and Blood of the Lord under the appearance and figure of
bread and wine, that is under the accidents of bread ... so
also that the Body and Blood of the Lord are held and divided
by our hands and teeth, yet only by accident ((
Greek characters),
per accidens), that is according to the accidents of bread and
wine."[1] It has been said that the Synod of Jerusalem repre-
sents a Romanizing tendency and a very strong reaction against
Lukaris's Protestantism. However, Mogilas says the same
thing; he answers the question: "What is the third Sacrament
((Greek characters))? The Holy Eucharist, or the Body and Blood of our
Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine in
which really and properly, that is, in actual fact ((Greek characters)),
Jesus Christ is present."[2] Indeed, it is impossible to find an
Orthodox definition of this Sacrament which does not exactly
coincide with the Catholic faith. Nor did they ever attempt to
establish a difference on this point. As for the word, they
always say (Greek characters), which is an exact version of Transub-
stantiation ((Greek characters) = trans; (Greek characters) = substantia). And in the Russian
translation of the Acts of Jerusalem they form a derived word
from the Latin Transubstantiatio (transsubstantziatzija). More-
over, when Mr. Palmer showed his book with a denial of this
faith to the Archpriest Koutnevich, the Archpriest promptly
said: "But we believe and teach transubstantiation."[3] Quite
lately, however, some of their theologians are disposed to deny
it. What they appear to mean is that they are not disposed to
commit themselves to all the scholastic theory of substance and
accident.[4] To which we may answer that we also distinguish
between the defined dogma and its philosophical explanation,
and that the Catholic Church has never officially committed
herself to all the theories by which her theologians try to
explain her mysteries. Certainly all their definitions abun-
dantly satisfy us, and they could not have any difficulty in
accepting the decree of Trent on Transubstantiation.[5] As for
1 Dositheus: decr. 17.
2 Conf. Orth. i, qu. 106.
3 Visit, p. 145.
4 So the note about Philaret of Moscow in Headlam: The Teaching of the Russian Church, pp. 8-9.
5 Sess. xiii. cap. 4, Denz. p, 758.
