Article. 6 - Whether the form of the consecration of the bread accomplishes its effect before the form of the consecration of the wine be completed?

Objection 1: It seems that the form of the of the bread does not accomplish its effect until the form for the of the wine be completed. For, as Christ's body begins to be in this by the of the bread, so does His blood come to be there by the of the wine. If, then, the words for the bread were to produce their effect before the of the wine, it would follow that Christ's body would be present in this without the blood, which is improper.

Objection 2: Further, one has one completion: hence although there be three immersions in Baptism, yet the first immersion does not produce its effect until the third be completed. But all this is one, as stated above (Q[73], A[2]). Therefore the words whereby the bread is do not bring about their effect without the words whereby the wine is .

Objection 3: Further, there are several words in the form for the bread, the first of which do not secure their effect until the last be uttered, as stated above (A[4], ad 3). Therefore, for the same reason, neither do the words for the of Christ's body produce their effect, until the words for Christ's blood are spoken.

On the contrary, Directly the words are uttered for the bread, the host is shown to the people to be adored, which would not be done if Christ's body were not there, for that would be an act of idolatry. Therefore the words of the bread produce their effect before. the words are spoken for the wine.

I answer that, Some of the earlier doctors said that these two forms, namely, for the bread and the wine, await each other's action, so that the first does not produce its effect until the second be uttered.

But this cannot stand, because, as stated above (A[5], ad 3), for the truth of this phrase, "This is My body," wherein the verb is in the present tense, it is required for the thing signified to be present simultaneously in time with the signification of the expression used; otherwise, if the thing signified had to be awaited for afterwards, a verb of the future tense would be employed, and not one of the present tense, so that we should not say, "This is My body," but "This will be My body." But the signification of this speech is complete directly those words are spoken. And therefore the thing signified must be present instantaneously, and such is the effect of this ; otherwise it would not be a true speech. Moreover, this opinion is against the rite of the Church, which forthwith adores the body of Christ after the words are uttered.

Hence it must be said that the first form does not await the second in its action, but has its effect on the instant.

Reply to Objection 1: It is on this account that they who maintained the above opinion seem to have erred. Hence it must be understood that directly the of the bread is complete, the body of Christ is indeed present by the power of the , and the blood by real concomitance; but afterwards by the of the wine, conversely, the blood of Christ is there by the power of the , and the body by real concomitance, so that the entire Christ is under either species, as stated above (Q[76], A[2]).

Reply to Objection 2: This is one in perfection, as stated above (Q[73] , A[2]), namely, inasmuch as it is made up of two things, that is, of food and drink, each of which of itself has its own perfection; but the three immersions of Baptism are ordained to one simple effect, and therefore there is no resemblance.

Reply to Objection 3: The various words in the form for the bread constitute the truth of one speech, but the words of the different forms do not, and consequently there is no parallel.