You say that you have read in a certain decretal letter of ours[7831|+4] that it is wrong to think what certain ones have presumed to say, namely, that the water of the Eucharist is changed into phlegm, for they say falsely that from the side of Christ not water but a watery liquid came forth. Moreover, although you recall that great and authentic men have thought this, whose opinions in speech and in writings up to this time you have followed, from whose (opinions), however, we differ, you are compelled to agree with our opinion. . . .
For if it had not been water but phlegm which flowed from the side of the Savior, he who saw and gave testimonyto the truth (Joh. 19, 35)[[b:Joh. 19, 35]] certainly would not have said water but phlegm. . . .
It remains, therefore, that of whatever nature that water was, whether natural, or miraculous, or created anew by divine power, or resolved in some measure of component parts, without doubt it was true water.
Om RK Documenten te kunnen verbeteren is uw reactie zeer waardevol. Heeft u aanmerkingen of suggesties voor verbeteringen of bent u een fout tegen gekomen? Laat het ons weten.
Naar de oude site