1. Exposition of the Opinion

300. One statement here [from Henry of Ghent] is that the bread is not annihilated, and from this is inferred that, after the conversion, the bread is not nothing and consequently is something. But it is not what was before, because what was before has been converted. Nor is it anything other than the term into which it is converted. Therefore, after the conversion it is something, since that which, as being thus what was bread before, is converted is the body of Christ. Or if this be denied, one must grant that a something-ness of Christ’s body belongs to what was bread, and likewise the being of the body of Christ belongs to it, otherwise the bread after the conversion could in no way be said to be something; rather one would have to say that it had been altogether annihilated.