Dist. 14, Part 2, Art. 2, 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-a2-q1
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On the luminaries in comparison to the things upon which they act.*

Next there is inquiry concerning the luminaries themselves in comparison to the things upon which they act. And concerning this three [questions] are asked.

First it is asked, whether in the different luminaries there is a diversity of perfections.

Second it is asked, whether they have a diversity of impressions.

Third it is asked, whether from their impressions a diversity of customs is caused.

### Question I. *Whether the luminaries have a diversity of perfections.*

Concerning the first [question] one proceeds thus, and it is asked whether the luminaries have a diversity of perfections. And that they do, is seen [thus].

*Arguments.* 1. As the Philosopher holds, "sun" is not the name of an individual, but of a species; and likewise "moon." But it is settled that "sun" and "moon" are imposed upon different things: therefore those things are diverse according to species.

2. Likewise, there cannot be but one sun, as the Philosopher says, because the sun is [made] from the whole of its matter; but if the sun did not differ from the other luminaries except in number only, it would not be from the whole of its matter: therefore it differs by more than number: therefore it differs in species.

3. Likewise, a body which is naturally luminous, and a body which is of itself opaque, are of another and another nature according to species: but the body of the sun is of its nature luminous, whereas the moon, so far as it is of itself, is an opaque body, as is evident in the eclipse of the sun by the interposition of the moon: therefore sun and moon differ in species, and by parity of reasoning so do the other planets.

4. Likewise, the earth is adorned with different stones and plants and animals according to species: therefore by parity of reasoning it is seen that heaven is adorned with different luminaries differing according to species.

*To the opposite.* **On the contrary:** 1. Of a simple body, not having any admixture of another body, the parts are uniform both with respect to the whole and to one another; but heaven, as the Philosopher proves, is a simple body, not mixed, and likewise the luminaries: therefore they do not have forms diverse according to species.

2. Likewise, the luminaries are [made] by an aggregation of the light of their orb, as the Philosopher holds in the book *On the Heavens and the World*; but a greater and a lesser aggregation does not make diversity according to species, but only according to number: therefore the luminaries of heaven are not perfected by diverse forms according to species.

3. Likewise, a greater and a lesser flame do not differ according to species, although in the one there is a greater aggregation of light than in the other: therefore if this is seen to hold concerning the celestial luminaries, it is seen that they do not differ in specific form.

4. Likewise, the noblest form which is in the sun is its very light; and the noblest form in any thing whatsoever is the ultimate form: therefore light is the ultimate and completive form of the sun in its species. But in light it agrees with all the other luminaries; therefore it is seen that the luminaries of heaven are not distinct in species.

> **Conclusion.** The luminaries of heaven differ in species.

**I respond:** For the understanding of what has been said, it must be noted that the common position of the philosophers has been that among the luminaries of heaven a diversity is to be found with respect to species and form. — And this accords well enough with right reason, although not entirely right reasoning has moved certain men to posit a diversity according to species in the luminaries of heaven. *Their false reasoning.* For some have posited that the luminaries were necessarily diverse according to species on this account, that they do not have transmutable matter, and each was [made] from the whole of its matter. — *It is refuted.* But this reasoning is false and vain and a source of error, and was the occasion for some to posit one soul in all men, as will appear better below. Hence as to [the claim] that transmutability of matter is required for diversity according to number, it must be said that this is not generally true, namely in diversity according to number which is observed in some things according to the simultaneity of their production and according to their immediate procession from the first Maker; but it holds true only in those things one of which is generated from another. — And therefore, this reasoning set aside, the reasoning for the diversity of those luminaries can be drawn from the fourfold cause. *True fourfold reasoning.*

*First reasoning.* And first the reasoning is drawn from the *end.* For they were produced for the sake of diverse influences to be effected in these lower things and for the adorning of celestial nature; and therefore it was fitting that they have diverse species and powers, so that from the conjunction of diverse powers perfection in effect should result, and from the comparison of diverse species beauty should arise in the adornment.

*Second reasoning.* The reasoning is also drawn from the *efficient* cause, who according to his power and wisdom and goodness produces diverse things according to species and form, so that what could not be given to one alone by itself, might be given to diverse things in species.

*Third reasoning.* The reasoning is also drawn from *matter.* For just as in mixed things matter according to the diversity of mixtures is adapted to the reception of diverse forms, so in simple bodies according to the greater rarity and density in their parts [matter] is adapted to the reception of diverse forms, as is evident in the elements, whose matter according to greater density receives the form of earth; whereas when it is rarefied according to more and less, it is disposed to the forms of the other elements. In this way it must be understood concerning heaven. For since in celestial nature, as is said in the book *On the Substance of the Orb*, there is to be found rare and dense, it happens that according to greater rarity and density the matter is susceptible of diverse forms. Yet rare and dense are otherwise in elemental matter and in celestial nature. For in the elements they are caused by cold and heat dissolving and constraining the parts of matter; in heaven, however, they are caused only according to the diverse position of the parts. For in the dense the parts are nearer together, and in the rare more distant, because in the dense they are compressed and more united, and in the rare scattered.

*Fourth reasoning.* The reasoning is also drawn from *form.* For light is one *common* form, found in all the luminaries, and according to the greater and lesser participation of which [the luminaries] are more and less noble; and therefore, since they participate in this form diversely, they have diverse degrees of completion, and hence also diverse *completive* forms.

Therefore the reasonings showing that the luminaries of heaven are diverse according to species are to be granted, although that reasoning is of little worth which [claims] that they are [made] from the whole of their matter, as has already been shown.

*Resolution of the opposing arguments.* 1. To that which is objected, that it is a simple body; it must be said that the simplicity of a body removes that diversity which has its origin from mixture and from the forms perfecting the mixed; but it does not remove that diversity which comes from the diversity of simple forms, as is evident, for although an element is a simple body, nevertheless not all the elements are of one species.

2. 3. To that which is objected, that they are [made] by an aggregation of light; it must be said that the whole reasoning is not touched there, but only the disposition to diversity is touched. And therefore the following reasoning [about] the greater and lesser flame does not hold; for the luminaries differ more than do a greater and a lesser flame, as is gathered from their powers and consequent operations.

4. To that which is objected, that the ultimate form is completive: *Note.* it must be said that this is true with respect to forms which *dispose* to it; but light is rather a form *perfecting* other corporeal forms, than disposing to them, since according to the greater and lesser participation of it the corporeal forms are more and less complete. — *Another solution.* Or it must be said that light is the noblest of corporeal forms, namely of those which are extraneous to it; but this is not true of the forms of the celestial luminaries, in which its power and nature are completely preserved.