Prima Secundae
Lecture 243: The Qualities and Divisions of Human Law

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

So, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. Deo gratias. God, our enlightenment. Guardian angels, strengthen the lights of our mind, or illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor. May you, God. Help us to understand what you have written. Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, amen. Going back to that thing about vice is the road to what? Misery, right, huh? And Thomas says, you know, in one place, he would say probably this, you know. Talking about error, right? Magna pars, miseria. It's a great part of misery, right? But when Thomas talks about how pride is a cause of error, right, huh? And he says it's a cause of error in two ways, right, huh? In one way, it makes you overestimate your powers, and therefore you attempt something beyond your powers, and you easily fall into error. And then you don't want to accept the master, right, huh? And listen to the master, you know, those who are wiser than you are. In those two ways, it leads to error, right, huh? So magna pars, miseria. Vice is the road to misery, right? Without the more obvious examples of getting the daily paper, you know. Sister Rosalie, open the paper there. The top thing, a man was being imprisoned or coming to her out. He killed his girlfriend, right? The bottom of the page was a woman who killed her fiancé. Sister Rosalie, top and bottom. Top and bottom of the page. But one thing after another, you can see there, you know. Let's interrupt the Article 3 here. Yes. Question 95. The third one goes forward thus. It seems that Isidore unsuitably describes the quality of the laid-down law, positive law, saying that the law is, what, honest, just, possible, according to nature, according to the custom of one's, what, country, suitable to the place and the time, necessary, useful, huh? Manifest also, huh? Lest something it contains, right, in captivity through obscurity, huh? Not, you know, useful just to the private, huh? But written down for the common utility or usefulness of the citizens, huh? That's quite an Isidorean. Yeah. For above, huh, in three conditions, he explained the quality of the, what, law, saying that the law is everything that is constituted by reason, as long as it is, what, suitable to religion, that it's suitable to discipline, that it is suitable, yeah, to salvation. Therefore, superfluo, yeah, superfluously, after words, he multiplies the conditions of law. So how many things does he have here in this one here? Moreover, justice is a part of honestatis, of honesty, huh? It's kind of a funny word, honesty, the way he's got it in our use of it in English. As Tolias, or Cicero, says in the first book on the offices, huh? Therefore, after he has said honesta, superfluously, does he add justa? Multiplying words, huh? He came to that in prayer. He just had the Our Father the other day, was it yesterday, I think, yeah? Was it today in Mass? That was very recent. Again, from the Gospel of Matthew. Now, the Our Father is only in Luke, isn't it? And it's not complete in Luke, I mean, it's a Schrodinger version, yeah. So I always say, it gives an example of how Matthew's holding up Luke, huh? Moreover, the written law, according to Isidore, is divided against, what? Custom. Therefore, it ought not to be placed in the definition of law, that it is according to the custom of the... Moreover, the necessary is said in two ways, huh? To wit, that which is necessary, simplicity there, right? But is impossible to be otherwise. And necessity of this sort is not subject to human judgment, huh? When such a necessity does not pertain to the human law, there's also a necessity according to the, what? End, huh? And such necessity is the same thing as usefulness. Therefore, superfluously, does he lay down both necessary and useful. What's against this? Well, the authority, huh? Yeah, was he the farmer? Was it the farmer or that one that you guys adore? No, no. The different one. It's going to attack him, he'll pick a farmer, but he is. The Benedictines are always, what, farmers, huh? Are you guys farmers here, too? Yeah, that's the beginning farm. Yeah. And orchards, too. We definitely have a little orchard, fruit trees. Last year they produced a little bit. I'm sure you're going to get more. Yeah. Oh. Did Bishop Wright go out and bless the vineyards there in France? I think he did. Yeah, yeah. I told you the story about, I guess he was Bishop Worcester, he would send in his chauffeur to get the wine right in at the package store, right? Oh. But the guy was kind of a jokester, you know, he'd say, You got the booze for the bishop? Everybody could hear him in the story, you know? Yeah. Mass, he was someplace, and maybe he skipped one of the complex or something, and then he asked, after we asked, he explained to everybody in the sanctuary, he said, You can always take out the collection, but you can never take out the collection. I answer it should be said, that each thing that is for the sake of some end, right, it is necessary that the form be determined according to its, what, ratio to the end, right? Thomas used the way proportion of the amount of a ratio, right? So that's like the form of the chair, right? It's got to fit the end of it, right? The end is not to lie down, but to sit. That's why it goes up instead of going down. It's got these chairs showing you. You have to lay down. They go all the way down like this. They go actually horizontal. They go first halfway, and then they go all the way down. Might come in handy if you're short of beds, and you're tired of sleeping. Just as the form of the, what? Yeah. Such as is suitable to cutting, right, huh? As is clear in the second book of the, what? Physics, huh? Of course, the Himmica-Syrki stories say the examples are very, what, concrete in Aristotle and Thomas, huh? by the moderns, you know, have some kind of a imaginative example that you cut up in, you know, rather than illustrating the point simply. So, you know, we're going to get to the end of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book of the book for each thing is what right and measured necessary that it have its what form proportional or to its rule and to its what measure right okay that's all I would make a little break there right I'm going to apply it to this huh now human law has both right because it is both something ordered to an end right and is a certain rule or measure regulated or ruled or measured by a certain superior measure which is twofold both the divine law and the law of what nature this is clear from the things that above now the end of human law is the what usefulness of men just as also what the jury spirit to us the man experienced in the law right this must be kind of almost in ton of messiah right as he says and therefore Isidore in the condition of law first lays down three to wit that it is what an agreement with religion right that is insofar as it is proportioned to the divine law that it is suitable to what discipline insofar as it's proportion to the law of what nature and that it is proficient for salvation insofar as it's proportion to human usefulness medieval guys really something weren't they and to these three all other conditions which he later lays down are reduced huh now the rest of this Thomas is going to be answering the objections right at the same time because he's going to see how the other ones are reduced huh isn't it nice that he had three and then he reduced them to three right the rule of two or three right for this that he calls it what honesta refers to this that it is suitable to what in agreement with what religion i don't know exactly i don't know exactly i don't know exactly i don't know exactly i get the other word honesta but honesta has got the idea of what suitable to honor right the bonum honestum huh yeah but what he joins justa possible according to nature according to the custom of one's country fitting to the place and time and time are added to the what convenient of what discipline huh now it was just to mean they're naturally just maybe possible according to nature mean that uh you can fulfill it it's not to it's according to the custom of one's country and suitable to place and time no no Tom's going to explain this a bit right human discipline is to be observed first as regards the what order of reason which is implied in this that it is said what just too much to too little just secondly to the ability of the what agents huh for the discipline not to be suitable to each one according to his what capacity right it's possible observing the possibility what of nature huh for that should not be placed upon boys which is placed upon perfect men okay and according to human custom huh for man is able not only to what live in society or for man is not able right to live alone in society right not what with other is some kind of custom right third is regards suitable circumstances right he says fitting to place and what time huh he shouldn't be making jokes in church yeah and aristotle has a virtue concerned with jokes and so on right huh utropoleia yeah and uh shakespeare talks about that huh yeah as well as labor is lost right but utropoleia means what easily turning right i ever said he can turn away that's kind of funny right i tell you about that one of my colleagues there in the in the uh county house you know there there's a uh kind of a gold dollar you know so that's kind of nice so he put a dollar in and put it in his pocket right and take it home right i saw him the next day and he says i came home and i said to my wife you know oh look i got this thing he reached his pocket he couldn't find it so i said you can't serve amman and god he's gonna turn you whatever you know he's got a gold coin and he said you're having whatever you do it he's starting to put it back as soon as you get in these envelopes there's some change you know huh because you put it in the cup there you know he said you think that the pastor at least let's keep the change yeah yeah it's always a joke about going down to the racetrack you know we're going to increase the amount you know by winning down the racetrack we're going to gamble with the money you know came in but that's not a good way to go i don't think my voice is not good today here um third regards these suitable circumstances right suitable to place and time and that the things he adds necessary useful refers to this that is suitable to what salvation that necessity refers to what yeah we use the word necessity sometimes in that sense uh usefulness to the what achievement of good things manifestation to what it could come from it from the law itself right and because it is said that law is order to the common good this is shown in the last part of the determination and to this is good response to all the objections you know that's pretty good huh what a patient matt thomas was huh to think all that out huh amazing who's this composer this conductor there i don't care his name carison or something i forget but i was turning the radio on the classical music station there and they had mozart's uh 33rd symphony i said this is too fast he's performing too fast sure enough it's that same guy you know he must have out a whole collection of the symphonies and they've been playing them all the time i can't recognize right away you know why uh my brother mark said beecham you know taught the other man how to really conduct mozart right and you lose an ability right he doesn't really understand the ability of mozart when he plays it too fast it's like those guys who conduct uh you know beethoven and then they conduct mostly like beethoven you know just this is terrible so thomas pays attention to these little things uh isidora is not even augustine right because the greatest of the doctors of the church yeah i don't think thomas is a doctor is he or is he He's a doctor, yeah. He's a doctor. He's not a father in the church, though, because a father is a good thing. Kajitin says at the beginning of the commentary on the Summa, you know, that Thomas seems to, what, inherited the mind of all the church fathers, right? Because he so reverenced them, huh? That's true, right? Yeah, I know that text, but I'm trying to say where it is now. I used to quote that a lot to people. Probably got it somewhere. Right across the text, look at my text in the sentences. Just on the use of the word love there, you know, in the sentences, right? The Trinity. Nice text, little text sit down, that's brought together. Article 4. Some more Isidorean stuff here, huh? Have you read Isidore? Have you read Isidore? No, other than what little pieces are in there. I think one of the brothers of the Benedictines. Yeah, yeah. Oh, to the fourth one goes forward thus. It seems that unsuitably Isidore has laid down the division of human laws. Or of human what? For under the law, or under the justice, he comprehends the just gentian, right? Which is thus named, as he himself says, because in it, right? Because all, almost all. Ferry means almost, huh? Almost all the, what? Nations. Use it, huh? Okay. But as he himself says, the use naturali, the natural digest, is what is common to all nations. Therefore, the use gentium is not contained under the, what? Positive law, human law, but more under the, what? Natural law, huh? You think Thomas was a canon lawyer the way he's going into these things, huh? I was reading this biography of John Quincy Adams, you know. And so when he got out of Harvard there, he was, he was learning law, right? And he wrote in this thing, you know. You know, dealing with bills and bankruptcies and these things, you know. Driving him crazy, right? If this is why I reduced this, it says I wish I would leave this world shortly, you know. So finally he got out of that, you know. And Washington appointed him in an ambassadorial position, you know. He's thinking he'd bring it into the lawyer in the accounting house there and see what he thinks of that. He's bored of what's killing him, you know, huh? Moreover, those things which have the same strength do not seem to differ formally, but only materially. But laws, club of sites, the decisions of the Senate, huh? And others of this art which he lays down all have the same, what? Strength. Therefore, it seems that they did not differ except materially. But such a distinction art should not be cared for, right? Since it can be in infinitum, huh? You can't have any division in infinitum. It's got to be two or three, as Berkowitz says. Okay. Therefore, unsuitably, this division of what? Yeah. This division of human law is introduced. Moreover, just as in the city, there are princes and priests and what? Soldiers. So, also, there are other offices of men, huh? Positions of men. And therefore, it seems that it has been laid down a certain military law right and a public law, which consists in the priests and the magistrates. So, there ought to be other laws laid down for the other offices pertaining to citizens. Moreover, those things which are parachidens should be omitted, huh? But it happens to the law that it be, what, brought forth by this or that man, right? Therefore, it's unsuitably laid down the division of laws, human laws, from the names of the legislators, as some are called, what, grenidia, some falchidia, and so on, huh? Yeah. I know, yeah. In contrary, the authority of Isidore suffices. Yeah. Does that make any sense out of all this? The answer should be said that each thing is able to be divided per se, according to that which is found in its, what? Yeah. Just as in the notion of animal is contained anima, soul, which is either rational or what? Yeah. And therefore, the animal is properly and per se divided, according to rational and irrational. Not, however, according to white and black, which are altogether outside of its, what? Reason, right? Just like in geometry, you divide quadrilateral, right, by the length of the sides, right, and by the angle that they meet at, right? That's a per se division, right? That you wouldn't divide them according to green and yellow and other triangles because that would be, what, accidental, right? You know? Sometimes Thomas speaks, you know, of the method of reasoned out knowledge as definiendo, defining, dividing, and demonstrating. But why does he give defining before dividing? You have to kind of define quadrilateral before you see the way to what? Divide it that is per se, right? Because it's determining what is, what? Left undetermined when you say four sides, right? You don't say four-sided figure, but the sides are all equal, or just two of them, or, you know? So, he's giving a more difficult example here from the soul, right? And it's most difficult to know what the soul is, by the way. Just as long as I'm saying that. Maximo difficult. You've got to know the soul through its powers, and its powers through its acts, and its acts through its objects, right? I wonder what the average guy really thinks a soul is nowadays, you know? Now, there are many things of the, what, ratio of human law, according to which each, what, human law, property, and per se, is able to be, what, divided, right? For it is first of the notion of human law that is derived from the law of nature. And according to this, the The jus positivum, the laid down law, is divided into the, what, law of the nations and civil law according as in two ways something can be derived from the law of nature. For to the law of nations it pertains those things which are derived from the law of nature as conclusions from, what, principles, yeah, as just, what, sellings and buyings and so on. And others of this sort, without which men are not able to live, what, with each other, which is of the law of nature because man is naturally a, what, social animal, as is proved in the first book of the politics, the sins which are derived from the law of nature by way of a particular determination pertained to the, what, civil law according as each city determines something civil to itself, right? So they, what, what was I used to do, he was trying to get in the car and he was influenced by England, you know, where the, you know, you get in on the, the other side, yeah, and he's going to open the door until they hear it's like, I don't know why he had this English thing on his mind, you know. But that's obviously something determined and not a conclusion, right? Any reason why the English want to drive in that way, I don't know. Secondly, of the ratio of human law, B is that it be ordered to the, what, common good of the city, right? And according to this, the human law is divided according to the diversity of those who especially give, what, work towards the common good, huh? To it, the priests, huh? Praying for, yeah. Praying to God. Praying to God, yeah. It's always strictly, it's funny, the Latin there, right? Because we don't say, but, yeah, we say pray to God, right? And they say pray God, right? Thank God. Yeah. Thank God. As the priests who pray for the people, pray God for the people. The princes governing the, what, population as a whole? And the, what, soldiers, right? Fighting for the, what, salvation of the people, right? And therefore, for these men who are concerned, they're common good, right, huh? Some special, what, laws are actin'. But the carpenter is not aiming so much at the common good, huh? But the chair I want, you know? So I can sit at my desk, and so on. Selfish guy sitting at his desk there just reading the sentences. Like a log in suckers, but. The common stakes up prudence or foresight, huh? And the species of foresight, huh? And he has the foresight of the individual, and the foresight of the, what, father, and then the foresight of the general, and the foresight of the head of the state, right? You see kind of prominence there in the military there, right? Like you have here. So some people don't have even enough foresight to direct themselves, right? Yeah. But then you need more foresight to direct, you know, family, because you notice that each child is somewhat different, you know? And my daughter there, you know, because she teaches all home schools, all attend one. And you realize, you know, the different ones, and what's difficult for one, or, you know, why you have to adapt yourself to each little one, huh? And that's something, huh? That's a more universal. But it's what's the only you get, you know? I told you I was driving up by Professor Kasurik, and I was in college, and I said, I wish I knew what was going on in Washington, and I knew what the situation was at the time. He says, that's a lie, he says. They don't know themselves, he says. He talked about St. Paul, and so, you know, the city's always too big to be governed, right? You know? So why didn't you D.C.? I didn't get a slice of the idea of what's going on, you know? He said. He came in, and this one little lady there in the parish, he says, he doesn't have any experience. He doesn't, you know? They're talking now, you know, about who's the better thing, the Republicans who had been governors and the Republicans who were senators, you know? Somebody's saying, well, the governor's really more like what a president does, right? Yeah. Yeah. So we'll see what happens in the right side of it. So those are two different divisions, right? They're based upon something different, right? I suppose in the case of the quadrilateral, you can divide it according to the length of the sides, according to the, what, angles of which the sides meet, huh? It's a little simpler than this. Combine the two, right, huh? Because the square and the rhombus have the same, what? Sides, right? They're all equal. The rhomboid and the oblong, right, have unequal, what? Sides, yeah. But they're all, they're all parallelograms, right? With the opposite sides and angles equal, right? And you have the odd thing, trapezium, right? Where you have a real mess, huh? You don't sort of divide the trapezium. The third of the erosion of law, human law, is that it is, what? Instituted, right, by the one governing the community of the, what? The city. And according to this are distinguished, what? Human laws, according to the diverse rules of the city, right? Which one, according to the philosopher, is the, what? Yeah, is ruled by one man. And according to this are taken the constitutions of the princes, huh? Another, what? Regimen is, what? Aristocracy, which is the, what? Rule of the best, huh? And according to this are taken the, what? Response of the prudent and the senate on the old man who are wise, huh? Not seen out of the wise, you know, from age and experience. Another rule is that of oligarchy are the few princes divide, what? Rich. Rich and powerful. And according to this is taken the, what? Use Praetorium, huh? Which is also called the honorarium, huh? That's kind of new to me, those words. Another regiment is out of the people, which is named Democratia. And according to this are taken the, what? Plebiscites, huh? The police have to vote now sometimes. You know, homosexual marriage and all these other things are coming up. Another is tyrannical, which is altogether, what? Crout, huh? Whence from this is not taken any, what? Law. There's also some regiment which is mixed from these, which is the optimum, right? According to this is taken law, which, what? Be greater by birth, together with the people. Sanction. This is what he says. Rest. Rest. I'll talk to you a little bit. You hear Estella, you know, they divide the government into, what, six kinds, right? The rule of the one, the few and the many, and for the common good, and for the, what, private good. If it's for the private good, then it's bad, right? The question is, how is it possible that one part of the city rule the city for the good of one part? Either because they're more powerful in some way, right? Either because of numbers, then you have democracy in the pejorative sense, or they're, what, richer than the rest, then you have oligarchy, and then you have, or else, military power, then you have the tyranny, right? But kingship and being, you know, a good thing is one man like the loose of France, right? For the good of the common good, right? Yeah, yeah. Then you have the rule of the, what, virtuous, right? Or the rule of, what, middle class, and so on. Yeah. Okay. So the tyranny code, om nino corruptum, right? Now the fourth thing that is of the notion of human law is to be directive of human acts. And according to this, according to diverse things about which laws are given, are distinguished laws which are sometimes named from their, what, authors. Like the Julian law from Julius Caesar, I guess, about adulteries. Or Cornelius, right? The secretaries. And thus about others. Not about, not on account of the authors, but on account of the things about which they are. That's kind of a way of naming things, right? What they name, you know, some of these stars up there, you know, and discovered it, Or they name the whole place, you know, where the scientists are working on. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I heard that advertised on the radio, yeah, sometimes, yeah. Yeah. I don't know if most of you would appreciate that or not, I don't know. The star out there that's named or you. If you gave over your life savings, she'd appreciate it. The first, therefore, it should say that the us gentium is in some way natural to man, right? According as it is reasonable, right? Insofar as it's derived by the law, from the natural law, by way of a conclusion, which is not, what, far removed from the beginnings on. Whence easily in such things men, what, have agreement. He's distinguished, nevertheless, from the natural law, most of all from that which is common to what? All animals, huh? What you do with all these divisions, but put down your exam, though, right? Well, on a judgment day, mostly once I had a prescription for something. A lady in front of me, she asked how to spell the drug she was supposed to get. Oh, yeah. And I said, oh, my God, we have to be able to spell it to get it? I said, no, that's not fair. I'm not a chemist. I don't know how to spell this out. They ought to read the doctor's thing if they can. Make the doctor's thing.