“Species specierum”: late scholastic eucharistic theology and the roots of posthumanism. Part 1: Body-soul dualism and the doctrine of the four humours

Canon 23.3 of the Council of Trent (1551) anathematises those who “deny, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each species, and under every part of each species, when separated”. As is often the case in liturgical history, this rule merely gave theological confirmation to a longstanding ritual practise, namely the communion of laymen with the Body of Christ alone. However, from the “species”, “parts”, “whole” and “living” Body of Christ, very strange theological arguments emerged. In the generations following Trent, theologians and philosophers took up rancorous debates over Christ's “parts”. Was His hair alive, His nails, and, in turn, were His humours - blood and bile - participants in divine or human will? In the first of two articles, we shall examine the background to this problem in the context of body/soul dualism. Instead of stretching far and wide in this vast subject, we shall dig deep and narrow with a very widespread medical doctrine that would seem to cross the barrier of body and soul. The history of theological and philosophical debates over the four humours shows us the extent to which what took place before Trent reflects philosophical views that differ radically from common Christian tradition. For the Church Fathers, the soul was the source of reason and, no less importantly, life. The soul was the principal agent in the person's relations with the world and not a passive object trapped in a body. We also illustrate how modern, Cartesian dualism is theologically unacceptable and leads to a range of (bio-)ethical and apologetic problems.