Dist. 14, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 1
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/2/d/14/q/bon-sent-II-d14-p2-a1-q1
----------------------------------------
### ARTICLE I.

#### *On the luminaries by comparison with the body in which they are placed.*

### QUESTION I.

#### *Whether all the luminaries of heaven are placed in one continuous body.*

Concerning the first [article] one proceeds thus and it is asked whether all the luminaries of heaven are placed in one continuous body. And that they are so [placed] seems [to be the case]:

*Grounds.* 1. From the text of sacred Scripture, which says that all the luminaries are placed in the firmament, Genesis 1: *Let there be,* it says, *luminaries in the firmament of heaven,* etc.

2. Likewise, this seems [to follow] by reason. Whatever bodies are distinguished from one another are distinguished either by form or by surface; but the body of the heaven from the moon up to the starry heaven is uniform, and again is not a body having a terminated surface: therefore it is impossible that it should have plurality or distinction: therefore all the luminaries are situated in one and the same body.

3. Likewise, if any bodies are distinguished from one another, the motion of the one does not follow upon the motion of the other; but the outermost sphere moves the whole that is beneath it from east to west: therefore it is necessary that the whole celestial nature be one continuous body.

4. Likewise, just as the birds were produced for the adornment of the air, so the luminaries [were produced] for the adornment of heaven; but there is one body of air which is adorned by all the birds: therefore by parity of reason there is one body of heaven, which is adorned by all the luminaries.

*On the contrary* one argues thus. 1. Number arises in bodies of the same nature from the division of a continuum; but the orbs of the planets are said to be seven both by natural philosophers and by mathematicians: therefore they are discontinuous: therefore the luminaries of heaven are not in one and the same continuous body.

2. Likewise, it is impossible that two bodies which are moved by altogether diverse and disparate motions should be continuous according to their whole [extent]; but the orbs of the planets, as the astronomers say, are moved contrary to the outermost sphere: therefore it is impossible that they should be continuous with one another.

3. Likewise, Damascene in his enumeration of the heavens distinguishes the heaven of the seven planets from the heaven of the stars; but this would not be so if that body in which the planets and the stars are were continuous: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, if all the luminaries were placed in the firmament, namely so that [they were] in one continuous body, then the stars would all be fixed, and none would be erratic: if therefore some are said to be fixed and others erratic, it seems that they are placed in one body and another.

*Incidental question.* In addition to this it is asked why God made more stars than he made planets, or why there are more fixed stars than erratic ones.

> ### CONCLUSION.
>
> *The luminaries of heaven are placed in several orbs, yet in one continuous body, which Scripture calls* firmamentum.

**I respond:** For the understanding of what has been said it must be *premised* that according to the common position of those who speak about this matter, whether natural philosophers or mathematicians, the luminaries are placed in diverse orbs. — But this distinction of the orbs, according to the better understanding, does not come from a distinction of *forms,* as air and water are distinguished, nor does it come from a discontinuity of *surface,* as one stone is distinguished from another, but it comes from a diversity of *motions.* Now the diversity of *motions* does not destroy continuity in that which is subtle and apt for motion; as is plainly evident in water, when according to its diverse parts it is moved into diverse positions, and likewise in the air; nevertheless on this account they are not made discontinuous. — *Conclusion.* According to this position, therefore, it must be said that the luminaries of heaven are placed in several orbs, yet in one continuous body, which Scripture calls by the name of *firmamentum*; and so it says that all the luminaries are placed in the firmament of heaven. — Whence the arguments adduced for this part must be conceded.

*Solution of the opposing [arguments].* 1. To that which is objected, that number comes from the division of a continuum; it must be said that this is true of that number by which bodies of the same nature are numbered in the genus of beings; but it is not true of the number by which bodies are numbered in the genus of movables. For the production of this latter number the distinction of motions alone suffices; and so it is in the case at hand.

2. To that which is objected, that the orbs of the planets are moved by motions contrary to [that of] the outermost sphere, therefore they are discontinuous; it must be said that the consequence does not follow; *it is to be noted,* for this does not hold true except in a solid body. For in a subtle and rare body, such as water and air, there is a manifest counter-example. For in these the distinction can come from the power of the mover, with the continuity of the movable being preserved, because [the movable] is most obedient to the mover; nor do they have a surface so terminated as solid bodies have. And this is plainly evident, when two opposite winds blow in the air, namely so that one [blows] from above and the other from below.

3. To that which is objected from Damascene, that the heaven of the planets is distinguished from the firmament; it must be said that the distinction of the heavens is more attended to according to the diversity of *properties* and *motions* than it is attended to according to the *discontinuity* of bodies, although it can be attended to in either way. Whence also Rabanus in the distinction of the heavens comprehends the starry heaven and the heaven of the planets under one and the same heaven.

4. To that which is objected, that if the planets are in the firmament, they are not erratic stars; it must be said that the consequence does not follow, because in one and the same body things contained can be variously arranged, namely so that the one is fastened inseparably while the other [is] not at all. And the *fixed* stars are said to be placed immediately in the eighth sphere, by whose motion they are moved; the *planets,* however, are in lower orbs, which are moved by another motion; and therefore to our sight they appear to wander, while they advance contrary to the way of the higher orb.

*To the incidental question.* To that which is asked, why in the outermost sphere God placed many luminaries; for this the Philosopher assigns three *reasons.* And the first reason is that the eighth sphere is most of all the cause of life for inferior things beyond the other spheres; and this cannot be except by diverse light in diverse stars. — The second reason is that nature so tempered things that to the lower spheres, which have more motions, it gave one star; and to the higher one, which has fewer [motions], it gave many stars. — The third reason is that motion flows in from the higher orbs into the lower. Since therefore there ought to be a pre-dominance in that which flows in, so that that orb might excel the other lower ones which it moves, it abounded in the multiformity of luminary bodies. — *Judgment on these.* Among these reasons, however, the middle reason seems to be the more probable, in which is shown the divine wisdom, which reduces multiformity to unity; and therefore to that sphere which approaches more nearly to uniformity of motion it gave multiformity of bodies; but to those which have multiformity of motions it gave unity of luminaries.

### Scholion.

**I.** Concerning this and the following question, which pertain to astronomy, the other commentators for the most part either remain silent, especially concerning the first, or dispatch the matter in a few words. — Against the doctrine set down in the first question, in the reply to the second [objection], Dionysius the Carthusian (here q. 3.) makes this remarkable objection: « That by the inviolable authority of canonical Scripture the heavens *are most solid, as it were fused of bronze* [so Job 37, 18]. On account of which one and the same heaven in its various parts does not seem to be able to be moved by contrary motions in the manner of water and air, or of similar subtle, soft, and divisible bodies ». — On the first question treat Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3, a. 2, quaestiuncula 1, and Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 3, q. 1.

**II.** As to the controversy noted in the second question, which is between Aristotle and other physicists and mathematicians, Durandus has already observed (here q. 3): « *Concerning the planets,* however, although Aristotle says the same [namely, as he says concerning the fixed stars] (II. de Caelo et mundo), nevertheless the astrologers say more truly, positing that they are moved according to eccentrics and epicycles »; which he there proves at greater length.

**III.** On the second question: St. Thomas, S. I, q. 70, a. 1, ad 3. — Scotus, in each Scriptum here, q. 2. — B. Albert, Commentary on the II. de Caelo et mundo, tr. 2, c. 3, and tr. 3, c. 7, 11, 14. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3, a. 3, quaestiuncula 1. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 3, q. 2. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 3.

---