Prima Secundae
117. Power and Glory in Psalm 62; the Senses of 'To Have' and the Ten Categories
Class of 2013-04-18
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/117-power-and-glory-in-psalm-62-the-senses-of-to-have-and-the/

[0:00] In the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the, Holy Spirit, Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. Deo gratias. God, our enlightenment; guardian angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, order and illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor, and help us to understand all that you've written. Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the, Holy Spirit, Amen.

[0:35] I was thinking about Psalm 62. Do you happen to know that Psalm? The correct number, of course. Correct number. Begins, O God, you are my God whom I seek. For you, my flesh pines; my soul thirsts. Like the earth parts, the, life is without water. As if I gaze toward you, the sanctuary, to see your power and your glory. We should try to understand why does it say to see your power?

[1:00] power and glory, right? And the way I used to kind of interpret it, which I think makes some sense. No, well, this is referring to the kingdom of God, right? The power and the glory. No. But then I was thinking of another sense of the letter, maybe even better than that. And if you look back upon the way the prayer goes, O God, you are my God whom I seek.

[1:23] For you, my flesh pines. That's my flesh, right? And my soul thirsts, right? Both the body and the soul, right? Huh? And then the other one said, "To see your power and your glory," right? Well, then I was recalling the conversation between

[1:40] Christ and the Sadducees, who didn't believe in the resurrection, and they got this cock and bull story about the the wife with the seven husbands, right? Huh? And trying to think ridiculous and so on. But when Christ is saying later on, he's used the word in Greek, you know, "planaste, right? You err, right? You are mistaken, right? But then he kind of gives the reason why they're mistaken, right?

[2:03] Knowing neither the what, scriptures nor the power of God, right? Huh? Well, of course, that's the way the Greeks had difficulty with the teaching about resurrection, right? I mean, that's ridiculous, right? Huh? Because they don't know what the scriptures or the what power of God, right? Now, if you could take then the power as referring back to my flesh, right, where you're looking for the resurrection, right, and the and the immortalizing of your body, right, huh?

[2:37] And then the glory to what the soul, right? Now at the end, you probably know Thomas' prayer there, the Adorote Devote, right? Well, the last quatrain, right? Huh? Jezu, come, velatum, nunc, spisio, oro, fiat ilud, quatum, sisio, right? It's that same word that you have in the song, right? Sisio, right? And then they might become what. Glory, blessed in your glory. Yeah. So you could take the glory, referring back to the soul, which is thirsting for God, right, and the flesh, which is pining for the power of God to be shown in the resurrection of the body and the mortal body taking on immortality, right?

[3:20] That's kind of beautiful, you know. I think interesting. You are interested in my first one. Well, maybe power and glory signifies the kingdom of God. Well, I suppose that's correct too, right? But here you can kind of in the same order, right? The flesh is mentioned before the soul, and the power before the glory, right? And the power corresponds to the the bodies, you know, worn out, you know, and going to die and so on, right?

[3:45] And it's what looking for that resurrection and it's taking on immortality, right? And the soul seeking the glory, right, which is the the beatific vision, right? And then I think of the other psalm there, where the Lord is King in splendor robed, robed as Lord and girded about with strength. We get two things, right? Splendor, which is the light, right? We can also refer to the second person of the Trinity, but He's the light, and then power, right?

[4:15] The same two things, right? You are seeking those two things in there. There is something for your body, mainly there is something for your soul in the kingdom, right? Huh? The vision of God as He is, but there is something for your body, which is what the resurrection of it, and it's taking on immortality and all the other gifts, you know, eternity and so on. That fits into that explanation that in the psalm, right, where the king is.

[4:44] you know, there's many qualities. It doesn't say anything about love there, but it it speaks of what the Lord is King in splendor robed, robed as Lord and girded about with strength. We use that in our liturgy every day. Yeah, yeah, and that's that's of course a metaphor, right? As Thomas points out, and he's talking about the incarnation, huh?

[5:07] Because some people thought he took God, the second person, took on what human flesh, kind of like a like we take on our clothing, right? Huh? And that's Thomas. There are some some texts in Scripture that speak that way, but Thomas is just speaking metaphorically, right? And Shakespeare says, "I'm going to shuffle off this mortal coil," right? Which is this body and its troubles.

[5:32] Okay, just a little side on the wonderful word "have," right? And Aristotle in the fifth book of Wisdom, huh? When he takes up the word to have, and gives us a number of meanings, but then he says that it seems to have as many meanings as the word "in." Right. Now these are not all the meanings of the word "in. But they are, but kind of the chief meanings and the central meanings, right?

[6:02] But there are other meanings to attach to these, like to be in time, right? Okay. Now, you can turn these around, right? If there is wine, let's say, in the bottle, right? Then the bottle has what wine in it, right? So, here's the word "has," right? Yes, right? If the part is in the whole, then the whole has this part, right? If the genus is in the species, then the species has a what genus, right?

[6:37] And the same thing can be said about the difference, right? And the species has the genus and differences, right? And the differences are in the species, right? And so, but the species has them, right? And here are the other words, right, If the species, in other words, in the genus. the genus has species, and that's one of those funny words that can be singed or plural, right?

[7:03] So, the genus has species, meaning he has many species, right? Okay. Now, why do these two meanings come first? What's something being actually in something? Why, when the species in the genus in the is actually in there?

[7:28] No. No. If dog was actually an animal, we'd say that was an animal. We'd be saying it got is a dog, right? But it's in there in what ability? And likewise, form is originally in the matter in ability, right? So, was was Michelangelo right when he said the statue is already in the marble. In ability. Yeah, but not an act, right? So, act is more known than ability, right?

[7:57] And the whole in the parts is a bit like form in matter. huh? Aristotle points out in the second book of the physics there. And this is a different kind of ability, right? This is the active ability, right? I got you in my power.

[8:24] I have you now. I have you now. What's that saying in the web? In the power of the agent, right? Okay. And then when you say, "I left my heart in San Francisco," right? Love is said to be in the thing what loved, huh? Okay. And so our Lord said, "You know, let your treasure, you know, in heaven's son." And where your treasure is, there your heart should be, right?

[8:56] If you think your treasure in the local bank, that's where your heart is in the local bank, right? But if you think your treasure in heaven, your only treasure down here. Well, then your heart's going to be there, right? Okay. Now, it may sound strange, but if someone loves me, could I be said to have their love? Have their love, have their heart in a way, right?

[9:20] So have has as many senses here, right? Okay. Now, when Thomas distinguishes Aristotle distinguishes the eight senses of in in the fourth book of Natural Hearing, the so-called Physics, right? But he doesn't order them like he does in the fifth book of Wisdom. So Thomas is going to order them, and we'll order them imitating Aristotle when he's taught us in the fifth book. So he orders them.

[9:46] This is the order that Thomas gives them. He's the only guy who can do it, I think. but then he says Aristotle hasn't put to be in time, right? Well, he says that's reduced to being in place. It's not the same sense, but time like place is a measure, extrinsic measure, right? So there are other senses, but they're what reduced to these, right? Differences in species reduced to this, right?

[10:16] Okay. So it's good what C. S. Lewis says, right? C. S. Lewis criticizes the way of speaking. You know, I've got some time, right? You shouldn't say that. Time's got two. You're in time, right? And you have to obey, you know, in a sense. Because you know you're always thinking of power, time, right? You're in time, right? I've got to go now, you know. You don't have time, right?

[10:40] Time's got you, right? It's commanding you to go now to your next place, right? So I just go through the imitation of, I mean, to the distinction of eight senses of air, corresponding to, or nine senses here to eight senses of air, right? To begin to see how equivocal by reason, right, is the word, but to have, right? Now, thank goodness, Thomason's not going to go through all these senses, right?

[11:14] It's an extremely involved thing, right? Okay. And there are other senses, right? He's concerned with the ones that I use to name what categories, right? Huh? And

[11:37] might be used in some species of some category, right? Okay. So let's look back here upon this now. To the first, then one goes forward. Thus, it seems that habitus is not a what quality, right?

[12:02] Now, quality is one of the ten what highest genera, right? Okay. So Porphyry, after they define genus and what species, right? Then you can see thereon it's possible for the same thing to be both a genus and a what species, but a species with respect to what is above it, more universal, and a genus with respect to what is below it, right? Okay.

[12:42] So if odd number, let us say, is a what species of number, right? But under odd number, there's three and five and seven, right? Huh? So odd number is both a genus and a species, right? Just like I'm both a father and a what son, but not in comparison to the same person, right? But then we can go on and say now, if the same man could be both a father and son, is every man both a father and a son?

[13:16] There are Some sons who are not fathers, right? And if there's a guy named Adam, right? He'd be a father, but not a what? Son, right?

[13:33] In the same way, if you're talking about cause and effect, can the same thing be both a cause and effect, but not of the same thing, right? And then you raise the question, but is every cause an effect? The answer to that is no, right? Okay. So, does every is every genus a what? Species? Does it have a genus above it?

[14:04] Well, how do you know that? I don't. You don't have any mind, you know. On top of every thought, you know, that more universal thought it goes up, you know, forever up into the heavens, right? Somewhere, you know. How do you know that there is a genus which is not a species, which would be called also a highest genus, right? You could ask the first question: Is there a species that is not a what?

[14:31] Genus, right? But let's just stick with the other question here. Is there a genus that is not a what? Species, huh? How do you know that, right?

[14:46] I read Aristotle. I didn't know there are always crazy species. I mean, you know, like the numbers, right? You know, a number can be half and what? Double, right? Like four is double of two, and it's half of eight, right? And eight is double four, but half is sixteen. But is there a number which is double but not half of anything? Like nine or something.

[15:27] I don't think so. No, numbers go on forever, don't they? As continuous as divisible forever, right? I can prove that too, but I'm not going to bother to prove it right now. Um, so there are series where it goes on forever, right? Now there's a half which is not what double of anything. Like one is half of two, and three is half of six, but is it double of anything three?

[15:58] No. But there's nothing that is what double but not half. So how do you know there's a genus which is not a species, huh?

[16:16] How you know there's a father, there's not a son, right? It's a little hard to know without the the Bible, right? Yeah. Is it one of those? I'm I'm just sort of guessing. It's one of those. It can't go on forever because you'd never have a thought. to. You'd have to have infinite thoughts to think about anything, right?

[16:39] Yeah. But notice, huh? If every genus had a genus above it, right? If every genus was a species of something above it, you'd never come to a most universal word, would you?

[17:00] As a matter of fact, you do come to a most universal word, like the word "being," right? Is anything that is that isn't a being?

[17:13] Is there? See, or is there something that is not something? So, being or something is most what? Universal, right? And it wouldn't be any most universal name, right? And there wouldn't be a genus, Yeah, yeah. Because there always be more universal one, right? Okay.

[17:40] But now the next question is: Is this most universal name, like being or something, which is equally universal, is that one genus of everything, right? Say. Well, we should go back to the definition of what genus, right? And genus is a name said with one meaning of many things other than kind, signifying what it is. So take that whole thing, right? So, if you take that whole thing, right?

[18:24] Genus is a name said with one meaning of many things. When I say many things. I'm using the word "many" as opposed to what? One. Not many as opposed to few, right? Yeah. So it may have as few as two, right? That's still many.

[18:57] Of many things, other in kind, huh? Or other in species, if you want to speak Latin. Signifying. What it is. So animal, for example, is said of dog and cat and horse, right? With one meaning in mind, right? A living body that has sense. And there are many things there: cat, dog, and horse, and so on. And there are other in kind, right? And signifies what they are, right?

[19:42] Okay. What is a dog? It's an animal. Doesn't signify completely or distinctly what it is, right? But in general, it states what a dog is, and what a cat is, what a horse is, right? Or you could say that you know, take example from our friend Euclid there, my teacher. Quadrilateral is said of what? Square and oblong and rhombus and rhomboid and trapezium. It's one word said with one meaning, right?

[20:12] Four-sided, delineal figure. Many things, other in kind, right? Signifying what is it? What is a square? It's a quadrilateral. What is an oblong? What is a rhombus? Quadrilateral. It's a square. Think it's a quadrilateral and so on. So although there is a most universal name, right, like being or something, right, It's just said of everything, It's that one genus said of all things, right? We've got one name here, right, said of many many things, right, other in kind, and you might say, touchy, it signifies what it is, but is it said with one meaning?

[21:07] Well, when did I come to be? When I learned geometry? So. Taken to be then? I'm going to get married, and I came to be. In some way. Yeah. So it's not univocal. But when I was generated by my parents, right, then I came to be. Then I came to be. Without wealth. Yeah, yeah, Yeah. So it's not univocal. Yeah. Is my nose and my ear the same thing?

[21:42] They're both things. Yeah, two things, right? Huh? But is my nose and the shape of my nose two things? Like my nose and my ear are two things? No. Or is a man and a dog two things? Yeah. Is a man and the shape of the man two things? Is it? So you might hesitate to say, right? Because the man and his shape are not two things in the way the man and the dog are two things, right?

[22:09] Okay. And so the man and the dog are two things in the sense of a substance, right? Huh? Mm-hmm. But the man and the shape are two things in the sense of a substance and an accident, right? Okay. So

[22:26] this is the way we now come to the conclusion that there is highest, there's a highest genus or highest genus, right? Because there are most universal names. But then we discover that the most universal names are not necessarily one meaning. Then realize that there's going to be more than one highest what genus, right? Okay. Now, to Aristotle belongs the glory, right? Now the next step, which is to discover, right, what those many highest genera are,

[23:00] and he distinguishes. In the book called Categories, ten highest what? genera, right? And in the book on places, there kind of badly transliterated as the topics, right? He distinguishes those same ten, right? And in the same order, right?

[23:24] Now, how the hell did he do that? Because who can understand a division into ten? The human mind simply breaks down, right? Okay. What's wrong with metaphysics? I mean, God gave us ten commandments, but you know they had to put them on two tablets and put three on one and seven on the other. You know, you had to subdivide the seven too. You know, the mind just cannot see that there's there's ten.

[23:48] I can't give you a reason why there should be ten, right? Okay. But now, what's the clue, right? Well, Aristotle doesn't give us in the what's come down to us, right? Okay. What's wrong with the guy, right? Okay. But Thomas, when he takes up these ten, as he must do in the very book, when the question comes up about the categories and whether emotion is the same as acting upon, undergoing, and so on, these are two of the ten.

[24:17] And in the metaphysics, when Aristotle touches upon the ten again, well, Aristotle calls these the figures of predication, right? Because they're distinguished by the way something can be said of individual what substances, like you or me or the dog out there, right? Okay. And that's because Aristotle has shown in the Categories that everything apart from individual substances either exist in or are said of individual substances. So you can use that one thing, individual substances, to distinguish the ten by how something is what said of them, right?

[25:04] Okay. But of course, when, you do that. You've got to divide it into two or three, right? Of course. Thomas is certainly not abandoning the rule of two or three or both. The purpose of ten. Now, what is the division into three?

[25:41] There's no such a divide as said of individual substances, huh? Individual substance is a thing that doesn't exist in inside of anything else it's not in anything else, nor is it said of anything else, right? So Dwayne Burkis does not exist, in anything else as a subject. That is to say. Nor is Dwayne Burkis said of anybody else, right? But something can be said of individual substances, like let's take Socrates, right?

[26:29] Let's take Phaedo Examples here, right? Something can be said of individual substances by reason of what it is. So, what is Socrates? A man. More generally, he's a what? Animal, right? More generally, he's a living body, right? More generally, he's a body, right? And most generally, he's a what? He's substance, okay.

[27:07] What can be said of Phaidor by reason of what he is? Well, Phaidor's a dog. The dog is a what? Quadruped, right? It's a quadruped, an animal, right? It's an animal, a living body, a living body, a body. It's a body, a substance, right?

[27:29] So this gives rise to one highest genus, and wisdom is chiefly about substances. Aristotle shows this in the Metaphysics. Now, or something can be said of individual substances by reason of what?

[27:53] Something in them, right? It's in the subject, right? But not what they are, right? Or something in them. And that's going to be subdivided.

[28:18] So I, you can see maybe a Socrates, if you can believe the Meno, right? He shows the slave boy in the Meno there that the way to double a square is not to double the side, but is to what? Take the diagonal, right? So I can say of Socrates. he's a geometer, right? And he has a famous conversation with Theatetus, who's the famous geometer in the history of mathematics, right?

[28:45] Now he's said to be a geometer by reason of a certain science that's in his mind, right? Okay. Or Socrates is quite a healthy man, right? Everyone else gets drunk under the table, and Socrates, you know, goes away and he spends his usual normal day, right? Thinking, huh? Okay.

[29:10] Now, some things are said of Socrates or of you and me by reason of something what outside of us, right? Okay. Let's change it to my seat. By reason of something

[29:32] outside of us, A simple example of that is, I am said to be clothed now, right? Okay. Well, the clothing is not in me, like the geometry is in me, right? Right.

[29:52] So this is the threefold distinction that Thomas. gives, right? Now. Divides this into what two? Either absolutely, or towards another, right? So, fatherhood is something in me towards Paul or Maria or Marcus, right? Okay. Maybe someone towards Sophia too, right? It's more oblique. I think we got a great thing there.

[30:41] Now, usually called this what relation, right? But that's kind of be careful. with Those abstract words, right? Aristotle in Greek calls this category pros ti, right? And in the commentaries, they translate it ad aliquem, right? That brings out the nature of this category, right? It's towards another, right?

[31:09] So towards my wife, I am a husband, right? Towards my father, I am a son. Towards my brother, I am a brother, right? Towards my son or daughter, I am a what? Father, right? Towards you, I am a teacher, I guess. Okay.

[31:30] So this is one of the ten, right? Absolutely, he divides it into two. Now we usually call them quantity and what? Quality, right? But the Greek is again more concrete, right? He'll call a quality poion, which they translate in Latin qualis, and he'll call what quantity poson right? In Greek, and they'll say in Latin quantus, right? They can use the abstract word, right? But Aristotle, when he first enumerates them, he likes the concrete word because it kind of touches upon the fact that it's something in the individual substance, right?

[32:17] Okay. So you have quantity, quality. Now in English, the best we can do is it would be to say how you are, right? And what? How much? And if we don't say anything, we don't say how this to make the abstract word. do we howness But in Latin, we go from qualis to quality, right? And posas, I mean poion to poiotes, you know. Okay. But how are you?

[32:47] today? Are you healthy. And then how much? So here you got 1, 2, 3, 4, right? Here you have only 1, here you have 2, and one divided into 2, so you have 3, right?

[33:11] And that's why it calls it absolute, right. In myself, I'm five foot 9 or something. I keep on changing my mind, who I think I am. Sometimes I'm as much as 5 foot 10, sometimes I'm as low as 5 foot 8, I don't know. Okay. But that's something in myself, right now. My father is something in me. towards another, right?

[33:40] Now, down here, right, a reason is something outside of, huh? Now, they usually distinguish the one that is given the name what echein to have, habitus, against the other five, right, there's six down, there, right, because it's called man's category, right? My teacher Charles De Koninck used to give a lecture just on man's category, right? And it's pretty important for us, right? Okay. It's especially important for women.

[34:19] They got to have a different. I can't possibly wear that to this, you know. It'd be a scandal, right? I mean, I mean, we wear something different for you know a formal affair, right? And something different for you know being out at the park or somewhere, you know, and and so. you know. If You're getting married, right? You can't show up like

[34:41] the ten minute shoe, right? For yourself, you know, these ready clothes to teach our lesson. anyway. Okay. Um. So there's man's category, might say, right? But he's going to touch upon that. But in Greek, it's called echein right? Yeah Okay. Notice how you can say about me that I'm clothed. You even say I'm housed. I'm not houseless, right? I'm housed. But something is being said of me by reason of something outside of me, right?

[35:19] This is said to be man's category because the other animals don't wear clothing, right? Things of that sort, right? Except they come in the service of man, right? You might put something over the horse, you know, or the dog, but then you're kind of a, you know little girl might just a cat.

[35:36] But they don't normally go around doing this themselves, right? Okay. So to be clothed is the best example of this down here, right? Echein to have. And so they call it Latin habitus right? We'll read this again in the text there. That's. We're going to have the same word that's tied up with the word to have, right? Don't say the word have here right now. Those are the words said in all the categories, right?

[36:04] Okay. Then Thomas sees two ways that a thing is named from something outside of it. In general, and not just man, right? And one is by a measure, right? And the other is by what? Acting upon or what? Undergoing, right?

[36:33] So acting upon and undergoing. poiein and paschein in Greek, right? Sometimes you see actio and passio, right? But notice this, in a way, acting upon implies a reference to something. Yeah, that you're acting upon, right? Which is other than yourself, right? And undergoing, not only are you

[37:04] being warmed, let's say, right, but you're being warmed by another, right, by the agent, right? So it's the cause and effect, right? I noticed, huh? To be hot would be up here in quality, right?

[37:23] But to be being heated would be down here under undergoing, right? I'm being heated by another, right? By being hot is just in myself I'm hot, right? But being heated is from another, right? Okay.

[37:43] Kicking and being kicked, right? Just a fair example. Now the extrinsic measures are place and time, right? So from time you get when, right?

[38:05] They're going to execute me at dawn, huh? When? Dawn. When the sun rises, right? Well, that's sun. What the hell am I going to do with me when the sun rises? Yeah, the next thing, right? Okay. So when that's important, right? Get you to the church on time. The other guy said in the musical, right? I'm getting married in the morning. you know, get me to the church on time."

[38:29] I want to find such a disgusting man. That man, my mother. I see a great actor there in the British. Now in place you get what? Where,

[38:46] Well, as Thomas points out, huh? There's another category of type of place, which is the position of what parts in place, and this could be called position. Like you are sitting now, right?

[39:04] He says there's no category in addition to when, because in time it's already implied number, right? And not number I mean order, right? Okay. Time is the number of motion according to before and after. In fact, if you know the chapter on before in the categories, first thing of before is in time, right? So it's already got the idea of order in there, right? But if you say where are we now?

[39:31] We're in this room. Yeah, two guys are sitting and I'm standing, right? So to be in this room doesn't say whether we're sitting or standing or laying down. Someone's at it, and you see. But it's the order of what parts in place, right? So it's more or less vertical like this. You don't you're like this, right? If you're laying down, you'd be laid out this way, okay?

[39:57] Now, you say. Isn't that in the body? Isn't that intrinsic? The shape of my body is different now than the shape of your body, right? Your body is in this shape, right? Or we just take the shape of the body and put it up in quality. But sitting, huh? If I, you know, crouch like this, am I sitting? Am I sitting now? You're squatting. Yeah, sitting. Because in order to be sitting, I got to have something outside of me, like a chair around which I am, right?

[40:27] Huh? If you invite someone to your house, this is the example I said. Sit down. And say, well, I can't sit down. You can't even go like this. A little bit crazy, right? Or, give an

[40:43] example. You know, if a guy jumps off the airplane, right, is going down like this, he's got his body like this, right? It's in the same shape as a man standing, but is he what? Standing? No, I'm just going to find out if he doesn't have a parachute. He's not standing, right? Huh? In order for me to be standing, I have to have something outside of me that my parts are arranged with respect to the floor, right?

[41:06] And I'm going straight down, right? Okay. You know, it's important to sit right in the chair, otherwise you've got a bad back. You know, if you don't sit properly in the chair, you know, I discovered that myself. Especially the older I get. Okay. So, substance is one. Quality is two. How much quantity is three? Towards another relation is four. And then you have what? Six down here, right?

[41:37] Man is one, right? And then three in general of measure, and two because of cause and effect. That's a brief introduction to the ten highest what? Genera right? Okay.

[42:04] Now I regret to say that Albert Husek, you know, and he has towards another down with these last six if I remember right? I shouldn't say I shouldn't say No.

[42:30] It's gonna be a real problem to get to the Trinity right? Start thinking this way. Okay. now Thomas is not going to go through all this, but the idea of the word habit, right? it comes from the verb what? to have, right? So he doesn't want to mix up, you know. the word to have there with all the other senses than the one he's concerned with there, right?

[43:01] But then when he defines or quotes Aristotle's definition of the habit as a disposition, not easily moved, right? Well, he's got the word position in there, right, or disposition, right? Here we have a category called position, right? It's not that, right? Okay, and so he's got to take some of the senses that are especially relevant to seeing that this is not them, right?