B. Scotus’ own Opinion

194. I say therefore that if one posits conversion in the matter at hand (which will be spoken about in d.11 nn.14-29) and if one posits that there is here some perceptible sign truly containing the body of Christ here present, which sensible sign may be called the sacrament - I say indeed that this is true, namely that the body of Christ is in fact here under the sacrament after the consecration or conversion. But that it could not be here without conversion or without being under the sacrament (meaning some determinate sensible sign or other), I do not see, as was argued in the preceding question [nn.113-114].

195. And perhaps those, who deny that God can make Christ’s body to be outside heaven otherwise than by conversion and under the sacrament, would not concede that God could do so save because they were constrained by the faith.

196. As to this way of existing without quantity and without dimensions or non-locally, I do not see how this same thing could be done in several places without it also being possible for it to be done in a natural way, since in the first way there are two miracles and in the second only one, namely the two of causing the presence here of the body of Christ and of separating it from its natural mode. Consequently, therefore, the body can be here in a natural mode just as also in the sacrament.