RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I am debating a Romanist and he got embarrassed when I poiinted out the substance/accidence distinction in Transubstantiation, which is official dogma, but it assumes the validity of Aristotelian metaphysics, which has as much in common with reality as "aether."
My Catholic catechism is boxed up, so I could be wrong, but I thought Rome assumed that Aristotle was valid on this point. Is that correct.
My Catholic catechism is boxed up, so I could be wrong, but I thought Rome assumed that Aristotle was valid on this point. Is that correct.