Prima Secundae
187. Aquinas on Sinning from Certain Malice: Whether It Is Possible, and Whether Sinning from Habit Is Sinning from Malice (ST I-II q.78 a.1-2)
Class of 2014-11-06
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/187-aquinas-on-sinning-from-certain-malice-whether-it-is-possible/

[0:00] In the Name of the Father, the Son, Holy Spirit. God, our enlightener guard you, angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, ordain our images images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, Angelic Doctor. Help us to understand all that you have written. Name of the Father and the Son, Holy Spirit. Amen. I was reading again about how the angels are enlightening us, and why we don't always know that they're enlightening us.

[0:34] I know myself sometimes, you know, I have the, I have this urge to say, I should really go back and reread this again, you know, this book or this thing, you know, and they say, gee, yeah, this is really, really things that I've, you know, forgotten or didn't fully understand, or things that, you know, enlighten what I'm doing in other places and so on. I know why I get urges to read that book, you know, you know, the angels.

[0:58] It's not like you haven't read it though. Yeah, yeah. the angel persuasive, you know. Okay, we're going to read the first article here, and I get why did that come to me. You see, my great angel, must say, Dwayne, He writes a sloppy, sloppy lecture, whatever call it, you gave last time. Yeah. Okay. So look at the premium again here. Then we're not to consider about the cause of sin, which is on the part of the will, which is called what malice, and about this four things are asked.

[1:37] First, whether someone is able from certain malice or industry to sin, and then whoever sins from habit, whether whoever sins from habit sins from certain malice, and third, whether whoever sins from certain malice sins from habit. Is convertible or not? And we'll find out. I don't think it is convertible, but we'll find out. Suspense here. And whether the one who sins from certain malice sins more gravely than the one who sins from passion, I would guess that he, that is so.

[2:18] Okay. So does Don Giovanni sin from passion or certain malice? Huh? No, he goes to the altar. He can't repent at the end, right? Down he goes, screaming to hell. Oh boy.

[2:49] To the first one proceeds thus. It seems that no one sins from industry or from certain what malice, huh? Now, ignorance is opposed to industry or certain what malice, huh? But every one who is bad is ignorant, according to the what philosopher. And then from Scripture, Proverbs chapter fourteen, they are mistaken, right? They err, right, to use the Latin word. They wander, who do what something bad, right?

[3:29] Those two great authorities there, right? Therefore, no one sins in certain malice, right? That would seem like you know something is bad and you choose it, right? Okay.

[3:51] So Warren says he's got little what patience of those who defend abortion, right? Because they know it's evil, right? They know you're doing something you shouldn't be doing, huh? But how is that possible, huh? It seems that you must be ignorant, huh? Well, look at the reply to that, which is very interesting, the reply to that first objection, huh? Before we even go to the body of the article, because Saint Thomas has a threefold distinction, right?

[4:19] Defending what Proverbs says and what Aristotle. Aristotle says, right, huh? But pointing out that the man who sins from ignorance, right, and the man who sins from passion, and the man who sins from certain malice, each are ignorant, but in what different ways, huh? That's a bit a key text, right, huh? So he he defends that what the philosopher says and what God says, I guess, in the Book of Proverbs, right?

[4:49] To the first, therefore, it should be said that ignorance sometimes excludes knowledge by which someone knows, right? simpliciter, huh? That to be bad which is being what done, huh?

[5:09] And then he's said to sin from ignorance, right? An example of this would be what in Scripture would be Saint Paul himself, right? He was persecuting the church, right, huh? But he was what forgiven in some way, right? Because he argued from he did from what ignorance, right, huh? I thought he was doing something good, right, huh?

[5:37] Sometimes it excludes the knowledge by which a man knows this now in particular to be bad, right? Just as when someone sins from what passion, right? So you may know something universal, but doesn't apply it, right, huh? So maybe this is David, right, huh, with Bathsheba, right, huh? Okay. Make you forget the universal right To this bathing woman, right? Okay.

[6:10] But now, what about the malice? Huh? Because Thomas is going to defend that even he is ignorant in some way, right? Sometimes it excludes the knowledge by which someone knows this evil should not be what sustained, right? On account of the pursuit of some good, right? He knows, however, some that this is bad that this is bad, right? Huh?

[6:40] And thus he is said to be ignorant, the one who sins from certain malice, right? Huh? Okay. So, what about abortion, right? You know, you know abortion to be something bad, right? Huh? But I'm in a jam. I I'm a sophomore in college, and you know I can't have this baby. I can't, you know, you know, and so on. And therefore, I'm going to have an abortion, right?

[7:07] Huh? So I can continue my college education without you know a horrible interruption, right? Huh? So I know it's bad abortion, but I don't what know that I should not sustain such an evil abortion to avoid this other one, okay? So it's interesting the way he distinguishes those three kinds of evil, right?

[7:39] Now, what about when when David had the the husband there, Bathsheba, killed, right? He knew that was bad, right? Huh? He knew that murder is what bad, right? Huh? But he didn't seem to know that he shouldn't what sustain such an evil in order to hold on to Bathsheba, right, or to continue to enjoy her, right? Huh? Okay.

[8:06] That's a beautiful, beautiful, beautiful text, you know. But that kind of ignorance, I think, is somewhat. So what I'm thinking of. It's kind of this willful inadvertence in a certain way. Yeah. Is he indicating that I don't want to add too much? Yeah. Yeah. But in the sense he he loves the some good, right, more than he loves the good is going to be deprived of, right?

[8:40] This will come out another repidal objection, right? Huh? Okay. More what Dionysius says in the fourth chapter of the Divine Names that no one aiming at evil does something, right?

[8:56] But this seems to be to sin from malice to intend evil in sinning, right? Well, but Dionysius—he's a big authority, right? No one aiming at evil does something, right? But that's what you're trying to say here, aren't you? When you talk about sinning from evil, from malice, isn't it? Okay. But what is apart from intention is not is, as it were, praeter, right? And does not denominate the act, and therefore no one sins from what malice.

[9:36] That's a very powerful objection, too. Now, what does Thomas say? To the second, it should be said that evil is not able, secundum se, as such, to be intended by someone.

[9:57] It, however, can be intended in order to. avoid some other what evil, right? Or to obtaining some what good, right? Okay. What? Yeah. Look at the answer to you. Yeah. To the second should be said that evil is not able to be secundum se as such intended by someone, right? But it can be intended to avoiding some other evil, like interruption of my college education, or to achieve some other good, like Bathsheba, as has been said, right?

[10:44] And in such a case, someone chooses to what pursue a good per se intended, right? Without this, that he undergo the detriment of a what other good, right? Just as someone lascivious wills to enjoy pleasure without offense of God, right? But the two things being proposed, right, they're incompatibles. He wishes more by sinning to incur the offense of God than to be deprived of the what pleasure, right?

[11:22] And that's true of David there in that example there, right? To the third, malice itself is a sin. If therefore malice is a cause of sin, it would follow that sin is a cause of sin in infinitum, which is inconvenient.

[11:49] No one therefore can sin from what malice, huh? Now to the third, he says it should be said that the malice from which someone is said to sin can be understood as habitual what malice, huh? According as a bad habit is named by the philosopher as malice, right? Just as a good habit is named what virtue. And according to this, someone is said to sin from malice who sins from the inclination of his habit, huh?

[12:26] Because the habit itself is called a kind of malice, right? One can also understand actual what malice, right? Huh? Whether the choice of the what bad is named malice, and that and thus one is said to sin from malice in so far as he sins from a bad choice from the choice of the bad. For whether the malice is said to be some preceding guilt from which arises a subsequent guilt, right?

[13:07] As when someone what attacks fraternal what grace from envy, right? And then the same is not a cause of itself, but the interior act is a cause of the what exterior act. And one sin is a cause another, not however in infinitum, because there is possible to arrive at some first sin which is not caused from some prior sin, as has been said above.

[13:45] Now, what's the great said On the contrary, right? But against this is what is said in Job thirty four, chapter thirty four, as it were of industry they recede from what God, and they do not wish to understand his what ways. But to recede from God is to sin. Therefore, some sin from industry or from what certain malice.

[14:21] Funny, got the word industry taken up in a little different sense, but. can also look at the whole picture here. which you go to the body of the article right? now i answer it should be said that man, just as every other thing, huh, naturally has a desire of the what good, huh. Whence that his desire declines to something bad happens from some corruption or disorder in one of the beginnings of man, right?

[15:04] Just as also what has found sin in the actions of natural things. When the baby is born defective in someone, there's some defect in the genes or in the seed for the parents, right? Which is the beginning of the child.

[15:23] But now the beginnings of human acts are the understanding and what desire, and the desire, both the rational desire which is called the will, as well as the sense desire. So you've got what three, right? Sin therefore in human acts happens sometimes from the defect of the what understanding, as when someone sins through what ignorance, right?

[15:56] And from the defect of sense desire, sense desiring power, as when someone sins from passion. So also from the defect of the will, which is the disorder, disorder of the same, right? Okay, that's beautiful. I mean, good example three, right? now just got through studying the angels again. there in the three hierarchies, each heart is three what? Orders, and each order has a beginning, middle, and end, right?

[16:30] So three is really dominates the the angels there, right? The number three, and dominates the zero, three. Now, it's the third one we're concerned with right now in this question on malice, right? Okay.

[16:59] So do you have a disorder in your understanding, or disorder in your concupiscible appetite, or irascible appetite, or do you have a disorder in your your will itself? That's kind of the principal thing, isn't it? Too and action, the will.

[17:19] The will, however, is disordered when it loves what more? Yeah. Okay. Now, what what sense of order is he talking about here in the categories?

[17:43] Yeah. Yeah, yeah. The fourth sense, therefore, right? Isn't it? Okay. The first sense of before and after is in time, right? Today is before tomorrow, right? Second sense of before is in being, huh? If this can be without that, but not vice versa. Like the letter C can be without the word cat, the word cat can't be without the letter C.

[18:10] Water can be without life, but maybe life can't be without water. Maybe that's a harder example, right? Um. The third sense of before is in the discourse of reason, right? Okay. So the principles come before the conclusion, right? Premises, genus before the species, and so. In the fourth sense, some more remote senses Aristotle says, is where the better is before the lesser, right?

[18:50] Then Aristotle is through with the four central senses, right? But then he brings in a fifth sense. The sense in which the cause is before the what effect, right? But I don't think that fifth sense is fifth in order, right? I think it should be placed alongside of the second sense, huh?

[19:16] So of those five senses, right, the disorder here is in what loving more the lesser good than the greater good, right? So all my colleagues who chose to follow a lesser knowledge in place of wisdom, huh? You know, I mean, what does Aristotle? He has the fourteen books of wisdom, right, huh? But usually he refers to the fourteen books of wisdom as first philosophy, right? And

[19:56] what sense of order is that? when He says first philosophy. The fourth sense, The fourth sense yeah, It's better than all the rest, right? And then he calls natural philosophy second philosophy, right? Okay. Now we're accustomed to call the fourteen books of wisdom the metaphysics, right? Huh? Just somewhat misleading because you've run together three Greek words in the word metaphysics, right? And therefore nobody knows what they're doing anymore with the word, right?

[20:27] But the three words run together are meta, which means after, ta, which is the article the, and phusika, which means the books in natural philosophy, right? So it's saying after natural philosophy. Now, how can first philosophy come after natural philosophy? What? Second philosophy. Yeah, yeah. So how can yeah? How can that be? When you're

[21:01] all mixed up. No. No. There can be, you know, it's apparent to Andronicus of Rhodes, right? The the editor of Aristotle's works, right? Who kind of coined that word, right? But it's because it comes after. in time.

[21:20] Yeah. And you could you could call you know mathematics third philosophy, at least looking philosophy, right? Okay. And so natural philosophy comes before first philosophy in the order of learning, right? Which is the third sense of before, right? I don't even want to say that, right? But first philosophy is called first philosophy because it's before in goodness, right? It's a better philosophy, right? It's more divine. Aristotle in the sixth book calls it theology, right?

[21:52] Because eventually you're studying God, right? Okay. I was looking at another text there, of, Thomas. You know, I don't know if you've ever studied the soul. You know, but when Aristotle defines the soul, he speaks of it as being the first act, right? Of a natural body composed of tools, right? And what does first act mean there, right? Well, it's contrasted with second act, which is operation, right?

[22:23] Huh? Well, what sense of first and second is there when you speak of form, which the soul is substantial form, as being the first act, right? And habit is something called a first act with respect to using the habit. Why operation or doing something is called second act, huh? But what sense of first and second is that? What sense of before is that?

[22:55] Yeah. Yeah, and the second sense too, right? See, so I can have a mind without thinking, but you can't think without a mind, right? Okay, and my mind in some way causes my thinking, right? That's why I say the second, the so-called fifth sense, there is really very close to the second, second sense, right?

[23:16] Ah, which is better, right? Which is the end or purpose? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's kind of interesting, huh? When you speak of first philosophy, you're saying it's because it's better, right? Huh? When you say first act, using first there in the second sense and perhaps also in the fifth sense, so-called fifth, right? Not fifth in order, right? Aristotle uses both ways of speaking, right? I mean, he's talking about he knows these orders backwards and forwards, huh?

[23:54] Incidentally, is there some reason why first philosophy is called first philosophy besides the fact that it's better than all the other kinds of philosophy? Any other reason they call it first philosophy?

[24:16] Yeah, just like natural philosophy is about natural things, right? So first philosophy is about what's first, right? Now most of all because it's about the first cause, huh? And the first being, huh? And there we do the same thing, but a little difference in meaning there, right?

[24:39] So God is both the first cause and the first being, right? Is a cause of all other things, and He is what able to be without all the things, but they can't be without Him. So He's first in being. He's first in the second sense and in the so-called fifth sense, right? Okay.

[25:00] But it's also about the first what statements and the first thoughts of our mind, huh? The most general, like the whole one more than a part, like the first statements and the first thoughts there, and therefore it's about what is first in the sense of what the fourth, the third sense, the order of what? Yeah, the discourse of reason, right?

[25:32] A lot, lot to you know to be seen in the word first philosophy, huh? Okay. So, a will is disordered when it loves the lesser good more. So if I love mathematics more than wisdom,

[26:02] yeah, yeah. So I'm a philosopher, and a philosopher etymologically is named from the love of what, wisdom, yeah. If you look at the word mathematikos in Greek, huh mathematikos is someone who's fond of learning, and it's also a synonym for philomathes, right? But if you're a lover of mathematics most of all, then there's a disorder in you, right? And I remember my old teacher Kasurik there. You know, he translated Thomas's commentary in the first two books of natural hearing, the first two books of the so-called physics.

[26:45] But he put a few little things in there, a nice in the beginning there. One is a nice little passage from Albert the Great, right? And he says anybody who studies the lesser things without having in mind as a goal the higher things, right, has a perverted attitude towards knowledge unless he be forced to it by necessity. You know, you have to, you know, doctor may have to study lesser things, right?

[27:09] But if you, apart from being forced to consider lesser things out of necessity, a mother has to consider lesser things. If you prefer the lesser to the greater, then there's what, yeah, yeah. So these men that devote their lives to literature, you know, which is less than philosophy, they have a disordered desire to know, right? Because they certainly can't put food on the table without the greater literature.

[27:38] Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Aristotle talks, you know, about how one thing about studying the animals, right, and the plants, right, rather than studying, you know, the immortal substances, the immaterial substances, is that we can know them better, right? But nevertheless, it's better to know a little bit even about the higher things than to know a lot about the lesser things, huh? Spend your life, you know, entomologist studying insects, right?

[28:12] Well, and there's quite a few kinds of insects, you know. You can spend your whole life with insects, right? And I guess they're always discovering new kinds of insects that they didn't know existed, right? And so great detail in the knowledge there but it's nothing compared to knowing a little bit about God or you know about my guardian angel, right?

[28:34] I think my guardian angel, if he has a sense of humor, gee, I suppose they do. Must be amused, you know, by trying to understand what an angel is.

[28:48] Okay. So, I mean, this disordered will is what a common thing, isn't it? I mean, if you love beer more than wine, and those people who do, that's a disordered desire in the will, right? What? At least in the sense that. Yeah. If you.

[29:34] Okay, so going back, that is the disordered will when it loves the lesser good more. Okay, that's that's possible to do so, isn't it? Yeah, yeah. So, I must have loved soda pop more than wine when I was young. My brother Marcus, you know, say to me, you know, I say if it wasn't for me, he said you'd probably be drinking soda pop with your. dinner

[30:07] used to be a little grocery store we'd go by there, you know, and it's funny about a one-armed man, right? You know, he lost an arm or something, but but he had a nice cooler in front there, you know, that's grape soda and orange soda. Oh boy, get a little money go by there, you know.

[30:29] Okay, so not going to really bad people. I mean, there's there's a lot of disorder there, but you love more, right? Usually people when they start off in wine, they like white wine more than red wine, right? But then once they get on, they get like the red wine more because there's more to taste there, right? Okay.

[31:10] Consequently of this is that someone chooses, right, to suffer detriment, right, harm, you might say, right, in a good less loved, right, in order that he might enjoy a good more loved, huh? Now this can be good in some cases, right? As when a man wishes to undergo cutting off of a what limb, member, knowingly that he might conserve his life, which he loves more, right, huh?

[31:45] Okay. Read about all these things being chopped off during the Civil War, right? You know, didn't know what else to do. Okay. And in this way, when a disordered, when some disordered will wishes some temporal good, right, when a man loves loves some temporal good, as example, what? Well, or pleasure, right, and then the order of reason, right, or the divine law, or the love of God, or something of this sort, right?

[32:26] It follows that he wishes what to suffer, huh? Let me see if I can translate that. Some loss. And something of spiritual goods in order that he might enjoy some temporal good, right, huh? Okay.

[32:57] For evil is nothing other than the lack of some what good, huh? And in account of this, someone knowingly, right, wishes some spiritual what evil, which is evil what secundum quid which he is deprived, huh, from some spiritual good, right, that he might enjoy a what temporal good, right? That's my friend there, Don Juan, Don Giovanni. Whence when some jealousy is said from certain malice or from injustice to sin, as it were, knowingly choosing what bad, yeah.

[33:45] Okay. Now it's the recent election there, you know. Someone was not doing too good, you know, because he was too pro-life, you know. So he decides to, you know, drop this thing in favor of something. You know that he shouldn't be, you know.

[34:06] Some people do that, right? When we get elected, right? And maybe this is what you have to do in the state to get elected, right? See, so he more wants to be elected than to stand up for what is right.

[34:24] Okay. So we saw the objections. so we did not go over the beginning. Now the next two articles are about what connection between habit, right, and malice, huh?

[34:44] Habit is a second what nature they call it sometimes. So watch out for habit, huh? I guess when you die, you're stuck with your habits. Yeah, stuck with forever. That's what one of our priests said. A lady was in favor of abortion. Identified herself as Catholic, and he said, "You think if Christ was talking like I am right now, that he'd support you? And she said, "He would respect my choice."

[35:15] And I said, "Yeah, forever and ever, People respect their choice. the second one goes forward. Thus, it seems that not everyone who sins from habit sins from certain what malice, huh?

[35:39] For the sin that is from certain malice seems to be the most grave. But sometimes a man consists, I mean, commits some light sin from what habit, huh? As when one says a idle word, right, huh? Chatterbox, huh?

[36:03] There used to be a little restaurant in Saint Paul, my hometown. They're called Chatterbox, right? I think what was funny was we we had a friend. His telephone number is almost the same as the number of Chatterbox. And so every time you call me, as soon as you get the Chatterbox, say, "Oh, Chatterbox!" I just laugh, you know, and Chatterbox. But there must be a lot of idle word there if this name properly the restaurant, huh?

[36:32] But sometimes a man consists, okay, from habit, as he says an idle word. Therefore, not every sin which is from habit is from certain what malice, huh? Let's look at the reply to the objection, right?

[36:48] To the first, therefore, it should be said that venial sins do not exclude what spiritual good, the spiritual good which is the grace of God or the love of God, right, huh, the charity. Whence they are not said to be evil simpliciter, but secundum quid. That's a famous distinction there, right, between simpliciter and secundum quid, huh? That comes up in the what first distinctions of being, right?

[37:18] Because substance is being simpliciter, and accident is being what secundum quid, right, huh? Okay, and likewise the other division to act and ability, right?

[37:37] So if I know something in ability, do I say I know it? simpliciter? I'd say I know it in ability. I'm able to know it. That's very qualified, diminished sense, right?

[37:55] So that's some relief, huh? My venial sins are evil secundum quid and not simpliciter right? But my mortal sins are. In account of this, neither are the habits of them said to be simply evil, right? But solum secundum quid, huh? So when you get the chatterbox there, you tell me your habit is secundum quid evil, huh? Okay.

[38:28] Second objection: Acts proceeding from habit are like acts that are generated, right? I like the acts from which the habit is what generated, huh? Okay. That's the point that Aristotle makes. That's a quote from Aristotle, as is said in the second book of the what Ethics. That's the book where Aristotle talks in general about the moral virtues, right, before he gets into them in particular.

[39:00] But the acts preceding a what vicious habit are not from certain malice, huh? Therefore, also the sins which come from habit are not from certain malice. Okay.

[39:19] Now, it's a difficult objection, right? Well, sure they're alike, but are they in every way alike? No. And this is the point that Aristotle makes in the Ethics, right? To the second, it should be said that the acts which proceed from habits are like what the acts from which the habits are generated in species, right? Secundum species. They differ, however, from them as the perfect from the what imperfect.

[39:57] So if I do a brave act before I've acquired the habit of courage, I do so with what difficulty and some hesitation and and so on, right? Huh? Why the act that I do after I've acquired the habit of what courage, I do with a sense of ability and so on, so it's much more perfect my act, huh?

[40:21] Okay. And such he says is the difference of the sin which is committed from certain malice and the sin which is committed from some passion, right? Okay.

[40:44] So if a person, you know, has no experience with alcohol and they get drunk, right? They didn't stop in time. Ex aliqua passione right? Got a little carried away, right? But if they acquire the habit, you know, they just get drunk every what? Yeah, yeah.

[41:11] Every weekend, decide to get drunk, right, or to get, you know, then it's kind of a a stable choice almost. He says, and such is the difference of the sin that is committed from certain malice to the sin that is committed from some passion, right? So the sin that is committed from some passion can come before the acquiring of the habit, right? Huh? But if you repeat the act enough, then you get the habit, and then you're kind of a stable way you you do that.

[42:01] Moreover, the third objection now: in those things which someone commits from certain malice, he rejoices after he has what committed them, huh? According to that of Proverbs chapter two,

[42:18] who rejoices when they do what? Badly, and rejoices, huh? Exult in the most. Yeah. And this, because to each one is pleasant, what follows what when he when he achieves that which he intends, right? And who operates what is in some way connatural according to habit, huh? So habit is said to be a second what? Nature, huh?

[42:53] Took in the song, the second nature to me now, right, huh? Like breathing in and breathing out, right? Or breathing out and breathing in is what? First nature, right? I'm breathing air in and out all day long, and hardly ever think about it. You, I don't think about the fact that I go day after day, and I don't think, just think to AJ, it was every day I've been breathing in the air and breathing it out.

[43:15] I haven't been even thinking about the fact I do that, right? It's so natural to me, right? But habit becomes something, what? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[43:27] I say, you know, what play you're currently reading of Shakespeare? You know, what? What kind of question is that to ask? I never read Shakespeare. I can't understand it. Yeah, yeah. I mean, you must be reading some play, I mean, currently.

[43:58] But those who sin from habit, after the sin committed, they what? Sorrow. Sorrow. For the evil are filled with what? Penance, right? That is, those having a vicious habit, as is said in the ninth of ethics, right?

[44:15] Well, it happens sometimes, right? No. Can't stand themselves anymore, right? Therefore, the sins which are from habit are not from certain what? Malice, huh? Okay. Well, to the third, it should be said. That the one who sins from habit always rejoices about that which he does from habit, so long as he uses the habit, right? Huh? But because he is able not to use the habit, but through his reason which is not wholly corrupted yet, he is able to meditate something.

[44:54] What? Yeah. It can happen that the man not using the habit is sorrowful, right, about that which he has committed through what habit? Huh? For many times such what do penance about their sin, because? sorrow about their sin Not because. the sin secundum se displeases them, right? huh? On account of something incommodious that occurs in the sin, right? Okay. But the habit is something that you use when you want to, right?

[45:32] Hard to avoid using it if you have it. It's like the man's wife leaves him because he's fooling around with other women, and he's crying because his wife left him. Was it was it was the case there, you know, where where the I think it was the Spanish Civil War, I think, you know, where the communists were, you know, killing people and going to churches, and I think there was a girl there in a white dress, you know, and she stood in front of the church entrance, you know, and they shot her, you know, of course the blood just you know came through it in the white dress, you know, it just kind of shocked them.

[46:07] They stopped them, you know. You know, it shows you there's something in you. Your reason is entirely corrupt, right? There's something about the way the the girl, you know, white dress, you know, the blood coming, and you just you just have to think, you know, for a moment, you know. Well, if the person just falls on the ground like that, they're running around your body, right? You know, but just the blood just just into that sorry.

[46:37] Okay. Or people, you know, they go and harm something, and they actually see the harm they've done to the person's body or something, you know, and then they start to repent, you know.

[46:56] But against this, sin from certain malice is said to be that which is from the choice of something bad, right? Huh. But to each one that is choosable, that is inclined to, to his own what habit, as is said in the sixth book of ethics, huh? So Aristotle defines, you know, the the virtue, right? Huh? He'll speak about it as what use the word choice in there, right?

[47:26] A habit with choice. Therefore. The sin which is from habit is from certain what, Malice. Now in the response there, Thomas sees a distinction which is important to see. I answer it should be said that it is not the same thing to sin having a habit and to sin from habit. Now why is they not the same thing? Because to use a habit is not necessary, right?

[48:06] But it's subject to the will of the one having it, huh? Not sure whether the habit be good or what, bad, right, huh? Okay. So even a Christian, let's say, who doubts something about the faith, right? Um, he's he can do that, right? And then he's not using the habit of faith, right? Which would repulse this doubt, right? Okay.

[48:32] This could be sudden, and you know, you know, first question of what can happen. But I mean, the point is you don't necessarily use a habit whether it be good or what, bad, huh?

[48:46] Once a habit is defined, and this is the one that Thomas often quotes, Averroes right? Here he agrees with Averroes huh? But once a habit is defined as that which someone uses when he what, wills, yeah.

[49:04] Thomas, in the bottom of my text, we have one from Augustine too for this, but also one from Averroes, right, in the third book on the soul, commentary

[49:17] eighteen. And therefore, just as it can happen that someone having a vicious habit breaks into an act of virtue, in that reason is not wholly what corrupted through a bad habit, huh? What seems that movie there last? Train to Yuma, was it? Was that the one famous one? The guy's trying to bring the guy into prison, you know, and the guy finds a tempt. He's he's really all kinds of things, you know.

[49:47] Difficulties in doing it, and finally the guy's attempt to build there a time to escape, and he just doesn't do it, you know. He feels got through so much. It's a really interesting movie there, you know. Good, good, best of movies.

[50:07] I think they did two or three times in the movie. I mean, different actors and the thing. And therefore, just as it can happen that someone having a vicious habit breaks into an act of virtue, right? In that reason is not wholly corrupted, right? Through the what?

[50:30] But something what integral remains, huh? From which it happens that the what the sinner does something of the genus of what good things, right, huh? You know, I was reading this this biography of John Paul II, you know, and it's kind of interesting that his working with the head of the Polish government there, finding the general there, Jaruzelski, was not a believer, you know, but he was doing some good things, you know, despite his habits, huh?

[51:08] He died. He died with the faith. Jaruzelski died not long ago. Yeah. I think returning to the church. This book had some quotes of his, you know, biography or autobiography, you know, very interesting. Remember that time when he met him? I always thought that Jaruzelski was extremely nervous, right? And he sits at the barbers, his his things are shaking, his legs are shaking. The Pope was there.

[51:37] The Pope knows to do, you know. I mean, I I seen you know the film, you know, you know, you know the time when the

[51:45] he's the head of the he's the general and everything, you know. The many personal things in this book, you know. Confirmation of things I suspected, you know.

[52:08] This also can happen that someone having a habit, huh? Sometimes does not act from habit, but also from what a passion arising, or even from what Ignorance. Ignorance.

[52:25] So that's a person having a what habit, but not acting from habit, right? Um. But whenever he uses a vicious habit, right? Necessarily he sins from certain malice, right? Thomas is very strong there, right? When you act from a habit and from a habit that is what vicious, then you necessarily sin from certain malice, huh? Why? Because to each one having a habit, that is per se lovable, right?

[53:08] What is fitting or in agreement with his own habit, huh? Because it comes to him in some way what connatural, right? According as custom and habit are turned into what nature, huh?

[53:36] This over that is suitable according to a vicious habit is that which excludes a spiritual good. So what is in agreement with a vicious habit excludes a spiritual good. Too bad, that's the way it is. From which it follows that a man chooses a spiritual evil that he might obtain the good that is what suitable to him. According to the habit. And this is to sin from certain what malice.

[54:17] Whence it is manifest that whoever sins from habit sins from what certain malice. Not everyone sinning having a habit, right? But who sins from the habit, right? Sins from certain what malice, huh? These habits are dangerous things, huh? If they're bad.

[54:44] Good habit, I don't think is dangerous, but. Of course, the Americans are getting habituated to all kinds of crazy things, right? Homosexual marriage and all this. They're getting accustomed Yeah, yeah, and then and then because habitual, right? And.

[55:20] Johnny has two mothers, or Johnny has two fathers, or something. Some some some families get two mummies, some get two fathers, some get a mommy and father. So teaching them in some grade schools, I mean, they they get away with it. Just. Okay.