Dist. 8, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 3
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/8/q/bon-sent-IV-d8-p1-a1-q3
----------------------------------------
### Question III. *On the preeminence of the figures.*

Thirdly it is asked concerning this, about the preeminence of the figures, and it is asked which figure is the more expressive: whether the one that existed in the time of the law of *nature*, or the one that existed in the time of the *Mosaic* law, or the one that existed in the time of the law of *grace*. And that the one which existed in the time of the law of *nature* [is the more expressive] seems [to be the case]:

1. By the authority of Ambrose, *On the Sacraments*: « It appears that the Sacraments of the Christians were earlier than those of the Jews »; but this is not said except by reason of the law of nature: therefore in some way the Sacraments of the Christians existed more [fully] in that time: yet not as to truth or efficacy: therefore as to the expressiveness of the figure.

2. Likewise, the law of nature agrees more with the law of grace, or of the Gospel, than does the law of Moses, because the evangelical law has more from natural dictate than from institution, whereas the contrary is the case in the law of Moses: therefore its Sacraments too figure [things] more expressively, as it seems.

3. Likewise, this same thing seems [to follow] by *reason*: because Melchisedech offered sacrifice in bread and wine, and the Sacrament of the altar is now offered and celebrated in the same species: therefore, since it cannot be figured more expressively than in something like it as to species, it seems that then the most expressive figure preceded.

**On the contrary** 1. Hugh of Saint Victor argues: As the passion of the Savior drew near, so the signs ought to have been more evident; and the reason for this is that knowledge of the truth grew: therefore, since in the time of the written law knowledge of the truth grew, and the passion of the Savior drew near, it seems that the figures were more expressive.

2. Likewise, this seems [to hold] to the letter in the *manna*: because that food was from heaven, refreshing all equally and common to all and having every sweetness; but the bread and wine of Melchisedech were from the earth, and this Sacrament *is the bread coming down from heaven*: therefore it seems that the figure of the manna was the more expressive.

### Conclusion.

> *Those figures of the different laws mutually exceed one another in expressiveness.*

**I respond:** It must be said that the figures of those laws, according to diverse considerations, mutually exceed one another in expressiveness, as the arguments brought forward show. — For this Sacrament can be prefigured as to its *rite*, or as to its *effect*, or as to its *sign*, or as to the *thing signified*. If as to the *rite*, then the more expressive figure preceded in the *sacrifice of Melchisedech*, as the arguments brought forward prove; and this is plain. But if as to the *effect*, then it was expressly presignified in the *manna*, as the aforesaid arguments show; and thus the response to both sides is plain.

But yet a question still remains: why did the more expressive prefiguration, as to the *rite*, precede in the law of *nature*? And to this it must be said that, because the Lord instituted the written law as something to be fulfilled and done away with, just as truth does away with the shadow; therefore, lest we should seem to judaize, he arranged to give the figures in the law of Moses expressed, yet differing as to the rite, so that from their very institution the doing-away and imperfection of that law might be manifestly shown; and therefore Christ says of himself rather that he is a priest according to the order of Melchisedech than of Aaron, in order that there might be shown there the transfer of the law and of the priesthood, as the Apostle shows to the Hebrews. And thus the whole is plain.

---