|
Objection 1: It seems that Christ's body is in this sacrament as
in a place. Because, to be in a place definitively or
circumscriptively belongs to being in a place. But Christ's body
seems to be definitively in this sacrament, because it is so present
where the species of the bread and wine are, that it is nowhere else
upon the altar: likewise it seems to be there circumscriptively,
because it is so contained under the species of the consecrated host,
that it neither exceeds it nor is exceeded by it. Therefore Christ's
body is in this sacrament as in a place.
Objection 2: Further, the place of the bread and wine is not
empty, because nature abhors a vacuum; nor is the substance of the
bread there, as stated above (Question 75, Article 2); but
only the body of Christ is there. Consequently the body of Christ
fills that place. But whatever fills a place is there locally.
Therefore the body of Christ is in this sacrament locally.
Objection 3: Further, as stated above (Article 4), the body of
Christ is in this sacrament with its dimensive quantity, and with all
its accidents. But to be in a place is an accident of a body; hence
"where" is numbered among the nine kinds of accidents. Therefore
Christ's body is in this sacrament locally.
On the contrary, The place and the object placed must be equal, as
is clear from the Philosopher (Phys. iv). But the place, where
this sacrament is, is much less than the body of Christ. Therefore
Christ's body is not in this sacrament as in a place.
I answer that, As stated above (Article 1, ad 3; Article
3), Christ's body is in this sacrament not after the proper manner
of dimensive quantity, but rather after the manner of substance. But
every body occupying a place is in the place according to the manner of
dimensive quantity, namely, inasmuch as it is commensurate with the
place according to its dimensive quantity. Hence it remains that
Christ's body is not in this sacrament as in a place, but after the
manner of substance, that is to say, in that way in which substance is
contained by dimensions; because the substance of Christ's body
succeeds the substance of bread in this sacrament: hence as the
substance of bread was not locally under its dimensions, but after the
manner of substance, so neither is the substance of Christ's body.
Nevertheless the substance of Christ's body is not the subject of
those dimensions, as was the substance of the bread: and therefore the
substance of the bread was there locally by reason of its dimensions,
because it was compared with that place through the medium of its own
dimensions; but the substance of Christ's body is compared with that
place through the medium of foreign dimensions, so that, on the
contrary, the proper dimensions of Christ's body are compared with
that place through the medium of substance; which is contrary to the
notion of a located body.
Hence in no way is Christ's body locally in this sacrament.
Reply to Objection 1: Christ's body is not in this sacrament
definitively, because then it would be only on the particular altar
where this sacrament is performed: whereas it is in heaven under its
own species, and on many other altars under the sacramental species.
Likewise it is evident that it is not in this sacrament
circumscriptively, because it is not there according to the
commensuration of its own quantity, as stated above. But that it is
not outside the superficies of the sacrament, nor on any other part of
the altar, is due not to its being there definitively or
circumscriptively, but to its being there by consecration and
conversion of the bread and wine, as stated above (Article 1;
Question 15, Article 2, sqq.).
Reply to Objection 2: The place in which Christ's body is, is
not empty; nor yet is it properly filled with the substance of
Christ's body, which is not there locally, as stated above; but it
is filled with the sacramental species, which have to fill the place
either because of the nature of dimensions, or at least miraculously,
as they also subsist miraculously after the fashion of substance.
Reply to Objection 3: As stated above (Article 4), the
accidents of Christ's body are in this sacrament by real
concomitance. And therefore those accidents of Christ's body which
are intrinsic to it are in this sacrament. But to be in a place is an
accident when compared with the extrinsic container. And therefore it
is not necessary for Christ to be in this sacrament as in a place.
|
|