Tertia Pars
75. Summa III, Q.33 aa.3–4 & Q.34 aa.1–2: Flesh Taken On as It Was Conceived, a Miraculous Conception, Christ's Holiness and Free Will from the First Instant
Class of 2010-02-04
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/13-tertia-pars/075-summa-iii-q-33-aa-3-4-q-34-aa-1-2-flesh-taken-on-as-it-was/

[0:00] Think about that a little bit. Wait, they never say they never mention that God loves Himself. As far as I know, I didn't hear something Paul put to you. Yeah. I never. Just keep on hearing he loves us unconditionally. Unconditionally. Okay.

[0:29] Um. Grew up to Article Three, right? Whether the flesh of Christ was first conceived and afterwards what taken on? To the third one proceeds thus: It seems that the flesh of Christ was before conceived and afterwards assumed, huh? For what is not cannot be taken on, or taken up. But the flesh of Christ begins to be through conception. Therefore, it seems that it was taken on by the Word of God after it was what conceived, huh?

[1:17] Well, Christ gave it at the same time, and yet you're assuming something that is. Yes, before. Yeah. Anyway, moreover, the flesh of Christ was taken on by the Word of God mediante the rational soul, right? Huh.

[1:39] But in the end of conception, it takes on a what? It Gets a rational soul. Therefore, in the end of conception, it was assumed. But in the end of conception, it's said to be what? Yeah. Therefore, it was first conceived and afterwards assumed, huh? Moreover, in everything generated before in time, is that which is imperfect, than that which is perfect, as is clear through the philosopher in the ninth book of wisdom.

[2:15] But the body of Christ is something generated. Therefore, to its ultimate and last perfection, which consists in union to the Word of God, not at once in the first instant of conception did it arrive, but first it was flesh conceived and afterwards flesh assumed, huh? But against this is what Augustine says in the book on Faith to Peter. No, that's not the Apostle Peter. As far as I know, my my structure is kind of funny, you know, that he's laying down to somebody named Peter.

[2:52] Most firmly hold, huh? And in no way doubt, right? That the flesh of Christ was not conceived in the womb of the Virgin before it was taken on by the what? Yeah.

[3:12] This not by Augustine, because my as a footnote says Fulgentius Do you know that? Might be not there. The answer: It should be said that, as has been said above, we properly say that God was made a man. Not, however, properly do we say that man was made what? God. Because God took on, or drew to himself, took to himself, I guess you'd say, huh? As some say, ad sumari, huh?

[3:48] Take to oneself, take to. Yeah. So as some said, sibi took to himself that which is of man, right? Ah. That did not pre-exist, which was of man, as it were per se subsisting, before it was taken up by the Word. We have another? Nestorian here or something? Um, if the flesh of Christ was conceived before it was taken up by the Word, you would have some hypostasis, apart from the hypostasis of the Word of God, right?

[4:25] Which is against the notion of the what incarnation, according to which we lay down that the Word of God was united to human nature and to all of its parts in the union of what? Yeah, hypostatic union. Nor was it suitable that a pre-existing hypostasis of human nature or some part of it that the Word of God would, by its assumption, destroy, right? That would be most inappropriate.

[4:55] My God, come along and leave your prison and take on your. So long. I'm taking over now. And therefore, against faith is it to say that the flesh of Christ was before conceived and afterwards taken up by the Word of what? God.

[5:23] Now, to the first, it should be said that if the flesh of Christ was not formed or conceived in instant, right, but through the succession of time, it would be necessary for one of two things to follow: either that what was taken on was not yet what flesh, or that it was what before a conception of flesh, then it was taken on. But because we lay down that the conception in an instant was perfect, consequently, in that flesh at the same time.

[6:00] Was what to be conceived? It was being conceived, and it was conceived, okay. And thus, as Augustine says in the book on Faith to Peter,

[6:21] we say that the what Word of God conceived by the what receiving of flesh and the flesh itself by the incarnation of the Word was what, yeah.

[6:42] And to this is clear the response to the what second for Simo together when the flesh was conceived, it was what has been conceived and is animated.

[6:59] Now, if Aristotle talks about you know these perfect operations in the ninth book of Wisdom, right, and he compares you know understanding, let's say, with walking home, right, and he says, well, when you are walking home, have you walked home? No. But when you are understanding something, have you understood yet? Yeah, yeah. When I understand the Pythagorean theorem, I have understood it, right? So, when Christ is is being conceived, he has been conceived because of the infinite power, right, of the Holy Spirit.

[7:37] So it's like the operation he calls perfect, right? He calls walking home imperfect because as long as you are walking home, you haven't walked home yet. Sort of because it created merely created power of the generation, imperfect, so that the conception is imperfect. Yeah, in the same way, you know, I am not like when Christ is the boat there, you know, it's there, right? But if you got to row the boat there or be pulled by the wind, when you are going to port, you are not.

[8:08] You haven't gone to port yet. You haven't arrived. You're not safe yet. Okay. To the third, it should be said that in the mystery of the incarnation, one does not consider the ascent right as of something pre-existing, progressing. Usque up to the dignity of union, right? As Photinus the Heretic proposed, right? Huh. But rather is considered there a descent, according as the perfect

[8:50] Word of God took on the imperfection of our nature. According to that of John chapter six, I have come down. from heaven. It's come down. I was reading the what was the thing on

[9:12] on the symbolum pastorum, right of Thomas. He's talking about Christ on the cross, right, and how he teaches us things on the cross. And you know the prayer of Thomas after communion. You know where he says he asks for the virtues, right? Increasing the virtue and elimination of the vices and so on. But the virtues he mentions there are charity, patience,

[9:43] humility, and obedience, right? Well, in this treatise on the the creed, there I think it's that's where I s where I saw it. He's speaking about how Christ gives an example of the virtues on there: charity. Patience, humility, obedience—exactly those four, right? You know. So I've often thought about those four. You know, you can see why. Obviously, he has charity in there, right, and so on, and maybe other reasons why those other virtues are important.

[10:15] But this is exactly the four that he speaks of as Christ is exemplifying on the cross, when he gets in that same order, right? So it's kind of appropriate, I suppose. You know, in after the communion where you're, you're contemplating in the mystery of his dying the cross and so on, that you ask for increase of those virtues that he most exemplifies on the cross and and in his Passion in the Eptos cross, too, of course.

[10:42] And it's those those those four four virtues that he brings out there. De descendere de caelo That's why sometimes divide. You know, the six articles of the humanity of Christ. You know, the three of descent and the three of ascent. Yeah, yeah. You have to divide it into two or three. You know.

[11:12] You can also divide those six into three if you want it instead of into two. But that's a different way, yeah. Um. To the fourth, one proceeds thus. It seems that the conception of Christ was what natural. For according to the conception of the flesh of Christ, he is said to be the Son of Man.

[11:43] Now a lot in in Daniel there about the Son of Man. Kind of should be striking. But he is the true and natural Son of Man, just as he is the true and natural Son of God. Therefore, his conception was natural.

[12:03] Moreover, no creature produces a miraculous operation, but the conception of Christ is attributed to the Blessed Virgin, who is a what pure creature. For he said that the Virgin conceived Christ.

[12:28] Therefore, it seems that was not miraculous, but a natural conception. Moreover, in order that some transmutation be natural, it suffices that the passive principle be natural, as has been had above, huh? But the passive principle on the side of the mother in the conception of Christ was natural, as is clear from the things said. Therefore, the conception of Christ was natural. Now, what do you say? Do you say respondio?

[12:58] Something be natural in two ways. But against this is what Dionysius says in the epistle to the monk Caesarius. Above man did Christ those things which are of man, right? And in this he shows what he shows us the Virgin supernaturally conceiving.

[13:34] I answer: It should be said that, as Ambrose says in the book on Incarnation, much in this mystery is what we find according to nature and beyond nature, right?

[13:54] If we consider that which is on the side of the matter, right, conceived, which the mother administers, the whole is what natural, totum est naturale. If, however, we consider that which is on the side of the active power, which I guess is the Holy Spirit, the whole is what miraculous, huh? And because each thing is more judged according to its form than according to its matter, right?

[14:29] And likewise, according to the agent more than according to the what patient. Hence, it is that the conception of Christ ought to be said Simpliciter. There's that distinction again now. Simpliciter miraculous and supernatural, but secundum aliquid natural.

[14:57] I thought you were going to say something like this because when he talks about the movement of heavenly bodies, right, is this natural or voluntary? Well, on the part of the bodies, there is a natural aptitude for this motion, so in that sense it's natural, right? But the mover, the angels, right, and they are voluntary moving it, so therefore it's voluntary on the side, you know. So you have to make that kind of distinction, right?

[15:30] Now, is this wooden table artificial or natural? One way natural Artificial. Part of the form, it's artificial. Yeah, but we would say the table is something natural, artificial.

[15:46] Yeah, even though the matter is something natural, right? See, but it's kind of the same that Thomas is making here, right? The form is from art, right? And it's a table more by reason of its form than by reason of its matter, huh? Okay. And it's artificial by its agent, right, as opposed to its matter. He just pulls the plug on all the advertising campaigns for natural foods.

[16:20] Made with natural, made with natural, made with natural. That well, no, it's not natural; it's artificial. Artificial process. I'm part of that. I'm part of that, but we don't name him.

[16:39] If you don't understand artificial, to the first, therefore, it should be said that Christ is said to be the natural son of man, right? Insofar as he has a true human what nature, by which he is the son of man, even though he has this what Miraculously. Miraculously. just as the blind man illuminated sees naturally through the

[17:14] visual power, which nevertheless he has what? Yeah, that's a nice comparison, right? Does he have natural sight? Yes, miraculous way. We we have natural sight, natural, right? It's sort

[17:42] of about these old women in the in the scripture there that conceive, right? Conceive naturally by the. To the second, it should be said that the conception is attributed to the Blessed Virgin, not, as it were, to the active principle, but because she ministers matter to the conception, and because the conception was celebrated in her womb.

[18:23] It's interesting. What's the psalm there where you know they compare Christ coming out of the womb there, right? And like the groom coming out of his bridal chamber, right? And running over the world.

[18:41] Now he says, "A passive principle, a natural passive principle, suffices for a natural change when, in a natural and accustomed way, it is moved by its own what active principle, but this is not does not take place in the thing proposed, right? And therefore, that conception cannot be said to be simpliciter naturally, So that's interesting distinction. this simpliciter and secundum quid,

[19:15] If they mention there, that's underlying the second kind of mistake outside of speech, the mistake for mixing up what is so simply, what is so not simply, but in some way. In the great dialogue of Plato, the Meno, right, It's so striking because Mino objects to investigating what they don't know, what virtue is, and he makes the mistake of mixing up simply and what. Yeah, and then Socrates, when he replies to that, he makes the same kind of mistake, and Aristotle, you know, notes this there in the beginning of the Postior Analytics. So the uh what Meno is overlooking is the fact that what you don't know you can know in some imperfect way.

[20:17] So as I used to always say to students, you know, the man is being paid to look for the cause of some disease, right? He knows in some way what he's looking for, the cause of that disease, right? But he doesn't know it simply because then his research would be over.

[20:39] But if we're knowing in some way, he knows in some way where to look. Then Socrates replies, you know, well, has the slave boy ever studied geometry? No. And yet a theorem of geometry comes out of the slave boy's answers. Socrates said, "Well, I didn't teach him. Did he? He recalled it now. Well, that implies that the slave boy already knew it when he actually answered wrongly the way to double a square is to double the side, and that we get a thing four times as big.

[21:15] So, but if you know the major premise and the minor premise, or what will be the major and minor premise of a syllogism, but you never put them together, you don't know the conclusion. And so you go through Euclid, you know, comes a new theorem, and he brings together things, and you say, what's that? Make a reference there. You go back to look up what the theorem was you forgot, and yeah, yeah.

[21:41] So you don't really know the new theorem until you put those together, and then you see the new theorem following from them. But you are able to know them from what you knew already. You don't have to prove any other theorems before you can prove this one, right? But to be able to know something is to know it. Not simple. No. Yeah. That was you had to, you know, abolish schools, right?

[22:14] Yeah. I already know French. I already know German. I already know Chinese. You know. And I go to Chinese restaurants. You get these little things there. You know, the fortune cookies. You know, and on the back, you should have a teach you a Chinese word, right? Yeah. You know, I'm able to learn a little bit of Chinese this way. We've got a chance right there. Yeah. Question thirty-four here.

[22:46] Then one ought to consider about the perfection of the child what conceived, huh? This goes back now to the to question twenty-seven. Let me say here. Let's look back at the proemium there, twenty-seven. Let's look back at 27 just for a second here. After the forest said, in which

[23:21] about the union of God and man, and about those things which follow upon this union have been treated, right? It remains to be considered about those things which the Son of God incarnate in human nature united to Himself did or underwent, huh? Which consideration is fourfold, huh? For first, we consider about those things which pertain to his entry into the world. Secondly, about those things which belong to the procession of his life in this world, huh?

[24:03] And that's starting up in question what forty. That's a way of going ways here ways here. Third, about his exit from this world, right? That's up in question forty-six, and fourth, about those things which pertain to his exaltation after this life, huh?

[24:27] Now we mentioned how how Thomas divides the Gospel of what Matthew, according to first three of these four, right, huh? Now about the first four, huh? About the first rather, four things occur to be considered. First, about the conception of Christ, huh? Secondly, about his what nativity,

[24:58] and that starts apparently in what thirty-five. Okay. Third, about his circumcision. Fourth, about his what baptism, huh? Okay. Now we're still on the conception, right? Stingy, yeah. Now about his conception, it's necessary to consider first, as regards to the mother conceiving. Secondly, to the what mode of conception, and now as regards perfection of the conceived, and this is question what thirty-four. So we don't be completely lost where we are.

[25:45] Yeah. Can't see the forest for the trees, huh? Then we're not to consider about the perfection of the offspring conceived, and about this four things are asked. First, whether in the first instant of the conception Christ was sanctified by what grace? Whether in the same instant he had the use of what free will, free judgment? Third, whether in the same instant he was able to what?

[26:32] And fourth, whether in the same instant he was fully a comprehensor, right? Okay. First, whether Christ was sanctified in the first instant of his conception. To the first, then one proceeds. Thus, it seems that Christ was not sanctified in the first instant of his conception. Who would think that?

[26:58] For it is said in one Corinthians chapter fifteen, not before what is spiritual, but what is animal. Then what is spiritual? Then. So we generate our offspring, then we nourish them, and then we instruct them. But the sanctification of grace pertains to spirituality. Therefore, not at once in the beginning of his conception did Christ to it Grace. of sanctification. Yeah. But after some space of time.

[27:40] Moreover, sanctification seems to be from sin. Sanctified from sin, according to that of one Corinthians six. And this you were at some time, to wit, sinners, right? But you are washed, huh? But you are what sanctified. But in Christ there never was sin. Therefore, it does not belong to him to be sanctified by grace.

[28:09] Moreover, just as through the word of God all things are made, so through the word incarnate are all men sanctified who are sanctified, as is said in Hebrews chapter two. Who sanctifies and who are what? And all who are sanctified from one, right? But the word of God through which all things are made is not what self-made, as Augustine says in the first book of the Trinity.

[28:42] Therefore, Christ, to whom are sanctified all, is not Himself sanctified, huh? But against this is what is said in Luke one, chapter one, who is will be born from you will be called what, Son of God, huh? In John chapter ten, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, huh? I answer, it should be said that has been said above, that the abundance of the sanctifying grace of the what?

[29:24] Oh, excuse me, the abundance of the grace sanctifying the soul of Christ is derived from the union of the Word, right? According to that of John, for we saw His glory as it were the only begotten from the Father, and there's kind of a consequence of that, full of grace and what, truth, right?

[29:54] For it has been shown above that in the first instant of His conception, the body of Christ was animated and taken on by the what, Word of God. So if the one who is only begotten from the Father is going to, as a consequence of that, be full of grace and truth, he must be from the very first, huh? Because he was taken on by the Word.

[30:20] Whence consequently it is that in the very first instant of conception, Christ had the fullness of grace sanctifying His soul and His body, huh? Interesting, His body, huh?

[30:39] Now what about Saint Paul here, one Corinthians fifteen, not before what is spiritual, but what is animal? He says right there, huh? Look before and after, right? To the first, therefore it should be said, huh? That that order which the Apostle lays down there, right, pertains to those who come, right, to some kind of progress to the spiritual state, right?

[31:11] But in the mystery of the incarnation, more is considered the descent of the divine fullness upon human nature in human nature than the progress of human nature of a human nature as it were pre-existing in God, huh? That gets you back into the heretics, right, huh? Yeah.

[31:36] And therefore in the man Christ. From the beginning, there was perfect what spiritualness, spirituality. The second should be said, sanctificare, is for something to become what holy.

[32:04] You can't make a word in English, can you? For sanctificare with holy, qualified. There's no word there. Made holy, I suppose you could say.

[32:21] That's not the word holy. Not in English. Yeah, say made holy, I suppose you have to say. Sanctified, made holy. Now. Something comes to be not only from the contrary, huh, but also from what is opposed negatively or in a privative, huh, lacking way.

[32:55] Just as white comes to be from the black and also from what is not white, huh? Now we are made holy from being sinners,

[33:09] and thus our being made holy is from sin, huh? But Christ, according as his man, was made holy because this holiness of grace he did not always what have because he was not always a man. Not, however, was he made holy from a sinner because he never had sin, huh?

[33:43] But he was made holy from not holy according to man, not in a privative sense. Privation is what is a negation in a subject, right?

[33:59] That he was sometime a man and was not holy, okay, but only in a negative sense, huh? Because when he was not a man, he did not have human holiness. Okay, he was never a man without being holy, but he was at one time not a man, right? And therefore, he was made together a man and a holy man.

[34:31] The rest of us are conceived in our mothers, yeah, out of sin, and therefore, okay, on account of which the angel says, "What is born from you will be what holy." Which Gregory, expounding in the eighteenth book of the morals, says to the distinction from our holiness, right? Christ is asserted to be born what holy.

[35:03] We, however, if we are made holy, we do not, however, born, because we are restricted by the condition of our corruptible nature, right? He, however, alone is truly what born holy, who from the carnal conjunction was not conceived, huh?

[35:44] Now the third objection here: He cannot be made holy because he makes others holy, right? To third, it should be said that in a different way does God do the creation of things through the Son,

[36:07] and another way the whole what Trinity, the sanctification of men through the Man Christ. For the Word of God is of the same power and operation with God the Father,

[36:23] whence the Father does not do something through the Son as it were through a tool, right? Which moves being moved itself, but the humanity of Christ is as a tool, right? Of his divinity, as has been said above,

[36:43] and therefore the humanity of Christ is both what sanctifying and what sanctified. It's like a moved mover, right? That's the way Thomas explains kind of the union of of human nature with God there. According to Athanasian Creed, they compare it to the union of the soul and the body, and he says, "Well, it shouldn't be understood insofar as the body, the soul is the form of the body, because the divinity is not the form of the body, but insofar as the body is a tool in the sense of the soul, right?

[37:23] And the it's a tool in the sense of a joined tool, like my hand, right? Because the humanity of Christ is joined to his person, right?

[37:39] So it's like a joined tool of God, right? There's a great efficacy from that. So a tool is kind of a moved mover. I do one more article here before we. Yeah.

[37:59] I was going to say kick the bucket. I don't want to get it. Get out my face, kicks my sense out of my toilet. I say. You never know.

[38:18] You have three priests visiting. Yeah. Yeah. Good sir. I see four. I think there's only. other stories. To the second one goes forward. Thus, it seems that Christ, as man, did not have the use of what free judgment in the first instant of his what conception. Huh.

[39:00] This is grosses has to be taken up before we can talk about his meriting. I suppose on the next article. Yeah. Ah, for before is the to be of a thing, than to act or to what operate. Huh. But the use of free judgment, free will, is a certain what operation. Therefore, since therefore the soul of Christ began to be in the first instant of his conception, it seems impossible in the first instant of his conception he would have the use of what free judgment.

[39:39] Huh. Moreover, the use of free judgment is choice, but choice presupposes deliberation, the deliberation of counsel. For the philosopher says in the third book about the the ethics that choice is the desire of what has been preconsuled, huh. Therefore, it seems. um deliberate, right? Therefore, it seems impossible that in the first instant of his conception that Christ had the use of free judgment. Huh.

[40:19] Moreover, free judgment is a faculty of the will and the reason, as has been had in the first part, and thus the use of free judgment is an act of the will and the reason or the understanding. But the act of the understanding presupposes the act of the sense, which is not able to be without the convenience of what organs, which do not seem to have been there in the first instant of the conception of Christ.

[40:51] Huh. Therefore, it seems that Christ was not able to have the use of free judgment in the first instant of his conception. Of course, he had many kinds of knowledge. I guess. We'll see what the master says. Try to listen to me, and you can hear the master.

[41:13] But against this is what Augustine says in the book about the Trinity. As soon as the Word came into the womb, right? Preserving the truth of each nature, he was made flesh and a perfect man.

[41:32] But a perfect man has the use of free judgment. Therefore, Christ had in the first instant of his conception the use of free will.

[41:47] I tell you, I downloaded that in the my computer there, the Vatican there, the Augustinum Hipponensem, something like that, the encyclical of John Paul II. On Saint Augustine, really impressive, you know. You know, Augustine. It was a centenary. Centenary of his birth or something. You know, it was some, yeah, some, yeah, yeah, yeah. But really impressive to see him laid out. He lays it out pretty strongly there, you know.

[42:15] Augustine really something. This thing I was talking about about the about the virtues of Christ on the cross, you know, and so on. But Thomas, you know, before going into that, he says, you know, as Beatus Augustinus says, as Blessed Augustine, I don't remember using that phrase so often, but says Blessed Augustine says, you know, this is, you know, the master teaching us on the cross, you know.

[42:39] John Paul used that in the first thing he wrote as pope, which was not an encyclical; it was a letter on catechesis. And so, quote: I always remember it. I, it struck me that it still strikes me that he says one of the most popular and sublime images of Christ the teacher is the crucifix. It's interesting. He points out two things: it's popular, but it's a sublime image as a teacher,

[43:09] which is why it belongs in classrooms. Yeah. Okay. Answer should be said. This has been said above. That the human nature which Christ assumed, right? There belonged what spiritual perfection onto that human nature, in which he did not progress, but which he had at once from the beginning, right? But the last perfection does not consist in power or in what habit. But in operation, whence it is said in the second book about the soul by the philosopher, right, that operation is the second act, huh?

[44:02] The soul is the first act, and therefore, and therefore it should be said that Christ, in the very first instant of his conception, had that operation of the soul, which he was able, right, to have in an instant. And such was the operation.

[44:24] No, she said an operation which can be had in the instant, right? Okay. But such was the operation. But such is the operation of the will and the understanding, in which there consists the use of what free will, right?

[44:42] For at once and in an instant is perfected the operation and the understanding and the will, much more than the bodily vision, right? Let's go back now to the teaching of the philosopher in the ninth book of wisdom, right? In that intelligere these very things Aristotle talks about there. intelligere, velle and sentire is not a motion, right? Which is the actus imperfecti, the act of the imperfect, which is successively, huh, gradually perfected, right?

[45:15] But it's an act of the perfect, as is said in the third De Anima. So going back to what I said, if you take a motion like walking home, Aristotle says that when you're walking home, you haven't walked home. When you have walked home, you're no longer walking home. So it's an it's an activity that is by its very nature what imperfect, huh? And then he contrasts out the perfect act, like understanding or willing, right, or loving, right.

[45:45] So I'm loving my wife. Have I loved you yet? He's talking. I've heard him say, "I'm loving you, but I haven't loved you yet." Yeah. So these operations be performed, right? That's the conditional. Yeah.

[46:05] In the instant, right? Huh? See, and when I'm understanding what a triangle is, have I understood it yet? Yeah. See, so it's a different thing. Now you can see that our grammar is made to fit motion rather than these perfect acts, huh? And so we speak, you know, of you know, walking home is in the present but not the perfect, you know, but having walked home is a is perfect or something, you know.

[46:32] Okay. Doesn't quite fit these things here. So that's why he says, huh? Subito, at an instant, is perfected the operation of the understanding, the will, right? Much more than even the bodily vision, right?

[46:51] In that to understand to will, but nevertheless also to sense, right? So, and I see that painting over there. Have I seen it yet? Yeah.

[47:06] And here you phrase not the ninth book, but that's where it's bringing up more fully. But also in the third book about the soul, right? When Aristotle says that sometimes he'll speak of understanding as emotion, but it's really more perfect act. Understanding is anyway reasoning to be more like emotion, and therefore it should be said that Christ, in the first instant of his conception, had the use of what free will, free judgment.

[47:35] Now, different senses of before, but you gentlemen have been trained in this area. To the first, therefore, it should be said that to be is before by nature than to do, right? But is not. However, before in time, right? Huh? That's a different sense. But together with the agent, when the agent has perfect being, right, it begins to what? Act, yeah. Unless there be something impeding it, right?

[48:09] Just as fire, at once when it is generated, begins to what? Heat and to enlighten, huh? But heating is not terminated in an instant, but through succession of what? Times. It takes a while to cook the meat, right? Um. But illuminating is perfected in a what? Well, yeah, okay, Thomas. Well, seems to be. And such a operation is the use of free will, right? Even God Himself in His divine nature has free will, right?

[48:49] So God always loved us, huh? Interesting. See that, right? Not only He loved us, He always loved us. He loved us before we were.

[49:07] I wish they would talk about God loving Himself a little bit. And he and he, like, you could just qualify that and say that he always loved us from all eternity, but not unconditionally.

[49:20] Okay. Now, the second thing. What about what the philosopher says in the third book? There. To the second, it should be said that together, at the same time, Simo, right? Together, when counsel or deliberation is ended, right? There can be what? Choice, huh?

[49:48] So these pro-choice people aren't really in favor of concilium or deliberatio, right? They don't have the the facts out there, so they're not really in favor of choice. You heard about about the the advertisement or not advertisement? The message going to be at the the Super Bowl. Well, I guess this this one player who's a Heisman winner. You know, Oh, I heard about this. yeah, yeah. His mother was told to you know you should abort this one, you know, and she had.

[50:18] She was Filipino, I think she was Filipino, or she lived in the Philippines. I, I yeah, I know. And and and so she's you know she said no No, and she had him and and he ended up to be a Heisman yeah yeah. So of course when they heard that they were going to have this, you know, they've been fighting it, you know, the Planned Parenthood and the rest of people there, you know, saying, oh this is terrible, this is a terrible attack upon women and so on, you.

[50:44] I mean, I mean, I thought they saw my choice, you know. didn't. She made the right choice. No one gets up there and who's going to have an advertisement about the you know their choice to kill the baby, you know. So it should be very interesting. I heard about this, but I didn't know. I didn't. And it costs millions of dollars, I guess. It's going to be in the Super Bowl.

[51:01] Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. He's still in college, right? He's still a college player. No, no, I think he's pro now. I think. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, it's it's. But they've been trying to get it off, you know. You know, they're writing to CBS and protesting. You know, this is a terrible thing. This is going to divide us. You know, and everything. You know, everybody should be united.

[51:21] you know, As if abortion didn't divide somebody. you know, Literally divide somebody not only from their parent, but divide us. So, was this supposed to be like a commercial, or? Well, it's not commercial. I mean, it's a message. I mean, it's not really a commercial, isn't that? Yeah, it's not advertising, but they're going to put it. I mean, it's a commercial slot. Yeah. During the Super Bowl.

[51:44] Yeah, really. It's not actually advertising, It's not the But it's a message. Yeah, he's getting the. bet. If I saw that, I think it was. So he must be on a team of players. Well, yeah, I don't know if he's on these teams or what team he's on. Whatever it was, I remember because he became a superstar when he was in college. He won the Heisman Trophy, and he was always very pro-life because his mother made this.

[52:02] She made the point. I was told to get rid of you, and I didn't. He just puts messages in the Bible on his thing Oh yeah let's say he puts the messages in the Bible with his eyes, or but he always makes chapter and verse some scripture.

[52:18] I read, I just read that in the register. it came this week But I didn't. I didn't connect with the Super Bowl, or if I did, yeah, yeah, yeah. That's the occasion. Yes, that's that's.

[52:29] This weekend, I think it's supposed to. Yeah, Sunday. Yeah. Okay. Um maybe. What? Second. To the second, here, okay. To the second should be said. Together, when counsel deliberation is what ended, there can be choice.

[52:57] Now, those he says who need the deliberation of counsel, right? In the ending of the counsel, they first have certitude about choosing, and therefore, at once they what choose, right? Huh? Once it is clear that the deliberation of counsel is not presupposed, yeah, to choice except on account of the investigation of the uncertain, right? But Christ, however in the first instant of his conception, had the fullness of justifying grace.

[53:36] So also he had the fullness of what truth known, according to that again, that text of John, full of grace and what truth, huh? I told you I should be reading the Gospel of John. you know. that's like. Whence, as it were, having certitude of what all things, he was able at once. An instant to what choose? I remember remember, uh, Father Baumgartner talking about that. You know, that it's important to know that, right?

[54:09] Because in the very moment of his what conception, he was able to what merit for us. You know, this probably we'll see in next one. And Father Baumgartner used to teach at St. Paul Seminary. You know, Because certainly he didn't know the answer, he sent over to Baumgartner So yeah, I was in his office asking questions. Pick up the phone. Call Father Baumgartner over at the Even Father Baumgartner was also a you know a law graduate.

[54:39] You know. Oh really? Yeah. But I remember I went to being over in his office there and I was seeing some article written for

[54:49] the Journal of the Catholic American Catholic Philosophical Association, and he was going through people who had written things about wisdom, you know, and metaphysics and so on, and correcting them and so on. And so I said to him, "Must have been a lot of work," as I did write the journal. Just making kind of conversation. He says, "He says all these pretensions to learning." He says, "See if I have, you know, just just jumping into print without anything to say, except a mistake."

[55:20] Okay. To the third, it should be said, huh? What about presupposing senses? Or in Christ's many kinds of knowledge. To the third, it should be said that the understanding of Christ, according to his infused right knowledge, was able to understand also not turning to what images, right? Huh? Whence there could be in him the operation of will and understanding without the operation of what sense. But nevertheless, there could be in him also the operation of sense in the first instant of his conception, and most of all as regards the sense of what touch, by which sense the what offspring conceived senses in his mother even what before he obtains a rational soul, right?

[56:27] Now that's the order of generation, as is said in the book on the generation of animals by the philosopher. Whence Christ, in the first instant of his conception, had a rational soul,

[56:41] his what body being formed, organized, right? Much more in that same instant was able to have the operation of the sense of what touch. They say they say the baby, you know, knows the voice of his mother before he gets out of the womb. You know. The continuity there. I remember she said

[57:04] the mother, young mother, she was expecting her first child, and she was the last few couple months where she was home, and in the afternoon she would always certain time, about two o'clock, and she would lie down on the sofa and she turn on the soap opera and you know kind of rest and watch TV and so on. So she noticed after the child was born, whenever the music came out of the soap opera, the baby just goes to sleep.

[57:29] I already knew that. I already knew that music. So when my sister learned that. She and her husband, their, first child, Ed, my brother, in-law plays the guitar. He likes to sing and so on. So they would sit down in the evening and he would strum the guitar and sing to the baby before he was born, so she would hear their voices and so on.