|
Objection 1: It seems that the substantial form of the bread remains
in this sacrament after the consecration. For it has been said
(Article 5) that the accidents remain after the consecration. But
since bread is an artificial thing, its form is an accident.
Therefore it remains after the consecration.
Objection 2: Further, the form of Christ's body is His soul:
for it is said in De Anima ii, that the soul "is the act of a
physical body which has life in potentiality". But it cannot be said
that the substantial form of the bread is changed into the soul.
Therefore it appears that it remains after the consecration.
Objection 3: Further, the proper operation of a things follows its
substantial form. But what remains in this sacrament, nourishes, and
performs every operation which bread would do were it present.
Therefore the substantial form of the bread remains in this sacrament
after the consecration.
On the contrary, The substantial form of bread is of the substance of
bread. But the substance of the bread is changed into the body of
Christ, as stated above (Articles 2,3,4). Therefore the
substantial form of the bread does not remain.
I answer that, Some have contended that after the consecration not
only do the accidents of the bread remain, but also its substantial
form. But this cannot be. First of all, because if the substantial
form of the bread were to remain, nothing of the bread would be changed
into the body of Christ, excepting the matter; and so it would follow
that it would be changed, not into the whole body of Christ, but into
its matter, which is repugnant to the form of the sacrament, wherein
it is said: "This is My body."
Secondly, because if the substantial form of the bread were to
remain, it would remain either in matter, or separated from matter.
The first cannot be, for if it were to remain in the matter of the
bread, then the whole substance of the bread would remain, which is
against what was said above (Article 2). Nor could it remain in
any other matter, because the proper form exists only in its proper
matter. But if it were to remain separate from matter, it would then
be an actually intelligible form, and also an intelligence; for all
forms separated from matter are such.
Thirdly, it would be unbefitting this sacrament: because the
accidents of the bread remain in this sacrament, in order that the body
of Christ may be seen under them, and not under its proper species,
as stated above (Article 5).
And therefore it must be said that the substantial form of the bread
does not remain.
Reply to Objection 1: There is nothing to prevent art from making a
thing whose form is not an accident, but a substantial form; as frogs
and serpents can be produced by art: for art produces such forms not by
its own power, but by the power of natural energies. And in this way
it produces the substantial forms of bread, by the power of fire baking
the matter made up of flour and water.
Reply to Objection 2: The soul is the form of the body, giving it
the whole order of perfect being, i.e. being, corporeal being, and
animated being, and so on. Therefore the form of the bread is changed
into the form of Christ's body, according as the latter gives
corporeal being, but not according as it bestows animated being.
Reply to Objection 3: Some of the operations of bread follow it by
reason of the accidents, such as to affect the senses, and such
operations are found in the species of the bread after the consecration
on account of the accidents which remain. But some other operations
follow the bread either by reason of the matter, such as that it is
changed into something else, or else by reason of the substantial
form, such as an operation consequent upon its species, for instance,
that it "strengthens man's heart" (Ps. 103:15); and such
operations are found in this sacrament, not on account of the form or
matter remaining, but because they are bestowed miraculously upon the
accidents themselves, as will be said later (Question 77, Article
3, ad 2,3; Articles 5,6).
|
|