Prima Secundae
Lecture 297: Gratuitous Grace and Sanctifying Grace Distinguished

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

Now, what the heck is this? Another distinction, huh? But these are distinctions into two, huh? To the third, then, one goes forward thus. It seems that grace is unsuitably divided into running before, right? Coming before and fouling, huh? For grace is an effect of divine love, huh? But the love of God is never, what? Fouling, because he doesn't love us because we're good, but we're good because he loves us, right? Right? It's always, that was the before and after we were talking about before, right? But it's always, what? Yeah, according to that of the first epistle. Now, I can read the first epistle of John to see this, right? See how the divine thing was moving me to read the seven canonical epistles. Not as if we love God, but because he, before, loved us. Therefore, grace cannot be laid down to be running before, then, going before and fouling, right, huh? Well, let's look at the reply to this, huh? Because it would be pretty beautiful, let's reply. To the first, therefore, it should be said that the love of God names something eternal. Well, there we get to the eternal there, right? He's unchanging and therefore eternal. And therefore, nunquam, that means what? Never, I guess, huh? Can it be said except to be prevenience? God's love is always before. But grace signifies a temporal effect, huh? It's in the creature, right? Does God have any grace in this sense? Which can precede something, right, huh? And be subsequent to something, huh? And therefore, grace can be said to be before or after, but the love of God cannot be said to be both before and after, right, huh? Okay? Let's look at the second objection. Grace gratum faciens, huh? Grace making us, what? Settable God is one only in man, huh? Since it is sufficient. Settable God is sufficient according to that in the second epistle to the Corinthians that my grace is sufficient for what? You, huh? But the same cannot be before and after. Well, that makes sense to this guy here anyway, huh? Okay, so he's talking about before and after, huh? Therefore, grace is unsurably divided in prevenienti, coming before and going after, huh? What's the problem? Can I close something up? Anti-tech stuff we don't want to get washed off, huh? Okay. To the second it should be said that grace is not diversified through this, that it is itself before and, what, after, huh? According to its essence or nature, right, huh? But only according to its effect, right? Just as has been said about operating and cooperating, right, huh? Because even according as, what, subsequent grace pertains to glory, right, huh? Is not other in number from the grace running before, to which we are now, what, justified, huh? Just as the charity of the road, huh? That's translation, concrete translation of breakfast. Just as the charity of the road is not, what, taken away, evacuated, huh? But is perfected in, what, heaven. So also about the, what, it should be said about the light of grace, huh? I know he's got the word lumen in there, huh? Every perfect gift coming down from the father of lights, huh? Because neither in its notion implies some, what, imperfection. Well, you can chew these things, huh? I don't mean you have to really chew that in the first sense of the word chew, because I don't think you should be chewing your book up. I won't help you to understand it any better, I don't think. Okay? Moreover, grace is known through its effects, but infinite are the effects of grace, of which one comes before another. Therefore, if, according to this, grace ought to be divided into going before and subsequently, it seems that there are infinite species of grace. But every art avoids the infinite, right? Infinite are left behind by any art, right? And therefore, grace is not so to be divided into going before and going after. My goodness. To the third, it should be said that, though the effects of grace can be infinite in number, just as infinite are the acts of man, right? Possible ones. Nevertheless, all reduced to some determinate number, right? In species. And moreover, all come together in this, that one of them precedes another. Sounds like the old idea of motion, right? That motion is divisible forever. Yeah, yeah. That's one sense of before and after, right? The sense in which today comes before tomorrow, or this hour comes before this hour, or, you know? The sense in which Wednesday comes before Thursday, and Thursday comes before Friday. And Friday, you know, different species of, what, before and after, are they? In the same way that Wednesday comes before Thursday, Thursday comes before Friday. My father came before me, and my grandfather came before him, and I came before my son, and my son comes before my grandchildren. But against this is that the grace of God comes from his mercy. That was from his love. Oh, okay. It's from his mercy, I guess. You could say both, right, huh? But both in Psalm, in the Psalm 58, I guess it is. Must be the correct number, huh? It's read, my, what, his mercy. Yeah. And again, in Psalm 22, his mercy, what? Yeah. Yeah. Therefore, grace is so to be divided into coming before, prevenientum, and prevenientum, coming before. How do they translate it in English there? Prevenientum. It's not English. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I answer, it should be said, that just as grace is divided into operating and cooperating according to diverse effects, right, of the same grace, huh? So also in running before, right, coming before and following, in whichever sense grace is what? Taken, huh? Now there are five effects of grace in us. My goodness. Five effects? Of which the first is that the soul be, what? Healed. Okay. Second is that it wills the, what? Good. Third, that the good that it wills, it efficaciously, huh? Operates, huh? The fourth, that it perseveres in the good. Fifth, that it arise at glory, huh? That's it. No other thing after that, I don't think. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It is called what? subsequent respect to the first effect and just as one effect is after one effect and before another right so grace can be called coming before and subsequent according to the same effect with respect to what yeah just like thursday is after wednesday or before friday so is thursday before or after both yeah now who is its authority for this absurd statement and this is what augustine says right in the book on nature and grace it goes before that we be healed it follows that as healed we are what fed i guess it goes before that we are called it follows that we are glorified that's beautiful that's beautiful so you better stop In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen. God, our enlightenment, guardian angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, or to illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas, Angelic Doctor. Pray for us. And help us to understand all that you have written. Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen. It's up to Article 4, I guess, huh? I'll come back a little bit to the article there on the distinction between operating and cooperating grace, right? I was thinking, you know, myself a little bit of those, you know, prayers I composed for myself, you know, huh? And kind of the way I was led to choose some words, right? I'll compare these two little prayers that I had constructed. Help us, God, to know and love you. Help us, God, to know and love you, right? And then this other prayer, right? Move me, God, to love you above all other things, and all other things for the sake of you, even myself. Now, why had I chosen the words there? The one I say, help, right? And the other I say, move me. What's the difference in those two? Why would I do that? I was thinking about how my mind worked. See? Yeah. Or even the one between operating and cooperating, right? Now, when I say, what's the difference in those two graces, right, Evan? See? And which of these would be asking God for operating grace? Those two prayers that I constructed. And which one would be asking God for cooperating grace? Yeah, yeah. Because I'm already thinking about the fact that we're trying to understand God and so on, in this course and so on, and we're trying to love him, right, huh? So we've already begun, in a sense, and we're seeking his help to cooperate with us so we can do this meritorious act and so on. But in that case, why did I use the term move me to love you above all other things, and all other things for the sake of you, even myself? As if that's something, what? It's even harder for me to begin, right, huh? So I'm asking God to move me. Thomas does speak of the mover, right? In the operating grace, huh? So, now, I could change the words. I could say, move me, God, to what? Know and love you. And then help me, God, to know and love you, right? So what's your own of those words say first? Move me to, move me, God, to know and love you. See? That's from the beginning. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's becoming first, right? And then, as he moves me, right, huh, then I begin to, what, understand God and to love him. And then I want to be confirmed in these, right, and perfected in these things that I'm doing, right, huh? But I have, right? Okay. Then I thought, too, of how in the, maybe you see something like this in your office. I don't know, but I've already seen these things, you know. Or some days at the office, they would say, Oh, Lord, open my lips, and my tongue shall announce your praise. Uh, and hasten to help me, you know, and so on, right? Well, when you say, open my lips, and I will praise you, right? What kind of grace are you acting for? What? Yeah, it's as if you're kind of closed, right, huh? You know? You're asking God to open your lips up, to open your heart and your mind and your will, right? To knowing and loving him, right? And then when you say, uh, incline to my aid, yeah? That's what they say in the beginning of the lodge or something like that. Um, uh, hasten to help me, I mean, you know? It comes from, uh, from the Psalms, I guess, those words originally. But there you have the operating grace and then co-operating grace, right, huh? But you're asking for the operating grace first, right, huh? See, see, see if I gotta, you know, you know, you know, you know, you know, he's gotta do it because I've got a closed, closed lips, right? See, that's kind of interesting, right? So just thinking of how I, without thinking about this distinction between those two kinds of grace, I had chosen the word help in the one prayer, right? So I was thinking more of, you know, he's helping us as we try to understand and love us because we're already trying to do this, right? It's another thing, you know, to love God above all other things and even yourself, and all the things I say to you, even yourself, that's so, so, so, more beyond that, I'm almost like saying he's gotta, what, initiate this, right? I'll never have this, right, huh? So there I, I said, move me. I just, spontaneously, I had chosen the word move, I didn't say, help me, like I was already doing this, you know? But like it was, it was, you know, above my, yeah, yeah. He had moved me to, to love him above all other things and even myself, you know, which is, you know, something that people aren't hard to understand, right, huh? Because you naturally love yourself, right? And why don't you love yourself the most, right? I mean, fool, speak all of myself, which in the third says, you can't see, you know? He loves Richard. Yeah, yeah, because I am I, he says, yeah. It reminds me of that, we have a tool, we have a workshop, you turn it on, it goes, eh? And then you have to, and then it spins. Yeah. That's kind of like with us. We have a little bit of, eh, but then we, we need to move, we need to motion. Could you say that even the desire that leads to our prayer shows that there's been operating grace, and so in both cases, we're really asking for cooperating, cooperating grace? Yeah. Could you say that as well as opposed to saying that one is operating and the other one is Well, I'd say that you want to be moved by God first because he's, he's the origin of all things, right? So you want to be moved by him first, right? And then after he moves you, right, huh? Then you want him to come and help you to continue the motion and to perfect the motion, right? So the desire and the prayer to ask for that, that operating grace isn't showing that there's already been a prior movement by God, so that we, he's moved us to this desire and to pray to him. Well, he might have, yeah, he might have already moved us in some ways, yeah, yeah, yeah. It seems to be the order there, I mean, they used to use it in the lodge, didn't they, I think it was, I want to open my lips, my tongue shall not, you know, I'll praise you or something like that. And then, and then it would go to, he seemed to help me, right, huh? And it seemed to kind of, you know, repeat the order there, right, huh? Be too sure of yourself, right? You know, that you, that you need a, someone to move you, huh? I don't know that it was part of their office in Egypt, but he referred to this, this is the prayer for all monks, is from that psalm, oh God, I need my assistance, oh Lord. Yeah. Okay. We're up to Article 4 here, right, I guess. To the fourth one goes forward thus. It seems that the grace, gratis data. Remember the distinction that we saw before? How can you speak of this as one kind of grace when all grace is gratis data? What's the way of naming that? Yeah. Yeah, that one of the two kinds of graces keeps the common name, or in this case, the common phrase, gratis data. The other one adds something special because it makes you gratam to God, right? So that's called, yeah, yeah. That's a very common thing, huh? That's a very common thing, huh? And you can go through, you know, different parts of philosophy, right? First out, you know, he distinguishes habit against, what, disposition. And then other times he'll say that habit is a, you know, a stable disposition, right? So habit adds something significant or noteworthy, right? And that is what? Stability, yeah, yeah. So that stable disposition gets a new name, habit. And the unstable disposition of the mood keeps the common name, right, huh? Okay? You know, I always told my mother, didn't like me saying man is an animal, right? Well, don't we sometimes use the word animal and we say man and the animals? As if the animals are something different than man. Just imagine man is an animal, right? Well, you have animals said of the animals with reason and the animals without reason, right? And the animals that have reason have something very noteworthy, reason, right? So they got a new name, man, and the other ones keep the name, what? Yeah, yeah. So there's all kinds of examples of that, right? And people, you know, I used to always make fun of the priest saying, you know, you can't treat the girl like a thing, you know? Well, she is something, right? But don't make a distinction between a thing and a person, don't they? That's kind of a common thing, right? Well, isn't a person a thing? Is a person nothing, huh? Huh? Person is something, right? So they are a thing. But sometimes, you know, the things that are not, what, don't have will and reason, they keep the name, what, thing, and we give this thing as reason and will a new name, right? It gets a new name because it's something noteworthy. We call it a, what, person, huh? Or Aristotle in the book, in the Ethics, right? In the sixth book of Ethics, he distinguishes the virtues of reason, right? And he distinguishes between, in Greek, they're episteme and sophia. Or in Latin, scientia and sapientia, right? Okay? So there, sapientia, for wisdom, is distinguished against knowledge, we might say in English, right? You know, okay? But then, in the book devoted to wisdom, the first philosophy there, the 14 books, we call metaphysics, he says that sophia is an episteme. Well, he's obviously contradicting himself, right? You know? And, I know he hasn't, he hasn't contradicted himself, right? But wisdom is a, what, scientia or episteme about the greatest things, about the very first cause, God, right? That's, makes it really stand out as something very special compared to any other kind of knowledge, right? So it gets a new name, wisdom, right? I always tell the lady wisdom there, my daughter, my grandchild, sophia, that the wisdom is about God, right? So I don't ask her, what is wisdom about Jesus? God. Very wise, what she says, right? But that's why it gets the name wisdom, right? So Aristotle can both say that wisdom is not the same virtue as episteme or scientia or knowledge, right? And then he can say what is knowledge, right? It is an episteme, right? And those kinds of examples come, right? My daughter would like some particular food. She says, I don't like this. I love it. Well, I mean, is it loving something, liking it? Yeah, but you might, you know, for these lesser loves, right? Lesser likings, they might keep the name liking, right? And this intense liking, right? Gets a new name, love, right? When you talk to somebody, you tell the girl you like her, you gotta love her. You gotta say, but there are all kinds of examples of this, right? You see? It runs the whole of our language, yeah. We have another example here with not one word here, but the term gratis, right? Gratis data, right? Well, all grace is gratis data, right? So what's so special about this grace, right? And why is it, you know, why does it have that name, right? What keeps the common thing that all grace has and the grace that does something very profound, very, very noteworthy, right? That makes you gratum to God, right? Pleasing to God, that gets a new name, right? Gratia, gratum, faciens, and so on. And the other kind keeps this. Okay. I never see the modern philosopher explain that. All kinds of things, right? They don't explain a lot of it. Yeah. They don't even explain it themselves. So every gift that is given to us from God can be called gratis, right? It can be called gratia, gratis data. But infinite are the goods which are given gratis to us by God, right? Conceited to us. Both in the goods of the soul and in the goods of the body, which nevertheless make us, what? To God, yeah. Therefore, the grace's gratis data cannot be comprehended under some certain, what? Division, huh? Now, Thomas explains a couple things here. To the first, therefore, it should be said, as it has been said above, not all benefits which are given to us divinely are, what? Should be called gratia, gratis data, right? But only those which exceed the, what? Faculty of nature. Fisher, just as the, what? Fisherman. I guess that's Peter, huh? Yeah. Abounds by the sermon of wisdom and science and others of the sort. And such are placed here under gratia, gratis data, huh? Now there it seems like you almost got a, a, a, the other way that you have something, you know? And that is one that keeps something more, what? What's the other way of something where the two keeps the common name? Yeah, yeah, yeah. So if you might say, um, what's the difference between a boy and a girl? Well, a boy is a man and a girl is a woman, right? Okay. But then you might distinguish between, what? A man and a boy and, because he has the fullness of what a man is, right? And the boy has it and then he, what? Just a boy, you know, because it's a hard name. Yeah, yeah. So he, he gets a new name, right? See? Not because he has something noteworthy in addition, you know? Because he's, he's really undeveloped, right? And the same way with the girl, right? Okay. My mother, my mother used to meet with the, you know, the Rosary Society where I was at the house there, you know, and I was, I figured it was the girls, right? They liked that, I'd be called it, girls rather than, than women. So something that is, there's above nature seems to be, crosses, right? Yes, it doesn't, if it's something that's according to your nature, it's something that you have. and a right to, you know, but you get something that is above your nature, that's really gratis, right, has it more fully. Gravy. Potatoes are fine, but for graveyard it's something more, some she used to say, in terms of longevity, she said, anything over 60, gravy. Moreover, gratia gratis data, are distinguished against gratia gratum facientum, right? And that's the way we talked about before. But faith pertains to grace, what, gratum facientum, because through it we are justified, according to that of Romans 5, justified therefore from faith. Therefore unsuitably is faith placed among graces, right, gratis data, especially since the other virtues are not placed there as hope, what, charity. To the second, therefore, he says, it should be said that faith is not numbered here among the graces gratis data, according as it is a certain virtue justifying man in himself, but according as it implies a certain super eminentum, right, certitude of faith, an excelling certitude of faith, right? From this that man is made, what, suitable to instructing others about those things which pertain to faith, right? So that's kind of like that way we're saying, right, where there's an excellence in this, right? But hope and charity pertain to the desiring power, right? According as through it, man is ordered to what? Into God, right? Moreover, the operation, third objection, the operation of healings, I guess, health, and to speak diverse genera of what? Languages, huh? Are certain, what, miracles, huh? But the interpretation of sermons or of speech pertains to what? Wisdom or what? Knowledge. According to that of Daniel 1, verse 17, huh? To these boys the Lord gave, what, huh? Knowledge and discipline in every book and wisdom, huh? Therefore unsuitably are divided the grace of healings and the greatest graces of the genera of tongues against the operation of virtues and the interpretation of, what, speeches, words against the sermon of wisdom and science, huh? To the third, therefore, it should be said that the grace of sanitatum of healings is distinguished from the general operation of virtues because it has a special reason for inducing us to faith, huh? To which someone is more prompt, right? To which someone is more prompt, right? Through the, what, benefit of bodily health. Then they should acquire the, what? Inquiring the virtue of faith. Similarly, to speak in various tongues and to interpret words have special reasons of moving to faith. And, therefore, they are placed as special. Grace is given gratuitously, huh? Because you'll see that better when you see them by the article, huh? Moreover, wisdom and science are certain gifts of the Holy Spirit. So we use those words, huh? Seven gifts. So also, in understanding and counsel, piety, fortitude and fear. This has been said. Therefore, these also ought to be, what? Placed among graces, gratuitously given. To the fourth, therefore, it should be said that sapientia and scientia, grace and, I mean, wisdom and knowledge, are not computed. Not numbered among the graces given gratuitously, according as they are enumerated among the gifts of the Holy Spirit. By reason of which the mind of man is, what, easily moved, right? Or easily movable through the Holy Spirit, to those things which pertain to wisdom or knowledge. For thus they are the gifts of the Holy Spirit, as has been said above. But they are numbered among the graces gratis datis, according as they imply a certain abundance of knowledge and wisdom. That man not only in himself is able to write the taste divine things, but also to instruct others and to, what? Overcoming. Overcoming. Contradicting. Contradicting. Yeah. And therefore, among the graces gratis datis, significantly they are laid down as the sermo sapientiae, right? And sermo scientiae, right? Because as Augustine says in the 14th Book of the Trinity, it's one thing to know what a man to believe in order to obtain eternal life or blessed life. Another to know in which way, what? He is useful and what? Reaching others, right? Yeah. And defending it against the impious. Okay. But now the text that Thomas is going to be concerned with here in the body of the article. But against this is what the apostle says in the first epistle to the Corinthians, in the 12th chapter, starting in the 8th verse, etc. Others, through the Spirit, is given the sermo sapientiae, right? Speech of wisdom. To another, sermo scientiae, the speech, I suppose you could say, of what? Knowledge. According to the same Spirit, huh? To another, faith in the same Spirit. Another, the grace of what? Healings. Another, the operation of virtues. Another, prophecy. Another, the discretion of spirits. Another, genera of tongues. Another, interpretation of what? Now, does the apostle, which is St. Paul, right? By Antonio Messiah. Does the apostle divide here into two or three? No, he doesn't. He divides into what? Yeah. Sapientia, sciencia, fides, healing, the operation of virtues, prophecy. It's something that, you know? Taking these off almost all my fingers, right? About nine or ten there, huh? Yeah, yeah. I'm sure there would be so. Yeah. Okay. Let's see what Thomas does now, huh? The answer should be said, that as has been said above, gratia gratis data, right? God, grace gratuitously given, right? Right? Is ordered to this, that a man cooperates with another, that he might be led back to what? Yeah. Okay. So it's not like, you know, for your personal. Grace gratum faciens is for your own happiness, huh? Now, man cannot act for this by what? Moving inwardly, right? For this belongs to God alone, right? Does he go out the window? Does he take the woman's head and say, get in there and straighten that head out, you know? No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. He's following the rules. First, that a man obtains a fullness, right, of knowledge of divine things, right? That from this, he is able to instruct others, right? Second, that he's able to confirm or prove those things which he, what, says. Otherwise, his teaching would not be efficacious. So we see my first grade professor there, he gave up philosophy for a while, right? Because the people who were instructing him were saying, well, this is because you're Catholic, then you do this, right? Well, I mean, it's not efficacious teaching, right? So they met the economy. He says, now, if you instruct me in the way I was instructed in the States, he says, I will get up in the middle of your class and leave. And he says, fine, fine. Of course, he stayed, right, you know? He had great respect, you know? And he kind of used to come down on a lecture tour, you know, he'd talk at the colleges and he'd talk at the St. Paul Seminary and so on. And he'd stay at Christchurch's house, you know, and so on. I remember going to talk at the St. Paul Seminary there and De Connick up there and, of course, there was some problem with the microphone. And so he jumps out of the audience, runs up to the stage, fixes that front door. You know, that, you can see, I kind of, you know, that's how I respect, you know, feel your poverty, you know. It's wonderful to see, though, you know. So he just revolted to De Connick, yeah, and to De An. De An came down, he used to pay his way down, see what's on his mind, you know. Third, that those things which he can seize, he's able to suitably, what? Yeah, yeah. And I think I was mentioning, you know, I've been reading this little book that Warren Rue sent me, because he's one of the authors in there. It's about the Canadian saints, right? And it has, you know, about 14, I guess, of them that have been Canadi's, you know. It's a little life of them, you know, and so on. Well, it's describing this one guy. He was a professor, right? He was a Jesuit, right there. And he was fluent in about five languages, right? But now he went to Canada and he wanted to work with the Indians. He had to learn how to speak to a language. And for some reason, he had his, you know, impediment, he just could not. He spoke five languages, he could not, you know. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I guess he has to be kind of the servant of the place, you know, and so on. But he became a saint, right? And I mean, that's, he doesn't have that third thing here, right? You know, that third thing is necessary, right? And so you can see, you know, he's a smart man. He was, you know, a lecturer down in France, right? He could lecture the Indians because of the not having the third thing here, right? And it's pretty brutal because if you couldn't master their language, they treated you like an idiot. Yeah, yeah. Really mocked them. They treated you like dirt. They were feeling like the stupidest boy in class. You could be, you could probably have a theater and six different things and they treat you like you're an idiot because you can't master their language. So that's division of three. It makes sense. You can understand it. The distinction of three like that, can't you? Now, as regards the first, three things are, what, necessary. I'll say, that's another division, but into three. Just as appears in human, what, teaching, right? For it's necessary that the one who ought to instruct another in some knowledge, that first, right, that the, what, beginnings of that science are to him most, what, certain, huh? And as regards this is laid down fides, right? Which is a certitude about invisible things, right? Which are supposed as beginnings in Catholic, what? Teaching. So Augustine has the ingredient in faith, hope, and charity, right? Thomas has the catechetical instructions. Secondly, it's necessary that the teacher has himself rightly, correctly, about the chief, what, conclusions of the science, huh? And thus there is laid down the sermo sapientia, right? Which is a knowledge of, what, divine things, huh? Third, it's necessary that he abound in examples and the knowledge of effects, which sometimes is necessary to manifest the, what, causes. As regards this is laid down the sermo scientia, right? Which is the knowledge of human things. For the invisible things of God to the things which have been made are, what, you know. That's three forms of, what, grace, gratis, data, right? Second thing. The confirmation in those things which are subject to reason is through, what, arguments, huh? That's things that are subject to reason, right? Okay? But in those things which are above reason, divine reveal, the confirmation is through those things which are proper to God's, what, power. And this in two ways. Well, there's a division of two, right? The first one was subdivided in three, this is into two. In one way that the teacher of sacred doctrine does those things which God alone is able to do. So, in the works of miracles, whether they pertain to the salvation of the body, and as regards this is laid down the grace of, what, healings? Or whether they order to only the manifestation of the divine power, as if the sun stands or becomes dark or if the sea is divided, right? As regards this is laid down the operation of, what, power is it? Yeah. So, that's, what, two, right? So, we get three before, right? Now, two more, right? Now, we get five. Secondly, that one can manifest those things which God alone is, what, able to know. And these are contingent future things. As regards these is laid down, what, prophecy. Or also the hidden things of hearts. And as regards this is laid down the discretion of, what, spirits. So, you get a division into two and each of them is subdivided into two. So, you get four, right? So, four and three is, what, seven, huh? Now, we come to the third thing, right? The faculty of pronouncing can be observed either as regards the, what's idiomatic, right? You know, it's private, right? In which something can be understood. And according to this is laid down the genera of, what, tongues. Or as regards the sense of those things which are put forth. And as regards this is laid down the interpretation of what speaks, yeah. So, you got two under the third one, right? So, you have, what? Yeah, yeah. So, you divided it into three and the first one was divided into how many up there? We had Fides, Sermosapientia and Sermoscientia. So, there's three, right? See? Then the second one was divided into two but each of those into two. So, the nine, I'll get it, right? But different than the nine Quarries of Angels, right? So, they're divided. into three hierarchies and each of them into three right yeah each of those three is divided into the beginning middle and end and so on they get down you don't know how far it goes down but it's easier to follow right this here it's three and four and two they're all divided into a different number thomas is okay he's solving two or three huh now we come to the article five right with the grace gratis data is more worthy than grace to the fifth then one goes forward thus it seems that grace gratis data is more worthy than grace gratum faciens grace gratuitously given i guess yeah first because the good of the of the deishina is better than the good of one as the philosopher says in the first book of the ethics but the grace making one gratum is ordered only to the good of one man but the grace given gratis data to it is the given is ordered to the common good of the whole church ergo gratia gratis data is dignity or from gratia gratum faciens okay now how the hell is going to get out of there i haven't got a clue well let's look at the reply to the first objection here right who's you go to this old pagan aristotle what does he know what does he know about grace he talked about the gifts of the holy spirit he went to uh the the heroic virtues that aristotle talked about which are above the human thing to the first there of it should be said that as the philosopher says in the 12th book of wisdom 12th book after the books in actual philosophy right i was reading uh king lear just recently and uh and we used to call this course uh the philosophy of nature you know we're doing the physics it's called the philosophy of nature but shakespeare refers to it as the wisdom of nature right it's a rather beautiful way of saying it right because in timid decision i mean wisdom is kind of like a synonym almost for the word philosophy right so the philosophy of nature could be translated into english then is the wisdom of nature right but what i like about it is that um it has a double meaning there right you could say the wisdom of nature is about what about the wisdom of nature right the wisdom that nature shows right what it does just like you normally say um the word of god right one sense the word of god is the second person of the blessed trinity right but the other meaning of the word of god is the bible right so somebody says to me what is the bible and you want to give a brief answer what's the best answer to give yeah it's the word of god and the written word of god right and uh but what's the bible about yeah yeah it's kind of interesting that way it is right so um you couldn't say the philosophy of nature is about the philosophy of nature it would make any sense to say that right but if you take the the the synonym there of philosophy that's kind of wisdom uh then the wisdom of nature could be said to be about the wisdom of nature and i like that right to get two for the price of one right it's beautiful shakespeare the very simple metaphors are actually this is similarly the way it's said but in one scene there false as water hasty as fire and uh you know why why do you have that why is water said to be false false as water yeah yeah and so it doesn't have any shape of its own right now so false yeah it's like like in the in the two gentlemen of verona right where you have proteus right now and proteus you know has uh is engaged you know to one woman and then when he gets to the court and sees the daughter of the head of the court um he falls along with her you know so why is shakespeare giving him the name proteus right proteus is a character that you can meet in in the odyssey right now i mean a god is changing his what his shape right everything right so it's it's a simple thing false is water right he water is no form that it keeps right and uh it adapts to whatever its environment is what kind of person is that right not a friend of mine yeah i remember someone saying to me you know i always end up with agreeing with the last guy i talked to so he talks to me he agrees with me you know yeah it makes sense i'm saying you know because i'll talk to somebody else he does whatever he says you know shakespeare compares that to you know his head has always changed like his hat with a new new style in a new fashion you know just read just the hat yeah yeah yeah but it's such a simple metaphor right they're similarly false as water right then he goes on in the same almost sentence and says history is is fire you know decision there to the first therefore it should be said that as the philosopher says in the 12th book of wisdom of metaphysics the good of the multitude just as of the army is twofold right one which is in the multitude itself to wit the order of the army right the other which is separated from the multitude as the good of the what yeah and this is better because to this the other is what ordered huh so we often say that we say you know um there's two orders here to consider in the chair right and one is the order of the parts of the chair to each other right so this say part comes in a little slant you know and uh it's a little it's a slightly up to single right that comes in that right and uh but then the whole chair is ordered to what sitting right and uh so sitting is the purpose of the chair right and the end of purpose is always better right and then the uh so serastal says the order of the parts you know to each other right to back an example of the order of parts of the army it's because they were the army to what the leader or to the gold leader which is victory right as macarthur used to say and for war there's no substitute for a victory right you know so no matter how good your army is you don't reach the victory you've lost out now i was kind of struck you know you know i was reading thomas again in summa kind of gentiles and as i mentioned before you know chapter 28 is where he talks about god being perfect right but he gets through explaining you know why god is perfect he says as far as the uh god is not perfect right because it comes from per factum me right now okay now in the uh i think it's at the end of the uh sermon on the mount our crisis and be you perfect even as your heavenly father is perfect right well that's taking the latin word perfect right huh so what's the greek word for perfect yeah yeah it's the same word the aristotle is for perfect right to lay us right now okay which i mean to be transit kind of kind of uh it comes from telos right ended so Ended, yeah. Yeah, finished, yeah. Yeah. And finished with the end at Galactin, you know. Well, you know, when Thomas gets through, he's showing that God's perfect, and he goes on to show that God is, because of that, good, right? But in the Greek, it's even more clear than in Galactin, because good can be said of the means as well as the end, but it's primarily the same thing as the what? Ended, yeah. When Aristotle talks about that fourth kind of cause, the end, you know, and he says that if you take away the end, you take away the good, right? And so it's kind of very interesting to go to Laos, to saying that it's good, right? But in that sense, it seems to me that the Latin word is not as perfect in its etymology, right, as is the what? Greek word, right? I've talked before about how I think the English word is understanding in terms of its etymology is better than even the Latin word, intellectusa, and much better than the Greek word, nous, you know. It doesn't have that thing. But the understanding is a very, what? A very useful word, right, huh? You can point to the fact that the sense is no only accidents, right, huh? But the reason is the only part that what? The understanding, the name for the reason, the understanding is the only part that knows what? Substance, right? Or that reason knows the underlying cause, right? It knows what stands under the words you're using, right? So the word understand is really very, what? Marvellous, huh? Now my teacher, Monsi and Dianne, said, you know, sometimes, you know, if you take Greek and Latin and French or English, right, you'll find that the word in one language is better. Another word might be better in another language, right, huh? So I think understanding is better than the Latin word, yeah. I mean, the, yeah, the Latin word intellectus, but much better than the word nous there, you know. And, uh, but I think with today's taleos, right, that's better than the Latin word perfect, and this is where we get our word perfect, right? Perfectus, huh? So you have to kind of look around a little bit, huh, and see things, huh? I kind of like the word fichitasumata, I think it's better than happiness, right? Happiness comes from the word hap, right? Shakespeare says, the two gentlemen of Rotary, we should be a part of your happiness. But it's like saying that it happens, you know, but fichitasumata means what? Fruitful, right? Fruitfulness, right? Well, that fruit is a natural product of the tree, right, huh? And happiness is not something that just happens, you know? In Greek you have more words, right, huh, you know, for these things, huh? So Aristotle has the word, you know, it's like our word blessed, you know, he has the word eudaimonia, which uses the ethics, but then in politics he uses the word, you know, just derived from luck, huh? It's like our word happiness, right? So the average guy would think, you know, some people are lucky in life, some people are unlucky, right, huh? Got hit in a car accident or something, you know? Every day in the newspaper, somebody's got hit by a car, you know? I'm born to lose. Just an unlucky guy. So Aristotle, let's come back to the distinction Aristotle makes there, right, huh? That the good of the multitude, that is of the army, is twofold, right? One which is in the multitude itself, right? As with the order of the army, right? The other which is separated from the multitude as the good of the leader, right, huh? And this would be victory. And this is better, right, huh? So the army rejoices when it is victorious, right? Not because of its order, right, huh? But it helps. Because this also, right, right, that other is ordered, right, to this, huh? Now the grace gratis data is ordered to the good, common good of the church, which is the ecclesiastical order, right? But the grace gratis fachians is ordered to the common good separated, which is God himself. Therefore, grace gratis fachians is no billiard. The grace gratis fachians is no billiard, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only thing that he's going to do, which is the only interesting how to answer that first objection, philosophy. Moreover, that is a greater virtue that is able to what? Yeah. And what only in itself is affected? Just as great as the clarity of the body that can also illuminate other what? Bodies, huh? And that which in itself shines, but then it cannot illuminate other things, huh? Okay. An account of which also the philosopher says now, in the devil can quote scripture, in the fifth book of the Ethics, that justice is the, what? Pre clarissima, a very true term, right, huh? Yeah. In which man rightly has himself towards others, right? Does there still compare it to the evening star or something like that there, you know? It almost gets poetic, right? Oh, well, marvelous justice is, huh? But through grace gratis datum, a man is perfected in himself. But through grace gratis datum, man works for the perfection of others, right? So it's like justice, right? Therefore, grace gratis datum is more worthy than grace gratum faciens. Well, that, that connoisse is disturbing over here, you know, I don't know about you guys. It's actually broken. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, let's see how Thomas gets out of this, huh? Dini, Dini, he's, he's really tied himself up now, you know, he's got to, he's got to drown, right? What happened to, what did he need? Did he find he drown? Yeah. Yeah. He, uh, had somebody, uh, he had people punch him in the stomach to show how strong his stomach was, and somebody punched him when he wasn't ready. And his appendix burst, and he died from, uh, sepsis. Yeah. Way to go. Yeah. Did you see his other names? Did you see his other names? I do not know. I thought Italian, but I could be. Well, maybe, because I don't. He was a spiritualist, too. He thought, he was dabbling in that stuff. He thought that he would be able to come back and will. Well, that's when he died, but apparently he made it, I guess, yeah, I guess not. He lost that bet. So, it was over the names he couldn't get out. Yeah. Okay, now, to the second, it should be said that if grace, gratuitously given, right, was able to, what? Effect in another, right? But a man obtains the grace, making one acceptable. It would follow the grace, gratis, data, would be more noble, right? Because it would do more than the other one did, right? Because it would make you that way, right? Just as more excellence is the clarity of the sun illuminating than that of the illuminated body. But to grace, gratis, gratuitously given, man cannot cause another, a conjunction, right, rejoining to God, which he has to grace. Peace. Peace. Peace. Peace.