Prima Secundae
259. Aquinas on the Old Law's Rules for Foreigners, War, Slaves and Children (ST I-II q.105 a.3–4)
Class of 2016-01-28
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/11-prima-secundae/259-aquinas-on-the-old-laws-rules-for-foreigners-war-slaves-and/

[0:00] Consider more correctly, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Angelic Doctor. Help us to understand all that you have written. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Amen. Up to one o five, Article Three.

[0:20] Okay, to the third one goes forward. Thus, it seems that the judicial precepts are not suitably treated as regards outsiders or extraneous. For Peter says in the Acts of the Apostles, in truth, right, I find that God, right, is not a accepter of persons, but in every nation that fears God and does justice, he is accepted to, is acceptable to him. But those who are accepted to God are not to be what excluded from the Church of God.

[1:05] Unsuitably, therefore, is it commanded Deuteronomy twenty three that the Ammonites and the Moabites, even after the tenth what, yeah, will not enter the Church of God in eternal.

[1:21] And contrary to that is commanded about some gentiles that you should not what abominate Idumea because he is your brother, nor the Egyptian because he you were a stranger in his land. Once you

[1:42] look at the reply to the objection, it might be a little easier than. To the third, it should be said that the men of no nation does the law exclude from the worship of God and from those things which pertain to the salvation of the soul. For it is said in Exodus chapter twelve, if one of the what travelers or strangers right wanderers, colonist right, and make the what pass over Passover to the Lord, let every masculine one of them be circumscribed right, and then to be celebrated by the right, and at the same time he will be what indigenous to the earth.

[2:39] And in temporal things as regards those things which pertain to the community of the people, they ought not just anyone to be admitted right at once, by reason said above what, be in the body of the article.

[2:57] But some in the third generation, the Egyptians and the Idumeans. Others perpetually are excluded in detestation of the old guilt, as the Moabites and the Ammonites and the Amalekites.

[3:15] Just for just as one man is punished on account of the sin that he commits, that others would what fear and desist from sinning, so also on account of some sin of the race or city can be punished, right? So that others are going to abstain from a similar what sin.

[3:42] But it can be dispensive, dispensation, right? some to be admitted into the college of the people on account of the act of some what virtue, huh? Just as Judas, huh? He said that Achior, the leader of the sons of Ammon, was what?

[4:06] added to the people of Israel, and to every succession of his what? Ways of his family, huh? And similarly, Ruth, the Moabite, huh? Who was a woman of virtue, huh? Okay. Was there some prostitute who did something for them? Yeah, yeah. Jericho.

[4:31] Although it can be said that that prohibition extends to men, not the woman, to which does not belong simply to be citizens. Put that in the, throw that into the current debate, huh? The war on woman, yeah.

[4:54] Mister, reply to the first objection, where we learn the woman not simply citizens. Just secundum quid, huh? However, those things which are not in our power do not merit any what punishment, huh? But that a man be a eunuch, huh? Or that he be what? Fornication. Fornication is not in his power, right, huh? Therefore, unsuitably is it commanded, Deuteronomy twenty-three, that the eunuch and the one born from fornication will not enter the church of the Lord, huh?

[5:39] Okay. And down down the pro-life march certainly, the woman who people are born, you know, of rape, right, and so on, huh? And something is very very dramatic, you know. Don't have a right to be, you know, and so on.

[5:58] The second should be said that, as the philosopher says in the third book of the politics, in two ways someone is said to be a citizen. In one way, simpliciter in another way secundum quid. huh. Now, simply, he is a citizen who is able to what do those things which pertain to citizens, as to give consul or to make judgment in the people, right? Secundum quid, however, is a citizen whoever inhabits the city, even vile persons, right?

[6:37] And boys and old men—that's me, I guess. I'm a citizen secundum quid, I guess of the of the thing that the who are not suitable to this for this that they have power, right? In those things which pertain to the comuna. Therefore, the the spurious, and account of the vileness of their origin are excluded from the church. That is from the college of the people as far as the tenth generation, and likewise the eunuchs to which it could not belong.

[7:15] The honor which is owed to what fathers, and especially in the people, the Jews, in which the worship of God is conserved through the generation of the what flesh.

[7:29] For even among the Gentiles, huh, who generated the one who generates many sons, were given what? Some special honor. Yeah, as the philosopher says in the second book of the what politics, huh? Well, Jane, my daughter, and my yeah.

[7:54] Neverless, as regards those things which pertain to the grace of God, huh, the eunuchs are not separated from others, just as neither what strangers, I guess. For it is said in Isaiah

[8:10] 56. Let the son of the stranger not say. Who adheres to God by separation? Divide the Lord divides me from my from the people, and let not the eunuch say, "Behold, I'm a dry tree." Yeah, a withered. Yeah.

[8:36] Okay. Third one. Moreover, the old law mercifully commanded that what. Who I translate as immigrant, somebody who's coming. Yeah. Not be afflicted, right? Okay. For it is said in Exodus 22, "You shall not exalt the. The immigrant, nor afflict him, right? Huh? For you were aliens and so on in the land of Egypt, right? Huh? And the traveler, or the yeah, I'll give you, are not molested, for you know the souls of immigrants, because you were also wanderers or something like that in the land of what Egypt.

[9:29] Trying to think of that English novel, Fair Green Pickle. You know, he's traveling around a lot. Fair Greenness gets his name from that. Okay, but for the affliction of someone who pertains that he be oppressed by usuries, and so to be there for the law permits, Deuteronomy twenty-three, that you lend money to aliens, usury. My goodness.

[9:58] To third, it should be said that to. Take usury from aliens was not according to the intention of the law, but from a certain permission, on account of the proneness of the Jews to avarice, and that they might more peacefully have themselves to the strangers from which they what gained wealth. Makes the world go round. It's kind of like Moses' law, allowing the, Divorce. Yeah, because they were kind of cruel and they might kill their wife to get rid of this this uh, connection.

[10:35] So, you know. Non-politically correct Thomas. Soon to be dead. Yeah, they they they didn't quote this part in the Second Vatican Council talking about the Jews. They didn't. No, no.

[11:03] I was telling you, this question uh, should be uh, learned by all the political candidates out there about immigration, refugees, and border security. That's what that's what this question. should be discussed. Women, women as citizens. Women as citizens, that's incidental, but it's interesting because it really addresses a lot of the questions that come up today. New House, of First Things was trying to put forward a Catholic case for uh, being prudent with immigration, Yeah.

[11:33] but it's quite amazing how so many of the bishops have thrown caution to the winds. Yeah. My mother used to say, "Charity doesn't mean you got to be stupid."

[11:50] Okay. Much more do they approach us men than trees, but to those who are what near us, right? We more owe affection, right, and to bestow upon them the effect of love, right? According to that of Ecclesiasticus thirteen, every animal loves what is like itself, just as every man his neighbor.

[12:20] And so be therefore the Lord commands that of the cities of the enemies, those captured, right, all should be killed. Nevertheless, the trees should not be cut down. Just yeah yeah just cut cut down the people but not the. Yeah.

[12:48] Okay. To the fourth, it should be said that about the cities of the enemies, a certain distinction should be applied. For some are remote, not of the number of those cities that were what promised to them. In such cities, being attacked, the men are what killed who fought against the people of God. But one takes pity on the women and the infants.

[13:20] But in these cities nearby, which were uh, pre-promised, Of the promised land that had been promised to them. All are commanded to be killed. huh? I think on account of the what prior iniquities of them, right? To which punishing the Lord sent the people of Israel, as it were, carrier outs of the divine justice,

[13:52] because they acted impiously, coming entering air when you go in. Web. Web them out. Yeah. Tough talk here. Yeah. Richard Dawkins refused to debate that phenomenal Catholic philosopher and apologist, Doctor Daniel Craig, on this very point. And Doctor Craig came up with an answer that seems to be akin to Saint Thomas's, which is not a surprise. He may have got it partially from Saint Thomas, but so this is actually a big issue in the big atheist debates.

[14:28] today. You know, this divine justice, the Israelites being the executors of divine justice in this kind of way. But the fruit-bearing trees, right, are commanded to be reserved on account of the usefulness of that people whose

[14:48] city and territory were subjected to their. Okay. Okay. They'd not have us asking the questions at the debate tonight, huh? The Republican debate tonight shouldn't have us asking the questions. I don't think. I think we'd be

[15:15] persona non grata from then on. Okay. Moreover, the common good, according to virtue, should be preferred to the private good by each one, right? But in war, that is committed against enemies, the common good is sought, right? And so it be therefore, as it commanded, that the battle being imminent, some should be what sent home. Ah, to wit, those who what built a new house, who plant a vineyard.

[15:53] and who married a took a wife This is funny isn't it Instead of burning your draft card you plant a vineyard Yeah yeah yeah Or go get married. To the fifth, therefore, it should be said that the new builder of a house or the planter of a vineyard, the one joined to a wife, are excluded from battle on account of two things.

[16:25] First, because those things which a man newly has or at once is prepared to having, he is more accustomed to love, and consequently to fear their what loss. Whence it is probable that from such a love, more death would be feared, and thus they'd be less brave to fighting. That's why my uncle Jim, they said, he's gonna he he'd volunteered for the first world war and then he volunteered the second world war.

[16:59] So I'm a bachelor. I should go in because I'm not a father. You know, if I get killed, it doesn't doesn't for the family. Secondly, because as the philosopher says in the second book of the physics,

[17:16] it seems unfortunate, right, when someone approaches some good to having some good, if afterwards he be impeded, what from it, and therefore less the what those close remaining are more saddened about the death as such, because they were not able to what enjoy the goods prepared for them, and also people considering this were in

[17:46] awe. These men, therefore, were sequestered, right, the subtraction from the battle, from the fear of death, eh? Okay. Moreover, from guilt, one ought, not to what get some commodity, right, some advantage, but the man who is what fearful and you know afraid in his heart is culpable, right, huh? For this is contrary to the virtue of fortitude, and so be therefore from the labor of battle should be are excluded the what fearful and those having a weak heart.

[18:38] To set to the sixth, it should be said that the timid are sent back to the house, not that they would get some benefit from this, right, huh? But lest the people from their presence would. What get something not suitable?

[18:55] Because through their fear and flight, right? Also, others would be provoked to fear. Kind of funny, know how? Because they're trying to allow women now into battle, now, and some men, you know, who are not really, you know, even you know, think women can do some good things in the army, right? They're even opposed to it, right? Because this gets in the way of the kind of courage that you need on the battlefield, the kind of bonding of men, you know, where they do their will to give their life for another person.

[19:27] But uh so it doesn't look like a good idea, you know. huh? No. Ignatius likes to tell us about how. The Israelis tried it, and it was it proved to be such a bad idea because the men would do stupid things to try to save the women. Yeah. And they they stopped. Yeah. That's interesting. That's good. Yeah, it's a good example. Example, yeah. Well, that's where you should get the AIPAC group down in Washington to convince the military leaders.

[19:54] We tried this; it didn't work. Yeah. Yeah. It's funny how they've had this information. for. decades now about the Israeli experience and yet you know you just don't want to see it It's too bad Too bad I should I should talk to Gail Trotter about Shore and how they should I mean, aren't the Israelites the ones who are the best at protecting the airplanes? You know, from the terrorists, right?

[20:21] It's really hard the terrorists to get into those things. They don't think they have open borders in Israel They don't think it's a good idea

[20:45] But against this is what is said, yeah, in by divine wisdom, right? Proverbs eight. Right are all my sermons and all my words. There is nothing depraved, perverse in them, right?

[21:04] Yeah. Okay. And should be said that with strangers, right? There can be a way of behaving of men in two ways, right? In one way, pacifice peacefully. You get the word pacific, huh?

[21:29] Another way, hostiliter right? You know how the Pacific Ocean got its name, huh? That's what it's interesting. The old translation we have of Saint Catherine of Siena. Yeah. God is always referred to as the Pacific one. And in the old translation of the Bible, we have one of the kind of peace offering sacrifices called pacifica Makes peace.

[21:59] You know how the word "where the word paper" came from? Papyrus. What? Papyrus. Yeah, yeah, and I guess paper was actually invented in in China. Yeah, I am reading a world history now. The Tuesday library's got this, you know, you know, some books you can buy a dollar. Here is a is this world history forty dollar book. One dollar, so okay, I'll get it. So it's kind of reading it for my music, and he's talking about that, huh?

[22:29] But paper was brought in from from China, right? And you are doing the same thing you did on papyrus, except that it's a different thing entirely. That's how they started calling it paper after papyrus. So it's kind of this name, this you know, something different than papyrus, but it's interesting. These valuable things you pick up from history books, you know.

[22:54] What what they call a fund stash? I was trying to see how I was trying to see how he was going to divide world history. You know, differently than than MacNeil, the Rise of the West, which is probably the best history history in the world. But you know, the division of history that we had—ancient, medieval, and modern—is a good division of European history, right? But it's not the best division of world history as a whole, right?

[23:23] And the way that MacNeil did in his book, right, he divided the world history into three parts, right? But the first part up to about 500 BC is the part where civilization begins in the Middle East, right, and kind of spreads out from there, right? But kind of, you know, it's kind of the leader, right? And then the middle period from 500 BC to 1500 AD, right, is called the Eurasian cultural balance by him, right?

[23:54] Because there's four main centers of civilization: one in the old Middle East, one in in Europe, right, one in India, one in China. Some lesser ones, but those four main ones, where they're kind of developing, kind of independent of each other, and sometimes one is advancing more than some of the other ones. And then starting in 1500, you have the rise of the West, right? And not only colonially, but you know, eventually that Western technologies have to accept that, or else you get to be on the wrong earth.

[24:22] So I wonder if this guy's been doing anywhere different, right? And sure enough, his middle chapter is about, you know, he doesn't use the term Eurasian cultural balance. He's talking about the divergent of civilizations, right, which means they're independent of one of another to some extent, right? While the first part is dominated by you know discussion of Sumeria and Iraq and and Egypt and so on, and they spread out from there.

[24:46] And then the the last part, you know, is going to be the same. So you can't really prove upon that, right? That's a better division of world history than ancient, medieval, and modern. That makes division, you know, it's a division to three even there, you know. But that makes sense for European history, but not for world history.

[25:06] I also found out about paper comes from papyrus, so found all kinds of little bits of information that I can. Yeah. Good investment. Yeah, yeah. Remember my my friend Roy Monroe used to have a a book on the Incas, right? Huh? And I guess they had kind of like a planned economy, right? And at a certain time, everybody would get a pair of shoes handed down, you know, and a pair of pants handed down, right?

[25:40] Well, maybe you know I wear out my pants more than you do, and and you wear out your shoes more than I do, or something like that, or something like that. And so down at the bottom, you had had trade, you know, you know, for shoes. I used a pair of pants. Well, y'all get. But it kind of shows the only way that the planned economy can exist is by.

[26:01] Some frantic exchange at the bottom. Sort of proof that it's always accompanied by a black mark Yeah. Okay. So we can be at peace with them or hostiliter Pacifice with with Germany now and hostiliter back in the Second World War there.

[26:32] As regards both ways, right, according both ways, the law suitably contains what suitable contains suitable precepts, huh? For in three ways, huh, is offered to the Jews occasion that they might what commune with the extraneous peacefully, right?

[26:58] First, when the what the extraneous ones made a what passage through their land as it were wanderers, huh? Another way, when in their land they came inhabited as immigrants, huh? As regards both, the law of what mercy was proposed as precepts, huh? The law proposes precepts of mercy. I should put away. Yeah. For I said Exodus twenty two, "Advenam non contristabis." Don't sadden the immigrant, huh?

[27:43] And you shall not molest the what? Yeah. So I said to the Indian woman, I opened the door for her in church, and I said, and I said, it just came to mind. I said, you must be a Thomas Christian. She said, yes. I said one Indian boy. I said one time in church, I sat on. I said, are you Thomas Christian? You can't know. So I said, yes, he is.

[28:05] So I've been kind, you know, to these Indians that are coming to our parish. Um. Third, when some extraneous people are wholly what? They want to be admitted. Yeah. Yeah. In their consortium, in their right. religion and and their life. Yeah. And in these, a certain order is to be observed, huh? For not at once do they receive to citizens. Like Obama wants it, so they can start voting democratic.

[28:45] in it. Is Nepal a citizen? That's. Another question. I think it's a kind of a displacement when you're doing with those illegals. He wants to be. That's an interesting. excitement isn't it. He wants to be accepted, and that's why he wants all them to be accepted. He's just displaced his own. He's just a proud citizen of the world. Okay, just as among some what Gentiles it is established that one is not regarded citizens except the one who are so from a grandmother or grandfather or grandparents or something.

[29:23] As the philosopher says in the third book of the Politics, huh? That applies to people. Yeah. And this because if at once the extraneous coming in received to treating those things there are the people, there are many dangers that can happen, right? Huh. For the extraneous not having yet a firm love, right, for the public good, huh? They might what some things against, yeah. And therefore the law established that about some or from some nations, right, huh? Having some affinity to Jews, to wit, of the what Egyptians, among whom some were what born and nourished, and of the Idumeans, the sons of Esau, the brother Jacob, in the third generation would be received in the what consortium of the people.

[30:26] Some, however, had themselves in a hostile way, right? As Ammonites, the Moabites, never would be admitted into the what consortium of the people. The Amalekites, however, who were adversaries, and with whom they had no what agreement of.

[30:52] I guess a relation. Yeah. They weren't related to. them. It's the word. Perpetual enemies were to be had, right? Okay. For it is said in, Exodus seventeen. The war of God will be against Amalek from generation to generation. That's pretty sad. Yeah. You know, with these, Mohammedans over there, you know, want to kill us, you know, kill everybody. That's that's that's my that's one of the reasons I think that's relevant to.

[31:25] the refugees who are Muslims, We ought to be very cautious because we can't judge their religion. That's we can't decide what's real Islam or what isn't. Yeah. That's their business, but then we have sufficient reasons to exclude a lot of them because of this issue. It's a national security issue. Well, people on the left that I've spoken to in the past quite often don't see culture as being an issue at all.

[31:47] They see everything boiling down to economics. So that all these people want is just a fair shake, a chance to make a good living, looking for opportunity, and it's a very Marxist sort of view of humanity.

[32:04] Especially since the last year. If you're shooting in California, you could say, well, that's obviously not the case. I mean, that's that's, you just point to the facts. Of course, the facts are irrelevant. things. Exactly. Don't confuse them with the

[32:16] facts. Okay. So that's the peaceful contact. Okay. Similar it regards the hostile communication with extraneous. That's a nice way. Shooting at them. That's hostile. My cousin is in the navy now. He knew some guys in the hillbilly country, you know, and they began noticing back home, you know, and talking about shooting the neighbors, something like that. It's kind of funny to hear this, you know, just because you know they've been living, you know, but they're never saying what's going on.

[33:11] First, it instituted that war would be justly right entered into. Yeah, for as commanded Deuteronomy twenty that when one approaches to attacking the enemy, one offers them first what peace. Okay. Secondly, he instituted that they fortiter huh carry out the yeah they bravely carry out the war right having confidence in God right. And for this to be observed better, he instituted that the war approaching, the priests would what strengthen them, promising the aid of God.

[33:54] huh? Of God. Third, commanded that the impediments of war would be removed by sending back to the house. those who could Give some impediment to it, right? Secondly, that victory would be moderately used, having mercy on the women and the little ones, and also on the trees, not cutting them down. Don't cut down the fruit Yeah. So I don't know if you approve of that salting of the Carthage soil there.

[34:25] That was pretty weak. Yeah, that's pretty. That was exciting. now We're gonna find out for domestic persons, huh? Now I gotta go back and propose in your place. Stretch, snack. Look at that. Once again, I don't care.

[34:51] To the fourth one goes forward. Thus, it seems that the old law, right, huh, edited precepts unsuitably laid down precepts about domestic persons, huh? For the servant, that which he is is of his lord or master, right? As the philosopher says in the first book of the Politics, huh? But that which is of something is to be what perpetually of him, right? Therefore, unsuitably does the law command Exodus twenty one that the servants or slaves in the seventh year, right, should be what?

[35:35] Should we go out free Seventh year, huh? That's interesting. Seventh year. Seventh year, yeah. Seventh is a symbol of wisdom, right? Thomas Aquinas died at the age of what? Yeah. Thomas says that the square of a number has the same significance symbolism that the first number does, right? So seven times seven, huh? But the Greeks kind of divided the ages into sevens, you know. So seven times seven makes forty nine.

[36:10] really very much for the wise men right, the mass this morning had the wisdom there for Thomas, huh? Yeah. But Aristotle says the mind was best at forty nine, huh? So you know how far I've gone from my best. The decrepitude is way down here They say seven is the age of reason, right? So you kind of. Yeah. Footnote to that is that the church's law does not speak about the age of reason.

[36:49] It speaks about the age of discretion. Big difference. Moreover, just as some animal, as an ass or a cattle, and a possession of the Lord, so also is a possession of the Lord, master, so also the slave or the servant, huh? But about animals, it's commanded in Deuteronomy twenty two that they be what returned to their owners if they are found to be what wandering, right, huh?

[37:26] Error comes from the Latin word for to wander, right? Not to wonder. Yeah, yeah. Christ uses that word too in the Gospels, huh? The Greek, huh? The word wander from the Greek, huh? Yeah.

[37:43] You you wander, he says. knowing neither the power of God. nor the scriptures. Yeah, yeah. So I define error as a disordered movement of the mind, right, wandering.

[38:04] There's one guy saying, "back there, you should let your mind wander once in a while." I mean, there's still something that can be said, you know, but

[38:16] As long as it doesn't get lost. Yeah, yeah. Therefore, unsuitably, is a command in Deuteronomy 23. You shall not what return the servant to his master, the one who flees to you. Okay.

[38:47] So why return his animal, not return his slave, right? Yeah. Especially fleeing up north, you know, send them back there where they belong. Yeah.

[38:59] Seems very interesting. Moreover, the divine law ought more to what Provoke us to mercy than the human law, right? But according to human laws, those people are gravely punished who exceedingly what? Afflict. Yeah, bitterly afflict servants or their servant girls and so on. So, okay. But that is most bitter affliction, from which follows what death. therefore, unsuitably is it established Exodus 21 that who strikes his servant or his what handmaid with what rod, if in one day he lives, he will not be subject to punishment because he is his what money.

[40:01] possession of, him I guess, pecunia. What did you translate pecunia there? It says because it is his money. Yeah. His servant, it's like it's like his wealth or something. Yeah, yeah.

[40:19] So if he survives one day, you're beating them. My goodness, we should look at some of the replies here before we go on forever. Yeah. Get lost here. Look at the third objection here.

[40:33] To the third, it should be said that about the. Beatings inflicted upon servants. The law seems to have considered whether it was certain or uncertain. Now, if the injury was what certain, the law applied a punishment, right? For the mutilation, huh? The what?

[41:06] Forfeiture of the servant. Yeah. Who was commanded, right, to be given his liberty, right? For death, however, the punishment of what? Homicide. Yeah. Since the servant, in the hand of the Lord, beating him, right, died, huh? But if the injury was not certain, but had some appearances, the law inflicted no punishment on what? His own servant. As when the servant struck did not at once die, huh?

[41:47] But after some days, huh? Because it's uncertain whether he died from the. Striking. Yeah, that's kind of strange, huh? Because if he had. Struck a free man. Yeah. It's thus that not at once was did he die, but that he could walk upon his cane. Yeah. He would not be what guilty of homicide the one who was struck, even if afterwards he died, huh?

[42:21] But these are held to. paying the rent fees. Yeah. Expenses, I guess. Which the one is made with his doctors, right? Pay the pay the hospital, fees. But this in the his own servant has no place, huh? Because whatever the servant had, and also the person, of the servant himself, is a certain possession of the Lord, and therefore for a cause designed, wherefore he is not subject to the punishment of what?

[42:59] Money. He's not fined. Because he is his money. That's be strange, huh? Let's go back and look at one and two here before we go on again.

[43:12] What about not sending him back? To the second, should be said that that commandment is understood about the servant who is sought by his what? Lord, as minister for killing. Yeah. He wants to kill him. Or for some the minister the service of some sin, right? Yeah. My text has got Domino there capitalized. It shouldn't be capitalized. I don't think. No.

[43:37] Yeah. the Lord doesn't use you for sin. Is it? What? He says his is capitalized too. Right. This Yeah. This one is the proper addition.

[43:57] To the first, therefore, we'll go back to the first objection too. about freeing the slave. To the first, therefore, it should be said that because the sons of Israel were liberated by the Lord from what slavery, and through this they were what.

[44:19] In service. The Lord did not wish that they would what be forever servants, right? Hence it is said Leviticus twenty-five: if you were what by poverty compulsed and sold to your what. To your brother Brother, Sold yourself to your brother you would not what oppress him with the slavery of

[44:47] his family or something but as were a mercenary or sojourner, for you are my servants, huh? and I brought you out of Egypt. So that they might not. Come under the condition of servants,

[45:11] and therefore those who were what not simply servants, but secundum quid, a certain time being diminished or finished, would be dismissed Okay. Okay. Now we come to the what these first three objections are about your the master and the servant, right, or slave. Now we go to the father, I guess, and the son, right? Okay.

[45:41] Moreover, other the fourth objection. Moreover, other is the what the the rule of the master to his servant, slave, and of the father to his what son. Okay.

[45:57] That's where Aristotle raises a nice proportion there about the emotions, right? Should reason rule the emotions like a master rules a slave, or like the what? Yeah, yeah. You know, I was talking to my cousin Donald about that. He was talking to that with some psychologist, right? And I guess this is kind of the source of a lot of psychological problems, right? You know, your reason is ruling your emotions like a what slave?

[46:26] Yeah. But this pertains to the rule of a of a master over his servant that someone is able to what sell his servant or his servant girl. Okay. And so be therefore does law permit that someone sells his what daughter as a servant or a maid servant? Yeah.

[47:07] To the fourth, it should be said, as has been said, that no Jew, huh, was able to what. Possess another Jew. As simpliciter servum, huh? This distinction between the simpliciter and secundum quid. But he was a what servant secundum quid, as it were, someone under pay, you might say, a mercenary, huh? Usque ad tempus to some time, huh? We had that in America, right? And you had indentured servant, or what they call them, to work in your certain number of years.

[47:43] Wage slaves They have big jobs. And in this way, the law permitted that poverty, forcing one, someone could sell his son or his what? Daughter. Never thought of that. one. You should reconsider and contact the children and say, look, your mother and I need some extra cash. Yeah, They've got so many kids they could sell a few, you know.

[48:14] Temporarily. Just until we decide to retire, really. After our world cruise. And this also is the the words of the law itself, right? Show, right? For it says that if someone sells his daughter into servitude, right, he will not what?

[48:37] He will not go out as um... As accustomed to go out. Say it again. If any man sell his daughter to be a servant. she shall not go out as a bondwoman are want to go out. Yeah, maybe "ancilla there" is more like a simpliciter, right? And "famula is more lesser. yeah,

[49:03] Yeah. And in this way, not only the son but also himself, someone could what? Sell. Sell. Never thought of selling myself. But more as a mercenary than as a what? Servant, right? Okay. According to Leviticus 25, if being compelled by poverty, right, one sells to himself. Sells himself to the brother. Yeah. You will not oppress them with the servitude of servants, but as it were a mercenary, and they, yeah, follow me.

[49:49] I wonder. Somebody's claiming that the colon the colonial came from Columbus, because that was his name. But this this is before Columbus. Is there a Latin word for colony? Is it like colony? I don't know. This is Colonus. C O L O. It says a particle line or verse clause of period line or fragment

[50:25] Okay. Number five, the son has power over his what? Father has power over his son, right? But it's of him to punish, but excess.

[50:49] The one who has power over the one sinning, it's of him to punish, but some excess. And so be therefore as commanded Deuteronomy twenty-one that the father lead the son to what punishment by the seniors.

[51:09] Punish him yourself, right? Yeah. Actually, the police to to train your children, right? You can't do it. Um. To the fifth, it should be said that, as the philosopher says in the tenth book of the ethics, the paternal rule has only the power of admonition, right? Not, however, a coactive power. Even though it does, through which they are able to depress the rebellious. And the yeah, and therefore in this case the law commands that the son who is contumax, how do you translate that?

[51:54] contumax? Stubborn. Okay. Be punished by the princes of the city, right? Didn't scripture have something there about the killing the son if he if he insults the parents, the mother or the father? I think so, yeah. Yeah, it's rather strong. This is, this is like what happened with you when you were at the store going to leave, she had the cop to threaten you.

[52:25] That was my aunt. I had it coming too. I was spinning these these toadstool seats we had in those days. She says to the person who came in to get this coke or something, you know. This little boy has been doing these spinning these things all day. So, well, we can put him in jail for a day, he says.

[52:47] My mother always joked like, "I really sobered up after that, But I don't think my aunt Helen realized how much she had sobered me up. Saved me from the gallows.

[53:04] That's the beginning of your conversion right there. Yeah.