Dist. 10, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 4
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/4/d/10/q/bon-sent-IV-d10-p1-a1-q4
----------------------------------------
### Question IV. *Whether the body of Christ is under those species dimensively or circumscriptively.*

Fourthly it is asked whether the body of Christ is under those species dimensively or circumscriptively. And that it is so, seems [to be the case]:

1. Because everything that has extension or dimension and is not abstracted from it, if it is somewhere, is there dimensively; but the body of Christ under the Sacrament is not abstracted from dimension, since it is organic there and has part outside of part: therefore it is there dimensively or circumscriptively.

2. Likewise, the body of Christ is not abstracted from its properties; but as the Philosopher says in the *Six Principles*: "It is proper to position first of all to adhere to substance"; therefore if it is not abstracted from the more remote properties, neither [is it abstracted] from position. But position is the ordering of parts in place: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, every body that is somewhere locally is there circumscriptively; but the body of Christ in the Sacrament is locally [present], because Innocent says that "it exists in several places"; but this is so only under the Sacrament: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, every body that is somewhere, such that it neither exceeds nor is exceeded by that in which it is, is not only locally but also circumscriptively, and dimensively; but the body of Christ is under the Sacrament in such a manner: therefore etc.

**On the contrary:** 1. To be definitively is superior to being circumscriptively; but the body of Christ is not definitively under the Sacrament, as has been proved: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, everything that is dimensively somewhere is made equal to that in which it is: therefore if it is dimensively [present], it is made equal to the host; let the host therefore be split, and then likewise it will be made equal to the part: therefore one and the same thing is equal to the part and to the whole; which indeed God cannot bring about, because then the same thing would be greater and less than itself, and two contradictorily opposed things would be true at once, and the two-cubit equal to the one-cubit.

3. Likewise, everything that is in something conterminately; if it be dimensively [there], it must be configuratively [there]; this is plain: therefore since the body of Christ is there conterminately, because it neither exceeds nor is exceeded; if it is dimensively [there], it is of the same figure: therefore round and thin.

4. Likewise, everything that is somewhere inseparably, if it is there dimensively, is moved at its motion in which it is, whether it be carried or turned over; but the body of Christ is inseparably in the host: therefore if it is there dimensively, just as the host is turned, so also the body, and thus it will have at one time its head above, at another its feet. — If to all these you should respond by miracle, [saying] that that would be true if it were by nature; this does not solve [the difficulty]: because by a miracle the definition is never separated from the defined; but these arguments proceed not according to accidental properties, but through proper accounts or definitions.

> ### Conclusion.
> The body of Christ, having its own proper dimension, not the dimension of the host, is not in it dimensively.

**I respond:** It must be said that that is called to be dimensively somewhere which is so in it, that the whole [is] in the whole and the part in the part according to commensuration; and a thing of this kind ought not to have been the case for the body of Christ under the Sacrament, because then it would be necessary for it to be made equal and configured [to the host], as the aforesaid arguments prove. But this was not fitting to the truth of the Sacrament, because, as has been proved above, for the truth of the Sacrament it is required that it be there in its own quantity; and if it were made equal to the host, it would not be there in its own quantity, but would be conformed not in its own figure; and therefore this ought not to have been done, but it ought to have been done that the body, having its own perfection, be in that host; and so, having its own dimension, it would not be there dimensively. — The arguments adduced for this are therefore to be granted.

**Solution of the opposing [arguments]:** 1. To that which is objected, that what has dimension is [there] dimensively; it must be said that this is true if it be there as a thing located in a place; but it is not there in that way, but as the thing signified contained in the sign; and because it is signified in the same way in a small host as in a large one, it is contained in the same way.

2. To that which is objected, that it is not abstracted from its properties; it must be said that the properties of the body of Christ are twofold: some absolute, as being two-cubit and of such a figure; some relative, as to be seen and touched and to occupy so much place. From the absolute ones it is not abstracted, but from the relative ones it is abstracted, both for the truth of the Sacrament, by which it is required that a great body be in a small species, and for the benefit of faith, by which it is required to be hidden. According to this it must be known that position is the ordering of parts in the whole, and from this it is not abstracted — of this the Philosopher speaks — and [the ordering] of parts in place, and from this it is abstracted for the truth of the Sacrament.

3. To that which is objected, that it is there locally; it must be said that something is said to be locally [present] either because it is according to bodily presence, or because [it is] according to commensuration owed to a body. In the first way it is there locally, in the second way it is not, but rather only in heaven; whence Innocent distinguishes being locally [present] against being sacramentally [present].

4. To that which is objected, that it is there conterminately; it must be said that to be conterminately is said in two ways: in one way privatively, because it neither exceeds nor is exceeded; and in this way it does not follow from this that it is dimensively [present]; in another way positively, because the first corresponds to the first, and the last to the last, and the middle to the middle, and what is so is there dimensively. But the body of Christ is not there in this way; and therefore it is not there dimensively or circumscriptively, although it neither exceeds nor is exceeded, because the middle does not correspond to the middle.

---