Prima Secundae
Lecture 202: Sin from Malice: The Disorder of the Will

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

Yeah, get into malice now. Then we ought to consider about the cause of sin which is on the part of the will which is called, what, malice, right? I think I mentioned before about how Thomas' prayers, have you ever seen his prayers there for confession? He's saying, you know, that he sinned against God the Father from, what, infirmity, right? Because we appropriate to God the Father, what, power, right? And then from ignorance he sinned against his son to whom we appropriate wisdom. And then by malice against the Holy Spirit, right? And therefore he's offended the whole trinity, right? It's kind of a beautiful way of tying that up, you know? So I pray for somebody, you know, and I'll invoke the Father, you know, to give them power and strength, right? And the Son to give them wisdom, you know, and the Holy Spirit to give them love, right? And it's kind of what's appropriate to those three, you know? It's beautiful at times that they pray around the confession. So now we're down to malice here. So when Hitler did the, what do you call it, the, getting rid of the Jews there, huh? Was that passion or malice? When Hitler, when Hitler. Oh, when Hitler did it. Yeah, Holocaust, that's what they call it. Yeah, that was planned. That's what I look at to draw another comparison, but in the legislature or whatever, say, well, they can't say that they are ignorant. They all proclaim, they know what the church teaches. They disagree with it. They all have ignorant. And it's not like they're not free. They don't have the ability or power to do something else. What's left? Actually, the way up here, I heard on the radio, a very nice ad from the national pro-life organization, you know, very, very, very well said, you know. I haven't heard of the radio on the radio before, you know. You know, it's very good. The next week, is that what they're talking about? Maybe so, maybe so, but I didn't know. Must cost a lot of money to put it on the radio like that. But very good. Talking about stopping the hearts of the baby and so on, you know. To the first, one proceeds, oh, let me look at the poem here. Then we ought to consider about the cause of sin, which is on the part of the will, which is called, what? Malice, huh? So, infirmity is on the side of the passions, right? And ignorance on the side of reason. And again, on the side of will, right? This is the worst one, right? This is the worst, it seems to me. But about these four things are asked, huh? First, whether someone from certain malice or, what? Industry can sin, huh? Well, you know the way Hitler, you know, organized the thing, right? I mean, it's really organized for production. But same with the abortion, you know, industry, right? As we call it, we call it industry right now. Second, whether whoever sins from habit sins from certain malice, huh? That's a way to habit here now, huh? Rather than passion, right? It doesn't say whoever sins from passion, sins from certain malice. You wouldn't say that. Third, whether whoever sins from certain malice sins from habit. This is the reverse, right? Whoever sins from habit, does he sin from certain malice? And whoever sins from certain malice, does he sin from habit, huh? Watch out for those habits, right, huh? Fourth, whether the one who sins from certain malice sins more greatly than the one who sins from passion. I would anticipate that he would say yes. I don't think that is, huh? Buckley talking about the tenacious ill will, some of his opponents. Tenacious ill will, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his, some of his. That is ignorant, according to the philosopher. And it says so in the Bible, too. Proverbs chapter 14, verse 22. They err who do evil, right? They're mistaken. Therefore, no one sins from, what? Certain malice, huh? But that everyone sins from ignorance or being ignorant. What I do understand is that the same statement, right? Let's see what Thomas says. I'm just guessing, you know. I'm going to have a slice of the idea. How Thomas gets out of here. Morva Dionysius, huh? In the fourth chapter of the divine name, it says that no one intending to evil. Yeah. But this, it seems to, it is to sin from malice, to intend evil in sinning, right? Well, what is outside of intention is, as it were, Procidemes, and does not denominate the act. Therefore, no one sins from malice, huh? I mean, Dionysius, I mean, he's, you know, quite a big authority, huh? Is it Gregor the Great that brought Dionysius back from, I think he was ambassador or something to Byzantine, yeah, to the capital, and then I think he, he was, Dionysius was known there more than in the West, you know. He was known at all in the West, I don't know. But, uh, moreover, malice itself is a, what, sin. If, therefore, malice is the cause of sin, it would follow that, what, sin is the cause of sin in infinitum, which is unsuitable, inconvenient. No one, therefore, sins from, what, malice, huh? But, again, this is what is said in Job 34, 27. Quasi de industria, right? They receded from God, right? And did not wish to understand his ways. But to recede from God is to sin. Therefore, some sin ex industria, or from certain, what, malice, huh? There are people around like that today. There was some Christian who was giving some witness when they gave pride praise, and somebody did videotapers, and the way they insulted this guy, they said, we don't want any, you're Jesus stuff. They know what that means, and they know what they mean, and they don't want to know what it means. I answer, it should be said that man, just as every other thing, right, naturally has a desire of the, what, what, whence that is. desire declines to the evil right happens from some corruption right or disorder in some of the beginnings of man right for thus in the actions of natural things the cotton right is found i wonder how they translate that in the text because the cotton you know sin has got a more narrow meaning than the cotton in latin right so you know if a baby is born with you know defects that's called a the cotton the tour right it's not a sin you know but how do they translate that yeah that's what came out of the translator program that's why i say sometimes you know translating is a thankless task you know because there's no way sometimes to translate these things so i say you know translating shakespeare into french is a thankless task you know how do you translate full fathom five thy father lies keep the alliteration there you know no it doesn't translate that now the beginnings of human acts are the understanding and what desire right both the rational desire which is called the will and the sensitive desire right now sin in human acts happen sometimes as from the what defect of the understanding when someone sins through what ignorance and from the defect of the since desiring power as when someone sins from what passion right so also from a defect of the will which is the what disorder of it but a will is disordered when it loves more the lesser good consequently it is that someone chooses right to suffer loss in the good less loved that he might enjoy the good more loved that that's what david was doing there when he just as when a man wishes to what go cutting off of a member knowingly that he might conserve his life which he loves more yeah yeah and in this way when some what disordered will loves more some temporal good as for example wealth or pleasure right then the order of what reason or of the divine law or the love of god right or something of this sort it follows that he wishes what to undergo a what a loss of spiritual goods that he might enjoy some what temporal good huh what did faust say right he sold a soul right or to get some things some temporal things now the evil is nothing other than the what privation or lack of some good and thus someone knowingly wishes some spiritual evil which is evil what simpliciter through which a spiritual good is a spiritual good is what lost or deprived that he might enjoy a what temple good once he has said from certain malice or from industry to sin as we're knowingly choosing what evil yeah maybe that could be yeah that's today with the word industry industry industry yeah yeah you wonder why the democratic party now you know so uh pro-abortion you know the votes a woman you know that they do this or what might this kind of be a a stepping stone of some of the power it's nothing livable about it by itself even they agree that's when obama say that the first of the first election one of the debates leading up to his first election when they asked him about it he said he said nobody likes abortion you'd need that nobody likes it so there's some of the motion what is it seems to be more malice now than ignorance you know science and knowledge and stuff to the first therefore it should be said that ignorance that ignorance sometimes excludes knowledge by which someone simply knows right some picture there knows this to be bad that is done and then one is said to sin from ignorance right sometimes already excludes the knowledge by which a man knows this now to be evil right as when he sins from passion right sometimes already excludes the knowledge by which someone knows this evil to not be what sustained on account of the obtaining of that good right he knows nevertheless this simply to be what evil and thus he is said to what and thus is said to the ignorant the one who sins from what yeah so in this case he knows something something to be bad right but he doesn't know that it should be what not sustained on account of getting something good he knows something to be bad right but he doesn't know that it should not be sustained this evil in order to get this other good i mean if he didn't know the baby was a human being that would be one thing right but if he knows it to be human being he knows this is bad you know but you have to do that in order to yeah yeah i remember when when uh because ginsburg i think was being uh you know testifying before she was a which is being appointed to spring court you know or interviewed and she she was saying well you have to have this you know more women to be equal with men right because it's actually discrimination woman you know to force her to keep this thing in her for nine months you know she doesn't want it in here so therefore in order for women to kill people yeah Doctors or lawyers who should know better, especially doctors, they don't want to see it. They look away. That's the crash. I suppose it's a willful energy. We've got to stop now here, or what is it? We've got to stop now? No, we can finish the ejection. Okay, finish the ejection's here. We want to get our money away. To the second, it should be said that evil is not able in itself to be intended by someone, right? It, however, can be intended to avoiding some what? Other evil. Or to achieving some other what? Good. Good, huh? And in such a case, someone chooses to what? Pursue the good per se intended, without this that he what? Some good. Yeah. Just as someone who's lascivious, right? Wishes to enjoy some pleasure without the offense of God, but two things being proposed, he more chooses by sinning to incur the offense of God than to be deprived of the pleasure, right? So women must be equal with men, right? And therefore they must be free to engage in sex without having trouble with the baby. Yeah. Which men can do, because men can do this, yeah? And they take off and they have no responsibility for the results of this act. So they're, so they're model and exemplar, they're irresponsible men. Yeah. Yeah. You must be as free as men are. That's right. Free for justice. The third, it should be said, that the malice from which someone is said to what? Sin, can be understood to be an habitual what? Malice, right? According as a what? Bad habit is named by the philosopher. Now who is that philosopher? He's quoting all the time. I don't pee. It's named malice, right? Just as a good habit is named what? Virtue. And according to this, someone is said to sin from malice, who sins from the inclination habit. It can also be understood as actual malice, right? Whether the choice of the what? Evil is called what? Yeah. And thus it is someone said to sin from malice, insofar as he sins from the choice of something bad. Or also, malice is said to be what? What? Some preceding guilt from which there arises a subsequent guilt. As when someone attacks what? Fraternal attacks from envy, right? And then the same is not a cause of itself. But the interior act is a cause of the exterior act. And one sin is the cause of another. Not over infinitum. Because it is necessary to arrive at some, what? First sin. Which is not caused from some prior sin, huh? Goes back to your life history, right? Back to your first sin, huh? Okay, we've got to stop there then. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, amen. God, our enlightenment, buried in angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, or to illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas and Jellic Doctor, help us to understand all that you have written. In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, amen. I was reading again about how the angels have enlightened us, huh? And why we don't always know that they enlighten us. I know myself sometimes, you know, I have this urge to say, I should really go back and reread this again, you know, this book or this thing, you know. And they say, yeah, this is really, really things that I've, you know, forgotten or didn't fully understand, or things that, you know, enlighten what I'm doing in other places and so on. I don't know, why did I get the urges to read that book, you know, you know. It's not like you haven't read it, though. Yeah, yeah, the angel persuasive, you know. Okay, we're going to read the first article here. And I guess, why did that come to me? You see, my great angel must say, Dwayne? He writes a sloppy, sloppy lecture, whatever you call it, you gave last time. Yeah. So look at the premium again here. Then we're not to consider about the cause of sin, which is on the part of the will, which is called what? Malice. And about this, four things are asked. First, whether someone is able, from certain malice or industry, to sin. And then, whoever sins from habit, whether whoever sins from habit, sins from certain malice. And third, whether whoever sins from certain malice, sins from habit. Is it convertible or not? We'll find out. I don't think it is convertible, but we'll find out. Suspense here. And whether the one who sins from certain malice, sins more greatly than the one who sins from passion. Well, I would guess that it is so. So does Don Giovanni sin from passion or a certain malice, huh? No? He can't repent at the end, right? Down he goes, screaming to hell. To the first, one proceeds thus. It seems that no one sins from industry or from certain what? Malice, huh? Now, ignorance is opposed to industry or a certain, what? Malice, huh? But everyone who is bad is ignorant, according to the, what? Philosopher. And then from scripture, Proverbs chapter 14. They are mistaken, right? They err, right? To use the Latin word. They wonder. Who do what? Something bad, right? Those two great authorities there, right? Therefore, no one sins from certain malice, right? That would seem like you know that something is bad and you choose it, right? So Warren says he's got little, what? Patience of those who defend abortion, right? Because they know it's evil, right? They know you're doing something you shouldn't be doing, huh? But how is that possible, huh? It seems that you must be ignorant, huh? Well, look at the reply to that, huh? Which is very interesting, huh? The reply to that first objection, huh? Before we even go to the body of the article. Because there are times has a three-fold distinction, right? Defending what Proverbs says and what Aristotle says, right, huh? But pointing out that the man who sins from ignorance, right, and the man who sins from passion and the man who sins from certain malice, each are ignorant but in, what, different ways, huh? Let's read a key text, right, huh? So he defends that, what the philosopher says and what God says, I guess, in the book of Proverbs, right? To the first therefore it should be said that ignorance sometimes excludes knowledge by which someone knows, right, simplicitare, huh? That to be bad which is being, what, done, huh? And then he is said to sin from ignorance, right? An example of this would be, what, in scripture would be St. Paul himself, right? He was persecuting the church, right, huh? But he was, what, forgiven in some way, right? Because he argued from, he did from what? Ignorance, right, huh? He thought he was doing something good, right, huh? Sometimes it excludes the knowledge by which a man knows this now in particular to be bad, right? Just as when someone sins from, what, passion, right? So you may know something universal but doesn't apply it, right, huh? So maybe this is David, right, huh? With Bathsheba, right, huh? Okay? Make you forget the universal, right? To this bathing woman, right? Okay. But now, what about the malice, huh? Because Thomas is going to defend that even he is ignorant in some way, right? Sometimes it excludes the knowledge by which someone knows this evil should not be, what, sustained, right? On account of the pursuit of some good, right? He knows, however, some pitchy terror that this is bad, right, huh? And thus he is said to be ignorant, the one who sins from certain malice, right, huh? Okay. So, what about abortion, right, huh? You know abortion to be something bad, right, huh? But I'm in a jam. I'm a sophomore in college, and, you know, I can't have this baby. I can't, you know, you know, and so on. And therefore, I'm going to have an abortion, right, huh? So I can continue my college education without, you know, a horrible interruption, right, huh? So I know it's bad abortion, but I don't, what, know that I should not sustain such an evil abortion to avoid this other one, huh? Okay. So it's interesting how he distinguishes those three kinds of evil, right? Now, what about when David had the husband there of Bathsheba killed, right? He knew that was bad, right, huh? He knew that murder is, what, bad, right, huh? But he didn't seem to know that he shouldn't, what, sustain such an evil in order to hold on to Bathsheba, right, or to continue to enjoy her, right, huh? Okay. That's a beautiful, beautiful, beautiful text, you know? Yeah. Is he indicating that? I don't want to add too much. Yeah. Yeah. But in a sense, he loves the, some good, right, more than he loves the good is going to be deprived of, right? This will come out in another, in another objection, right, huh? Okay. Moreover, Dionysius says in the fourth chapter of the Divine Names, that no one aiming at evil does something, right? But this seems to be to sin from malice, to intend evil in sinning, right? Dionysius, he's a big authority, right? No one aiming at evil does something, right, huh? But that's what you're trying to say here, actually, when you talk about sinning from evil, from malice, I mean? But what is, apart from attention, is not, is as it were, procidance, right? And does not denominate the act, huh? And therefore, no one sins from, what, malice, huh? That's a very powerful objection, too. Now, what does Thomas say? To the second it should be said, that evil is not able, secundum se, as such, to be intended by someone, huh? It, however, can be intended in order to... avoid some other what evil right now or to obtaining some what good right okay look at the answer to yeah yeah the second should be said that evil is not able to be secundum say as such intended by someone right but it can be intended to avoiding some other evil like interruption of my college education or to achieve some other good like pashiba as has been said right and in such a case someone chooses to what pursue a good parasy intended right without this that he undergo the detriment of a what another good right just as someone lascivious wills to enjoy pleasure without offense of god right but the two things being proposed right they're incompatibles he wishes more by sinning to incur the offense of god than to be deprived of the what pleasure right and that's true david there in that example there right okay to the third malice itself is a sin if therefore malice is a cause of sin it would follow that sin is the cause of sin in infinitum which is inconvenient no one therefore can sin from what malice now to 30 says it should be said that the malice from which someone is said to sin can be understood as habitual what malice according as a bad habit is named by the philosopher as malice right just as a good habit is named what virtue and according to this someone is said to sin from malice who sins from the inclination of his habit because the habit itself is called kind of malice right one can also understand actual what malice right huh whether the choice of the what bad bad is named malice and that and thus one is said to sin from malice insofar as he sins from a bad choice from the choice of the bad for whether the uh malice is said to be some preceding guilt from which arises a subsequent guilt right as when someone what attacks fraternal what grace from envy right and then the same is not a cause of itself but the interior act is a cause of the what exterior act and one sin is a cause another not however infinitum huh because there is possible to arrive at some first sin which is not caused from some prior sin as has been said above now what's the great said counter against all this rejections right but against this is what is said in job 34 chapter 34 as it were of industry they recede from what god and they do not wish to understand his what ways but to recede from god is to sin therefore some sin from industry or from what certain malice huh funny got the word industry taken up in a little different sense but can also look at the whole picture here which you go to the body of the article right now i answer it should be said that man just as every other thing huh naturally has a desire of the what good huh whence that his desire declines to something bad happens from some corruption or disorder in one of the beginnings of man right just as also what has found sin in the actions of natural things huh when the baby is born defective in someone there's some defect in the genes or in the the seed from the parents right now which is the beginning of the child but now the beginnings of human acts are the understanding and what desire and the desire both the rational desire which is called the will as well as the sense desire so you've got what three right now sin therefore in human acts happen sometimes from the defect of the what understanding as when someone sins through what ignorance right and from the defect of sense desire since desiring power as when someone sins from passion so also from the defect of the will which is the deorder disorder of the same right huh that's beautiful i mean good example three right now just got through studying the angels again there in the three hierarchies each heart is three what orders and each order has a beginning middle and end right so three is really dominates the the angels there right the number three and it dominates the seer huh three now it's a third one we're concerned with right now in this question on malice right huh so do you have a disorder in your understanding or disorder in your kills appetite or hassle appetite or do you have a disorder in your what your will itself that's kind of a principle thing isn't it too and action that will the will however is disordered when it loves what more yeah okay now what's what sense of order is he talking about here in the categories yeah yeah the fourth sense therefore right isn't it the first sense of before and after is in time right today is before tomorrow right second sense of before is in being huh if this can be without that but not vice versa like the letter c can be without the word cat the word cat can't be without the literacy water can be without life maybe life can't be without water maybe that's a bad example right um the third sense of before is in the discourse of reason right the principles come before the conclusion right premises genus before the species and so on and the fourth sense so more remote senses aristotle says is where the better is before the lesser right then aristotle is through with the four central senses right but then he brings in a fifth sense the sense in which the cause is before the what effect right but i don't think that fifth sense is fifth in order right i think it should be placed alongside of the second sense huh so of those five senses right the disorder here is in what loving more the lesser good than the greater good right so all my colleagues who chose to follow in lesser knowledge in place of wisdom huh you know i mean what does aristotle he has the 14 books of wisdom right huh but usually refers to the 14 books of wisdom as uh first philosophy right and um what sense of order is that this is first philosophy The fourth sense, yeah. It's better than all the rest, right? And then he calls natural philosophy second philosophy, right? And we're accustomed to call the 14 books of wisdom the metaphysics, right? Just almost misleading because you've run together three Greek words in the word metaphysics, right? And therefore nobody knows what they're doing anymore with the word, right? But the three words run together are meta, which means after. Ta, which is the article, the, and Fusica, which means the books in natural philosophy, right? So it's saying after natural philosophy. Now how can first philosophy come after natural philosophy? What? Second philosophy. Yeah, yeah. So how can that be? No. There can be, you know, it's apparent to Adronicus of Rhodes, right? The editor of Aristotle's Thinks, right? Who kind of coined that word, right? But it's because it comes after. Yeah. Yeah. I see. Yeah. You know, you could call, you know, mathematics third philosophy, at least looking philosophy, right? Okay. And so natural philosophy comes before first philosophy in the order of learning, right? Which is the third sense of before, right? I don't even want to say that, right? But first philosophy is called first philosophy because it's before in goodness, right? It's a better philosophy, right? It's more divine, right? Aristotle in the sixth book calls it theology, right? Because eventually you're studying God, right, huh? Okay. I was looking at another text there of Thomas, you know. I don't know if you've ever studied the soul, you know. But when Aristotle defines the soul, he speaks of it as being the first act, right? Of a natural body composed of tools, right? And what does first act mean there, right? Well, it's contrasted with second act, which is operation, right? Well, what sense of first and second is there when you speak of form, which the soul is, substantial form, as being a first act, right? And habit is something that's called a first act with respect to using the habit. By operation or doing something is called second act, huh? But what sense of first and second is that? What sense of before is that? Yeah. And the second sense too, right? See, so I can have a mind without thinking. But you can't think without a mind, right? Okay. And my mind in some way calls my thinking, right? That's why I say the second, the so-called fifth sense there is really very close to the second sense, right? Which is better, right? Which is the end or purpose? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's kind of interesting, huh? When you speak of first philosophy, you're saying it's because it's better, right, huh? When you say first act, you're using first there in the, what, second sense and perhaps also in the fifth sense, so-called fifth, right? Not fifth in order, right? Aristotle uses both ways of speaking, right? I mean, he's talking about, you know, he knows these orders backwards and forwards, huh? Incidentally, is there some reason why first philosophy is called first philosophy besides the fact that it's better than all the other kinds of philosophy? Any other reason they call it first philosophy? Yeah. Just like natural philosophy is about natural things, right? So first philosophy is about what's first, right? Now, most of all, because it's about the first cause, huh, and the first being, huh? And there we do the same thing, but there's a little difference in meaning there, right? So God is both the first cause and the first being, right? He's the cause of all other things, and he is, what, able to be without all other things, but they can't be without him. So he's first being, he's first in the second sense and in the so-called fifth sense, right? Okay, but it's also about the first, what, statements and the first thoughts of our mind, the most general, like the whole one more than a part, like the first statements and the first thoughts there, huh? And therefore, it's about what is first in the sense of what? The fourth, the third sense, the order of what? Yeah, the discourse of reason, right? A lot, a lot to be seen in the word first philosophy, huh? So, a will is disordered when it loves, the lesser good more. So if I love mathematics more than wisdom, yeah, yeah. So I'm a philosopher, and a philosopher etymologically is named from the love of what? Wisdom, yeah. If you look at the word mathematikos in Greek, huh, mathematikos is someone who's fond of learning, and it's also a synonym for philomathes, right, huh? But if you're a lover of mathematics, most of all, then there's a disorder in you, right? And I remember my old teacher, Kassarik, there, you know, he had translated Thomas's commentary in the first two books of natural hearing, the first two books of the so-called physics. But he put a few little things in there, nice, in the beginning there. One is a nice little passage from Albert the Great, right? And he says, anybody who studies the lesser things without having in mind as a goal the higher things, right, has their perverted attitude towards knowledge unless he'd be forced to it by necessity, you know? You know, a doctor might have to study, you know, lesser things, right? But if you are being forced to consider lesser things out of necessity, a mother has to consider lesser things. If you prefer the lesser to the greater, then there's, what, these men that devote their lives to literature, you know, which is less than philosophy. They have a disordered desire to know, right? Because they certainly can't put food on the table without the greater literature. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Aristotle talks, you know, about how one thing about studying the animals, right, and the plants, right, rather than studying, you know, the immortal substances, the immaterial substances, is that we can know them better, right, huh? But nevertheless, it's better to know a little better, even about the higher things, than to know a lot about the lesser things, huh? Spend your life, you know, etymologists studying insects, right? Well, I mean, there's quite a few kinds of insects, you know, you can spend your whole life with insects, right? And I guess they're always discovering new kinds of insects that they didn't know existed, right? And so great detail in the animals here, but it's nothing compared to knowing a little bit about God or, you know, about my guardian angel, right? I think my guardian angel, if he has a sense of humor, gee, I suppose they do. Must be abused, you know, by trying to understand what an angel is. So, I mean, this disordered will is, what, a common thing, isn't it, huh? I mean, if you love beer more than wine, I know some people would do, that's a disordered desire to, in the will, right? Or at least in the sense of it. What? At least in the sense of it. Yeah. So, going back, that is the disordered will, when it loves the lesser good more. That's possible to do so, isn't it? Yeah, yeah. So, I must have loved soda pop more than wine when I was young. My brother Marcus, you know, would say to me, you know, I said, if it wasn't for me, he said, you'd probably be drinking soda pop with your...