09.06.2013 Views

View Volume II - In Today's Catholic World

View Volume II - In Today's Catholic World

View Volume II - In Today's Catholic World

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

208 THE HISTORY OF HERESIES,<br />

Persons than one, then there must be more than one operating<br />

faculty. There are three Persons in God, but only one operation<br />

common to all three, because the Divine Nature is one and in<br />

divisible in God. But as in Jesus Christ there are two distinct<br />

Natures, there are, therefore, two wills, by which he operates,<br />

and two operations corresponding to each Nature ; and, although<br />

all the operations, both of the Divine and human Nature are<br />

attributed to the Word, which terminates and sustains the two<br />

Natures, still the will and operations<br />

of the Divine Nature should<br />

not be confounded with those of the human nature ; neither are<br />

the two Natures confused because the Person is one.<br />

REFUTATION X.<br />

THE HERESY OF BERENGARIUS, AND THE PRETENDED RE<br />

FORMERS, CONCERNING THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF<br />

THE EUCHARIST.<br />

1. Moshcim, the Protestant Ecclesiastical Historian, asserts (1)<br />

that in the 9th century, the exact nature of the faith of the body<br />

and blood of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist was not established,<br />

and that, therefore, Pascasius Radbertus laid down in a book he<br />

wrote two principal points concerning it ; first, that after the con<br />

secration nothing remained of the substance of the bread and<br />

wine, and, secondly, that in the consecrated Host is the very<br />

body of Jesus Christ, which was born of Mary, died on the<br />

cross, and arose from the sepulchue, and this, he said, is<br />

&quot; what<br />

the whole world believes and professes.&quot; This work was op<br />

posed by Retramn, and perhaps others, and hence Mosheim<br />

concludes that the dogma was not then established. <strong>In</strong> this,<br />

however, he is astray, for, as Selvaggi writes (note 79, vol. iii),<br />

there was no controversy at all about the dogma, in which<br />

(1) Mosh. His. t. 3, Cent. IX. c. 3, p. 1175.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!