Prima Secundae
257. Aquinas on the Old Law's Judicial Precepts (I-II q.105 a.1-2): Rulers and the Best Mixed Government, Sharing Goods, Inheritance, the Jubilee and Loans
Class of 2016-01-21
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/257-aquinas-on-the-old-laws-judicial-precepts-i-ii-q-105-a-1/

[0:00] Name of the Father, the Son, Holy Spirit, Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. Deo gratias. God our enlightenment, guardian angels strengthen the lights of our minds, order illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor, help us to understand what you have written. Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Amen. Probably the twenty-second distinction, you know, huh? You know these nice little particular things, huh?

[0:37] About Christ. Now, here asked this question: Was it necessary for Christ to rise from the dead? Was it necessary? There's two different senses of necessary. Absolutely necessary. Absolutely, no. What Thomas is going to say: There are three reasons why it was necessary. Oh, this this is rather interesting. I said, you know, I've never seen this question asked this way, you know. Yeah. And he says, and the first reason he gives, I was talking to my my student last night because we're doing the physics, right?

[1:12] Of course, he goes to the third book of the physics, right? Where Aristotle has a famous passage there where he compares two words, which are not synonyms, but they're they're close. The words, what, perfect and whole, right? Why part is something imperfect or incomplete, right? So he's already shown, you know, that the body of Christ, goodness and the thing was still attached to the the second person, right?

[1:40] And and the the soul Christ was of course too. And he says now, if these parts were not in a whole, then there'd be something imperfect, right? And it's not fitting, you know, that the second person of the Trinity take on something what imperfect, right, huh? So therefore, the body has to be brought back together to have because the whole is better than the part, right? That's the first reason he gives, right?

[2:05] Say. Then the second reason he gives is he goes back to Christ's death on the cross, right? That this was most painful and most what shameful this kind of death, right? And therefore his maximum what humility that he had in undergoing this kind of death merited, right, the glorification of his what body, right, that had undergone this, and therefore it's necessary that he rise glorious, you know.

[2:34] And there you go. Now, what's the third reason, huh? Well, the third reason is that our is for us that the glorifying of our body must come through Christ, who is the head of the church, right? And he's going to have to what first in his own self have perfection of the body and then pass on to us, so he had to rise in the dead. To start the whole process, you know, beautiful, beautiful little text.

[3:03] I never, I still remember that thing. Yes, maybe it's asked in the Suma too, but I don't remember. You know, it's been so long since I looked at the, the part there. But just beautiful little things, like that, in there, you know. Beautiful little texts.

[3:18] They're understandable, not too hard, you know, to, to work with, huh? Okay, up to one o five, huh? We're gonna start there, I guess.

[3:34] Then we're not to consider about the reason for the judicial precepts, huh? And about this, four things are asked. And these four things are in regard to the four things that you have to have the law for, right? First, by reason of judicial precepts, which pertain to the what princes, huh, to the leaders of the country, right? Secondly, about those things which pertain to the what life together, you might say, huh, of men to each other, huh?

[4:05] Third, about those things which pertain to others outside the city, right, extraneis huh? Then fourth, about those things which pertain to the household, right, domesticam conversationem, husband, wife, and father and son, and master and slave, right, and so on.

[4:26] Thomas has that division there, you know, the the three parts of three kinds of associations in the house in, in some of Saint Paul's epistles, right, where he's talking now what husbands and wives should do to each other, or how they should act towards each other. Now, father and son should act towards each other, and how the master and the slave should act towards each other, and it's divided into that thing.

[4:50] Maybe you know, given that these things are kind of particular things here, maybe as we look at the objections, we can go from the first objection to the reply to the first objection, you know, then second objection, you know, because they're they're kind of particular, and then. Yeah.

[5:07] I do myself as sometimes I'll just take my computer and I'll copy the the replies, and then I'll go through all the objections and see the answers, and then I'll read the body of the article, and I read the replies again to the objections, you know, sometimes, but this way kind of.

[5:25] Okay. To the first, then one goes forward. Thus, it seems that unsuitably has the old law ordered things about the rulers, right, the princes.

[5:38] Because, as the philosopher says in the third book of the Politics, the ordering of the people especially depends upon the greatest prince or ruler. But in the law is not found in what way we're not to institute the supreme prince. But there is found things about the lower, huh? Rulers or princes, sir. First, provide from the whole people wise men, right? Huh? These aren't the top people, right?

[6:08] The top guy. In Numbers eleven, you know, gathered together seventy men, right? Huh? Of the seniors of Israel, yeah. Okay. And to the right one, give from you wise men in what? Gnarls, gnarls.

[6:32] Yeah. Therefore, insufficiently is the old law ordering the princes of the people. Right? Seems to be ignoring the top person. Right? That's a serious objection, right? Now.

[6:48] Now, Thomas says to the first. Therefore, it should be said that this people was ruled under a special care by God, right? Huh? When sin is said in Deuteronomy seven six, the what? The Lord God, right? Huh? Your Lord God has chosen you, right? That you might be a people that are what? Peculiar or special to him. Special to him, yeah. And therefore, the Lord reserved to himself, huh?

[7:17] The institution of the supreme what ruler, right? Yeah. I know what what you're doing now in your liturgy, but you've been doing the book of Samuel for seems like two weeks at least now, not more, you know. And you sign this and you're just demanding the kingship there, you know, and then a few weeks ago yeah. And this is what Moses asked in Numbers what twenty seven, huh?

[7:49] The Lord God, right, will provide, right, for what? A man. Flesh of spirits, huh? A man will be over this multitude, huh? And thus, from the ordering of God was instituted Joshua in the what principality after Moses, right? And about the what individual judges, right? They were ruling there before they had a king, right? Who were after what Joshua, right? Huh? It is read that the Lord raised up for his people a savior, and the spirit of the Lord was in him, as is clear in Judges chapter what three.

[8:33] And therefore, also the election of a king, the Lord did not commit to people, but he reserved this to himself. We should have our president, I think. Huh. I think we need. We're obviously unable to choose. one. I know. Somebody said God wanted us to have democracy. He'd give us choices. Yeah.

[8:57] Okay. As is clear in Deuteronomy chapter seventeen, you will constitute him what king, whom the Lord your God right has chosen. So that's taking special care over the highest nut.

[9:15] So that's good answer to that first objection, right? It seems like you're neglecting the supreme ruler, and then no, he's giving special care for that. He's doing it for himself, right? And

[9:31] when what's his name Samuel goes to David's father, right, and goes to all the sons, and not this one, not this one, none of them, you know. We have any more? Any more? Yeah, yeah. Yeah, because that's what Because that's what he says when they when they he's rejected the one he says The Lord hasn't chosen any of these. The Lord hasn't chosen. Yeah

[9:56] Yeah, yeah, yeah. Second objection. As Plato says, it belongs to the best to what bring out the best, right? But the best ordering of a city or a people is to be governed through a what king, because this kind of rule most of all represents the divine rule by which the one God rules the universe from the beginning, right? Therefore, the law ought to institute a king for the people, and not permitted for their what judgment, huh?

[10:31] Deuteronomy 17 huh? When you said I will constitute over me a king, you will constitute him and so on, huh? Well, Thomas has a what interesting answer to this. To the second, it should be said that the king is the best rule of the people if it not be corrupted, huh? That's a big yes. So, so Aristotle divides government into basically what six kinds, right, huh? He had the rule of the one, the few, and the many, but a good form and a bad form of that, right, huh?

[11:08] And the kingship is the rule of what one, and tyranny would be the rule of one as bad, right? And that'd be the worst form of government, right? Then you have the what you know the aristocracy, then you have the the oligarchy, yeah, then you have the what republic and democracy, right? But that's at least you know bad, right, huh? You know, so so the one government is the least good, the republic, and the opposite of it is the least bad, right?

[11:39] The other one is the best itself and worse than the yeah yeah. Do you say that the framers of the Constitution tried to create a hybrid between making a democratic republic because it's not a pure republic and it's not a pure democracy? Yeah, yeah, yeah. They didn't like the word democracy; it was a bad word for them, right? Okay, so so it begins Thomas at this point, huh?

[12:04] Okay, but on account of the great power which is conceded to the king, right, huh? Easily the kingdom can degenerate into a what tyranny unless there be what perfect virtue of the one to whom such a power is what conceded,

[12:26] because it's not except a virtuous man that can bear well good fortunes, as the philosopher says in the fourth book, huh? The ethics, huh? And they had these big prizes coming out, you know, from the the yeah yeah

[12:45] mega things, you know, and they talk about you know most of these guys who win the big prizes in five years they're they're broke because they don't know how to do it, the

[12:57] yeah yeah yeah. Now, perfect virtue is found in few, huh? I like that quote And especially the Jews were prone to both what cruelty and to avarice, huh? So,

[13:21] through which vices men most of all fall into what tyranny, huh? To avarice and cruelty, huh? And therefore, the Lord from the beginning, right, did not institute a king for them, right, with full power like a king would have, but but it could degenerate into this tyranny, but the judge and the governor in their what custody, more right? But afterwards, the king, at the petition of the people, as it were, indignatus huh?

[14:00] He conceded, right, as is clear through what he said to Samuel, right? They have not cast off you, but me, lest I reign over them, huh? So, let's see, good answer to this. Okay.

[14:20] But instituted nevertheless from the beginning, right? About the king that should be instituted, first the way of what choosing, right? In which two things were determined, to wit, that in his election, one awaits the judgment of the Lord, right?

[14:41] And secondly, did not make a king from some other nation, because so such kings are accustomed to be little affected to the nation to which they are put over. Yeah. And consequently, did not really care about them, right?

[15:02] Secondly, he ordered about the kings instituted how they ought to have themselves as regards themselves, right? That they do not multiply their chariots and horses and their wives. But then, Didn't Solomon get a lot of wives, and they kind of led them into idolatry, isn't it? That's what our liturgy used to say when the text we had, we don't use anymore. Speaking to God, he said, "You taught your wisdom, divine wisdom, to Solomon, and he became as one who knew no wisdom."

[15:45] Nor also that they are not to have immense what wealth, right? Because from the desire of these things, princes decline to tyranny, and they love justice, huh? He instituted also in what way they should have themselves to God, that they always read and think about the law of God, right? That they always be in the fear of God and obedience.

[16:15] Who was it? Louis the Ninth was he the one? Louis the Ninth. Yeah, he was a saint, wasn't he? Yeah. One of the donors that became a poor Clare, Paris, Saint Bernard's poor Clare, objection of mine. And the first chapter then is self.

[16:38] Instituted also in what way they should have themselves to those subject to them, right? That they do not treat them with contempts proudly, right? Or oppress them, nor decline from justice, right?

[16:54] Moreover, as is said in Matthew twelve, the third objection now: every kingdom divided in itself is made desolate, right? Which is also by experience made clear in the people of the Jews, right? In which the division of the kingdom was a cause of its what destruction, right? But the law especially ought to what intend those things which pertain to the common salvation of people. Therefore, there ought to be in the law prohibited the division of the kingdom into two kings.

[17:28] Nor should this what by this authority to be induced by the divine authority, as is read, its induction by the authority of the Lord through what the prophet. Yeah. Okay.

[17:48] Now, to third, it should be said that the division of the kingdom and the multitude of kings, or more, is what to that people given in punishment for their many dissensions, huh? Which are most of all against the kingdom of what? David. Yeah. Just they moved Then to their progress, progress, Yeah. Once it is said, O. C. Chapter thirteen, I will give to them a king and my furore meo.

[18:22] I will give you Obama. And O. C. Eight, huh? That they shall reign, but not for me, right? They will be what. Yeah, yeah, no,

[18:50] don't know them, right? To spruce them. Okay, the fourth one, huh? Moreover, just as priests are instituted for the what usefulness of the people in those things which pertain to God, as is clear Hebrews chapter five, so also the princes are instituted for the use of I mean for the usefulness to their people in human things, huh? But to these priests and the Levites who are in the law, there are what given over some things in which they are able to live, right?

[19:32] As the tithes, first fruits, and many other things of this sort. Therefore, likewise to the princes of the people there ought to be ordered some things whence they are sustained, and especially when they are what privated from accepting of what gifts, huh? As is clear Exodus twenty-three, you shall not take gifts which blind even the prudent, huh? And subvert huh. The words of the just.

[20:04] To the fourth, it should be said, that the priests, through the succession of what origin, are taken, given over to sacred things, and this, therefore, that they might be had in greater what reverence, if not just anybody from the people was able to become a what priest, the honor which gives way to reverence for the divine worshiper, and therefore is necessary that to them some special things be given, both in what de decimis the tithes yeah, first fruits, but also in the offerings and sacrifices in which they live.

[20:50] But the principles, as the princes, as has been said, are assumed from the whole people, and therefore they have certain what proper possessions, private possessions, from which they are able to live, right? And especially since the Lord prohibited him, also the king, lest they superabound in what wealth or magnificent clothing, right? Huh?

[21:19] Because it is not easily, but from these that they would what be be raised up to pride and tyranny, huh? Also, because of the princes were not much wealthy, and it was laborious the principal, yeah, their office, in full solicitude, they would not be much what affected for by by the people, right? And thus be taken away the matter of sedition, huh?

[21:53] Okay, they're talking about there in the radio. They were talking about how all these guys go down to Washington after down there, you know, in Congress for fifteen twenty years. They were poor when they went down there. Now they're rich. How does that take place?

[22:09] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Moreover, as in fifth objection area. Moreover, as kingship is the best regime, so tyranny is the worst corruption of the regime. But the Lord, right, instituting the king instituted a what? just tyrant by the right of tyrants. Yeah.

[22:54] As it's said in one book of Kings, this will be the the right of your king who will command you, right? And he'll take your sons and make soldiers and so. But this requires punishment, I guess. Therefore, unsuitably is provided to the law about the ordering of princes. To the fifth, it should be said that that right was not given to the king from divine institution, but was more pronounced a what usurpation of the kings,

[23:28] okay? Which the what? Establish themselves. Yeah, degenerating into tyranny and depraving their subjects, huh? And this is clearly what is added in the end that they will be what you will be to them as servants, because that's probably what a tyrant is, right? Which properly pertains to the tyrant, huh? Because the tyrants command their rules as slaves, right? Not as freemen. Whence this was Samuel said this to deter them, yet they ask lest they ask for a king, huh?

[24:09] And it follows that people do not wish to hear the voice of Samuel. It can happen nevertheless that even a good king, without being tyranny, takes sons and constitutes tribunes and centurions, and many he takes from many things he takes from his subject on account of procuring the common what.

[24:35] Okay, Thomas got away there pretty well defending the law against his objections. But against this is that the people of Israel are commended by the beauty of their what? Order. Yeah. So order is a part of what beauty, right? Yeah. So is beauty more the object of the reason or the will? The reason. Which is interesting topic, right? Interesting, thoughtful. On

[25:12] a type of order, there you might think this more to do with with reason than with, but some connection with the other two. But the beauty of order of the people depends upon the instituting of good institution of princes. Therefore, through the law, the people were well instituted about their what beginnings.

[25:37] Enough of me. What Thomas says in the body of the article, get the whole story here now. Instead, bits little bits of food here.

[25:47] I answer: It should be said that concerning the good ordering of princes in or rulers in some city or nation, two things should be what observed, huh? One of which is that in all, that all should have some part, right, in the what Governor. governing, yeah. But because through this is conserved the peace of the people, and all love and keeps such an ordering, as Aristotle says in the second book of the Politics.

[26:26] In other words, it should be noted is according to each species of rule, or ordering of princes, of which there are diverse species, as the philosopher considers in the third book of the what Politics, huh?

[26:43] Yeah, right here. Especially right, Of kings, kings, in which one rules according to virtue, right, and aristocracy, which is the power rule of the best, huh, in which some few command or rule according to virtue, right, huh. Whence the best ordering of princes is in some city or kingdom, in which one is over them according to virtue, who looks over all, and under this some few, huh, ruling according to virtue.

[27:30] But nevertheless, such princes, in some way pertain to all, both because they are able to be chosen from all, and also because they are chosen what by all. So it's just such as the best, polity, well commixed, huh, well mixed together from the kingship in so far as one, over all. And aristocracy, in so far as many rule according to virtue, and from democracy, that is the power of the people, in so far as from the people are able to be chosen princes, and to the people pertains the princes.

[28:17] And this was instituted according to the divine law, for Moses and his successors governed the people, as it were, singularly ruling over all, right, which is a certain species of kingship. They chose also seventy-two old guys, huh, according to virtue, huh.

[28:39] Seventy two seniors Yeah, rule by senior citizens. Eighty years old or younger, older, older. Yeah. And this would be aristocratic, right, huh? But democratic that these were chosen, right? From the whole people, for it said, "Provide from all your people wise men." Right, huh? And also the people would what choose choose them, right? Whence it is said, "Deuteronomy one give from them, from you, wise men." Once it is clear that Best was the ordering of princes which the law instituted, huh?

[29:28] How they worked on practice. is another question. Okay, I go to Article Two. To the second one proceeds thus. It seems that unsuitably we treated the precepts, the judicial precepts, as regards the manner of people towards each other, right?

[29:56] For men are not able to live peacefully among each other if one takes those things which are of the other. But this seems to be induced in the law. My goodness. For it said in Deuteronomy twenty-three, entering in the vineyard of your neighbor, right, eat grapes as much as you please.

[30:19] That's kind of like saying it says in the Bible that there is no God. Yeah. Yeah. Somebody told me that they have that kind of rule though, kind of in Europe, there in some places you can walk them and pick an apple out, or you know, things just to keep the peace. Yeah, yeah. Because people are inclined to do that, so is your neighbor. I thought this was the idea that this is given creation given to all by God.

[30:44] Yeah. Not contrary to private property. No. This is a way to keep the peace. But it's also a longer pathway. You can't just climb one. All right, and it wasn't like you could go there with a basket and fill it up. It's not that step. Pull up the truck, pick an apple, and then open up a stand in front of your neighbor's house. Let's look at the reply to that first objection, right?

[31:13] Because it'd be pretty particular, So. To the first, therefore, it should be said that as the apostle says in the epistle to the Romans, who loves his neighbor, right, loves and fulfills the law, right. Because all the precepts of the law, especially those ordered to one's neighbor, seem to be ordered to this end that men would what love one another. Now, from love it proceeds that men would communicate and share their goods with each other, right?

[31:52] As is said in the first epistle of John, right? Who sees his brother undergoing necessity, suffering necessity, and closes his bowels, I guess, from it. In what way does the charity of God remain in him, right? And therefore the law intends for men to be accustomed to easily what sharing the goods with one another, right? Just as the apostle says in the first epistle to Timothy, he commands the what the rich to easily give and share, yeah.

[32:36] Now it is not easily communicative that which is not what, does not sustain that his neighbor takes some little thing, right? Yeah, he can't he can't bear that his neighbor takes some things. Yeah. without any great detriment to him, and therefore the law orders that, when entering into the vineyard of his neighbor, is he able there to eat the what? Those are best branches. It looks like to me.

[33:05] Yeah, that's the same too. But not to carry them outside, as I thought I was saying. Nay, from this, given the occasion of great damage, from which peace is disturbed, which among those who are disciplined are not what disturbed from the taking of little things, but more friendship is confirmed, and men are accustomed to easily sharing. Huh?

[33:36] Got a beautiful custom. Yeah, yeah. You see, you see that. I, I know. We always see it with the Lebanese. The food. Yeah. They will give you more than way more than you need, and they kind of insist on you taking more and more. Yeah,

[33:53] that's not a good idea. That's not a good idea. But you're from the northern climate, colder up there, kind of the Mediterranean world at least. Yeah, yeah. You know, I don't know if Warren is talking about where. I was in Spain, one of those places where you could, you know, you know, as you walk through, you can take an orange, right? But I guess people would do it, but they have those oranges that they use for marmalade or something like that.

[34:14] And they're really really very bitter. The Valencia oranges, those are the sweet ones. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I don't know if you're talking about those kind of oranges here, but I mean that's that's probably what they do with any of the plants near the edge. It's probably a bigger fruit.

[34:35] Just take as much as you want. I think back now about my days as a boy there, you know, and taking green apples off the trees of the people, you know.

[34:51] Warren, I used to meet down Mississippi River there, you know, but there's we found a nice apple tree down there, you know, and we were vlogging to the Bluffton. It was kind of nice, you know, to refresh yourself with a green apple there after. When I was down in Florida in high school, we used to go. One of I ran on the track team, and we go up one of the places we go is north of town.

[35:10] Now it's all developed, Back then it was still a lot of orange groves, and some of them were left. They weren't really cared for. Yeah. We used to go through there, and we we picked some of the oranges and carried them along. Yeah. I remember on the track team in the inner city when they were having their workouts, they'd run by those open markets. What? Full of like Koreans, and they grabbed oranges as they ran by.

[35:34] A little refreshing break. Didn't Ruth in there the custom there Ruth she could pick up the grain that fell or something? There's something in the law too that the poor would follow. They weren't to reap everything clean. Yeah. There was at least some as the poor were following to pick up. the remnants Yeah, yeah. That was a custom then to be. I think it was especially it was provided for either in the law or one of the things.

[35:59] Yeah. Don't don't hinder the doing. Yeah. A little different than the way we look at it, you know, nowadays you know kind of. That only just shares so much I mean that's one of the things Yeah, that's what you always see. That usually in smaller business that's more personable. You see the owner or whoever they are, they're good to the employees. They let them have extra things or the customers, and say, "Oh, don't worry about it, and take that."

[36:26] And and it's I always remember it's good business. There's nothing else. You please everybody when you do that, even if. But it's a small thing, you know. Yeah. I remember I was very pleased when I went. my very great-dear mom, and we went out for a burger to my favorite burger joint down in Florida. It's not up here. And I ordered my sandwich, and there was a whole bunch of us at the table.

[36:48] My sister's got seven kids, and her son-in-law came, and all these people, and so so we're all feasting at the place, and I complained because I didn't want something on the burger, and they put it. I ate it anyways, but the girls said, "Well, we won't let you. We won't let you pay for it then." I said, "Oh, okay. I wasn't paying attention to the buying." She just said, "We'll pay for it.

[37:10] Okay." Okay. Second one here now. I guess second objection. From this, many cities and kingdoms are destroyed, because the possessions, right, arrive at the woman, as the philosopher says in the second book of the Politics. Tell that to Hillary. But this was introduced into the old law, for it's said in Numbers 27, that a man when he's dead without a son, the heredity will pass to the daughter.

[37:54] And therefore, not conveniently is does the law provide for the salvation of the what people? Wasn't Shakespeare's history play there right where the the law Salic law you know supposed to be that doesn't descend to the female the the kingship? Which play is? Was it Henry the Henry V? In the very beginning, Henry V is deciding, you know, he's going to go over there and claim his kingdom, right?

[38:20] And and the bishop and the cardinal there is explaining, you know, that the French are not being honest about what the law really was there and so on, with what these lands were. But some of them had a law against that, right? That you couldn't descend to the female, right? The kingdom. About something like this. To second, it should be said that the law did not establish that woman would succeed to the goods of the father, the paternal goods, except in the case of the what lacking of male sons, right?

[38:59] Then it was necessary that there be a succession to the females would be conceded in consolationem patris on the consoling of the father, to whom it would be grave if his heredity altogether passed to the extraneous people. So I leave it to my daughter. I mean, rather than have it go to the strangers, right?

[39:21] But it they added to this, however, about this law, a certain caution, right? Commanding that the women succeeding to the paternal heredity would marry, right, men of their tribe. I guess, huh? To which the so that the lots of tribes would not be confounded, huh? As is had in numbers, huh? Yeah, the outcomes, the lines.

[40:01] Okay. Third objection now. Moreover, the society of men, most of all, through this is conserved that men, what, selling and buying, I guess, exchange things right, which they need. as is said in the first book of the Politics, huh?

[40:23] But the old law took away the what? Selling. For it commanded that the possessor of what is sold would return to the seller in the fiftieth year, the jubilee year, as is clear in Leviticus twenty-five. unsuitably, therefore, the law instituted this the people about this. That's kind of a odd thing, right? Fifty years jubilee. You can't give up your slaves to the year, someone. Okay, let's see what he says about this.

[41:07] To third, it should be said, as the philosopher says in the second book of the Politics, that the regulation of possessions adds much to the conserving of a city or of a people. Whence, as he himself says,

[41:26] that among the cities, certain cities of the Gentiles, it was established that no one, right, would be able to sell what his possession, except for a what?

[41:45] Because if one could sell possessions, it would happen that all possessions would come to what a few. That's like where we are. And thus be necessary for the city or the region to be evacuated of habit inhabitants. And therefore, the old law, to removing a danger of this sort, thus ordered that what that one would come to necessities of men, conceding the possession of the the selling of possessions to a certain time, and nevertheless removing the danger, commanding that at a certain time the possession sold would return to the seller.

[42:30] I wonder if you get this in the States today. I don't think you could very well. and this instituted that the what? Again, this, I think, is the generation. Yeah, would not be confounded, but there would always remain the same distinction in tribes. It's all like the Near East now with the tribes. You get the tribe on the other side

[42:56] because the domestic what houses were not distinguished by what branches. There distinct estates Well distinct estates And that allotted you said Yeah Yeah that's what it is It was conceded that they could be sold forever, right? Just as mobile goods, huh? Furniture. But there was not established the number of the homes in the city, as there was a what Certain measure of of possession to which nothing was what added, huh?

[43:36] But was able to add something to the number of houses in the city. I hope so. The house ever were not in the what? The house hour which were not in the city, right? But in the village, huh? Not having walls, were not able to be sold what forever, because these kinds of houses were not constructed except for what cultum worship. Put you to the cultivation and care of possessions.

[44:10] Okay. And therefore the law suitably established right about what. Priest here from we have in the parish now who's from Columbia, right? He's down there again for a couple on vacation there. He's talking about the about the the some of the old villages, you know, where they get up and go to mass at four o'clock in the morning for them out to the fields, right? I think that.

[44:41] Yeah. Some nice customs down there. I thought Maronites have a new bishop for Colombia just in the last couple days yeah I thought Columbia was in kind of a bad, you know, condition. There, I remember people that I knew from Columbia said you didn't go to bed without hearing a gun by your bed, you know, or something. You know, they. depends on the way you live. Yeah, yeah.

[45:12] Yeah, it was kind of got impression that it was kind of a horrible place. That's what we had. The candidate what was the name of the candidate came here a few years ago. Was from down there in the south. I guess it's in the big cities. Not sure where in the drug business. The drugs he said is kind of like it's in the wilderness. Warm. Yeah. They were getting supported by the Chavez's tyranny in Venezuela too.

[45:35] Yeah. It was destabilizing Colombia, but they had a very good president for some time. Uribe, his name was. Who really was doing good stuff? I don't know what's been going on the last few years, though.

[45:53] Yeah. Okay. we're still on the third objection here? To start the fourth? Sorry. okay. Can we look at the fourth objection then? Okay. Moreover, it's most expedient for the necessities of men that men be prompt to what. Lend to each other. Yeah. Yeah.

[46:36] Which promptitude is taken away through this that the creditors do not what? Pay what they receive. Yeah. Whence it is said in Ecclesiasticus, many are what? Refused to lend. Yeah. Not out of wickedness, but they were afraid to be defrauded without cause. Yeah. For this, the law induced, huh? Because first it commanded Deuteronomy 15 that who owes something from his what? Friend or neighbor or brother, ought not to what?

[47:15] Seek after it, I guess. Yeah. Because the year of remission is of the Lord. Hey, socialists here. And Exodus 22, huh? It said that if the Lord being what? By the Lord of the animal. Yeah, the the animal loaned, I guess, mutuatum, was dead, right, huh? He'd not be held to what? To pay back. Yeah. Secondly, because it takes away from insecurity which is had through the what pledge, Pledge, yeah?

[47:50] For it is said in Deuteronomy 24 when you what? Seek from your neighbor. Something he owes you. Do not enter what. His house to take away the pledge. Yeah. Nor at nighttime before you will be the pledge, but immediately you render it to him. Yeah. You know that's all. Therefore, insufficiently was ordered in the law about what loans, is it, mutuum Okay.

[48:23] Got a long reply to this. To the fourth, it should be said that as has been said, the intention of the law was to accustom men to its precepts, to this that they would be what. Easily coming to each other's aid in necessities, right? Huh? Because this is most of all a a fomentum, something encouraging friendship, right? Huh?

[48:59] And this facility of coming to aid not only was established in those things which gratuitously, right, and absolutely are given, but also in those things which are what? Kind of a loan yeah. When you say somebody giving this to me, or are you lending it to me, right? When I borrow borrow a tool of my, my father-in-law. He says, "No, what does it say right here?" I said, "I said, well, I couldn't see anything there, you know."

[49:29] He give me his he give me his name, you know, or something like that. Okay But also those things which were lent, because this kind of subvention is more frequent and necessary for many things. And the facility of such a what? Assistance. Yeah. Is in many ways instituted.

[50:07] First, that they be what? Easily obtained. Yeah. Nor that they are retracted from this by the approaching year of remission that is had in Deut. 15.

[50:23] That's, that's the quote that Saint Basil has this homily on. Yeah. Take heed to thyself, lest perhaps a wicked thought steal upon thee, and it's about that I don't want to give because the year of remission is coming. Yeah. I don't want to give. Yes, eternity. Yeah. I don't want to be gentle. Oh no, not the year, you know, the year, the jubilee year when I'm not allowed to plant my crops.

[50:43] So I'm going to need more. So I don't want to give as much now because that's coming up. That's the that's a thought. but he uses it. as a uh occasion to think about knowledge Okay

[50:56] Secondly, lest the one to whom something is lent, yeah, is weighed down with either what usuries or some what? Like taking some pledge entirely of the necessities of life. Yeah, omnino vitae necessaria things are very necessary for life, I guess. And if they be taken, that they be immediately what? Restored. Yeah. For it is said in Deuteronomy twenty-three, you will not what? I guess. so. Loan them.

[51:34] Take loans, is that what that means? Lend to my brother money to usury. Yeah. You will not take in place of the what? Lesser, what's superior? A mound, is that what it's named? Millstone. Millstone, molan, okay. It's a molan. Yeah. Because you will what? is...

[52:01] You will place his soul to yourself. Yeah, I suppose. Oh yeah, the yeah the two stones are the the millstones. the upper and lower, is that right? Yep. And if you take away his millstone, one or the other, then basically he's going to die. Yeah. He hasn't got any grain. And take from your neighbor what his his clothing, return to him before sunset. I always like that expression that means the death of the sun literally.

[52:33] Mm. Slowly so constant. the death of the sun. Always so constant. Mm-hmm. Third, that you are not what. Requested or required, you know, with importunity, right? Without?

[52:53] For if you lend money to my poor people who dwells with you, you will not urge him as it were, like one exacting, you know,

[53:06] An account of this is commanded, Deuteronomy twenty four. When you what request from your neighbor something which you owe him? Don't go in his house to take away the pledge Yeah. And you stand outside And he will bring to you. Yes. Because the house is the safest receptacle of each thing, each one. Every man. Whence man's house is his kingdom, I guess. I mean, is his his castle.

[53:42] Whence is molesting the man to invade his house, huh? Then also because it is not conceded to the creditor that he take the what pledge that he wished, but more to the debtor that he give what he needs less. Fourth, instituted that in the seventh year the debts would be entirely remitted. Huh. I guess near that seventh year, I'm not going to lend anything to you. That's for sure.

[54:15] Maybe not even the sixth year. It was probable that those who what were able to render something, Generously. Yeah. before the seventh year would what.

[54:39] Pay back before the seventh year Yeah. And they would not gratuitously defraud the one lending. If over they were entirely impotent, huh? To give the same reason that there would be a debt remitted from the love, which was also about giving it newly on account of indigence, huh? Okay. If we can't pay you back, you just forgive it, right? It's yours. Yeah.

[55:25] About animals lent, this law commanded that on account of the negligence of the one to whom they were lent, right? Huh. If in his absence they die or may be weakened, They are compelled to return them, right? If, over him being present and diligently guarding them, they die or are debilitated, they are not to be restored. And most of all, if they were what?

[56:02] What does that mean? By reward? Consideration. By what? High for the consideration. Oh. Yeah. Because they could also have died and been weakened with the one lending them, yeah. And thus, if the conservation of the animals is sought,

[56:35] already some gain, I suppose, is given from the loaning; it would not be a gratuitous loaning, right? And this should be most of all observed when the animals were what? When they were paid for animal rental something consideration. What? Higher for a consideration. Yeah, yeah.

[57:00] Because then they would have a certain price for the use of the animals, whence nothing would accumulate, right, for the restitution of the animals, except on account of negligence, the one guarding them. If, over they were not rented, they could be some have some equity. At least they

[57:27] restore what. The use of the dead animal or the weakened one That it was able to be rent I suppose the loss of the rent that he would have had Yeah. Yeah. Hm. I don't know if we can get this through Congress. I don't think we will. There are twelve arguments.

[58:01] Seven more to go. That lucky seven.