A Candid Inquiry into the Controversies among Evangelicals · §273

Annotatio V §.II close: Tridentine anathema if one affirms bread and wine remain (1 Cor. 11) — stop before Eph. 4 proof

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Thus someone who affirms with Paul that in the Eucharist the substance of bread and wine remains (1 Cor. 11:26–28) is treated no milder than if he had trampled the whole foundation of the Christian faith:

Trent, Session XIII, Canon II, launches a terrible anathema in these words — if anyone says the substance of bread and wine remains with Christ’s Body and Blood, and denies that marvelous conversion of the whole substance of bread into the Body and of wine into the Blood (species alone remaining), which the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation, let him be anathema (pag. m. 130).

Stop before the proof that true divine Fundamentals make the limits — from Ephesians 4 (authoritative and ratiocinative).

Latin

eóque porrò illi, qui e. g. affirmat cum Paulo, in Eucharistiae Sacramento remanere substantiam Panis & Vini, 1. Cor. XI. 26. 27. 28. haut aliter, ac si fundamentum fidei Christianae integrum conculcâsset, anathema terribile per Concilium Tridentinum Session. XIII. Canon. II. annunciatum sit his verbis: Si quis dixerit, in Sacrosancto Eucharistiae Sacramento remanere Substantiam panis & vini unà cum Corpore & Sanguine Domini nostri Jesu Christi, negaveritque mirabilem illam & singularem Conversionem totius Substantiae panis in Corpus & totius substantiae vini in Sanguinem manentibus duntaxat Speciebus panis & vini: quam quidem Conversionem Catholica Ecclesia aptissimè Transsubstantiationem appellat, anathema sit. pag. m. 130.

About this text

Samuel Strimesius — Prefatio through Controversiae Post Lutherum Controv. III-XIII + XV Tolerantia, Hexades Annotationum Prooemium and Annotatio I through Decem Theses / Francus plus Annotatio II §.I-§.VI and Annotatio III §.I–§.VII (through Cassellanum 1661) from Ingenua in Controversias Evangelicorum (Frankfurt an der Oder, 1708). Honest partial; Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio III §.VIII+ fruits / §.IX+, Hexades theses body, deeper Controversiae / Part II remain.

English follows the locked 1708 Francofurti ad Viadrum Latin of Prefatio §I–II, Crimina defenses through III, Part I Protheoria through Controversiae Obices/Historia/Varii gradus, Formula Discord/Disparitas, Ulterius confirmatur / Classes / Formula protest / triplex differentia, Coena Domini Controversiae Priores through Precariae Hypotheses (Controv. print pp. 34–40), Controversiae Post Lutherum Natae Controv. III–XV tip (providence through De Tolerantia mutua; Controv. print pp. 40–78), Hexades Annotationum Prooemium H.I–§.III (Hexades print pp. 1–4 / PDF ~182–185), and Annotatio I De Augustana Confessione §.I–§.VIII tip (Hexades print pp. 5–24+ / PDF ~186–205+), reconstructed from Google Books PDF page images (ONB copy, id 3epYAAAAcAAJ) with pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Sister Halle digitization of Ingenua in Arminianismum (DOI 10.25673/65287) remains Anubis-blocked — skipped; Controversias only. Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio I §.IX+, Hexades theses body beyond §.VIII, and remainder of Controversiae / folio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.