Bonaventure

Quaestio II. Utrum corpora gloriosa possint claritatem suam secundum imperium animae oculis nostris occultare.

The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body and the English translation. Quaracchi restarts its footnote numbering on every printed page, so the labels are page-qualified: notes 3–9 of page 1026 and notes 1–4 of page 1027. Notes 1–2 of page 1026 anchor in the preceding question, and notes 5–10 of page 1027 anchor in the following article.

Secundo quaeritur de claritate in comparatione; et quaeritur, utrum corpora gloriosa possint claritatem suam secundum imperium animae oculis nostris occultare. Et quod sic, videtur:

1. Quia Christus post resurrectionem apparuit discipulis in eadem effigie et colore, in quo prius; sed, sicut dicit Augustinus de Civitate Dei³, « Christus sua resurrectione ostendit, quale sit futurum corpus nostrum »: ergo alia corpora similiter poterunt.

2. Item, corpus illud est in perfecta obedientia respectu animae: ergo apparet et resplendet secundum plus et minus, ut animae placet.

3. Item, claritas illa oculis non clarificatis est improportionalis: ergo quod ab eis videatur, est condescensionis: ergo occultatio ipsius a nostris oculis est de natura ipsius gloriosae lucis.

Contra: 1. Quanto aliquid luminosius est, tanto minus potest visum latere; sed corpus gloriosum est magis luminosum quam non gloriosum⁴; sed hoc non potest latere: ergo nec illud.

2. Item, lux se manifestat illuminando; sed illuminare est actus lucis naturalis et essentialis: ergo cum nihil possit privari actu essentiali, ipso salvato in esse; impossibile est, quin corpus gloriosum irradiet, ergo⁵ quin illuminet et se visui manifestet.

3. Item, sicut se habet pati ad impassibile, ita occultari ad lucem; sed corpus gloriosum non potest pati, quia est impassibile⁶: ergo nec occultari, cum sit luminosum.

Conclusio. Corpora gloriosa possunt claritatem suam secundum imperium animae oculis nostris occultare, sed etiam ostendere.

Respondeo: Ad hoc dicunt aliqui, quod claritas corporis gloriosi visui glorioso est manifesta et ei occultari non potest, oculo non glorificato est occulta et ei non potest manifestari, quia est ei improportionalis; unde quia occultare est de manifesto occultum facere: ideo dicunt simpliciter, quod non potest. Nec est trahendum ad consequentiam de Christo, quia Deus erat⁷. — Sed istud est mirum dicere, quod claritas corporalis omnino sit improportionalis et occulta; et quia, si non in se, saltem posset videri in irradiatione. Et praeterea videtur Christus non mirabilia fecisse, sed argumenta resurrectionis ostendisse⁸.

Et ideo aliter dicendum, quod corporis qualitas secundum exigentiam eius, in quo est, agit. Corpus autem gloriosum est subtile et per subtilitatem suam potest omne non gloriosum penetrare, ut infra⁹ patebit; potest etiam resistere. Et ideo dico, quod quia corpus gloriosum per effectum spiritualis potentiae potest omne corpus penetrare, potest et penetrare oculum; et tunc non erit obiectum eius et ideo potest latere. — Rursus, quia potest corpori se obiicere, potest et claritatem suam omnino ostendere, licet oculus obtundatur et non comprehendat. Et quia potest omnino latere penetrando subtiliter, et omnino patere se obiiciendo visibiliter; potest et medio modo plus et minus se ostendere. Unde si hic esset anima gloriosa cum corpore glorificato, plus et minus posset de sui corporis claritate oculis nostris claudere¹, et hoc per naturam illam, qua non tantum clarum est, sed penetrativum et spirituale. — Et concedendae sunt rationes ad hanc partem.

1. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod quanto luminosius, tanto minus potest visum² latere; dicendum, quod verum est per naturam luminis; potest tamen per naturam spiritualitatis et subtilitatis.

2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod lux se manifestat illuminando; dico, quod non tantum illuminando, sed etiam oculis intuentium se obiiciendo; et quia potest esse, quod corpora gloriosa radios penetrent visibiles corporis non gloriosi; ideo etc.

3. Ad aliud dicendum, quod occultari est dupliciter: vel propter obscuritatem a parte obiecti, et de hac verum est, quod lux non potest occultari; alia est per impotentiam a parte oculi, quia non potest ibi figi³ propter excellentem subtilitatem, et haec luci non repugnat, sicut passibilitas impassibilitati. Et primo modo impossibile est, lucem occultari, secundo modo est verum et possibile⁴.

---

Question II. Whether glorified bodies can hide their brightness from our eyes at the command of the soul.

Secondly, inquiry is made concerning brightness in comparison; and it is asked whether glorified bodies can hide their brightness from our eyes at the command of the soul. And that they can, seems to follow:

1. Because Christ after the resurrection appeared to the disciples in the same shape and colour in which he was before; but, as Augustine says in The City of God³, "Christ by his resurrection showed what our body is to be": therefore other bodies likewise will be able to.

2. Likewise, that body is in perfect obedience with respect to the soul: therefore it appears and shines forth according to more and less, as it pleases the soul.

3. Likewise, that brightness is disproportionate to eyes that are not glorified: therefore that it be seen by them is a matter of condescension: therefore the hiding of it from our eyes belongs to the nature of that glorious light itself.

On the contrary: 1. The more luminous a thing is, the less it can lie hidden from sight; but a glorified body is more luminous than one not glorified⁴; but the latter cannot lie hidden: therefore neither can the former.

2. Likewise, light manifests itself by illuminating; but to illuminate is the natural and essential act of light: therefore, since nothing can be deprived of its essential act while it itself is preserved in being, it is impossible that a glorified body should not irradiate, and therefore⁵ that it should not illuminate and manifest itself to sight.

3. Likewise, as to suffer stands to the impassible, so to be hidden stands to light; but a glorified body cannot suffer, because it is impassible⁶: therefore neither can it be hidden, since it is luminous.

Conclusion. Glorified bodies can, at the command of the soul, hide their brightness from our eyes, but also display it.

I respond: To this some say that the brightness of a glorified body is manifest to glorified sight and cannot be hidden from it, whereas to an eye not glorified it is hidden and cannot be manifested to it, because it is disproportionate to it; whence, since to hide is to make hidden what is manifest, they say without qualification that it cannot. Nor is any consequence to be drawn from Christ, because he was God⁷. — But it is astonishing to say that bodily brightness is altogether disproportionate and hidden; and because, if not in itself, at least it could be seen in its irradiation. And besides, it seems that Christ did not work marvels, but displayed proofs of the resurrection⁸.

And therefore it must be said otherwise, that the quality of a body acts according to the requirement of that in which it is. Now a glorified body is subtle, and by its subtlety it can penetrate everything not glorified, as will appear below⁹; it can also resist. And therefore I say that, because a glorified body through the effect of a spiritual power can penetrate every body, it can also penetrate the eye; and then it will not be the eye's object, and therefore it can lie hidden. — Again, because it can present itself to a body, it can also display its brightness entirely, although the eye be dulled and not comprehend it. And because it can lie wholly hidden by penetrating subtly, and lie wholly open by presenting itself visibly, it can also display itself in a middle way, more and less. Whence, if a glorified soul were here with a glorified body, it could close off from our eyes more and less of its body's brightness¹, and this by that nature whereby it is not only bright, but penetrative and spiritual. — And the reasons for this side are to be granted.

1. To that which is objected, that the more luminous a thing is the less it can lie hidden from sight², it must be said that this is true by the nature of light; nevertheless it can, by the nature of spirituality and subtlety.

2. To that which is objected, that light manifests itself by illuminating, I say that it does so not only by illuminating, but also by presenting itself to the eyes of those beholding; and because it can happen that glorified bodies penetrate the visible rays of a body not glorified, therefore etc.

3. To the other it must be said that to be hidden is twofold: either on account of obscurity on the side of the object, and of this it is true that light cannot be hidden; the other is by an incapacity on the side of the eye, because it cannot be fixed upon it³ on account of its surpassing subtlety, and this is not repugnant to light, as passibility is to impassibility. And in the first way it is impossible for light to be hidden, in the second way it is true and possible⁴.

---