Bonaventure

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation that follows.

Quaestio III. Utrum conveniat alicui orbi moveri absque stellis.

Tertio quaeritur, utrum conveniat alicui orbi moveri absque stellis. Et quod non, videtur:

*Ad oppositum.*

1. Quia caelum empyreum ponitur a Sanctis esse immobile propter sui uniformitatem¹; sed caelum, quod universaliter caret stellis, est uniforme: ergo nullum caelum, quod caret stellis, est mobile.

2. Item, ubicumque est motus, ibi est continuitas et variatio²; sed continuitas, quae est in motu, est a continuitate magnitudinis: ergo pari ratione variatio motus est a varietate mobilis. Sed corpus caeleste, quod caret stellis, non habet in suis motibus varietatem: ergo nec mutabilitatem.

3. Item, omnis motus est propter aliquam indigentiam supplendam vel in ipso mobili vel in aliquo inferiori³; sed caelum, quod caret stellis, non potest moveri propter suam indigentiam, cum nulla

in motu illo eius indigentia compleatur; nec propter supplendam indigentiam in inferioribus, quia ita bene influit quiescendo, sicut movendo, et uniformiter: ergo videtur, quod nullo modo absque stellis caelesti corpori moveri competat.

4. Item, motus caeli est perfectissimus omnium motuum, et ideo est omnium motuum regula⁴: ergo si per regulam mensurantur omnia quae sunt in genere illo, anima mensurat omnes motus per motum primi mobilis: ergo motus primi mobilis maxime notus est ipsi animae. Sed nullius corporis motus est notus ipsi animae, nisi quod habet in se aliquod luminare, quia non deprehenditur motus orbis nisi per motum luminaris: ergo videtur, quod non sit ponibile⁵ aliquem orbem moveri, qui careat omni luminari, praecipue cum motus eius lateat sensum nostrum, et sacra Scriptura uniformis orbis reticeat motum. Et sic videtur, quod ponere, aliquem orbem moveri supra firmamentum, quod est nostris oculis conspicuum, sit temerarium.

Contra:

*Fundamenta.*

1. Omnis multitudo reducitur ad unitatem⁶: ergo motus corporis multiformis reducitur ad motum corporis uniformis; sed uniforme corpus non est, nisi quod caret omni luminari: ergo videtur, quod ultra istos orbes, in quibus sunt luminaria, sit aliquod caelum mobile.

2. Item, motus ille, qui est mensura omnium motuum, est ille qui est ab oriente in oriens per occidens, qui est motus diei naturalis effectivus et complet viginti quatuor horas; sed dies naturalis omni tempore est uniformis: ergo et iste motus: ergo et mobile: ergo etc.

3. Item, si est recta ordinatio medii ad extrema, necesse est, medium participare quodam modo naturam utriusque extremi⁷; sed caelum crystallinum medium est inter empyreum et firmamentum: cum ergo empyreum sit uniforme et immobile, et firmamentum sit multiforme et mobile, videtur, quod crystallinum caelum sit aut multiforme et immobile, aut uniforme et mobile. Sed si multiforme et immobile esse non potest, cum varietas mobilis disponat ad motum: ergo necesse est, quod sit uniforme et mobile.

4. Item, quandocumque aliqua plura concurrunt ad constitutionem alicuius, necesse est, per virtutem alicuius illa coniungi: ergo quandocumque plura mobilia concurrunt ad effectum unum conformem per suam influentiam, necesse est, quod coniungantur per alicuius mobilis uniformitatem. Si ergo virtus planetarum et stellarum concurrit ad productionem effectuum in his inferioribus secundum quandam conformitatem, necesse est, ultra illa esse aliquod mobile, per quod iungantur, quod quidem habeat in toto et in partibus uniformitatem; et ita alicui orbi absque stellis competit moveri.

*Quaestio incidens 1. Est igitur quaestio, quis sit ille orbis, et per quam naturam competit ei moveri. Si enim, quia caelum est[^8]; tunc ergo, empyreum erit mobile. Si quia caelum, quod est non tantum continens, sed etiam contentum; obiicitur tunc de caelo igneo et aethereo, qui quidem continent et continentur, et tamen non moventur orbiculariter. — Quaestio incidens 2.* Iuxta hoc quaeritur de sufficientia et numero caelorum; et cum natura caelestis distinguatur ab elementari, quomodo aliquae differentiae caelorum sumuntur penes elementa? Si tu dicas, quod propter naturam perspicui in eis repertam; tunc, cum perspicuitas sit in aqua, elementum aquae deberet dici caelum.

Conclusio. Caelum aliquod carens stellis ultra firmamentum est mobile.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod est ponere, aliquod caelum moveri, quod caret luminarium et stellarum varietate; et hoc est caelum aqueum sive crystallinum. Ad cuius cognitionem etsi pauci philosophi pervenerunt, quia corporeum latet sensum, ratiocinando tamen pervenerunt aliqui⁹; et illi qui pervenerunt, posuerunt, ipsum moveri, sicut quidam astronomi nisi sunt hoc probare. *Notandum.* Communiter tamen ad cognitionem existentiae huius caeli pervenerunt omnes tractatores catholici, auctoritate sacrae Scripturae divinitus illustrati, quae ipsius existentiam expresse declarat¹⁰, motum tamen eius vel quietem non explicat. Sed doctores theologiae, rationibus suffulti, communiter ponunt, illud caelum moveri.

*Ad quaest. incid. 2.* Et inter alias rationes potissima ratio est illa, quae sumitur ex perfectione universi, ex qua etiam distinctio caelorum et numerus rationabiliter potest investigari.

Et hoc patet sic. *1. Caelum communiter.* Caelum enim de sua communi acceptione dicit aliquam naturam perspicuam et contentivam; de sua vero propria acceptione nominat naturam perspicuam, contentivam, supra contrarietatem elevatam.

*1. Caelum communiter.* Secundum primam acceptionem caelorum distinguuntur a Rabano¹¹ septem caeli. — Natura enim

*Sufficientia numeri septenarii. perspicua et contentiva aut est luminis dativa, aut luminis receptiva. Si est dativa, aut est uniformis, non mota, et sic est empyreum; aut est multiformis et mota, et sic est sidereum; aut est uniformis et mota, et sic est crystallinum. Quarta differentia esse non potest, scilicet quod sit multiformis, non mota, propter hoc quod motus est passio consequens naturaliter ad multiformitatem corporis. — Si autem natura perspicua est luminis receptiva, aut separabiliter, aut inseparabiliter. Si inseparabiliter, aut secundum circulum superioris superficiei, et tunc est igneum; aut secundum circulum inferioris superficiei, in quo communicat aëri, et tunc est olympium, quod quidem dicitur olympium propter Olympi montis approximationem. Si autem est receptiva[^12] separabiliter, sicut aër, qui illuminatur ex praesentia corporis luminosi et obtenebratur ex eius absentia; hoc dupliciter: aut secundum superiorem partem, et sic est aethereum; aut secundum inferiorem, et sic est aëreum. — Et in hac distinctione[^13] comprehenduntur omnia corpora mundi praeter terram et aquam. Terra enim non potest comprehendi nomine caeli, quia caret tam perspicuitate quam ambiendi capacitate. Aqua autem similiter caret, quia, quamvis habeat perspicuitatem, non tamen ambit undique. Et sic ex ista sufficientia caelorum, in qua ostenditur sapientia Conditoris et perfectio universitatis, satis manifeste apparet, quod oportet ponere, aliquem orbem sine luminarium multiformitate moveri; et illud proprie dicendum est primum mobile. — Ita secundum Rabanum.* Haec autem distinctio et sufficientia sumta est secundum enumerationem Rabani, qui caelos numerat secundum communem acceptionem caeli, prout nominat naturam perspicuam et contentivam; sic enim comprehendit naturam caelestem proprie dictam et elementarem, licet non omnem.

*II. Caelum proprie. Si autem caelum proprie dicatur natura caelestis, scilicet natura perspicua, undique contentiva, et nulli contraria; sic distinguitur a quibusdam Triplex numeratio.* philosophis¹⁴ per octo orbes, qui dixerunt, octavam sphaeram ultimam esse. — Alii autem, amplius illuminati in hac materia, ultra octavam sphaeram posuerunt nonam. — Tertii, perfecte illuminati, venerunt ad perfectam orbium distinctionem, ut ponerent decimam sphaeram, in qua est quies et vita sempiterna, videlicet caelum empyreum, de quo, etsi Augustinus vix aut nunquam loquatur, Beda¹⁵ tamen et Rabanus ipsum esse expresse testantur.

*Sufficientia horum numerorum. Horum autem numerum et sufficientiam possumus sumere sic. Distinctio enim caelorum aut est per diversitatem propriarum formarum, aut per distinctionem motuum et luminarium contentorum. — Caeli 3 per diversitatem formarum.* Si per diversitatem formarum, sic distinguimus tres caelos. Aut enim viget in eo natura perfectae luminositatis, et sic est habile ad statum gloriae, et ideo quietum; et sic est empyreum. Aut viget in eo natura perfectae perspicuitatis et effectivae frigiditatis; et sic est crystallinum sive aqueum, quod quidem facit ad conservationem rerum corruptibilium, et ideo est habile ad motum. Aut viget in eo natura perspicuitatis simul et luminositatis et effectivae caliditatis; et sic est caelum sidereum, quod quidem facit ad transmutationem rerum inferiorum; ideo est multiforme et motum¹⁶.

*Caeli 7 per distinctionem luminarium. Si vero fiat distinctio caelorum penes distinctionem luminarium, sic est distinctio orbium. Aut enim orbis continet multitudinem siderum, aut unitatem. Si multitudinem, sic est caelum stellatum; si unitatem, sic cum septem sint planetae, secundum quos regitur universitas temporum, quae septenario dierum clauditur, septem sunt orbes; et sic tertium caelum sua multiformitate continet octo sphaeras sive orbes, et duo sunt praecedentes, et Ita 10 caeli.* ita decem, ut sic perfectioni partium universi respondeat etiam perfectio numeri, scilicet denarii.

Ex praedictis igitur patet, quod qualitercumque sumatur sufficientia caelorum, sive sub propria appellatione caeli, sive sub communi, ponere est, caelum crystallinum moveri, quod quidem caret stellis. — *Ad quaest. incid. 1. Et ideo ad quaestionem propositam respondendum est, quod absque stellis potest aliquis orbis moveri, scilicet caelum aqueum, quod est mobile primum, et quod uniformiter movetur ab oriente in oriens per occidens; et illius virtute trahitur firmamentum et omnes orbes inferiores, ut uno die naturali, scilicet per spatium viginti quatuor horarum, ab oriente in oriens revolvatur, quamvis nostro sensui non appareat, et aliqui philosophi hoc senserint, quod firmamentum sit mobile primum. Aliqui tamen philosophi deprehenderunt, quod ipsum firmamentum movetur proprio motu, ita quod in centum annis procedit uno gradu[^17]. Sive autem hoc sit verum, sive falsum, hoc tenendum est, quod communiter doctores theologiae ponunt, quod est Conclusio 2.* caelum aliquod mobile ultra firmamentum, carens stellis. Et concedendae sunt rationes hoc ostendentes.

*Solutio oppositorum.*

Ad 1, 2. Ad illud vero quod obiicitur in contrarium, quod est uniforme; dicendum, quod si habeat uniformitatem per carentiam diversitatis partium, habet tamen diversitatem secundum rationem dextrae et sinistrae per comparationem ad influentiam motoris¹⁸: et haec diversitas sufficit ad faciendum motum. — Et per hoc patet responsio ad secundum,

quia non est talis variatio in illo motu primi mobilis, quae exigat diversitatem luminis in partibus, quin potius concordat uniformitati. Etsi enim motus dicatur variatio respectu quietis, motus tamen primi mobilis respectu aliorum est uniformis.

Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod aequaliter influit, cum movetur et quiescit; dicendum, quod falsum est. Si enim quiesceret, non moveret orbes inferiores suo motu; nunc autem, cum movetur, vis motiva ab ipso descendit in corpora inferiora.

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod motus eius debet esse notissimus, cum sit regula aliorum motuum; dicendum, quod non oportet esse notum sensui in se, sed sufficit, quod notificetur in effectu suo. Sic etiam non percipimus revolutionem octavae sphaerae ab oriente in oriens manifeste nisi per solem et alia luminaria. Per hunc modum uniformitas quantum ad spatium horarum nobis motum caeli uniformis expresse indicat; hunc¹⁹ tamen percipimus per varietatem diei et noctis.

Ad illa vero, quae ultimo querebantur, iam patet solutio ex praedictis.

Question III. Whether it is fitting for some orb to be moved without stars.

Thirdly it is asked whether it is fitting for some orb to be moved without stars. And that it is not, it seems:

*In the contrary sense.*

1. Because the empyrean heaven is held by the Saints to be immobile on account of its uniformity¹; but the heaven that universally lacks stars is uniform: therefore no heaven that lacks stars is mobile.

2. Likewise, wherever there is motion, there is continuity and variation²; but the continuity which is in motion is from the continuity of magnitude: therefore by parity of reasoning the variation of motion is from the variety of the mobile. But a celestial body that lacks stars does not have variety in its motions: therefore neither does it have changeability.

3. Likewise, every motion is for the sake of supplying some need either in the mobile itself or in something inferior³; but the heaven which lacks stars cannot be moved on account of its own need, since no

need of its own is filled in that motion; nor for the sake of supplying a need in inferior things, because it influences as well by resting as by moving, and uniformly: therefore it seems that in no way is it fitting for a celestial body to be moved without stars.

4. Likewise, the motion of the heaven is the most perfect of all motions, and therefore is the rule of all motions⁴: therefore if all things that are in that genus are measured by the rule, the soul measures all motions by the motion of the prime mobile: therefore the motion of the prime mobile is most known to the soul itself. But the motion of no body is known to the soul itself unless it has in itself some luminary, because the motion of an orb is not perceived except through the motion of a luminary: therefore it seems that it is not positable⁵ for any orb to be moved which lacks every luminary, especially since its motion eludes our sense, and sacred Scripture is silent about the motion of a uniform orb. And so it seems that to posit that some orb is moved above the firmament — which is visible to our eyes — is rash.

On the contrary:

*Fundamental arguments.*

1. Every multitude is reduced to unity⁶: therefore the motion of a multiform body is reduced to the motion of a uniform body; but a body is not uniform unless it lacks every luminary: therefore it seems that beyond those orbs, in which there are luminaries, there is some mobile heaven.

2. Likewise, that motion which is the measure of all motions is the one which goes from east to east through west, which is the motion productive of the natural day and completes twenty-four hours; but the natural day is at every time uniform: therefore so also is this motion: therefore so also is the mobile: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, if there is a right ordering of the middle to the extremes, it is necessary that the middle participate in some manner the nature of either extreme⁷; but the crystalline heaven is the middle between the empyrean and the firmament: since therefore the empyrean is uniform and immobile, and the firmament is multiform and mobile, it seems that the crystalline heaven is either multiform and immobile, or uniform and mobile. But since it cannot be multiform and immobile — since variety of the mobile disposes to motion — therefore it is necessary that it be uniform and mobile.

4. Likewise, whenever several things concur to the constitution of some thing, it is necessary that they be conjoined by the power of some one thing: therefore whenever several mobiles concur to one conformable effect through their influence, it is necessary that they be conjoined through the uniformity of some mobile. If therefore the power of the planets and stars concurs to the production of effects in these inferior things according to a certain conformity, it is necessary, beyond them, that there be some mobile through which they are joined, which indeed has uniformity in the whole and in the parts; and thus it is fitting for some orb to be moved without stars.

*Incidental question 1. It is therefore a question what that orb is, and through what nature it is fitting for it to be moved. For if [it is moved] because it is heaven[^8]; then the empyrean will be mobile. If because it is a heaven which is not only containing but also contained; then objection arises concerning the fiery and aethereal heaven, which indeed contain and are contained, and yet are not moved circularly. — Incidental question 2.* Alongside this it is asked concerning the sufficiency and number of the heavens; and since the celestial nature is distinguished from the elemental, how are some differences of the heavens taken from the elements? If you say, on account of the nature of the transparent found in them; then, since transparency is in water, the element of water ought to be called heaven.

Conclusion. Some heaven lacking stars beyond the firmament is mobile.

I respond: It must be said that one must hold that some heaven is moved which lacks the variety of luminaries and stars; and this is the watery or crystalline heaven. To the cognition of which, even though few philosophers attained — because the corporeal eludes sense — nevertheless some attained it by reasoning⁹; and those who attained it held that it is moved, just as certain astronomers strove to prove this. *Note.* Commonly, however, all Catholic treatise-writers attained to the cognition of the existence of this heaven, illumined divinely by the authority of sacred Scripture, which expressly declares its existence¹⁰ but does not explain its motion or rest. But the doctors of theology, supported by reasons, commonly hold that that heaven is moved.

*To incidental question 2.* And among the other reasons, the most powerful reason is that which is taken from the perfection of the universe, from which also the distinction of the heavens and their number can be reasonably investigated.

And this is shown thus. *1. Heaven in the common sense.* For heaven, in its common acceptation, signifies some transparent and containing nature; in its proper acceptation, however, it names a transparent, containing nature elevated above contrariety.

*1. Heaven commonly.* According to the first acceptation, seven heavens are distinguished by Rabanus¹¹. — For the

*Sufficiency of the septenary number. transparent and containing nature is either giving light, or receiving light. If it is giving, it is either uniform, not moved, and thus it is the empyrean; or it is multiform and moved, and thus it is the sidereal; or it is uniform and moved, and thus it is the crystalline. A fourth difference cannot exist, namely that it be multiform, not moved, because motion is a passion that naturally follows the multiformity of a body. — But if the transparent nature is receptive of light, [it is so] either separably or inseparably. If inseparably, [it is so] either according to the circle of the higher surface, and then it is the fiery [heaven]; or according to the circle of the lower surface, in which it communicates with the air, and then it is the olympian, which indeed is called olympian on account of its nearness to Mount Olympus. If however it is receptive[^12] separably, like air, which is illumined by the presence of a luminous body and darkened by its absence; this [happens] in two ways: either according to the superior part, and thus it is aethereal; or according to the inferior, and thus it is aëreal. — And in this distinction[^13] are comprehended all bodies of the world except earth and water. For earth cannot be comprehended under the name of heaven, since it lacks both transparency and the capacity of surrounding. Water likewise lacks [these], because, although it has transparency, nevertheless it does not surround on every side. And thus, from this sufficiency of the heavens, in which is shown the wisdom of the Creator and the perfection of the universe, it appears quite manifestly that one must hold that some orb without the multiformity of luminaries is moved; and that ought properly to be called the prime mobile. — Thus according to Rabanus.* This distinction and sufficiency is taken according to the enumeration of Rabanus, who numbers the heavens according to the common acceptation of heaven, insofar as it names a transparent and containing nature; for thus he comprehends the celestial nature properly so-called and the elemental, though not every [elemental nature].

*II. Heaven properly. If however heaven be properly called the celestial nature — namely a transparent nature, containing on every side, contrary to none — thus it is distinguished by some Threefold enumeration.* philosophers¹⁴ through eight orbs, who said the eighth sphere is the last. — Others, however, more illumined in this matter, beyond the eighth sphere posited a ninth. — A third group, perfectly illumined, came to the perfect distinction of orbs, so as to posit a tenth sphere, in which is rest and eternal life, namely the empyrean heaven — concerning which, even though Augustine scarcely or never speaks, Bede¹⁵ nevertheless and Rabanus expressly testify that it exists.

*Sufficiency of these numbers. The number and sufficiency of these we can take thus. For the distinction of the heavens is either by the diversity of their proper forms, or by the distinction of motions and luminaries contained in them. — 3 heavens by the diversity of forms.* If by the diversity of forms, we thus distinguish three heavens. For either there is vigorous in it the nature of perfect luminosity, and thus it is apt for the state of glory, and therefore quiet; and thus it is the empyrean. Or there is vigorous in it the nature of perfect transparency and of effective coldness; and thus it is the crystalline or watery, which indeed serves the conservation of corruptible things, and therefore is apt for motion. Or there is vigorous in it the nature of transparency together with luminosity and of effective heat; and thus it is the sidereal heaven, which indeed serves the transmutation of inferior things; therefore it is multiform and moved¹⁶.

*7 heavens by the distinction of luminaries. If, however, the distinction of the heavens be made according to the distinction of luminaries, thus there is a distinction of orbs. For either an orb contains a multitude of stars, or a unity. If a multitude, thus it is the starry heaven; if a unity, then since there are seven planets, according to which the universality of times is governed — which is enclosed by a septenary of days — there are seven orbs; and thus the third heaven by its multiformity contains eight spheres or orbs, and the two are preceding, and Thus 10 heavens.* so [there are] ten, so that in this way the perfection of number — namely the denary — may correspond to the perfection of the parts of the universe.

From what has been said, therefore, it is clear that howsoever the sufficiency of the heavens be taken — whether under the proper appellation of heaven, or under the common one — one must hold that the crystalline heaven is moved, which indeed lacks stars. — *To incidental question 1. And so to the proposed question it must be responded that without stars some orb can be moved, namely the watery heaven, which is the prime mobile, and which is moved uniformly from east to east through west; and by its power the firmament and all inferior orbs are drawn along, so that in one natural day — namely through the space of twenty-four hours — it revolves from east to east, although it does not appear to our sense, and some philosophers have thought that the firmament is the prime mobile. Yet some philosophers have detected that the firmament itself is moved by its own motion, in such a way that in a hundred years it proceeds one degree[^17]. Whether however this be true or false, this must be held — which the doctors of theology commonly posit — that there is Conclusion 2.* some mobile heaven beyond the firmament, lacking stars. And the reasons showing this are to be conceded.

*Solution of the opposing [arguments].*

To 1, 2. To that which is objected to the contrary, that it is uniform; it must be said that if it has uniformity through the lack of diversity of parts, it nevertheless has diversity according to the account of right and left by comparison to the influence of the mover¹⁸: and this diversity suffices for producing motion. — And by this is patent the response to the second [objection], because

there is not such variation in that motion of the prime mobile as would demand diversity of light in the parts; rather it accords with uniformity. For even if motion be called a variation with respect to rest, the motion of the prime mobile with respect to the others is uniform.

To 3. To that which is objected — that it influences equally when it is moved and when at rest — it must be said that this is false. For if it were at rest, it would not move the inferior orbs by its motion; but now, when it is moved, motive power descends from it into the inferior bodies.

To 4. To that which is objected — that its motion ought to be most known, since it is the rule of the other motions — it must be said that it is not necessary that it be known to sense in itself, but it suffices that it be made known in its effect. So also we do not perceive the revolution of the eighth sphere from east to east manifestly except through the sun and the other luminaries. By this manner the uniformity, as far as the space of hours, expressly indicates to us the motion of the uniform heaven; this¹⁹, however, we perceive through the variety of day and night.

To those things which were last asked, the solution is already evident from what has been said.