To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
This Tract of S. Cyril (according to Vasques e 1.1 the Iesuit) is not found among his antient workes, but cyted out of him by Thomas Aquinas, and therefore the authoritie thereof, may bee suspected; notwithstanding I answer as followeth.
First, S. Cyrill, by the words, Conuerting them into the veritie of his flesh, vnderstandeth not Popish Transubst. but mysticall and Sacramentall Conuersion, to wit, conuersion of significati∣on,
vse, and operation; for he speaketh of Bread and Wine, [ A] not according to a part of their nature, to witte, their mat∣ter and substance, but according to their whole nature, con∣taining substance, accidents, and quantitie: now if the things offered b 1.2 to God, in the holy Eucharist, are the whole creatures of Bread and Wine, and the same are conuerted into Christs flesh; then the accidents and quantitie are conuerted into Christs body, as well as the matter and forme, which Ro∣mists deny.
Secondly, from the word Conuersion, Romists cannot prooue Transubstantiation: for if the conuersion, be onely of vse, rela∣tion, [ B] and operation, as in the water of Baptisme, then it follow∣eth not, That because S. Cyrill taught conuersion, Ergo, hee taught Transubstantiation. And if it be a substantiall conuersion, then also there cannot be Popish Transubstantiation, for in this forme and substance perish, and the accidents remaine: in the other, the common matter remaineth, and the forme and acci∣dents perish c 1.3.
In all substantiall conuersions, naturall or miraculous, there is a new thing produced, out of that which is conuerted, as ap∣peareth in the conuersion of Water into Wine, and Lots wife [ C] into a Pillar of salt, &c. But in Popish Transubstantiation, the body of Christ is not produced anew d 1.4: for it is praeex∣istent, and receiueth no substantiall change, by the confession of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 themselues e 1.5: neither is it substantially vnited vnto the accidents of Bread and Wine, for it giueth no subsistance to them, and it sustaineth them not, but it is vnited accidentally f 1.6 onely, by being made present where the substance of the Ele∣ments formerly were. Now if water should be poured vpon the ground, or otherwise consumed, and wine be brought from 〈◊〉〈◊〉, as haile and snow g 1.7 are, and be placed where water for∣merly [ D] was, here is no substantiall conuersion: so likewise when the substance of Bread and Wine cease, and Christs body and bloud are brought 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the place where these were, no substan∣tiall thing is produced, but one substance succeedeth in the roome of another, by that which they stile vbiation h 1.8.
It is in vaine therefore for Romists to obiect the Fathers [ A] words, speaking of conuersion of bread and wine into Christs bodie and blood, because in Popish Transubstantiation, there is not conuersion of bread into Christs bodie, but onely a locall succession of Christs bodie into the same vbitie, where the sub∣stance of bread formerly was a 1.9.
Thirdly, In all substantiall conuersions, either a new thing is [ B] produced, or the old preserued. In Transubstantiation, no new thing is produced, nor any old preserued: Ergo, Transub∣stantiation is no conuersion. If they answere, That some new thing is produced, to wit, an vnion of Christs bodie with the Sacramentall signes b 1.10. I answere, That when a garment and a bodie are vnited, here is no substantiall conuersion, or when a Diamond and gold Ring are vnited, or when the humanitie or Deitie are vnited in the person of Christ.
If they say, That the bodie of Christ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is preser∣ued, as when nourishment c 1.11 is receiued into the bodie, it pre∣serueth the same; then I demand, Whether Christs bodie is preserued in regard of the being? and if they affirme, then it is also produced according to the being d 1.12, because the same thing which produced the bodie of Christ, doth at this present onely preserue it, and no new thing super-added; but it is not pro∣duced anew, Ergo, It is not preserued or continued in the [ D] being which it formerly had, by any new Action.
If they answere, It is preserued according to the Sacramen∣tall being: I reply, That this Sacramentall being, must be either the being of Christs bodie, according to matter and forme; but
then Christs bodie receiueth no such being, for it was preexi∣stent. [ A] Or else it is the vnion and application of Christs bodie, to the Sacramentall signes; and then I reply, That this vnion is onely accidentall a 1.13, and in regard of presentialitie and vbitie, and consequently it is no conuersion of bread into Christs bo∣die, but a translation and adduction of Christs bodie from hea∣uen, vnto the place of the substance of bread: but translation and adduction of one substance, into the roome or seate of another, is not substantiall conuersion b 1.14, but alteration of place.
Vasq. in 3. Tho. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 3. Disp. 180. ca. 3. n. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Cyrillus Alexandrinus in Epistola ad Calo∣syrium, [ E] quae inter eius opera non habetur, illius tamen testimonium citat S. Tho. in Catena. in illud. Luc. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. & acc epto pane.
〈◊〉〈◊〉. li. 4. ca. 32. Aug d. fid. ad Petrum. ca. 19. Sa∣crificium panis & vini, in fide & cha∣ritate, sancta Ec∣clesia Catholica, per 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or∣bem terrae, offerre non cessat.
〈◊〉〈◊〉 non 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, siue 〈◊〉〈◊〉, sed mutat 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
Aureol. 4. d. 11. q 1. ar. 1. virtute transubstantiatio∣nis, nō accipit cor∣pus Domini esse post non esse, quo∣niam prius erat.
Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3. Fauentin. in 4. Disp. 35. ca. 6. Quae∣ro quis sit terminus formalis huius a∣ctionis (Transub.) & conuersionis? non est corpus Christi. quia illud est terminus mate∣rialis, ergo termi∣nus erit Christi 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 panis. Hoc autem totum est accidentale, & nihil addit in re nisi 〈◊〉〈◊〉 realem sub 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
〈◊〉〈◊〉. Corpus Christi in Eucharistia respicit accidentia omnino 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ergo non potest 〈◊〉〈◊〉 illorum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 aliquem modum essendi substantialem, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ab 〈◊〉〈◊〉, quem habebat antequam fieret 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 8. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 conuertitur in corpus Christi, quod nulla sit mutatio in ipso, nec habet aliquid 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 ad species quae est accidens. Petigian. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Theol. in 4. d. 11. [ E] q. 3. ar. 7. Terminus nouae actionis accipit esse per ipsam actionem, sed per Transubst. quae 〈◊〉〈◊〉 actio noua, non accipit corpus Christi esse substantiale, sed presentialitarem ad species. Ergo corpus Christi non est terminus Transubst. secundum esse substantiale, sed solum secundum 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
〈◊〉〈◊〉. in 4. d. 11. q. 4. Disp. 44. Sect. 2. Grando & 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 adducuntur è coelo in terram, & secuudum quid 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in esse presentis in terra. Ibid. Tota ipsa Trausubst. est 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Ioh. d. colon ex Scoto q. 11. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cor∣poris Christi in Eucharistia, est tantum respectus extrinsece adueniens.
〈◊〉〈◊〉. 4. d. 11. q. 1. ar. 3. Vbiatio est quando aliquid de vbi non, transit ad aliud vbi.
Aureol. 4. d. 11. q. 1. ar. 1. Praecise vnum succedit alteri, non est verum dicere quod illud, cui succeditur, accedat & conuertatur in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 quod succe∣dit, imo è conuerso 〈◊〉〈◊〉 accedit ad illud cui succedit. Idem. ar. 2. Illud non transit in aliud, quod desinit, antequam perueniat ad illud, sicut non transit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 qui desinit esse antequam perueniat illuc.
Bonacin. d. Sa∣cram. d. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Disp. 4. q. 3. p. 6. §. 2. Greg. Val. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 4. Disp. 6. q. 3. punct. 2. & 3. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mutatio∣nis illius non est simpliciter non esse, sed esse substantiale corporis Christi, non quasi de nouo productum, sed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 succedens substantiae panis, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 substantialem intimae cuiusdam coniunctionis substantiae suae, cum [ C] ijsdem illis 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 antea erat quo{que} per suam substantiam 〈◊〉〈◊〉 coniunctus panis, & quidem 〈◊〉〈◊〉 etiam, quodam naturae & rationis ordine, quam ab illis informaretur.
Bellarm. d. Eu∣char. lib. 3. cap. 18. Conuersio panis in corp' Domini, non est productiua nec conseruatiua, sed adductiua. Nam corp' Domini pre∣existit ante con∣uersionem, sed non sub speciebus pa∣nis, conuersio 〈◊〉〈◊〉 non facit vt corpus Christi simpliciter esse incipiat, sed vt incipiat esse sub speciebus panis. Greg. Val. to. 4. Disp. 6. q. 3. punct. 2. & 3.
Fauentin. 4. Dist. 11. q. 3. Disp. 45. ca. 7. Scotus 2. d. 2. q. 1. ad 1. Conseruatio est continua∣tio esse prehabiti, non tamen est 〈◊〉〈◊〉 causationes & actiones, sed est actio vna & eadem, qua Deus primo crea∣uit creaturam, quae respectu 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 temporis, quo creatura ponitur in esse dicitur creatio: respectu vero alio∣rum sequentium dicitur 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Vasques 3. Tho. to. 3. Disp. 181. cap. 5. Si ali qua actio fuerit, vel, res aliqua cuius ipsa 〈◊〉〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 causa, ca non potest esse Transubstantiatio aut terminus illius: atqui conseruatio Christi, non est actio proceedens à verbis 〈◊〉〈◊〉, neque esse Christi permanens est 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ipsorum. Ergo talis actio non potest esse Transubstantiatio, neque esse Christus terminus illius. Porro autem talem actionem & terminum, non posse à verbis 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 ab 〈◊〉〈◊〉 patet, quia Deus etiam sine illis verbis, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 prorsus modo Christum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in suo esse: 〈◊〉〈◊〉, cum conseruat illis prolatis, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 non 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 [ E] 〈◊〉〈◊〉, sed per accidens & concomitanter cum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 se habet.
Vasques in 3. Tho. to. 3. Disp. 181. cap. 3. Vnio cum illis, quocunque modo fiat non po∣test non esse acci∣dentaria.
Suar. to. 3. in 3. part. Tho. Disp. 50. Sect. 4. Per solam actionem adductiuam, reuera non explicatur vera conuerfio substantialis & Transubstantiatio, sed solum translo∣catio [ B] quaedam, quando vna substantia solum succedit loco alterius, non potest proprie dici vna conuerti in aliam.