← Back to Distinction 49

Dist. 49, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 2

Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 49

Textus Latinus
p. 1014

Quaestio II. Utrum gloria corporis sit a gloria animae originaliter.

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation. Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page, so the labels here are page-qualified: notes 1–7 of page 1014, and note 1 of page 1015. Notes 2 and following of page 1015 anchor in the following chunk and are rendered there.

Secundo quaeritur de origine beatitudinis sive gloriae corporis, utrum sit a gloria animae originaliter. Et quod sic, videtur.

1. Dionysius ad Dioscorum1: « Beatitudo non est corporum, sed ab animabus redundat in corpora ».

2. Item, gloria inest corpori per resurrectionem, et resurrectio per unionem animae: ergo ab anima inest corpori gloria.

3. Item, specialius videtur quoad impassibilitatem: quia, ut dicit Philosophus2, « egrediente anima, exspirat et marcescit corpus »: ergo quod sit incorruptibile, hoc non habet nisi ab anima. — Si dicas, quod loquitur secundum statum istum; hoc non solvit, quia, sicut anima nunc continet corpus, ita et tunc; unde Augustinus de Vera Religione: « Corpus non habebit stabilitatem nisi per animam, et haec per Deum ».

4. Item, de spiritualitate videtur: quia super illud primae ad Corinthios decimo quinto3: Novissimus Adam in spiritum vivificantem; Glossa: « Quia spiritus perfecte adhaeret Deo, sic vivificat, ut corpus spirituale efficiat »: ergo manifestum etc.

Contra: 1. Quandocumque aliquid est alicuius origo per redundantiam, similitudo est utrobique et univocatio; sed claritas corporis et spiritus sunt claritates aequivoce4: ergo haec non redundat in illam.

2. Item, omne quod est ab alio per redundantiam, illo separato, iam non inest: ergo si anima separaretur a corpore, corpus fieret obscurum; quod videtur inconveniens dicere5.

3. Item, quod habet totaliter esse per redundantiam ab aliquo, illi coniunctum, participat proprietates illas sine aliqua immutatione ex parte sui: ergo si anima gloriosa uniretur modo corpori passibili, ipsum faceret impassibile; sed hoc non potest stare: quia, quod de passibili per naturam fiat impassibile, est a virtute infinita: ergo non ab anima.

4. Item, anima Christi summe erat gloriosa, et corpus summe passibile, ergo et habens alios defectus: ergo et huiusmodi defectus non privantur per gloriam animae, sed per qualitatem absolutam corporis: ergo etc.

Conclusio

Gloria corporis quoad dispositiones, quae sunt qualitates absolutae ipsius corporis, est a Deo corpus reformante, quoad consummationem est per influentiam animae gloriosae.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod est loqui de dotibus corporis, in quibus eius glorificatio consistit, vel quantum ad dispositionem, vel quantum ad consummationem. Si quantum ad dispositionem; sic dico, quod dicunt dispositiones, quae sunt qualitates absolutae ipsius corporis, quae dantur sibi a Deo in eius reformatione. — Si quantum ad consummationem, sic dico, quod sunt a gloria animae sive ab anima gloriosa. Unde sicut in praesenti anima in corpus influit, et per illam influentiam corpus est coloratius, corpus est durabilius, corpus est virtuosius et agilius, quam cum anima separatur: similiter dico in proposito suo modo, quod anima gloriosa influens in corpus omnes dotes istas, ad quas dispositiones habebat, per sui reformationem perficit et consummat. Unde credo, quodsi corpus separaretur, quod etsi esset clarum et impassibile, non tamen ita ut nunc6.

Ad argumenta: Ex his patent obiecta ad utramque partem. Nam primae rationes ostendunt, quod sunt in corpore per influentiam; quod quidem verum est quantum ad consummationem. Secundae rationes ostendunt, quod non sunt totaliter in corpore per redundantiam a gloria animae; et hoc quidem verum est7; praeexigitur enim, quod a Deo reformetur habile, et per influentiam animae illa habilitas consummetur.

p. 1015

Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de spiritualitate, dicendum, quod verum est, ubi agens et patiens communicant in materia; sed non est ita in anima et corpore; unde anima, immobilis existens, per influentiam causat motum in corpore; sic et in aliis proprietatibus, sicut dicitur calor animalis sive1 ab anima.

---

English Translation

Question II. Whether the glory of the body derives originally from the glory of the soul.

Secondly it is asked concerning the origin of the beatitude or glory of the body, whether it derives originally from the glory of the soul. And that it does, is shown thus.

1. Dionysius to Dioscorus1: « Beatitude does not belong to bodies, but overflows into bodies from souls ».

2. Likewise, glory is in the body through the resurrection, and the resurrection is through the union of the soul: therefore glory is in the body from the soul.

3. Likewise, it seems so more particularly as regards impassibility: because, as the Philosopher says2, « when the soul departs, the body breathes out its last and withers »: therefore that it should be incorruptible, this it has only from the soul. — If you say that he is speaking according to the present state, this does not resolve the matter, because, just as the soul now holds the body together, so it will then also; whence Augustine, On True Religion: « The body will not have stability except through the soul, and this through God ».

4. Likewise, it seems so with regard to spirituality: because upon that text of the first letter to the Corinthians, chapter fifteen3: The last Adam into a life-giving spirit; the Gloss: « Because the spirit adheres perfectly to God, it so gives life that it makes the body spiritual »: therefore it is manifest, etc.

On the contrary: 1. Whenever something is the origin of something else by overflow, there is in both a likeness and univocity; but the brightness of a body and that of a spirit are brightnesses equivocally4: therefore the one does not overflow into the other.

2. Likewise, everything that is from another by overflow, once that other is separated, is no longer present: therefore if the soul were separated from the body, the body would become dark; which it seems unfitting to say5.

3. Likewise, that which has its being wholly by overflow from something, when joined to it, shares in those properties without any change on its own part: therefore if a glorious soul were united in the ordinary way to a passible body, it would make it impassible; but this cannot stand: because that a thing passible by nature should become impassible is from an infinite power: therefore not from the soul.

4. Likewise, the soul of Christ was glorious in the highest degree, and his body passible in the highest degree, and therefore also having the other defects: therefore defects of this kind are not removed through the glory of the soul, but through an absolute quality of the body: therefore etc.

Conclusion

The glory of the body, as regards the dispositions which are absolute qualities of the body itself, is from God reforming the body; as regards its consummation, it is through the influence of the glorious soul.

I respond: It must be said that one may speak of the dowries of the body, in which its glorification consists, either as regards disposition, or as regards consummation. If as regards disposition, then I say that they name dispositions which are absolute qualities of the body itself, which are given to it by God in its reformation. — If as regards consummation, then I say that they are from the glory of the soul, or from the glorious soul. Whence, just as at present the soul flows into the body, and through that influence the body has more colour, the body is more lasting, the body is stronger and more agile, than when the soul is separated: likewise I say in the case at hand, in its own manner, that the glorious soul, flowing into the body, perfects and consummates through its own reformation all those dowries for which it had the dispositions. Whence I believe that, if the body were separated, then even though it were bright and impassible, it would nevertheless not be so as it is now6.

To the arguments: From these things the objections on either side are plain. For the first set of reasons show that they are in the body through influence; which indeed is true as regards consummation. The second set of reasons show that they are not wholly in the body by overflow from the glory of the soul; and this indeed is true7; for it is presupposed that it be reformed by God so as to be capable, and that through the influence of the soul that capacity be consummated.

To 4. To that which is objected concerning spirituality, it must be said that it is true where the agent and the patient share in matter; but it is not so in the case of the soul and the body; whence the soul, while remaining itself immobile, causes motion in the body through influence; and so too in the other properties, as heat is called animal heat, that is1 from the soul.

---

Apparatus Criticus
  1. 1
    Ita quidem codd. et edd.; error tamen in ipsos irrepsisse videtur, cum inter epistolas Dionysii nulla ad Dioscorum habeatur. Inter epistolas Augustini haec epist. invenitur sub n. 118. (alias 56.), in eaque c. 3. n. 14. haec sententia continetur; verba vide supra pag. 1005, nota 4.
    So indeed the codices and editions; nevertheless an error seems to have crept into them, since among the letters of Dionysius none to Dioscorus is found. Among the letters of Augustine this letter is found under n. 118 (elsewhere 56), and in it, c. 3, n. 14, this statement is contained; for the words see above, page 1005, note 4.
  2. 2
    Libr. I. de Anima, text. 90. (c. 5.), ubi etiam insinuatur quod anima continet corpus. — Verba August., de Vera Relig. c. 12. n. 25, sunt: Inde iam erit consequens, ut post mortem corporalem... hoc corpus restituatur pristinae stabilitati, quam non per se habebit, sed per animam stabilitam in Deo; quae rursus non per se stabilitur, sed per Deum, quo fruitur etc.
    Book I On the Soul, text 90 (c. 5), where it is also intimated that the soul holds the body together. — The words of Augustine, On True Religion, c. 12, n. 25, are: Thence it will now follow that after bodily death... this body be restored to its former stability, which it will not have of itself, but through the soul made stable in God; which soul again is not made stable of itself, but through God, whom it enjoys, etc.
  3. 3
    Vers. 45. — Glossam exhibet Petr. Lombard. (in hunc loc.); sumta est ex August., Epist. 205. (alias 246.) c. 2. n. 11: Anima quippe in corpore animali vivit quidem, sed non vivificat usque ad auferendam corruptionem; in corpore vero spirituali, quoniam perfecte adhaerens Domino unus spiritus est [I. Cor. 6, 17.], sic vivificat, ut spirituale corpus efficiat etc.
    Verse 45. — Peter Lombard sets out the Gloss (on this passage); it is taken from Augustine, Letter 205 (elsewhere 246) c. 2, n. 11: For the soul in an animal body indeed lives, but does not give life to the point of taking away corruption; but in a spiritual body, since one who adheres perfectly to the Lord is one spirit [1 Cor. 6:17], it so gives life that it makes the body spiritual, etc.
  4. 4
    Aristot., de Praedicam. c. 1: Aequivoca dicuntur quorum nomen solum commune est, secundum nomen vero substantiae ratio diversa... Univoca vero dicuntur quorum et nomen commune est, et secundum nomen eadem substantiae ratio, ut animal et homo etc.
    Aristotle, Categories c. 1: Things are called equivocal whose name alone is common, but the account of the substance answering to the name is diverse... But things are called univocal whose name is common and the account of the substance answering to the name is the same, as animal and man, etc.
  5. 5
    Cfr. art. seq. q. 1. et sectio 2. a. 2. q. 1. — Superius pro est ab alio cod. F est in aliquo.
    Compare the following article, q. 1, and section 2, a. 2, q. 1. — Above, for is from another, codex F reads is in something.
  6. 6
    Edd., post clarum addito subtile, agile, hic legunt: ut tunc, quando anima beata erit sibi coniuncta. Superius pro ad quas dispositiones plures codd. ad quas dispositionem.
    The editions, having added subtle, agile after bright, read here: as then, when the beatified soul will be joined to it. Above, for for which dispositions, several codices read for which disposition.
  7. 7
    Cod. A addit quantum ad dispositionem.
    Codex A adds as regards disposition.
  8. 1
    Cod. K (1 a secunda manu) esse, edd. esse vel exire. Superius pro spiritualitate permulti codd. subtilitate. — Cfr. Fulgent., de Fide ad Petr. c. 29. — Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.
    Codex K (1, by a second hand) to be, the editions to be or to go forth. Above, for spirituality, very many codices read subtlety. — Compare Fulgentius, On Faith, to Peter, c. 29. — See the scholion to the preceding question. ---
Cited by

1 place in the Opera Omnia citesthis question. Derived from Quaracchi’s own apparatus, never tagged by hand.

Whether agility inclines the glorified body to every difference of position, or to some determinate place
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 49
supra pag. 1014, nota 2

4 further references address the article or printed page this question belongs to, rather than the question itself.

← Dist. 49, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 1Dist. 49, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 2→