是显而易见的,无论是从案件的性质(例如,从参考一林肯雕像说:“这是林肯”)或从共同的说法的惯例(例如,在此情况下提喻:“这种玻璃是酒”),现在,无论从案件的性质,也不在一个共同的说法是面包对人体容易或可能的代名词。 Were one to say of a piece of bread: "This is Napoleon", he would not be using a figure, but uttering nonsense.一个人说他的一块面包:“这是拿破仑”,他不会使用数字,但说出的废话。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".只有一个符号渲染所谓不正当手段明确和理解,即通过,常规解决事先以表示它是什么,因为,例如,如果一个人说:“让我们想象一下,这两条面包前我们要苏格拉底,柏拉图“。 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,但是,代替通知他的门徒说,他打算利用这样一个数字,告诉他们,而在包含的承诺话语相反:“面包,我会给予,是我的肉体是世界的生活”(约翰6时52分),这种语言,当然,可以只用一个神人,因此,在一定的真实存在为前提的信念在基督的真神的信仰,上述规则将建立自己与自然的含义确定性,即使机构的话说,“这是我的身体 - 这是我的血”,孤零零矗立着,但在原始文本语料库(机构)和血(血)是由同位显着增加之后,身体被指定为和血“为你而定”为“为你[许多]棚”,因此给予使徒身体是同一机构自那钉在十字架上的耶稣受难日,而他们圣杯醉,这是自相同的血棚为我们的罪,在十字架上,因此上述直接排除同位语的每一个比喻解释的可能性。

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.我们到达从随之而来的情况下,考虑了相同的结论,同时考虑到听众和Institutor,这些谁听到的话,机构并没有学会的语言学家和逻辑学家理性,对关键设备,使他们拥有,分析一个模糊而神秘的用语,它们是简单的,没有受过教育的渔民从人民,谁与孩子般的天真后,他们的主人的话并深为接受的信仰无论他建议他们挂普通职级,这种孩子气的性格不得不不可忽视的基督,特别是关于他的激情和死亡,当他作出了他最后的遗嘱,作为一个垂死的父亲,他深深困扰的儿童说话的前夜。 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.在这样一个庄严的时刻可怕的,唯一的讲话将是一个合适的模式其中,难以理解的数字剥离,取得完全对应的词要传达的意思使用。 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.必须记住,同时,作为无所不知基督神人,必须有预见到他可耻的错误会导致采用他的门徒和他的教会一个前所未闻的隐喻;为教会下降到目前的一天呼吁在她的教学与实践的话基督。

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.如果当时她的做法由单纯的面包和酒的崇拜偶像崇拜,这种犯罪必须制定到神人自己负责。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.除此之外,为了基督研究所作为一个最神圣的圣体圣事,是在教会隆重庆祝甚至到了时间的尽头。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.但是,内容和圣礼的组成部分,必须与这些清晰的术语,表示要坚决排除一切礼仪和崇拜的错误。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.).可能从该圣杯奉献的话云集,基督建立了新的血液约,正如旧约已在动物(见出埃及记24:8典型的血液成立;希伯来书9时11分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.与司法真实的本能,法学家规定,在所有有争议的点A的话将必须采取其自然,字面意义,因为他们是正确的信念主导,即每一个心智健全的遗嘱,他最后一次在制订遗嘱,是毫无意义的隐喻深感关切的语言有它做一次明确和束缚。 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.现在,基督,根据他的遗嘱的字面旨趣,留下了一个宝贵的遗产,而不是单纯的面包和酒,但他的身体和血液我们。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!"我们是合理的,那么在他到自己面对矛盾和感叹:“不,这是不是你的身体,但仅仅是面包,你身体的信号!”

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.对所谓的Sacramentarians,由路德给予那些反对的真实存在谁的名字,尽可能清楚地证明政府驳斥了一个比喻的含义是不可能的。 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.一旦清单字面意义上是被遗弃,场合是考虑到对据称是一个谜,基督为解决方案提供了无休止的争论,他的追随者的意义。 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).目前还没有到在十六世纪的争端,当时克里斯托弗Rasperger写了约200名不同的解释一整本书的限制:“Ducentæ verborum,'美国东部时间语料meum特设'interpretationes”(因戈尔施塔特,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.在这方面,我们必须限制自己的字面的意义,这是路德的痛苦的嘲笑甚至高达1527年初屁股最新,最广为人知的扭曲检查。 The first group of interpreters, with Zwingli, discovers a figure in the copula est and renders it: "This signifies (est = significat) my Body".第一组的口译和茨温利,发现在美国东部时间系词呈现它的数字:“这意味着(美国东部时间= significat)我的身体”。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").在这种解释的证据,引自圣经的例子,如:“七只母牛是七年”(创41:26)或:“萨拉和琼脂是两个人权公约”(加拉太书4:24),豁免是否动词“是”(Esse品牌,einai)本身都不能作为用“系词在比喻的关系”(魏斯)或表达“的身份在一个隐喻连接关系”(Heinrici),其中最逻辑学家否认,逻辑的基本原则,牢固树立这个真理,即所有命题可分为两大类,其中第一和最全面的denominates一分为东西,因为它是在本身(如:“人是理性动物”),而第二根据指定的事,因为它是作为一个符号别人用的东西(例如,“这张照片是我的父亲”)。 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".要确定是否打算发言者的表达方式第二,有四个标准,其仅同意联合将使动词“是”要具有“象征”的意思。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.从上述三个标准,其中有参考无论对案件的性质抽象,或对共同的说法的惯例,或事先约定的一些公约,但仍然是一个第四和最后的决定性的意义,即:当一完整的内容是另一个完整的物质前提,就不可能存在没有它们之间的逻辑关系的身份,但只有相似关系,因为首先是一个形象,符号,象征了对方。 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".现在,这个最后的命名标准不适用于圣经的例子提出了Zwinglians,特别是关于他们的话,机构解释如此;因为这话已经不是:“这面包是我的身体”,但无限期:“这是我的身体“。 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.在主的晚餐Zwinglian概念,某些“圣表达式”(locutiones sacramentales)历史上的神圣文本作为的话,机构p​​arallelisms认为,已经引起广泛注意。The first is to be found in I Cor.首先是要找到在我肺心病。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时04:“与岩石为[标志]基督”,但显而易见的是,如果主题岩是采取在物质意义上说,隐喻,根据刚才提到的第四个标准,就是像在类似明显短语“基督是葡萄树”。 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,如果在这一段话岩剥夺了所有的重大,它可能是一个精神意义上理解,因为使徒自己是“精神岩”讲(佩特拉spiritalis),它在人Word在以往任何时候都伴随着一种无形的方式在他们的journeyings以色列人并提供了他们的水域的精神源泉。 According to this explanation the copula would here retain its meaning "to be".根据这一解释,系词,在这里保留其意思是“是”。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).一个接近的方法与并行的话,机构发现显然是在所谓的“圣事的表现形式”:“美国东部时间pactum meum特设”(创17:10),和“美国东部时间enim相多米尼”(出埃及记12:11) 。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.这是众所周知的在一天的成功赢得了他的解释整个苏黎世天主教人口后者短语精明如何茨温利。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,很明显,没有之间可以并行上述表现形式和制度的话看出,没有真正的并行,因为那里是完全不同的事情的问题。 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).即使是口头并行可以指出,在旧约两种文本,因为这个问题是一个仪式(割礼在第一种情况,和羔羊的逾越节在第二仪式),而仅仅涉及谓词抽象(约,主逾越节)。 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".更沉重的代价的情况是,系词更紧密调查发现,美国东部时间将保持其应有之义“是”而不是“象征”。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.对于刚刚为割礼不仅象征着神圣的契约性质或对象,但真的是这样,所以仪式的逾越节羔羊是真正的逾越节(第一期)或Pasch,而不是它仅仅表示。 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".诚然,在某些圈子里以前是英国圣公会的习惯,呼吁在阿拉姆的舌头,这是由基督发言,他的使徒公司应该贫穷,因为它是认为,任何字都可以找到这个语言的对应的理念“来表达。” 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,即使prescinding从阿拉姆舌头,在美国东部时间Copula函数通常省略,这样的疏漏,而其严格意义上的事实使“是”,红衣主教怀斯曼(海悦Syriacæ,罗马,1828年,第3-73 )生产不低于四十叙利亚表达的意思传达成功“来表达”,从而有效地爆发了犹太人的舌头的有限的词汇神话。

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".第二组的Sacramentarians与厄科兰帕迪乌斯,努力寻求转向为比喻来语料库在谓词中包含的概念,给后者的“Signum的corporis”的感觉,让学会的话,就变成:“这是个好兆头[符号,图像,类型]我的身体“。 Essentially tallying with the Zwinglian interpretation, this new meaning is equally untenable.从本质上讲与Zwinglian解释理货,这个新的含义也同样站不住脚。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.在所有世界上的语言表达“我的身体”指定一人的自然的身体,而不是仅仅是该机构的标志或符号。 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).如此,那就是圣经的话是“基督的身体”不是偶尔有“教会”,这是所谓的基督,一个神秘人物身体中的意义,总是很容易辨别,如从文本或上下文(参见歌罗西书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.这个神秘的感觉,但是,在体制是不可能的话,原因很简单,基督并没有给他的教会的使徒吃,但他的身体,而“身体和血”,由他们的真正原因和逻辑关联,不能彼此分开,因此都是用较少的一个形象化的敏感。 The case would be different if the reading were: "This is the bread of my Body, the wine of my Blood".案件会有所不同,如果阅读是:“这是我的身体,我的血酒面包”。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).为了证明至少有这么多,这对圣杯的内容仅仅是酒,因此,仅仅是一个符号的血,新教徒诉诸圣马太,谁涉及文字是基督,完成后,最后的晚餐,宣称:“我不会喝这种葡萄树[genimen葡萄]水果从此”(马太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.这是必须指出,圣路加(22:18 sqq。),谁是更精确的时间顺序,地点在他的机构账户基督的这些话,好叫基督的血可能与真正的权利仍然被称为(神圣)酒,一方面,因为血液是partaken的方式后,在喝醉酒的,另一方面,因为血液继续存在下,酒的外观表现。 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.在其五花八门的流浪从因循守旧是始终与基督的神性拒绝放弃的真实存在,还强迫信仰,现代批评的目的,是占了沿其他行的文本。 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".以十分武断,怀疑是否学会从基督的口中起源的话,它的痕迹,他们作为其作者圣保罗,在他们的殷切希望,灵魂据说夹杂着一些原始的重视“身体”的价值和他的主观思考的“圣体圣事宴会重复”。 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.从这个多灾多难的喷泉头的话,机构首次发现的圣福音到他们的方式,卢克,然后,通过另外的方式,分别为圣马修和圣马克文本编织。 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.按理说,后者的说法只不过是一个完全无理猜测,这可能是因为无偿转给因为它是先进的。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.这是,而且,基本上不实所附的祭祀与主的晚餐重复的值仅仅是圣保罗的反思,因为基督牺牲的价值附加了他的死亡(参见马克10:45),并庆祝了自己的圣体晚餐与犹太人逾越节,这本身也必须每年重复连接。 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.至于的话,机构的解释,目前有三个现代化争夺霸权的解释 - 具有象征意义的寓言和末世论。According to the symbolical interpretation, corpus is supposed to designate the Church as the mystical Body and sanguis the New Testament.据象征意义的解释,主体应该是指定为奥体血的教会和新约。We have already rejected this last meaning as impossible.我们已经拒绝了这一不可能的最终意义。For is it the Church that is eaten and the New Testament that is drunk?的是它的就是吃和新约教会是喝醉了?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?圣保罗没有品牌的教会和新的对身体和血液基督滔天罪行犯了约partaking的?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.案件没有太大的关于寓言的解释,这将在浇注辨别的酒一对在十字架上流血仅仅出更好的比喻。This again is a purely arbitrary explanation, an invention, unsupported by any objective foundation.这又是一个纯粹的任意解释,一项发明,不支持任何客观基础。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.然后,也将遵循类似,即破的面包是基督的身体杀死寓言,其意义完全不可想象的。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,因为它是一个浓雾和劳动采取了一个明确的形式,不完整的末世论的解释将使圣体是对未来的预期仅仅是天上的宴会。 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.在假设的真实存在的真理,这样的考虑可以开放讨论,因为作为面包的天使partaking的是真正的永恒乐的和地球到天堂的转变预示预期。 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.但是,仅仅是象征性的预期为意味着天地的unconsecrated面包和酒的末世论的解释是截然相反的文字,发现没有在生活和基督的性格丝毫没有意义的操作支持。

B. Proof from Tradition二,从传统的证明

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.至于从传统论点的说服力,这是历史事实决定的意义,那就是真实存在的教条依然存在,正确地说,不受干扰下到图尔的(草1088)邪教Berengarius时间,因此可以声称即使在那个时候,拥有十个世纪不间断。 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.在教条的历史上过程中产生的一般三个伟大的圣体的争论,其中第一个由Paschasius拉得伯土开始,在第九世纪,几乎延长到了听众的范围和有关本身单独与哲学的质疑,圣体圣事是基督的身体与自然的身体,他在巴勒斯坦,现在在天堂一样。 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.这样的数字身份很可能已被剥夺了Ratramnus,巴努毛如斯,Ratherius,兰弗朗克,和其他人,因为即使现在一个真实,虽然偶然的,与圣事和基督的身体的自然条件而有区别,必须严格维持。 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.对于一对教会的一部分正式程序第一次是当Berengarius提供的旅游,由司各脱Eriugena(四约884),在第一个对手的真实存在,影响的著作,后者拒绝了真理,而陷于变体。 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.他修好了,但公众丑闻,他给了由教皇格列高利七世的在罗马举行的1079年做了一个主教在场真诚收回讲话,死不甘心教会。 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.第三和尖锐的争论是,开幕式由在十六世纪的改革方面,对此必须指出路德是谁之间的改革者仍然固守旧的天主教教义只有一个,而且,虽然它遭受多方面失实的陈述,辩护,最顽强。 He was diametrically opposed by Zwingli of Zurich, who, as was seen above, reduced the Eucharist to an empty, meaningless symbol.他是截然相反的茨温利的苏黎世,谁,正如上面看到的,降低了圣体为空的,毫无意义的象征。 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.经获得了他的看法这种友好的Carlstadt的,布策尔,和厄科兰帕迪乌斯当代的游击队员,他稍后在阿敏念派,门诺,苏西尼,和圣公会,担保有影响力的盟友,甚至今天的主的晚餐主义理性概念并不很大差别,从Zwinglians的。 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.在日内瓦期间,加尔文被巧妙地寻求一个人之间的信义文字和形象化的Zwinglian解释,这种极端的妥协带来的暗示而不是在一个案件或其它象征,只是在大量存在,在一定意味着,即“动态”,存在,这主要包括在此,这在目前的接待,基督的身体和血的功效从天上传达的命中注定的灵魂和精神的滋养他们。 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.到梅兰希的流毒和不诚实的两面派谢谢,这个有吸引力的卡尔文中介地位作出这样的印象,即使在信义界,这不是在1577年至公式的康科德的“加密加尔文毒液”被成功地从人体拒绝路德学说。 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).安理会的遄达会见了教条式的定义,改革这些大相径庭的错误,那神人是“真的,真的,并大大”下的面包和酒的出现目前,故意打算从而反对表达维尔到茨温利的Signum的,realiter到厄科兰帕迪乌斯的figura,并essentialiter卡尔文的virtus达(sess.十三,可以的。我)。 And this teaching of the Council of Trent has ever been and is now the unwavering position of the whole of Catholic Christendom.而这种教学安理会的遄达曾经是而且现在是对整个天主教基督教的坚定立场。

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.至于学说的父亲,是不可能在目前的文章,以乘教父文本,这通常是由精彩的美丽和清晰的特点。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.我只想说,除了十二使徒遗训(第九,第十,第十四条),最古老的父亲,因为伊格(Ad. Smyrn,七。广告Ephes,二十。。。。广告Philad,四),贾斯汀(亚太线上。,我lxvi),爱任纽(2002上海高考Hær,四,十七,五;。第四十八,四,五,二,二),良(德复活卡恩,八。。。德pudic,九;德由于以下原因造成,十九。。德BAPT的,十六)和塞浦路斯(德由于以下原因造成的DOM,十八。。德lapsis,十六),证明没有丝毫误解的是什么教会的信仰,而后来教父神学熊影见证了这一方法的术语教条夸张,作为格雷戈里的nyssa(Orat.儿茶酚。,三十七),耶路撒冷的西里尔(Catech.神秘岛。,四,二sqq。),特别是医生的圣体,金口[坎。 lxxxii (lxxxiii), in Matt., 1 sqq.; Hom.捌拾(捌拾叁),在马特,1 sqq。。坎。xlvi, in Joan., 2 sqq.; Hom.四十六,在琼,2 sqq。。坎。xxiv, in I Cor., 1 sqq.; Hom.二十四,在我肺心病,1 sqq。。坎。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],向谁可能会增加拉丁教父,希拉里(德Trinit,八,四,13。)及刘汉铨。(德神秘岛,八,49;。九,51平方米)。 Concerning the Syriac Fathers see Th.关于叙利亚的父亲见次。Lamy "De Syrorum fide in re eucharisticâ" (Louvain, 1859).拉米“德Syrorum在重新eucharisticâ善意”(鲁汶,1859年)。

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".由圣奥古斯丁的立场是,目前,一场激烈的争论的主题,因为教会的对手,而自信地认为,他赞成的一方的问题,他是一个不折不扣“象征”。 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Loofs意见(“Dogmengeschichte”,第四版,哈雷,1906年,409页。),圣奥古斯丁永不放弃,在A却认为“真正的身体和血液基督接待”,这一观点广告。 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".哈纳克(Dogmengeschichte,第三版。,弗赖堡,1897年,三,148)强调,当他宣称,圣奥古斯丁“无疑是在这方面与所谓的学前教育改革和茨温利方面之一”。 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).在这种轻率的结论,而所有的天主教徒提前不容置疑的事实,奥古斯丁要求神崇拜应该被渲染到圣体肉第一(在PS。三十三,enarr。,我10),并宣布在最后的晚餐“基督举行并进行自己在自己手中“(在PS。时候正好,注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.他们坚持认为,这是正确的,它是不公平的独立的这个伟大的医生的教学有关的从他的圣体圣祭教义,因为他明确无误地宣称,真正的身体和血都在马萨诸塞州的圣提供的各种刚才提到的极端的意见要求,企图在一个合理和公正的解释,其验证是要寻求在公认的事实发现,渐进的发展过程发生在心中的圣奥古斯丁地作出。 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.没有人会否认,某些词语出现在奥古斯丁作为强行作为良和塞浦路斯或他的亲密文友,刘汉铨,的mileve,希拉里和optatus的金口的现实。 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.另一方面,这是毫无疑问的是,由于决定性的影响的渊源和柏拉图哲学,其中,众所周知,但是轻微的附加价值,可见物质和世界的合理现象,奥古斯丁也没有提到什么是恰当的真实(水库)在圣体,以基督的肉(CARO)的,但转移到加快原则(醑),即由一个有价值的共融带来的影响。 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.这方面的一个合乎逻辑的结果是,他让卡罗,由于车辆和水库antitype的,不确实只是象征性的价值,但充其量只是一个短暂的,中介机构,及下属价值(Signum的),并置于基督的肉和血,根据目前的面包和酒的外观(figuræ)在太多,决定就他的自然,历史主体的反对。 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.奥古斯丁是由于个人的合作和努力,在拯救的工作,一为单纯的迷信活动和常规机械敌人艰苦的后卫,他没有坚持要求在耶稣的圣体圣事的真实个性活泼的信仰,并呼吁关注在基督的肉体,而不是精神的效率。 His mental vision was fixed, not so much upon the saving caro, as upon the spiritus, which alone possessed worth.他的精神视野是固定的,没有那么多后,节省卡罗,一若醑,因为只有拥有价值。Nevertheless a turning-point occurred in his life.然而一个转折点发生在他的生命。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.与佩拉和勤奋的金口细读冲突摆脱柏拉图束缚他,他此后重视卡罗一个单独的,个人的价值,独立的精神世界,去那么远,其实,以维持太强烈的共融儿童是绝对必要的救助。 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,如果读者在其他父亲的困难,晦涩,和某些不准确的表达了一些发现,这可能是解释一般三个理由:

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).因为和平与安全是有他们对教会的掌握真理,何处,结果呈现一定的准确性,都希望他们的术语,因为与它的秘密纪律,明确与圣体圣事而言,是需要维护的严格东,直至在西方第五年底下降到第六世纪中叶;由于许多父亲的圣经寓言解释,这特别是在亚历山大学校(克莱门特的亚历山德里亚,奥利盛行的偏好,西里尔),但发现了一个字面解释上所规定的学校安提(西奥多的Mopsuestia,Theodoret重点有益的平衡)。 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,由于该亚历山大寓言意义并不排除文字,而是应该作为工作的基础,现实用语的克莱门特(Pæd.,我,六),奥利(魂斗罗Celsum八,十三32;坎。九,在莱维特,x)和马特的西里尔(,二十六,二十七;。。。魂斗罗内斯特,四,五)有关的真实存在,是容易入账。 (For the solution of patristic difficulties, see Pohle, "Dogmatik", 3rd ed., Paderborn, 1908, III, 209 sqq.)(对于教父困难的解决方案,见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.从传统的说法是补充和从处方参数,它的痕迹中的真实存在,通过回中世纪教条不变的信念,以早日使徒教会,从而证明了反圣体歪理邪说已经完成反复无常新奇真正的信仰和暴力破裂作为从一开始就流传下来。 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.掠过已经过去了自改革间隔,这期间收到来自安理会的遄达的整个性格,我们对时间的改革,路德(大etliche Rottengeister,1532)的事实,整个重要见证基督教则认为,在现实的存在。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).而这家公司,普遍的信仰,可以追溯到不间断的旅行团Berengarius(草1088),事实上 - 省略了司各脱Eriugena唯一的例外 - 为了Paschasius拉得伯土(831)。On these grounds, therefore, we may proudly maintain that the Church has been in legitimate possession of this dogma for fully eleven centuries.基于上述理由,因此,我们可以自豪地认为,教会在这个完全合法拥有十几个世纪以来被教条。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).当Photius开始在869希腊的分裂,他接管了他的教会的天主教圣体不可剥夺的财富,珍惜它的希腊人,在里昂的谈判,在1274年和1439年佛罗伦萨团聚,可以显示到现在还完好无损,而他们大力在耶路撒冷分裂的主教(1672年)的辩护反对加尔文的头脑西里尔Lucar,君士坦丁堡牧首(1629)的卑鄙阴谋。 From this it follows conclusively that the Catholic dogma must be much older than the Eastern Schism under Photius.由此得出结论说,遵循天主教教条,必须根据Photius比东部裂老。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.事实上,即使nestorians和monophysites,谁打破了从罗马在第五世纪,有,这一点从他们的他们的文学和礼仪书籍明显,保存他们的信仰在圣体为毫不动摇地为希腊人,尽管这在教条式的困难,对他们的本质联盟拒绝考虑,站在了一个明确的真实存在的方式和正确的概念。 Therefore the Catholic dogma is at least as old as Nestorianism (AD 431).因此,天主教教义是至少一样古老,景教(公元431)。 But is it not of even greater antiquity?然而,不甚至更大的古物?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.要决定这个问题,我们只要检查的质量,其历史可以追溯到时间的使徒(见各种礼仪篇)的基本要素,最古老的liturgies的访问罗马地下墓穴,那里有基督作为目前显示的下一个鱼象征圣体的食物(见圣体圣事早符号),以破译Abercius的第二个世纪,著名的铭文,虽然下的秘密学科组成的影响,显然证明了该年龄信心。 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.从而从处方参数进行我们带回到遥远的过去的朦胧并从那里来的使徒,谁反过来可以得到在现实的存在,从没有人,但他们的信仰基督自己的时间。


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.为了避免在一开始,卑微的概念,在我们收到的圣体只是在他的全部身体,只是血液中的基督,但不是基督,安理会的遄达定义的真实存在是这样的,包括与基督的身体和他的灵魂和神性以及。 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.严格的合乎逻辑的结论以外,在所应许的话:“他不吃我同样也应当由我活”,这也存在总体不变的传统属性,它的特点的救主的分离的部分为肉食性圣餐(食肉)完全贬义的上帝。 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.虽然体分离,血液,灵魂和标志,是绝对说,在全能的神力量,但实际不可分割坚决然后由基督的神性与人性本质的联盟indissolubility教条成立。 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.在案件的使徒了庆祝主的过程中triduum僵直晚餐(时间在基督的身体在坟墓),当一个真正的分离之间发生了基督的构成要件的地方,便有可能出现确实存在,在神圣的主机只,不流血,无生命的基督的身体,因为它躺在墓,并在血圣杯只有从他的身体分离和脱落的,因为它是地球上,无论是身体和血液,但是,以他的神hypostatically团结吸收,而他的灵魂,寄居在莲步,将仍然完全排除在圣体的存在。 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.这不真实的,虽然不是不可能,假设,计算出良好扔经安理会的遄达(阶段作业,十三,长三)根据指定的本质区别,之间的词义前六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.承奉献,或前六verborum话,只有由目前它是由说话的机构,即身体和基督的血表达的美德。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.而是由一个自然的共存(每concomitantiam)的原因,同时也成为目前所有认为这是从刚刚任命身体不可分割的部分,必须从与他们天然的联系,始终是他们伴奏。 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.现在,荣耀基督,谁“不死现在没有更多的”(罗马书6:9)有一个动画机构通过其下静脉生机的灵魂,他的生活影响课程的血液。 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. Hence Christ is present in the sacrament with His Flesh and Blood, Body and Soul, Humanity and Divinity.

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.这是一般的和基本原则,这完全是抽象的二元性的物种,必须,然而,扩展到面包和酒的每一个物种。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).因为我们没有收到主机之一,在神圣的基督圣杯的一部分,在另一方面,好像我们的整体接待依赖于我们对两种形式戒;下,单靠食物的外观,相反,以及根据葡萄酒的外观,仅我们接受基督的整个整个(参见理事会遄达,sess。十三,可以的。三)。 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.对此,唯一合理的概念,认为它在圣经的事实验证,即圣保罗(哥林多前书11时27分,29)重视同罪“的身体和血的主”,以卑微的“吃或喝“,在选言的意义上理解,像他那样以”吃,喝“,了解它的系辞感。 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.对于这种传统的基础是要在父亲的证词和该教会的礼仪中发现,根据这一荣耀救主只能在他的总体性和完整性的祭坛现在,而不是分成部分或歪曲的形式一个怪胎。 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,分别最高崇拜是由于主机和神圣的圣杯献身内容。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).在这最后的真理,是基础,特别是允许和圣餐礼的内在只有在一个俗人和神职人员不庆祝弥撒实物(见下两种交流)。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教条后,我们自然会导致进一步的真理,即,至少在任一成零件的具体分工种,基督在每个人用充分和整个精华的部分存在。 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.如果神圣的主机被分解成块或神圣的圣杯,如果在小批量醉,基督在每个粒子和每个拖放目前在他的全部。By the restrictive clause, separatione factâ the Council of Trent (Sess. XIII, can. iii) rightly raised this truth to the dignity of a dogma.通过限制性条款,separatione factâ安理会的遄达(sess.十三,可以的。三)正确地提出了这个真理的教条的尊严。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).虽然从经文我们可能只判断它不可能是基督圣分别每个粒子,他打破了面包,我们肯定地知道,在另一方面,他祝福的圣杯的全部内容,然后把它交给他的弟子要partaken的distributively(参见马修26:27平方米;马克14:23)。 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.这是只有在德律但丁教条基础上,我们可以了解如何西里尔耶路撒冷(catech.神秘岛。五,全21)有义务遵守圣餐在传递神圣主机到自己的嘴巴最谨慎小心,所以,甚至没有“一屑,比黄金或珠宝贵”,从他们手中可能下降到地面;阿尔勒Cæsarius如何教导有“,就像在小片段就像在整个”;如何在不同的礼仪断言守法完整的“不可分割的羔羊”,在“的主持人师”尽管,以及最后,如何在实践中忠实地分享了对主机的神圣破碎的颗粒和共同喝同一杯。

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.虽然上述论断包含三个教条的信仰,还有第四命题仅仅是一个神学的结论,即,即使在该物种的具体分工,基督存在于每个仍然完整主机粒子和全面,完全每届圣杯内容的集体下降。 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.对于没有在每一个基督圣体种单粒子目前在他的整个人格的分裂,甚至发生之前,我们都不应被迫得出这样的结论是划分进程带来了总体性的存在,而根据教学,该教会的真实存在和总手术的原因是要在陷于变单独找到。 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.毫无疑问,这个最后的结论指导的哲学和科学探究注意存在的特有的圣体圣事的身体,这是违反一般规律的经验模式。 It is, indeed, one of those sublime mysteries, concerning which speculative theology attempts to offer various solutions [see below under (5)].这确实是其中的一个崇高的奥秘,就其中投机神学试图提供各种解决方案[见第(五)项]。


Before proving dogmatically the fact of the substantial change here under consideration, we must first outline its history and nature.在证明了这里的教条下,考虑有很大的改变的事实,我们必须首先概述其历史和自然。

(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)对科学发展陷于变体的概念很难说是一个希腊人,谁没有获得超越其更广泛的Notes产品,相反,它是拉丁神学家,谁是刺激工作杰出贡献它在完成上述三个圣体圣事争议的逻辑形式进行,这个词似乎已陷于变体首先由图尔Hildebert(约1079)使用。 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.令人鼓舞的例子,他很快其次是其他神学家,如斯蒂芬欧坦(草1139),Gaufred(1188),彼得和布卢瓦(草约1200),于是几合一议会还通过了第四届理事会的这个重大的表达,在拉特兰(1215年),以及理事会的里昂(1274),在希腊皇帝迈克尔Palæologus专业的信念。 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.安理会的遄达(sess.第十三章四;。。可以二)不仅接纳的信仰传承的思想中蕴含的道理,但权威证实了“一词的资质”,以表达最明显,合法发展理论的概念。 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".在一个陷于变密切的逻辑分析,我们发现第一和基本的概念是说的转换,这可能被定义“成另一种东西被一些过渡方面”为。 As is immediately evident, conversion (conversio) is something more than mere change (mutatio).由于是立即明显,转换(conversio)的东西比单纯的变化(mutatio)更多。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.而在短短的两个极端的变化之一可能是表示否定的,因为,如在白天和黑夜的变化,积极转换需要两个极端,这是有关的事情的东西给对方,并必须有,另外,这样的一相互密切关系,这在过去极端(总站广告quem)开始只能作为第一个(总站一现状)不再是,如,如成酒在水转换在迦南。 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."第三个因素通常是必需的,被称为公社tertium,其中,甚至已经发生转换后,无论是身体或至少在逻辑上团结一个极端向另一个;在每一个真正的转换,必须满足以下条件:“那是什么以前是,现在是B“的 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.一个非常重要的问题提出自己的定义,是否应进一步推断以前不过去极端的存在,因为它似乎奇怪的是,现有的一现状总站,一,应纳入已经存在总站广告quem湾转换如果转换的行为不是成为单纯的替代过程中戏法的手表演,无疑总站广告quem必须以某种方式存在新,正如总站一现状必须以某种方式真的不再存在。 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.然而,作为后者的消失是不可归责于妥善所谓湮没,所以没有需要设立的假设,所谓严格,说明前者的成面世。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.转换的思路是充分意识到,如果满足以下条件,即。,一个物质的东西已经存在,被收购一新的和以前完全不存在的模式。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,在死者的复活,粉尘对人体将会真正转化为他们的灵魂复活the以前存在的机构,就像他们在死亡尸体已被转换成真正的灵魂离开了。 This much as regards the general notion of conversion.至于这么多的转换的一般概念。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.陷于变体,但是,是不是所谓的简单转换,还有大量的转换(conversio substantialis),因为有一点是大幅或转换成另一种本质。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,从陷于变体的概念是排除所有的只是偶然的转换排序,无论是纯天然的(如昆虫的变态)或超自然的(例如摩塔伯尔基督的变形)。 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.最后,从各个不同陷于变体等大量的转换,在此,只有转换成另一种物质 - 意外保持不变 - 就像会这样如果木材被奇迹般地转化为铁,其余的铁物质的隐藏下外观的木材。

The application of the foregoing to the Eucharist is an easy matter.作者:圣体前的应用程序是一件容易的事。First of all the notion of conversion is verified in the Eucharist, not only in general, but in all its essential details.所有的转换的概念首先是在圣体验证,不仅在一般,但在其所有必要的细节。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.因为我们的转换,即,面包和酒为总站一现状,以及基督的身体和血液总站广告quem的两个极端。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,一个极端之间的停止和其他外观亲密的联系似乎是保留了一个事实,即这两个事件是结果,而不是两个独立的过程,因为,如毁灭和创造,但一个单一的行为因为,根据全能,对面包和酒出发,以弥补身体和血液基督房间物质的目的。 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.最后,我们有面包和酒的出场公社tertium不变,根据该露面前存在的基督具有了新的,被圣模式,没有它他的身体和血液无法分享者以男性的。 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).这陷于变后果作为总的物质转换,是对面包和进入人体和血液基督酒全部内容的过渡,是教会(理事会的遄达,sess。第十三表达学说,可以。二)。 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.因此被指责为违背信仰的Durandus过时的观点,只有大量表格(预计substantialis)的面包进行转换,而主物质(质料)仍然存在,特别是,路德的Consubstantiation学说,即共存对与基督的真身面包物质。 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,Impanation倡导Osiander和某些Berengarians,并根据其中一个本质的联盟应该采取的面包之间的物质和神人的地方理论(impanatio =杀出潘尼斯factus),是权威拒绝。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.因此,天主教教义陷于变体周围设置了一个真实存在的教条的强大堡垒,构成一个独特的理论本身的文​​章,这是不符合真实存在涉及,虽然该学说是真正的存在在一定含有陷于变。 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.正是出于这个原因,比约六,在他的教条式的牛市“Auctorem fidei”(1794)针对皮斯托亚主教会议Jansenistic伪(1786),抗议镇压最大力反对这种“学术问题”,作为主教曾建议牧师做。

(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. (b)在心中的教会,陷于变体已经如此紧密联系在一起的真实存在,这两个教条,流传下来的有来自一代又一代,虽然我们不能完全忽略dogmatico历史的发展。 The total conversion of the substance of bread is expressed clearly in the words of Institution: "This is my body".该物质的面包总转化明确表示在体制的话:“这是我的身体”。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.这些话的形式,不是一个理论,而是一个实践命题,其本质在此组成,即主语和谓语之间的客观影响和核实身份后,才说出话已全部,而不是不同的是一个国王宣告到底层:“你是一个重要的”,或者“你是队长”,这将立即导致该人员晋升到更高的命令。 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.当,因此,谁是他的一切的真理和一切权力说,面包:“这是我的身体”,面包成了,通过这些话,基督的身体话语;因此对句子完成,该物质面包不再存在,但在基督的面包外观身体。 Hence the bread must have become the Body of Christ, ie the former must have been converted into the latter.因此,面包一定是基督的身体,即前者必须向后者已被转换。The words of Institution were at the same time the words of Transubstantiation.的话,机构是在同一时间陷于变的话。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.事实上,实际的方式,其中面包和基督的身体的影响是存在的情况下,没有被读入的学会的,但他们严格exegetically推断的话。 The Calvinists, therefore, are perfectly right when they reject the Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation as a fiction, with no foundation in Scripture.在加尔文教派,因此是完全正确的,当他们拒绝为小说中的Consubstantiation路德学说没有在圣经的基础。 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."对于曾断言基督为了他的身体与物质共存的面包,他会表达了由Copula的预测手段和主体之间特别简单的身份,但将采取一些这样的表达式为:“这个面包含有我的身体“,或者”在这个面包我的身体。“ 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.如果他想要的面包构成了他的身体圣插座,他将不得不为这个既没有明确说明,从案件,也没有按照一般说法自然可以一块面包作,以显示一个人的身体插座。 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,提喻是在圣杯平原为例:“这是我的血”,即内容的chalice我的血液,因此不再酒。

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.关于传统,良和塞浦路斯最早证人,几乎无法获得任何特别考虑到了面包和酒的身体和血液基督的,或在其中前者是自然元素的方式转换成遗传关系后者,因为即使奥古斯丁剥夺了陷于变清晰的概念,只要他曾在柏拉图的债券持有。 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.另一方面,关于这一问题已取得完整清晰的作家,因为早在耶路撒冷,Cyrrhus Theodoret,对果树,金口格雷戈里和西里尔亚历山大在东方,西里尔和刘汉铨,在后来的拉丁美洲作家西。Eventually the West became the classic home of scientific perfection in the difficult doctrine of Transubstantiation.最终,西方成为科学完美经典的家中困难的学说陷于变体。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).英国圣公会的学习工作的博士皮塞索赔(主义的真实存在,如所载的父亲,牛津,1855),谁否认为陷于变教父论点的说服力,已达到彻底回答了由红衣主教Franzelin (德Euchar。,罗马,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.从传统的说法是惊人地证实了古代礼仪,他们的表达方式转换思路清晰美好的祷告。Many examples may be found in Renaudot, "Liturgiæ orient."很多例子可以在勒诺发现,“Liturgiæ东方。”(2nd ed., 1847); Assemani, "Codex liturg."(第二版,1847年。)Assemani,“法典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,罗马1749年至1766年。)登青格,“Ritus Orientalium”。(2卷,维尔茨堡,1864年),关于本Thomists的Scotists内收理论与生产理论,见Pohle,“Dogmatik”(第三教育署。,帕德博恩,1908年),三,237 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.由于路德任意限于真实存在的接待时刻(在犹他州立大学,不另计),安理会的遄达(sess.十三,可以的。四)由佳能公司特别强调,事实上,那之后,基督是真正的奉献当前和,因此,也不会让他的存在后,进食或饮酒的动作而定。 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.相反,他继续甚至在神圣的主机和神圣的祭坛上的颗粒或在圣餐后,他的圣体分布ciborium仍然存在。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.在信仰的存款的存在和持久性的存在是如此密切相关,即在心中的教会都继续作为一个不可分割的整体。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.理当如此,就如同基督承诺肉类和饮料,作为一种永恒的东西(参见约翰6:50 sqq。),所以,当他说他的肉和血,即:“你们要,吃,这是我的身体。 “使徒们收到了他神圣的主的身体,这已经是目前并没有客观地成为了第一个partaking的行为如此手。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."这种非真实的存在依赖于实际的接待非常清楚地体现在圣杯,无论如何,当基督说:“。你们都喝这一切对于[enim]这是我的血。” Here the act of drinking is evidently neither the cause nor the conditio sine qua non for the presence of Christ's Blood.在这里,显然是既不饮酒行为的原因,也不是必要条件,基督的血不存在。

Much as he disliked it, even Calvin had to acknowledge the evident force of the argument from tradition (Instit. IV, xvii, sect. 739).尽管他不喜欢它,甚至卡尔文不得不承认,从传统的说法显然力(Instit.四,十七节。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.不仅有父亲,而其中的金口,与特殊的活力,捍卫理论中的真实存在的持久性,但教会的不断实践,也建立了真相。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).在教会初期,信徒经常进行的有福了圣体圣事与他们自己的家园(见良,“广告uxor。”第一,二,五;塞浦路斯,“德lapsis”,26),或者在长途旅行(刘汉铨,德excessu fratris,我,43,46),而习惯于采取执事圣体那些谁没有参加神圣的服务(参见官,亚太线上。,我,注67),以及向烈士,被监禁,和体弱者(见尤西比乌斯,历史。传道书。,六,四十四)。 The deacons were also obliged to transfer the particles that remained to specially prepared repositories called Pastophoria (cf. Apostolic Constitutions, VIII, xiii).执事也不得不转移颗粒仍有特意准备叫Pastophoria库(参见使徒宪法,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.此外,这是习惯,只要第四世纪庆祝Presanctifed群众早日(参照老底嘉主教,可以的。XLIX)号,其中收到了神圣的主机已被神圣一天或几天以前。 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).在拉丁美洲教会的弥撒的presanctified是时下限于耶稣受难日,而,自从Trullan主教(692),希腊人庆祝封斋期间,整个IT除星期六,星期日,以及盛宴报喜(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.一种通用的持久性存在深层次原因是发现这样一个事实,那一段时间之间的甜点和接待的圣餐,奉献和之间的共融,即逝去而在其他圣礼都甜点和接待情况要在同一瞬间发生。 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).洗礼,例如,历时仅相当于洗礼的行动或与水沐浴长,因此,一个短暂的圣礼,相反,圣体和圣体,仅构成常设圣餐(参见安理会的遄达,自编码扩频通信。第十三章。三)。 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,但是,仅限于一个时间间隔,其中一开始是由奉献时刻和圣体由种反腐败决心。If the Host has become moldy or the contents of the Chalice sour, Christ has discontinued His Presence therein.如果主机有霉点或酸味圣杯的内容,基督内已停止他的存在。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.由于在腐败过程中的基本物质,返回对应于改变后的意外特有的性质,物质不灭法虽有圣体转换奇迹,仍然没有任何中断的力量。

The Adorableness of the Eucharist is the practical consequence of its permanence.圣体的可爱是它的持久性的实际后果。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.根据一项对基督,同样的latria崇拜(宗教局latriæ)为是由于众所周知的原则三位一体的上帝,是因为还向圣言,神人基督,而事实上,由工会的本质原因,基督的人性和其个别组成部分,因为,例如,他的圣心。 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).现在,相同的同一主耶稣是真正的圣体表现为在天上存在;因此,他是被崇拜的圣体,和公正的,只要他仍然下的面包和酒,即从目前的出现瞬间陷于变体在其中的物种进行分解(见理事会遄达,sess。十三,可以的。六)的时刻。 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.在圣经证明的情况下,教会找到正当理由,并在礼仪,使最古老和不断的传统神崇拜的圣体,但当然,必须区分的教条式的原则和纪律作了不同关于崇拜的外在形式。 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.而即使东方承认,从最早的千古不变的原则,并在实际上,只要在耶路撒冷分裂的主教在1672年年底,西有进一步表现出了建立和越来越多的严肃性,投资和奉献精神表示敬意不懈活动圣体的祝福。 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.在早期教会,朝拜圣体的限制,主要是向大众和圣餐,只是因为它是今天在东方人和希腊人。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).即使在他的时间坚持西里尔耶路撒冷一样,就像在一个强烈的崇拜和尊敬在圣餐(参见刘汉铨,德藻Sancto,三,二,79刘汉铨和奥古斯丁的态度。。奥古斯丁,在PS时候正好,氮。9)。 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.在西方的方式是一个开放的有福了越来越多的崇高的圣体崇拜,信徒甚至被允许沟通的礼仪服务之外。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.后Berengarian争议,圣体是在第十一届和第十二届世纪升高对于其崇拜修复异端亵渎和明确的目的,加强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.在十三世纪相继出台,为更多的最神圣的荣耀,在“theophoric游行”(circumgestatio),也是节日的科珀斯克里斯蒂提起下在市区四圣朱莉安娜列日邀约。 In honor of the feast, sublime hymns, such as the "Pange Lingua" of St. Thomas Aquinas, were composed.在荣誉的盛宴,崇高的赞美诗,如“pange语言”的圣托马斯阿奎那,分别组成。In the fourteenth century the practice of the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament arose.在十四世纪的圣体博览会的实践产生。 The custom of the annual Corpus Christi procession was warmly defended and recommended by the Council of Trent (Sess. XIII, cap. v).一年一度的科珀斯克里斯蒂游行定制的热烈捍卫和安理会的遄达(sess.第十三章。五)推荐。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).一个新的动力给予了圣体崇拜通过对圣体的访问,由圣阿方liguori介绍(Visitatio党卫军Sacramenti。),在稍后的时间投入大量的订单和永久的崇拜,在许多教区教会机构对“永恒的祈祷”,国际圣体代表大会举行,如在九月的伦敦,1908年,这些因素都保持在他活着的信念是谁奉献说:“看哪,我与你所有的日子,甚至到了世界“圆满(马太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:在圣体圣事方面的投机神学的主要目的,应该是讨论哲学,并寻求,三个明显的矛盾逻辑解决方案,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)有关圣体物种,或面包和酒的外表,没有继续存在的自然基础学科(accidentia正弦subjecto);

(b) the spatially uncircumscribed, spiritual mode of existence of Christ's Eucharistic Body (existentia corporis ad modum spiritus); (二)空间uncircumscribed,对基督的圣体圣事机构(existentia corporis广告modum醑)生存的精神模式;

(c) the simultaneous existence of Christ in heaven and in many places on earth (multilocatio).(三)基督的同时存在,在天堂和在地球上(multilocatio)的许多地方。

(a) The study of the first problem, viz.(一)有关研究的第一个问题,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).不论是否面包和酒的情况下继续其应有的物质其存在的事故,必须立足于明确规定陷于变体真理的后果,其中的面包和酒的全部内容全部内容分别转换成身体和血液基督在这样一种方式,“只有面包和酒外表保持”(理事会的遄达,sess十三,可二:。。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,没有面包和葡萄酒作为他们固有的底层物质的外表只是继续陷于变体相反。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.如果它被进一步问,是否有这些外表任何问题,他们在所有的固有,我们必须回答圣托马斯阿奎那(三:77:1),这个想法是被视为不恰当的拒绝,因为虽然身体基督,除了其自身的事故,也应当承担的面包和酒的。 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.最可能说的是,从圣体圣事机构收益神奇的底气,它支持的外表剥夺他们的天然物质,并保留他们免于崩溃。The position of the Church in this regard may be readily determined from the Council of Constance (1414-1418).该教会在这方面的立场可以随时决定从安理会的康斯坦茨(1414年至1418年)。In its eighth session, approved in 1418 by Martin V, this synod condemned the following articles of Wyclif:在第八届会议1418年批准了马丁五世,这主教谴责威克里夫以下文章:

"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. “黑质潘尼斯materialis等similiter质vini materialis在萨克拉门托altaris剩磁”,即物质实体的面包和同样的葡萄酒原料物质的祭坛圣留,“Accidentia潘尼斯非subjecto欢迎常驻正弦”,即:事故面包不留没有主题。

The first of these articles contains an open denial of Transubstantiation.这些文章的第一篇包含一个陷于变体拒绝开放。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,至于文字方面,可能会被视作一首不同的措辞认为,如果不是,该会的历史表明,威克里夫,直接反对“没有主题的意外”的学术上的理论一样荒谬甚至异端邪说(比照,德Augustinis,德重sacramentariâ,罗马,1889年,二,573 sqq。),因此,这是安理会谴责第二篇文章,而不是仅仅作为第一个结论的意图,但作为独特和独立的主张,因此我们可能会聚集在从矛盾的命题主题的教会的教导,“Accidentia潘尼斯欢迎常驻正弦subjecto”,即做面包的事故仍然没有主题。 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."这样,至少,是当代神学家就此事的意见;和罗马问答,指的是上面提到的安理会的遄达佳能,简洁地解释道:“在任何物质的意外固有的面包和酒,但继续以自己现有的。“ 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.在这种情况下,在十七和十八世纪,谁倾向于笛卡尔,为E,Maignan,德劳因和Vitasse,展示,但很少神学渗透时,他们断言,圣体表现为错觉,幻觉,并提出一些神学家,相信意外,指称,以神圣的全能后,五官,即仅仅是什么似乎是面包和酒的主观印象是事故造成了直接影响。 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.自笛卡儿(草1650)放在其实际的扩展了有形的物质的本质,只承认其实质形而上学的团结模式事故,它是明确的,按照他的理论,即连同面包和酒的物质转换,事故还必须转换,从而使之消失。 If the eye nevertheless seems to behold bread and wine, this is to be attributed to an optical illusion alone.但如果我的眼睛,似乎看见面包和酒,这是要归功于一种错觉孤单。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.但乍一看是明确的,毫无疑问能够受理至于物理现实,或事实上,至于之前和之后陷于变身份的意外,这身体,而不仅仅是光,圣体圣事是意外的延续一再坚持要由父亲,并与这些过度严格地陷于变体的概念似乎有危险。 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.特别是针对该monophysites,谁在圣体转换为基础的,在对人性到他的神的基督代表应该享有的转换参数,并从父亲的未转换的圣体意外继续向未转换的结论人性的反驳基督。 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.这两种哲学和神学的论据,也对Cartesians先进的,因为,例如,感官犯错的证词,该公社tertium必要性完成陷于变主意[见上述第(3)]的圣餐观念的祭坛作为基督的无形的身体,是作为一种食物共融partaking的实际物理意义明显的迹象,喝惊人表现“擘饼”(fractio潘尼斯),其中设在事故整除现实等有关所有这些原因,神学家认为一个无可争辩的事实,不能在问题没有冒然称为物理现实的意外。 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.至于现有的实质内容没有意外的哲学的可能性,吸引了老年学校和绝对意外模态之间的一个细微差别,通过模态意外被理解,不涉及如不能,目前,仅仅从他们的模式,一种形而上学的物质分离矛盾,例如形式和机构的议案。 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.这些事故被指定为绝对的,是充分的客观现实,从他们的物质现实中的独特,在这样一种方式,没有内在的厌恶在他们可分参与,因为,例如,一个体的量。 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.亚里士多德,亲自教(Metaphys.,六,第三版。作者Bekker,第1029,甲13),这一数量是不是一个有形的物质,但只有一个实质性的现象。 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.现代哲学,另一方面,由于一直努力洛克时间,拒绝完全从思想领域看成是虚的物质概念,并以休息和质量表示满意的感觉excitants作为一个单独的视图物质世界的联想和现实所谓的心理是在试图进行各种细节了。 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.).天主教教会不觉得呼吁跟进这些新的哲学体系的短暂变化莫测,但立足于健全的原因,正确区分这本身和它的(色彩,形式,不同特点的大小之间的事,她学说永恒的哲学等)。 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.虽然“自在之物”,甚至可能仍然难以察觉的感官,因此在康德作为本体语言指定,或在斯宾塞,不可知,语言然而,我们不能逃脱下方的外表求事的必要性这似乎,下方的认为这是下面的形式已经形成,即底层或课题,维持有色色的现象。 The older philosophy designated the appearances by the name of accidents, the subject of the appearances, by that of substance.旧哲学所指定名称的意外,对外观的主题,由该物质表现。It matters little what the terms are, provided the things signified by them are rightly understood.无关紧要的条款是什么,他们提供的是正确地理解,标志着东西。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.什么是特别重要的物质及其有关材料意外素质,是小心翼翼在这次讨论中,在自然哲学的最大的不确定性笼罩,即使在现今有关事项的性质,因为域名的必要性,一个系统拔下来再有抚养的时间是在原子论和能量的离子和电子,最新的理论证明。

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.旧的神学试图与圣托马斯阿奎那(三:77),以证明对亚里士多德-士林形质说的原则,绝对意外的可能性,即系统的教导我们的机构构成要件中的质料构成实质性联盟并预计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.今天有些神学家将设法来与现代科学,它立足的能量非常富有成果的理论,所有的自然过程的理解通过与莱布尼茨试图解释圣体accidentia正弦subjecto按照自然哲学的活力。 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.假设,根据这个制度,一个力与它的表现形式,其影响能源与真正的区别,可以看出,在第一造成影响的能量(物质)的本质需要的是面包凭借撤回转换,而在神奇地能源(事故)影响继续存在。 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.对于可以说休息,这是远离教会的意图,限制天主教的调查有关的圣体学说的任何自然哲学的特定视图或什至要求他建立中世纪物理学原理的真相,所有的教会的要求是,该物质的材料被拒绝,而这些理论不仅违背了教会的教学,但也有令人憎恶的经验和完善的原因,因为泛神论,物活论,一元,绝对唯心论,笛卡尔等,

(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)第二个问题源自于存在的整体,这意味着基督在他的全部是在当前和整个主机在每个最小部分作为精神的灵魂,是存在于人体[见上文( 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.困难达到高潮时,我们认为没有灵魂或基督的神性的问题在这里,但他的身体,这与它的头部,躯干和成​​员,先后承担了生存的精神模式和独立的空间,一种存在,的确模式,既不经验,也不涉及任何哲学体系可以有至少端倪。 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.这对有形的物质转化成一种精神的想法可以在任何方式被受理,是从圣体圣事体本身材料的实质内容明确。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.即使是上述从物质的数量可分给我们带来任何线索的解决方案,因为根据最佳成立意见不仅是物质的基督的身体,而是由他自己聪明的安排,其有形的数量,即它的全尺寸,与其会员积分和四肢,完整的组织是目前在主持人的身材矮小的限制,并在每个部分进行。 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.后来的神学家(如Rossignol的,罗格朗)使出了不体面的解释,根据该基督在减少的形式和地位,一种微型的身体目前的排序,而其他(奥斯瓦德,费尔南德斯,Casajoana)承担,没有更好的健身意识对基督的身体的成员相互compenetration内的狭小天地里的一针点。 The vagaries of the Cartesians, however, went beyond all bounds.变化莫测的Cartesians然而,超越了所有界限。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.笛卡尔已经在向体育Mesland(编辑金刚砂,巴黎,1811),信,表达了意见,认为基督的圣体圣事与他的天体的身份是由他的灵魂,它保留了所有动画身份圣体体。 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.在此基础上,提出了几何Varignon在地球上的圣体圣事机构,这被认为是最忠实的,虽然大大减少,原型,基督的小型天体的副本真正的乘法运算。 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.也不是n维的现代理论扔任何于主体光,为基督的身体是不可见或触摸不到,因为它给我们占据了第四维,而是因为它超越,是完全独立的空间。 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.这种模式的存在,很明显,不属于物理和力学的范围来,而是属于更高,超自然的秩序,即使不从密封的坟墓复活穿过紧闭的门进出,该未来的荣耀复活的身体变形。 What explanation may, then, be given of the fact?什么可以解释,那么,鉴于这一事实?

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.这一问题的最简单的治疗,到院学派,尤其是圣托马斯(三:76:4)提供的,他们降低了正在向成为模式的模式,即它们的存在追溯到模式特有的圣体圣事体向陷于变体;一个东西有如此“是”因为它是在“成为”了,因为前六verborum的直接结果是基督的身体,其数量,目前只存在每concomitantiam,必须遵循模式其特有的物质存在,并像后者,必须存在没有分裂和延伸,即在每一个部分在整个主机完全和完全。 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.换句话说,基督的身体是目前在圣,而不是在“量”(每modum quantitatis)的方式,“物质”(每modum substantiæ),后来士林(贝拉明,弗朗西斯科苏亚雷斯,Billuart了,可是其他人)试图在这个沿其他路线解释改善内部和外部的数量区分。 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.通过内部的数量了解,实体,凭借这只是一个有形的物质拥有“侧重的延伸”(quantitas际有普里莫在ACTU的东南大学),即是在三dimensionaI空间扩展的“能力”。 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.外部数量,另一方面(quantitas外耳炎在ACTU的secundo东南大学),是同一个实体,但是,就因为它遵循其自然的倾向,占据空间,实际上扩展了自己的三个维度。 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.虽然延长或内部侧重的数量是如此的约束与机构的,其本质就从他们可分涉及一种形而上学的矛盾,外部的数量,另一方面,一种自然的后果和影响,这可以被搁置,由扣缴第一个原因,是有形的物质,保留其内部的数量,并没有扩展到空间本身。 At all events, however plausibly reason may seem to explain the matter, it is nevertheless face to face with a great mystery.在所有的事件,但原因可能似乎振振有词地解释这个问题,但它仍然是面对面地与一个伟大的奥秘。

(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)第三次和最后一个问题,是因为有基督在天上多地点,并呼吁世界各地数以千计的神坛。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.由于在自然秩序的事件每个机构只限于在一个位置空间(unilocatio),使前一个托辞定律的证明立即释放从犯罪嫌疑人,没有进一步的问题多地点属于超自然的秩序。 First of all, no intrinsic repugnance can be shown in the concept of multilocation.首先,没有内在的反感,可显示在多地点的概念。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.因为如果要提出异议,没有生命能存在脱离本身还是显示出它的各种自我地方之间的距离,诡辩是很容易发现,对于多地点不滋生个别对象,但只有它的外部关系和存在的空间。 Philosophy distinguishes two modes of presence in creatures:哲学区分两种存在于动物模式:

the circumscriptive, and在circumscriptive,和

the definitive.权威的。

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.首先,在场的恰当的机构,只有模式是凭借该对象,只限于在这种明智的确定的空间部分,它的各个部分(原子,分子,电子),在这个空间中也占有相应的位置。 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.第二个模式的存在,即妥善属于灵性的存在,需要物质存在的东西的全部在整个空间,以及整体和各部分的整个空间。The latter is the soul's mode of presence in the human body.后者是灵魂的人体内存在模式。The distinction made between these two modes of presence is important, inasmuch as in the Eucharist both kinds are found in combination.之间存在这两种模式的区别是重要的,因为这两种在圣体中同时出现者。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.因为,首先,有明确的验证了连续多地点,也称为复制,在此组成,即基督的身体是完全在每个部分的连续不间断的现在和尚未完全主机,并在整个本主机,就像人的灵魂是在身体中。 And precisely this latter analogy from nature gives us an insight into the possibility of the Eucharistic miracle.而后者正是这种来自大自然的比喻让我们对奇迹的圣体圣事的可能性的洞察力。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.因为,如果,因为已经看到上面,可以在一个无所不能的神超自然的方式传授给一个机构这样的精神,未扩展,空间uncircumscribed模式的存在,这是自然的灵魂,对于人类的身体,你可能猜测的可能性基督的圣体圣事中,身体与目前在整个主机的整体性,以及整体,并在每个部分整个。

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.还有就是,而且,连续多地点,即基督不仅在一个主机上,但在无数不同的主机目前无论是在ciborium或呼吁所有在世界各地的祭坛。 The intrinsic possibility of discontinuous multilocation seems to be based upon the non-repugnance of continuous multilocation.不连续多地点的内在可能性似乎是按照非连续多地点厌恶基础。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.对于后者的主要困难似乎是相同的基督是两个不同的部分,A和B,主机的持续存在,它被认为并不重要,我们是否在A和B的连续线段AB或没有加入遥远的地方。 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.的奇迹不大幅增加,如果由东道国突破的原因,A和B两部分,现在完全相互分离。Nor does it matter how great the distance between the parts may be.它也没有多么大的部件之间的距离而定。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.无论主机的碎片是遥远的一英寸或彼此千里是完全无关紧要在这样的考虑,我们不必怀疑,那么,如果在一个天主教徒崇拜的圣体圣事的主,在纽约,伦敦同一时间和巴黎。 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.最后,必须提到的混合多地点,因为基督与他在天上的统治自然的尺寸,从那里他没有离去,与他的圣事的存在,同时在世界各地的无数地方住。 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.这第三种情况将与前二完美的规定,是我们每不可能允许想象,是根据基督的面包外表完全一样,他在天上,他已经放弃了目前存在的自然方式。 This, however, would be but one more marvel of God's omnipotence.然而,这将是一次奇迹,但上帝的无所不能。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,没有矛盾是明显的事实,是基督在天上他的自然保留二维关系,并在同一时间需要注册后,地球上的祭坛住处。

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.还有就是,此外,一些多地点,其中,但是,一直没有实现的圣体第四类,但将是,如果基督的身体都在天堂和在地球上存在的固有模态的存在。 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?"这样的奇迹可能被假定为已在圣保罗的转换发生在大马士革门,当基督亲自said.to他:“?扫​​罗,扫罗,你为什么逼迫我” 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.而同时也有圣人bilocation,有时在hagiography阅读的网页,因为,例如在圣阿方liguori的情况下,不能随意抛弃作为值得信赖的。 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. Thomists和一些后来的神学家,这是事实,拒绝在本质上是不可能这样的多地点种类和申报bilocation也只是一个“幻影”没有有形的存在了。 But Cardinal De Lugo is of opinion, and justly so, that to deny its possibility might reflect unfavorably upon the Eucharistic multilocation itself.但枢机德卢戈是认为,公正所以,这可能会否定其可能性反省圣体多​​地点本身不利。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,许多Nominalists变幻莫测的问题,因为,例如,一个bilocated人可以生活在巴黎,并在同一时间死在伦敦,在巴黎恨,并在同一时间在伦敦情,不可能将作为作为普通的一天,因为一个人,其余如他,不可能是相反的命题问题,因为它们互相排斥。 The case assumes a different aspect, when wholly external contrary propositions, relating to position in space, are used in reference to the bilocated individual.案件已经不一样了,就完全相反的主张对外,与空间位置,是在参考了bilocated个人使用。In such a bilocation, which leaves the principle of contradiction intact, it would be hard to discover an intrinsic impossibility.在这样的bilocation,这让矛盾的原则不变,这将是很难发现一个内在的不可能性。

Publication information Written by J. Pohle.出版信息写了J. Pohle。Transcribed by Charles Sweeney, SJ.转录由查尔斯斯威尼,律政司司长。The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume V. Published 1909.天主教百科全书,体积诉公布1909年。New York: Robert Appleton Company.纽约:罗伯特Appleton还公司。Nihil Obstat, May 1, 1909.Nihil Obstat,1909年5月1日。Remy Lafort, Censor.人头马lafort,检查员。Imprimatur.认可。+John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York+约翰米farley,大主教纽约

Consubstantiation Consubstantiation

Catholic Information天主教新闻

This heretical doctrine is an attempt to hold the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist without admitting Transubstantiation.这个邪教教义,是企图在没有承认陷于变体的真实存在的基督在圣体圣事。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.据判决书称,基督的身体物质存在同物质的面包,在这样的态度,他的血液物质与物质的葡萄酒一起。Hence the word Consubstantiation.因此,字Consubstantiation。How the two substances can coexist is variously explained.如何在这两种物质可以共存有各种解释。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.最微妙的理论是,正如神的儿子走上自己是一个人体的任何物质都不会破坏它,也是如此,在他担任圣体面包的性质。Hence the theory is also called "Impanation", a term founded on the analogy of Incarnation.因此,该理论也被称为“Impanation”,这个词建立在比喻的化身。

The subject cannot be treated adequately except in connection with the general doctrine of the Holy Eucharist.这个主题不能充分治疗,除非与圣体圣事一般学说连接。Here it will be sufficient to trace briefly the history of the heresy.在这里,这将足以追查简要地异端的历史。In the earliest ages of the Church Christ's words, "This is my body", were understood by the faithful in their simple, natural sense.在教会基督的话,最早的年龄,“这是我的身体”,是由在其简单,自然的感觉忠实的理解。 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.在讨论过程中产生的时间,以他们是否应采取的字面或形象,而当它被解决,他们将采取在这个意义上说,基督是真的,真正目前,这一问题的存在方式从字面上开始烦躁。 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.从第九至十二世纪的争论,之后时间陷于变学说,它教导我们,基督是在目前由圣体的面包和酒进入他的身体和血液全部内容的变化,充分表明作为天主教的教义。 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.在第一阶段,它打开了质疑身体是基督的身体是非常诞生,受难,复活历史的机构。This is maintained by Paschasius Radbert and denied by Ratramnus in the middle of the ninth century.这是由Paschasius Radbert并在第九世纪中叶Ratramnus拒绝。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.我们关心更密切关注的是这里的争论,当Berengarius(一零零零年至1088年)否认,下一阶段如果不是真实的存在,至少有任何的面包和酒的物质进入身体和血液的物质变化。 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).他认为,“献身面包,保留其实质,是基督的身体,那就是它不会失去任何东西了,但假设一些东西,这是不是”(潘尼斯sacratus在altari,萨尔瓦苏阿质,美国东部时间科珀斯克里斯蒂非amittens狴erat桑达assumens狴非erat -比照。Martène和杜兰德,“词库诺伟司Anecd。”,四,彩色105页)。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.很显然,他拒绝陷于变体,但什么样的存在,他似乎已经承认在他漫长的职业生涯不同时期各不相同。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.在他的意见是在罗马(1050,1059,1078,1079)举办各种议会谴责,韦尔切利(1050),普瓦捷(1074),虽然双方教皇亚历山大二世和圣格列高利七世治疗具有显着的考虑他。 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.如果他的主要对手是兰弗朗克,事后坎特伯雷大主教(德Corpore等血色多米尼adversus Berengarium Turonensem),Durandus的Troarn,Guitmundus的Aversa和朗格勒休。Although it cannot be said that Berengarius found many adherents during his lifetime, yet his heresy did not die with him.虽然不能说是Berengarius发现许多追随者在他的一生,但他的异端邪说和他没有死。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.这是维护威克里夫(Trialog,四,六,10)和路德(瓦尔希,第二十条1228),并且是高教会圣公会之间的党在现阶段的看法。 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).除了政局上述,这是第四次拉特兰会议(1215年),安理会的康斯坦茨,(1418年谴责 - “面包的材料实质内容和方式,如葡萄酒的材料物质的圣餐仍坛“,和对威克里夫谴责主张)第一,安理会的遄达(1551)。

Berengarius and his modern followers have appealed chiefly to reason and the Fathers in support of their opinions.Berengarius和他的现代追随者们呼吁的原因主要是为了他们的意见,并在父亲的支持。 That Transubstantiation is not contrary to reason, and was at least implicitly taught by the Fathers, is shown in the article TRANSUBSTANTIATION.这不违反陷于变体的原因,至少是含蓄地由父亲教导,在文章中陷于所示。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.在由一个人两个性质之间的化身和圣体比喻父的讨论是经常提到的,这导致了偏袒Impanation表达意见。 But after the definitive victory of St. Cyril's doctrine, the analogy was seen to be deceptive.但后圣西里尔的学说最终胜利,这个比喻被认为是骗人的。(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. (见Batiffol,练习曲德历史学等,第二辑​​,第319 sqq。)伟大院学派的一致拒绝Consubstantiation,但他们在不同的理由这样做。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.).阿尔伯图斯思,圣托马斯和圣文德,坚持认为的话,“这是我的身体”,否定了它,而黑尔斯,司各脱,Durandus,奥卡姆,皮埃尔德阿伊亚历山大宣布,它不抵触圣经,也只能是推翻由父亲的权威和教学的教会(Turmel,历史。德拉théol。断定。,我,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).这种论点已成为绊脚石英国国教的作家,谁引用了对圣体的错误意见的schoolmen一些支持,如蒲赛,(1855)“的真实存在主义”。

Publication information Written by TB Scannell.出版信息撰稿结核病斯坎内尔。Transcribed by Dan Clouse.转录由丹克劳斯。The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IV.天主教百科全书,第四卷。Published 1908.1908年出版。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.纽约:罗伯特Appleton还公司。Nihil Obstat.Nihil Obstat。Remy Lafort, Censor.人头马lafort,检查员。Imprimatur.认可。+John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York+约翰米farley,大主教纽约


In addition to the works mentioned, see HARPER, Peace through the Truth, (London, 1866), I; FRANZELIN, De SS Euch.除了上述工程,识破真相,(伦敦,1866年),哈珀,和平我; FRANZELIN,德党卫军Euch。(Rome, 1873), thes. (罗马,1873年),帖。xiv; SCWANE, Dogmengeschichte (Freiburg im Br., 1882), III; VERNET in Dict.十四,SCWANE,Dogmengeschichte(弗赖堡的IM溴,1882年。),第三,在快译通韦尔内。de théol.德théol。cath.导管。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).希沃特Bérénguer去旅游,在Kirchenlex,希沃特Consubstantatio STREBER;赫德利,圣体圣事(1907年); WAGGETT,圣体圣事(圣公会,伦敦,1906年);戈尔,基督的身体(伦敦,1907年)。

Additional Comments补充意见

Transubstantiation is a central belief of the Roman Catholic Church.陷于变体是一个罗马天主教会的中心信念。Catholics might find possible bias in the articles included above, which each might be construed as containing a Protestant tendency.天主教徒可能发现上面的文章可能有的偏见,包括每个可能被视为含有倾向新教解释。

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.我们(相信编辑),谁恰巧是新教,认为上述条款准确地摆事实,对陷于整体上的现代学术态度。 Catholics are taught that there is compelling Scriptural and Patristic Tradition proof for supporting the premise of transubstantiation.天主教徒们告诉我们,有令人信服的圣经和支持的前提下的变体教父传统的证明。They therefore may take exception with some of the statements made.因此,他们可能会采取例外与一些发言作出。We hope to soon locate a Catholic scholar's article on the subject to add to this presentation.我们希望尽快找到一个天主教学者关于这一问题的文章,以增加此演示文稿。

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.这个题目是一个大概在30个不同的重要的基督教科目时,个人可以申请自己的成见和假设,得出自己的结论的例子。 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.天主教徒选择相信,面包“实际上变成血腥”它的过程中吃,尽管他们也认为,有迹象显示它没有向外。 没有可能的方式来反对这种说法!如果你有一个梦想或恶梦昨晚,没有人有任何没有可能的方式的争论,你,因为这是一个个人经验,无法证实或其他有争议的人。 因此,如果天主教徒的观点正确的关于“成为血腥”,没有评论家会曾经“证明”他们是错误的,而且,他们永远无法“证明”,他们是对的。

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,加尔文等人,每个人都感到这是一个不合逻辑的结论,而且,更具体而言,圣经没有明确支持“血腥”的解释。 一些新教徒来到得出结论认为,面包是“仅仅是象征性”的主,而其他人(以下路德)觉得它真的成了上帝,但在一个非流血的方式。

No one can either "prove" or "disprove" any of these viewpoints either. 没有人可以“证明”或“否定”的观点无论任何这些。

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.这是一个主题上不可能有永远协议!每个组都有自己的成见和应用的假设和解释确定了明确的结论/。 由于圣经没有包括足够的细节告诉大家,一种或另一种更正确,他们每应被视为“同样正确的”(个人意见),因此完全组的有效这样做的。 Therefore, we see no cause or basis to criticize Catholics for their conclusion regarding Transubstantiation.因此,我们认为没有任何原因或依据有关陷于变批评为他们的结论天主教徒。But we also see no cause or basis to criticize Zwingli et al for a purely symbolic understanding.但是,我们也看不出有什么原因或依据批评理解为纯粹的象征性茨温利等人。

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!我们的教会认为,这种论调是几乎无关。 什么是真正重要的是如何感知的圣体是由特定的人,并影响其参与大英寸如果一个人根本吃面包了,作为一个平凡的一块,它没有任何好处在任何教会! 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,如果人的心是深受成年礼(主的真正愿望)的影响,那么它是有效的,无论什么意见,对可能的解释。

We have a rather different thought to offer up on the subject!我们有一个相当不同的思维,提供关于这个问题了!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).现代科学已经证明,即使是在任何液体或固体(阿伏伽德罗数)少量的原子数目令人难以置信。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.如果有一个你的办公桌上一杯咖啡,或流行玻璃或丽嘉饼干或糖果,也有像100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000原子在它的东西。 When Jesus Lived, He breathed!当耶稣活着,他的呼吸!Every breath He exhaled had water vapor in it and carbon dioxide, atoms and molecules that HAD BEEN PART OF HIS BODY.他的每一次呼吸已被呼出了他的身体部分水蒸气和二氧化碳在里面,原子和分子。A number of years back, I studied this subject carefully.若干年后,我仔细研究这个课题。The winds of the world distribute such air, including those molecules, all around the world, within a couple years.世界上的风散布这些空气,包括世界各地的分子,几年之内。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!由于堪萨斯州小麦植株在生长,它发生在二氧化碳和从空中,然后成为水蒸气,植物的一部分!The point here is that some of those molecules had actually been part of the Body of Jesus 2000 years earlier!这里的关键是,这些分子有些人居然被耶稣的身体二千年较早的一部分!I did the math on this, and was amazed!我没有就这个问题的数学,并且很惊讶!Every mouthful of that coffee certainly contains around a MILLION atoms that had once physically been part of the Body of Jesus!每一口咖啡一定含有大约一万元的身体曾一度被耶稣的身体的一部分原子!Similar for crackers or candy bars!类似的饼干和糖果了!

This is really an entirely different subject, but it certainly is an established fact.这实在是一个完全不同的主题,但可以肯定的是既定的事实。I see it as sort of affecting such arguments regarding the Nature of the Eucharist.我认为影响有关圣体性质,例如参数排序。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.如果有人要认为万,实际上已被耶稣的身体的一部分原子是“血腥”,我真的不能反驳这点,因为有些/这些原子肯定了他的血和他的肉。 However, if a different person would choose to look at that coffee as more "symbolic", well that is also sort of true!但是,如果一个不同的人会选择看,咖啡随着越来越多的“象征性”,那么这也是真正的那种!

This is brought up to try to show that "arguments" on "human important perceptions" are probably not really very important.这是从小就尝试表明,“论据”“人类重要的看法”也有可能不是真的很重要。 Also, that you might look at EVERY piece of bread, and meat, and vegetable, and every glass of any liquid, in a new light!此外,你可能看每一块面包,肉类,蔬菜,每天的任何液体玻璃,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!有了正确的心态,我相信,人们可以看到一个非常直接的方式,每一口食物,每一口的液体可以说是“基督”!Instead of just sucking down a Pepsi, look at it for a moment, and contemplate these facts.而不是只吸了一百事可乐,看它一会儿,思考这些事实。I have a VERY large number of "religious experiences" in this way!我有一个“宗教经验”这种方式非常大的数字!

Some Christians might get upset over the molecule discussion above.有些基督徒可能会心烦意乱分子上述讨论。NO, it is NOT meant as any replacement for Faith perceptions of the Eucharist!不,这并不意味着任何信仰的圣体圣事的看法更换! It is NOT to imply that Faith perceptions are incorrect or incomplete.它并不是说信仰的看法是不正确或不完整。Just the reverse!正好相反! 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!我们的小教会鼓励所有成员花凝视着晶圆或即将在圣体仪式采取的面包,几秒钟,以实现除了信仰的重要性,他们的教会,ACTUAL事实说明,他们正在寻找在,约摄取了耶稣的身体实际的物理部件! Personally, I often get a shiver, in realizing just how intimately Jesus is to me in that Rite!就个人而言,我常常一哆嗦,就如何实现密切耶稣是我在这礼!We hope that is also true among the Congregation!我们希望,也成为了众成真!

Newer Additional Comments (Nov 2005) by the Editor of BELIEVE.较新的附加评论的编辑器(2005年11月)相信。

I sometimes wonder how Members of the Clergy might act if they were to interact with Jesus Himself, without realizing it!我有时很想知道神职人员可能会采取行动,如果他们要交互耶稣自己没有意识到这一点,!Several Lutheran Ministers have behaved to us in extremely poor ways on this subject!部长们几个路德对这个问题表现在极其恶劣的方式给我们!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 subject presentations in BELIEVE which may be inaccurate or incomplete, and usually asking for their assistance in improving this particular presentation.而在经过最初的卑鄙的电子邮件,指控相信作为一个路德教对手,与恶劣的语言往往令人惊讶的,我一直向他们保证,相信是不是“对路德教”,其实一直想改善任何1300主题演讲中认为这可能是不准确或不完整的,通常为他们特别提出改善这种援助要求。 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!一个路德部长只是这一请求作出反应,说他不认为有任何理由,他应该做我们的研究!OK!行!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.这很好,但没有任何信义部合作,这是很难的非路德(非宗派新教牧师)要真正了解路德的态度。

I will attempt to describe the issue, as best I understand it.我将试图描述的问题,尽我所知。

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.据我们从研究中可以发现,这个词Consubstantiation绝对没有其他用途的其他描述,而不是所谓的路德信仰有关圣体。 However, Lutheran Clergy seem to go ballistic regarding the very existence of the word!然而,路德会神职人员似乎去弹道导弹关于这个词非常的存在!Now, if the "definition" of the word Consubstantiation is inaccurate, I could easily see why Lutherans would want to correct it.现在,如果“定义”这个词Consubstantiation是不准确的,我可以很容易明白为什么lutherans会要改正。 But that has never been their interest, in dozens of Lutheran Clergy who have complained about the above (scholar-written) articles.但是,从来没有自己的利益,在路德会神职人员谁对以上(学者编写的)的文章抱怨几十人。They always are intensely outraged (and most very clearly express extreme outrage!) at the very word itself!他们总是强烈愤慨(非常明确表示,最极端的愤慨!)在这个字本身!In every case, I have calmly tried to ask why, and none have ever responded to that question.在任何情况下,我试图冷静地问为什么,没有回答过这个问题。

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.这种态度可能是有意义的,如果单词Consubstantiation了一些第二层含义,一个使用其中的含义显然是从路德关于圣体圣事的信仰不同。 No Lutheran Clergy has never indicated that there is any other such usage.没有路德会神职人员从未表示有任何其他用途。

This then seems REALLY confusing to me!这就似乎真的迷惑了我!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.在这每一个通讯点,我通常指的是单词“鼠标垫”,其中,据我所知,只有一个单一的用法,即小面积一台计算机上移动鼠标左右。 If someone became intensely emotionally irritated by the word "mousepad", I would wonder why.如果有人情绪变得强烈的话激怒了“鼠标垫”,我想知道为什么。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!没有其他知道的用法,不管这个词的定义,它必须有事情要处理与鼠标移动它!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,即使被认为是不准确的定义,不是更有意义试图以更加完善的正确比成为虐待和卑鄙的,因为这个词被用来定义鼠标垫?

In my interactions with Lutheran Ministers on this one subject, I have started to wonder how well they have their acts together!在与我的相互作用对路德部长这个问题,我已经开始想知道他们的行为以及他们在一起!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.有些人坚持认为,是的,路德描述这一观点,但后来放弃了,是的,梅兰希第一次使用这个词,但后来也完全驳斥。 Does this mean that Lutheran beliefs today are not compatible with what Luther had believed as he initiated the Protestant Reformation?这是否意味着今天的路德信念不相信什么路德为他发起了宗教改革兼容吗?(seems like a fair question). (似乎是一个公平的问题)。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.其他路德会神职人员“,宣布”对我来说,路德从来没有使用这样的词(这是真的!),它首先是用大约60年后的大约1590年。 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.不过,其他路德会神职人员坚持这个词用在路德Consubstantiation(无论是100或200年),和那些声称有人说,第一次使用它司各脱。 But none have ever provided BELIEVE with actual texts of any of these things, and instead only refer to MODERN Lutheran texts.不过目前还没有提供过这些事情与任何实际的文本相信,而不是仅指现代信义文本。The standards of BELIEVE are such that that is not good enough!作者认为,标准是这样的,这是不够的!If we are to dump the work of a highly respected Christian scholar (our included texts), we would need REALLY good evidence and documentation!如果我们要转储一位德高望重的基督教学者的工作(包括我们的文本),我们将真正需要良好的证据和文件!

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.即使所使用的特定的词之前路德,这并不一定意味着它没有或没有意思是一样的人。The word "mouse" has been around for thousands of years, but never referred to any part of a computer until twenty years ago!这个“鼠标”已经存在了数千年,但从来没有提及,直到二十年前的任何一台计算机的一部分!Should we read a Shakespeare mention of a mouse with outrage, in not properly also referring to the computer?如果我们读了一本莎士比亚与愤怒鼠标也提不正确指的是电脑,?

In any case, all we want are actual facts.在任何情况下,所有我们要的是事实。Except for these aberrant Lutheran Clergy Members, we actually strongly support the Lutheran Church and wish to improve BELIEVE to better present their beliefs.除了这些异常路德会神职人员,我们其实是路德教会大力支持,并希望改善相信更好地介绍自己的信仰。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,对于这一个词,Consubstantiation,他们似乎马上生气和复仇,进入攻击模式,没有(还)曾经提供实际的证据(不包括他们的同龄人最近的文章),而这正是我们真正需要的。 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.例如,如果司各脱实际使用期限Consubstantiation,我们只需要的书籍和页码的名字,所以我们可以研究这个词是在其中使用的上下文。

This subject has been quite confusing to us at BELIEVE.这个问题已经相当混乱给我们相信。We would have thought that the Lutheran Church would have LOVED to have a "special word" that referred ONLY to their unique belief on the Eucharist!我们本来以为信义会喜欢有一个“特殊词”中只提及他们在圣体独特的信念! No other Church other than the Roman Catholic Church has such a specific word associated with it.没有其他教会的罗马天主教会比其他有这样一个特定的词与它相关联。But it is clear that Lutherans would really wish to eliminate that word from our language!但很显然,路德会真的要消除,从我们的语言文字!And we do not see why!我们不明白为什么!We have made many offers to "correct an inaccurate definition" but Lutherans do not seem interested in that.我们已经提出了很多优惠“纠正一个不准确的定义”,但路德在这似乎并不感兴趣。

Consubstantiation Consubstantiation

Possibly a solid Clarification!可能是一个坚实的澄清!

General Information一般资料

Dear Editor:尊敬的编辑:

I was browsing your article concerning the various views of the Lord's Supper, or Eucharist.我在浏览你的文章关于主的晚餐,或圣体圣事的各种意见。You noted that none of the Lutheran pastors who have spoken with you could cite anything, beyond modern articles, asserting that the Lutheran position is not "consubstantiation."你指出的路德谁的发言与你能举出任何超出现代的文章,没有牧师,声称路德的立场是不是“consubstantiation。” Allow me, first, to present a source from the time of the Reformation and, second, to add some clarification.请允许我,第一,目前从时间的改革,第二来源,补充一些澄清。

Nicolaus Selneccer(1530-1592), one of the authors/orchastrators of the Formula of Concord writes, "Although our churches use the old expressions 'in the bread', 'with the bread,' or 'under the bread' they do not teach an inclusio, consubstantiatio, or delitescentia. The meaning is rather that Christ, 'when giving the bread, gives us simultaneously His body to eat.'" Vom hl.尼古拉Selneccer(1530年至1592年),作者的/的公式的康科德orchastrators一写道:“虽然我们的教会使用旧的表达在面包','用面包,'或'下的面包' 他们不教一inclusio,consubstantiatio,或delitescentia。意思是相当是基督,'当给予面包,同时他的身体给我们吃'" VOM的HL时。Abendmahl des Herrn etc. (1591) Bl E 2.Abendmahl德Herrn等(1591)基本法é 2。

The reason Lutheran pastors get upset over the attribution of the term "consubstantaion" to our theology is two-fold.路德牧师克服了对“consubstantaion”我们的神学归属不安的原因有两方面。

First, you may find in early Luther (the Luther of whom he himself writes, in his introduction to his Latin writings, was still a "raving papist.") that he preferred "consubstantiation," as argued by Peter d'Ailly's "Questiones on Peter Lombard."首先,你会发现在早期路德(路德的人,他自己写道,在​​介绍他的拉丁文著作,仍然是一个“疯狂papist。”),他宁愿“consubstantiation”,由彼得德Ailly's“Questiones主张在彼得伦巴。“ Luther preferred d'Ailly's view, however, largely for philosophical reasons.路德推荐德Ailly's观点,但是,主要是为了哲学的原因。It required only a single miracle whereas transubstantiation, as it had been pushed from Aquinas to Duns Scotus required a second miracle: the annihilation of the substance of the bread.它要求只有一个,而陷于变单一的奇迹,因为它已被推迟到邓司各脱从阿奎那需要第二个奇迹:在面包的物质湮灭。Though, at the time, Luther only argues that it is "better philosophy" and would be preferred only if transubstantiation hadn't already been declared by the Church.虽然,在当时,路德只认为这是“更好的理念”,将是首选只有陷于不是已经被教会的声明。So, the first reason why Lutherans reject the idea of consubstantiation is that the term itself is wrapped up in the same philosophical categories as transubstantiation and is, therefore, rejected on those grounds.所以,第一个理由路德拒绝consubstantiation想法是,这个词本身是包裹在为陷于同样的哲学范畴,因此是,这些理由加以拒绝。 The Lutheran objection to transubstantation wasn't so much that they excluded the bread/wine, but that the theory had dogmatized Aristotle which, in turn, speaks where Scripture has remained silent.路德反对transubstantation没有那么多,他们排除了面包/葡萄酒,但该理论亚里士多德教条化,这反过来,讲经文一直保持沉默的地方。 It forces theology in a way typical of Scholasticism: it sets up a principle (principium/Oberbegriff) as the "first thing," under which all our theology must be made to fit.它强制的方式典型的士林神学:它规定了一个原则(原理/ Oberbegriff)作为“第一件事情,”在所有我们的神学必须作出适应。The Lord can't be forced into our principium, therefore, where the Lord has not declared the "how," we are best never to dogmatize our theories about how it may have been possible.主不能强迫进入我们的原理,因此,如果主没有宣布“如何,”我们最大的努力教条我们对如何它可能已被可能的理论。 Notice these words from the Smalcald Articles, III, 6 "We care nothing about the sophistical subtlety by which they teach that bread and wine leave or lose their own natural substance, and that there remains only the appearance and colour of bread, and not true bread."请注意从Smalcald文章,三,六“我们关心的微妙的诡辩,使他们教导说,面包和酒离开或者失去自己的天然物质,并有仍然只有面包的外观和颜色,而不是真正没有这些话面包 “ The criticism, here, isn't merely the conclusion (that bread is no longer) but the philosophical method, or "sophistical subtelty" which attempts to expalin the how.的批评,在这里,不仅是结论(即不再是面包),但哲学方法,即“诡辩subtelty”试图解释如何去做。Lutherans were quite willing to allow for transubstantation, or even consubstantation, so long as the Church would not make a dogma of such.路德会很愿意让transubstantation,甚至consubstantation,只要教会长时间没有作出这样的教条。 The reason, in the Babylonian Captivity, Luther cites transubstantiation as one of the "three walls" having obscured the Gospel of the Sacrament is not that they have gotten rid of bread, but they have dogmatized a theory that can't be scripturally substantiated.究其原因,在巴比伦囚禁,路德援引“三墙”一陷于有遮蔽的圣餐福音是不是他们已经得到了面包赶走,但他们有一个理论教条化,不能根据圣经证实。 Thus, the reason we reject consubstantiation is for the very same reason we reject transubstantiation.因此,我们之所以拒绝consubstantiation是为了同样的原因,我们拒绝陷于变体。 Instead, we prefer to speak of the "Sacramental Union," or the "unio sacramentailis."相反,我们更愿意谈论的“圣事联盟”或“unio sacramentailis。”The unio sacramentalis is the Lutheran counterpart to Roman transubstantiation, and Late Medieval consubstantiation, with which is it often mistakingly confounded.该unio sacramentalis是对应到罗马陷于信义,晚中世纪consubstantiation,这是它与通常mistakingly混淆。Like consubstantiation, unio sacramentalis presupposes the bread and body, wine and blood, exist together.像consubstantiation,unio sacramentalis前提是面包和身体,酒和血,共存。 Bread and wine are not destroyed or "transubstantiated."面包和葡萄酒是不会被破坏或“transubstantiated。”The difference, however, is that no theory is built up about the coexistence of two substances, reflecting the accidents of one to the exclusion of the other.所不同的,但问题在于,没有任何一种理论是建立了对两种物质共存,反映了一个意外的其他排除。

Second, we prefer not to be call "consubstantiationists," because the differentiation implied by the use of the term suggests that our primary "difference" in our confession of the Sacrament, against Rome, is that of bickering over the presence of bread and wine.第二,我们不希望被称之为“consubstantiationists,”因为这个术语的使用许可的分化表明,我们的首要“差异”在我们的供词对罗马的圣事,就是以上的面包和酒的存在争吵。 This isn't the matter, at all.这不是问题,在所有。While we do believe Rome is wrong to dogmatize a philosophical theory (transubstantiation) our real "criticism" with the Roman doctrine of the Eucharist is the *sacrifice* of the mass.虽然我们相信罗马是错误的教条一种哲学理论(陷于)我们真正的“批评”与罗马的圣体学说,是牺牲的群众* *。Hence, as Luther says in the Babylonian captivity, they have turned what is truly Gospel (beneficium) into law (sacrificium).因此,作为路德在巴比伦被掳说,他们已经把什么是真正的福音(beneficium)进入法律(sacrificium)。 That is, they have turned something that is primarilly God's gracious, Gospel-deliviering action *for us* into an action we offer to God in order to appease the wrath of the Father.也就是说,他们把东西是primarilly *成为一个行动,我们向上帝,以安抚愤怒的父亲上帝的恩典,福音歌曲deliviering我们行动*。

Ryan T. Fouts瑞安福茨

This subject presentation in the original English language这在原来的主题演讲, 英语

Send an e-mail question or comment to us:发送电子邮件的问题或意见给我们:E-mail电子邮件

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at:的, 主要相信网页(和索引科目),是在:
BELIEVE Religious Information Source相信宗教信息来源