Prima Secundae
26. Summa I-II q.5 a.7-8: Are Good Works Needed for Beatitude, and Does Everyone Desire It? With the Logical Division of the Second Part
Class of 2011-05-26
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/026-summa-i-ii-q-5-a-7-8-are-good-works-needed-for-beatitude/

[0:00] Whether there are required some good what deeds, in order that man might achieve beatitude from God, gotta do something. Good job. Now a baby is always baptized, right? It's pretty quick, right?

[0:26] To the seventh, one proceeds thus. It seems that there is not required any doings of man, nor that he might achieve beatitude from God.

[0:40] For God, since he is a agent of infinite, unlimited power, he does not presuppose enacting some matter, right, or even some disposition of matter, right. But at once he is able to produce the whole.

[1:00] But the works of man, since they are not required for his beatitude as an efficient cause, because God alone gives this, right? They cannot be required for it except as what dispositions. Therefore, God does not presuppose, right? It's not doesn't preneed,

[1:25] you might say, right? Yeah, require. The only way of saying it. Dispositions, right, enacting, can confer right beatitude without the what preceding works. So you can take a dummy who's never studied philosophy and enlighten him more than me right now.

[1:56] Moreover, just as God is the author of beatitude with no intermediary, right, immediately, so also institutes what nature without any intermediate. But in the first institution of nature, he produces the creatures with no disposition preceding, right, or without any what action of the creature preceding, right.

[2:26] But at once he made each perfect in its species. So when he created your soul or my soul, right? That was it. Immediate to him. Therefore, it seems that he can confer beatitude in man without any preceding what operations. So why didn't he do this? He could have done it, right?

[2:55] Moreover, the apostle says in the Epistle to the Romans, chapter four. That the beatitude of man is that to which God confers, right? Justice without what? Works. Works. Therefore, there is not required some works of man for achieving what? The beatitude. Of course, in baptism, what happens in baptism? Proceeding works there. Yeah, yeah. Poof. That's why some they say they too delay their baptism, you know, and say, "Get my sins, you know, do my sins, and then get baptized at the end."

[3:39] I don't know if that whether that works, but sounds like a good idea anyway. Kind of dicey. Sometimes I kill them. He's maybe the exception that proves the rule. But against this is what is said in John chapter thirteen. If you know these things, you'll be blessed. If you also what? Do them. Do them, right? Therefore, by action one arrives at what? The beatitude. Now, kind of interesting the way Thomas orders the articles, right?

[4:17] Because this one comes after the two articles where the man, by his natural powers, can achieve it. No, can he be helped by some creature? Well, not in the sense of can't give it to him, right? Okay. Then. Then anything required? Then, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[4:37] Answer: It should be said that the rectitude of the will is required for beatitude, as has been said above. And the rectitude he said of the will, since this is nothing other than the what? Ode order of the will to the last end, which is thus required for the achievement of the last end, just as the suitable disposition of matter for the achievement of its what? Form.

[5:17] But from this is not shown, Thomas says, that some operation of man ought to precede his what? Beatitude. Because God is able at the same time to make the will to be rightly tending to the end and the end itself that follows upon this.

[5:42] Just as whenever he what at the same time simul, disposes matter and induces what the form, so what sense is necessary? But the order of divine wisdom, huh, requires a hoc fiat

[6:17] I would think maybe something other than this. Yeah, this not come about, right? That it should not be thus. Yeah. Now, quoting the philosopher again here, as is said in the second book about the universe, de caelo et mundo,

[6:34] of those things which are what born are born to have a perfect good, right? Some have this without motion, right? Some by one motion, and some by what many.

[6:54] So you speak of man and the angels, right, on their natural knowledge. The angel is born to have what his natural knowledge complete, right? And he's created. But we're to achieve it through what motion? Which motion is called discourse, right?

[7:15] Now, to have a perfect good without motion belongs to that which naturally has that. But now to have beatitude naturally is of God alone.

[7:33] God is beatitude itself. Whence of God alone is it proper, and that to beatitude, right? He is not moved through any preceding what operation.

[7:53] Since beatitude exceeds every created nature, can't belong to any created nature by nature, by its nature, that is to say, no pure creature suitably attains beatitude without the motion of some what operation by which it tends to that. But the angel, huh,

[8:19] But the angel, who is superior in the order of nature than man, achieves that, according to the order of divine wisdom, right, by one motion. That is what by the motion of one, one motion of meritorious operation, as has been what laid out in the first book, right? So you know Thomas says it's not in the moment of creation that they were blessed, right? In the moment of creation, their natural knowledge was perfect, right?

[8:58] And those who referred back to natural knowledge to the glory of God, then they received complete vision, right? Those who rested in their natural excellence, right, and didn't refer it back to God, were lost, right? So it's kind of frightening to us, who live in time and make mistakes, and sometimes you know repent of these mistakes and so on. To have it, you know, one one shot, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[9:34] But you had to realize how perfect the angel was in his knowledge, right? He was making a decision, you might say, a choice with complete knowledge, you might say, huh? And we don't. We make kind of half ignorant, half half knowing choices, right? You read about these, you know, accounts of people who had abortions and so on, you know, and a lot of these women they're they're they're you know kinda hard to believe ignorant as they are, but some of them are so ignorant, you know, as to what this is all about.

[10:28] Is God's mercy only towards us or not towards the angels? I mean, they just had one one chance. Yeah. There was not much mercy involved. Well, you got to realize how much more excellent than they were, though. We need mercy. Mercy

[10:48] because we're poor, because we're miserable. Mercy doesn't mean mercy; it has to do with misery. The angels weren't miserable when they were. Oh yeah. So. That shows off the mercy. of God Aristotle says in the third book about the soul there is that man is an animal that has a sense of time. And and we live in time, right? And our life, that is, to say, is measured by time, right?

[11:17] Angels' life isn't measured by time, right? So you know the people like Origen and so on who thought that the the fallen angels could. Repent. Yeah, they're kind of thinking of them as being like us in time, and they're not.

[11:39] It's hard for us to understand how how well formed they are, you know. Yeah. I told you how my son Marcus said, "Why couldn't we be born, you know, knowing all we need to know?" And I said, "Well, you you want to be born an angel, then, right? That's not the way man is, right? We're not born knowing all that we need to know, huh? That's why we need fathers and mothers and and teachers, right?

[12:07] Right. Our liturgy we often pray for our fathers, our brothers, our teachers. I think that's very significant. Our teachers are always included. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[12:22] Thomas, you know, he explains those scripture where it says all fatherhood is named, you know, from God, right? God's fatherhood, but all fatherhood in heaven and earth, right? He says, "What? What's this in heaven? Right? When so far as one angel illumines another angel, right? Then he's like his father, right?

[12:48] So. But men achieve beatitude by many movements of what operations, which are called merits. Once also, according to the philosopher, beatitude is reward of virtuous what operations.

[13:23] People must understand virtue is its own reward. That's kind of the sense, right? Huh? That virtue gives rise to what happiness, right? Thomas says often that virtue is the road to happiness, and vice is the road to misery. Read in daily newspaper, and you'll see. Yeah. That vice is the road to, just awful things that you read about, you know, every day in newspaper. You know, finally, you don't want to read about anymore, but you know what's going on all the time.

[13:56] You know, people are suffering terribly, right, because of their vice. Okay. Reply to the first objection. To the first, therefore, it should be said that the operation of man is not required for the achievement of beatitude on account of the insufficiency of the divine power making us blessed. Huh?

[14:41] But that there might be what preserved order in things. Huh? Sapientis est ordinari, right? Belongs to the wise to order. I was reading this chapter there, you know, whether God punishes us, right? In the

[15:06] volume of Summa Contra Gentiles, one of the arguments of course, is that God leaves nothing out of order, and so when you step out of order, right, He's got to balance things again, right?

[15:24] See, why does He have to punish us? You know, one reason is He doesn't leave anything disordered. Belongs to the wise to order things, huh?

[15:40] And you know, even the wisest of human laws can't, you know, order all things and correct all the disorder in society, right? You don't know inside people's souls very well, of course, but God doesn't leave anything disordered. right? Of course, Thomas gives a simple example there. You know the one animal eating the other animal, right? He brings some good out of the evil of the animal. one animal being destroyed.

[16:07] The other animal has what a meal, right? So he balances things that way, right? It's horrible things there in Dante. There, you know that. Oh yeah. The the the devils are chewing up the damned. So that's big. It's kind of

[16:41] okay. To the second, it should be said that the first creatures, at once God what produced perfect, right? Huh. Without any what disposition or operation of the creature preceding, because thus he instituted the first individuals of the different species, that through them nature would be propagated to those who come after. And likewise, because through Christ, who is both God and man, beatitude was going to be what drive to others, according to that of the apostle in the Epistle to Hebrews chapter two, that he brought many sons into glory, right?

[17:30] At once from the beginning of his conception, huh? Without any what meritorious operation preceding, his soul was blessed. Huh? That's very interesting reason he's giving there, right?

[17:45] That shows he can do that without what any preceding things, huh? In other words, Christ did not merit his beatitude, right? That he merited except it's on the part of his body, right? But not on the part of his soul, huh? He enjoyed the beatific vision from the moment of his what incarnation.

[18:07] But this is singular in him, right? Huh? Although, huh? To baptize boys, huh? The what? There comes what the merit of Christ to their achieving beatitude, although they are lacking in what. Their own merits. Yeah, How can this be? In that through baptism they are made perfect members of what Christ.

[18:38] That's interesting. Thomas's prayer before communion, right? Huh? He wants to he's praying to God the Father, right? Huh? That he might so receive the body that Christ took from the Blessed Virgin, right? That he might be made what a member of his mystical body, huh?

[18:58] But this is an even better way, quicker way, but. Yeah. It's kind of interesting those two, you know, kind of principal sacraments, baptism and the Eucharist, right? And both one is what made a member of Christ, huh? I suppose those sacraments to some extent do, you know, but those two seem to have this, like this right here, he's talking about, right? And then Deacon Thomas' prayer there for the Eucharist.

[19:32] Now, to the third, it should be said that the apostle speaks there of the beatitude of hope, right? Which is had through what? Justifying grace, which is not given on account of what? Preceding works, huh? But does not have the notion of the end of motion as beatitude, but's more the beginning of motion by which one tends to what? Beatitude,

[20:04] In the other, article, it says he gives grace and glory. Take a little break here before we do the last article. That's kind of funny. This comes at the end here, right? Whether every man desires what beatitude, huh?

[20:21] To the eighth one goes forward. Thus, it seems that not all desire beatitude, huh? For no one is able to desire what he doesn't know, since the good grasp or known is the object of desire, as is said in the third book about the soul. But many do not know what beatitude is, because, as Augustine says in the thirteenth book about the Trinity, it is clear from this that some place beatitude in the pleasure of the body, right?

[21:00] Some in the virtue of the soul, some in other things. Therefore, not all are what not all desire beatitude, huh? Some in money. That's really another case. They were the paper where the person who won one of these million dollar things, you know, this other woman had the same name as the person, right? Oh no! So people are calling her, you're trying to sell her something, or asking for money from her, because she has the same name.

[21:36] So if you win these things, you're probably going to be hounded to death. Yeah. Yeah. Got to disconnect your phone and and put guards up around the house and. Yeah.

[21:49] Happiness. Moreover, the essence of beatitude is the vision of the divine essence, the divine substance, the divine nature. But some think this to be impossible—that God be seen through His essence by man. Whence they don't what desire this, huh? Therefore, not all men desire beatitude, huh?

[22:21] Moreover, Augustine says in the third thirteenth book about the Trinity that the blessed man is the one who has everything that he wishes and wishes nothing bad. But not all what wish this, huh? Because some badly wish some things, huh? And nevertheless, they will those things to what to will themselves, huh? And they will themselves to will those things. Therefore, not all wish beatitude.

[23:02] But against this is what Augustine says in the thirteenth book about the Trinity. See what is that? Seeing what is that? What is that? In the said context mime or a farce or an actor mime or a farce or an actor. He says that. yeah. Okay. He says this in jest.

[23:35] All wish to be what blessed, huh? None wish to be what. Miserable. Yeah. No one does not know in his what will. Will. Not fail to acknowledge in his will. Yeah. Yeah, for everyone wishes to be what blessed, huh? Thomas is going to answer this by a simple distinction, right? Answered should be said that beatitude can be what considered in two ways. In one way, according to the common notion of beatitude, and thus is necessary that every man what will beatitude, huh?

[24:22] For the definition or the notion of beatitude, common notion, is that it be a perfect good, huh? A good that is what lacking in nothing, huh? Since, however, the good is the object of the will, the perfect good is of something that wholly satisfies his will. Whence to desire beatitude is nothing other than to desire that his will be satiated, satisfied, huh? Which everyone wishes, right?

[25:03] In another way, we are able to speak about beatitude according to its what particular or special definition. As regards that in which beatitude consists, right? I remember how Thomas already spoke about beatitude and then what did it consist, right? You know, but kind of a general notion and then this more precise notion. Um, and in this way he says not all know beatitude, because they do not know that to which the common notion of beatitude what belongs.

[25:41] And consequently, as regards this, not all what. Yeah. Okay. And so Romeo thinks that Juliet is happiness, right? Haven't learned. I think he's mistaken. Haven't learned.

[26:03] You know what? What is uh? Fact we say at the end of Vanity Fair, the novel, you know, for who in this life ever gets what he wants? For having gotten it, is what satisfied, right? See, a school says something on that, you know, where you keep on seeing this as being your happiness, you know. And for a little kid, it's candy as happiness, right? Having all the candy you want, right?

[26:26] That makes you happy, right? After a while, you say, "Well, no, no, it doesn't make me happy. I like candy still, but it didn't really bring me happiness, candy, you know." Then you think it's a woman later on, you know, and you know, but no, money, money, yeah, yeah, yeah. But none of these things satisfy, right? Yeah.

[26:53] Once Thomas says is clear the response to the first one, right? Because they don't know in what happiness really consists, but they want to be happy, right? Just like at the beginning of the commentary of the Psalms, where he says, "One thing we have in common: everybody wants to be happy, but we differ in the road we take to happiness, and then the end of that road."

[27:17] Yeah. Because not everybody is happy. Now, to the second, those who say that the vision of God is not possible. To second, it should be said that since the will follows upon the grasping of the understanding or of the reason, just as it can happen that something is the what same secundum rem in reality, which nevertheless is diverse according to the what consideration of reason.

[27:57] So it happens that something is the same secundum rem in the thing, and nevertheless, in one way is what desired, another way is not desired. This calls upon the fact that the mind can know something in a confused way and know it what distinctly, right? So, knowing what beatitude is in a confused way, they all want it, right? But they don't know distinctly what it consists, and in that way, they don't want what true beatitude is.

[28:30] A lot of these discussions, you know, you get people, you know, where the time with the young people, and some of them are dissatisfied with life because they realize something more, and and the idea of what happiness is that they got from their parents, they realize that's not really going to satisfy them, you know. They're kind of searching for this perfect good, huh? I know as a child, I had that idea.

[28:52] There must be something that when you have it, you don't want anything else. I don't know where I got that idea, but I just didn't have that idea, you know. But I didn't know what it was, you know. Okay.

[29:06] So, because the will follows upon the reason, and the reason can know something what in an indistinct way, right, or know it what distinctly.

[29:21] Stuck these guys when I get married, right? Became a very confused person to marry. Yeah, but then they finally see this one woman. They say, "Now I know this is the one." So I'm looking for all my life. They knew they confused what they're looking for, right? But not until they met Junior or wherever your name is. Then they realized this is the one for me.

[29:48] So beatitude is can be considered under the thought of a what final and perfect good, right? Which is the common what thought of Beatitude, huh? and thus naturally and from necessity, right? The will what tends towards that, right? It can also be considered according to what special considerations, either on the side of the what operation itself, or on the side of the operating power, on the side of the what object, and thus, of necessity, the will does not what tend to it.

[30:33] Everyone wanted to be a politician, right? You know, the ruler, you know. Just as well. I don't think I would have found happiness there. Nope. I didn't know what happiness was. I remember my brother had the basic books of Aristotle, and he opened the book, and the only book that interests me at first was a book called *The Politics*. How do I milk this for all its worth?

[31:16] So, when Thomas examines what the chief good of man is, he says it's got to be an operation; it's not just an ability, right? It's got to be an operation of our highest power. It's got to be in regard to the highest object too, right? So gradually thinks out what our beatitude is, and then you want that to be the beatitude, right?

[31:42] Now, the third should be said that that definition of beatitude that some lay down—that the blessed man is the one who has everything that he wants—and what

[31:56] to whom all things desired succeed, right, or come to him—in some way understood is good and sufficient. In another way, it is what imperfect, imperfect, huh? For if we understand it simply about all things which a man wishes by his natural desire, thus it is true, right, that the man who has everything that he wants naturally, right, is blessed, right, huh? For nothing satisfies the natural desire of man except the perfect good which is beatitude.

[32:33] If, however, it be understood about those things which man wishes according to the apprehension of reason, thus to have some things which man wishes does not pertain to beatitude, but more to what misery, right? In so far as having these things impede man, lest he have whatever things he naturally what wants, huh?

[33:00] Just as reason sometimes takes as true what impedes one from a knowledge of truth, huh? And according to this consideration, Augustine adds that to the perfection of beatitude, that he wishes nothing bad. If everything you want, and you wish nothing bad, so that comes up in in prayer, right? Because you pray for the things you want, right? Well, sometimes you want something that's bad for you. This guy going to hear this prayer?

[33:30] He does if you're punished enough. Although the first suffices if it be rightly understood, that he is blessed who has everything that he wishes. So Thomas sometimes argues from this definition of Augustine, right, to what true beatitude is, huh? But just by itself, it's still a common notion, right? So if you say I want everything I want, what's obvious, isn't it, right? And therefore I want the attitude, right?

[34:02] I can't help but want it. I can't help but want everything I want. Can you? And if I have everything I want, then I'm happy, right?

[34:18] Now one of those advertisements I saw years ago on TV there for some medicine or some something like that, and the guy's woman is saying, you know, and would you like your health? You pretty much got it, got everything.

[34:32] Whereas St. talks about that in the first book of the Nicomachean Ethics, you know, to man who's sick, health seems to be what happiness. To man who's poor, money seems to be what happiness, right?

[34:47] And when everything there, particularly lacking, they find that to be happiness, right? Now both the people really more happy. I don't know if they are.

[35:04] If they're holy, they are. Other than that, I don't know. Today was a feast of Saint Philip Neri. In the little book there, they had the quotes from Philip Neri. You know, he doesn't want any sad saints in his order. You know, any sad people. Says it's easier to perfect someone who's joyful, he says, than who's sad. Interesting. That's right. Doesn't St. Teresa say that a sad saint is a sorry saint?

[35:35] Yeah. Something like that. God loves a cheerful giver, right? You have everything and you're joyful about it, huh? Somewhere in there, I'm trying to find it real fast. Where? I probably won't find it fast.

[35:56] Is it the end of chapter eight in Romans? I can't find it now. But. Where he talks about, he says the things that I want, I don't do, and so forth. Somewhere in there, I can't find it right now. But he makes this point. St. Thomas makes the point that,

[36:21] in terms of desiring the good in a general way, everybody wants it. But when you find out particulars, maybe someone because he says there are two ways to understand what he says here. One is in terms of a just man, and one's in terms of a sinner. But even the sinner, in general, wants what's good. Everybody, everybody wants world peace. Everybody wants world peace. Oh, we should all just get along.

[36:46] Yeah, of course, sure. But when it comes down to particulars, then some want it, some don't want it, and that's what he comments on that. I can't find the exact passage now, but

[36:58] okay. Now we come to the end here of the fifth question here. Let's go back to this distinction that I made before and say,

[37:10] how would you divide the second part of the Summa? Now, knowledgeable people would say there are what two ways of dividing something, right? Some might say, okay, we can divide the second part of the Summa into what's called the prima secundae, which is that volume there, and then I have another volume called the secunda secundae, which is much thicker, right? This one. Okay,

[37:57] the secunda secundae. Okay, I'm pretty sure we'd say that's the division of the second part of Summa, right? But what distinction is being overlooked here? The logical division. Yeah. What what distinction or division is this? Editorial. division. Yeah, this is what I call the editorial or

[38:29] reference division. Okay. So if you want to find the text in the second part, because it was in the prima pars, I mean secundae, or the secundae secundae, right? And then once you get the prima secundae, the secundae secundae, is it in question one or what question is it, right? And what article, right? Okay.

[38:55] But now the other division we call the logical. Or understandable. Okay. And that's usually in two or three, as we say, right? But now, what is the actual logical or understandable division of the second part?

[39:27] Two, two, two parts. So we just finished the first part. Yeah. Yeah. Now, the first part, which is questions one through five, questions one through five of the Prima Secundae, right?

[39:55] And that's divided against the rest of the Prima Secundae right? Yes And the Secunda secundae, right? Okay. That's the logical, understandable division, right? Now, Thomas at the beginning of the first question, there, right?

[40:27] If you look at the Summa, question one, article one, right? Ah, he says we are first to consider or occurs to be considered about the last end of human life, right? And then about those things to which man is able to what arrive at this end, or also that he deviates on this end, right? Do you have that in the question one, article one, the premium though before that, right?

[41:09] Okay. Now that that's a logical or understandable division, right? You're going to talk about the last end of man, right? And then how you get there or don't get there, right? That makes sense, right? Okay. Now,

[41:29] the first of those two parts is what we just finished going through, questions one through five, right? Now at the beginning of question six, you have another

[41:44] premium, we call. Okay. And so now he's going to subdivide the second part, right? So he says at the beginning of question six, there before he gets into article one, because therefore to beatitude through some acts is necessary to arrive, right? And this was touched upon in question five, article seven, huh? It's necessary, consequently, to consider about what human acts, right? That we might know by which acts one arrives at beatitude, or the road to beatitude is impeded, right?

[42:24] Okay. Now this is the beginning of talking about the second part here, right? Huh? But because operations and acts are about what singular things, therefore every operative science, huh? Is what perfected perfected in the consideration of particulars, right? The moral, what therefore consideration which is of human acts, first ought to be considered in universale in general, right? Secondly, in particular, and that's the distinction now between the what rest of what Prima secundae in the rest of.

[43:14] The prima secundae, right? He's going to talk about the human acts by which you arrive at your end. or don't, right? In universale, in general, right? And then in the secunda secundae, which is longer than the whole prima prima secundae, he's going to deal with this in what In particular, right? So this is the logical or understandable division, right? What does prima secundae secunda secundae tell you about the matter?

[43:48] What understanding does it give you, right? Moral matter is divided into prima secundae secunda secundae, right? The first and the second, and the second and the second. That's very that that really enlightens your mind, doesn't it? No. Moral matter is divided into a consideration of the end of man, and then how you get there and don't get there. Now that's understandable, isn't it? Right. Okay.

[44:16] Where you want to go and how you get there. See, that enlightens your mind, huh? So that's why you need these two divisions, then. Okay. What's the editorial and reference division of the Gospel of Matthew? Editorial. Or reference division, yeah. If I wanted to refer you to something in the Gospel of Saint Matthew, right? Sure. What would I give you? Going to refer you to a particular, find something.

[44:52] Okay. The numbers, the chapter, and the verse, right? Yeah. So that's the reference division, right? There are twenty-eight chapters in in Matthew, right? And each chapter divided to verses, right? Now, apparently, that division was made in the Middle Ages, right? University of Paris, because they wanted to have a way of, you know, I wanted to call your attention to this, and you wanted to call your attention to this, and I this one through by point.

[45:18] We got a common way that we can, you know, refer, right? Because everybody had their own way, you know. Okay. But that's what does twenty-eight chapters tell you about the Gospel of Matthew? Nothing. You don't understand anything in these twenty-eight chapters, but it's useful for referring to a particular passage, right? Okay. Now, if you look at Thomas's commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, right? He says that among the four Gospels, Matthew especially emphasizes the human nature of Christ.

[45:53] That's why he's represented by the man, right, in the four animals, huh? And he says, now, as a man, he came into this world, right? And he proceeded through this world, sermonizing, right, telling parables and giving sermons and so on. And healing people, and then he went out of this world, right, by his death and resurrection, huh? So the Gospel of Matthew is divided into three parts.

[46:24] His first few chapters deal with what he's coming into the world, right, and then the second thing is proceeding through the world, and then finally his what leaving the world, right. That makes some sense, right? Okay, and it's division into three, right? Well, that's what we call the the logical or understandable division, right? Okay, and then you know his subdivisions, right? Coming the world, dealing with his his birth, right, of the Blessed Virgin, and then the manifestation of his birth, you know, when the the Magi and so on, so on, right?

[47:02] Which was subdivided, right? So this is important thing to realize that we need this division here in order to refer to things, right? And you know, I can marry it in addition here. It's very nice. You often, you know, refer to the other passages, you know, where the things talked about. So that's a very useful thing, right? But as far as understanding is concerned, you have to have the second what division, right?

[47:30] So it's marvelously arranged, huh? For us to arrive at the division into the first part, right? The division of the what that's understandable or logical, right? I mean, if we had not gotten to the end of question five, we would have been would have been in suspense for the rest of the summer if the how it doesn't all stick.

[47:52] Okay, you see the importance of that, right? I'm surprised I never heard people, you know, especially make that distinction or point out, but it's kind of obvious when you stop and think about it. But you don't really, for the most part, you know, do that. And most people only have the editorial division in mind, right?

[48:12] In fact, we probably don't even know that there's 28 chapters in Matthew, but that's that's kind of arbitrary, right? How many chapters you have and so on, right? And

[48:24] so, is Yavagona teaching more or not, or silenced? We'll have to we'll have to consult Yavagona and find out. Yeah, now as I say, next next Thursday I'm going. We're going away to California for this wedding, so. Oh. James is getting married there to Lisa. Yeah. Yeah. So did he meet her at school? Yeah. Did they both go to TAC? Yeah, yeah, that's what's going on. Dangerous.

[48:59] Dangerous going to school there, and so. But then I'll be back after that. Won't be out there. Won't be out there that long. Oh wow.