Prima Secundae
Lecture 290: Grace as a Quality in the Soul

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

in the name of the father and the son holy spirit amen thank you god thank you guardian angels thank you thomas aquinas dio gracias god our enlightenment help us god to know and love you guiding angels strengthen the lights of our minds or to illumine images and arouse us to consider more correctly saint thomas aquinas angelic doctor help us to understand what you have written so this is the second and the first part right and then necessity of grace and now the essence of it and then we're going to have the division of it right in the next question we're starting 110 now question 110 okay then we're not to consider about the grace of god as regards its essence that is what it is right and about this four things are asked first with the grace places something in the soul secondly with the grace is a what quality third with the grace differs from an infused what virtue and fourth about the subject of greece is it in the powers of the soul or is in the soul itself so let's look at the first article to the first one goes forward thus it seems that grace does not place something in the soul for just as man is said to have the grace of god so also is said to have sometimes the grace of another man once for example is said in genesis chapter 39 that the lord gave joseph grace in the sight of the prince of the prison huh so he had him in his good grace as you might say right well that's something in the prince of the thing rather than that's one sense of the word grace can be said right huh and he'll be distinguishing that in the body the article the three senses of grace but through this or by this that a man is said to have the grace of a man nothing is laid down the one who has the grace of another but in the one whose grace one has right and it lays down a certain what exception of the person accepting that person therefore through this that a man is said to have the grace of god nothing is placed in the soul does only signify that god accepts him right okay there's one sense of grace but that's not the one we're interested in here right so it's a good reply to the objection right to the first therefore it should be said that also in this that someone is said to have the what grace of man is understood in him to be something that is what acceptable to the man just as one is said to have the grace of god but in a different way because that which is what acceptable to a man and another man is presupposed to one's love of that man but it is caused from the divine love that in man he be pleasing to god as has been said right now so thomas looking before and what after right so the good is the good in a man an effect of our love or is it more the cause of our love is it good another man is that more an effect of my love for this other man or the cause of my loving yeah yeah but now in the case of god is uh god's loving me an effect of the good in me or is it what is god's love the cause of the good that is in me so it's just a reverse right that's a beautiful example of looking before and after in the fifth sense that aristotle gives but the one that is really attached to the second sense as i mentioned before right but as thomas would point out more fully in the body article these different senses of grace have a what yeah and he's touching upon that here right didn't apply that for subjection too second moreover as the soul makes alive the body right vivifies the body right so god vivifies the soul once it is said in deuteronomy 30 he is your life but the soul vivifies the body immediately therefore nothing falls in the middle between god and the soul therefore grace does not place something created in the soul right no but is god the cause of life in the soul in the way the soul is the cause of life in the body the soul is the cause of life in the body because it's the what form of the body or aristotle calls it the first act right the substantial form of the body but god is a cause of the life of the body what body has a what mover or maker yeah yeah so i take three pills in the morning and three pills in the evening some of the things what's the well the doctor has this has me on this frigiment right so um am i healthy by this medicine or am i healthy by my health as a formal cause right okay okay but my medicine as a what fishing cause or assisting fishing cause and so on i teach you in one of his books there he's thanking this wealthy woman who who paid for us going to graduate school right and he's assisting a fishing cause development yeah yeah she's quite a woman i guess it was very important to know the four kinds of what causes them now causes that which something depends upon right for its being or coming to be right so when aristotle distinguishes the kinds of causes he begins with what matter first now i used to teach that in class during the taught an assumption i put the word spelled out c-a-t on the board right and say now you walk into the classroom you see that word on the board what's the most undeniable and therefore the most known dependence that that word has upon something other than itself what does the word c-a-t on the board there depend upon for its being there yeah what's the letters c-a-t right okay i say if anybody denies that right we'll take away the c and erase it and take away the a and erase that and take away the t okay now where is the word cat it's not it's like what's most known right okay you don't see anybody printing on the board right you come into the room right and it's on the board right but even you don't see a writer you at least see that it depends upon c-a and what t okay now what else does it depend upon anything else well then i need the word cat on the board and then i print next to it a c-t same word same letters right does the word cat depend upon anything besides the letters c and a and t because you have the same letters in the word act actually right yeah that's a different kind of cause right then okay first kind causes matter right matter is defined as that from which something comes to be existing what in it right okay You might say that the word came to be from the writer or the printer, right, huh? But he's not in it, see? And you might say that sometimes a thing comes to be from its opposite, right? He became healthy from being sick, right? But the sickness is not in the health, right? So the matter is that from which something comes to be existing in it, huh? But the second kind of cause is what we call form, right? An order is an example of that kind of cause. And what's the third kind of cause? Yeah, the mover or the maker, right, huh? And you say, now, why is the C before the A, right, huh? Because the A in the other one is before the C. So it's not because it's A that it comes before or after C, right, huh? It depends upon the printer, the writer, huh? If he can put the C before the A and put the A before the C, like Berkowitz can do in his great. Ability. His unlimited or somewhat unlimited ability. Why did he put the C before the A? Well, it could be because he wanted to talk about his favorite animal, the king of the beasts. Or why do you put the A before the C? Well, maybe he wanted to talk about human acts or something, right? Or maybe even he wanted to talk about the ninth book of wisdom, which is about ability and act, right? Yeah, the five acts or something, yeah. And therefore, right, that's another kind of cause. It's my purpose was to talk about my favorite animal. Oh, geez, too. A friend out there. He's barking vigorously when I arrived. I hope he's not barking at me. So, the purpose, right? What kind of cause, huh? So, here we're talking about two kinds of causes, right? Is God a cause of the life of the soul as the form intrinsic to the thing? See? No. It's more as the, what? The maker, the mover, right? Okay. But grace is a cause of the life of the soul as a form, right? In it, huh? And then we're going to find out whether it's a form in the powers or in the soul, right? So, to the second, it should be said that God is the life of the soul by way of a deficient cause, right? But the soul is the life of the body by way of being a formal cause, huh? So, the letters are a cause in the way of, what? Matter, right? And the order of the letters are a cause of the word cat as a, what? Intrinsic form. But the writer is a, what? Efficient or maker. It's interesting. Aristotle gets the third cause. He speaks of the mover before the, what? Maker, right? Why does he do that? Yeah. Things in motion sooner catch the eye than what not stirs, huh? I was thinking about that statement of the Shakespeare. It seems to be in a trocaic meter, right? See, once you stop and think about that, right? Because that's the, what? It's not the conversational meter that we tend to fall into, which is the iambic, right? It's a little tangential, but it should be a very brief one. Yeah. That is, the ocean catches, sort of catches the eye than that which not stirs. Yeah. And Aristotle in De Anima is talking about color being the primary power of the eye, the object of the eye. Object of the eye, yeah. And so, and motion would be one of the common sensicals that's shared. Common sensibles, yeah. Sensibles. But I was curious why, I'm beginning to understand his distinctions in that, but why would Shakespeare say like color is sooner catches the eye? Why does he choose motion? Because he thinks that's true. You know, I take the example of all the, the, you know, I get the newspaper in the morning and there's a section called sports, right? Now, people are paying up with sports, it seems to be somewhat, right? Maybe too much. But every sport has some ball that's moving around, right? And you're watching the ball moving around. And, and the players, they're moving around and you're watching they're moving around the way they move, right? So all you're doing is watching what? Yeah, what's got your attention here, huh? Yeah. And when you're in the, in the train depot or you're picking up somebody at a train or airplane, something like that and they don't see you but they're coming out to the gate, you know? What do you do? You do that and you don't get somebody's attention, right? Might be some of you owe money to or something like that. You're not going to say, here, here, here. You see? That catches your attention, right? You know, if you're hiding, right, you don't want to move around too much, right, huh? You see? Shoot the animal or something, right, huh? You don't want to move too much, right? You've got to be quiet and then wait there patiently until the animal runs across your path, yeah. You see? And the thing that struck me when I was thinking about it, you know, how isn't it kind of strange if you say, in motion, things in motion, is the thing in motion or is the motion in the thing? And you say, well, that's kind of strange. Maybe there's two different senses here of in, huh? We see that when you go through the eight senses of in, right? The first, where you see it is in the third and fourth sense, right, which are right next to each other. The third sense of in is the genus is in the, what, species, huh? And the fourth sense is the species is in the genus. Well, can A, B, and B and B and A? Well, now it's the same sense of in, right, huh? So the genus is in the species as a composing part, right, of the, what, species, huh? Which is composed of the genus and differences, huh? But the species is in the genus, right, as in a, what, universal whole, right, huh? But it's in their inability, right, huh? It's not composing the genus, huh? So animal, the meaning of animal is not a composition of dog, cat, horse, and elephant because then a cat as an animal would be composed of a dog, a cat, a horse, and an elephant, right? More. Yeah. Yeah. So you can have, what, two different senses of in that are very striking there, right, huh? That the genus is in the species and then the species and the genus play a different sense, right? And so when Aristotle talks about, say, accident and the accident is in the substance, right, that would be more like the, what, would be more like the fifth sense, right, the form in the matter, right, huh? Okay. Okay. But when you say that, you know, a thing in motion, right, then we've got different senses in there, right? And it's not one of the eight senses Aristotle gives, but it can maybe be attached to one of these, huh? But it's in likeness, huh? And when you say, you know, he's in health, right? Same way, right? Yeah. That's kind of strange, huh? Because is the form in the matter or is the matter in the form? Which would you say first? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So the shape of the table here is in the wood, right, huh? Okay? But could the matter be said to be in the form in a somewhat different sense? Well, where do we get the word form first, huh? Because I think we've mentioned before here this beautiful beginning that Thomas says in the disputed questions on power, right, di potencia, where he says that all of our names, you know, all our knowledge begins with the senses and the sensible senses don't transcend the continuous, so we start to name things with something, what, continuous, so it's in the continuous, right? And that's why the first meaning of end is is what, in place, which is something continuous. The first meaning of before is in time, which is something continuous, right? Well, where do we get the idea of form first, huh? Is it a substantial form? The soul is a form, oh. What? What do you mean? What's the first sense of form? Yeah, which is in the continuous, right? Okay. Like the triangle has a certain form and so on, right? The sphere is a certain form, right? And a cube, right, huh? But isn't the form like a, what, a limit, right? Yeah. So, in a sense, the area, the matter, whatever it is of the sphere, is in the, what, contained in the surface, right? Just like we speak of place, right, huh? We're in this room, but the inner surface of the room is containing us, right, huh? Yeah. You can see how you could speak of matter being in form, right, huh? It's like in its, what, its limit, huh? What limits it, huh? Contains it, right? That's how people tell. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it's, it's, you know, later, use the word form, right, when you apply it to the substantial form. And when Aristotle, or Thomas, following Aristotle, talked about the early Greeks, you know, they thought of every form kind of as an accident, right? And matter is substance, right? And every accident is, every form is an accident of this matter. And so, you know, Plato a bit, and then Aristotle a bit saw form in this other sense. Eventually, form is carried over to what a thing is, huh? What does St. Paul say is about Christ, huh? He's in the form of God. He took on the form of a slave. He was, yeah. It's interesting, huh, how this goes back to the, what, continuous always, right? I was talking to my student there. He comes on Tuesday night there, and I was saying, when Thomas takes up the substance of God, and of course, we know the substance of God more negatively, right, huh? But in the Summa Contra Gentiles, the first thing he takes up about the substance of God is that it's unchanging. There's no motion in God, right? And therefore, God is eternal, right, huh? But there he's starting from what? Motion, right? Just something continuous, right? And that's going to be negated of God, right? And this goes back to the proofs of the existence of God, huh? The first proof is always from motion, right? In the Summa Contra Gentiles, the first two proofs are from motion, right? And then when he goes in to talk with substance of God, the first thing he brings out is that it's unchanging. There's no motion. And therefore, God is not, what, in time, right, huh? Now, if you compare my life to God's life, huh? My life is very much in time, right, huh? And my life has a beginning in time. I was born on January 18th, 1936. I must have been in my mother's womb then about April of 1935, so with as close as I can get, huh? As precise as I can get, huh? The beginning of my life was sometime in 1935, maybe April, sometime in there. I don't know exactly when the end is going to be, but it can't be too far off now. And, but besides that, there's a, what, before and after, right, huh? Because this year is after last year, and before next year, if I have a next year, right? And that's because my life is in motion, too, right, huh? In God's life, there's no beginning and there's no, what, end, like there is in the things that are in time, and there is no before and after, right, huh? So Guethius' definition of eternity is totesimo, all at once, right? No before and after. And perfect possessio, right? Vitae in terminabilis, huh? A life that has no beginning, no end, right, huh? And that's how you're starting off with something continuous, right? Motion and time, in a sense, is tied up with motion, which is a number of the before and after in motion, right? And then when you get to God, you deny, you know, any motion in God, and therefore you deny what belongs to time. So unlike things that are in time, that have a beginning and an end, and a before and after, God has none, right, huh? It doesn't mean he's bored, he's frozen, right? Because I always think back of when I was a little kid there and you read the fairy tales and there'd be a picture in the book, you know, and the Wicked Witch of the North, or whatever it is, has put a spell upon them, and everybody's frozen, right? And so now, right? And they had the picture of the servant bringing in the turkey or whatever it is, and he's holding it there, right? It's not until Prince Charming shows up and kisses the princess, you know, that everybody will come alive again, right, huh? But God's life is not what? You know, Poetheus says that the now that flows makes time, right? The now that stands still, right, makes, what, eternity, right? But it's not like you made the now of time stand still, right? Because that would give him a very insufficient life, right? I have practically no life at all in the now of time, right, huh? I can't even think, right? I can't even say my name in the now of time, can you? I mean, I get two syllables of my name, Duane, right? I can't even say both syllables at once, right? You know, I'm really extremely limited, huh? So, you know, to point out that it's not the now of time that's been stopped still to make this eternity, he says, perfect possession, right, huh? A completed prepossession, right? Then I said, what does Thomas do after he's shown this about God, that he's in no way changing, right? And in no way in what time, but he's in eternity, right? What's the next thing he shows, right? Well, that God is not, what, composed anyway, right? Does that go back to continuous? See? What the word composed means, to put it into native English, it means put together, right? What's the first meaning of put together? Yeah, you put one together to another, right? So they're touching, right, or becoming one. And you have something, what, continuous, right, huh? Okay. So you're starting off with the continuous, right? And then you're going to negate that of God, right, huh? But the first meaning of put together is of continuous, right? So the first thing we show about God, if we do so inductively, in this part, is to show that God is not a body, right, huh? Then later on, we show that he's not put together from matter and form, right, huh? And then he's not put together from substance and being, right, huh? And there's no accidents and so on, right, huh? But the first meaning of put together, right, is what you find in a body, right, huh? Just something continuous, huh? So what's the third thing he shows about God, right? See? Well, that he's perfect and therefore good, right? See? I said, does perfect seem to go back to continuous? That's a little more, it's not so obvious as the first two, right, huh? See? Because in one case, in the case of motion, that's one continuous thing. But in the case of put together, you're thinking more of a magnitude, right? Like a line or a surface or a body, right, huh? Because it's kind of hard to put together, you know, other parts of time, right? Because the other one's gone, you know? The next one is here. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We can say, you know, that the week is put together from seven days, right, huh? But when Tuesday is here or Thursday is here now, I guess, Wednesday is longer here. So how can you put together Tuesday and Wednesday, right? See? You know? So I mean, the first meeting put together would be magnitude, right? Like in the body, right? Okay? So different kind of continuous, right? Then you have the first one's motion. But once you get to perfect, what's the continuous thing there, Mr. Perk? What's your emphasis upon the continuous being the beginning of all our knowledge, huh? That's kind of, in a puzzle way, that's probably why you put it third, right, huh, Thomas, right, huh? It's further removed from the continuous, right? Because I was thinking about it, you know? And remember this beautiful thing that Aristotle points out in the physics, and Thomas is always quoting it, huh, you've probably heard it quoted here in this class. He says, Whole and perfect mean almost the same thing. Ah, well, now, before and perfect mean almost the same thing. the same thing. What is the hole? What's the first meaning of the hole? Yeah, yeah. It's the integral hole, as you call it sometimes, huh? The composed hole, right? Okay. Now, it's kind of very clear with the case of the hole in the part, so make it up, which is better, right? Which is better, you know, a whole car or steering wheel? Which is better, you know, a repair float or, you know, just the ice cream or just the fruit beer. What's better, you know, a chair, a leg or a seat or a chair, right? It's obvious that the hole is what? Better, you know? So you kind of introduce the idea of the perfect, right? Because the hole is like the perfect, right? That's one way of showing how it goes back to the continuous. I mean, people would see, you know, that the hole is better than the part more easily than they would see that form is better than matter. The soul is better than the body, you know, see? But the whole car is better than the fender, you know? You want a car, whole car or just want a fender? Yeah. You want your whole dinner or just a product, right? You want your whole wage this week or you want just a product? You want your appetizer, not the whole meal? In Quebec, you know, and the menu there, if you're getting an appetizer and a main course and some kind of dessert called repart complet, you know, complete meal, right? Huh? Wasn't it a complete meal? It was a whole meal, right? Better than just, you know, part of it, right? Yeah. Remember this in the old Elk and Seltzer commercial? I can't believe you write the whole thing. Yeah. It's interesting how the complete meal has got three parts, right? The idea of three being the whole and so on. And, you know, as Aristotle says, we use the word three in praising God, right? God's excited, so he knows about Trinity. But here's the idea that the idea of God being all perfect, right? The three has some perfection about it, huh? Mozart's always writing music with three movements at least, right? That seems to be necessary. But if you look at the word perfect, what does it mean? Well, I mean, it comes from a factor made. Something's made, right? When I'm going back and we're talking about the third kind of cause, his first set is the mover, and then like that is the what? Maker, right? And, you know, these are similar, the mover and the maker, because they're both cause and act, right? But the most known act is motion, and then the act that the maker makes is what form, right? But then you're being introduced again to the idea of what act is being better than what ability, right? And so when we know that God is pure act, we know something about his perfection, and therefore his, what, goodness, right? It's kind of amazing to see how our mind is led there, right, huh? But Thomas, in this beautiful text from the sentence, I mean, from the De Potentia, he's talking about how our names go back to the, what, continuous, right, huh? That's kind of funny, because there's two definitions of the continuous, right? That whose parts made it a common boundary, right? The other one is that which is divisible forever. Well, God is altogether simple. He's not divisible at all, right? So what can be further away from God in terms of divisibility than that which is divisible, what? Forever, right, huh? Cut a line in half, and then cut the other one in half, cut that in half, and you can go on, what? Forever, right? That's about as divisible as something could be, right? And so you're starting off with something that's divisible forever, and reasoning to something that is not divisible at all, right? It's not put together anyway, right? I'm put together in all kinds of ways, right? You know? Well, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's a problem, yeah. Can you divide a thing from itself? And sometimes you see a man is divided against himself, right? That's because he's got some multiplicity in them, right? One part of him is against the other part, right, huh? It is advertised on the radio all the time, you know, if you're, don't let drugs and alcohol take your life over, and they're all called this number, you know, and they're going to cure your attachment, your things. I mean, there's just something, you know, conflict going on in people, right? And Shakespeare compares it to a little city, you know, it's a civil war, right, huh? That man is in the state, it's kind of a civil war, right? Which is kind of a beautiful metaphor, if you want to say, but it's great. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Republican Party is in a kind of civil war right now. People are calling other people real names, you know, huh? Charlton and, you know, and it's just, I don't know what's going to happen, and the Democrats in the campaign, whoever gets in, you know, they'll be playing back with the other Republican Senate about so-and-so, you know? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah grace is custom to be taken in, what, three ways, huh, in one way for the love of someone, you can't see that in English word, grace, you know, just as we are custom to say that this soldier has the grace of the king, that is, the grace has him as someone, what, grateful to him, right? Secondly, it is, you know, my good graces is the kind of expression that we get maybe the nearest to in English, you know, where we have that sense. Now, the second sense, it's for some gift given gratis, right, huh, just as we are custom to say, I...