Prima Secundae
Lecture 283: The Fulfillment and Containment of Old Law in New Law

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

The Lord, as regards some, fulfilled the law, but no mention is made about the judicial and the ceremonial. Therefore, it seems that the new law is not totally fulfilling of the old. Now, to the fourth, it should be said that ceremonial precepts of the law are not commemorated because their observance is totally excluded through their fulfillment, right? So they are fulfilled, but their fulfillment means they should not be preserved. Judicial precepts commemorates the, what, precept of the Italian? That what is said about this should be understood about, what, all. In which precept he teaches the intention of the law, not to be that the punishment of Italian, Italian, revenge, which he excludes, warning that man ought to be prepared to suffer greater injuries, right, huh? But only in account of the law of justice, right, which still in the new law remains, huh? But against this is what the Lord says, huh? It's a pretty good authority. I came not to solve the law, but to fulfill it. And afterwards he adds, one iota, or one, what? None will not pass away from the law until all come about him. What Thomas says here in the body of the article. Answer, it should be said that it has been said. The new law is compared to the old as the perfect to the imperfect. But everything perfect is fulfilled, everything perfect fulfills that which is lacking in the imperfect. And according to this, the new law fulfills the old law insofar as it supplies that which was lacking, you might say, in the old law. It goes back to the idea that it's perfect to the imperfect, huh? So does adulthood complete your, perfect you, what you were as a child? Or is it contrary to what you did as a child? I put away the things I did as a child. But in other words, it's perfected, right? Yeah, yeah. Now, yeah. In the old law, two things can be considered. The end and the precepts contained in the law. Now, the end of any law is that men become just and virtuous. The very well observed here is that they pass a law about abortion and so on, make people worse. Whence the end of the old law was a justification of men, which the law was not able to effect. But it was figured by some, what, and promised in words, right, huh? And as regards this, the new law fulfills the old law by justifying it by the power of the passion of Christ. And this is what the apostle says in the epistle to the Romans. That it was impossible for the, what, God sending his son in the likeness of the flesh of sin. He damned sin in the flesh, huh? That the justification of the law might be, what, fulfilled in us, right? And as regards this, the new law shows what the old law promised, right, huh? According to that of the second epistle of the Corinthians, as many promises of God, many promises of God there are, in him it is. That is in Christ, huh? He's fulfilling the promises, right? All of them in Christ. And as regards this, he completes what the old law figured, right, huh? Whence in the epistle to the Colossians, he says about the ceremonials, that they were the shadows of the future. The body, however, was Christ himself. And therefore, truth pertains to Christ, huh? The truth of these things. Because the new law is said to be the law of truth. But the old law of the shadow of the figure, right? The precepts, however, of the old law, Christ fulfilled both by deed and teaching. By deed, because he, what, wished to be circumcised and to observe the other legal things, which were in that time to be observed, right? According to that of Galatians 4, he was made under the law. But his own teaching fulfilled the precepts of the law in three ways. I didn't know that. First, because the, by expressing the true understanding of the law, just as in homicide and adultery, in which prohibition the scribes and the Pharisees did not understand, except the prohibition of the exterior act. But you've got to put away your desire to kill somebody, right? Whence the Lord fulfilled the law by showing that the interior acts of the sins also fall under, what, prohibition, huh? Secondly, the Lord fulfilled the precepts of the law by ordering in what way they might be more safely observed than the old law established. For the old law, for the old law established that man should not, what, commit perjury. The new law observed that he had to altogether abstain from, what? Swearing. Swearing, except in case of necessity. You can't break the law. Third, the Lord fulfilled the precepts of the law by adding certain, what, counsels of perfection, as Matthew 19, where the Lord said to, what? Yeah, I want to do something more. One thing is lacking to you. If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have and come follow me and so on. Okay. There's three ways. A lot of stuff in Thomas, isn't there, huh? son holy spirit amen thank you god thank you guardian angels thank you thomas aquinas still gracios god our enlightenment guardian angels strengthen the lights of our minds who would illumine our images and arouse us to consider more correctly say thomas aquinas and jelly doctor help us to understand what you've written father and the son holy spirit amen i was going to talk a little bit about the the uh looking above and below is distinguished yeah and i was thinking of you know that the words above and below um seem to have almost as many senses as the words but yeah the four main senses right so the first sense is of course the most sensible one right it seems to me that you know the first sense of before course is before in time right i think here the first sense would be you know space i mean place rather than right so that uh i'm above my mattress and mattresses uh and below my mattresses the uh you know the wires or whatever they are you know and so on okay um you see dinner's on the table right the table is under yeah that's the first that's the first sense of under right because that corresponds to the first sense of of before in a sense right now in the second sense right we speak of the agent as what acting upon the patient yeah so michelangelo is acting upon the marble right or the carpenter is acting upon the wood right huh and i suppose you think of him as being above because in a lot of cases he is above he's acting upon but it's not really limited to the spatial thing so if he's pounding something into the ceiling he's still acting upon it right okay that's a whole series of things that tie up with that right the idea of the cause right now you can say that okay that's why the the form is said to be what above the matter right the matter to the underlying right and since matter is the cause that's most known to us that's why the word ground maybe in english right is the word for what cause even shakespeare's seen sometimes use the word ground for cause right so they're the cause instead of being before the effect right it's what under it right now notice this goes back to our senses right you get two things basically the horizontal and then the what the vertical right and before and after you're more thinking along the horizontal thing right see but above and below it's the vertical right now but it seems it strangely has somewhat similar meanings right and then we speak of sometimes the underlying cause of course sometimes in the ancients they speak of the cause of being above right and the effect is what hanging from it right now but still you're doing this vertical direction right okay then what comes next right well would you put um dog under animal or plant so this this is in the mind right okay or aristotle says that philosophy is a methodos methodos which means over metta hold us over a road right so there's a road yeah underlying it right but the methodos is over the road right it's a knowledge that follows the road right i was kind of curious you know that that the going forward along this road you think of as terms of before and after right now but the road itself you would think of as being under the methodos but i say another example of that is this idea we tend to put the what yeah yeah that goes back to the to the to the singular right which is based on matter and that the form is above it right we can't actually do that right i was thinking you know of the calendar up there at all but you know we speak of you know you know mondays before tuesday and this week is before that week right huh but in the calendar we put it in what this order right so the first week of it tend to be up there and the last week down here right strange right okay and then what about the fourth sense right well i put mozart above heiden in fact heiden would put mozart above himself right and uh you know hegel goes so far as to say mozart is above all the masters in all the arts and all the ages right well that's the fourth sentence of what before right instead of saying i put mozart before heiden or the baroque before the the romantic age in music right um i said put it above right okay yeah and so i was i was uh uh i got through this seeing this thing here you know and i got up to uh chapter 8 of john right i've been reading the greek you know and they're reading the katina orion and so on and uh our lord says i am from above and you are from below chapter 8 there verse 23 right it's very concrete the greek yeah i am from above and you are from below right you know and uh so that's the fourth sentence isn't it um now when you guys go to the chapel right you're going kind of in the horizontal direction which get into the chapel you're going to pray of course one of the definitions of prayer is that it's the ascent of the mind to god right which in english means what going up to god right of course our lord teaches us to pray saying first our father who art in heaven right so you're thinking of god as being what above you right now but he's not above you in a spatial sense right because god's everywhere but this is the fourth sentence right so even our lord there huh i showed that to my student on tuesday night he said yeah she writes that down so it's kind of it's kind of convincing you know because i i had to think about this and then i just got up to chapter 8 the other day it's kind of curious you know that you should have almost the same four senses and perhaps in the same order right but using the vertical as opposed to the you see another another example here would be from the very important one i got thinking about it again because i was reading thomas there on faith and of course he always takes the definition of faith and saint paul so in latin they say it's the substantia the substance of things hoped for right conviction of what is not seen and i think i mentioned that the greek word there is which is the same etymology right but no so you speak of substance right sometimes we'd say substances before what accidents right but actually when you say substance you're speaking as being what under right and kind of supporting the accidents so that's kind of the second sense right where you have this sense of cause and one can be without the other maybe and so on it's kind of striking you know shows you how we're tied to our senses our starting point right yeah thomas always says we name things as we know them right so the order in naming follows the order in what knowing yeah things would have been had we been uh hey god they created us in space where there's technically no up or down yeah you're without gravity and so it's interesting how within the context of creation and gravity we have this perspective from our our experience living within that context but also it seems to point to uh higher truths as well beyond the natural chester there was a dinner party some some relative there's no such thing as true and false right and wrong it's just one great upward movement of the universe and chester said well there's no right wrong no true and false what's the difference between up and down it's interesting that the word understanding which is rather important you know you english for the act of our mind right that's taken from the vertical direction right it's not before standing it's understanding right so to understand in effect means to know its underlying god so to understand a word means to know what the meaning or thing that stands under the word right to understand episteme right method us so know the road that underlies it right you see so in my english bible too it translates very very accurately you know i am from above and you are from below right it goes on so so deconic put on cindy on above him right i told you when i was reading my doctor's thesis under diana i think they see what deconic would say you know he says why are you asking me when you got dion for your thing i said i wonder what you think anyway he says okay so he told you what he thinks you know warren up there he's going to study under deconic because he was a scientific you know natural natural philosophy teacher and but deconic made crystal clear to him that dion was the greatest mind up here you know my teacher conservative he got old he went out to california and i was teaching out you know catholic girls college out there and one of his girls went up to quebec you know and she said this is deconic right and she made perfectly clear that deconic had told her you know that dion was the greatest mind you know so deconic put dion above him right above himself you Okay, we're up to Article 3 in Question 107. To the third one goes forward thus. It seems that the new law is not contained in the old law. For the new law consists especially in faith, whence it is called the law of faith, as is clear in Romans Chapter 3. But many things to be believed are treated in the new law, which are not contained in the old. Therefore, the new law is not contained in the old. That convinces this dummy here. Aren't you convinced? Moreover, a certain gloss, and in my footnote it says, Augustine, huh? But a certain gloss says in Matthew 5, upon that of verse 19, who unties one of these commands, least commands, that the main commands of the law are what? Yeah. But in the gospel, they are what? Greater. Commands. But the greater cannot be contained in the lesser. Nice quantitative thing, huh? This man who resolves with his imagination, right? Therefore, the new law is not contained in the old. Well, that convinces this dummy over here, too. Moreover, what is contained in another is had together with it, right? If, therefore, the new law were contained in the old, it would follow that having the old law, one has the new. Therefore, it would be superfluous, the old law being had, to again give a new one. Therefore, the new law is contained, is not contained in the, what? Well, I'm thoroughly convinced now, right? Three is the first number about what you say all. I'm wholly convinced now, huh? Aren't you? Yeah. Yeah. Against this is what is said in Ezekiel 1, 16. Rota and rota. What does that mean? Wheel of thinning a wheel? That is the New Testament in the old. That's Gregory expounds, huh? Someone said it's been the prophet Ezekiel, I guess. Wheels to thinning a wheel, so. That's how basic. Amazing text. That's marvelous. Lovely. Now, let's see what the Master says, right? We've heard from the Opposition. I answer, it should be said, that something is contained in another in two ways. In one way, an act, has the located in place, right? So what's the first sense of in? We're in this room, right? Second sense of place, of in, is what? Part in the whole, right? So my heart is in my body, right, huh? Better be. And then the third sense of in is what? We're at the reverse. Yeah. Because the genus is in the species, in act, right, huh? But the species is in the genus, right? In ability, yeah. And then eventually you get the senses of what? Effect and cause, right? So the form is in the matter, and the, I mean, you're in my power, right? And so on, right? So something is contained in another in two ways. In one way, an act has it located in place, right? That's the first three senses, right? That's where he begins in those senses, right? In another way, in what? Power, yeah. Has the effect in the cause. Or of the complete, I suppose, incomplete. Just as the genus is contained in the species. No, excuse me. The genus contains the species in power. Otherwise, that was deceiving of that Latin there, right? So the genus contains the species in potestate, right, huh? So when you say number, are you saying seven? Or, you know, are you saying five? There's a number of people here today. Are you sitting there's five here? Well, five is a number, right? So you've spoken about five, but in potestate, right? Not in octa, right? Okay, just as the genus contains the species in potestate, and as the whole tree is contained in the, what, seed, huh? Okay, in the power of the seed, right? If you just came into this world and you saw one of these tremendous trees and someone showed you an acorn or something and said, well, you can get another one like this just from this, and you'd rather take it back, wouldn't you, huh? And in this way, the new law is contained in the old, as in a, what, seeded? That's amazing, huh? You've just been told that the new law is contained in the old law is in a seed. Isn't that amazing? For it has been said that the new law is compared to the old as the perfect to the, what? Whence Chrysostom, huh? Expounding that which is had in the Gospel of Mark, I guess, huh? Chapter four, huh? Further the earth will, what? Bring forth the first herb, then the, what? Yeah, and then the full fruit in the, yeah. And thus he says that first it will, what? Give rise to the herb in the legi naturae, right? Afterwards, the spicas. That's the, what? Ear, yeah. In the law of Moses, afterwards, the full fruit in the Gospel, huh? Isn't that beautiful? That's beautiful. I wonder Thomas is going to give Paris for Chrysostom. Yeah, right, yeah. I think in the Gospels, right? Thus, therefore, huh? The new law is contained in the old as fruit in the ear. Here. And ear of grain. In the sense of wheat, right? Okay. To first, therefore, it should be said that all things which are to be, what? Believed. Are tweeted in the New Testament explicitly and openly, right? They are tweeted to be believed in the Old Testament, but implicitly under a figure, right? And according to this also, the things to believe, huh? As you guys think to be believed, the new laws contained in the, what? Hold, huh? I was reading St. Alphonsus Liguri this morning, and he was talking about how the chapter 53 there in Isaiah, you know, is a gospel, you know, and he's quoting the number of the church fathers, right? It's so, what, almost explicit, right, about the passion of our Lord, huh? It's kind of a hard one for, I guess, the Jews to deny. It's appropriate. to Christ. That's a thing, right? Beautiful thing. To second it should be said that the precepts of the new law are said to be majora, greater I guess, than the precepts of the old law as regards the explicit, spelled out, making known, right? But as regards the substance of the commands of the New Testament, all are contained in the Old Testament, right? This is true. You can see that about charity, right? It's explicit in the Old Testament, isn't it? Whence Augustine says against Faust that nearly all things which, what, commanded or admonished, right? Where he added, I say over to you, are found also in the old books, right? But because, except to be the taking away, is it? The Lord opened that every iniquitous motion to harming your brother should be put into the genus of Homicide, right? I could kill you. I could murder you. Maybe I have a figure of speech in some cases, but... If I do that, I'll kill you. As regards these manifestations, the precepts of the New Law are said to be greater than the precepts of the Old Law. Nothing, however, rabbits, the greater to be contained in the lesser, your tootay, right? In its power, just as the tree is contained in the, what, seed, broccoli, you know? A little seed, you get a nice, nice, big... I told you one time when I planted it growing and they were all nice there, but one of them was white, you know? I said, Rose, will you move? You did? But I knew it was cauliflower, and I went and sniffed it, you know, and so on. But it's got a cauliflower seed in there. They're probably, you know, it feels like that. That's what happened, the time it happened, that's why I planted, you know? Oh, my own, my own, my own. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I told you how I was trying to grow something in his garden, you know, up there, and Quebec is kind of a lousy, you know, the seed, the growing seeds and so on, and he's having not too much luck, you know? Well, one of his girl students there, she went out in the garden and she tied one of these things from the nice, big thing from the market. Warren thought, oh, my goodness, how excited, you know? He runs out there, you know, and then he goes, I'm solving a joke, and it's a beautiful joke on the part of the girl, you know? You know, it's fine as soon as it's come up, you know? You must have done something right. Yeah. Now, to the third, it should be said that that which is implicitly given should be what? Made explicit, right? Or Shakespeare'd say unfolded, yeah. And therefore, after the old, what, law was given, is necessary for the new law to be given, from the confused to the distinct, as Aristotle says. As the end, it has to be formed. How do you kind of see it sometime? Unfold yourself. It's a poor student. Now, how do you think about it? How do you think about it? How do you think about it? How do you think about it? How do you think about it? How do you think about it? How do you think about it? To the fourth one goes forward thus. It seems that the new law is, what, heavier than the old, huh? Yeah. For Matthew 5, upon that, who loosens one of these commands, right? The least one, says Christ is them. The commands of Moses in act are, what, easy. You shall not kill. You shall not commit adultery. The mandates are commands of Christ. You shall not be, what, angry with your brother. You shall not, what, desire your neighbor's wife and so on. In act are, what? Difficult. Difficult, right, huh? Therefore, the new law is, yeah, yeah. You can't even desire the woman next door, right? A little pursuer. Moreover, it is easier, right, to, what, use earthly prosperity and the tribulations of what? But in the Old Testament, the observation of the old law was followed by, what? Temple prosperity. This is clear in Deuteronomy 28. But the observers of the new law, a multiple adversity, right? Followed, right? As is said in 2 Corinthians, show yourselves as ministers of God and much patience and tribulations and necessities and difficult, yeah. Therefore, the new law is more grave than the old law, right? Moreover, what has itself by addition to another seems to be more difficult. But the old law prohibited perjury, the new law, oaths, right? The old law prohibited the, what, getting rid of a wife without a book of, you know. The new altogether prohibited, what, you know, dish, dish, yeah. This is clear in Matthew 5, according to Exhibition of Augustine. Therefore, the new law is more grave than the old, right? But against all this is what is said in Matthew 11. Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, right? Which Elric's founding says, the, what? Those laboring in the difficulties of the law and weighed down by the sins of the age, he calls to himself, right? Afterwards, he adds about the yoke of the thing. My yoke is sweet and my burden is light. But therefore, the new law is lighter than you go. Well, now I'm really completely puzzled, right? I'm completely tied in a knot. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to untie myself. So I go to the master and say, Thomas, how do you untie this? I answer, it should be said, that about the works of virtue, about which the precepts of the law are given, and there can be observed a two-fold difficulty, huh? Thomas, he always says, this is a distinction that I just couldn't see by myself, huh? It's a simple distinction. One is on the side of exterior works, huh? Which of themselves have, what? A certain difficulty in weight, huh? As regards this, the old law is much heavier than the, what? New, because the old law obliges us to many exterior acts in multiple, what? Ceremonies. Which the new law, which is apart from the precepts of the natural law, has added the fewest things in the teaching of Christ and the, what? Apostles. Although some things are after added from the, by the institution of the holy, what? Fathers. Fathers. In which Augustine says, moderation should be observed, right? Lest the way of living of the faith will become, what? Burdensome, huh? He says, huh? To the questions of what? Chorus, about some, that our religion, which in most manifest, and few in number, right? Sacraments of, what? Celebrations. The mercy of God wished to be, what? Free, huh? Works, huh? That might be tolerable. The condition of the Jews, who, to the legal sacraments, were subject not to, what? Resumptions. Another difficulty, though, is about the works of the virtues in the inward or interior acts, right? That one should exercise a work of virtue promptly and with delight, huh? So we should get up in the morning promptly and with delight, huh? What a delight to get out of bed early, huh? And about this, this difficulty is virtue, right, huh? And this, to one not having virtue, is valde difficile, right? A very difficult, but to virtue, it's rendered, what? Easy. And as regards this, the precepts of the new law are heavier than the precepts of the old law because the new law prohibited the inward, what? Motions of the soul, which expressly, in the old law, right, are not prohibited in all cases, right? Although in some they are, what? Prohibited, huh? In which, being prohibited, a punishment is not, what? A down-air. This, however, is most difficult to one not having virtue. Just as the philosopher says in the fifth book of the ethics, that to do those things that the just man does is easy. But to do those things in the way in which the just man does them, to which promptly and pleasantly with pleasure, is difficult, right? What? Not having justice, huh? And thus it's also said in 1 John 5, that my commands are not, what? They are not grave, which Augustine expounding says, they are not grave to the one who loves, but to the one not loving, they are grave, huh? To do things to someone you love is not difficult, huh? If you don't want somebody, it's very hard to do these things. Changing diapers. Amazed how a woman can do this with the greatest of ease. Mother always talked about she was not at home or stuff like that. Yeah, my father had to change the diapers, you know. I was kind of amazed how he did it. It was a talking point, you know. I'm one of the mothers. I love those little ones, you know. So they don't, they want their child to be comfortable, you know, and get his diaper changed. Yeah, men don't even think about stuff like that. To the first objection, therefore, it should be said that that authority, right, expressly speaks of the difficulty of the new law as regards the express prohibition of the prohibition of inward, what? Motions, right? To the second, it should be said that the adversities which observers of the new law suffer are not imposed from the law itself. Nevertheless, an account of love in which this law consists, they are easily, what? Tolerated. Because as Augustine says in the book, in the words of the Lord, all things that are what? To the second, it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should be said that it should But they're made by love to be Pope Nula, close to nothing, right? To the third, it should be said that those additions to the precepts of the old law, or to this, that they might be more easily fulfilled, what the old law, in fact, commands, as Augustine says. And therefore, through this is not shown that the new law is more grave, but more that it is, what, easier, right? One question now away from grace, huh? Yes.