Tertia Pars
121. Christ Sitting at the Right Hand of the Father (Summa III, Q. 58)
Class of 2011-01-20
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/13-tertia-pars/121-christ-sitting-at-the-right-hand-of-the-father-summa-iii/

[0:01] Name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, Guardian Angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. Deo gracias. God, your enlightenment. Guardian Angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, order to illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, Angelic Doctor. Amen. Help us to understand all that you have done. Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

[0:33] Amen. Nice passage there in the three fifth three fifths Psalm, you know, where he's talking about God's justice is above the what mountains, and His truth above the clouds, and His mercy above the what heavens, yeah. And Thomas talks about the gradation there, right, and how one is in a sense superior to the other, right? It's kind of interesting text there.

[1:06] Okay. Then we're not to consider about the sitting of Christ. Do we get the word session? Huh? Session. Yeah. Sitting of the Congress. Yeah.

[1:24] This is the sitting of Christ to the right of the Father, right? And about this four things are asked: whether Christ should sit at the what right of the Father; secondly, whether this belongs to Him by His divine nature; third, whether it belongs to Him by His human nature, or according to His human nature; and fourth, whether it is private to Christ. Huh?

[1:57] I mean, there I think "appropriate" would be translated. as private, huh? It's? Not appropriate because that's what the second and third articles are touching upon. Now,

[2:10] so I scandalize people by translating "appropriate" or "private" sometimes. I'm kind of stubborn about that. To the first, one goes forward. Thus, it seems that it does not belong to Christ to sit at the right of the Father of God, the Father. For right and left are differences of bodily positions. That there are political differences, but but it had origin, I guess, from the French thing. Have to sit.

[2:42] But nothing bodily belongs to God because God is a what spirit, an immaterial substance. As is said in John chapter four. Therefore, it seems that Christ should not sit at the what Right of the Father. Moreover, if someone sits to the right of someone, the that one sits at his left. If therefore Christ sits at the right of the Father, it would follow that the Father sits at the left of the Son, which is not fitting at all.

[3:20] Moreover, to sit and to stand would seem to have what opposition, right? But Stephen, Saint Stephen, says Acts seven, "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of the Power of God." Therefore, it seems that Christ is not set at the what? Right of the Father. Got a little restless there, isn't it?

[3:50] But against all this is what is said in the Gospel of Saint Mark in the sixteenth chapter, the last chapter, I guess, that the Lord Jesus, right after he had spoken to them, he sent them to heaven, and he sat at the right of God, right.

[4:09] Thomas says, "I answer. It should be said that in the name of sitting, we can understand what two things, to wit, rest or quiet, according to that of Luke twenty-four, sit here in the what city, and also the royal or judicial power, according to that of Proverbs chapter twenty, that the king who sits in the seat of judgment dissipates all evil by his what gaze,

[4:49] but in both ways, it belongs to Christ to sit at the right of the Father. In one way, in so far as he remains eternally incorruptible in the beatitude of the Father, which is said to be his what right, according to that of Psalm fifteen, delights on his right forever, right to the endless. When Augustine says in the book on the symbol or the creed, he sits at the right of the Father.

[5:29] Understand to sit to what to dwell. In which way we say about some man, huh? In his own country he sat for what? Years, yeah, for three years. Thus, therefore, believe that Christ dwelt in the right of the God the Father. Blessed is him, and the name of his beatitude is the what? Right. Right to the Father.

[6:02] Another way, Christ is said to sit at the right of the what, Father, in so far as he rules with the Father, and from him he has the power of judging, judicial power. Just as one who sits at the right of the King right assists him in ruling and in what, judging Judging, right. Once Augustine says another sermon on the creed, understand the right and the right that power which that man what took or received from God, who will come to judge and who before came to be judged.

[6:51] It's interesting. So he takes two different sermons of Augustine, right? So you must read him carefully, frequently, and with whoever it's to the first. Therefore, it should be said, as Damascene says in the fourth book, we do not what place local place the right of the Father, right?

[7:25] For who is what not able to be have a line drawn around him, right? That's how I use that term, you know, to draw a line around something, right? draw a line around happiness there in the Nicomachean Ethics. So, in what way is the one who cannot have a line drawn around him, huh, able to be what to obtain a place in the right? Huh.

[7:57] For the right and the left of those things are those things which are circumscribed or have lines drawn around them. But the right of the Father we call the glory and what honor of his what divinity.

[8:16] Okay, now the second text here, right? When the Father be at the left, and so on. To second should be said that that argument proceeds according as to sit is understood to sit at the right is understood in a bodily way, right? Huh. Whence Augustine says in a certain sermon of the about the creed, if we take this what in our fleshly way or bodily way that Christ sits at the right of the Father, he would be to the left, right?

[8:50] Huh. But there, that is an eternal beatitude. Everything is what on the right, but those those leftists are in bad position, right? Because there is no what misery there, right? Okay. But when we speak of you know the right hand man of the king, right, doesn't mean the king is inferior because he's on the left now.

[9:18] So it's not to be understood in a bodily sense, right? So it's a right and no left, huh? So it's like I want you not understanding it is relative, so right? Because right is relative to left, huh? So you can't have one without the other, right? It can't be the taller without the shorter, and something in the right without something in the left, right? It's not to be understood that that way.

[9:55] It's funny though. Thomas didn't say that it's a metaphor here, does he? Didn't say that at all. It's maybe like some of those. I can't remember exactly how it's worded, but sometimes there is certain when you take some perfection we're familiar with, and you leave out whatever limitation is, and you say, oh, you see that much of that. So maybe that's the way that's being used. Well, too sometimes the metaphor is on the side of that from which the name is taken, right?

[10:29] Rather than that which is applied, huh? So it's a difficult thing. The third should be said, as Gregory says in the Homily on the Ascension. To sit is of one what judging, huh? But to stand of one fighting, huh? Or one who's aiding, huh? Stephen, therefore, in the labor of the fight is placed, right? You see him standing as having him as a one to aid him, right?

[11:05] Huh? Okay. You would just sat there, you'd seem to be not considering the bottom, right? Don't just sit there. Help me. But Mark describes this after the ascension that he sits, right? Because after the glory of his, what Assumption, he'll be seen as a judge in the end. Now, whether to sit at the right of the Father belongs to Christ according as God. To the second one goes forward.

[11:49] Thus, it seems that to sit at the right of God the Father does not belong to Christ according as He is God. For Christ, according as He is God, is the what? The right. Right arm, is it? Dexter, but this is dexter and the right. arm. The right of the Father, yeah. But does not seem to be what the same to be the right of something, and the one who sits at the right of him.

[12:19] Therefore, Christ, according as He is God, does not sit at the what right of the Father. Moreover, Mark sixteen is said that the Lord Jesus was assumed in heaven, and He sits from the what. Right of God. But Christ was not assumed in heaven according as He is God. Therefore, neither according as God does He sit at the right of God. It's a good argument, huh?

[12:57] Moreover, Christ, according as He is God, is equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit. If, therefore, Christ, according as He is God, sits at the right of the Father, for like reason, the Holy Spirit would sit at the right of the Father and the Son, and the Father at the what right of the Son. Which is never what found.

[13:26] But against this is what Damascene says, that we call the right of the Father the glory and honor of His divinity, in which the Son of God existed before the ages as being as being God and consubstantial to the what Father, right. It's coming back in the creed now. It's kind of consubstantial. Yeah. New translation. Okay.

[13:58] Answer: It should be said that, as is clear from the things foresaid, by the name of right, three things are able to be understood. It doesn't do. We got three things, huh?

[14:16] In one way, according to Damascene, the glory of His what divinity, right? In another way, according to Augustine, the beatitude of the Father, and a third way, according to the same Augustine, the judicial power, right? Huh? But sitting, as has been said, either indwelling or the what kingly or judicial dignity is designed or signifies.

[14:50] Whence to sit at the right of the father is nothing other than, together with the father, to have the glory of divinity, and beatitude, and the judicial power, and this in an unchangeable way, in a royal way, I guess. But this belongs to the son, according as he is God. Whence it is manifest that Christ, according as he is God, sits at the right of the Father.

[15:22] Thus, however, that this preposition "odd," which is what transitive, implies only a personal what distinction, huh? Now, why didn't he say that at the beginning, John's Gospel, right? They get the word "odd" because the Greek word is what archaic, o logos ken logos a poston thing, right? Well, that's a singular odd, huh? Thomas, there, nothing. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't know why, because they'll translate in logic.

[16:00] there they'll translate the category "post T towards something as "ad aliquid," right? No, don't translate by ad but. Did he translate that one? Maybe he just passed it along. Pass the buck. And the order of origin, right, huh? Not, however, a grade of nature or dignity, right? Which shows none in the divine persons, right? Quality that we spoke about. No, Doctor Brick was. This one has the three because it refers to the right, whereas the other one had two because it was something of sitting.

[16:43] Okay. That's just noise. At the same question, why is it going to three? Yeah. Okay. Trivia. Trivia. To the first, therefore, it should be said that the son is said to be the right of the father

[17:10] by appropriation, in the way in which also he is said to be the power of the father, right? The virtue of the father. But the right of the father, according to the foresaid three meanings, is something common to the what. Three persons, so. Yeah, I thought this is my own. I just to clarify my own understanding. I thought appropriations are curious or peculiar because what is said is actually common to all three, but it helps to understand something about one of them.

[17:46] Yeah, that's why I'm wondering why he's. Yeah, it's when Saint Paul says that Christ is the virtue and the wisdom, I guess, huh? Yeah. Of the Father, right? Yeah. Well, it's not just that. That's only his, yeah, yeah, yeah. But I guess that's what I'm wondering about. Here, he seems to be at the end. Maybe he's leaving something unsaid here. That because I thought if one of them is by appropriation, and he says, "But the right of the Father, according to three significations foretold, is something common to three persons, but meaning, but it's not an appropriation, because appropriation is common to three, but it helps understand as an add something.

[18:24] Yeah, there's some proper. Yeah, whereas this means maybe it's not an appropriation. I don't know. That's what I'm trying to figure out what he means.

[18:38] Isn't he saying that it isn't appropriation? Well, he seems to be making distinct in the last sentence of what is said there, or the beginning, the right of the Father is said appropriate by appropriation, but the right of the Father, according to three significations foretold, is something common to three persons, but every appropriation is common to three persons, but then it adds something that it helps to understand something of one of the three.

[19:06] So as I'm guessing, maybe he means that by saying it's common to the three, but it doesn't it doesn't add something else. I I don't know. So I couldn't figure it out. Unless he's speaking elliptically, leaving something out, but I don't. He might be putting more meaning to set than there is.

[19:26] But we have Article Four where we're going to find out whether it's private or not. It'll be more clear at that point, yeah. The second argument here seems to say it's got to refer to his human nature, right? Okay.

[19:52] That Christ, according as he is man, is assumed to the divine honor, which is designated in the foresaid sitting, but nevertheless that divine honor belongs to Christ in so far as he's God, not to somewhat assumption, yeah, something, but to his eternal origin from the Father.

[20:19] So he seems to be taking that text as they're referring to his sitting in his human nature, right? But he can also sit in his divine nature, right? Right.

[20:39] Now, to the third, it should be said that in no way it can be said that the Father sits at the right of the what, Son or the Holy Spirit,

[20:50] because the Father and the Holy Spirit draw their origin from the Father and not the what, reverse. But the Holy Spirit properly is said to sit at the what, right of the Father or the Son, according to the foresaid sense. Although, according to a certain appropriation, it's attributed to the Son, to whom is appropriated equality, right? Go back to Trinity. We saw that as Augustine says, that in the Father there is unity, in the Son equality, and in the Holy Spirit the connection of unity and equality. I thought God hates equality, but doesn't He love His Son?

[21:53] And things other than self equality. Now, whether to sit at the right of the Father belongs to Christ according as His man. To the third one proceeds thus: It seems that to sit at the right of the Father does not belong to Christ according as His man. For as Damascene says, the right of the Father we call the glory and the honor of His what, Of the divinity.

[22:26] But the honor and glory of divinity, the divine nature, does not belong to Christ according as His man. Therefore, it seems that Christ, according as His man, would not sit at the what, the right of the Father.

[22:44] Moreover, to sit at the right of the one ruling would seem to exclude what, Subjection. subjection, because the one who sits at the right of the one ruling, in a way, rules with him, right? But Christ, according as man, is subject to the Father, as is said one Corinthians fifteen. Therefore, it seems that Christ, according as He is man, is not at the what, right to the Father.

[23:17] Moreover, Romans eight, upon that who is at the right of God, the gloss expounds. That is equal to the Father in the honor by which what God the Father is, or at the the right of the Father that is in the what greater goods of God. And upon that of Hebrews one three, He sits at the right of God, up high. The gloss says that is to equality with the Father, right?

[23:54] Above all in place and dignity. But to be equal to God does not belong to Christ according as he is man. Not even equal to Himself.

[24:08] For as He Himself says in John chapter fourteen, the Father is greater than me. Therefore, it seems that to sit at the right of the Father does not belong to Christ according as he is man.

[24:24] But against, this is what Augustine says in his sermon on the creed. Understand this right, the power right which that man received from God that he might come to judge. Who before came to be what judged? Huh.

[24:49] Where are we coming out there, huh? He expresses himself. I answer it should be said, that as has been said, by the name of the right of the Father is understood either the what glory of his divinity, or his eternal beatitude, or his judicial and royal power.

[25:19] Now this preposition ad toward designates a certain what Approach. approach to the right, huh? In which is designated a certain a certain coming together with a certain what distinction, which can be understood in three ways, huh? In one way, that there be an agreement in nature and a distinction in person, and thus Christ, according as he is the Son of God, sits at the right of the Father, because he has the same nature with the Father,

[26:00] whence the aforesaid belong essentially to the Son just as to the what Father, and this is to be in equality of the Father, huh?

[26:16] In another way, according to the what grace of union, which implies reversely the distinction of nature and the unity of the what person, and according to this Christ, according as he is man, is the Son of God, and consequently sitting at the right of the Father. Thus, nevertheless, that secundum quod does not designate the condition of the nature, but the unity of the suppositum, unity of the person, as has been expounded above, huh?

[27:00] In a third way, the aforesaid excess can be understood according to habitual grace, which is more abundant in Christ compared to all other creatures, right? So much so that the what human nature in Christ is more blessed than what other creatures, huh? And above all others creatures, he has royal and judicial what power, huh?

[27:32] Thus, therefore, if the word secundum quad, according to which designates the condition of nature. Christ, according as he is God, sits at the right of the Father; that is, in the equality with the Father. According as he is man, he sits at the right of the Father; that is, in the more potent goods of the Father, above all other creatures. That is in greater beatitude and having judicial power.

[28:15] If, however, secundum quod designates unity of the suppositum, thus also, according as he is man, he sits at the right of the Father, according to what? Of honor. In so far as by the same honor we venerate the Son of God with the what same human nature assumed, as has been said above. It's sort of in the Eucharist, here, when you honor that, right? As God, right?

[28:56] Human nature there, right? Huh? But because of the divine person there. So Thomas is making a lot of distinctions, all right? His divine nature in his person, and in another way, in, his human nature.

[29:32] So there's no feast in the church, is there, for the session of Christ? Yeah, it would be understood in the assumption, huh? So maybe it's not appropriate for one of your sermons, huh?

[29:49] Well, unless you're founding free. To the first, therefore, it should be said that the human nature of Christ, the humanity of Christ, according to the conditions of his nature, does not have the glory or honor of what the divine nature, which nevertheless it has by reason of the person to whom it is what. Yeah.

[30:28] maybe something like ascension yeah yeah yeah Whence Augustine, I mean Damascene, there adds, in which to wit the glory of the divine nature, right? The Son of God existing before ages as God, and consubstantial to the Father sits, right? And what? Glorified With him. Yeah. In his flesh, yeah.

[31:11] For the one hypostasis, one person is adored, but one adoration with his flesh by every creature. I think Mohammedans are going along with that. That's no problem. To second should be said that Christ, according as man, is subject to the Father, in so far as secundum quad designates the condition of what nature,

[32:05] and according to this, the human nature, it does not belong to him to sit at the right of the Father by reason of what equality, according as his man.

[32:20] For thus it belongs to him to sit at the right of the Father, according as through this is designated the excellence of beatitude and the judicial power above what every creature in his human nature.

[32:37] To the third, it should be said that to be in equality with the Father does not pertain to the what of Christ, but only to the person what assuming.

[32:52] But to be in the greater goods of God, according as it implies a certain excess over other creatures, belongs to the assumed nature. So, when they have in the benediction there, when they when they praise the

[33:19] you're praising the human nature. Divine praises. Yeah. I think it does both, humanity and divinity mainly. Yeah, yeah. But if you say it's human nature, it's as joined to this what divine person, right? Yeah, yeah. He's speaking about benediction plus sacrament. Yeah no I haven't just seen that title of Divine Presence. Yeah, we call we call the Eastern Church call divine praises a divine office. Yeah. No, no, that that that prayer is called the divine praises in the benedictions.

[33:52] Yeah. Oh. I mean, sometimes we say, you know, that the human nature of Christ is a creature, huh? But Thomas says you shouldn't be saying Christ is a creature. That's because of the person there, right?

[34:11] So if you're that's kind of a subtle thing there, right? So if you're giving divine praises to the human nature by itself, that would seem to be wrong, right? But if you're honoring that the human nature has joined to the divine person, then it's not as a as a creature, right?

[34:40] You see, Christ is a creature. You'd be saying that this person is a creature, right? That's not really correct. This person is not a creature.

[34:52] I could say perhaps that the human nature of Christ is a creature, but even that, you have to be careful with, right? This creature is the name you give to a a hulk, an equid, right? To a person, right? Huh? Yeah. And you don't want to give it to this person, so have to be very careful.

[35:21] Because that's the nature sort of culminates in. Yeah, yeah. Would you say my say my finger is a creature? You know, kind of careful about that when speaking. There's five creatures, you know. Well, there's one creature here, the the supposed to him, you know, huh? Now, the much awaited question is this private to Christ?

[35:51] To the fourth one precedes us. It seems that to sit at the right of the Father is not private to Christ. For the apostle says in Ephesians two that he what revived us, right, and made us to sit in heavenly things in Christ Jesus. But to be what resuscitated is not private to Christ, right? Therefore, for a like reason needed to sit at the right of God on high.

[36:37] You don't have the phrase of sitting on the right there, of course, in that phrase, But you're sitting with him in celestial things. But does you find some times where it says in Scripture to to rule with Christ, right? Didn't it say that's the one that says if we if we died with him we shall reign with him. Yeah. Why not sit with him now? Yeah.

[37:09] Moreover, Augustine says in the book on the symbol, the creed, that for Christ to sit at the right of the Father, this is to dwell in his beatitude. But this belongs to many others, right, to dwell in God's beatitude. Therefore, it seems that to sit at the right of the Father is not private to Christ.

[37:32] Moreover, he himself says, Apocalypse three, who overcomes comes right, I will give him to sit with me on my throne. Yeah, this is good here. And just as I have conquered and sit with my Father in his throne, well, see, good just as. It's pretty good argument, though. And through this Christ sits at the right of the Father that he sits on his throne, right? Therefore, others who conquer will sit at the right of the Father.

[38:14] Moreover, Matthew twenty, the Lord says, to sit at the right or my left is not a mine to give, but to those to whom has been prepared by what my Father. But this would be said in vain unless it was prepared for someone. Therefore, to sit at the right does not belong to Christ alone.

[38:44] But against this is what is said, Hebrews one the last week or so have been from Hebrews, you know. Yeah. Our office, we have. Yeah.

[39:01] To which of the angels, as he said, sit at my right? Huh. That is in my more potent gifts, right? Or to me, according to what?

[39:15] Yeah. As it were, to no one, right? But the angels are superior to other creatures. Therefore, much less does it belong to others to sit at the right of the Father. than Christ.

[39:37] I answer: It should be said, as has been said, for Christ, Christ is said to sit at the right of the Father, in so far as by his divine nature he is in equality with the Father, right?

[39:52] And according to his human nature, in an excellent possession of the divine goods over all other creatures. But both of these belong to Christ, what? Alone.

[40:08] Therefore, to no other, neither to angel nor to man, does it belong to sit at the right of the Father, except, but to Christ alone.

[40:25] Now, what about this first objection from Ephesians? To the first, therefore, should be said that because Christ is our head, that which is given to Christ, right, is also what? In us. In him, right. In him. And it comes to this, because he himself already is what? Revivified, huh? The apostle says that God.

[41:00] Yeah. Revivifies us to him, right? Who nevertheless in us are not yet what? Raised up. Yeah. But are to be raised up. Okay. According to that of Romans eight, that who raised up Jesus Christ from dead vivify also our mortal bodies, huh?

[41:32] And according to the same way of speaking, the apostle says that he will make us to sit with him in heavenly things. To wit, in this that he our head, right, which is Christ sits there, huh? It's kind of strange, right? Tom mistakes that, huh? Instead of saying you make us sit, but not quite equal,

[41:54] he says it's because our our head is there, right? So it's kind of like we're in him, but it belongs to him alone. Yeah, yeah. It's only like a partake. And what about beatitude there? To the second, it should be said that because the right is the divine what beatitude, huh? To sit on the right does not signify simply to be in beatitude, but to have beatitude with the certain what Lordly power.

[42:55] lordly power and, as it were, private and natural, right, huh? Which to Christ alone belongs, and to no other creature. But it can nevertheless be said that every saint who is in beatitude is constituted to the right of God.

[43:17] Once it is said, Matthew twenty-five, put the sheep on the right. So what is Thomas saying there? He seems to be saying that, in some sense of the words, you can say we're going to be be established there. Yeah, on the right.

[43:44] That should be above the angels, not necessarily. Depends. Much depends on your merits. You see, I question what he says here. He says that angels are higher than other creatures. You know that goes back to the line of country. Well, Mary is above the angels. Not by nature, but by grace. By grace. So, so there may be there may be some saints who by by grace some of the angels, but not necessarily all.

[44:17] Not by nature. Not by nature, and some some saints it might be by grace, but others may be not. Everybody can be seen Okay That's I'm just going by. Say Thomas talks about. I had looking up somebody. I don't remember the details now. Ray Mcleare asked me about the passage St. Paul says. Don't you know that we will judge angels? So what does St. Thomas say about that?

[44:40] Among other things, he says, "Well, St. Paul says that we, not you." So maybe Saint Paul will, but not everybody. And that's one of his explanations. One of his explanations.

[44:55] So, and and there's other ways. I think I maybe explained it once before. Before, there's different ways. Now the what? To the third. To the third, it should be said that by throne is signified the judicial power which Christ has from the Father, and by this he is said to sit on the throne of the Father. But other saints have this from Christ, huh, or by Christ, and according to this, they're said to sit in the throne of what?

[45:43] Christ, as we're. Getting some power judging from him, right? According to that in Matthew 19, you also will you will sit upon what twelve chairs and judging the twelve tribes of Israel, right? It's big on the right side of those apostles. there you get up there.

[46:34] So if you go back to that text there from the Apocalypse, it says, "Who conquers, I'll give him to sit with me in my throne, right?

[46:44] Just as I have conquered and I sit with my father in his throne, right? " That's kind of what he's what a distinction he's making here, right? He's not saying that we're sitting on the what his throne, meaning the father's throne, but in the throne of Christ because we're getting from him some power of judging. The apostles are getting some power of judging from him.

[47:14] It's communicated to us because he's our head. Now the fourth objection. To the fourth, it should be said, as Chrysostom says, on Matthew, that place, right? That is the what?

[47:45] Right. Is not open, I guess, in view. Inaccessible and unapproachable. To all, not only all men, but even to the angels, right? Just as what Paul places that what special for the the only begotten, saying, "To which of the angels did he ever say, 'Sit at my right'? "

[48:11] The Lord, therefore, not as it were to some what just being there, I guess We're we're going to sit there, right? But condescending to the what asking response

[48:30] that this only they ask, which was to stand what before others. Before the others, next to me. yeah Yeah. Yeah, Thomas had a discussion of who's greater, uh Peter or or uh John, right? He doesn't ask about the other apostles, but those two guys, because one is made head of the church, and and the other is the one whom Jesus especially loved, and he gives the arguments back and forth, and finally he says maybe we shouldn't try to decide this.

[49:02] But he's very clear, though. It seems he talks about Mary having the highest place, and then next to her the apostles, right? And then what he kind of stops there, you know. But he finds it is what foolish to try to be equal to Mary, or even to be equal to the apostles, right? Because their proximity to him, right? Um, I was noticing you have a statue of Joseph there in the back, there with a little candle in front of his.

[49:30] Is that new or is that there before? Been there. It's been there before. In the warmer weather, we put it out in the vestibule. Yeah, I remember seeing it. I just haven't noticed it today. there Yeah, I thought is that. new We move it inside. You wouldn't want it to get cold this time of year. You want Joseph to get cold.

[49:45] But I would think that Joseph has the rank of of an apostle, right? If not more, you know. Yeah, I kind of put him after the Blessed Mother.

[49:54] Yeah, yeah, yeah. And John the Baptist up there, sometimes, maybe after the apostles. Yeah, well, the other thing about you know the rule of prayer is rule of faith. You know, when I grew up, it was always like every church that I've seen and knew of in Saint Paul, you always had a little side chapel to the Blessed Virgin, one to Joseph, right? There was kind of a prominence given to Joseph as well as Mary that there wasn't given to the other apostles, right?

[50:17] So I don't know. Saint Teresa of Avila there, she's really impressed with Joseph, huh? You know about her way of protesting. She always disliked the fact that the feast was always in Lent, so she couldn't couldn't celebrate it Mm. as as festively as she wanted to. So she used to go to her cell. She had a little drum and she had a little horn, and she all all by herself.

[50:47] They would hear her banging on her drum and tooting her horn It's all right. I'm sure she got a lot of glory out of that. Saint Joseph, was so special. I noticed that like in the Enchiridion of Indulgences they would they they um had six litanies, right? And three of them are dealing with Christ, the Sacred Heart, and the Blood, and the Name, right? Then one for Mary, one for Joseph, and one for all the saints, right?

[51:19] So Joseph has that prominence in the rule of prayer being the rule of faith there. One can also say that the sons of Zebedee, right, asked for a certain excellence before others, right, in partaking of his judicial what power, right. Once they did not ask that they would sit at the right or the left of the Father, but at the right or the left of Christ. Okay.

[51:59] So, take a little break now, if it's appropriate between two two questions.