An introduction to God's omnipresence
through the "four ways" of Francis de Mayronnes
Jeffrey C. Witt (Loyola University Maryland)
https://jeffreycwitt.com | jcwitt@loyola.edu
@jeffreycwitt
June 9, 2022, Olomouc
# The Four Ways
* Via immensitatis
* Via causalitatis
* Via immutabilitatis
* Via coexistentiae
"For some say that, just as God is intensively infinite, so he is extensively infinite, not that he has part outside part, but that he is able to coexist in infinite places."
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e287@52-74
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e287/cod-FdM888/transcription@52-74)
"Alexander of Hales, St. Albert the Great, Odo Rigald, and St. Bonaventure are allied in teaching that God is omnipresent **not only** because of His operation in all things but also because of his infinite perfection, which reasons, however, they never intended to be mutually exclusive."
---
Fuerst, *An Historical Study*, p. 204.
"It is able to be said that though God has infinite intensity, nevertheless he does not have extensive infinitude or infinite magnitude, which are imagined by the preceding arguments, therefore they do not conclude."
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e341@76-99
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e341/cod-FdM888/transcription@76-99)
"the second way for some people is the way of causality. For it is necessary for the agent to be present and near to the patient, but God acts everywhere, therefore etc."
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e365@1-20
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e365/cod-FdM888/transcription@1-20)
"since the mover is in the moved it is manifest that the mover and moved will be in it [the moved object] at the same time"
---
Thomas Aquinas, Scriptum, Liber I, Liber I, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Articulus 1, ta-l1d37q1-d1e171
(http://scta.info/resource/ta-l1d37q1-Qd1e171/critical/transcription)
"But this *ratio* does not demonstrate, because while perhaps this is believed, namely that God acts immediately in the action of a natural agent, to some this does not seem to be true"
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e372@1-23
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e372/cod-FdM888/transcription@1-23)
"it is not necessary that any agent be locally present to the patient"
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e379@3-9
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e379/cod-FdM888/transcription@3-9)
"'where' (*ubi*) indicates a relation of something placed ("locatus" or "located") to a place (locus), and this is a relation that God does not have."
On the other hand, he also says that:
"'place' (*locus* or 'location') has a relation of "presence" (*praesentialitas*) to what 'is placed' (*locatus* or 'placed')"
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e495@35-53
http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e495@35-53
"therefore God would be said to be transferred from place to place through a new relation of presence in this place in which God previously was not, and from this God would be said to be in something in which he previously was not, just as it said above about a new creation which is in the creature, and without anything new in God"
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e495@54-104
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e495/cod-FdM888/transcription@54-104)
"if God created a star, but destroyed the heavens, he would still be able to move it circularly. But he wouldn't be able to do this unless it had some relation to something. But since he has destroyed the heavens, it must retain some relation to God himself (ipsum)."
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e595
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e595/cod-FdM888/transcription)
"If God were to destroy the entire universe, with the exception of the "poles", then he would be able to join these poles together which would require perpendicular motion. But this perpendicular motion would not be possible without a relation of presence to a first [unmoving thing]."
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e608
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e608/cod-FdM888/transcription)
"God is able to move everything at the same time. But everything has to move in relation to something else, and in this case, they cannot be related to each other [since everything else is already moving]. Therefore, they must be moved in relation to God"
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e619
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e619/cod-FdM888/transcription)
"all things which are moved have a relation to something immobile. But this can only be God"
---
Francis of Meyronnes, Commentarius in libros Sententiarum, Liber 1, Distinctio 37, Quaestio 1, Paragraph FrMS88-e84800-d1e629
(http://scta.info/resource/FrMS88-e84800-d1e629/cod-FdM888/transcription)