Prima Secundae
240. God Cannot Deny Himself: Homicide, Theft, and Adultery in the Decalogue, and Whether the Mode of Virtue Falls Under the Law (I-II q.100 a.8–9)
Class of 2015-10-15
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/240-god-cannot-deny-himself-homicide-theft-and-adultery-in-the/

[0:00] Okay. To the second, it should be said. This is now the second objection. If you go back, it was based upon that what. Proportion, right? Huh? That human laws to man is the divine nature and all, and we can dispense with human law, right? And so, so to the second should be said that as the apostle says in the second epistle to Timothy, God remains what? Faithful.

[0:30] He's not able to negate himself, huh? Now, what did Shakespeare say? This above all, to thine own self be true, and must follow night the day. It can't not then be false to any man. I mean, here it applies even to God in a way, right? Now, that God is what? True to himself. Yeah, that's in a sense what it means, doesn't it? Yeah.

[1:01] I suppose fidelity in marriage would mean being true to yourself, right? Now, being a husband or a wife. True. to your better self Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Now he would negate himself if he what took away the order itself of what his justice, right? Why? Because he himself is justice itself. Okay. So you can argue that you know all these things we say about God that he's just, but he's justice itself, right?

[1:33] Because he's altogether simple, right? So if you say God has justice, you got to realize you're speaking a little differently than saying a man has justice, right? Because the virtue the man has of justice is something other than the man, right? But in God, there's no putting together. God is in no way put together. I'm put together in a lot of ways. You're held. Fall apart too.

[1:56] Yeah. That's why I can fall apart, right? God can't fall apart. So God is not only wise, but he's what wisdom itself, right? What does Christ say? I'm the what word? The truth and the life. Did he say that? Yeah. Yeah. There's a road Hmm The road Yeah the road. Yeah. But then he says what? As God is the what? Yeah. Didn't say I'm alive or I'm true.

[2:29] Well, they could say it too, right? But you got to realize, you know, you have to, you know, as Dionysius says, you have to use both ways of speaking to bring out fully God, right? He's not only true, but he's truth itself. He's not only alive, but he's life itself. I like to say sometimes by way of comparison God is not just truthful as I can be on a good day.

[2:56] He's truth itself. Yeah. Thomas shows at the end of the first book of the Summa Contra Gentiles that God is blessed on beatitude, right? And he goes on to show that God is beatitude itself. And therefore, his beatitude, you know, which in essence can only be something partaken of, right? But he is it, you know. It's like saying God is happiness itself. Oh, that's nice.

[3:23] And therefore, in this, God is not able to dispense, right? That what? It be lawful that man does not, ordinarily in an ordered way, have himself towards what? God. Or he is not subject to the order of his justice, even in those things according to which men are ordered to each other, right?

[3:50] And Aristotle's talking about the order of the universe, right? And he says there's two orders to consider here, right? One is the order of the parts to each other, and then the order of all of them to the separated good which is God. Thomas is always quoting that, you know. It's coming back to here, right? Because the first three are what the order to God Himself, right?

[4:14] The first three commandments of the Decalogue, and then the other one is the order of what things to each other, right? So, and the lastly, we take the example of the chair, right? We say what the back of the chair and the seat have a certain order with respect to each other, right? And usually the back is slightly what a slightly obtuse angle, right? Coming into the seat here.

[4:40] No, slightly obtuse. You wouldn't want it any other way. Yeah, you wouldn't want it simply a right angle, and therefore you would want an acute angle. Enough.

[4:52] Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Nobody, you'd be doing a lot of harm, right? The trains in New York, they got new ones, and they had acute angles on the

[5:03] seats. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. But the order of the parts of the chair towards each other, right, is because of the order of the whole chair to sitting, right? Yeah. That's where Sitting outside the chair yeah Yeah That's the way the universe is, right? The order of the parts among themselves is an account of the order of the whole universe to God, who says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

[5:33] antonomasia. I was thinking of that beautiful antonomasia there in Saint John, right? Where he says, "And when he appears, we shall be what like him, for we shall see him as he is." But aren't we already like him? Because we're made in his image and likeness, right? And if we have grace, aren't we very much like him? So why does Saint John say, "And when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is"?

[6:15] That's the likeness we're I think we're aiming at. That's the fullness of the likeness. Yeah, but but then we're like him by antonomasia, right? It's not that we're not like him by what grace, or that we're not like him even by our what being made in his image and likeness, right? Huh? But when our image and likeness, you know, is infused with grace, that are even more like him, right?

[6:37] When we have glory and see him as he is, right, which is the way he sees himself, right, then we are most what like him, and therefore by antonomasia Yeah, he doesn't say then we are most like him, does he? No, because that would be speaking what properly, right? And but this is speaking figuratively, right? But by antonomasia, right?

[7:09] No, Aristotle's use of antonomasia there when he says that Homer is what the poet, right? That's antonomasia, right? But the word poet itself, as Plato points out, is by antonomasia because the word poet in Greek means what? Maker. Yeah. So there's a maker of the table, maker of dinner, the maker of glass and so on, but maker of clothes and so on. But among all the makers, the maker of the play, right, or the epic, he is the maker, right?

[7:42] The Greeks themselves, for some reason, that that was the what the greatest of the makers, right? Although I think you know, I have this theory here about which of the fine arts will survive in heaven, right? And I don't think that there will be that Michelangelo will be sculpting things, right? Or that the painters will be painting things, right? Because our surroundings will be so beautiful, what do we need a painting for, a sculptor?

[8:20] And the saints, you know, in their glory, will be what most pleasing, right? So what do you need a painting for? I don't think that there will be fiction either up there or or plays. And I get this theory, you know, that you know in plays basically you have two kinds, tragedy and comedy, and then something you know in between. But I think tragedy and comedy are a result of the fall of man, right?

[8:43] You know, it was something tragic because man has fallen, right? And even the laughable person in the comedy is because of our fallen nature, right? On little pickpockets, and and but everything, you know, first of all, will be away now, you know, except you know Christ saved us from that. So I don't see that I'm going to have tragedies or comedies up there, right now. And

[9:11] of course, you know, you know how what's his name? Chesterton says, you know, there's something too great for God to show us on this earth, and I sometimes fancied was his humor, you know. But you know, it's kind of funny how you have examples of Christ, you know, being sad, you know, he weeps over Jerusalem, and being angry with the hardness of the hearts, you know, it's mentioned in Scripture that he has those, but you don't have him cracking any jokes, you know.

[9:38] And I saw something good say, "Well, he has a sort of humor, you know." Plays on words, but not in a humorous. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I talked to it with Warren, you know, and he thinks he made this little bit of irony, you know, in Christ, you know, Christ sometimes that kind of humor, you know, which befits a superior man, you know. But

[9:59] rejoice Yeah, yeah. He rejoices Yeah Yeah But. I mean, I mean, even these little silly things, you know, I we have a. Thing remote for the TV, right? And of course, you have a thing for the the telephone. You can walk around with it, you know. Now, no cord, you know, the thing on there. Well, the the the thing for the telephone was ever the the other thing was.

[10:24] So I picked it up and I'm done. I started. I realized I realized that's the thing how you get the station, man. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I'm telling ghosties, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[10:40] I mean, those things are funny, but but would that happen in heaven? You know, you know, what you gonna laugh about the little things? You know, little

[10:50] funny things that little children do too. You know, and the little mistakes they make, you know, and so on. You know, I always tell that story of my son Paul. You know, I told you one time he was his little boy. You know, but he's kind of straightening some of his mind. He said, "Did I come from Mama?" It's out of the blue. He says. to me one day I said yes.

[11:09] You came from mama. Then he said, "How about Maria? Did Maria come from mama?" I said, "Yeah, Maria came from mama too." And then he said about his younger brother there. And Marcus, did you come from mama? And I said yes. And he said, "Did you come from mama?"

[11:30] I said no. Well, then you don't really belong, but you can stay. Well, that was kind of. Well, I didn't think the occasion, you know, explained the whole the whole truth of all this matter was was appropriate, you know. But those we find very funny, right? But I mean, would there be these, you know, those events, these kind of things in heaven, you know? What would be the source of our laughter in heaven?

[11:58] I don't know. It's hard to see. I mean, we're not going to be playing jokes at each other, are we up there? I don't think. You know, he was talking about one of the little one of the little girls, you know, who made a coffee cake, you know, but instead put the coffee in. She put the coffee greens in, you know. Everybody's

[12:21] ridiculous. I know. But you you would make these little, you know, funny, you know, innocent mistakes, you know. Okay. Now, interesting way Thomas arranges these objections. You know, sometimes one kind of clears away some more obvious difficulties and then more deeper ones.

[12:55] To the third, should be said that the killing of a man is prohibited the Decalogue, according as it has the notion of something what not owed right? Huh. For this, the precept contains the very notion of what justice. Huh.

[13:16] For human law cannot what concede this right that be licit for a man to be killed without it being owed to him, right? Huh. But malefactors, evildoers, to be killed, right? Or the enemies of the what country? This is not what. Unowed. Yeah. Undue. Okay. So if I'm attacking a country, I'm owed to death, right? Okay. Whence this is not, in fact, contrary to the precept of the what Decalogue, nor is such a killing homicide, right, which is prohibited by the precepts of the Decalogue, as the great Augustine says there in the book on the free judgment there.

[14:09] In like case, if from someone is taken away what was his own, if it be what, Owed to him that he what give it up, right? This is not theft or what? Yeah. Right behind whatever you've been saying Yeah. Which is prohibited by the precepts of the Decalogue, right? Okay.

[14:34] So you have to understand. To the reason to understand the Decalogue, right? Thomas is helping you to understand the command more here, right? huh? This is harder to see, right, than the ones in the first couple ones. which are more general.

[14:58] And therefore, when the sons, notice the examples he gives here, and now when the sons of Israel, by the precept or command of God, took the what spoils of the Egyptians, right? This was not what theft, because this was owed them from the judgment of what God.

[15:20] Now that's the commandment of what? Thou shalt not commit theft. Yeah, yeah. Similarly, also Abraham, when he consented, right, to kill what his son, he did not consent in what homicide, huh? Because it was owed for him to kill him, right, by the command of God, who is the Lord of life and what death, huh?

[15:49] As woman, it's not their beauty; their body is not theirs. It's God, right? Huh? We're more gods than our own. He who what inflicted the punishment of death upon all men, right? Both just and unjust men, right? For the sin of the first parent, huh? Whose what? Judgment. Or sentence. Yeah. If man is to carry out by the divine authority, will not be homicide, huh? Any more than God is, huh?

[16:28] And likewise also, this one interests me now. I have a great admiration for Osee I see a lot of nice, nice quotes from him, you know, Thomas says. And likewise also, Osee, what approaching the what? What unfaithful wife? Yeah. Or to an adulterous woman, right? Huh? Known as moechatus right? Or fornicatus?

[16:52] Yeah. Because he approached the one that was his own, according to the divine what command? Who is the author of the institution of what? Yeah.

[17:06] Okay, I don't know if what's his name there can, from Germany can make use of this. I just send them the whole question. Yeah.

[17:17] So another distinction Thomas is talking about here then. Thus, therefore, the the precepts themselves, the Decalogue, as regards the ratio, the reason of justice which they contain, are what immutable, unchangeable, yeah. But as regards some what determination through application to singular acts, that this or that be in fact homicide, or theft, or adultery, and those are the examples he took from Scripture itself, right? Huh. Or not.

[17:50] This is what changeable, right? Huh. Because some man is what. Sometimes. Is owed, his life, right? Huh. Okay. It's important to point it out, even you know the Pope seemed to be kind of against the death penalty now, right? Yeah. John John Paul the Second and then the present Pope too, I think. Yeah, present Pope. I I read something recently that he I I was reminded of reading our teachers carefully.

[18:24] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because he often uses rhetoric in a way that sounds contrary to other things. So he gave a talk. I think I told you about this, this some society has to do with penal law, international penal law, and he said in his talk, at least it's translated, I looked at the Italian, and said, he says, "Well, we know that you know John Paul II in the Catechism, uh, the death penalty is condemned."

[18:52] Hmm. Condemned. I thought, gee, no, so then he gives two references. to Evangelium Vitae and the Catechism So I looked it up, And the first thing the Catechism says is it gives the reason why it's perfectly legitimate. And I said, "Well, this is more a rhetorical way of speaking." to say, "We want to exclude it rather than it's actually condemned because the Catechism the present Pope, condemned it.

[19:14] It just said it's a very restricted use, but they recommend it because it's in their judgment it's not necessary to exercise in death penalty." I think we're in text two of Benedict. You know, he's talking about you know that if you disagree with the Pope about the death penalty, you're not a bad Catholic for disagreeing with him, right? Yeah. That this is somewhat a prudential matter that not a matter of.

[19:36] So this is this is yeah. This Pope in particular uses more rhetoric sometimes than strict reasoning. That's the way I that's the way I put a pious in Mm-hmm. So Ben the 16th said that? Yeah, A Catholic can kind of disagree. with... Yeah, about, about that. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, respect for the Pope's and his thing, and and and with the circumstances, you know, in some way justify you know this or not, but yeah, this.

[20:02] It's not just a matter of of justice, yeah, that's what that's what yeah. The popes and bishops, many bishops, are recommending this very strongly because of the circumstances in which we live, and you can interpret those in different ways. That's where it's a matter of judgment. But I often point out to everybody that the pope has never condemned capital punishment. Has never actually condemned capital punishment as such.

[20:28] In this or that case, maybe they got the wrong guy. It's unjust in that case. But as such, because scripture doesn't and the teaching of the church never has, and as far as never will because of this, this is a good explanation of the reason why. And you may think, you know, that if you don't have the death penalty, then you're respecting in some way the life of this man who's done horrible things.

[20:50] Nevertheless, right? Maybe committed murder and so on. Even you know, and then a fortiori, you should you know spare the innocent babies. You know, you you guess in respect for life. Maybe that's part of the the thinking of of of I think yeah you know. That's my interpretation. Yeah yeah Our our. Reno from first thing some months ago, was saying that uh our current Pope's education, his formation, didn't have the didn't lend itself to, I guess, oratorical precision in its oratory, rhetorical precision, like we saw with Pope John Paul II.

[21:30] Pope John Paul II, and Benedict. Yeah. weighed every word. Yeah, Pope Francis, he's also admitted that too. That he often speaks spontaneously, without really thinking. It's just... Yeah, yeah, Yeah, He's exuberant.

[21:49] Probably disagree with him about the, uh, he the, environment. Yeah, yeah, that's yeah. There's many instances in his encyclical where it's rhetoric and it's not reason. When he talks about how there's all kinds of species that are being destroyed that we'll never know what they are. And I said, well, If you don't know what they are, how do you know they're being destroyed? You know Yeah. He says it Yeah.

[22:17] We'll never know what they are Yeah. Okay Okay. Okay. Let's read the whole last paragraph. then Thus, therefore, the precepts, of the decalogue itself, as regards the ratio of the reason of justice which they contain, are immutable, right? But as regards some determination through application to singular acts, as to whether this or that be homicide, theft, or adultery, right, or is not such, right? This is what changeable.

[23:01] Sometimes by the authority of God alone, right? Huh? In those things which by God alone are instituted, as in matrimony. Now that's something to give to our friend there in Germany. And in others of this sort. Sometimes also by human authority in those things which are committed to human jurisdiction, right?

[23:27] As regards this, men carry the what? Place of God, not regarding all things. I can remember after they they went into the, vernacular for the mass, right? And my my aunt had, I don't know, Bissinger, one of those little popular Catholic magazines, anyway. And somebody's writing, in, you know, that she'd been defending the use of Latin all the time with her Protestant neighbors, and now the whole thing was cut out, you know, but like, and uh, uh, it felt like you know, that was kind of defeated almost.

[24:04] You had to say the mass in Latin, you know, you couldn't say it in the vernacular. That was really kind of probably was said in Greek before. maybe it was said in Latin. I don't know, and or Aramaic or something else when Christ instituted it. And then you have to say it in Aramaic because Christ said in in,

[24:25] but people get mixed up in those things, you know. Yeah, it was a strong reaction against the Protestants and others around the time a little before who insisted on vernacular, and they came down hard against it. Yeah, yeah. And that just kind of stuck in people's brain. And then when they allowed us to do our Sunday thing on Saturday evening, right? Huh? That probably kind of scandalized some people, right?

[24:47] You know that you can fulfill your Sunday obligation on Saturday. That sounds like a you know. And reducing the fast. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Actually, had to fast from midnight, huh? Before you went to communion, you know. Not even water. some people really need a drink of water. I guess you know they. they Before Pius XII, they weren't allowed to take a drink of water. As far as I know, as far as I.

[25:15] You wouldn't take you wouldn't take a drink of water, you know. I remember when we had our first Holy Communion, and of course we were kind of assembling in the school before marching over to church, you know, and marching. And the good sisters, of Saint Joseph, had covered up all the the fountain. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Because some kids would go there without thinking, right? And then they, this is you know, they were doing a whole class, of first communicants, right?

[25:37] And that would be terrible. You you couldn't go to communion, and that was kind of the law at that time, right? Huh? I remember one one of the ladies in the parish. They were saying to my to my mother, you know, you know, you know how hard it is for not to drink water in the morning, you know, like they didn't, you know, physically they they needed a drink of water, and such relief when when that's changed to one hour before, you know.

[26:02] Which I like to call at least an hour before the beginning of mass, not the hour before the time of mass, you know. I guess it's the time when you receive the communion, right? Huh? It's an hour from that, but I like to be a little safe, you know, and doing an hour before mass.

[26:27] Okay, the fourth one that was more a what thinking out, right? Mm-hmm. Than an inter uh what? Interpretation. of a command. Yeah, the dispensation.

[26:40] This is the one about the one on Sunday, right? I mean, on the Sabbath day, right? How can you defend the country on that day, right? Okay. For he's not understood to violate the Sabbath, who does a work that's necessary for human salvation, as the Lord Himself proves Matthew twelve, right? Huh. Yeah, and one thing I was a little confused about was you know that is the obligation of Sunday mass.

[27:07] Obligatory for a person who's traveling, right? Isn't there some question about that? They usually, I've heard said if you're traveling, you're dispensed. Yeah, yeah. If you can't, you know, make.

[27:22] Yeah, the circumstances. For example, if you're going someplace for a week and a half, and you're down the street from a parish church. Yeah, that's- You don't have much of an excuse. Yeah. yeah, yeah. Well, it's like I suppose too, you know if you're in a place where the only meal being served is on Friday. Hamburger. Yeah, yeah. Filena.

[27:46] That? was my dear Aunt Margaret. She told me how one day she was really hungry. She went to some place. Yeah. Big burger. Yeah. She spent a bite into it, somebody said, isn't it Friday?

[28:01] Yeah. Oh, sir. One of Rosalie's Irish, uh, friends when she was a young girl, you know they, she was on an airplane, I guess, and they served meat, and it's Friday, she didn't realize it, right? They, we eat meat, and it's Friday. And of course, they're a little nervous flying in the airplane the first time. One of our, uh, new, uh, new monks here, uh, was looking at his plate Yeah.

[28:29] in the kitchen when he was just about to wash up after a midday meal yesterday. Um, no, sorry, it was Tuesday, and he had a caterpillar, which apparently had been in some of the lettuce from the garden or something. Yeah. He was kind of looking at it, and he pointed to it, and I said, it's okay, this is a meat day. But you can't have it on Monday.

[28:53] Okay. Should we take a little break now, or? Ninth article: Whether the mode of virtue falls under the precept of the law. To the ninth, one goes forward. Thus, it seems that the mode of virtue falls under the precept of the law.

[29:17] For it is the mode of virtue that someone what justly do just things and fortiter strong things, and similar about other virtues. Now that means what you know that you do with perseverance and stability and so on, right? Things like that,

[29:39] right? But in Deuteronomy 16, it's commanded justum quod justum est, carry out what is just, justly. Okay. Okay. Okay. So if I have a struggle there to avoid fornication or something or adultery or something like that, that's not. You know, if I avoid it, that's not an act of what chastity done chastely. I got to have my my my passions, you know, more under control than that, right?

[30:10] Okay. I got to rejoice in in in doing what is chaste, right? And so when I pay my debts, my debts I should come in and the joy I give you what I owe you. Yeah, yeah, yeah. If I pay, you know, to pay what I really do owe you, well, that's you know.

[30:30] We're going out to dinner there with the grandchildren. My son's trying to give me some money, and I said, "No, no, no." I got too many twenties in my hands to bulge my pocketbook. I can't even sit down, you know. So I'll pay for the whole thing here, and so.

[30:48] So that's a quote from Deuteronomy 16: 20, right? Justum quod justum est, exequaris, carry out, I guess, huh? The just thing, justly, right? Huh? That's the mode, right? Huh? Not just do justice, but do it justly. Okay. Therefore, the mode of virtue falls under the precept. Who would even think of this question? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And what argument is stronger than one from Scripture, right? I mean,

[31:21] the Lord is my rock, rock is a body. Therefore, God is a body, right? No. Yeah. You see how you're being led by the imagination there, right? Because you imagine the word, huh? Both premises, but don't know what's under it. You don't understand.

[31:46] More of that. Most of all, falls under the precept which is of the intention of the lawgiver. But the intention of the lawgiver is principally carried towards this, that it make men what virtuous, right? As is said in the second book of the ethics. Now they laugh at you for saying that today in American politics, right? Purpose of laws to make people virtuous. But it belongs to the virtuous man that he do something virtuously, right?

[32:15] Okay, that he enjoys doing it, and you know, the man in liberality is one of the virtues, right? Huh? You know, he should be glad to to to bestow freely your money upon those who are in need, right? Therefore, the mode of virtue falls under the precept. Okay, that should be the argument, right? Okay.

[32:44] Moreover, the mode of virtue now this is a little more concrete here. Property seems to be that someone voluntarily and with pleasure, delightfully, right? Does it, huh? But this falls under the precept of the divine law, for it says in Psalm ninety-one, serve the Lord in joy,

[33:07] and Second Corinthians chapter nine, not from this sadness or from necessity, huh? For God loves a what cheerful, hilarious character, huh? Take it, take it.

[33:29] And where the gloss says, huh? Maybe partly from Augustine. I don't know. Footnote there. Anyway, the gloss says, huh? Whatever of good you do, do it with what cheerfulness, huh? And then benefacis then you do well right, then you do well, right? Huh? If, however, you do it with sadness, it what comes from you, but you do not do it.

[33:59] Therefore, the mode of virtue falls under the precept of the law. I'm convinced, aren't you? Anybody not convinced? It requires the law requires you to do it in this way. Am in trouble? Well, that's your problem.

[34:21] But against this, no one is able to operate or to act in that way in which the virtuous man acts, right? Unless he has acquired or has the habit of the virtue. As is clear through the philosopher in the second and the fifth book of the ethics, Aristotle says a sign that I have acquired the justice, right? That I rejoice in paying what I owe, right? Huh?

[34:47] Whoever, however, transgresses the precept of the law merits punishment, huh? It would follow, therefore, that the one who does not have the habit of virtue, whatever he does, would merit what punishment. But this is against the intention of the law, which intends man, right, by accustoming him to good deeds to lead him into virtue, right? Now, therefore, the mode of virtue does not fall under precept. I answer.

[35:28] I answer: It should be said that has been said above. The command of the law, the precept of the law, has the coercive power, dim coactiva.

[35:44] That, therefore, directly falls under the precept of the law to which the law forces you. Yeah. But the force of the law is through the what fear of punishment. Aristotle himself says in the tenth book of the Ethics,

[36:02] because that properly comes under the precept of the law for which the pain of the law is inflicted, right? So, if I don't want to drive thirty miles an hour, I want to drive sixty miles an hour. I might be sad, but they're going to punish me for if I drive thirty dollars. I mean, thirty, thirty, thirty miles an hour. You know, is that going to going to punish me?

[36:29] Because I'm sad about it. Okay. But to instituting punishment, divine law has itself in a different way and human law, right? For the punishment of the law is inflicted, except for those things about which the legislature is able to judge, right? Because from judgment, the law punishes, huh? But man, who is the giver of the human law, right, does not have the ability to judge, except about exterior acts, huh?

[37:12] Because men see those things which appear, right? As is said in the first book of the Kings, chapter sixteen. But it is of God alone who is the giver of the divine law to judge of the interior movements of the will, according to that of Psalm seven, verse ten,

[37:33] scrutinizing the hearts and the loins, huh? God, huh? According to this, therefore, it should be said that the mode of virtue regards its its way is regarded by human law and divine.

[37:56] By both the human law and the divine law, right? The mode of virtue, quantum ad aliquid, as far as to some extent, right? But to some extent, quantum ad aliquid, from the divine law and not the human law,

[38:16] but regards something what? Quantum ad aliquid, neither by the human law nor by the divine law. He's not going to distinguish these three things, right? Now, the mode of virtue consists in three things, according to the philosopher. Now, this guy's pretty important, you know. This guy, where he is, in the second book of the ethics, huh? Yeah, he is. Of which, first is is someone acts knowing, right?

[38:50] Huh? And this is judged both by the divine law and by the human law. Because what someone does, what ignorance, he does per accidens, right?

[39:07] So in the plays or Shakespeare dealing with the what civil war, right? Do you have the father killing the son or the son killing the father? Yeah, yeah. Okay, and they discover that they've killed their father or their son, and then the king weeps and he sees us.

[39:27] Whence, according to ignorance, some things are judged to punishment or to what? goodness, huh? Both according to human law and according to the divine law, right?

[39:40] The second thing, however, is that someone does something what, willing or choosing, and an account of this choosing, right? In which is implied a twofold inward motion, right? To wit, of the will and what intentions about which before he is spoken, right? When Thomas talks about intention, there I've been reading there or the articles and the sentences, right? Intention is an art act of the will, but influenced by the what reason, which is directing this other than itself, right?

[40:21] So reason can direct itself and direct the will, and intention is with regard to the end. And then choice also involves the w the reason, right? But in reference to what is for the end, huh?

[40:37] Okay. And these two, human law does not judge, but only the what divine law. For human law does not punish the one who wishes to kill, and does not kill, but the divine law punishes him, right? According to that of Matthew five, who is mad at his brother is su subject to what judgment, huh? It's a curious thing talked about being punished for conspiring to kill someone, which is more than just thinking about it.

[41:12] Taking steps to. That's where I think of legislators and judges, executives who facilitate abortion are conspiring to murder. These guys who are planning to blow up something, you know, they they buy their equipment to make the bomb from the FBI and other guys. How do they get arrested after it? Yeah.

[41:46] Okay. And these two, the human law does not judge, but only the divine law. For the human law does not punish the one who wishes to kill and does not kill, but the divine law punishes. Okay, we saw that. And third, it be that he what firmly and immobiliter, firmly and without changing, has it, yeah. And this firmity properly belongs to habit, right? That someone operates from a habit.

[42:24] That is what, yeah. I find it hard to steal from people, you know. I remember we were boys there. We go and play in the park there in Minneapolis. There, and one time we were playing over there, and we found this billfold, right, huh? Some money in it, right? So we put it down to the to the desk there, you know, where there was a thing. Anybody reported a lost thing?

[42:49] No, no, no. So we went home and we looked in the newspaper, right? Sure enough, guy said he lost his his thing, right? So, so he he was offering reward to, I guess, right, right. So he comes over to the house there, and he's a guy who's not too well off, you know, he's got an old chunky car, you know. And my mother and father would not take any reward for it all.

[43:16] You don't you don't take any reward for returning this thing, right? And then he wanted to take me down to the register and buy me a ice cream soda or something. No, no, nothing, no. You know, you just return that. So they brought me unjustly, you know, huh? You know, so I just I got this this habit, you know, and I just just just cannot, you know, if somebody drops their their billfold and doesn't notice it, I can't pick it up and and take the money.

[43:42] I just can't. I just I try, but I just can't can't move myself, you know. Yeah. Okay. And as regards this, the mode of virtue does not fall under the precept, right? Neither the divine law nor the human law. For neither by man nor by God is one punished who transgresses the precept, who gives suitable honor to his parents, although he does not have the habit of what piety,

[44:27] huh? Here's that book of deconics there, the Pietas De Fies, you know, piety of Christ towards his mother. You know, beautiful little work. Pietas De Fies. It's in French, you know. Pietas De Fies. Yeah, I know that's what we were studying morphology and we're getting through sacraments and into the mass and. Precepts teaching is about Peter Feulner talking about mass intentions and so on.

[45:01] Now, when you fulfill a mass intention, he said lots of exagerated phrases. He says you don't have to have you know like good feelings towards the person you are making. You're not failing to fulfill the obligation. You don't feel sorry because somebody died.

[45:28] Okay, so the reply to the first objection: it should be said that the way of doing the act of justice, which falls under precept, is that it come about right according to the order of justice, right? Not already that it come about from the habit of what justice.

[45:48] To second, it should be said that it's about the intention of his to make them just. That the intention of the law giver is about two things: of one, that he intends through the precepts of the law to induce, right? And this is what virtue. Says to make them virtuous. Another thing is that about which he intends to what

[46:16] put forth a precept or bring forth a precept. And this is what leads or disposes to virtue, namely the act of virtue. But is not the same thing the end of the precept and that about which the precept is given. Just as as in other things, not the same. The end and what is to the end before the end. Okay, so he wants to make you eventually, if possible, just right.

[46:45] I mean, to have the habit of virtue justice, but you have to begin by doing it. You know, Aristotle has a kind of paradox. So you know, how can you say that what by doing just things you become just, and by doing chaste things you become chaste, and by doing brave things you become brave? Right. I mean, if you're doing brave things, aren't you already brave? See, well, you're not doing it as a brave man to do it, huh?

[47:11] But you are doing something that is good and something that will dispose you to be truly a brave man, right? Practice makes perfect. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The one one military man told me one time. He said, "But every time you say you go into battle, he says you got learn over again, right? Over again. Yeah, yeah. " It's it's difficult. Okay.

[47:40] Now to the third objection, right? He seems to be saying in Scripture, "Serve the Lord and yeah. " in joy To third, it should be said that to do without sadness the work of virtue falls under the precept of the divine law, because whoever acts with sadness does not willingly right act, but to act delectabiliter right with delight or with joy and cheerfulness in quodammodo in some way falls under the precept right, according as it follows the what pleasure from the love of God and one's neighbor, and that falls under the precept since love is the cause of what pleasure, and in some way it does not according as the pleasure follows upon the what habit, for pleasure in the work done is a sign

[48:42] of the habit generated. That's a quote from Aristotle in the second book of the Ethics, right, where he's talking about the moral virtue. For something can be delightful either on account of the end or on account of the suitability of the habit, right?

[49:02] So you might do something for your husband or wife with pleasure because you love them, right? Even though you don't have the habit of doing this, right?

[49:16] Okay, we've got time for the article. We've got to stop here at four twenty. What? This one's kind of long. Okay, okay. This is very important. The modus caritatis.