Bonaventure

Quaestio II. Utrum corpus gloriosum sit passibile passione veniente ab extrinseco.

Secundo quaeritur, utrum corpus gloriosum sit passibile passione veniente ab extrinseco, sicut igne, vel cultello. Et quod non, videtur:

1. Quia dicit Anselmus⁴, quod « erunt omnipotentes suae voluntatis, sicut Deus suae » : ergo si voluntas animarum est in conservatione corporis: ergo nihil poterit corpus animae laedere.

2. Item, « omnis passio magis facta abiicit a substantia⁵ » : ergo si est passibile ab exteriori, ergo potest fieri abiectio a substantia, ergo et corruptio. Sed supra probatum est, quod est incorruptibile et immortale: ergo etc.

3. Item, nihil compositum potest pati exterius, quod non possit pati interius; sed corpus gloriosum non potest pati interius⁶: ergo etc.

Contra:

1. Corpus gloriosum constat materialiter ex terra; sed terra non potest, manente forma, quam habet, tantum sublimari, quod sit igne superior: ergo manet infra ignem: ergo si inferius patitur a superiori⁷; sed tale corpus est inferius igne, videtur etc.

2. Item, corpus nobilissimum est inferius infimo spiritu quantumcumque peccatore⁸; sed spiritus peccatorum positus in igne patitur: ergo corpus humanum quantumcumque nobilitatum potest ab igne pati.

3. Item, omne continuum divisibile, omne divisibile partibile¹, et omne partibile est passibile ab exteriori: ergo etc.

4. Item, quandocumque corpus durum obviat molli, necesse est illud dividere, si sit impellentia vehemens; esto igitur, quod cultellus obviet corpori glorioso, aut ergo est durius cultello, aut cultellus penetrat; sed non est durius, cum sit carneum: ergo etc.

Conclusio

Corpus gloriosum est impassibile ab extrinseco omni genere passionis corrumpentis.

Respondeo: Dicendum, quod corpus gloriosum est impassibile ab extrinseco omni genere passionis² corrumpentis. Haec autem est duplex, scilicet per influentiam, sicut ignis comburit corpus; et per violentiam, sicut cultellus dividit. — Prima non est in corpore glorioso, quia talis influentia aut est secundum ordinem iustitiae; et haec est in daemonibus et peccatricibus animabus secundum ordinem iustitiae; in corpore glorioso non est talis passio, quia non meruit puniri. Alia est secundum ordinem naturae; et ista est solum, quando patiens est talis naturae, quod materia illa appetit esse sub alio actu, privatio enim est principium patiendi³. Quoniam autem in corpore glorificato iam terminati sunt appetitus; ideo, si gloriosum corpus poneretur in igne inferni, non laederetur.

Ad 1. 2. Et per hoc patet solutio ad duo prima, quia daemon patitur secundum ordinem iustitiae, licet sit superior per naturam. — Patet etiam secundum⁴, quod terra patitur, quia materia est rationem habens privationis.

Alia est actio per violentiam, et de hac dicunt aliqui, quod non patitur, quia nemo est qui inferat; et si esset qui vellet inferre, corpus posset declinare. — Sed tunc secundum istam viam corpus Adam ante lapsum habuisset dotem impassibilitatis⁵. Ponatur etiam per impossibile, quod cultellus applicetur ventri, aut venter resistit, aut non. Si non: ergo patitur, et cultellus subintrat, et ita est passibile; si resistit, quaero: per quam naturam? Et dicunt aliqui, quod habet naturam quintae essentiae, quae non est secabilis nec divisibilis; unde si⁶ quis iuxta solem esset et impingeret cultellum, non pertransiret; et non resisteret per naturam duri et mollis, sed quia caret duritie et mollitie et passibilitate.

Sed quia hoc difficile est intelligere, ideo dicendum, quod corpus gloriosum non potest pati per violentiam corporis obviantis, quia omne corpus est pervium ei, et illud pertransit, sicut videbitur⁷. Unde sicut si aliquis haberet cultellum crystallinum, non expelleret radium per eius ictum, immo radius penetraret, unde non pateretur ab ipso; sic in proposito intelligendum, corpus gloriosum penetrare cultellum.

Ad 3. Quod ergo dicitur: omne continuum divisibile; intelligendum est de divisione mathematica, non de divisione naturali⁸, de qua hic opponitur. Sic enim exponit Anselmus, quod illud intelligitur secundum intellectum, non secundum actum⁹.

De numeratione notarum. Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page. The apparatus below is therefore labelled by page: notes 4–8 of page 1023 and notes 1–9 of page 1024. Notes 1–3 of page 1023 anchor in the preceding quaestio, and note 10 of page 1024 anchors in the following article; they are rendered in those chunks, not here.

---

Question II. Whether the glorified body is passible by a passion coming from without.

Secondly it is asked whether the glorified body is passible by a passion coming from without, as by fire or by a knife. And that it is not, seems to be so:

1. Because Anselm says⁴ that "they will be omnipotent over their own will, as God is over his": therefore if the will of the souls is set upon the conservation of the body: therefore nothing will be able to harm the body of the soul.

2. Likewise, "every passion, the more it is done, casts away from substance⁵": therefore if it is passible from without, therefore a casting-away from substance can come about, therefore corruption also. But it was proved above that it is incorruptible and immortal: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, nothing composite can suffer from without which cannot suffer from within; but the glorified body cannot suffer from within⁶: therefore etc.

On the contrary:

1. The glorified body is constituted materially out of earth; but earth cannot, while the form which it has remains, be so far raised up that it should be higher than fire: therefore it remains below fire: therefore if the lower suffers from the higher⁷; but such a body is lower than fire, it seems etc.

2. Likewise, the noblest body is lower than the lowest spirit, however sinful⁸; but the spirit of sinners, when placed in fire, suffers: therefore the human body, however ennobled, can suffer from fire.

3. Likewise, every continuum is divisible, everything divisible is partible¹, and everything partible is passible from without: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, whenever a hard body meets a soft one, it must needs divide it, if the impulse be vehement; suppose therefore that a knife meets a glorified body: either then it is harder than the knife, or the knife penetrates; but it is not harder, since it is fleshly: therefore etc.

Conclusion

The glorified body is impassible from without by every kind of corrupting passion.

I respond: It must be said that the glorified body is impassible from without by every kind of corrupting passion². Now this is twofold, namely by influence, as fire burns a body; and by violence, as a knife divides. — The first is not in the glorified body, because such influence is either according to the order of justice; and this is in demons and in sinful souls according to the order of justice; in the glorified body there is no such passion, because it has not deserved to be punished. The other is according to the order of nature; and this occurs only when the patient is of such a nature that that matter desires to be under another act, for privation is the principle of suffering³. But since in the glorified body the appetites are already terminated, therefore, if a glorified body were placed in the fire of hell, it would not be harmed.

To 1 and 2. And by this the solution to the first two is clear, because the demon suffers according to the order of justice, although it is superior by nature. — The second is likewise clear⁴, namely that earth suffers, because matter is that which has the account of privation.

The other is action by violence, and concerning this some say that it does not suffer, because there is no one who would inflict it; and if there were one who wished to inflict it, the body could turn aside. — But then, according to that way, Adam's body before the fall would have had the dowry of impassibility⁵. Let it also be supposed, by an impossibility, that a knife is applied to the belly: either the belly resists, or it does not. If it does not: therefore it suffers, and the knife enters in, and so it is passible; if it resists, I ask: by what nature? And some say that it has the nature of a fifth essence, which is neither cuttable nor divisible; whence if⁶ someone were beside the sun and were to drive a knife against it, it would not pass through; and it would not resist by the nature of the hard and the soft, but because it lacks hardness and softness and passibility.

But because this is difficult to understand, it must therefore be said that the glorified body cannot suffer by the violence of a body meeting it, because every body is pervious to it, and it passes through that body, as will be seen⁷. Whence, just as if someone had a crystal knife, he would not drive out a ray by its stroke, but rather the ray would penetrate it, whence it would not suffer from it; so in the case at hand it must be understood that the glorified body penetrates the knife.

To 3. As for what is said, then — that every continuum is divisible — this must be understood of mathematical division, not of the natural division⁸ about which the objection is here made. For Anselm so expounds it, that it is understood according to intellect, not according to act⁹.

---