Prima Secundae
200. Summa I-II q.85 aa.4-6: Mode, Species and Order; Death and Bodily Defects as Punishments of Original Sin; Is Death Natural to Man?
Class of 2015-01-29
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/200-summa-i-ii-q-85-aa-4-6-mode-species-and-order-death-and-bodily/

[0:00] Article Article four Here now. to the fourth, one goes forward thus It seems that privation or lack of mode, species, and order is not an effect of sin,

[0:27] because Augustine says in the book on the nature of the good that where these three are great, great is the good; where they are small, small is the good; where there is none, none.

[0:44] But sin does not what annul the good of what nature, and therefore it does not take away mode, species, and order, right? However, nothing is a cause of itself, but sin itself is a privation of mode, species, and order, right? As Augustine says in the book on the nature of the good. Therefore, privation of mode, species, and order is not an effect of what sin. But as Mirai said, universal good is, huh?

[1:28] Moreover, diverse sins have diverse effects. But mode, species, and order, since they are certain diverse things, would seem to have diverse what lacks or privations. Therefore, they are deprived through diverse sins. Therefore, there is not is not therefore an effect of any what sin, the privation of mode, species, and order, right? Always takes a long time to absorb that teaching of Augustine, right? I think Thomas has an article on that, doesn't he?

[2:05] Back in the prima pars, where he talks about the good, you know, before he takes up the goodness of God, right? He kind of you know he's addressing beginners, you know, like us, and he shows that what the good is in general and so on before he takes up God being good, huh? Of course, he does even better in the Summa Contra Gentiles huh? Then he takes that thing up of Augustine that God is the good of every good.

[2:40] But against this is that sin is in the soul as infirmity or sicknesses in the body, right? You're saying somebody you're sick, you know? You're talking about the soul. You listen to some people, you know, I mean, they're really. Yeah, yeah. Talk about this homosexual marriage like that. Yeah, I just feel like saying, you are sick. Yeah. so in psalm 6 it said, "Have mercy on me, Lord, because I am sick."

[3:36] Yeah. But infirmity of the body, huh? Deprives the mode, species, and order of the body itself. Therefore, sin deprives mode, species, and order in the soul. Right.

[3:59] I don't know if you can make a verb out of lack. Huh? Lackens? I don't think it works. You can say deprive from privation, but I don't know.

[4:15] Answer: It should be said. This has been said in primo in the first part, right? And that is question five, article five, right? That's the one that was talking about the general question on the good, right?

[4:36] Answer: It should be said that as has been said in the first part, mode, species, and order follow every what each created good as such, right? And also each what being.

[4:52] For every being and good is considered through some form, by which is taken the what species, huh? Now the form of each thing, whatever it might be, right? whether it be a substantial form or an accidental form? Is according to some what measure. once is said in the eighth book of wisdom, the metaphysics. The eighth book of first philosophy, that the forms of things are as what numbers, huh?

[5:28] That's a marvelous thing there, because Aristotle knows going to disagree with Plato. You know that numbers are behind everything, right? And yet he sees a certain what truth in what Plato is saying, right? Huh? That and this comes out when he says that the what forms of things are like what numbers, right? So you know, if you have a a body there, right? And you add life, then you get a plant, right?

[5:55] Then you add sense, and you get an animal. You add reason, and you get man, right? So when Shakespeare says. What is a man, right? If his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed, a beast, no more, right? He sees it as like a number, right? You know, it's really kind of amazing that Shakespeare writes, says it so well. You know, he must have been wise.

[6:21] I don't know. He seems to be self-taught a bit, you know. In fact he was so popular Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Even the classical music station they play Mozart all the time, you know, not all, not all the time, but I mean, more than any other composer, you know, certainly more than Beethoven.

[6:54] Thank God. We haven't hit bottom. Yeah. I'm always kidding Beethoven. So he's popping up the music, you know. Okay. And from this, it has a certain what mode, huh? Which regards what measure, right?

[7:18] And the one gap there at Laval who wrote a doctoral thesis on modus and Thomas, right? But it's interesting. how Aristotle speaks of the, you know, what we say the way of proceeding in a science, right? But the Greek word for way there, instead of way, is tropas, huh?

[7:38] And I'm always helped with my friend Washington Irving, you know, who speaks of a turn of mind, right? Because tropes is a sense of a turn of mind, right? So to do this science, you have to turn your mind this way, and to do that one, you got to turn that way. So it's a very, it's a very what suggestive word that Aristotle has on tropas, huh?

[7:59] Now, in Latin, this tropas of going forward is called the modus procedendi, right? It's a more abstract word, but Thomas is often quoting Arist. I mean, Augustine, right, huh? That measure prefigit modum, right? And so you can say that the way of proceeding should what fit the subject, right? Just like your pants should, your shoes should fit your your feet, right? And so in some ways, the factors taken from the idea of fitting and measure makes sense, right, huh?

[8:36] Why in English we translate it, you know, modus procedendi is the way of proceeding, or to go fully in English, the way of going forward, right? But each of the words has something in them, right, huh? Montaigne used to say, you know, sometimes the the best word is in you know this language, and sometimes, you know. But sometimes there's something in each language, you know, with the with the word, right?

[9:00] So, tropus and modus and and way all have a different origin, etymologically, and so on, right? But they all bring out something about this, right?

[9:17] So he's explaining that, you know, the use of the word there. The forms of things are like numbers, and from this, it has a certain mode, huh? Which regards measure, right? And from its form, each thing is ordered to its what end? I can see that in Shakespeare's thing there, right? Huh? What is a man if his chief good and mark of his time be but to sleep and feed?

[9:46] There's a connection between what a man is and what his chief good or end will be, right? So you see how beautiful that is. Thus, therefore, according to the diverse grades. Of goods, there are diverse grades of mode, species, and what? Order. For there is a certain good pertaining to the very substance of nature, which has its own what? Mode, species, and order. And that is neither what?

[10:18] Deprived or diminished through sin, right? There is also a certain good of what? Natural inclination. And this also has its own mode, species, and order, right? So you see the universality of good, right? And this is diminished through sin, as has been said, but is not wholly taken away, right? There is also a certain good of virtue and grace, which also has its own what? Mode, species, and order.

[10:50] And this is taken away entirely through mortal sin, right? There is also a certain good which is an act that is ordered, which also has its own mode, species, and order, right? And the privation of this is essentially sin itself, right? And thus it is clear in what way sin is a privation of mode, species, and order, and it what? Deprives or diminishes mode, species, and order.

[11:20] It's not the same mode, species, and order, but the mode, species, and order in inclination is what? Diminished or deprived, right? But by the sin itself, the act itself is deprived of the mode, species, and order it should have. Whence is clear the response to the first two what? Objections, huh? Because he's saying sin doesn't annul the good of nature, the mode, species, and order of nature, but it does the mode, species, and order of inclination, right, huh?

[11:58] And then the second one is taking the act of sin, right, huh? And that is a privation of mode, species, and order. Okay. And that's what a different what?

[12:13] That's not the effect of sin; it is sin itself, huh? Okay. To third, it should be said that mode, species, and order follow one another, right? This has been clear. Need to give a little explanation of that, right? Because the key thing is is the form, and the form is what? Like a number, like Aristotle said, right? He always comes back to Aristotle there in the the eighth book of wisdom, right, huh?

[12:43] Beautiful thing there. He takes up matter and form and the union of the two, right? And that's where he says that the form is is in a way like numbers, right, huh?

[12:57] So what is a man if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. I used to say to students, you know, what is the three if it be half of four? At two, no more. I mean, you see, you know, the the likeness there that that Shakespeare sees and Aristotle sees between numbers and and

[13:25] yeah. Once they follow each other, because they have a a mode, right? Huh? Because that's tied up with measure, right? But it's because there's likeness to number, and then there also follows in every form an inclination to something, right? Whence they are what? Simul, right? Together, deprived and what? Diminished, right?

[14:00] So put that in your pipe and smoke it for a while, okay? Now. With their death and other bodily defects are effects of sin. What a mess! Sin gets us into it.

[14:26] It's not to question now we can get all this evil stuff, huh? Then get into into law, you know, huh? But we gotta stay in here firmly and look in the mirror and see how awful we are. To the fifth one proceeds thus, huh? It seems that death and other bodily defects are not effects of what sin, huh? I'm I'm interested in how he's gonna argue that

[14:53] How is that? not, for if the cause were equal, the effect would be what equal. But these defects are not equal in all, but in some defects of this sort more abound, right? When, however, original sin was equal in all, right, huh? As what?

[15:23] Which would it would seem of which, right? These what? Defects. Most of all, effects, right? Original sin, huh? Therefore, death and defects of this sort are not effects of sin, right? They should be equal in us, huh? Well, we all die.

[15:44] You you all got a got a death, right? As the fifth says there, it's a false death, huh? What are you fighting this for, huh?

[15:58] Second, moreover, the cause removed, the effect is removed. But all sin being removed by baptism or penance, these defects are not removed, huh? There you go. Wow. If I go to confession, I'll be a young man again, right? Your youth renewed like an eagle. Yeah. Pontius Pilate didn't know how to get it. He knew it, apparently. The font of youth

[16:29] is the baptismal font. Yeah. That's what he forgot. Therefore, they are not effects of sin. Moreover, actual sin has more the notion of guilt than original sin, huh? But actual sin does not change the nature of the body to some defect. Therefore, much less original sin. Therefore, death and other bodily defects are not effects of sin. But against this now, the argument for authority is strongest, huh?

[17:05] Scripture is the sole theology is. Who said that? John Paul II said it but he may have been quoting something else Was it wasn't it the 13th? Against this is what the apostle says in Romans 5: 12. Through one man sin came into this world, and through sin death. That kind of solves it, right? Now let's see kind of the reason for this.

[17:41] I answer it should be said that something is a cause of another in two ways. In one way, per se. In another way, per accidens.

[17:56] Per se, something is a cause of another that according to the power of its own nature or form produces the what effect. Whence it follows an effect is per se intended by its what cause.

[18:16] Whence since death and defects of this sort are outside the intention of the one sinning, right? It is manifest that sin is not per se the cause of these defects.

[18:35] Now per accidens something is a cause of another if it be a cause by removing the thing preventing it. As is said in the eighth book of the physics, that's Aristotle's book, right? That the one what removing the column, right? Per accidens moves the stone placed upon the column. Yeah.

[19:05] So it falls to the ground. He was describing that book on John Quincy Adams, right? His wife was getting quite active socially there, and they had these big dances, you know, a whole floor there in the house. But before he invited all the people in, he put extra pillars down the wall because because of some people coming to the dance, you know, was the thing to do.

[19:29] He was afraid the whole thing would collapse, you know, huh? That happened in Rome somewhere at the American seminary where they had some room and the whole floor collapsed Yeah?

[19:53] And in this way, the sin of the first parent is the cause of death and of all these defects in human nature. Wait till I get my hands on that guy. Do you realize? All the trouble you caused. In so far as through the sin of the first parent, is taken away original justice, right? To which not only the lower powers of the soul were contained under reason without any what disorder, but also the whole body was contained under the soul without any what defect, as is had in the first when we discussed the original state of man, right?

[20:42] And therefore this original justice being taken away through the sin of the first parent, just as it was wounded, human nature as regards the soul through the disorder of the powers of the soul, right? As has been said above. So also corruptible was effected through the what disorder of the body itself. It was made corruptible Yeah.

[21:18] Now the subtraction of original justice has the notion of what punishment, just as also the subtraction of grace, whence also death and all bodily defects following upon it are certain punishments of what original sin, huh?

[21:40] And although these defects were not intended by the one sinning, I didn't intend all this harm today. I mean, yeah, yeah. Nevertheless, they are ordered according to the justice of God punishing.

[22:08] Now, to the first, therefore, it should be said that the equality of the cause per se causes a equal what effect, huh? For augmented or diminished the cause per se is increased or diminished the effect, right? The hotter the fire, right? More, the more the burns up the thing. But the equality of the cause removens prohibens huh? It's an accidental cause, does not show the equality what of effects, huh?

[22:45] For as someone with equal impulse knocks down columns, it does not follow that the stones placed above will be equally what moved, right? But that will be more what quickly moved, which is more grave according to the property of its nature, to which it is left when the what prohibiting thing has been removed. Thus, therefore, original justice being removed, the nature of the human body was left what to itself, and according, and according to this, according to the diversity of the natural makeup of the body, right complexion.

[23:30] Paul Stam said. Yeah. Of some, the bodies of some were subject to more what defects, and some to less. Although what Original justice. Original sin. Yeah. Yeah. That explains a lot Yeah. Well, Paul Stam explained. About people. Yeah.

[24:02] So you have to see that distinction between the cause per se and the cause per accidens, right? To the second, it should be said that original what guilt, I guess, and actual are removed by the same by which also are removed these what defects, according to that of the apostle Romans eight eleven. He will make what living, our mortal bodies right, through the spirit dwelling in us. But both come about according to the order of divine wisdom, in a suitable time.

[25:03] right? Sapientis est ordinari, Right. For sense of orders in time. Right. Okay. It is necessary, therefore, that to the immortality in what, not not yeah, being not able to be to suffer right of glory, which is begun in Christ right, and through Christ is acquired for us, we arrive right. Conformed before to his what. We suffer like he does, right?

[25:40] Whence it is necessary that for some time, right, the ability to suffer, right, in our bodies remains, right, to what being promoted to the lack of sufferability, glory, right, conform to Christ, so we have to suffer his passions, right, to some extent, before we can be promoted to this. To the third, Yeah.

[26:14] To the third, it should be said that in actual sin we are able to consider two things: the substance of the act and the reason for what guilt.

[26:30] Now, on the side of the substance of the act, a sin, a actual sin, can what cause some bodily defect, just as from superfluous food some are made what sick and die. Like. I was saying earlier about the drunken Adams, right? Huh.

[26:53] I looked up something about Henry Adams there. You know, kind of famous thing that education Henry Adams on, but he's quite a anti-Semite, you know. Oh wasn't he Yeah, yeah. I mean he was some He was bad dealings with them or something, you know. Which one of the Adams was it that said, I can't believe in a God that became a man and got spit in the face?

[27:13] face by a Jew." One of them said that. That's why he wouldn't believe in Christianity. Wouldn't believe in Christ because he can't believe God would do that. Yeah, yeah.

[27:25] He thought the the Jews are really out to take over the world, and so on. Lots of things he thought. I did tell the story. You know, we we came back from a kind of vacation, something like that, and my father said, "Let's go out to dinner." I'd take out to dinner because I don't want my mother to have to prepare something, you know, other thing, and so on.

[27:45] So, we're going into the restaurant, so on. Long comes this business friend of my father. He said, "Oh, come on!" And he buys dinner for all of us, you know, and and he pays for everything. And I was kinda surprised my father let him do it, you know. And and he said afterwards to us, "Well, he's he's Jewish, right? He doesn't want to be regarded as a tightwad.

[28:02] He wants to overcome the reputation by his generosity. And if you don't let him be generous, he'll be offended. " And so my father understood what to do, you know.

[28:15] Yeah good judgment character Father was very knowledgeable in that way, you know. He got he got a lot of steel from some woman who sold steel, you know. He just treated it very kindly, you know. It's kind of unusual for a woman to be into steel, you know.

[28:34] He understood the people, you know, and ways it, you know, handle them too. Okay. But on the side of the guilt, it deprives grace, which is given to man to rectifying the acts of the soul, but not given to what the defects of body, yeah, in the way the original justice did this, right?

[29:06] And therefore, actual sin does not cause these defects in the way original does. Original takes away the original justice, right? In whereby the body was subject to the soul, right? Once you get baptism, doesn't prevent. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's not the same.

[29:24] Tamp it in more. I declare. But death, yeah, to sin. One proceeds thus: It seems that death and defects of this sort are natural to man, right? For the corruptible and incorruptible differ in kind or in genus, right? As is said in the tenth book of wisdom, the tenth book after the books on natural philosophy.

[29:49] But man is of the same genus with the other animals, which are naturally what corruptible. Therefore, man is naturally what corruptible. Moreover, everything that is composed from contraries is naturally corruptible, as having in itself the cause of its own corruption. But the human body is of this sort. Therefore, it is naturally corruptible. Moreover, heat consumes naturally the wet, but the life of man is conserved through heat and humid.

[30:29] Since, therefore, the operations of life are carried out through the act of natural heat, as is said in the second book about the soul, it seems that death and these defects are natural to man, right? You get withered, you know, get withered up and you die. That's it. You dry it up and that's it. Yeah.

[30:54] He's not going to be replying to these objections either, but it'll be clear from the body article. But against this, whatever is natural to man, God made in man. But God did not make death, as is said in the book of wisdom. Therefore, death is not natural to man. Moreover, that which is according to nature cannot be called what punishment nor evil, because to each thing that is suitable, that is natural to it.

[31:26] But death and these defects are the punishment of original sin, as has been said above. Therefore, they are not natural to man. Moreover, matter is proportioned to form, and each thing to its end. But the end of man is perpetual beatitude. This has been said above, and the form of the human body is the rational soul, which is incorruptible, as even Aristotle knew. Therefore, the human body is naturally incorruptible.

[32:09] He says the answer: It should be said about each thing that is corruptible. We can speak what two ways. One way according to universal nature, another way according to particular nature. For nature that is particular is the proper what. For active virtue, and that is conservator of each thing. And in this way, every corruption, defect is against nature, as is said in the second book on the universe.

[32:45] Because this virtue intends the being and the conservation of that which it is. But the universal nature is the active virtue in some universal principle of nature, as in one of the what heavenly bodies, huh? Kind of amusing when you read, you know, and they talk about the the different planets and what they do, you know, huh? Thomas kind of gives you the little summary of what they say, you know, it's kind of interesting, huh?

[33:28] So the universal nature is the active power in some universal principle of nature, as for example in some one of the celestial bodies, right? Like the sun, huh? Affects all the plants from growing, you know. Okay. Which power intends the good and conservation of the universe, to which is what necessary an alternation and generation and corruption in things, huh? And according to this, the corruptions and defects of things are natural, not to it according to the inclination of form, which is the beginning of being and perfection, but according to the inclination of matter, which proportionally is attributed to such a form according to the distribution of the universal what agent, huh?

[34:26] Is all clear to you now? This is second nature to Thomas because he's involved in what Aristotle says about these things, huh? And although every form intends to be perpetual so far as it can, right, huh? No form of a corruptible thing can what

[34:54] perpetuity of itself apart from the rational soul, in that it itself is not subject entirely to what bodily matter, just as other forms are. Nay, rather, it has its own immaterial operation, right? Like we, I was saying, you know, that the brain is not really the organ of what universal thought, huh? Might be the organ of imagination, right? But not of the universal reason that knows universal as itself.

[35:33] Whence, on this part of its form which is immortal, right, it is more natural to man incorruption than to other what corruptible things, as their forms are not perpetual. But because it also has matter composed from contraries, from the inclination of the matter there follows what corruptibility in the whole. And according to this, man is naturally corruptible according to the nature of the matter left to itself, but not according to the nature of his form, right?

[36:11] And he says the first three arguments or reasons, right, proceed on the part of matter, right. The other three proceed on the part of the what form.

[36:25] Whence, to the solution of them, it should be considered that the form of man, which is a reasonable soul, an understanding soul, as Shakespeare says, according to its incorruptibility, is proportioned to its end, which is a perpetual what beatitude, right? But the human body, which is corruptible according to considered according to its nature, is in some way proportioned to its form, and in some way what not?

[37:00] For twofold is this twofold condition can be noted in some matter, huh? One which the agent chooses, another which is not what chosen by the agent. Now comes a standard example here, huh? But is according to natural condition of the matter, just as the what? I mean the um I guess the woodworker carpenter or house builder I'm not sure which father is just a carpenter I think I just mean maker right Maker yeah To making the what?

[37:38] He chooses a matter hard and moldable, which can be made more subtle, right? That be apt for cutting, right? And according to this condition, matter proportioned to the yeah. But this that

[38:02] breakable and contracted it rusts, right? Huh? Follows from the natural disposition of iron, and the artist does not choose this in the matter, right? He chooses it for another reason, right? But he would more what repudiate it if he were able to, right? If he could make the metal so it doesn't rust. Anybody getting rusting around here in the house? Huh? Yeah. Everybody's got in their house some some rusting, right?

[38:29] Huh? Got a car rust right now. We had a car one time. We were putting on that kind of that plastic paint, you know, that that cloth, you know. Yeah, it's the most patched-up car in the whole churchyard, you know.

[38:46] It's falling apart, you know. You put this kind of a metal tape, you know, on there, and yeah, this part went and this part went, and it was kind of a joke because it was actually the most taped car churchyard for a parking lot.

[39:08] Now I don't have to keep cars quite that long, so okay. Once this disposition of matter is not proportion to the intention of the artist, nor to the intention of the art, right? Likewise, the human body is a matter chosen by nature, as regards this that. It is of a what, temperate complexion. That can be a most suitable organ for the sense of touch, which is the foundation of senses, right?

[39:37] And for the other sense powers and motive powers. But that be corruptible, this is from the condition of matter. Nor is it chosen by nature for that reason, right? But rather, nature would choose a incorruptible matter if it could, right? Okay. And notice the connection there, the likeness there of nature to art, right now, which is a comparison Aristotle often makes. But God, to whom is subject every nature, in the institution of man supplied for the defective nature, and by the gift of original justice he gave to the body, a certain incorruptibility, right?

[40:16] As long as he ate the the food he should, right? He would he would last. And according to this, it is said that God did not make what, death, and that death is the punishment of sin. So he talks about that in other places, you know. But I mean, it's like

[40:40] you could, with probability, guess, right, that God would give us what, a body suitable for our soul, right now. And since our soul is immortal, in order to the perpetual beatitude, right, that he would supply for the deficiency of our body, right. And that's what he in fact did do, right? But even for a natural reason, you can see there's some basis for thinking that God would

[41:12] give us something to to compensate for the defect of the what, body that couldn't last forever. huh? But he could have given, he could have made matter so that it didn't corrupt. Well, not in this universe, given the matter that this universe is made out of, right? Well, then what happens with the the resurrected body? Well, then then you're given a gift, right? Supernatural gift, right? To make the body more suitable to the to the soul, yeah.

[41:42] But but now, but I mean, the resurrected body of Christ would not be like the same as the body given to Adam, right? No, no, but I mean, no, it's going to be immortal without having to eat, right? So I'm sorry, sorry that you. I remember one time when when Warren Murray joined some gourmet society, right, to see what it's like. And they went to the annual dinner of them, you know.

[42:08] And before the dinner began, he got talking to this guy across the table. There, you know, who was in the greenhouse. He was talking about how they had difficulty flying this in from there, and this thing flying in from there, you know. And he he he could see he was very disturbed by the fact that they almost didn't, you know. fly in all the ingredients that they're going to have.

[42:26] They're animal products, so we're in good society. It's all fine, you know. He doesn't. Interesting food, you know. I mean, you can see the guy was just, you know, kind of, you know, you know, talking about. I guess he knew about the the difficulties in procuring all the special ingredients that they needed. Of

[42:48] course, that guy, I got from long dead societies. He likes interesting food. Yeah, so that even in the state of innocence, they don't need food. Great foods. But in the but the supernatural gifts we'll get in in.

[43:11] What will they get? This is my thing about the resurrected body. It seems we we we know things by their properties, right? Yeah. And if if things that are different have different properties, yeah, the resurrected body is going to have different properties than we have. Yeah. So is there like a substantial? Isn't a substantial change? No, no, but it's something supernaturally added to the body, right? That's a supernatural addition.

[43:40] Gift, yeah, yeah, yes. So it's not like now. So it's not like a transfer. Not like a substantial change. No, no. Okay. Because I was saying, if it were, then it wouldn't be the same nature. Yeah, that's four characteristics of the resurrection body. It seems impossible that those are the elements we have in that kind of body. Right, right, which would be different properties we have now.

[44:00] I can't walk through a door. Well, they're not proper. They're not proper to nature. They're supernatural. That's the point. Supernatural. Yeah. Okay, not proper to nature. See, the the soul is naturally the form of a body right now, so it seems unnatural, right, that the soul would exist forever without the body right now, and so it's it's reasonable right now what the church you know knows by revelation you know would be the state of the body after.

[44:32] Yeah, yeah. It's interesting that even in the in the damned, their bodies will not will be immortal right now, but they won't have all those gifts, you know. Yeah. Supernatural. Yeah. It's supernatural So the resurrection Matter itself is is given something supernatural. In the resurrected body. Yeah. Yeah. Material universe itself is somehow raised supernatural. Yeah. And you wonder what Aristotle thought because he knew the soul was immortal right now, and the soul is naturally in the body right now.

[45:08] You know, the body, the soul would be separate from the body given the kind of body it was, right? And so, thinking of Plato and Aristotle, kind of you know leads up to Christianity, right now because it's a. Certain

[45:29] problem there, right? That, in other words, he he would have found Christianity reasonable, right? It had been presented to him. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've often wondered if Thomas Aquinas said a prayer for Aristotle.

[45:44] What was it? Didn't they say was it Gertrude or Mechthild, One of them who asked our Lord, "What about Aristotle?" Oh, she did. Yeah. So what did he say? And he said, "Don't inquire into my my the counsels of my mercy," or something like that. Yeah. Where did they do that? Was it Gertrude or Mactild? Well, you know, Aristotle put up a a plaque, you know, to memorial to to Plato, right?

[46:09] Now, and he says the first man to show by both what word and deed that the virtuous life is the happy life, right? That's quite a compliment to Plato, right? You know, so I mean, you think you know these men, you know, in God's mercy, right? Would have some chance for the attitude. I mean, Dante had him in heaven, didn't he? No, He put up with a, oh, he was in heaven.

[46:34] He was in heaven. He was in heaven. Yeah, kind of, a, kind of a you know happiness that was not the supernatural happiness we have.

[46:46] Well Dante's in heaven Aristotle So, let's take a few more questions to go before we get to the to the law. There's some, but.