Chapter 64 — Solution of the difficulties as regards place

Now that we have made these observations regarding the mode of the change, the way is prepared to a certain extent for the solution of the other difficulties. We have already stated that when this sacrament is enacted, Christ’s body occupies a place in reference to the dimensions of the bread, which remain after the substance of the bread has been changed into Christ’s body. Hence whatever belongs to Christ must be in that place according to the exigencies of the aforesaid change.

We must observe, then, that in this sacrament something is present by virtue of the change, and something by natural concomitance. By virtue of the change there is that which is the natural term of the change in this sacrament. Thus Christ’s body is under the appearance of bread, into which the substance of the bread is changed, as indicated by the words of consecration: This is my body. Likewise, under the appearance of wine is Christ’s blood, as signified by the words: This is the chalice of my blood. By natural concomitance all other things are there, which are not the term of the change but are really united to that term. For it is plain that Christ’s divinity or his soul are not the term of the change; and yet both Christ’s soul and his divinity are present under the appearance of bread, because both are united to his body.

If, however, this sacrament had been celebrated during the three days succeeding Christ’s death, Christ’s soul would not have been present under the appearance of bread, since it was not then really united to his body. Neither would his blood have been present under the appearance of bread, nor his body under the appearance of wine, since they were both separated in death. Now, however, since Christ’s body in his natural form is not without his blood, both his body and his blood are present under either species. But under the appearance of bread, his body is present by virtue of the change, and his blood is there by natural concomitance. It is the converse under the species of wine.

Thus it is plain how to solve the difficulty about the inequality between Christ’s body and the place occupied by the bread. The substance of the bread is directly changed into the substance of Christ’s body, but the dimensions of Christ’s body are in the sacrament by natural concomitance, and not by virtue of the change, since the dimensions of the bread remain. Hence Christ’s body is related to that place not through its own dimensions, so that it need to be equal to the place, but through the dimensions of the bread which remain, and to which the place is equal.

Hence also it is clear how to reply to the objection about plurality of places. Christ’s body is in but one place as regards its own dimensions, but through the dimensions of the bread which has been changed into his body, it is present in as many places as this change is celebrated in. Indeed, this is not by being divided into parts, but by remaining entire in each place, since each consecrated host is changed into the whole body of Christ.