Prima Secundae
236. The Moral Precepts and the Decalogue: Natural Law, Every Virtue, and Numbering the Ten Commandments (Summa I-II Q.100 aa.1–4)
Class of 2015-10-01
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/236-the-moral-precepts-and-the-decalogue-natural-law-every-virtue/

[0:00] We're going to descend to these moral precepts and what other ones, in particular, right? The moral precepts and the ceremonial ones and the judicial ones, right?

[0:12] So we have to do a proemium here, he says. Then we're not to consider about each of the kinds of precepts of the old law. And first about the what moral precepts, right? Secondly about the ceremonial, and third about the what judicial. And that order is kind of clear, isn't it, huh? Because the moral precepts are even natural, right? The ceremonial ones are in reference to God, and the judicial is more in reference to other men and so on.

[0:46] About the first twelve things are asked. I didn't know that there were twelve things asked. Yeah. He means the sentences there, and it's usually two or three questions, you know. Sometimes just two, sometimes three questions. Yeah, but here he's got twelve.

[1:09] First, whether all the moral precepts of the old law are of the law of nature. That's a good place to begin, is it? I'm always struck by that in Aristotle, you know, where he's talking about how there's no mean of the extreme. And so he's explaining, you know, that you know the moral virtue lies between two extremes, huh? And neither too much nor too little, right? Nothing too much, as the seven wise men said.

[1:45] So, but then he says if something is already by definition an extreme, right? Then there's no what mean. So he says adultery, right? It's always wrong. And it's not like you know you shouldn't commit adultery too much, but but you should you know not too little, you know?

[2:10] You know, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, he's saying, beginning this example, there's no mean of the extreme, right? This is already extreme adultery, right? And the same thing you talk about murder sometimes and theft, you know, and so on. It's like he knows these things as being obvious, kind of, you know. He takes it as obvious examples, right? So I mean, you know, he's talking about the, you know, commandments as something natural there, right, huh?

[2:33] An example that you would use in ethics would be you can't. There's no mean of seven having seven. Can't can't have too much, can't have too little. It's extreme. Yeah, of course,

[2:48] of course. Sure. Yeah. Any amount of seven, t so on. All equally. I told you my wife had seven without the teeth, and the other. And time to keep.

[3:04] You just say something, you know, and they say, "Gee, what'd you do to get that penance My wife calls us mental cruelty. Oh she's gonna file for a degree of annulment Now we would joke, you know. We, Rose and I, we both say this, you know. We regard marriage as a dead end. Oh, what do they mean? What do they mean? You know, no way out, no way out.

[3:46] I was actually, you know, when I was, before I was married, you know, why did I marry somebody who didn't think it's no way out? You know, you know, somebody who thought they could get up and leave any time, you know, and you know, why did I marry such a person?

[4:12] Okay. Secondly, whether the moral precepts of the old law are about the acts of all the virtues, huh? That's a very interesting question. Let's get really interesting into these, these more particular things. Third, whether all the moral precepts of the old law can be reduced to the what ten precepts of the Decalogue?

[4:39] What? It's made the categories of Aristotle, right? Everything reduced to ten highest genera, down to ten. Fourth, about the distinction of the precepts of the Decalogue. Now there, I bet you get into twos and threes. I bet you anything. Yeah. Nothing. I think it's basically two. Because when he divides up the ten categories of Aristotle, it's into what two or three, always until he gets down to the to all of them, right?

[5:09] He doesn't try to understand. That's what's wrong with the metric system. First division is ten. Five about the number of them, right? My goodness, these, you know, about the distinction, right, and the multitude that comes from distinction. That's a beautiful order there. Distinction and then five about the number. A number rises from distinction, right? And then order, right? Huh? What a what a man who knows how to look before and after, you know, and sees that he's got to see distinction.

[5:48] Yeah, marvelous guy, Thomas. Secondly, about the way of what treating. Yeah. Eight, whether they're dispensable. And a lot of people would say yes. Under the eighth, that's all, yeah.

[6:10] Nine, whether the way of observing the virtue falls under the what precept, huh? And ten, whether the mode of charity comes under the precept, huh? Nothing too much, as the Greek said, right, huh? Can you love God too much?

[6:33] And eleven, about the distinction of other moral precepts, huh? That's interesting. You should do that. This be a. And ten or twelve, rather, whether the more precepts of the old law justify, huh?

[6:51] Now, when you hear somebody's confession, I hope you go through all these points with them. You know. That's what the old old farmer said. That knew your things after preaching about an hour, everything he knew.

[7:06] So what do you think? You know, he gave his best. You know, just right out of the seminar, he's got his PhD or whatever. The old farmer said, "Well, I don't know much, except about feeding the cows, but I know one thing: I don't feed him everything at once. "

[7:38] To the first, one goes forward. Thus, it seems that not all the what moral precepts pertain to the law of nature. For it is said in Ecclesiasticus That's Ecclesiasticus. Ecclesiasticus. If for no other reason that it's seventeen, so Ecclesiastes ends at twelve. That much. This is Ecclesiasticus. Ecclesiasticus yeah, If it ends in an E or E. You were saying the other thing that was that was Ecclesiastes.

[8:09] The other one was yes, I looked it up and said. The one's got it. I forget that. Okay. He will add to them what discipline and the law of life. What will inherit them?

[8:31] But disciplina is divided against the law of what? Nature. Law of nature, right? In that the actual law is, yeah, it's not learned, learned, yeah, but it's had from a natural instinct, right, huh? Therefore, not all the moral precepts are of the law of nature, right, huh? That's interesting. Pope Francis was being very emphatic at the UN about. Hmm. Basically, universally, we have to recognize the law of nature as a moral law binding on everybody.

[9:08] It's very clear. Moreover, the divine law is more perfect than the human law. But the human law adds some things to good what morals, pertaining to those things which are the law of nature. Which is clear from this that the law of nature is the same before all. But these other ones,

[9:38] instituting these morals, are diverse ad diversos, right? So, what age can get married, right? That thing, you know. Or they can smoke, right? They want to raise a smoking age now because all the trouble people are getting from eighteen to twenty-one again. I mean, you know, you have to specify an age, right? You can get married, right? Well It might be that. You know,

[10:04] southern climates they get married at earlier age, right? Northern climates. Therefore, much more should the divine law, right, have to add some things pertain to good morals above the law of what nature, right?

[10:26] However, just as the natural reason induces one what to good morals, right? So also what faith, whence it is said to the Galatians, chapter five, that the faith operates through love. But faith is not contained under the law of nature, because those things which are of faith or belief are above natural reason. Therefore, not all moral precepts of the divine law pertain to the law of what nature.

[11:12] But against this is what the apostle says, Romans chapter two, that the nations which do not have the law—I guess it's the law of the Old Testament, right? Naturally, those things which are the law, they do them, right? Which must be understood about those things which pertain to what good morals. Therefore, all the moral precepts of the law are of the law of nature, right? Aristotle was supposed to put up a testimony to Plato.

[11:43] You know, the first man to show by both word and example that the moral life is a happy life, right? You know, some men maybe had said that didn't show it by their. life. I mean they'd lived morally without you know being able to defend it you know by reason. But Plato, the first man to do both, right? What a compliment to his master, Plato, right now.

[12:07] Aristotle spent quite a few years in school Plato. Right, he he left when Plato died. uh but but uh had great respect for him, right?

[12:19] Albert the Great and Thomas—they both say that Plato and Aristotle are the chief philosophers. Certain parallel between Saint Albert and Saint Thomas there too. Yeah, yeah,

[12:43] yeah. Yeah, Plato's a great man. To know both of them, Albert the Great says, you know, to be a complete philosopher. Let's see what the master has to say here. Let me just stare.

[13:06] I answer: It should be said that the moralia precepts, distinct from the what ceremonial and judicial ones, right? Are about those things which, in themselves, right, as such, pertain to good what morals, right?

[13:31] For since human mores are said in order to what reason, which is the what proper beginning of human acts, those morals are called good which agree with reason, and those bad which discord from reason.

[13:57] That's what Dionysius says, right? Man to be good is to be in accordance with reason. Now, just as every judgment of looking reason proceeds from the natural knowledge of the first beginnings, what Aristotle calls the axioms, the worthies,

[14:27] so also every judgment of practical reason proceeds from some what beginnings naturally known, as has been said above, from which, in diverse ways, one is able to proceed to judging about diverse things.

[14:51] For some things in human acts are so explicit that at once, with little consideration, right, they can be approved or what disproved through those common and first what beginnings, abortion, right?

[15:11] Some things there are to the judgment of which is required much consideration of diverse what circumstances, which to consider diligently is not just of anybody, but of the wise, huh?

[15:29] Just as to consider the particular conclusions of the sciences does not pertain to all, but to the philosophers alone. For some things which are what, yeah, to be judged that should be judged, man needs to be aided by divine instruction, as about things to be believed, right? Thus, therefore, it is clear that since moral precepts are those things which pertain to good morals, huh? And these are those things which are what in agreement with reason.

[16:14] And every judgment of the reason of man, right, is in some way what derived from natural reason. It is necessary that all moral precepts pertain to the law of nature, but not in the same way, right?

[16:35] Because some things there are which at once per se reason, natural reason of any man judges to be done or not to done. As honor your father and mother, right? Aristotle talks about that. When Plato says what the father, the son is always in debt to his father, right? Okay, I said to my mother one time, I said, "Well, I wouldn't even be here without you, mother."

[17:06] Well, that's good. Yeah, always indebted to your mother and father, right? Such as honor your father and mother, and you should not kill, or should you what steal, right?

[17:30] And these things, he says, are absolutely of the law of nature, right? Some things there are which, by a what more subtle consideration of reason, by the wise are judged as something to be observed, right? And these are thus of the law of nature that they nevertheless need somewhat, yeah, by which the minors, the lessers, are instructed by the wiser, just as this says what

[18:07] before a dog, huh? Sometimes the translation here is rise up before the hoary head. Oh, not Koran. I don't know the word Koran. Koran before, right? And that's talking about the old man, right? And honor the person of the old man, right? Huh? Okay. Well, Koran. I see. There's a there's a blot on the page here. Yeah. Koran Kano. I don't know why Kano. How to protect yourself from a dog?

[18:43] White, gray, aged, old, wise, hoary. Only white man, white hair, no frizzles, and gray hair. Like Shakespeare, which graybirds call divine, you know, love, which graybirds call divine.

[19:18] And some things there are for which judging human reason needs divine instruction, right? Through which we are instructed about divine things, just as one ought not to make what, yeah, nor any similitude, and should not take the name of God in vain, huh? And through this is clear the response to what objections, huh?

[19:59] So they. all come under them, but there's something that is what more particular that some people might see, and something maybe others are not seeing. Then you need the why right.

[20:26] To the second one, then precedes us. It seems that the precepts, the moral precepts of the law, are not about all the acts of the virtues, huh?

[20:40] For the observation of the precepts of the old law are called what? Justification. Yeah, according to that is Psalm 1: 18. I will guard your justificationes. But justificatio is a carrying out of justice. Therefore, the moral precepts are not except about the acts of justice.

[21:06] I don't have to be courageous or temperate, right? But I've got to pay my debts. It's capitalist justice. At least pay your taxes. Yeah. Moreover, that which comes under precept has the notion of a what debt. But the ratio of debt does not pertain to the other virtues except to yeah, which the proper act is to render each one what is due him, right?

[21:38] I figure I sometimes think I owe myself a steak, you know. But nobody's before or after himself. And therefore, the precepts of the moral law are not about the acts of the other virtues, but only about the acts of what justice, huh?

[22:00] Well, if the law commands me to be brave as a soldier, then what I owe that to my country, huh? But whom do I owe it temperately Take moderately.

[22:30] Moreover, every law is laid down in account of the common good, as Isidore says. But among the virtues, only justice regards the common good, as the philosopher says in the fifth book of the Ethics. Therefore, the moral precepts are only about the acts of justice, huh?

[22:57] But against this is what Ambrose says: that sin is a transgression of the divine law and the disobedience of the celestial mandates or commands. But sins are contrary to all the acts of the virtues. Therefore, the divine law has to order about the acts of all the virtues.

[23:30] I answer: It should be said that since the precepts of law are ordered to the common good, that was in the definition of it, right? Has been had above. It's necessary that the precepts of the law be diversified according to the diverse ways of what communities, right?

[23:53] Whence also the philosopher in his politics says that other laws must be what established in the city which is ruled by the king, and others in those which are ruled by the people or by those who are potent or powerful in the city, ruled by the one, the few, and the many.

[24:21] Now, human law is ordered to the civil community, right, which is of men to each other. But men are ordered to each other through their outward acts, by which men communicate with each other, and this communication pertains to the notion of justice, which is properly directive of the human community, and therefore the human law does not propose precepts except about the acts of justice. And if it commands acts of the other virtues, this is not accepted, so far as they assume the notion of what justice.

[25:06] So, is there a law against getting drunk in our state, or not? If I stay home and get drunk, is there any law against that? If I get it, if I get into my car and start driving, then it falls under justice, right? I might hit somebody, yeah, property as well as some other body else's.

[25:32] So that's the question: What if you got drunk, got in your car, and zoomed around your property? You had a race track in your backyard behind a driveway that the police don't usually patrol. Yeah. There's a famous legal decision of a man who got drunk, crashes tree in crash, I was

[25:55] drinking, crashed his car into a tree, and then sued the landowner. I think. Or a municipality. This was like a town street, yeah. And this very short decision, the judge wrote it in verse and iambic pentameter, and it was a sort of a humorous, condescending decision. You know, if you're going to be a fool and hit a tree, you shouldn't drink so much. I can't remember.

[26:25] Yeah, I think it was very drink. You got to sue the city for having a tree there or something. Yeah. Okay. But the community to which the divine law orders is of men to God, right? Either in the present or in the future life, huh? And therefore, the divine law proposes precepts about all those things to which men are well ordered to community with what God.

[27:09] But man is joined to God by reason or by the mind, right? In which is the image of God, huh? And therefore, the divine law proposes precepts about all those things to which the reason of man is well what ordered. But this happens through the acts of all the virtues, huh? For the intellectual virtues order well the acts of reason in themselves. Aristotle talks about those virtues in the sixth book of the Ethics.

[27:48] The moral virtues, which he talks about in books two through five, right? Order well the acts of reason about the interior passions and about exterior what operations. And therefore, it is manifest that the divine law suitably proposes precepts about the acts of all the virtues, huh?

[28:15] Thus, however, that some without which the order of virtue, which is the order of reason, cannot be observed, huh? And they fall under the obligation of the precept, huh?

[28:31] Some, however, which pertain to the well-being of perfect virtue, and they come under the admonition of what counsel, huh? So Paul says. It's not a command, but it's better if you do it this way, right? Okay.

[28:51] To the first, therefore, it should be said that the fulfillment of the commands of law, even of those which are the acts of what other virtues, have the notion of justification. Insofar as what is just that man obey God,

[29:12] or also insofar as just that all the things which are of man should be subject to what reason? Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's interesting It's the right order Yeah yeah Yeah. That's kind of using justice in a broader sense, right?

[29:34] Since which Aristotle talk about in the fifth book. Yeah, my my anger, say, you know, it's a virtue for through the anger Aristotle talks about, huh? Christ me for a big humble heart, huh? But anger ought to be ruled by what reason, right?

[29:58] I was driving up to Quebec there one time. seeing Warren Murray and Monsieur Di Anso on new car, you know, and I was going up through Maine and the route to President Kennedy, you know, but it's an awful route because there's all kinds of potholes and things. So I was kind of not going too fast, you know, because you're putting the brakes on all the time and so on.

[30:20] Wait a minute, it's crazy French driver, you know. He roars by me, you know, and his wheels must have picked up one of these stones on the road, right? And whack, I could have hit the side of the car. Oh, I knew that was, I knew that he was going to leave a nice mark on the side of the car, you know, and say so. But I said, but I'm a philosopher.

[30:42] But there was this back to me. Well, no. So it's just that we, angry, should obey what reason, right now, okay? Or you want to drink too much? You say, well, no, I've had enough. Yeah, put the bottle away.

[31:05] Yeah, it's right that that my my thirst should should obey my reason, right? My hunger, okay. Okay, we've replied to objection two here. To second should be said that justice properly said pertains to the debt of one man to another, right? That's justice in the way Aristotle talked about in the fifth book, right? But in all the other virtues, there is attended the debt of the lower powers to what reason, right?

[31:46] And according to this notion of this debt, the philosopher assigns in the fifth book of the ethics, he said a certain justice metaphorical, right? So in likeness to not justice in the strict sense, huh? Okay.

[32:08] So he's taking the broad sense there. I'm going to get to the senses metaphorical. Okay. To third, the response is clear to those things which are said about the diversity of what communities, huh?

[32:25] Take a little break here now, right? Okay, we're up to Article Four. Okay, do we have three? Okay. No, industry. Oh. Okay, okay, three, okay. To the third one proceeds thus: It seems that not all the moral precepts of the Old Law are reduced to the Ten Laws or Ten Precepts of the Decalogue. For the first and principal precepts of the law are: You should love the Lord your God, and you should love your what neighbor, right?

[33:05] As is had in Matthew twenty-two. But these two are not contained in the precepts of the Decalogue. Therefore, not all precepts, moral precepts, are contained, in the precepts of the Decalogue. I'm going to get a division of two here a bit. Yeah, it's going to be those best. He had the two tablets, you know, with the three and the seven. as if he didn't divide it evenly into five and five, but he divides according to these two, I guess.

[33:34] Moreover, the moral precepts are not reduced to the ceremonial precepts, but rather the reverse, right? But among the precepts of the Decalogue is one ceremonial, remember, to make holy the day of the Sabbath, right? And therefore, the moral precepts are not reduced to all the precepts of the Decalogue. Moreover, the moral precepts are about all the acts of virtues, but among the precepts of the Decalogue are laid down only the precepts pertaining to the act of justice, as is clear to one running through them.

[34:12] Therefore, the precepts of the Decalogue do not contain all the moral precepts. Huh? There's a different what? The looser sense of discurrere huh? Run through them, right? But we use that that way of speaking sometime, right? Let me run through this once more. You know, you know, making all these plans for the safety of the Pope. Let's run through this once more.

[34:38] But against this is what is said, Matthew five: Blessed are you when they curse you, right? Huh? Says the gloss that Moses, huh, laying down or proposing the Ten Precepts, afterwards explains them what? In parts, right? Therefore, all the precepts of the law are certain what precepts? Parts of the precepts of the Decalogue, right?

[35:11] I answer: Should be said that the precepts of the Decalogue differ from the other precepts of the law in this: that the precepts of the Decalogue are what? Promulgated He proposed to the people. For God is said to have proposed the people. The other precepts he proposes to the people through what? Moses, huh?

[35:42] Those precepts pertain to the Decalogue, the knowledge of which man has to himself from what? God. huh For these are those which are what? Of this sort are those things which, at once from the what? First common beginnings, can be known, modica consideratione with a little consideration, right, huh? And also those which, from what? Faith. Divinely poured in, are known. Now among the precepts, therefore, the law are not counted or computed.

[36:58] The two precepts of the two genera of what? Those, to wit, which are first and what common, of which there is not another what? Edition of them, right? Publication of them, might say, except that they are written in natural reason, as it were per se known, right? Such as that one should do to know one harm right? Others of this sort. And therefore those which are what?

[37:37] Through a diligent inquiry of the wise, found to be what? In agreement with reason. And these come from God to the people by the middle of the teaching of the wise, right, huh? Now both of these precepts are contained in the precepts of the Decalogue, but diversely. For those which are first and common are contained in them as beginnings in what proximate conclusions, but those which are known to the wise or by the wise are contained in them a converso as conclusions in what?

[38:21] Yeah. Okay. I mean, it's more clear to get to the replies here. To the first, therefore, should be said that those two precepts on the love of God and your loving your neighbor as yourself are the prima, right, first, and communia, the common precepts, right, of the law of what nature, which are known per se to human what reason,

[39:02] either through nature or through what faith, and therefore all the precepts of the Decalogue to those two are referred to as conclusions to the what common beginnings, huh? So the first three are in some way tied up with the first, right, and the last seven with the love for your neighbor, right?

[39:28] Now, what about this objection from the third commandment, right? To the second, should be said that the precept about the observation of the Sabbath is secundum aliquid morale, right? In so far as through this is commanded that man at some time give what rest in divine things, or to divine things, according to that of Psalm 45, huh? Take a vacation

[40:06] and see that I am what God, right? Huh? And among and according to this, it's numbered among the what precepts of the Decalogue, but not as regards the what of the time,

[40:25] yeah, demanding. So we gotta read tax, I guess, huh? Because according to this, is ceremonial. So Thomas is admitting that in that third commandment, there's something what ceremonial, yeah. What's next for you? Meet the objection, right?

[40:48] But he distinguishes there that among the precepts of the Decalogue is one ceremonial. Well, it's not just ceremonial; it's what. moral. Yeah, you ought to set time aside to to worship God and so on, praise Him, right? Huh? Yeah, and then it's but it's ceremonial that should be the Sabbath, right, or Sunday or something, right? Huh? Okay. And

[41:17] since you know, when this this law about you can have Sunday mass now on Saturday evening, right? Huh? To prevent scandalize people in the old days, right? But. If you think of how the Jews, you know, would start the day from the evening before, right? We still do that. Liturgically we do that every day. Yeah. From Genesis, evening. or whatever.

[41:45] So we always have. we never. if you're familiar with the Roman Rite, in office, we'll have certain Sundays and certain big feasts I have first, vespers and second vespers. Yeah. Yeah. That's one of these canonical creations of the West. We just have every day begins in the evening. So we never have second vespers. We never have second methods. Never. We used to. Because we were Latinized. Okay.

[42:14] To the third it should be said that the ratio. Of debt or being owed, in the other virtues is more hidden than in justice, right?

[42:35] And therefore, the precepts of about the acts of the other virtues are not thus known to the people as the precepts of the acts of what justice. And on account of this, the acts of justice especially come under the precepts of the Decalogue, which are the first what elements of law, right? So I mean, so what's the first one there for us? It's honor your father and mother, isn't it, right?

[43:04] And don't you think you owe to your mother some honor and respect, right? So that's kind of idea of justice. So it's more obvious, right? Huh?

[43:16] And even Aristotle and Cicero see that, right? Huh? And then you have what? Thou shalt not what? Kill. And because that's unjust, right? Huh? And then you get to adultery, right? And you get to stealing, though. That's sort of. Then bearing false witness and so on.

[43:42] A lot of them are more hidden, right? Now, you know, covet your neighbor's wife or his, ox. His wine collection, or something. Sometimes they show these these guys with real nice wine cellars you know. Really, I'm jealous, you know. I mean, covet that wine cellar

[44:12] Okay. Now, with the precepts. Precepts of the Decalogue are suitably distinguished. To the fourth, one goes forward. Thus, it seems that unsuitably are the precepts of the Decalogue distinguished. For Latria, that's what you do when you worship God, I guess. It's named that one. Is another virtue from what faith? But precepts are given about the acts of virtues. But this that is said in the beginning of the Decalogue, "You will not have alien gods before me," pertains to what faith?

[44:54] But what is subjoined, "You shall not make what statue," I suppose, a sacred cow, And pertains to Latria, right? Therefore, there are two precepts, and not one, as Augustine says, huh?

[45:14] So the major term here is the precepts are given about the acts of the virtues, and here you seem to have two what virtues, huh?

[45:24] Moreover, the affirmative precepts in the law are distinguished from the negative ones, like honor your father and mother is affirmative, huh? Thou shalt not kill—that's negative, right?

[45:39] But this that is said, "I am the Lord your God," is affirmative. But what is put underneath that, "You shall not have alien gods before me," is negative. Therefore, there are two precepts, and they are not contained under one, as Augustine lays down.

[45:58] Moreover, the Apostle, the Epistle of the Romans says, "I do not know what I do not know concupiscence but unless the law said it." we shall not covet. it. And thus it seems that this precept, "You shall not covet," is one precept. Therefore, not not to be distinguished into two.

[46:32] So distinguishing things is important for Thomas, I guess. Yeah. Against this is the authority of Augustine in the gloss upon Exodus, where he lays down three precepts pertaining to God and seven to your neighbor. Three and seven. I

[47:01] answer: It should be said that the precepts of the Decalogue are distinguished in diverse ways by diverse people, right? For Hesychius, Leviticus 26, upon that ten women in one what?

[47:24] Yeah, they cook the breads, right? Huh? Says the precept about the observation of the Sabbath is not of the ten precepts because it is not observed according to the letter, according to all what time? Huh?

[47:48] He distinguishes four precepts pertaining to God. That the first be, I am the Lord your God. The second that you will not have alien gods before me. And us also, Jerome distinguishes these two. In Ocitiana, super illud populus iniquitatis tuas and can you two iniquities? Third precept he says is you shall not make a what? Yeah. Fourth, you will not take the name of God in vain.

[48:26] Pertaining to one's neighbor, he says six. The first is honor your father and mother. The second, you shall not kill. The third, you shall not commit adultery. The fourth, you shall not commit theft. Fifth, you shall not bear false witness. And the sixth, you shall not what? Yeah, it's covering the covering together. Okay. I find this a lot of different

[48:56] sentences about this. Different opinions, and then he get the first opinion, then he gives me criticism, and the second opinion, he says, find the third opinion final, yeah. And therefore, I it's funny he takes up. Make your doctoral thesis on this fourth article, right?

[49:24] Okay. Now, first, this seems to be what unsuitable that the precept about the observation of the Sabbath, right, is placed among the precepts of the Decalogue. If in no way it pertains to the Decalogue, that's that's an easy enough objection. You and I can see that, huh? Okay.

[49:55] Second, because as is written in Matthew six, no one is able to serve two masters, two lords. Seems to be what of the same reason, and to fall into the same what precept? I am the Lord your God, and you will not have what? False gods. Yeah, it's kind of the same thing.

[50:22] Whence Origen, distinguishing also four precepts, ordering us to God, lays down these two for one precept. The second he lays down: you shall not make a what. golden cow, yeah. Third, you will not assume the name of God in vain. The fourth. Remember, yeah, sanctify the day of the Sabbath. The other six, he lays down as Hesychius did right. Well, of course, Origen is a heretic anyway, so.

[51:07] But because to make a staturoid or likeness is not prohibited, except according or because of this, that one do not what. Worship for gods, for in the tabernacle God be commanded. Yeah, to serve Him, as is had in Exodus twenty-five. More Pseudo, Augustine Augustine lays down under one precept: you shall not have alien gods, and you will not make a what. Yeah.

[51:40] Likewise, also the concupiscence of a alien wife. Um. Yeah, for yeah, for a good yeah. Pertains to the concupiscence of the flesh, but the concupiscence of other things which are desired to be possessed pertains to the concupiscence of the eyes.

[52:08] Whence also Augustine lays down two precepts. About not desiring an alien thing, and an alien what wife. And thus he lays down three precepts in order to God, and seven in order to what, one's neighbor. At hope, Melius Est, and this is better, right?

[52:39] It's the same number as the categories of Aristotle, too. Might add, huh? Therefore, it's even more harmonious. Okay. To the first, therefore, it should be said that Latria is not accepting, certain what. Protesting, right? Yeah. Whence there are not other precepts given about latria, and others about what faith.

[53:17] But they are more given about latria than about faith. Because the precept of faith is presupposed to the precepts of Decalogue, just as the precept of what of love?

[53:31] For just as the first precepts, common precepts of the natural law, are per se known to the one having natural reason and do not need promulgation, so also to believe in God is first and per se known to the one who has faith. Right? For the one approaching God, God is necessary to believe that He is, as is said to the Hebrews 11, and therefore it does not need another promulgation except the what pouring in of faith.

[54:11] To the second should be said that the affirmative precepts are distinguished the negative. When one is not comprehended in the other, same knowledge of opposites as Aristotle and Plato say.

[54:26] Just as in the honouring of parents is not included that no man should be what killed, nor the reverse, right? But when the affirmative is comprehended in the negative and the reverse, there are not given upon it diverse precepts, huh? Just as not given another precept about this, which is you should not what commit theft, huh? And about this that is to conserve an alien thing or to restore it, right, huh?

[55:01] And for the same reason there are not diverse precepts about believing in God and about this that one does not believe in what? Yeah, okay. That's the same knowledge of opposites, right?

[55:27] To the third, it should be said that every what concupiscentia, coveting, you want to say that, come together in one common notion, and therefore the apostle singularly speaks of the command of what? Yeah, Desire. Yeah. Because, however, in special diverse are the reasons for desiring, right, huh? Therefore, Augustine distinguishes diverse precepts about not what coveting, huh? For they differ the species of concupiscence according to the diversity of the actions or the things desired, as the philosopher says in the tenth book of the Ethics, huh?

[56:18] So I didn't know about this difference of opinion as to whether there was ten or nine. Yeah. Were the others saying there was ten as well, but they were grouping four and six, really? Yeah. Whatever they were dividing four and six. Yeah, they they combine the last two as as one because they're both you know concupiscence. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And then they they divide the first ones into four instead of three, I guess.

[56:43] Yeah, right of ten then, right? Yeah. Time for one more or not? Uh, this next one is very, very long. Okay, you better stop there. Better stop there. Oh it's very, very long, isn't it? Oh, yeah. He's gonna give probably multiple opinions about dividing. Oh yeah. Yeah.