Tertia Pars
22. Virtues, Faith, Hope, the Gifts and Fear of the Lord in Christ (ST III, q.7, aa.2–6)
Class of 2009-01-15
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/13-tertia-pars/022-virtues-faith-hope-the-gifts-and-fear-of-the-lord-in-christ/

[0:00] The second one goes forward. Thus, it seems that in Christ there were not what virtues, right? For Christ had an abundance of grace, huh? But grace suffices to doing all things rightly, according to that Second Corinthians. My grace is sufficient for you.

[0:25] Therefore, in Christ there were not what virtues, huh? Moreover, according to the philosopher in the seventh book of the Ethics, now the seventh book of the Ethics, Aristotle has completed talking about human virtue, right? In books two through six, he talks about human virtue. In books two through five, about the moral virtues, and book six about the virtues of reason itself, right? And at the end of the first book, he's given this division of human virtue into these two kinds, huh?

[1:02] What is he doing then in book seven? Well, he does two things. He talks about those dispositions that either are habits that fall short of virtue, or vice for that matter, right?

[1:18] Um, or that go beyond the human what common measure, right? Okay. Aristotle calls those heroic virtues, right? Of course, it's interesting that he speaks that way because in Greek mythology, a hero is strictly speaking something in between a human being and a god. He has one parent human and one parent a god, right? So he may have Zeus as a father and a human mother, or he may be like Achilles as a what goddess for his mother and a human being for his father, right?

[2:03] Okay. There's something divine, something above the ordinary, huh? Okay. So Thomas often comes back to it. The philosopher says there. Moreover, according to the philosopher in the seventh book of the Ethics, virtues divided against a certain what heroic or divine habit, huh? Which is attributed to divine men, huh? But this most of all belongs to Christ. Therefore, Christ does not have virtues, but something heroic. higher than virtue, right?

[2:43] But sometimes Aristotle calls that higher thing a virtue too, right? But sometimes the word virtue is kept for the human level, huh? Moreover, as in the second, has been said in the second part,

[3:05] all the virtues are had what together. But to Christ is not suitable to have all the virtues, as is clear about liberality and what magnificence. Now these are the two virtues concerned with money and possessions and so on, and liberality with you know small things, and magnificence with you know endowing the chapel there, at TAC or some place, right? Big gifts, you know.

[3:38] Yeah, which have their act concerning what divitias, huh? Which is yeah, and these are the virtues that Aristotle takes up after courage and temperance or moderation. He takes up in book three, and then getting book four, he takes up liberality, magnificence, huh?

[3:59] Or generosity, you could call it, you know. Which wealth divitias, huh? Which Christ contemns, right? He contempts for, right? Okay. The son of man has no place where he can lay his head, right? He's not attached to these things. Huh? The devil took up in the thing and offered him all the kingdoms of the world, right? Only to come down and worship me. Okay. And more temperance and continence are about what base desires, huh?

[4:34] Which in Christ were not to be found. Therefore, Christ didn't have those virtues, right? But against this is what is said upon that of Psalm one two. But in the law of the Lord is his what will? His will is in the law of the Lord.

[5:02] Um. Here Christ is shown to be full of every what good, right? But this is the definition of virtue of Augustine, part of it, bona qualitas mentis, right? A good quality of the rational part of man, right? His virtue. Therefore, Christ was full of what every virtue, huh? Now, Thomas here touches upon distinction, which he is given in the second part here, and we've talked a bit about it before.

[5:40] That grace is in the what soul, right? But the virtues are in the what powers of the soul, right? Huh? And there is kind of a correspondence here because just because they had this kind of a soul. There follows upon having this kind of soul these kinds of what powers, right? Well, then, when grace is put into my soul, it is, right? Then there falls into the what powers certain virtues that are appropriate, huh?

[6:17] Especially what, in terms of grace is faithful with charity, but they're also infused moral virtues and so on. So I says, Thomas says, I answer it should be said, as has been had in the second part, that just as grace regards or respects the what essence of the soul, right? So virtue, as regards to its what power, huh? Whence is necessary that just as the powers of the soul are derived from its essence, huh?

[6:59] In logic, we'd say what the powers of the soul are like properties, right? Something outside the nature, but that follows upon the nature, huh?

[7:09] So the virtues are certain what things derived from grace, huh? But the more perfect a beginning or cause is, right? The more it what presses upon things its effects, huh?

[7:30] Whence, since the grace of Christ was most perfect, huh? It follows that from it there went forth virtues to perfecting the what each of the powers of the soul, as regards what all the acts of the soul, right? And thus Christ had what all virtues, huh?

[7:55] So just if you are two, you are going to be half a four, right? So if you have grace, you are going to have what virtues, yeah? That the virtues will follow from the grace, right? Because what grace is, just as being half a four or being a third of six follows from being what two, yeah?

[8:25] And it's appropriate that the partaking of the divine nature should be in our nature, right? Okay, the first objection, huh? Doesn't grace suffice, huh? That's a little bit like saying, you know, what do you need? Half a four, you got two, but they go together, right?

[8:52] To the first, therefore, it should be said that grace is enough for a man as regards all the things by which he is ordered to what Beatitude, right? But of these, grace perfects some immediately through itself, right, as to make the soul what pleasing to God, right? That's what they call gratia gratum, faciens And as a result, and some by means of the virtues, right, which proceed from grace.

[9:23] Okay. So the homeroom teacher, now in high school, you know, he says, "Well, money isn't everything," you know. And this wise guy says, "What it is, it'll buy."

[9:39] He just gave us a little fatherly lecture, right? In the homeroom, you know, that money isn't everything, right? And this wise guy says, "But what it isn't, it'll buy." Well, grace isn't everything, but but it isn't. It will what produce, right? Huh? Namely, the what. The virtues, right? Okay. So in that sense, it's enough. Like this guy says, money is enough, right?

[10:13] Now, the second objection is about what is this teaching of Aristotle there, right? That about what Christ has, right? The heroic virtue, right? He says that habit which is called heroic or divine, right, Aristotle, does not differ from virtue commonly said, except according to a what more perfect way, right? Insofar as someone is disposed to the good in a certain higher way than is commonly what belonging to all, right?

[10:54] Whence through this is not shown that Christ did not have virtues, but he had them most perfectly above the common way, way, right? Which people have these? Just as Plotinus laid down a certain what sublime way of virtues, which is said to be of the what purged soul, right? Okay. Sometimes Thomas comes back to that text of Plotinus and so on, and we're explaining the the books of the Bible, right?

[11:26] In the book of what Proverbs and then Ecclesiastes and then the what Song of Songs and so on. And the book of Proverbs is more ordered to a human mode of virtue whereby you live in this world using the goods of this world but moderately and reasonably, right? Huh? Not getting drunk with the wine, but you know, enjoying a little bit of wine a meal and so on.

[11:51] And but then you see you get Ecclesiastes, you know, vanity, vanity, and all is vanity. You realize that even these little petty, moderate pleasures are kind of what, yeah, yeah. And so you kind of order to a kind of contempt of of even the what modestness of these things, right? And then the soul is being purged from them, right? Huh? When You get to the Song of Songs then you're a purged soul, right?

[12:19] So you have kind of a higher, higher virtues, right? Huh? And Thomas is kind of alluding to that, but he comes back to that when he divides the the books of the Old Testament, huh? I told you about that little work that Thomas called the Commendatio Sacrae Scripturae Okay. Now, did Christ have generosity, liberality, and magnificence? Huh?

[12:51] To the third, it should be said that liberality and magnificence are commended about wealth, right? In so far as someone not only what appreciates, you might say, right, or values the wealth, or

[13:13] is not so much what appreciates the wealth that he wishes to what retain them, omitting that which is necessary to use them for, you might say, right.

[13:27] But he least of all appreciates or treasures wealth who wholly contemns them, right, and gets rid of them on account of a what a love of perfection, right? So there's a there is a value take, I guess, of poverty, right? See, because you're you're this is seeking a perfection of the soul, right?

[13:57] Now, remember a guy going to the Dominican there. I guess you signed some statement, right? He says I'm legally dead now. He says, okay.

[14:11] And therefore, in this that Christ had contempt, you might say, for all wealth, right? There shows in him the highest grade of what liberality and magnificence. Although he also what exercised the act of liberality, right, according as is suitable for him to do, right,

[14:34] by what giving to the poor, right? Whence? How do you translate that? What he gave he gave to the poor the things that were given to him. Yeah.

[14:57] Yeah. Whence, when the Lord said to to Judas, "Huh, what you're going to do, do quickly," right? The disciples didn't realize what he meant or what he had in mind. The disciples understood Christ to have commanded that he give something to the what poor, yeah. But notice the act of virtue is to give according to your circumstances, right, and and to what you have, right, okay. So what might be generous in one man might be extravagant in somebody else, right?

[15:28] Can't feed his family or something after he gives away this, right? Okay. So Christ had the act of liberality too. Now base desires Christ did not have at all, right? You know, as will be clear later on. But in account to this is not excluded, but that he had temperance, huh? Which is the more perfect in man. The more he lacks what base desires, huh? Hence, according to the philosopher in the seventh book of the Ethics, the man who is temperate—who has really the virtue of temperance, right—in this differs from the man who is continent, huh?

[16:15] As I mentioned before, in the seventh book, he takes up not only heroic virtue, right, but also things like what continents, right, um, which are less than what normal virtue, right? Okay. So something that is either above or below human virtue, huh? Okay. It's commonly found. that the tempered man in this differs from the containing man, that the tempered man does not have what base desires which the continent man undergoes, huh?

[16:54] So Aristotle talks. We've got virtue, vice, and then in the middle, continents and incontinents, huh? And the continent, incontinent man—they both have bad desires, but the continent man, after a struggle, his reason wins out. Was quite a struggle, you know. I had to call my buddy so I wouldn't, you know, take a drink or something, you know, my AA buddy or something, you know. And while the incontinent man, his passions went out, right?

[17:23] But then he regrets the fact that he gave in, right? So he's not totally bad, right? Okay. Quite a, what vicious man has bad desires and enjoys them, right? Satisfying them, right? Quite a tempered man is what doesn't really have to speak of these base desires, right? Okay. Yeah, yeah.

[17:50] Whence, thus taking continence, as the philosopher takes it there in the seventh book of Nicomachean Ethics, from this that Christ had every virtue, he did not have continence. which is not a virtue but something what less than virtue. Notice how thorough Aristotle is, right? And he gets through going through all these virtues of man. Then he talks about some other habits, some of which are what above human virtue or below human vice.

[18:19] He calls bestial, you know, and and then he has these things like continents, incontinents, which not quite a virtue, not quite a a vice in the full sense. Takes these things that are lesser.

[18:36] I suppose if you hear confessions, you're doing many people in continents or incontinents. And and yeah, what the one of the seven wise men of Greece, Bias, of Priene you know, he said most men are bad. Aristotle in the rhetoric, you know, he talks about the passions and how you arouse the passions and and quiet them and so on. When it comes to talk about fear, Aristotle about the things to fear.

[19:05] One thing he says to fear is to be in the power of another man, because it's a rule of men to evil whatever they can. So Aristotle, no way.

[19:17] See, he's just biased, right? You know. But it's kind of funny how these these appointees. You know, one guy that guy was you know going to be appointed to the commerce was it? He he had to step back, you know, because he's got an investigation. And the guy's going to be appointed to the Secretary of what is it?

[19:42] Treasury. You know, he didn't pay his income tax. And they all say it's an honest mistake, you know, but he's a busy man. Yeah, they try to say it's an honest mistake, you know. So the guy going to appoint to to be the Attorney General is like that. He's the guy that that arranged the pardon for a rich, terrible guy.

[20:17] So most men are bad You know there's a little blurb in the water that this fellow talking about how his daughter mentioned that Obama read backwards is the Latin word Amabo I will love Amabo I will go on

[20:47] to see if Christ had faith or not Article three. To the third one goes forward. Thus, it seems that in Christ there was faith. Apparently, he's going to take the opposite side, Thomas.

[21:05] For faith is a more noble virtue than the moral virtues, as for example temperance and liberality, right? But virtues of that kind were found in Christ, as has been said, right, in the previous article. In fact, much more, therefore, was there in him what faith? That's a nice dialectical argument, huh?

[21:33] The less noble virtues were found in him. Suddenly, the more noble one will be found in him. Moreover, Christ did not teach the virtues which he did not have. That sounds reasonable, right? According to that of Act one, Jesus began to do and to teach, and they always emphasize the order, right?

[22:00] But about Christ, it is said in Hebrews twelve that he is the author, right, and the one who consummates, huh, completes his faith. Therefore, in him there must have been most of all faith, right?

[22:15] That's a beautiful text that one there. The author and consummator there, of faith huh? But Thomas shouldn't you explain that in a way that will show the wonderfulness of that text, but that doesn't

[22:27] strengthen the argument here. Moreover, whatever is of imperfection is excluded from the blessing. But in the blessed there is faith. Now that's a strange thing to say. For upon that of Romans one verse seventeen, the justice of God is revealed in him from faith to faith. The gloss says from the faith of what words and hope to the faith of things and and species of seeing, I guess, huh?

[22:59] Therefore, it's kind of strange text. Therefore, it seems that also in Christ there was faith, since nothing of imperfection, since it applies nothing of what imperfection.

[23:12] But against this is what is said in Hebrews eleven one, that faith is the argument, huh? The conviction of what is not what. Yeah, and that's that's part of the text. I did the text is when the Thomas goes back to his defining faith, right? And the whole text is that faith is the what the hypostasis, the substance of things hoped for, kind of like a foundation.

[23:43] And then the Greek word that they translate argumentum here—it's actually a elenchos right? So the word Aristotle uses refutation, but it also has a sense of overcoming, right? So it's the so I translate it usually the conviction of what is not what seen, right? Okay, the mind is overcome, accepting but it doesn't see. Okay, it's the refutation of what is not seen. It makes any sense, but but I mean Aristotle's book on physical refutation is one of the words elenchos, but they often badly translate that, right?

[24:23] Assurance of things hoped for—that's not what it means. And and the yeah yeah what is not seen? Evidence of what's not seen? Yeah, it's very very very good. The evidence comes from what is seen? yeah, yeah, yeah. That's always one text I always check when every new Bible comes out. Since how they translate this stuff? Yeah, yeah, yeah. But to Christ, nothing was not appearing, right? According to that, that Peter says to him, "You know all things.

[25:00] Do you love me? You know all things. You know I love you. " It's in the last chapter of John. Therefore, in Christ there was what faith. The answer

[25:16] should be said that as has been said in the second part, the object of faith is a divine thing that is not what seen. Now the habit of virtue, just as any other one, receives its species, right, from its what object,

[25:43] and therefore excluding that the divine thing is not what seen. One excludes the notion of what faith, but Christ, in the first instant of his what conception, saw God fully through his essence. He had the we call the beatific vision, right?

[26:10] As will be what clear, below, right? Okay, whence faith in him could not be. So Christ had no faith. So did Mary have faith then? So she be the supreme example of faith then. She destroys all heresies, right? Even the father of Christmas. I'm Jesus whom you persecute. Why do you persecute me?

[26:51] Okay. Now the first objection is saying that faith is more noble than the moral virtues, right? So how can he have the lesser not having the what greater? Yeah, that's a good that's a good objection. To the first, therefore, it should be said that faith is more noble than the right. Yeah. Why? Because it is about a more what noble matter, huh? More noble object. Now, but nevertheless, it implies a certain defect in comparison to that matter, which is to not see, right?

[27:24] Which you're believing, huh? Which defect in Christ was not, right? And therefore, there could not be in him faith, although there could be in him moral virtues, which, in their very definition, do not imply any defect in comparison to their what matters, right? That's beautiful. Beautifully solves that, huh?

[27:59] The second one. Well, was Christ teaching a virtue then that? To the second, it should be said that the merit of faith consists in this: that man, from obedience to God, right, ascends to those things which he does not what see. According to that of Romans chapter one verse five, to obeying to what in faith, right? In all nations, for his what his name. That translation very well, I guess.

[28:41] How's your text have that translation? For obedience to the faith in all nations for his name. Okay, I guess that's close enough. It's in the south. Okay. But Christ had most fully obedience to what God, according to that of Philippians chapter two, he was made obedient to death, even the death of the cross, and was on right.

[29:09] And thus, nothing pertaining to merit did he teach that he did not more excellently, right, fulfill, huh? That's interestingly argued there, huh? Okay. Now this last one is a problem of the word, right? To the third, therefore, it should be said that as the gloss says there, faith propriae, properly is that by which I believe things that are not seen, right?

[29:56] But faith, which is of things seen, is said what Impro improperly, and by a certain likeness, as regards what the certitude or the firmness of the adherence. Right. He says, "Seeing is believing." Yeah.

[30:16] I'll believe it when I see it. Yeah. That's not taking believing then in the strict sense, properly, right? Yeah. But in terms of the certitude of it, huh? Kind of like St. Thomas said that. I won't believe it unless I can put my finger in his hand. Yeah. Of course, there's another question of what he's talking about.

[30:36] So Christ didn't have one of the theological virtues, right? Nobody's perfect. Want to take a toast right yeah, yeah. I just finished reading Charlie's book.

[31:01] Now, whether in Christ there was hope, right? To the fourth, one goes forward. Thus, it seems that in Christ there was what hope. He's going to take the opposite side again. For it is said in Psalm 30, verse 2, from the person of Christ, "In you, Lord, I have what Hoped. But the virtue of hope is that by which man hopes in God. Therefore, the virtue of hope was in Christ.

[31:37] Moreover, hope is expectation of future blessedness, as has been had in the second part here when we talked about hope. But Christ expects something pertaining to beatitude, to wit, the glory of His what body. Therefore, it seems that in Him there was hope, right? That's not what one chiefly hopes for, right? One chiefly hopes for the beatific vision, right? And and didn't

[32:06] I say that in the psalm? I could have used that maybe the Psalm 4 or whatever it was, but I have something I've rested in hope or something. I forget what it is. It's often in reference to the resurrection. Yeah. Something,

[32:23] but anyway. Moreover, each one is able to hope for that which pertains to his perfection, if it is in the what future, right? But something was in the future that pertained to perfection of Christ, according to that in Ephesians chapter 4, to the consummation of the saints, in the work of ministry, in the building of the body of what Christ.

[32:51] That the mystical body of Christ you're speaking of there. Therefore, it seems that it belongs to Christ to have hope, right? Or hope to have us under His feet, right? Or at least the head under His feet.

[33:08] But against that is what is said in Romans chapter 8, verse 24. What one sees, what does one? One does. What does one hope for? We have it. And thus it is clear that just as faith is of things not seen, so what hope is? But faith was not in Christ, as has been said. Therefore, neither hope, right?

[33:34] So he says, "I answer. It should be said that just as it is of the definition of faith that someone assents to those things which he does not see."

[33:47] Thomas defines the act of believing as assenting while thinking about it. So it is of the notion of hope that someone expects that which he does not yet have, and thus faith, in so far as it is a theological virtue, is not about anything not seen, but only about what God not seen, right?

[34:20] So also hope, in so far as it's a theological virtue, has for its object the enjoyment of God, right? Which man chiefly expects through the what virtue of hope, but ex consequenti, right? As a consequence, the one who has the virtue of hope is also able to expect what divine aid in other things.

[34:57] Just as the one who has the virtue of faith not only believes what God about divine things, but also about some other things which are what divinely revealed. But Christ, from the beginning of his conception, had fully the what divine enjoyment, and therefore he did not have the virtue of what hope. But he had nevertheless hope with respect to those things which he had not yet what attained, although he did not have faith with respect to what anything.

[35:40] Because although he knew fully all things by which holy faith is excluded from him, right? Nevertheless, he did not fully have all the things which pertain to his what perfection as a man, right? Because he didn't yet have the immortality and the glory of his body, which he would be able to what hope. So, in some qualified sense, he seems to admit that Christ has some hope, but that.

[36:11] But since it's chiefly about what the beatific vision which he had fully, he doesn't strictly speaking have hope, huh? And so, in reply to the first objection, he says, "To the first, therefore, it should be said that this is not said of Christ by the hope which is a theological virtue, because that's about what. Yeah, chiefly about that. But in that, some other things, right? He hoped for not yet having them, right?

[36:52] And then the second objection says, well, does it pertain to beatitude, right? The glory of the body. He says, to second, it should be said that the glory of the body does not belong to beatitude, as that in which beatitude chiefly consists, right? But to a certain what overflowing from the glory of the soul, as is said in the second part.

[37:21] Just like when you understand something, you're trying to figure something out. Once you understand, you get kind of what exhilaration of the body, right? Entire fountain, he's just jumped out of his bath and run down without putting his clothes on, right? So exhilarated, right?

[37:44] Whence hope, according as it is a theological virtue, does not regard the beatitude of the body, but the beatitude of the soul, right, which consists in the divine enjoyment.

[37:59] Okay. Now this last objection, I guess, as I was saying, seems to be talking more about his mystical body, right? Just not complete, right? His body's not complete. To third, it should be said that the building of the church through the conversion of the faithful does not pertain to perfection of Christ, by which in himself he is perfect, right? But according as he leads in others to a partaking of his own what perfection, and because hope is said properly with respect to that which is expected by the one having hope, right?

[38:45] Not properly is it said that the what virtue of hope belongs to Christ for the reason foresaid. So the third one is talking about his mystical body, and the second one about his what?

[39:02] Yeah, yeah. It's interesting the way he ordered these objections. When Thomas is arguing, you know, about whether let's see, my knowledge of Euclid, right? That that remain in heaven.

[39:24] Yeah, that remain. Yeah, it's it's two. I think maybe. Very interesting parallel. Probably part of what makes this chapter interesting. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But Thomas trying to kind of manifest this, right? Even though it's an imperfect knowledge compared to you know the knowledge of the division, but he says when you know the truth, does a dialectic whereby you arrive at the truth. Is that fast? No, he says.

[39:51] When you know the truth, you can more what perfectly order the dialectic, whereby you can lead someone else to the truth, right? So you don't cease to know dialectic arguments because you have necessary arguments. You're not seeing something disappears, right? Yeah. See, but that you can have these probable arguments as well as necessary arguments. It's not that they have to destroy the probable arguments, right? But actually, they're perfected, right?

[40:25] So my knowledge, you could be more perfect, right, in heaven than it is now. I've got time for an article here? Yes. Okay, whether in Christ there were now the dona, right? Now these are the gifts of the Holy Spirit, I guess.

[40:51] Now to the fifth, one goes forward. Thus, it seems that in Christ there were not the gifts take the other side now. He's got negative, right? Contrary guy. Just as is commonly said, the gifts are given in aid of the what virtues.

[41:15] But that which is in itself perfect does not need an outside aid, right? Since therefore in Christ there were what perfect virtues, it seems in him there was no what gifts. I don't want to back up these things.

[41:38] Moreover, it does not seem to be the same one to give gifts and to receive them, right? Because to give is the one having, to receive is the one not having. But to Christ it belongs to give the gifts. According to that of Psalm 67, he gave gifts to men. Therefore, to Christ it does not belong to receive the gifts of the what Holy Spirit. More divine to give than to receive, right?

[42:13] Moreover, four gifts among the seven, right, seem to pertain to the contemplation of the road, the way. To wit, wisdom, science, understanding, and counsel, which pertains to what prudence.

[42:33] Whence the philosopher in the sixth book of the Ethics numbers these among the intellectual virtues. Well, Well the word, wisdom has got many senses, huh? I said wisdom is four years old today. That's one meaning. Yeah. Sophia, is that? Yeah. And

[42:56] but Christ had the contemplation of the what fatherland, right? Therefore, he did not have these gifts. That's objection, kind of hard to take into account until we learn more about the gifts. But anyway, but against this is what is said in Isaiah chapter 4, verse 1. the seven women shall take hold of one man, right? That is the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, Christ through the glass.

[43:30] That's from Jerome, and my my text is that that one from Jerome, so good authority. Answer: It should be said that, as has been said in the second part, the gifts are properly certain perfections of the powers of the soul by which they are apt to be moved by the Holy Spirit.

[43:58] So something kind of different in the virtues, huh? The? Virtues are a little bit more on your own, a little bit more on your own. But the the gifts of the Holy Spirit are what certain perfections whereby you can be moved by the Holy Spirit in a way that's wholly what? Yeah, yeah. But the virtues act more in a in a way closer to human.

[44:28] It is manifest, however, that the soul of Christ most perfectly was moved by the Holy Spirit. That's really a good argument, huh? Damn good, huh? Which I could come with that, huh? Which I had thought of that. So simple, you know, but to the point. According to that of Luke chapter four, Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, came up from the Jordan right and was led by the Spirit in the desert to be tempted and so on.

[45:04] Whence it is manifest that in Christ was most excellently the what gifts, so you can understand that better if you've studied the gifts, right? But they're really something unique, huh? Perfections of the powers whereby you're to be what moved by the Holy Spirit. So really, really, sublime thing. That's heroic virtue, right? When Thomas talks about the gifts. He kind of goes back to that text of Aristotle about heroic virtues, right?

[45:51] But it's something where you're being moved in a way that seems to be very much above the human way. To the first, therefore, it should be said

[46:09] that which is perfect according to the order of its what nature needs to be aided by that which is of a higher nature. As man, no matter how perfect he is, needs to be aided by what God,

[46:30] and in this way the virtues need to be helped by the gifts which perfect the powers of the soul according as they are moved by the what Holy Spirit.

[46:49] Virtues aren't sufficient for perfect action. Yeah. Need something more than virtues for perfect action. Yeah. The supernatural. Yeah. Really, found things those gifts. Now about the giver and the giver and the given. huh? To the second, it should be said that Christ, not by the same, according to the same, is receiving and giving the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but He gives them according as He's God, right?

[47:23] And gets them or receives them according as He is man. Again, goes back to the distinction between the two what natures, right? Whence Gregory says, huh,

[47:39] in the second book of morals, that the Holy Spirit, huh, turn my page here, never deserted the what humanity of Christ, right? From whose what

[48:04] he proceeds, right? Okay. Now about the third objection, I'm not sure how to take that exactly, but anyway, to the third, it should be said that in Christ there was not only the knowledge of the fatherland, but also a knowledge of the road, as will be said below.

[48:43] But nevertheless, even in the fatherland in heaven, there are in some way the gifts of the Holy Spirit, as has been had in the second part. We have to go and study that text. You know, worry about it right now for our present purpose.

[49:00] Okay, let's go to the last article now in this. First section, right now. What is the gift of the fear there? To the sixth, one proceeds thus. It seems that in Christ there was not the gift of fear,

[49:20] for hope is more potent than fear. Ah, good idea. But the for the object of hope is the good, and of fear the bad. But in Christ there was not the virtue of hope. Therefore, there was not in him the gift of what fear. That's the same theological place there, right? We saw used another article, right? If he has moral virtues, you know, he's going to ask if it's your right.

[49:52] And the the virtue of faith, remember that. Here he argues: if he doesn't have the the better, he doesn't have the what? Yeah. Moreover, by the gift of fear, one fears either the separation from God, right, which pertains to chaste fear, custom, or to be punished by him, which pertains to what servile fear, huh? As Augustine says on the Epistles of John, but Christ did not fear to be separated from God through sin, nor to be punished by him on account of his what guilt, because it was impossible for him to what sin, as will be said below.

[50:47] But fear is not of about the impossible. Therefore, in Christ there was not the what? Yeah. Remember one of my former students doing her her what? I sent you it there, you know, on on fear, right? And all different senses of fear, right? I remember Father Boulay talking about these different senses of fear, huh? So she will find out some more senses of fear as we read through Thomas here.

[51:23] Moreover, as is said in one John four verse eighteen, perfect charity casts out fear, huh? But in Christ there was the most perfect charity,

[51:38] according to that of Ephesians three, the supereminent charity of the knowledge of Christ, and so on. Therefore, in Christ there was not the gift of what Well, see, it does cast out many kinds of fear, right? But is there some kind of fear. That's what. There's a particular translation, poorly translated. It says, "Perfect love casts out all fear." The scripture says there's an ambiguity in the scripture there.

[52:05] That's what sometimes. Translations are more interpretation than translations. So they add something and it shouldn't be there. It doesn't cast out all fear. But against this is what is said in Isaiah 11 that the spirit filled him with the what?

[52:23] Spirit of the Lord. Spirit of the tenth. Fear the Lord. I answer: It should be said that as has been said in the second part, fear regards two objects, of which one is a what? Terrible evil, right? Another is the one whose what? Power is equal to Infer evil. Just as one fears the king, in so far as he has the power of what? To death.

[53:01] Now he who has power would not be feared unless he had a certain what? Eminence of power, right? To whom one is not able easily to resist, huh? What is Aristotle saying though? To be in the power of another man.

[53:20] For those things which we have readily ability to repel, right? We do not fear. And thus it is clear that someone is not feared except on account of his what? Eminence, huh?

[53:39] Thus, therefore, it should be said that there was in Christ a fear of God, not according as it regards what? The evil of separation from God through guilt, right?

[53:59] Nor according as it regards the evil of punishment for guilt, right? But according as it regards the divine what? Eminence, huh? Divine excellence, huh?

[54:17] In so far as the soul of Christ, by certain affection of reverence, is moved in what? Towards God. Led by the what? Holy Spirit, huh? Whence in Hebrews 5: 7 is said that in all things he was heard on account of his what? Reverence, huh?

[54:42] And this affection of reverence to God, Christ, according as he was man, right, had more fully, right, than others, huh? And therefore to him Scripture attributes the fullness of the fear of the Lord, right? So you have this even, I think, in the beatific vision. You're going to have a certain what? Reverence of God, huh? It's in fear of seeing your your nothingness compared to him, right?

[55:11] Utterly dependent to our body, right? You know, you'll you'll be in the hand. Somehow, utterly dependent you are upon him. But somebody is excellence, right? Yeah.

[55:24] It's often that psalm is used in support of this to say that the fear of the Lord is holy, enduring, forever, and that they use as an argument saying it will be one of those things. Yeah. But this is this is kind of you know remote from the very first meaning of fear, right? And but still keeps something the notion of fear.

[55:54] Sometimes Thomas will speak of wonder as a form of fear, huh? And wonder you have for something in its excellence, huh? I was reading Macbeth there. You know my periodical editions, New Hudson Shakespeare, and I didn't realize that there is a famous, another famous emendation by the great Theobald in Macbeth, huh? And so I looked it up in you know the the folios, which the original edition that we have of the play, our original copy of it, have in the bank and school of time, and Theobald changed school to show, S H O A L, and the footnote in the New Hudson Shakespeare, Ebenezer I guess is the Ebenezer Black there from Glasgow, he says this is the brilliant emendation of what Theobald, huh?

[56:58] Which has been adopted by almost all modern editors. So I went to the you know I had the I had the the Yale Shakespeare there, you know, and I see yeah they adopted what Theobald, so they don't turn it to Theobald, they just you know mention that in the footnote that it's at school in the in the folios, and but they have shoal, S H, and and then the look at my other edition, you know, sure enough, they adopted it right, But he says the brilliant emendation, huh?

[57:29] The emendation that he has in Henry V, you know, in the death of of false death, no description of it, right? I guess the original the text that we had that says and he tabled the green fields, and

[57:44] Theobald says and he babbled the green fields. It's a document of the rest of it, right? this requires the happiest emendation ever made in Shakespeare, right? You know. there's certain defects in the text, right?

[57:56] And then you know, when I was reading this other edition there, or, what's his name? I can't forget the name of the guy. Um, Rolf, Rolf's edition of Shakespeare, right? The Hamlet, you know, when in the definition there of reason, right? You know, looking before and after is part of it, and Theobald says almost to America the phrase, right? You go to to Homer and you see that's a central thing, you know, looking before behind yourself, right?

[58:27] And uh, so, you kind of admire Theobald, right? Yeah. You know? Two beautiful emendations, you know, and then seeing this, you know, Shakespeare saying the same thing, somewhat even better that Homer is saying. The two greatest poets, you know, see exactly the same thing as characterizing reason.

[58:45] You find some text of Shakespeare, and And a lot of times you don't find them at all in modern editions at all. You don't. Not these interesting little footnotes as you sometimes have in. These, you know, I think the 19th century. Not, they weren't as crazy as we are, you know. Yeah, we got TV. Yeah, yeah. Which cannot be amended.

[59:11] Okay. So, now the first objection is saying, well, why doesn't he have hope, right? He says, to the first, it should be said therefore that the habits of virtues and of what gifts properly and per se regard the good, but the bad, consequently, for it pertains to the very definition of virtue that it renders one's what work good. Aristotle defines virtue there at first as what makes its habens good and its activity good, right?

[59:56] And therefore, we can speak of the virtue of a knife, right? Sharpness is the virtue of a knife. Good knife, good sharp. And therefore, it's of the notion of the gift of fear,

[1:00:15] which is not that evil that what fear regards, but the eminence of that good, right? To wit, the divine goodness, huh? By whose power some evil can be afflicted, right? But hope, according as is a virtue, regards not only the doer of the good, but also the good itself, in so far as it is not what had. And therefore, to Christ, because he already has the perfect gift of beatitude, the beatific vision, there is not attributed the virtue of hope, but the gift of what fear, because in his divine nature he is so much, right?

[1:01:02] Fears himself. His reverence for himself is God, right? Now the second objection regards what fear, according as it is, regards the object which is evil.

[1:01:18] When you talk even about timorum castus, huh? That's something less than the gift, I think, of the of the fear, right? Because then you fear to be separated from God, right? Don't fear to be punished, but you fear the separation from him, right? That doesn't seem to be the ultimate stage, you know. It's going to have heaven. Yeah, because they can't, they can't lose. Yeah, don't fear to be punished once you you enjoy the beatific vision.

[1:01:45] Nor do you fear that you could ever be separated from God. You know, you no longer be separated from him, but you still have this what reverence for him, right? You see, you know, infinite distance between the two of

[1:01:58] them. Even the soul of purgatory can't lose. Now, perfect charity casts forth servile fear, right, which regards what chiefly punishment, right? And thus, fear was not in Christ huh It came to gratia gratis data, right, And then we went to the fullness of Christ's grace. huh These prophecies come under the gratia gratis data.