Natural Accompaniment and Direct Conversion

[ChrisPietraszko]

I submitted a question awhile ago, and it wasn’t clearly answered for me. I was studying Aquinas’ Summa Contra on the Eucharist and trying to understand his terms when he says that Christ’s dimensions are present by “natural accompaniment” not by direct conversion. Where as his essence/substance is converted directly. I follow what this means partially that: Christ’s dimensions flow consequently from the direct conversion and are present by virtue of the Direct Conversion. But I’m not to sure I understand the “Natural accompaniment” part. Is this simply saying: “Where Christ’s essence is, so must his accidents also be present”? After all by Faith we believe he is present: SOUL AND BODY.

 

[ChrisPietraszko]

I submitted a question awhile ago, and it wasn’t clearly answered for me. I was studying Aquinas’ Summa Contra on the Eucharist and trying to understand his terms when he says that Christ’s dimensions are present by “natural accompaniment” not by direct conversion. Where as his essence/substance is converted directly. I follow what this means partially that: Christ’s dimensions flow consequently from the direct conversion and are present by virtue of the Direct Conversion. But I’m not to sure I understand the “Natural accompaniment” part. Is this simply saying: “Where Christ’s essence is, so must his accidents (subsiquently) also be present”? After all by Faith we believe he is present: SOUL AND BODY.