Tertia Pars
Lecture 108: The Necessity of Christ's Passion and Redemption

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

How many parts is life of Christ? Kind of into four parts, right? First, this is coming into the world, right? And then it's going through, what? Preaching and so on, right? And now the third part, right? Which would be with his passion and death and so on, and descent into hell. And then the fourth part again, glorifying afterwards. Consequently, he says, we're not to consider about those things which belong to the exit of Christ from the world. He divides us into, what, four parts. And first, about his, what, passion or suffering, right? Secondly, about his, what, death. Third, about his, what, burial. And fourth, about the descent to hell. It's interesting that Thomas puts that here, right? Because sometimes he divides that against. He puts it with the resurrection and the ascension, right? Because there's two ways of dividing the six articles. They sometimes give the faith there about Christ. And one is suggested by Psalm 8, right? Where he made him like the Lord of the Angels, right? So in his becoming man, he kind of lowered himself, right? Taking down the form of a slave, as St. Paul says in the Philippians. And then in his death, he lowered himself. And then when he, what, descended down into hell, right? Like the dead do, right? He's kind of going himself. And then the resurrection, which is, what, reward in a way for his death. And then his ascension, which is reward for his descent into hell, right? And then his, what, second coming kind of corresponds to his first coming, which is in humility, right? Mercy and the second one in justice, right? And glory and so on. That's one way of dividing them into the three, right? Well, there the descent is put with the, what, second group, right? No. First group, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But then in the, the way that they divide them in the, in the te deon, right, huh? Then you have his coming into the world, right? And then his death, and then his opening up heaven as a result of his death. And then his second coming, right? So it's divided into three. But he opened the kingdom of heaven after his death, right? And then Thomas gives the old division into the goods of the soul, the goods of the body, the exterior goods. So in the descent into hell, he gave the pediatric vision to the prophets down there, right? That's the good of the soul. The resurrection, the good of the body. And then the, what, ascension, good place. You know? So there, the descent into hell was put with the resurrection and the, you know? So, the saints have put the first group sometime with the second group, right? So, right. Now, about the passion itself, there occurs a three-fold consideration. First, about the passion itself. Secondly, about the efficient cause of the passion. And third, about the fruit of the passion, the effect of the passion. This is very thorough what Thomas does, huh? Well, I'll teach you because, you know, there's a painting, I guess, of Frangelico, I believe, where the saints there are kind of watching Christ on the cross, right? Most of them are making, you know, gingerflexions or, you know, bursting into tears and penance, you know. Like, Thomas is there trying to understand, you know. So, he has Thomas represented in that way, right? It doesn't mean that Thomas didn't do the other devoting things, devout things too, but, you know. It's something unusual with Thomas, right? He's trying to. This is really, I mean, if you know what God really is. And Thomas, you know, as far as we can know what God is in this life, he knew better than anybody else, it seems. He really wonders, right? You know, faith-seeking understanding, right? He really wonders that he should undergo all of this, right? So, what's the meaning of all this, you know? It is a very strange thing, right? I shouldn't have been choosing to undergo this with you. It's just very hard to understand. So, about the first, he asks 12 things, huh? 12 things are asked. First, when it was necessary for Christ to suffer for the liberation of men, right? Well, you've got the word necessity, right? Important to understand the word necessity, right? Theology. Secondly, whether there was some other possible way of human liberation, right? So, if it's to liberate us, that's the end or purpose of his suffering, right? If that's the end, was that the end that could be achieved only by this? Or if this was the best way of doing it, right? These first two articles are both kind of doing that. And the third article, even, whether this mode was, what? Conveniential, right? So, those first two articles kind of, what? Go together, don't they, huh? Now, the fourth one. The form of death, right? A little different one. Whether it was suitable that he suffer on a, what? Cross. Like Peter was to suffer later on, right? You're going to follow me. Follow me, he says. Maybe you don't want to go. Remember Paul VI there, you know, referring to that legend, you know, about Peter leaving Rome, you know, to avoid Rome. And seeing Christ walking into there. Where are you going? Turn Peter around. Then, what his passion was in general, right? Then, I'll get that. And then, going into details of that. Whether the pain, huh? Which he sustained in the passion was maximus, right? And then, whether his whole soul was suffering. That's interesting, right? To the whole soul, what does that mean? I was looking at Thomas' text there in the sentences there where he's following the teaching of Augustine. That the whole soul is in what? Not just in the whole body, but each part of the body. Because someone says, well, if my whole soul is in my head, how can it be in my foot, right? Then it would be in two places at the same time, right? And if the soul is something simple and indivisible, well, like a point. If a point's here, it can't be there, can it? And Thomas says, this is stupid, he says. It's a beautiful example of false imagination, right? You're imagining the soul to be in the body as in a place. And the soul is not in the body as in the place. But as a form in what? Matter, right? And you're imagining the indivisibility of the soul, to be liked, out of a point which has a position in the continuous, right? But it's outside the whole genus of the continuous. Well, it's a beautiful example. It's a two-fold false imagination, right? And false imagination is the fundamental cause of the state. Imagining things other than they are, or trying to imagine something that cannot be imagined. So when Descartes was trying to, you know, locate the soul someplace up here in the client, here in the head or something, he was kind of imagining the soul like a point, you know? It's got to be placed here rather than somewhere else. Or it's got to be somewhere else in a place, and it can't be in two places at the same time. So you've got this false imagination, huh? And people, you know, a more common example, of course, people imagine the soul as kind of an air-like thing, you know? Well, it's the shape of a man, right? It's like an air, too. Yeah. It's the way the port... That's the way Don represents a soul, though, right? You know, because when he meets the soul of somebody, he knows you recognize him because of his shape. But then he tries to hug them and embrace them, and you can't hug the air, right? So it's kind of frustrating you want to hug this person you haven't seen. I still can't see. Yeah. Now, the eighth one would surprise, of course, you know, the modern scholars, but not Thomas, right? Whether the passion impeded the joy of, what, fruition there because he enjoyed the beatification, right? So this is really a thing that the moderns are not... I was listening to... I didn't get the whole program, but Father Groeschel, he was on one of the evenings there. And people call in, you know, and they email and so on, ask questions. One woman is writing in and she says, well, the priest told me that he didn't know he was God until his baptism. And he didn't know he was the son of God. And then when the father said, you know, this is the Bible of the Son, oh, I am. And then another question, there's some doctor, I don't know, I forget what his name was, but his name was given on the program. And he says that when Christ says, you know, to the apostle at one point, whom do men say that I am, right? And it's because he's seeking, you know, affirmation from them. He really was what he was, you know. I mean, it shows you how these things, you know, are misunderstood, you know. And these are common things, right? And my wife said, you know, there's somebody that's using it in school there one time, you know. And she said, that's not right, you know. And he had these crazy notions and then, you know, about it. But, uh, seeking assurance, yeah. So, you can see where this cycle rises, right? Now, the ninth and tenth, of course, go to get it, because they're about the kind of exterior things, right? About the time of the passion, right, huh? And about the place of the passion, right, huh? So, Thomas considers all these things, right? With a loving attention. He's a diligent, huh? Intelligent thinker, which means a way to love, right? Love these things, huh? And this is someone like, because time and place are extrinsic, right? I think. Extrinsic measures. And then the eleventh one, whether it was suitable for him to be crucified with, what? These, huh? Now, we know why they crucified him with these, but was it, you know, he himself was accepting this, too, right? And this was part of his providence. And, strange enough, the eleventh, the twelfth one, right? Whether the passion of Christ should be attributed to his, what? Divinity. Can we say that God suffered? We say that God died on the cross, you know? Well, not in his divine nature, but in his, what? Human nature, yeah, yeah. That's very important, huh? So, the first one proceeds to the first thus. It seems it was not necessary for Christ to suffer for the, what? Liberation of the human race. For the human race ought not to be, or is not able to be liberated except by God, right? Am I not, what? The Lord? And there is not, what? A God beyond me, huh? Without me. I am the just God, and there's no one saving apart from me, right? But in God, there does not fall, what? You know, you've got to be careful about that. Okay? Because this, because sometimes you see that the Church of the Fathers, they were necessarily just for the thing of what? Force or something of that sort, right? Or contrary to the will, right, huh? Aristotle gives that sense, right? And he quotes the poet, right? The point about the sadness to your necessity, right? To let you go. It's necessary. Because this is repugnant to his, what? Omnipotence, right, huh? Therefore, it was not necessary for Christ to what suffer? Well, now you're convinced. You've got to understand the word necessary. Moreover, the necessary is opposed to the, what? Voluntary, right, huh? That's commonly done, right, huh? But Christ suffered by his own will, right, huh? For he said in Isaiah chapter 53, he was offered up because he himself willed, right, huh? Therefore, it is not necessary for him to suffer, right, huh? So notice the contrast between that and, what? You're talking about the Trinity, right, huh? Did the father generate the son voluntate, right? And they'd always deny that, right, huh? He wasn't contrary to his will, they'll say, right, huh? But you shouldn't say that he generated him by, what? Will, as if by choice, right? He chose to have a son. For the kind of necessity, right? So sometimes we contrast them, as if they're opposites, right? But you choose, and necessary, right? No? Thanks for having me said that. You know, it's not exactly if they had to do something, right? And they made a choice, right? Moreover, it is said in the Psalm 24, that all the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth. And truth, maybe there means what? Justice, right, huh? But it does not seem to be necessary that he would suffer on the side of the, what? Divine mercy, right, huh? Because just as, what? He gives gifts gratis, right, huh? So it seems that he can also gratis freely, right? Release our debts, right? Without, what? Satisfaction, right, huh? Nor does it seem to be on the side of divine justice, by which man merited eternal, what? Damnation. Therefore, it does not seem to have been necessary that Christ suffer for the liberation of, what? Of men, huh? It was kind of funny, because I was in the BJ's there, you know? My wife, and looking a little bit at the books there, you know? And there's a new book out in George Washington, right? But kind of emphasis is upon, you know, his domestic life with his wife and so on. So I was just kind of, you know, glancing at it and so on. And you don't realize, I didn't realize, exactly what the position of a woman was in colonial times, right? But she was really very subordinate to her husband, right, huh? And when a woman married, everything she possessed, either her stockings, belonged to her husband. You know? And so it's kind of funny, because some of the good conservatives, you know, said, we've got to go back and learn from our folks. When this comes out, I don't know if it's going to happen, you know? But it's kind of interesting. It went through a whole bunch of things, you know? Well, you know, they're really, and they're quoting, you know, even Benjamin Franklin, about women should be, you know, Tom below, you know? And so on. And, you know, when they take up this question of woman ordination, right? But Thomas talks about the support of the position of woman, how it would be appropriate, you know, for her to be, you know? So that apart from, you know, the fact that Christ chose men to be priests and not women, there's a reason why he chose men and not women, right? It wasn't arbitrary, you know? And people, of course, just try to pass it over you, you know? Because that accordance, as Father Boulay used to say, you know, you can't teach the church's doctrine of women today, he says. It wasn't safe to do so. But it's kind of funny to go back and realize how strong they apparently were. I just, you know, I wasn't paid, I said, I didn't want to, you know, buy the book, but we'd go, see when it comes out in the library or something, read it, you know? So, uh... I think by man, by man. You know, it's just part of the account of it, you know? Of the relations there, the position of women. Things are interesting. It's a bit like when you read the Epistles of St. Paul, you know, and he talks about how masters should treat their slaves, and say he's a master, he doesn't fulminate about the institution of slavery, right? I don't know, I should be criticized for that. Okay, the fourth argument. Moreover, the angelic nature is more excellent than the, what? Human. This is clear through Dionysius in the fourth chapter of the Divine Names. But for the reparation of the angelic nature, which sinned, Christ did not, what? Suffer, right? Therefore, it seems, neither was it necessary for him to suffer for the salvation of the human race. That's right. That's right. That's right. That goes back to the question of why is the human nature reputable in the way the angels are not, right? You know, realize that, you know, when the angel is created, his mind is, what, fully formed, right? He sees everything, right? And so he makes a choice. The whole angel goes in that direction, you know? A man is always kind of divided with his soul and his body, you know, and his imperfect knowledge and so on. And so, so long as he's in this changeable world, right, you can, you know, go from good to bad or from bad to good, you know? But the angel, he just goes in one direction, that's it, you know? That's the way we'll go when we die, just our will will fall. Like it says in Ecclesiasticus, isn't it? You know, where the tree falls there, it's a lie, you know? That's why you should pray, you know, that when you die, that your will will just fall towards God, you know? That's why you'll be in God before you die. But, you know, C.S. Lewis, you know, when he talks about the love of the angels, you know, he says it's ferocious. Kind of a good metaphor, you know? Not kind of, you know, half-hearted love, you know, but it's really, really good or something, you know? I mean, you know, that's, you know, if the good angels are the bad angels, right? C.S. Lewis said, you know, if you want to be as bad as the devil, you're never going to succeed, you know, and be as bad as he is. He's kept, you know, he's just really committed, you know? Well, it's terrible. But against this is what is said in John chapter 3. As Moses held upright the serpent in the desert, so is necessary that the Son of Man be exalted, right? That everyone who believes in him would not perish, but might have, what, eternal life, huh? Which exaltation is understood about the cross. Therefore, it seems it was necessary for Christ to suffer, huh? Now, Thomas says, you've got to understand the word necessary, right? He didn't say it. He said, answer, it should be said. There's a philosopher who teaches us in the fifth book of wisdom, huh? Fifth book, after the book's of natural philosophy. Let it have to sit down. Necessary is said in many ways. In one way, what, according to its own nature, is impossible to be, what? Otherwise, right? So if you take the very nature of the number three, it can't but be a number, right? Or a, what, odd number, right? Or a, what, prime number, right? Or half a six, and so on, huh? That's the first sense of necessary, right? Absolute sense, huh? And in this sense, it is manifest, huh? That it was not necessary for Christ to suffer, right? Neither on the side of God, nor on the side of what? In another way, something is said to be necessary from something, what, exterior, right? Now, the exterior causes are what? The mover, or maker, and the end, right? I have to go back to the distinction of the four causes. And, of course, the distinction of the four causes is tied up with the distinction of what the sense is of necessary, right? Because the first sense is kind of from the intrinsic cause, right? Because the very nature, what makes three to be three makes it to be a number, a prime, and first, and so on, and odd, and so on, right? And half a six, right? So, matter and form, right? Are intrinsic causes, and then mover and end. So, Aristotle is taken up in the fifth book of wisdom. He takes up the word cause before he takes up the word necessary. The word necessary, it comes in the first of the three groups of names, huh? The first group of names is names referring to causes. So, he has the word beginning, and then the word cause, and the word element, and the word nature, right? And then comes, last of all, but not least, the word necessary, right? That's the first part, right? So, in another way, something is said to be necessary from something exterior, which, if it be the efficient cause, that's one of the exterior causes, or the mover, huh? It makes the necessity of coaxio, of force, right? As when someone is not able to, what, go on account of the violence of the one detaining him, right? If, however, the exterior thing that induces necessity is an end, right, then something is said to be necessary from the supposition of the end. What does that mean? It means, if the end is to be achieved, then this must be so, right? Not that this must be so, necessarily, right, huh? You must study logic, huh? You can't go too late without studying logic. It's impossible to escape it. You must study your catechism. Not in that, say, kundum sui nituar, right? Not in the absolute sense, right, huh? Because these kids don't know the catechism at all, right? They don't teach a catechism. Were you taught by the Baltimore catechism? I was, yeah. I memorized it, you know. I said to people later in life, you know, who checked to it, I said, there was nothing wrong with the Baltimore catechism. We didn't understand the things very well. At least we memorized the things, and then we can, later on, you know, wonder about these things and why they were so, you know, and try to understand them better, right? They don't have that. And, of course, a child can memorize things in a way that older people can't, you know. I remember somebody who was, you know, was helping out in the confirmation program, you know, and part of the preparation of confirmation is called a review of the faith. Well, he said, it wasn't a review. It was a view. And he comes in and he's asking them, you know, what are, you know, the seven sacraments. Well, collectively, they couldn't have named the seven sacraments. And they, and you're getting things like, you know, graduation and so on. Ceremonia. Ceremonia. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, it's one thing to understand why there's seven sacraments, or how you distinguish them and so on. But to not even be able to name them is to, you know. So it isn't necessary in the absolute sense that you will learn a catechism, right? But for your well-being, for the well-being of the church, it's necessary, right? Okay. I remember a catechism saying to me, and he's talking to some guy, and he says, oh, God's not going to punish me for not going to Mass on Sunday, you know. He says, what do you think of that, Dwayne? I told him. Don't be so sure. But he's doing about those things, you know. He said, sorry, I don't need to do it. In my workshop. Well, I'd agree with you if God hadn't told us something else. Yeah, yeah. Okay. So if that exterior thing that induces necessity is the end, something is said to be necessary from the supposition of the end, meaning that if the end is going to be achieved, then this is so. But then you can distinguish this into two. When to it some end, either nullomotu poteseste, in no way is able to be, right? Or when it's not able to be suitably, right? Such an end would be supposed, huh? So he says it was not necessary for Christ to suffer by the necessity of, what? Force, huh? Neither on the side of God, who determined for Christ to suffer, right? Nor even from the side of Christ himself, who voluntarily suffered, right, huh? It was, however, necessary by the necessity of the end, right, huh? And now he's talking about, what? In what way is necessary by the end, huh? Which is able to be understood in three ways, huh? First, from our side, huh? Who are, what? Liberated by his passion, huh? According to that of John 3. It is necessary for the Son of Man to be, what? Exalted, right? What a euphemism for the cross, huh? But beautiful. That everyone who believes in him would not perish, but have... of what? To know life. And that's the thing that in the Latin you see, you say, to believe in him is always, what, formed faith, right? To believe God is just faith alone, right? But to believe in God is to, what, to go into him by love, right? So it's what they call formed faith, right? That's a problem with Luther and so on, right? It doesn't accept the distinction anymore, right? But it's a common thing in Augustine Townsend. You see that in the tweet, it's on faith there in the beginning of the Prima Secundae. It's a distinction in Latin, cratere, deo, cratere, deum, and indel. Secondly, from the side of Christ himself, who, through the humility of his passion, merited the glory of what? Exaltation. So he who humbles himself should be exalted, right? So Thomas says explicitly that, you know, his death merited, what, his resurrection, and his descent into hell is ascension, right? Okay, huh? Okay. He doesn't say the third thing I was saying, but in a way, the humility of his first coming, you know, merits the glory of his second coming, but more his death merits that. Okay. And to this pertains what is said in Luke chapter 24. These things are necessary for Christ to what? Suffer, and thus enter into his glory. Is that the two disciples there? He's explaining that? Yeah, yeah, yeah. We thought he was going to, you know, this and that. I don't know exactly. Your ways are not my ways, I'm so damn sure. And third, from the part of God, whose definition about the, what, passion of Christ was forenounced in scriptures, right, and prefigured in the observance of the old, what, law, right? And this is what is said in Luke chapter 22. The son of man, according as has been, what, defined, right, determined, he goes, right, huh? And Luke 24. These words which I spoke to you when I was still, what, with you, huh? Because it's necessary, in other words, Jesse again, right, to fulfill all those things which are written in the law of Moses and the prophets and the Psalms. And Thomas sometimes takes that as the threefold division of the Old Testament, right? Some of these questions say the law, referring to even the Psalms, right? It's the whole of the Old Testament. And you see the law and the prophets, and the law and the prophets and the Psalms, right? Kind of singing them up, singing them up. Because it is written, there's necessary for Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, huh? Now, I'm kind of interested in what Thomas does in that part. Because here in this text, he didn't see him making the distinction there of the two parts of, in the end, you know, explicitly, right? Saying that it's necessary for what? On our side, let the Son of Man be exalted, right, huh? That everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life, huh? And Christ, necessary for his, what, exaltation, and then for the Father to, what, fulfill his promise, right? Okay. The text there, when the Psalms there were, what God does for us is sometimes through mercy and sometimes through what, um, because of his promise, right? He's being, fulfilling his promise, right? Being truthful, right? You know? But the mercy is the highest, right? And, you know, I'll have to find that text, but remind a little bit of this. Maybe so, but this is in the Psalms, you know, and, and there's a beautiful text there. Yeah. Okay. And now, let's go back to the first one, right? First objection. This is referring to God as having the power to save us, right? As if he has that, omnipotent power, right? He says, to the first therefore it should be said that that reason proceeds of necessity of what? Force in the sight of God, huh? And to the second objection, right? We see the necessary as opposed to the voluntary. By necessary there, you mean necessary in the sense of what? Force. Force, yeah. You see what I mean? So, sometimes you find the Church Fathers, even Augustine, you know, using necessary just to mean what? Force, right, huh? Now, the third objection is the one based upon it being either mercy nor justice, right, huh? Justice, we should go to hell. Mercy, well, I could do it without going through all this. He said, to the third it should be said that for man to be liberated by the passion of Christ was suitable both to his mercy and his justice, right? He's really turning the hands of this objection, right? To justice because through his passion, Christ satisfied for the sin of the human race. And thus, man, through the justice of Christ, was what? Liberated, right? So, you have that kind of argument that Thomas gives from Augustine there, right? Where Augustine says, what? Man should do reparation because he's the one who sinned, but he can't do it. God could do it, but he doesn't deserve it. So, God solved this whole problem by becoming man. And then he could do what man alone could not do, man, pure man could not do, right? And yet it's man doing what? Preparation for man. That's why he said it would not be suitable for an angel to come down and suffer for us, right? Because then man would not redeem himself. To mercy, because since man by himself was not able to what? Satisfy for the sin of the whole human nature, right? God gave what? For him, as a one to satisfy his son, right? According to that of Romans chapter 3. We are justified gratis, right? Freely, yeah? Through his grace, huh? Through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God proposed as a what? Through faith in him, right? And this was of more abundant mercy than if he were to dismiss sins without satisfaction. So, somebody who offends us and they want to, you know, do something, you know, and you allow them to do something, you know, to kind of, aren't you more merciful than if you just forgive them without doing anything? You know, they can say false to hero, right? An affair, right? And then she's apparently died, but if he doesn't die, she's, you know, play much, you do about nothing. You've got to read Shakespeare. You've got to read Shakespeare. What? I've only seen it once. Yeah, yeah. And of course they have to go down and where she's apparently buried, you know, and say these prayers and so on. And they're going to do this yearly, you know, every time. And then the father says, you know, well, I have a, she has a cousin who's pretty much like her, you know. And if you marry her, you know. And of course the fail comes off. Well, it's a beautiful play, you know. Huh? Yeah. Oh, yeah, it's a very beautiful play. Once it is said in Ephesians 2, huh? God who is, what, rich, huh? He lives in mercy on account of his, what, exceeding charity by which he loves us, huh? When we were, what, dead by sins, he made us alive again in Christ. Now the fourth one, he doesn't go into the details here, but the, as I mentioned before, the sin of the angel was not remediable, right? Because the angelic nature is, like, completely actual, his mind, huh? You know, and he has complete understanding. So he sins, he does so with full knowledge, huh? But man is kind of divided with his body and so on, and he's very ignorant and so on. And so man is, so long as he's in this changeable world, he's changeable, right? And therefore he can be redeemed, but not the angel son. Now that's the first article, but the second and third one are going to be connected, right, huh? Because they're taking the idea that there's other ways it could be done, right? And therefore it's not necessary in the sense that the end could in no way be had without this, right? So it's necessary for me to have food to live. Can't do without food, right? But it's necessary for me to have steak to live, huh? Only to live one. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha You take any credit for our writing, you know, Shakespeare said it all, he says, you know, Shakespeare said it all, he says, you know, Shakespeare, you know, one or two others, he says, that's it, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha