Moreover, although the body of Christ may be really and truly contained under the species of bread, yet it is not circumscribed in a place in the sacrament of the altar. But the entire body of Christ is really contained under the whole host and under each part of the host, which is confirmed by the testimony of the Holy Fathers. Whence, the blessed Jerome is quoted in the De Consecratione, Distinction II., ‘Singuli.’ “Each individual,” he says, “receives the entire Christ the Lord, and He is whole in each portion and is not lessened through each; but He offers Himself entire in each.” Likewise, the blessed Hilary, the Bishop, is quoted in the De Consecratione, Distinction II., ‘Ubi.’ “Where,” he says, “there is a part of the body, there is also the whole.” From these passages it is clearly gathered that the whole Christ is in the whole host, and the whole is in a part; from which it follows that the body of Christ is not confined or circumscribed in a place.
But the faithful can be led to believe in the possibility of this in some other way. For the Christian ought to say that anything can be accomplished by the divine virtue, except that which can be clearly proved to involve a contradiction through reasoning from things known per se, which no one could doubt, and except that which can not be elicited from Sacred Scripture or the Doctors approved by the church. For we ought not to limit the divine power according to the mode of natural causes, since the divine power may infinitely exceed the virtue of all creatures.
Nor is experimental knowledge sufficient for saying that something can not be accomplished by divine virtue, since God might be able to change the entire order of natural causes. And it may be well known that He has done many things contrary to the common course of natural causes. For who ever experimentally knew of a virgin naturally conceiving without a husband, of two bodies existing at the same time, of the dead restored to life, of accidents existing without a subject, and of innumerable other things which, however, it is well known have been divinely wrought? Therefore, we ought not to say that some things can not be done by God, because we do not know by experience that they are done naturally. Therefore, since there is evidently no contradiction, which can be proven through self-evident propositions, involved in the statement that some substance a whole as regards itself coexists in two bodies, consequently the same substance a whole as regards itself coexists in some body and in each part of it. I am, on the contrary, certain that it can be proved through the rules of logic, which are said to serve zealously all science and knowledge. Having conceded that the same substance a whole as regards itself may coexist in two bodies or in one body and in each part of it, every contradiction can evidently be avoided; although it may not be clearly proved from purely natural causes that the antecedent is true. For a Christian ought not to say that God might not through His absolute power be able to make some substance to coexist with something corporeal, so that the whole may coexist with that whole body and with each part of it; nor can the opposite be proved. For we so hold that the rational soul is a whole in a whole body and in each part of it; and the opposite can not be proved through demonstrative reasoning.
Moreover, we similarly hold that an angel is definitively a whole in any place and in each part of it. Moreover, by virtue of the same none of the faithful ought to say that two bodies of the very same identical species, as well as those of diverse species, may not be able to exist at the same time in the same place through divine power. For the Saviour, Jesus Christ, entered thus into the midst of the disciples when the doors were closed and came forth into the world from the closed womb of a virgin and ascended into heaven with undivided celestial body. If, therefore, no contradiction appears in the statement that two bodies may exist at the same time in the same place, no contradiction appears in the statement that two parts of the same body may exist in the same place at the same time. From which it is obvious that for a reason equal to that by which two parts of the body of Christ can exist in the same place, all the parts of the body of Christ could coexist at the same time in the same place. Moreover, from this and the former statement follows the principal intention. For if it is not impossible for God, who can do more than we can think or understand, to bring it to pass that all the parts of the body of Christ may exist in the same body, and it is not impossible for Him to place the same whole substance in a whole and to place the whole in each part, as is obvious of the rational soul and an angel.
It manifestly follows that it is not impossible for God to bring it to pass that the whole substance of the body of Christ may coexist with the whole host and with each part of it, which is the principal thesis. Nor does this obtain, that the body of Christ has organic parts really distinct, of which one is not in another, as a finger is not in a finger; of which, moreover, some are in one total part and not in another, as the eyes are not in the hand or in the foot but in the head. For local separation is not required for a distinction of organic parts, but a real distinction of material dispositions. For although the hand, if the same dispositions are retained, might be placed with the eye, so that both the hand and eye would be at the same time in the same place, yet the hand would certainly be a hand and not an eye, and a man could not see through the hand but through the eye. And so then the organs can remain distinct and created to have distinct functions, no matter how much they might not be separate locally. And, therefore, this must not be denied of the divine power. But of what kind the diversity of disposition of the organs may be, whether indeed it be substantial or accidental, does not concern the present discussion.
Similarly, also, although the organs might not be separate locally, it would not by virtue of this follow that the hand would be in the foot, or the contrary; but only that those organs would be at the same time in the same place, which is not inconsistent with the disposition of the organs, as has been shown; since with even the local inseparability of one part from another it obtains that one part may be in another as in its whole, after the manner in which the eye is in the head, as in a whole; and as with the local inseparability of the rational soul from man it obtains that the rational soul may be a part of man; for the rational soul is wholly in the same place in which man is, and yet it is part of man. So the eye might be able to be a part of the head and yet be in the same place with the head. And so the possibility of the existence of the body of Christ with the whole host and with each part of it is obvious.
However, I assert nothing concerning all of the previous statements, except that which is consistent with the doctrine of the Saints; but if any statement should not be in agreement with their statements, let it be said only for the training of studious minds.
← Chapter V That the Substance of the Bread Does Not Remain After Consecration · Contents · Chapter VII That the Body of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar Is Not Seen →