Descartes: A Biography

end CUNYB/Clarke     December, :

 Notes to Pages–

the words of Christ, ‘This is my body,’ must be understood in their ‘proper sig-

nification’ (i.e., literally). See Poulain de la Barre () and Sorbi`ere (),

.

.Council of Trent, session XIII (October): Decree on the Most Holy

Eucharist, Chapter: ‘There is no inconsistency between these two things: that

our Saviour always sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven in his natural

mode of existence and, at the same time, that he is present to us sacramentally

byhis substance in many different places by a mode of existence which, although

wecan hardly express it in words, is still possible for God....’ Denziger (),

.

.The Council of Trent used the term ‘transubstantiation’ to refer to what it called

‘the conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body

of Christ Our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of

his blood.’ Denziger (),.

.Descartes to Mesland,February(iv.–).

.Descartes to Mesland [/](iv.).

.Descartes to Clerselier,March(iv.–).

.Descartes assumes in theMeditationsthat a stone is a substance (vii.). Accord-

ingly, he wrote to Father Gibieuf [January]: ‘From the mere fact that I

conceive of two halves of the same part of matter, in spite of how small they may

be, as two complete substances,...Iconclude with certainty that they are really

divisible’ (iii.). For a detailed discussion of the use of the term ‘substance’, see

Clarke (b),–.

.Descartes to∗∗∗[?] (iv.).

.Baillet (), ii..

.Mersenne (), Part II,: ‘this truth could not be as we believe it to be if we

accepted that the substance of bread is the same as the substance of Our Lord’s

body, because that undermines transubstantiation and every form of substantial

change.’

.Gassendi to Rivet,February: Gassendi (), vi..

.Charles Cavendish to John Pell,August: ‘if we should remove into Hollande

I should be in hope to see you, and intended to see De Cartes, but you write he

is gone to Paris. I desire your judgment of De Cartes his new booke. Doutelesse

he is an excellent man.’ Halliwell (),.Pell had informed him a few days

previously that ‘Des Cartes himself is gone into France’. Pell to Charles Cavendish,

August: Halliwell (),.

.He asked twice, with a repeat letter in case the first one was lost by messengers.

‘I desire you will doe me the favoure to send me one of De Cartes his new bookes,

De Principiis Philosophiae, without anie addition of his olde worckes, except he

hath either added or altered something in the matter.’ Charles Cavendish to John

Pell,August(Halliwell:). He made the same request onAugust

(Halliwell:).

.Charles Cavendish to John Pell,September: Halliwell (),.

.Charles Cavendish to John Pell,October: Halliwell (),.

.Descartes to Mesland, May(iv.–).