Prima Secundae
Lecture 169: Charity as the Greatest Theological Virtue

Transcript
================================================================================

among the theological virtues, right? Of course, obviously the Siddh Kanta is going to be from the Apostle, right? To six, one goes forward thus. It seems that charity is not the greatest among the theological virtues. Now, how the heck are you going to... Well, since faith is in the understanding, hope and charity in the desiring power, it seems that faith is compared to hope and charity as intellectual virtues compare it to a moral virtue. Now, as Socrates says in the, what, Sophist, appropriately named Dialogue, likeness is a most slippery thing, which means that you can, what, not grasp it when you think you have grasped it, right, huh? Escapes you, right, huh? Most slippery thing. It's a really marvelous that Socrates should have said that, huh? If you text someone, see, Dion pointed out to us, huh? Okay? And when Aristotle talks about the tools of dialectic there in the book on places, the third tool is the ability to find the ability to find a difference, right? When he gets to the fourth tool, he doesn't say an ability to find a likeness. He says the ability to what? Consider a likeness, huh? The Greek word is skeptics there, right? And to consider likeness means the ability to consider in what way they really are like, huh? In some ways they are like, in some ways they are not, huh? And when you have a proportion, right, a likeness of ratios, huh? There can be a, what, great difference, huh? The Lord is my rock, huh? Mm-hmm. There's some likeness there, right? But it's a very distant likeness, huh? So, you know, in what way is the rock really like God? Because in many ways the rock is quite different from God, right, huh? And so it's a tricky thing, huh? It's a slippery thing, huh? It's the expression he uses, huh? It's a perlative of slippery there. Greek text. Well, here you're saying, okay, um... Human. Yeah. Human moral. Yeah, you're saying that faith is to hope and charity and intellectual virtue is to the moral, right? And there's some likeness there, right? But is it such that justify this conclusion, right, huh? We have to consider that likeness, huh? Likeness is a most slippery thing. That's me. Plato sometimes in Socrates, yeah, really. And Thomas says, you know, the Philosophie Pekipui, that word we saw before, he said the chief philosophers are Plato and Aristotle, right? And his teacher, Albert the Great, said, you know, to be a philosopher you have to know both Plato and Aristotle, right? You know, of course, the philosopher, right? But Plato, yeah, I know him, too. This is a good example of that, right? Plato really sees that good. Would you say that to find a likeness or to see the likeness as a slippery kind of thing, is that something that would make poetry and art really dangerous? It's just why the imagination, you know, is kind of the source of what? Of error, right, huh? Imagination is taken up with the likeness of things, as the poet says, right, you know? Shell, you know, in his essay on poetry, right, huh? You know, he talks about, oh, the poet is, she's likeness to the things and so on, you know? But as Aristotle points out in the book, Consistical Refutations, likeness is the cause of error, right? And the most dangerous errors are ones where they most resemble the truth. So, you know, this kind of name is equivocal by reason. In some ways, you've got to be very careful, but the name is equivocal by reason of a likeness of ratios. And this is the way the word beginning is, right? The word end is, the word before, right? The word end, they're in the... To grasp that kind of a word is really difficult, right, then? Because you have to see in what way these things are alike and what way they are, what? Different, right, huh? I think it's careful, the carefulness of Aristotle, you know? The ability to find a difference. It doesn't seem to be the ability to find likeness. It's the ability to consider likeness. I guess maybe the best way to translate the word skeptics there, it's not skeptical likeness. What way they are alike, huh? It's a good example of it. Moreover, what has itself from addition to another would seem to be, what? Greater than it, right? But hope, as it seems, has itself from addition to charity, huh? For hope presupposes what? Love, huh? As Augustine says in the ingredient, huh? And he adds, it adds a certain motion of what? Extending to the thing, what? Loved, huh? Therefore, hope is greater than charity, huh? Unless you have some friendship to God, you don't hope that he's going to... You hope especially someone who has charity, right? So it adds to it, right? It goes beyond. Moreover, the cause is more potent than the effect. Well, that's good. You've got to be careful, though, because the fourth sense of before was what? Better, right? Better, right? But then the cause before the effect was another sense, right? So you've got to be careful, right? But faith and hope are causes of charity. As it's said in Matthew 1, the text we were talking about earlier, right? In the spiritual meaning of Abraham begot, and Isaiah begot Jacob, right? Faith begot hope, and hope begot love, huh? And that's kind of talked about in the beginning of the end of the premium to Verbum Dei in Vatican II, huh? So it says here in Matthew 1, given the etymology of Christ, I mean, not etymology, genealogy. I'm just stirred by the likeness there between the genealogy and etymology. It's a dangerous stupid thing it is, huh? The word I wanted slipped away from me, and it slipped away from me, and I got the wrong word. That's why I play the comparison to the guy who's rich in the cave to get a bird from me, and he grabs the wrong one, right? It's an error, right? It's a mistake, a mistake. But against this is what the Apostle says, huh? 1 Corinthians 13. Now there remains faith, hope, and charity. These three. Notice the order he gives them, right? It's not the order of their excellence, is it? It's some other order, right? The order of what they're coming to be, right? The order of maybe a reason, knowing them, right? Because both Thomas and Augustine, when they take up the catechetical instructions there, they take up faith, hope, and charity in that order, right? So you study the creed, and then the Our Father, and then the Two Commandments of Love, and the Ten Commandments, right? But in terms of the fourth sense of before, caritas is what? Right, right? The greater of these is charity. That's the fourth sense of before, right? But in the first sense, right? Maybe even the second sense, right? In the third sense of before, see, the first sense of before is in time, right? So faith comes before. Second sense is what order of being, right? Well, faith can be without charity, but charity can't be without faith, right? And then it's in perfect faith, of course. And then it may be in the order of what? Reason, right? Instruct a person first in faith. It may be in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the third sense of when it's in the But in the fourth sense, the better charity comes before and hope comes before faith. We don't have that often taught. I answer it should be said, this has been said above, the magnitude or the greatness of a virtue according to its species is considered from its object, right? Since, however, the three theological virtues regard God as their proper object, one is not able to say, one of them is greater than another, from this that it is about a greater object. That's an interesting thing he's pointing out. The theological virtues all have God as their object. But from this that one has itself nearer to the object than what? None. And it's in this way that charity is greater than the others. It doesn't have a greater object. It has the same object. For the others imply in their definition a certain distance from the object. For faith is about things not seen. It's the substance of things hoped for. The conviction of what is not seen, right? So there's a certain distance there. And hope is about things not had, right? So you can see, I've been all hope. You do it there. Yeah, you have it as well as hell for a different... I haven't thought of it, that one. But the love of charity is about that which is already had, right? For the thing loved is in some way in the one, what? Loving. Loving, huh? So you made a big impression upon her or vice versa, right? So he or she has been impressed upon your, what? Heart, right? In you, right? And also the one loving, through his affection, is drawn to union with the, what? Loved, huh? So I was quoting that thing from St. Therese of the Sill, right? And then Pius XI, I guess, was the one who said she was the greatest saint through modern times, which is kind of a bold statement. But I mean, but she said, you know, don't see what I can have in heaven that I don't have now. Our union is already complete. It's got an amazing saying, right, huh? But in terms of charity, right? Union is complete. An account of which it is said in the first epistle of St. John, chapter four, who remains in charity remains in God and God in, what? Him, huh? So I left my heart in San Francisco, right? If you love God, then you are in God, but then God is also, what? In you. That's interesting, huh? So one doesn't have a greater object because the object of all, then, is God, right? God himself, huh? But in faith and hope, just through a distance, right? So faith and hope disappear once you get to the vision, right? But charity is, what, perfected there, right? Because now it's C. But there's already a union there between you and God through, what, charity, right? So you're closer to the object, the supreme object, huh? That's a nice distinction, Thomas sees there, right? You can't say one is better because it has a better object than the others, right? Not because one is closer to that object than the other. See, so if you're in a distance, right? Not as good to see her close up, you know? Same object, darling, you know? Outside of the distance there, right? You're in close up, you know? That's interesting. Probably it's showing that wisdom is better than the other sciences in terms of the object being better, right? Even though you were too close to it in some ways, you didn't know the object too good, right? I'm closer to the square, you know? Than to God in that sense, right? To understand better what the square is, right? To comprehend what the square is, right? Don't really comprehend God, right? Now, to the first, therefore, it should be said Now, here we had a likeness of what? Ratios, right, huh? To the first, therefore, it should be said that not in this way has faith and hope to charity has, what? Prudence to moral virtue, right? You're not seen, you know? And this, on account of two things, huh? First, because the theological virtues have an object which is above the human, what? Soul, right, huh? But prudence and the moral virtues are about those things which are below man, huh? But in those things which are above man, more noble is love than what? Than knowledge, huh? Because knowledge is perfected according as the thing knowns are in the knower, huh? That's why the Aristotle, or Thomas, rather, speaks of the knowing powers as the vis apprehensiva, right? The grasping power, right, huh? You grasp something, it's contained in your, what, hand. And so when the mind grasps something, huh? It is contained in the mind, huh? Sometimes you see the first act of reason called simplex apprehensia, right? But the English word is clear to us, ungrasping, simple apprehension. So, knowledge is perfected according as things known are in the, what, nowhere, huh? But love, according as the one loving, is drawn to the thing loved. I left my heart in San Francisco, right? But that which is above man is more noble in itself than as it is in man, huh? Because each thing is in another by way of that in which it is. Now, the reverse is true about those things which are, what, below man, right, huh? So the stone is more, the atom is more noble in our mind than it is in itself, right? Secondly, because prudence moderates the appetitive motions pertaining to the, what, moral virtues, right, huh? How angry should I be with you, right? Because even Christ is in some scenes there in the Gospels is just, what, angry there with the hard-heartedness of the, you know, Pharisees and so on, right? But faith does not, what, moderate the appetitive motion tending towards God, huh? Which pertains to the, what, theological virtues. But it only shows the, what? Object. Object, right, huh? But the appetitive motion to the object exceeds human knowledge, huh? According to that of Ephesians chapter 3, verse 19, huh? The excelling science, the charity of Christ, right? Excelling what? Science, knowledge. Yeah. It's probably knowledge of the Greek, you know, and the shins. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I suppose you're thinking that little thing where it says in Scripture, a man doesn't know whether he'd be worthy of love or hate, you know? You don't really know your, your, your movement, huh? Mm-hmm. But you love God, huh? Now to the second, it should be... The second should be said, this is the great distinction, the second should be said that hope presupposes the love of what? That which someone hopes to obtain, right? Which is the love of what? Yeah, which in English should be translated the love of wanting. By which love more one loves oneself, right, who wants the good, than something else. Yes, but charity implies the love of friendship, to which one arrives, what? Through hope, by hope. Now, love of friendship is the way they call it love. It's also called the love of what? Wishing well, right? So, you know, we ask, you know, what does it mean to love somebody, right? Well, to really love somebody is to wish good to them, right? So, if you're seeking your own enjoyment from their company, right, are you really loving them? I have to say to students, you know, now, you go to the mixer, you see a nice girl, right? And what kind of love do you have for her right away? Yeah, yeah, this is the good you want for yourself. You want to enjoy this good, right? And you're not thinking of, I'm good for her, you know, even if you are kind of proud, you know, you're not actually thinking, I'm good for her, you know, therefore I should approach her, you know, because it'd be good for her to know me. I bring her some great benefits. No, you have the love of wanting for her, right? And the one to whom you wish good is yourself, right? And she's the good you want for yourself. And so, there's a great distance between that and then really, what, loving the woman, where you love her, wishing good, what, for her, right? And I don't think people understand that distinction very well, right? But it's absolutely essential, right? And I remember one of my girl students, you know, saying, in the course, you know, during these distinctions in the course, you know, and she got thinking about her parents, right? And why they stuck together, I don't know how many years, you know, they were married all these years. But they really wished good to each other, right? And that's what you have to have. That's kind of what you have to have for the marriage to, what, last, right? Right. That's very kind of cultural in the hedonistic culture today, to really think of the others who wish good for them. That's why, as Father Harden always points out, violations of the Sixth Commandment, always have violations of the Fifth Commandment, because unchaste people are selfish people. And so they're the kind of people who want to kill anybody for their own advantage. And so the two things always go together, unchastity and uncharted. Always go together. And in this age, whereas the physical murder is, well, in the West, anyway, less common, except for abortion, of course. You have the other types of murder, you know, the destroying of people's replications and job prospects and things like that, for those who are ideological enemies in one's view. But other things, though, just like, I think, when you first meet a good teacher, right, huh? What kind of love do you have for this good teacher? I want to know. Yeah, but you think he's good for you because he's going to, what? He's going to affect your mind somewhat, right, huh? You know, so are you really loving him? No. He's the good that you want for yourself, right? You want his teaching for yourself, right? Now, you might eventually come to love him for his own sake, right, huh? But you have to realize that's another kind of love, right, huh? So, I mean, the same sort of thing here as with the girl, right? The first kind of love you have is the love of what? Of wanting. Now, with wine, you know, it's forever the love of what? Only. Only. You don't ever wish the wine well. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It kind of backward way, you wish the wine to keep well, you know? Not to... Because I want to enjoy it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's the engine. There's always that one. Yeah, yeah. So, I remember the priest, when he was marrying my brother Richard and his wife, you know, he liked marrying them, you know, because he knew they were going to stick together, right? But so many of the people he married, you know, he had the sense, you know, that this is not going to last, you know? You have to marry them anyway, because they only get married, but, you know, but he just has that sense of, you know, a little sadness there that makes you think that this is not going to last, you know? And of course, love doesn't last nowadays, especially. I think, you know, like in business, you know, when you first, if somebody's useful to you, you know, so you have a love of wanting for this person, right? But sometimes, you know, a businessman gets to know somebody and they become real friends and they, and apart from that, they wish good to that guy, right? To succeed too, you know? Apart from any help he gives them, you know? But you've got to realize that it's improvement, right? So, down to the last objection here. To theory, it should be said that the cause perfecting is more potent than the effect, right? But not the cause disponence, huh? Thus, the heat of fire is what? And so, to which it disposes what? Matter, right? Which is clearly what? Yeah. Thus, our faith generates hope and hope charity, right? According to it, as one disposes for the other, right? So, they put disposition sometimes under the genus of a material cause, right? Mm-hmm. So, the matter has to be disposed in a certain way to receive the soul. It doesn't make the cause disposing the matter is better than the soul that it receives, huh? That's where you've got to stop, right? Yeah. That you could hardly ever put a stopping point, huh? Yeah. son holy spirit amen thank you god thank you guardian angels thank you thomas aquinas god your enlightenment guardian angel strengthen the lights of our minds forward illumine our images and arouse us to consider more correctly saint thomas aquinas angelic doctor pray for us help us to understand what you have written father son holy spirit amen i guess we're up to question 67. then thomas says in the premium were not to consider about the duration right of virtues after this life life and about these six things are asked first will the moral virtues remain after this life and then secondly whether the intellectual virtues remain and the other four are about the what theological virtues where their faith remains believe fourth whether hope remains and for some reason he has stuck in there right kind of afterthought whether something of faith or something of what hope remains and then six whether charity remains so to the first one goes forward thus it seems that the moral virtues do not remain after this life for men in the state of future glory will be like the angels god says christ says that to the sadducees doesn't he giving in marriage here as is said in matthew 22 but ridiculous to lay down that there are moral virtues in the angels as is said in the 10th book of the nicomachean ethics therefore neither in men after this life will there be the moral virtues moreover the moral virtues perfect man in this life or excuse me in the in the active life excuse me but the active life does not remain after this life and when christ says to what martha you know mary has chosen the better part and shall not be taken away from her it's going to continue the next life the contemplative life but the active life is going to be over right i'll start that just turn one time and says well then you got to get the active life in you don't have this life right where gregory says in the sixth book of the morals that the works of the active life pass away with the body no more filling out your income tax form right now therefore the get that into this life therefore the moral virtues do not remain after what this life moreover temperance and fortitude which are moral virtues are virtues of the irrational parts of the soul of the what concubus of appetite and the irascible appetite which even the dog and the cat have right the dog barking it's irascible you've been attacked by some vicious dog okay but the irrational parts of the soul are corrupted yeah when the body's corrupted because they exist in the body right and that they are the acts of bodily organs what's the english word for organ tool yeah so an aristotle defines the soul as the first act of a natural body sometimes they translate that you know first act of a natural organic body but it should be said you know first act of a natural body composed of tools right equipped with tools therefore it seems that the moral virtues do not remain after this life right because they're in those powers that are in the body the body is separate but against this is what is said in the book of wisdom chapter 1 verse 15 that justice is perpetual and what immortal but notice justice is in the will right which is in the reason as aristotle says in the immaterial part of man so maybe that could remain right in a way that fortitude and temperance would not remain except in their root you know but not actually now i answer it should be said that as augustine says in the 14th book of the trinity and who's he quoting augustine tully right that's cicero right so here we have some nice profound things in cicero that tullius laid down that after this life the four card of virtues are not able to what be right but that in another life men will be blessed by the knowledge only of nature right in which there is nothing better or more lovable as augustine says there by the nature which created what all natures right it's like time of god i guess huh he however afterwards i guess now who's ipsi i think it's augustine already determines that these four virtues in the future life exist but in another what way right now for the evidence of this it should be known that in virtues of this sort something is formal and something as what material material in these virtues is a certain inclination of the desiring part to certain passions or operations in some what way right but because this mode is determined by reason then what is formal in all virtues is the order of what reason huh the order which reason imposes upon these things thus therefore it should be said that all virtues of this sort will not remain in the future life as regards that which is material in them for they will not have in the future life place the concupiscences and desires of food and venereal things huh nor would there be fears and boldnesses audacities about the what dangers of what death right nor will there be distributions and communications of things which come into use in the present life which come for the use of the present life but as regards that which is formal there will remain in the blessed most perfectly after what this life insofar as the reason of each one will be most what rectified right it's coming by the marcus rectissima most rectified but in this case the reason of each person will be most rectified about those things which what pertain to him according to that status that state of life and the desiring power will be altogether moved according to the order of reason in those things which pertain to that what state that's prior you know from the daily newspaper you would experience whence augustine says that there will be prudence there without any danger of what error right don't make a mistake as to what you should do or not do right fortitude without the what being molested by evils that have to be tolerated right temperance without the repugnance fighting against you might say of lusts right that of prudence that no good will one what put before god or make equal to god right of fortitude that one will adhere most firmly to him of temperance that will not will not delight in any harmful defect but about justice is manifest which act you'll have there and that act would be to be what subject to god right because even in this life it pertains to justice to be subject to what one superior you have it right the bishop and so on now in answer to the first objection he says it should be said that the philosopher speaks there and the ethics there huh about these moral virtues as regards that which is material in right injustice as regards what exchanges and deposits and so on about fortitude as regards terrible right and dangers and so on and temperance as regards what depraved desires and so on and likewise it should be said regard to the second that those things which are of the act of life pertain materially to what the virtues now regard to the third objection right which in terms of the body to the third it should be said that the state after this life is twofold one before the resurrection when the souls are separated from their what bodies right i wonder if the first thing that greets you when you your soul separate from your body is your guardian angel right yeah another is after resurrection when the souls will again be united to their what bodies right now in that state of resurrection there will be the irrational powers again in the what organs of the body right just as they now are in the organs of the body right whence there will be able in irascible to be fortitude or in the concubiscible temperance right in so far as both what powers will be perfectly what disposed to obey reason but in the state before resurrection the irrational parts would not be actually in the soul right but only the root will be in them right in the essence of the soul as has been said in the what first part whence neither will the virtues of this sword be in act this is before resurrection now except in their root which is in the reason and the will right because they impose this order upon this two what irrational parts in which meaning in reason and will are the what the seed like things right the seminalia of these what virtues this has been said but he distinguishes like the objection make one think right from the book of uh wisdom was it where he said that justice now is perpetual and immortal there from the first chapter of the book of wisdom um but in the state before resurrection excuse me now um but justice which is in the will will also what remain an act right when specially it is said about it it goes back to the said country there that is perpetual and immortal right speaking of justice both by reason of the subject because the will is incorruptible and also by reason of the likeness of the what act so you qualify as a number of ways right ways these will remain right in a formal way and not an act in case of temperance and uh purge before the resurrection right but for justice it will remain right an act but after the resurrection then you can have them again so the the separated souls don't um experience the emotions i mean they would experience the will but not the sense of emotions yeah yeah you wouldn't have uh that's kind of strange you wouldn't have hunger and thirst and sexual desire and anger and so on but yeah that's kind of a strange thing to be in yeah maybe they might you might you know you might you know sometimes you carry these names over for reason they stood in what likeness of the acts of the will right you know the the um if you take the the names of words like say love or desire right which first name may be the emotion right and then you carry them over to the acts of the will you keep the formal aspect right but the body the accompaniment of the accompaniment of that is dropped right so but like when you carry words over to god you want to keep in the formal aspect to drop the interior aspect where you keep the difference and drop the word you have genius right just taken from the matter or something which is more potential this guy is shentia right what shentia really in us is as you know from the study of euclid it's a demonstration right the syllabus of making us know the cause and that which it is a cause it cannot be otherwise right is there something like that in god does he syllogize no but as far as knowing the cause the difference right and that which is a cause it cannot be otherwise he knows it more quickly than we do right so you keep the formal aspect right for the difference right and drop the what genius yeah so you know there's something material in my emotions right when we were in theories but insofar as there is a what desire for something good right or so on uh then there's a formal aspect to it you keep that formal aspect right you know it's hard you know i know it's just being a teacher and you're trying to get students to see the difference between love which is an emotion and love which is an act of the will and for people in general it's hard to really what separate those two right to do this isn't it especially older people i would think yeah especially women yeah women do it a special hard time with that and of course you know when they when they say you know that god has no emotions that sounds terrible you know i'm feeling cold yeah yeah yeah see it's really there's some passage there in one of his books there where he speaks of the love of the angels as being ferocious right so it's really it's really much more intense love than we have now we're kind of you know divided the kingdom divided against itself you don't stand right so i mean our our will love is not as intense as the the act of the angels right but sometimes you know they'll carry over even those words that name intense love you know eros right is sometimes carried over and applied in to god right and by tionysius the arabic right right because of the intensity of this right let's just try to get people to see something about this right then but uh god's love obviously is much more intense you know it's really more intense than our love is right it's really more intense than some devotion we have you know okay