Tertia Pars
119. Christ's Resurrection as Cause of the Resurrection of Souls; Why It Was Fitting for Christ to Ascend, and According to Which Nature
Class of 2011-01-13
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/13-tertia-pars/119-christs-resurrection-as-cause-of-the-resurrection-of-souls/

[0:00] In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the, Holy Spirit. Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. Deo Gracias. God, our enlightenment, guardian angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, order our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor, help us to understand our truth.

[0:33] So, whether the resurrection of Christ is the cause of the resurrection of what souls? Souls, huh? That's funny you should say that, huh? Right in the body. huh? Yeah. Sounds like a heretic. To the second one proceeds thus, It seems that the resurrection of Christ was not a cause of the resurrection of souls.

[0:58] Oh, that's the first article. It's a cause of the resurrection of the body. Yeah, there you go. Okay, he's not the heretic. I thought he was. Okay. Saint Paul talks about that, right?

[1:17] For Augustine says upon the Gospel of St. John that the bodies rise up through the what human dispensation, but the souls rise up through the substance of God.

[1:34] That seems to be saying that through his divine nature that he what resurrects the souls, right? But it's through his body and his own body resurrection that he's raising up the bodies, huh? Okay, but the resurrection of Christ does not pertain to the substance of God, right? But to the human disposition. Therefore, the resurrection of Christ is a cause of the resurrection of bodies. It does not ever seem to be the cause of the resurrection of the what souls.

[2:12] Moreover, the body does not act upon the what spirit, but the resurrection of Christ pertains to the body, to his body that fell right to death. Therefore, the resurrection of Christ is not a cause of the resurrection of souls.

[2:33] It's interesting because when Thomas talks sometimes about the effect of the death of Christ, huh? You have three things after the death of Christ, huh? You have the descent to what hell, then you have the resurrection, right? And then you have the what ascension, right? Three. Okay. So Thomas would go back to the division that you have in the Greeks of the goods of man, right? And they divide them into three kinds of goods: the goods of the soul, the goods of the body, and then exterior goods.

[3:13] So in the descent to hell, where he gives them the beatific vision, that's the good of the soul. The resurrection of the body, that's the good of the body, right? And the ascension is getting the right place, huh? Which is exterior goods. So he divides it according to those three what goods, right? Someone might say the resurrection just is concerned with the good of the body, right?

[3:36] The descent into hell is for the good of the soul, and the one that's neglected the most, right? Because it's in the Apostles' Creed, but not in the what Nicene Constantinople Creed, huh? What is the ascension for again? Uh, the exterior good, huh? Exterior. To be in the right place, huh? Nice place to be, right? But it's an exterior good, right? Okay.

[4:05] Moreover, because the resurrection of Christ is the cause of the resurrection of our bodies, the bodies of all rise, according to that of one Corinthians fifteen. All will rise, right? But the souls of all do not what rise, huh? Yeah. Because some go into eternal punishment, as is said in Matthew chapter twenty-five. Therefore, the resurrection of Christ is not a cause of the resurrection of the souls.

[4:39] That's an interesting argument, huh? Moreover, the resurrection of souls is by the remission of sins, but this was done or made through the what passion of Christ, huh? According to that of Apocalypse one, he washed us from our sins in his what blood, huh? Okay, St. Thomas says they're in the sixth quatrain, right, of the Adute Devote.

[5:12] Therefore, the passion of of Christ, right, is more the cause of the resurrection of souls than his what resurrection, huh? But against this is what the apostle says, huh? And that's the way referring to Saint Paul, right? By antonomasia, Romans chapter four, verse twenty-five. He rose on account of our justification, right? Justification refers to the change in the soul from sin to grace and so on, which is nothing other than the resurrection of souls.

[5:58] And upon this, in in Psalm twenty nine, it says, at vespers on the evening, there is what weeping. That the the glosses, there's joy in in the morning, right? That the resurrection of Christ is the cause of our resurrection. Both of our soul, now in the present, and of the body in the what future. So what do you gentlemen say?

[6:30] Interesting, the order, right? Because he talked about the resurrection being the cause of resurrection, the bodies first, right? In the first article, is that that were more what?

[6:40] Well, maybe more known, maybe more known, right? And the sacramental kind of ritual. I answer, it should be said, Thomas says that the resurrection of Christ acts in the power of his divine nature, which extends itself not only to the resurrection of bodies, but also to the resurrection of what souls, right?

[7:12] For it's by God or from God that both the what soul lives through grace, and the body lives through the what soul. Yeah. Of course, with grace comes God, right? That's what he say when the soul leaves the body, the body is dead, right? When God leaves the soul, which he does when he loses grace, then the soul is dead, huh?

[7:45] And therefore, the resurrection of Christ has as a tool, right, instrumentaliter, a power to what effect? Not only with respect to the resurrection of bodies, but also with respect to the resurrection of the souls, right?

[8:05] So that other division I was getting from Thomas, according to the good of the soul, the good of the body, the exterior good, that should be understood according to the Anaxagorean right principle of division.

[8:21] You know, Anaxagoras said everything is inside of everything, right? Then someone says, well, why is this a dog and that a cat and that a man? Everything is inside of everything, right? How is one thing? Well, we call things for what it has most of, right?

[8:36] Either absolutely or in comparison of the things, right? So the resurrection of the body seems to have what more to do with the body than the than the soul, right? But should not be understood except in the Anaxagorean way of dividing things, right? Okay.

[8:57] Because you could say that the descent to these souls there in in the Patriarchs and so on, that seems to be only benefiting their what soul, right? Okay. Why the resurrection is going to benefit the body, so at least in comparison, right? It's for that. But doesn't mean to eliminate that, right? It's the Anaxagorean way of dividing things.

[9:26] Just like we say that what Macbeth is a tragedy, right? Does a little bit of comedy in there. A little comic relief at one point. huh? It's going to shock some people, you know, huh? But you still would call it a tragedy because it has more of that, right? Than has comedy. in there. Likewise, it also has the what aspect of an exemplar, right? With respect to the what. Resurrection of souls, huh?

[10:07] Because to Christ rising, we ought also, even according to our soul, to be conformed, huh? As the apostle says, huh, Romans chapter six. Christ rose from the dead to the glory of the what, Father, so we also ought to walk in the newness of life, huh? That refers to the soul, right? And just as he rising from the dead no longer dies, so we ought to consider ourselves to be what, dead to sin, right?

[10:47] That we might live what, with him, right? So it's a cause, both in the sense of a what, the third kind of cause, instrumental, right? Insofar as it's instrument of his what,

[11:05] divinity and so on, but it's also an exemplar, right? Which is the second kind of cause, huh? Okay. Now what about this text from Augustine?

[11:24] Yeah. To the first, therefore, it should be said that Augustine calls the resurrection of souls to come about to the substance of God, as regards what, partaking, right? Now sometimes we define grace as what, Sharing. sharing the divine nature, partaking of it, right? Because by partaking of the divine goodness, souls become just and what, good, huh? Not, however, by partaking of any creature.

[12:06] Whence, when it is said, Christ has been said that souls rise to the substance of God. He adds to this, huh? By partaking of what, God, participatione indeed, the soul becomes blessed, right, huh? Not by the partaking of a holy what, soul, right?

[12:33] But by partaking of the glory of the body of Christ, our bodies are made what, glorious, huh? That's pretty good, Thomas, huh? Pretty good defense there That misunderstanding of the text of Augustine. right? I think the whole paragraph. Yeah. That's the lesson there. You see, Thomas doing this a lot with Aristotle, you know, some other authors understand the. Text of Thomas, I mean, of Aristotle, and then Thomas will show, you know, what Aristotle means by this, huh?

[13:09] I mean there's? There's a famous text in metaphysics there, where Aristotle seems to be saying that God knows only himself, right? And he can't know anything, you know, that's inferior to him, you know. And yet, you know, as Thomas points out, in the De Anima and in the metaphysics and the dialectic, he criticizes, you know, Empedocles' position because it makes us to know something that God doesn't know, right?

[13:38] And Aristotle, it's absurd, right? So Thomas understands the text of Aristotle, saying what God knows, what chiefly, right? And it's, by knowing himself, that he knows other things, right? It's not by knowing directly as the chief thing he's thinking about anything else, right? The chief thing he thinks about, and the only thing he chiefly thinks about is himself. But understanding himself so perfectly, he knows everything that's what effect of him, right?

[14:05] Everything that could be an effect of him that's in his power. So, but a lot of people misunderstand what Aristotle is saying there, right? Was that Thomas' text? What's in the twelfth book, The 12th book of Wisdom yeah, But it comes up other times too, and when we talk about these things in the Summa Contra Gentiles, other great works.

[14:34] Okay, to the second, it should be said, huh? That the efficacy of resurrection of Christ pertains to souls, not through what its own own power of the body rising, but by the power of what the divinity to which it is personally what united, huh? Okay, so that goes back to the first thing he's saying that the resurrection of Christ in the text there in the corpus, huh?

[15:13] That the resurrection of Christ acts in the power of his divinity, right? And therefore, it gives grace in that way. Now what about the third text here.

[15:28] Because not all souls resurrect in this sense, right? But all bodies resurrect. To the third, therefore, it should be said that the resurrection of souls pertains to what merit, which is an effect of justification. But the resurrection of bodies is ordered to punishment or reward, which are the effects of the one what judging. But to Christ does not pertain to justify all, but to judge all, right?

[16:01] And therefore, all all are resuscitated according to the body, but not according to their what soul. soul He resuscitates them Mm hmm So they can receive. I mean, part of the argument for the resurrection, one one of the arguments for the resurrection, why there will be the resurrection apart from the authority that there will be, is that so the one who has sinned or done well, right?

[16:30] His body will share in the punishment or the reward of what he's done in the flesh, right? And so he's saying that here, right? Now

[16:50] the fourth objection. This is done to the what passion of Christ, huh? To the fourth, it should be said that in the justification of souls, two things run together, right? Come together. To wit, the remission of what guilt, and then the newness of life through grace, right?

[17:21] As regards efficacy, right, efficient cause, I suppose he means there, which is through the what divine power. Both the passion of Christ, as well as the resurrection, right, is a cause of the justification. As regards what both, huh? But as regards this other kind of causality, which is the exemplar, right, which is under the second kind of cause form. Properly, the passion and death of Christ is the cause of the remission of what guilt, and the

[18:03] death of Christ, huh? And the death of Christ, huh? Is the cause of the remission of guilt, through which we die to what sin, right? But resurrection is the cause of the newness of life, which is through what grace or justice. And therefore, the apostle says Romans four that he was what Handed over? to death, that is to say, huh, on account of our sins, right? And he rose from the dead for the sake of our justification.

[18:43] But the passion of Christ is also a what meritorious cause. Yeah. Why was the resurrection meritorious cause? I don't think so. But his death, right. Passed out of this world. Now we go to the next question, which is on the ascension of Christ.

[19:13] Then we're not to consider. Now he has a little proemium as Monsignor Dionne would say. Then we're not to consider about the ascension of Christ.

[19:24] And about this, six things are sought or asked. First, whether it was appropriate or suitable for Christ to ascend. Secondly, according to what nature it belonged for him to ascend. How can his divine nature ascend? It can't be any higher than that, right? Yeah. Third, whether he ascended by his own what power?

[20:05] Fourth, whether he ascended above all the bodily heavens. Fifth, whether he ascended above all spiritual creatures. And six, about the effect of the ascension, right?

[20:33] Thomas Aquinas has the what disputed questions about spiritual creatures. There's eleven articles in it, but sometimes they call them separate substances, right? They also call them spiritual creatures.

[20:49] First of all, was it suitable or convenient for Christ to ascend? He's going to argue against this, right? Stubborn man about these things. To the first, then one proceeds thus: It seems that it was not suitable for Christ to what ascend. For, as the philosopher says, that's Aristotle by antonomasia This is Aristotle calls Homer sometimes the poet. In the Federalist Papers, quote Shakespeare, but identifying him as the poet says.

[21:34] He's the poet. Aristotle says in the second book on the universe, the De Caelo et Mundo, that those things which have themselves in the best way, right, possess their own good without motion.

[21:55] Because motion is to acquire something you don't have, right? But Christ had himself in the best way, right? Because according to his divine nature, he was the highest good, the summum bonum, and according to his human nature, he was supremely glorified, in the highest way. So you are not going to be as glorious in your body when you resurrect, when you are saved, as Christ's body is glorious.

[22:32] Therefore, he has his good without motion, but ascension is a certain motion. Therefore, it was not suitable that Christ should ascend. That's pretty convincing, huh? So maybe you are talking about, you know, an exterior good, huh?

[23:01] Moreover, everything that moves moves for something better, huh? But for Christ, it was not better to be in heaven than to be on earth. For nothing accrued to him through the fact that he was what in heaven, neither as regards his soul, right? His soul was no wiser was it for having ascended, right? Nor as regards his body, right? Was his body more glorious once it ascended?

[23:33] Therefore, it seems that Christ ought not to ascend into heaven. Does he indicate that he seeks something better, right? Amazing, Thomas gets these arguments. Where does he get them? Yeah, you got to dig these little tidbits up in order to take them out of context.

[23:57] But stumbling blocks everybody's way. Moreover, the Son of God assumed human nature for our salvation, but it would be more salutary or saving for men that he would always what converse with us on earth, right?

[24:24] As he himself says to disciples, "There will come a day, right, when you desire to see one day of the Son of Man, and you will not see it."

[24:39] Therefore, it seems that it was not suitable for Christ to ascend what to heaven. Do you remember those parts in the life there of Saint Teresa of Avila, you know, where Christ is present in human nature with her, but she can't quite express the way he's with her, you know, because not by simply. Imaginary vision, or or even or by the eyes, you know. But she's, you know, completely certain of his presence there, Sister.

[25:12] Didn't he say to her once something that you know she thought he was like sensibly present, and he corrected her and says, "I'm not present that way anymore," or something like that. I remember something telling that I haven't read. it, but I...

[25:25] One of these very impressive one time in my life where Christ, says to her, I will have you converse with angels and not with men. That's a beautiful idea. Now I converse with angels, not with men. It's just

[25:43] impressive. So wasn't it better for him to stay on Earth, right? As the. Might be for us, maybe. Moreover, as Gregory says in the fourteenth book of Moralia,

[26:04] the body of Christ, right, in no way was changed after the resurrection. But not immediately after resurrection did he ascend to heaven, right? But he said himself right after resurrection, "I have not yet ascended to my Father." So that Mary Magdalene said. Therefore, it seems that neither after forty days ought he to what ascend.

[26:35] But against all this is what the Lord Himself says, John twenty. I will send to my Father and your Father, right? Thomas will say, "He's my Father and your Father in a somewhat different way." He's he's his son, and we're his sons in a somewhat different way. There's some likeness there.

[27:08] I was seeing this thing from. the founder of Opus Dei, there you know, Father Christopher. He says, "There's more distance between you and God than between you and a two-year-old."

[27:28] And then he says, "But you know, like the two year old you're a child of God, right? And don't forget it," he says. So that's beautiful, he said, huh?

[27:43] Warren Murray is asking me if he could say, you know, there's more distance between you and God than between you and a and a cockroach or something. Because there's infinite distance, you know. Yeah Yeah. Thomas says, "it's a beautiful argument Or you know, he's going through the God knows, right? And some people say he doesn't know lowly things, right? Because it would be unbecoming him to know lowly things, right?

[28:11] And Thomas says, "Well, the difference between these lowly creatures and the highest creatures, right, is like nothing compared to the distance between even the highest creature and God, right? So if that was reason for God not to know the lowly things, because that little distance, that reason for not to know any of these creatures, you know, that's really, really, really sad, you know. Before I go, okay.

[28:43] Now Thomas says, I answer. It should be said that place ought to be proportioned or suitable to the what thing in place, locust to the located, right?

[28:58] But Christ, through His resurrection. began a what immortal and incorruptible life, huh? According to his what human nature, right? But the place in which that we inhabit, we dwell, the place in which we dwell, is the place of generation and what corruption. But the heavenly place is the place of incorruption, huh? Especially in the old understanding of heaven, right? And therefore, it was not suitable that Christ, after the resurrection, remained on earth, but it was suitable that he ascended to heaven, right?

[29:42] A suitable place for him. Now, what about the first objection from the philosopher, right? That the best things possess their good without motion. To the first, therefore, it should be said that that best having itself, that without motion it possesses its own good, is God, right? Who is omnino, entirely, completely immutable, right? According to that of Malachi chapter three verse six, I am the Lord, and I do not what change, huh?

[30:23] There's some heretics now want to say God changes, you know. He gets all shook up with our loving him, So. that's a little exaggeration, but they're saying something like that, you know. What? Leave no stone unturned. Yeah.

[30:44] Moral affairs. The guy. But every creature is in some way what changeable, as is clear through Augustine in the eighth book on Genesis to the letter, right?

[31:02] I guess Augustine did a couple works in Genesis, and one of them was criticized by Jerome, I think, and so he wrote something on Genesis to the letter, you know.

[31:15] And because the nature assumed by the Son of God remains what something created, right? As is clear from those things which have been said above, it was not unsuitable if to it some motion is attributed, huh?

[31:35] Now, what about getting better as regards his soul or his body in this thing, huh? To the second, it should be said that to this that Christ ascended to heaven, nothing accrued to him as regards what is of the essence of glory. Either according to his body, right, or according to his soul. So his body did not become any more glorious, or his soul any more blessed, right?

[32:12] Nevertheless, there are quite accrued to him some things regards the suitability, right, the decency of his place, right, which is for the what bene esse, the well-being of glory, huh?

[32:29] Not that to his body something either of perfection or of conservation was acquired from the heavenly body, right, but only in accord to a certain what, Fittingness. Yeah, fittingness, yeah. And this, in some way, pertained to his glory, right, and of this

[32:51] and of this fittingness he could have a certain what, joy, huh? Not that then newly he began what, rejoice about it when he ascended to heaven, but because in a new way he rejoiced about it, huh? As if a thing what fulfilled, huh?

[33:16] Whence upon that of Psalm fifteen, delights at your right hand forever, right, was granted for it to the end. The gloss says, huh, that delight and joy, joyce, though being me in what

[33:39] sitting down, sitting next to the human what, with all the human obtutibus What are obtutibus I'm guessing things that are. How they translate obtutibus there? Obtutibus Right. Well, anything that pertains to human vision or human sight, or having taken those away. Taken away from the sight of that. The sight of men, okay. Okay. Obtutibus taken away from the sight of the other has to do with gazing or contemplating.

[34:18] Now the third objection is a little different here, huh? Because this is talking about us, right? Would be better for us that he stated, right?

[34:31] To the third, it should be said that although the presence, the bodily presence of Christ, was subtracted or taken away from the what faithful by his ascension, right? The presence, nevertheless, of his divinity was always what to the faithful, according to that which he himself says, "Behold, I am with you all days." Even to the what consummation of the age. For who ascended to heaven does not desert us, adopted ones, as Leo Papa says.

[35:10] Because you say in the Eucharist that he's even present in his what bodily, yeah. That's in between, get a sense. You don't always have that.

[35:27] But the ascension of Christ in heaven, by which he subtracted his bodily presence from us, was more useful for us than his bodily presence would have been. Thomas says this in many places, you know.

[35:48] But now see the reasons he gives here. First, on account of the growth of faith, right, which is about things not seen. Whence the Lord Himself says, John sixteen, that the Holy Spirit coming will argue or convict the world of justice, that is of those things which they believe. For as Augustine says upon John, the what parison of the faithful will be a what condemnation of the unfaithful.

[36:28] Whence he adds, because I go to the Father, and now you will not see me. Blessed are those who do not see and believe, right?

[36:43] It will therefore be our what justice, huh? About which the world will be what convicted, right? Because in me, whom you do not see, you what believe, huh?

[37:00] Secondly, to the raising up of hope, right? So he's going to divide these reasons according to faith, hope, and what charity, huh? Whence he says, John fourteen, if I go away, prepare for you a place, right? I will come again, and I will take you to myself. That where I am, you also will be, right? So through this, that Christ gathered up his what human nature, assumed into heaven, he gives us the hope of arriving there, right?

[37:36] Because whereas the body, there the eagles will be what gathered, right? I don't know why people want to translate that, John, we want to translate it as the yeah vultures. Yeah, yeah, I don't really do that. You see that in some of the new Bible. Yeah, I'm not sure if the Greek word is ambiguous. Yeah, but I mean it seems more appropriate to translate as Aquila, you know, the the the uh eagles, right?

[37:57] Yeah, yeah. The other way around. I think my brother Mark talks about about you know he and and Ron McCarson and so on and and

[38:14] Peter Lukenson climbing mountains, right? And my brother Mark and Peter climb ahead, you know, and Ron's kind of getting tired. And then you see the you know these things start something over your head. They see they see those guys kind of falling behind. It's encouragement to go on.

[38:32] My brother Mark says that they come right down to you know just to you know to see if you're ready. They smell carrion. Carrion

[38:41] flesh. Yeah. It takes to be in shape you know before you go climbing the mountains. Once it is said in um Mikius uh he goes up. he ascends. right? Preparing the way before us.

[39:07] It's kind of interesting. huh? Usually, you see Thomas talking about it in terms of faith, you know, but he gives in terms of hope as well. It's very interesting. Third to what? Raising up the affection of charity to heavenly things, huh? Whence the apostle says, Colossians three. Seek what is above, right? Where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, right? Huh? Savor the things which are above, not those things which are upon earth, right?

[39:51] And as is said in Matthew chapter six, where your treasure is, there also your heart will be. And because the Holy Spirit is love, carrying us away to heavenly things, therefore the Lord says to the disciples, John sixteen, it's expedient for you that I go. For if I do not go, the Paraclete will not come to you. If however I leave, I will send him to you.

[40:22] Which Augustine expounding upon John says, you are not able to what? Receive the Spirit. Yeah, to grasp on the Son of the Spirit, so long as you persist in knowing according to the flesh.

[40:43] Um. But Christ, however, departing bodily, right, and not only the Holy Spirit, but also the Father and the Son, was what present to them spiritually, huh? Okay. So we'd be too much attached to the flesh of Christ, right, Rather than to his what divinity, I suppose. Yes, Mary Magdalene was in a tundra. Yeah. One one of those things on our calendar is an early martyr named Aquilina.

[41:16] She's a little twelve year old girl, little eagle. And I remember because for a while, our calendar kept spelling it Aquilina. And so I told the let's see, Michael, it's like look, she's a little eagle not a little drip.

[41:35] And then he wrote back. Oh, he says yes, she's from Byblos, which is my hometown, where my family comes from. No, she's a little eagle.

[41:50] That's a beautiful text there, now. That'd be your your sermon there in the feast of the Ascension now, the raw material now. you've got to proportion it to the congregation. Break it up, pre-chewed food, as we call it. Yeah. On the fourth it widens to lay, if? This is the appropriate place for him to be, huh? To the fourth, it should be said that although to Christ rising to immortal life, there was congruent or suitable a celestial place.

[42:28] Nevertheless, he put off his ascension, right? That he might what prove, in a sense, the truth of the resurrection. right? Whence it is said in Acts one verse three that after the passion he what gave himself or showed himself living to the disciples in many what arguments you might say in many signs through forty days, right? Huh?

[42:59] Whence the gloss says that because he was dead forty hours, huh? He confirmed himself to be alive forty days, huh? Or through the forty days, the time the present age, huh? By which Christ conversant in the church can be understood, according as man is from the what four elements, and he's instructed against transgression of the Decalogue.

[43:34] So they see significance in the forty days, right? But in general, the reason is that he wants to prove his what resurrection, right? Huh? He wants to say some parting words to the apostles too, huh?

[43:53] That's the joke. He's got Saint Peter has good news and bad news on Easter Sunday when he comes back from the tomb, and they say, "Well, what's the good news? God has truly rose from the dead." And they're happy. Well, what could possibly be bad news? Well, he wants to talk about last Friday.

[44:13] Those are those are his parting words. Well, in the chapel where where the college of Saint Thomas there, the University of St. Thomas, I was a student there, you know, they have a beautiful painting there of the of the ascension there. You know, could you imagine what did that to those apostles when they see him taken away from them? Now they keep on looking up there in the sky, right?

[44:34] He's coming back, in there Yeah. and then those haunting words too, where it says some doubted. Yeah, yeah. Is it Matthew or Mark? I can't remember. I don't remember. Yeah. Okay. Now, whether to ascend to heaven belongs to Christ according to his divine nature. Strange, Athanasian I have an article in this, right? It? Seems kind of obvious. It's not that. The second one proceeds thus: it seems that to ascend in heaven belongs to Christ according to his divine nature.

[45:22] Oh, I can go to argue such a such a. For it said in Psalm 46, God ascends in jubilation. Okay, that's. Psalm 46 huh? The one who ascends to heaven is your what? Helper, I guess. But these are said of God, even before the incarnation of Christ. Therefore, it belongs to Christ to ascend into heaven according as he is what? God.

[45:59] Moreover, is of the same one to ascend to heaven, of whom it is to descend from heaven. According to that of the words in John three, for no one ascends to heaven, except the one who descends from heaven. In Ephesians four, who descends, he it is also who ascends. But Christ descends from heaven not according as he is man, but according as he is God. For human nature was not in heaven before, but the divine.

[46:35] Therefore, it seems that Christ ascends from heaven according as he is God. That's a pretty clever one, Thomas. Moreover, Christ by his ascension ascends to the Father. But to equality with the Father, he does not arrive according as he is man. For thus he says, he is greater than me, right? Therefore, it seems that Christ descended according as he is God, right? No way he gets this from.

[47:07] It's from the students' exams. I remember one time I was collecting the students. You know, talking about the definition of motion there in natural philosophy, huh? And all the ways they misunderstand and misstate the definition. It's amazing how many ways they can do it, you know. You wouldn't think the human mind would be capable of making mistakes, but but it is. Somebody, when we studied with the Franciscans and history philosophy, they went over among others they went over Scotus and his doctrine, "haecceitas which could be unsuitably translated as "thisness."

[47:48] So somebody wrote a whole paper on his doctrine of thinness. He just misread the word on the board. His whole doctrine of thisness Okay. Doctor for our clients. Doctor for the obese. Against this is what is said in Ephesians four, by the gloss on the text. What ascends? What is it? Except what descended.

[48:24] It stands to reason, I guess, that according to his humanity, Christ descended and what ascended, right? He descended by taking on human nature, right? I answer. It should be said that the phrase secundum quod I know, knows the Latin there, huh? Respondio dicendum quod quad, and then it has a little l y there, right? That's the medieval Latin. This kind of trying to make an article in Latin, right?

[48:58] One of the parts of speech is missing, Latin, huh? And that is the idea. Is also one thing I noticed there in reading Scripture because you say in Latin, say in principio erat verbum, right? Huh? But in Greek, it says en arche ho logos, right? So you have the article there, and it kind of gives you the idea that this is being said by antonomasia. This is the thought, huh?

[49:26] The logos, and you see perfect language there, this Latin. I think I mentioned too how the when they studied Latin grammar, they realized the Latin grammarians did not understand their own language, and they had copied the Greek grammar, and then stuck on whatever it didn't seem to be in addition to the Greek one, and that's why the the order in which you learn the the Greek the cases in Latin is incorrect, and is fouling the order of the Greek,

[50:03] and the Greek will have just like the genitive, the dative, the accusative, and the genitive, I guess, is used for what is imagined to be before the action of the verb, the dative with it, and the accusative after it. Of course, the dative in Latin comes after the accusative. I gave the book to you, right? Book would be the accusative, and to you would be the dative, right?

[50:27] Then the ablative they stuck on because that seemed to be something the Latins had the Greeks didn't have, or they could do it, just added on to the list, right? But the ablative actually functions like the what the genitive in Greek, right? Before the verb and meaning, right? So they didn't understand their own language, and then I guess we maintained the Latin grammarians not understanding the English language, huh?

[50:49] Which is the same guy said, as the greatest invention of the human mind, he thinks, the English language, but it's a kind of barbarous language in some ways, huh? Rival Greek, huh?

[51:10] The English writers are so bad, as a sign of how bad they are. They had such a magnificent language to work with. Once again, Diagne used to, you know, praise Saint Thomas for thinking so well in Latin. Greek is so much superior. And I say, I brought him down. So great to think it was he did in French. I think he's just so superior. I see himself.

[51:37] Told me many times that he was so superior to French, for philosophy and for poetry, despite his native language being French. Warren Murray assures me that the English novel is far superior to the French novel.

[52:07] So, answered should be said that Lee, why, huh? The secundum quod that phrase can note two things, right? Namely, the condition of the one ascending, right, and the cause of the ascension, right.

[52:25] And if it designates the condition of the one ascending, then to ascend is not able to belong to Christ according to the condition of the divine nature. Because nothing is what higher than the deity, right? Divine nature, of which he could ascend, right? Nothing above, nothing above the divine nature that could ascend to.

[52:56] Also, because ascension is a locomotion, which cannot belong to the what divine nature, right? Which is immobile and what not in place, huh? And in this way, ascension belongs to Christ according to his human nature, which is contained in what place, and is able to be subject to what motion, huh? Whence, in this sense, we are able to say that Christ ascended to heaven according as he is man, not according as he is what God.

[53:48] If our secundum quod designates the cause of the ascension, since also Christ from the power of his divinity, right, ascended to heaven. Not, however, from the power of his what human nature, right? Let's talk about the principal cause, huh?

[54:12] It should be said that Christ ascended to heaven, not according as man, but according as what God was chiefly through His power as God.

[54:24] Hence Augustine says in the Sermon on Ascension, "De nostro fui," I guess, being of our nature, right? That the Son of God hung on the cross, right? Of His own, that He ascended, huh? Nice little text from Augustine, huh?

[54:43] So Thomas sees a distinction there, right? Divine nature could not ascend; the human nature could, but The human nature might ascend. By the power of the divine nature as the principal cause anyway, right? Because it has a meritorious cause. Well, no, but I mean, I mean that the power to what grow up doesn't belong to human nature through being, the human body as such, right? But is there a meritorious cause on the part of human nature?

[55:22] Well, there might be, yeah. But what the way to say I mean he merited that, right? I mean, the way Thomas will say sometimes, he what? By his death, he merited his resurrection, and by his descent into hell, his his ascension. Can

[55:43] I add? If I can, a little bit. By his lowly coming, his glorious coming at the end. Then you have the you know the three the three

[55:55] articles of faith: the descent and then the three ascent, right? Huh? That's one way of dividing the six articles of the Apostles' Creed. The other way is in the is in the T. D. M. Right? How to divide it? Right. We divided into three. Right. You have the coming into this world, and then you have his death, which is the main thing, why he came to die for us, right?

[56:21] And the three things that follow from that, and then you have the second coming, which is going to come to judge us. So you have it into three, and middle divided into the passion and the three effects, right? And you overcome the sting of death, you open up the glory, huh?

[56:41] Which then he divides according to the good of the soul, the good of the body, and the exterior good, because in sense of completeness, huh?

[56:53] And I was trying to reason out for the students there in class there what the chief good of man was. I first showed that the inside goods mean the goods of the soul and the goods of the body, rather than the outside goods, and then the next thing is to show that the goods of the soul rather than the goods of the body, right?

[57:14] Did you convince them? One student said, "Nobody thinks that you think, Berquist." Girls and money, you know. Odd man out. He's the odd man

[57:27] out. Now, the first objection here is regard to these texts here seem to be said about God in the Old Testament. To the first therefore, it, should be said that those authorities prophetically, right, are said of God according as he was to be what incarnated, huh?

[58:03] However, it is possible to say that to ascend, although it does not appropriate right It does not properly belong to divine nature, it can nevertheless belong to it what metaphorically. Insofar as it is said to what, Go up in the heart of man. he said to ascend in the heart of what man.

[58:29] When the heart of man subjects himself to God and humbles himself to God, right? Again, you know when Mary says, "My soul magnifies the Lord," right? How is that to be understood? Right? Is she making him greater than he is? You know, what does "magnify" mean, doesn't it? To make himself greater in her soul. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But if you apply it to God, you know, it's magnifying Him, right?

[59:06] In the same way, metaphorically, he is said to ascend with respect to any creature from this that he subjects it to himself, right? So the same can be said when we bless God. Yeah. That he isn't otherwise Yeah If if

[59:32] if we said God, you know, comes over us, right? Can that be said of God? Because we are coming under Him, we're being subject to Him, right? It's not He's going up above us now,

[59:50] but we're subjecting ourselves to humility and so on. Now, what about this text? The one who ascends is the one who descends, right? Augustine says in the book on the Creed, right, on the symbol, "Who is it that what descends? It's the God-Man, right? Who is it who ascends? The same God-Man, right? For descent is in a twofold descent is attributed to Christ, right? One by which he is said to what descend from heaven, which is attributed to the God-Man, according as he is what God.

[1:00:50] Not that this descent should be understood according to locomotion, but according to this what emptying himself, right? By which, when he was in the form of God, he what took on the form of a slave, right there in the Philippines, this of the Philippines.

[1:01:16] Just as he is said to be what emptied, right, not from this that he lost his own what fullness, but from this that he took on our what littleness. So he is said to descend from heaven, not because he deserted heaven, right, but because he took on a earthly nature, right, in the unity of his person.

[1:01:48] Another is a descent by which he descended in the lower parts of the earth, as is said in Ephesians four nine, which is a local descent, huh? Whence it belongs to Christ according to the condition of his what human nature. We have to qualify that a bit, though, you know, because it's not like his his soul is what changing its place, right? But its its power is being applied there, right?

[1:02:15] A little bit like we say of the angels you know, in the right place. So he descended from heaven by taking on human nature, right? And he descends in his, what human nature, right?

[1:02:48] Now the third objection is going to unfold more later on, but he says to the third, it should be said that Christ is said to ascend to the Father. He said, "Well, he's not equal as man to to the Father, in so far as he ascends to the sitting at the right hand of the Father, which belongs to Christ in some way according to his divine nature, in some way according to his human nature, as will be said below.

[1:03:16] Wait till we get to what's below. lest we proceed to sort of disorderly. and seem to warn us against. So, is it time for a break?