Dist. 48, Art. 2, 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/48/q/bon-sent-IV-d48-a2-q4
----------------------------------------
### Article II. *On the renewal of the higher bodies.*
### Question IV. *Whether plants and brute animals will be renewed.*

Fourthly it is asked, whether plants and brute animals will be renewed. And that they will not, seems [to follow]:

1. Because things that are for the sake of man's necessity ought themselves also to pass away when man of necessity passes away; but plants and animals are of this sort, since they are for man's food: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, all things that will be renewed have a perfective form, ordered to incorruption; but plants and animals do not have incorruptible souls: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, if they are renewed, then either *all* [are], or *some*. If *all*; then all the plants that have existed from the beginning, and all the animals, would occupy a hundred such worlds: therefore the world would have to be enlarged. If *some* are renewed and *some* not, I ask: which are they that are renewed? And there does not seem to be any greater reason for one than for another.

4. Likewise, renewal is of the same thing according to substance; but the substantial form of a brute is corrupted: therefore if it were generated again, it would be the forming of a new thing, not a renewal.

**On the contrary:** 1. The adornment of the heaven will be renewed, as is clear in the *supercelestial* bodies: therefore by parity of reason the adornment of the earth; but the adornment of the earth is plants and animals: therefore etc. Otherwise, if they will not be renewed, then the earth will be rewarded without adornment, and thus imperfectly: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, the supercelestial bodies and the elements serve man, and therefore they are rewarded; so plants and animals serve, and *serve* more, since they furnish food, and *labour* more in serving, since they give their own substance and die: therefore they are the more to be renewed.

3. Likewise, plants and animals are for the praise of God, as is clear, since in the Psalm they are invited to praise God: therefore if the praise of God after the judgement ought not to be lessened nor to decrease, but to be increased; therefore plants and animals ought not to cease.

4. Likewise, things that belong to the perfection of the universe ought not to cease; but plants and animals are of this sort: therefore etc. The *first* [premise] is clear, because then the universe will be more perfect. The *second* is clear, because they would now be superfluous if they did not belong to its perfection; and *besides*, they were created among the works of the six days, in which the world was constituted before man's fall.

5. Likewise, things that are nobler belong more to perfection; but vegetables and animals are nobler than the elemental bodies, since they have life: therefore etc.

6. Likewise, the differences dividing a genus belong to the perfection of the universe; but the differences are taken in respect of these two: therefore these ought to be renewed for the perfection of the universe.

### Conclusion

> *Plants and animals will not be renewed.*

**I respond:** It must be said that plants and animals will not be renewed, on account of this, that their ultimate perfection is corruptible by nature and takes its rise and root from matter; hence they are not fit to live or to endure eternally. — But the forms of the *supercelestial* bodies are altogether incorruptible; likewise the forms of the *elements* are incorruptible according to the whole and according to the part, so far as lies in themselves, since they are simple bodies; hence that they are corrupted, this is through an action coming from without; and therefore, when that action is removed, they remain incorruptible.

From this it is clear that plants and animals are not for the *adornment of the earth*, but for *man's service*, nor for the *praise of God* nor for the *perfection of the universe* except according to that state which is corruptible and *variable*; and therefore they need not be renewed. Hence the earth will have another adornment, nor is it necessary that it be multiform; rather that very uniformity will be an adornment to it.

**To the arguments for the opposite side:**

*To 1, 2, 3, 4.* And from this the first is clear, since the adornment of the heaven is naturally disposed to incorruption. — Likewise their service does not befit man after the resurrection, as does the service of the sun and moon; and therefore they are not rewarded. — Likewise they are for praising God according to the state of *infirmity*, when he himself is not manifest *in himself*; but when he shall be known sufficiently in himself, he will be praised in himself, nor is a multitude of creatures needed for this. — Likewise they belong to the perfection of the universe insofar as it is the dwelling-place of man *living animally*, but not after he has been *made spiritual*; and therefore they were created together with man, because man needed nourishment; and *besides*, God foreknew that he would sin.

*To 5.* But to that which is objected — that what is nobler belongs more to the perfection of the universe — it must be said that to have *nobler being* is twofold: either because it is *more permanent*, and what is so belongs more to the integrity of the universe; or nobler because *more complete*, and this does not belong more to the integrity of the universe unless together with the perfection of completeness it has incorruption of duration; for by this very fact, that it is *corruptible*, it does not belong to perfection.

*To 6.* To that which is objected last concerning the differences, it must be said that this does not follow, because the division of the *genus* by these differences is according to a *state*. — It can nonetheless be said that, when man has been renewed, all the differences that pertain to his *completeness* are preserved, such as *corporeal, animate, sensible, rational*; the other differences, *inanimate, insensible, irrational*, state a perfection joined to imperfection. Hence it must be distinguished that some differences are perfective *simply*, and some perfective *with diminution*. And thus that [objection] is to be resolved, because the first belong to the perfection of the universe simply, but the second only according to a state.

---