It should be noted, a doctrine central to Roman Catholic distinctives is Transubstantiation of the bread and wine in the Mass.
The teaching that things consist of substance and accidents is purely Aristotelian, and is actually essential to the doctrine of Transubstiation—namely that accidents (sensible appearances) can be different from substance. Hence the bread and wine used in the Mass may look and have all the other measurable characteristics of bread and wine...but their invisible substance is miraculously changed during Communion into the body and blood of Jesus.
Aristotle’s understanding of the nature of things—substance and accidents—is an absolute prerequisite to the central dogma of Transubstantiation. Hence the Roman Catholic Church to this day demands its members to accept Aristotle—at least when it comes to the Mass.
I have a book, GALILEO HERETIC, which advances the theory that Galileo’s ideas challenged the doctrine of the Eucharist, and that this was the central motivation for his persecution. The author, Pietro Redondi, identifies ATOMISM as the offending element of these ideas. It seems that atomism erases the distinction between substance and accident since it identifies qualities as necessary material consequences of atomistic substance, or something like that.
I read this years ago, and looking through it, it seems I haven’t retained very much of it! Well, enough of it that your remark instantly put me in mind of it.
>> Aristotle’s understanding of the nature of things—substance and accidents—is an absolute prerequisite to the central dogma of Transubstantiation. <<
Let’s say that the Catholic church found a way of explaining transubstantiation through philosophical concepts developed by Aristotle.