Tertia Pars
Lecture 116: Christ's Redemption: Modes and Effects of the Passion

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

Now, who did the passion of Christ work our salvation by way of what? Redemption. To the fourth one proceeds thus. It seems that the passion of Christ did not work our salvation by way of redemption. For no one what buys or redeems what is his own has not ceased to be his own, right? But men never were what? Ceased to be of God. Belonged to him. According to that of Psalm 23, right? The Lord's are the earth and the fullness thereof. The earth and all those who inhabit it, right? Therefore it seems that Christ did not redeem us by his what? Passion. So you take your stuff down to the shop there where you go to the shops. Oh yeah, pawn shop. Pawn shop, yeah. Then you have to go and redeem it, right? It ceased to be yours and you've got to redeem it. Otherwise it's no longer yours, right? It won't be yours again. You've kind of given up temporarily. But that's what Robert Dollarman was saying. Yeah, yeah. We never cease to be gods though, right? More as Augustine says in the 13th book about the Trinity, the devil was to be overcome by the justice of Christ. It's distinguished from his power, right? But this justice requires that the one who invades in a deceitful way, an alien thing, right? Ought to be deprived of it, because theft and deceit, no one should patronize, right? But also human laws say, right? Since therefore the devil, a creature of God to wit man, deceived in a deceitful way, right? And subjected him to himself, it seems that he ought not, a man ought to be, by way of redemption, freed from his, what? Power, right? So they had us there and I ran there and doing parties, thing, you know? I had them tied up in the, you know, if we could have gone in there, we would have gone in there without paying them. That woman they got out recently though, they gave a big payment of money, you know, so I don't know. American government did? I don't know, paid for it, but it's always just a sum of money. The one of those, the one who's on the hiking? Yeah, yeah. There's still two guys in there, their fiancé and their friend. Moreover, the one who buys or redeems some price, right? Yeah. To the one who possesses. But Christ did not, what? Pay in his blood. Which is said to be the price of our redemption to the devil, right? Who held us captives, right? Therefore, Christ did not redeem us by his passion. Yeah, our liturgy, the Blessed Mother paid our price. So how can Christ redeem us by his blood if he doesn't give his blood to the devil? That doesn't seem proper, right? It's a price. I had to give my money to the pawn shop. But against all this nonsense is what Peter says in his epistle. So, you were not redeemed by, what? Cruptable gold and silver from your vain, right? Away in your paternal tradition. But by most precious blood, right? The blood of the Immaculate Lamb and the Spotless Lamb. Christ. And in Galatians 3.13, this Christ, he said that Christ redeemed us, huh? From the curse of the law, right? Being made for us a curse, huh? But he is said to have been made a curse for us insofar as for us he suffered on the, what, huh? Therefore, through his passion he, what? Redeemed us, huh? And that's what Thomas says here in the body of the article. I answer it should be said that to sin, man is in two ways, what, obliged and obligated. First, by the slavery of sin, because the one who does sin becomes the slave of sin, as is said in John 8.34. And 2 Peter 2. That by which one is overcome, to this he is addicted as a... Slave, yeah. Because, therefore, the devil overcame man, by inducing him to sin, man was, yeah, addiction, huh? So they... To the servitude to the slave of the devil. Secondly, as regards the, what, you know, the obligation of being punished, yeah. But which man was obligated according to the justice of God, right, huh? And this is a kind of slavery, too, huh? Because it belongs to slavery, in a sense, that someone suffers what he does not want, since it belongs to a free man to use himself as he wants, huh? Therefore, because the passion of Christ was sufficient, and a superabundant satisfaction for sin, and the guilt, you might say, of the human race, huh? His passion was, as it were, a certain price, to which we are freed from both obligations, huh? For the satisfaction by which he satisfies, which someone satisfies either for himself or for another, is a certain price, right? By which one redeems both from sin and from punishment, huh? According to that of Daniel 4.24, redeem your sins by alms, huh? Christ, however, is satisfied, not by giving money or something of this sort, but by giving that which was most great, huh? Namely himself for us, right? And therefore, the passion of Christ is said to be our, what? Redemption, huh? The first objection says, well, he's always, we're always his, right, huh? To the first, therefore, it should be said, that man is said to be of God, or belong to him in two ways, huh? In one way, insofar as he is subject to his power, and in this way, never does man, what? Cease to be of God, huh? According to that of Daniel 4, that the high one, right, Chalcis, lords it in the kingdom of men, right, huh? And to whoever he wishes, he gives that, huh? In another way, man is of God through the union of charity to him, huh? According to that of Romans 8. If someone does not have the spirit of Christ, he is not, what? Of him, right? So, they've got the exact words there, right? He's not of him, right? So, therefore, in the first way, never does man cease to be of God. He's always subject to the power of God, right? But in the second way, man ceases to be something of God through his sin. And therefore, insofar as he is liberated from sin, Christ satisfying for him suffering, he is said to be redeemed through the passion of what Christ does. Kind of a subtle thing, huh? I keep on thinking the pawn, the pawn, the pawn, the pawn shop there. I keep on thinking the pawn, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop, the pawn shop. Thank you very much. But is there a way that the sinner is not, is not his son? Not God? Yeah. Distinction makes sin. Yeah. Yeah. Wake up. Why don't you cry again? In daily Mass it seems like, and not maybe every Mass, but it seems quite often somebody's thing goes off, and they try to fire and turn it off, you know? Oh yeah, it's very, very great doing the consecration I think, and the rest of the priests have got to... Yeah, I guess it would be worse if the priests on the phone went off. I think the Vatican came out with something a couple of years ago, but priests shouldn't have their cell phones in the confessional. I think that came out for any number of reasons. Don't have your cell phones in the confessional. They used to have bells, now they have not. Yeah. Now they have cells. Their bells were now themselves. I can't change that. Some of them are really loud, aren't they? Yeah. They play all these crazy music. Yeah. They should wire the churches, so all those signals should be blocked. Yeah, but of course they probably can't block. Well, if you go to a movie now, right, before the movie comes up, the screen will be saying, you know, turn off your things and da da da da da da da. I remember when we went to see the Patriarch in Halifax, and this was ten years ago, right? Because the Lebanese are always on the cutting edge of technology toys. And there was a guy standing at the door with a sign, turn off your cell phone. Yeah. Turn off your cell phone. Everybody that came in, just get a sign. Turn off your cell phone. He just stood there with a sign. I know when the Pope went to Cyprus, they had an announcement before the liturgy about, you know, the liturgy of the silence of no flags, because Lebanese always have these flags. It's cold, cold, cold. Everything's a political event. Everything's a political event. It's cold, cold, cold. It's cold, cold, cold. It's cold, cold, cold. It's cold, cold, cold. Everything's a political event. It's cold, cold, cold. It's cold, cold, cold. Everything's a political event. It's cold. Free so-and-so, you know. Now the second objection. To the second it should be said that man in sinning is obligated both to God and the devil, as he guards his guilt, right? He offended what? He offended God and subjected himself to the devil, consenting to them. Whence, by reason of the guilt, he was not made a what? Servant of God. But rather, receding from the service of God, he incurred the service of the what? Devil, huh? God justly permitting this on account of the offense committed against him. As he guards punishment, chiefly man was obligated to God as to the highest judge, right, huh? But to the devil, as it were, to the torturer, right? Torturer, yeah. According to that of Matthew 5, 25, huh? Lest perhaps your, what? Adversary turn you over to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the minister. That is to the cruel angel punishment, huh? So you've seen those pictures there in Dante and I read the, they do for the additions. The devils are sticking you with pitchforks and all kinds of things, huh? So, although, therefore, the devil unjustly, as regards himself, right, deceived man by his, what, fraud and so on, and held him under, what, servitude. As regards his guilt, as regards his punishment, nevertheless, it was just for man to, what, suffer this thing. God permitting this as regards, what, the guilt, and ordering it as regards, or punishment, huh? Ordering him by punishment. And therefore, with respect to God, just as required that man be redeemed, huh? But not with respect to the, what, devil himself, huh? Interesting, I was looking for this this morning, I couldn't find it. There's another passage in the Gospel, and I just found it now, where our Lord tells a parable about this, the one servant who owed a lot. Yeah. And he was forgiven, he went out and he straggled the other guy to pay everything and throw him to jail. That's the one where our Lord tells the story, and his Lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all his debts. Yeah. He isn't, that's the word he uses. I couldn't find it this morning that I didn't know. Yeah, I think that shows a... It's not in, it's not actually in this passage of Matthew 5. He doesn't see a handover that torture, he just says minister there, or servant, but in Matthew 18. Oh, Matthew 18. Here's where it is that he says about the handover. Oh, I see. Yeah. I was looking for that. That's interesting. It's the same gospel. Yeah. A third objection about the blood of Christ, huh? The third should be said that because redemption is required for the liberation of man with respect to God, right, huh? Not with respect to the devil. It was not the price, right, to be what? Admitted to the devil, but to what? God, huh? And therefore Christ, his own blood, which was the price of our redemption, is not said to have offered it to the devil, but to what? To God, huh? So as Thomas called it, Christ there, the pelican there in the prayer, the P.E. Pelican there. But because he, so here he gives us an understanding of redemption, but it doesn't seem that, or did he do it elsewhere? It gives us more specifics about salvation. Salvation is sort of a general word. Redemption is sort of a type of kind of salvation. What is, is he saving us from our sins? Wouldn't that be involved in what? Satisfaction? Is that sort? You see there's a couple ways. Salvation, I guess, in itself comes from the word for health, right? So it's like we know in our health. Sometimes I know in the Syriac, the word they use just has to be of life. So it's that sense of giving you that body for that understanding of your mind. So then, anyway, in that general sense, then the parts of it would be like, freeing, cleansing you from your sins, another part would be being freed from the devil, but I guess there would be more redemption, understanding. It seems to involve more than one of these things, saving, huh? Because he's redeeming us, and he's satisfied for our sins, and so on. We'll have to study that text where you call him the Savior, you know? Okay. Why do we call him the Savior, huh? Yeah. The Savior from our sins. Yeah. Yeah. That's why he's called Jesus, right? In the beginning of Matthew's Gospel, right? That's right. Yes. But he saves us from our sins by dying for them, right? Satisfying them for them. It seems to be, behold the Lamb of God in it. That's what he said. John says, you know? Baptists. So one effect, I mean, is the pain of the death, but then the other is, what I would think of as salvation, as the healing. So we still have the effects of sin, and it's like a child of baptism. Well, he's got a death page, but he saw the effects, you know? Yeah. Supplying to him. Yeah. Warren Murray is saying to me something about, who's that guy that's going around? Christopher West, I guess he is, talking about theology of the body, you know? But he seems to be denying the effects of the original sin, right? As if, you know... All he's got to do is look at his own vocabulary. Yeah. Enjoy yourself, you know? Because, you know, there's nothing wrong with it anymore. There's no disorder. It's all... It's all... Fixed. For our enjoyment, yeah. So I don't know. Oh dear. Yeah. This is theology of the body. Run amok. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's an article. I guess it's an Alison Hildebrand, a reason to do with Warren, you know? Yeah, I saw her article. That... That... Yeah, she wrote an article. It was in... I don't know, in The Wanderer or... I'm sorry, who? Alison Hildebrand. She wrote an article. Kind of tell him to keep his mouth shut. Well, that's interesting. She says, this is really shameful. What are you doing? Christopher West. Yeah, he seems to have sort of pulled in the reins. He took some time off, stopped talking about it. He's thinking things over and that. So I think he's kind of changed. Which is it? It seems to be safer. I don't know. Okay. I'll put an article before I break it. Yeah, that's for sure. Um... Would it to be the Redeemer is, what, something private to Christ, right? It seems that to be the Redeemer is not private to Christ. For it's said in Psalm 30, You have redeemed me, Lord God of truth. But to be the Lord God of truth belongs to the whole Trinity, and therefore it is not, what, private to Christ. A little by appropriation it is applied to him, but we'll see what Thomas says. For it is said to redeem who gives the price of redemption. But God the Father gave, what, his own son as redemption for our sins. This is a nice argument. According to that of Psalm 110, that God sent redemption to his people, right? And the gloss says that's Christ, right? Who gave redemption to captives. Therefore, not only Christ, but also God the Father redeems us, huh? He gives his own son, right? There you go. Yeah, he's the giver. Interesting. Moreover, not only the passion of Christ, but that of other saints, huh? His efficacious, you might say, for our salvation, huh? According to that of Colossians 1.24, I rejoice in my passions for you, and that I might fulfill those things which are, what? Lacking. Lacking in the passion of Christ. In my own flesh, right? For my body, which is the... In his body. In his body, which is the church. Therefore, not only Christ should be called Redeemer, but also other saints, huh? But against this is what is said in Galatians 3. That Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made for us a curse. But only Christ was cursed for us, right? Therefore, Christ alone ought to be called a Redeemer, huh? Well, he says, The answer should be said that in order that someone, what? Redeems, huh? Two things are required. First, the act of, what? Paying or tying this? And the price paid, right? If, however, someone pays for the redemption of another, the price of the thing, if it is not his, but of another, he has not said himself to chiefly redeem, but more the one of whom it is the, what? Right. Christ. But the price of our redemption is the blood of Christ, huh? Or his bodily life, huh? Which is in blood, as it says in theviticus, huh? That's the thing, yeah. Which Christ, what? Payed out. That's all he has. Yeah. Thoroughly, you know. Whence both of these pertain to Christ immediately, insofar as he is, what? Man, right? But to the whole trinity, as to a first and remote, what? Cause, huh? From whom it was, right? Both the life of Christ as a first, what? Source or author. And from whom or by whom was inspired to the man Christ, huh? That he suffered for us, right? And so the charity about which he died was inspired in him by God, right? And therefore, to be immediately the redemptor, redeemer, is proper to Christ insofar as he is a man, right? Although the redemption itself can be attributed to the whole trinity as to a, what? First cause. First cause, huh? Kind of distinction before, haven't you? What's the cause of the conclusion of the syllogism? Yeah, the premises, right? But in a remote way, it's reason itself, right? So do I know the conclusion by the syllogism, or do I know the conclusion by my reason? Do I know the area of this room by my calculation or by my reason? Well, you shouldn't, you know, be caught in saying one better than the other, right? But my reason is kind of by remote cause, and calculation is the proximate, huh? The immediate cause by knowing the area, right? I multiply the length by the width, and that's how I know the area, right? I do know it by my reason, too. The Latin word mens, you know, for the mind, right? The word mensura, measure, right? That's the reason it's involved there, right? To the first therefore it should be said that the gloss thus expounds, and sometimes these glosses are identified by name but not here. You, the God of truth, redeemed me in Christ, shouting, Into your hands, Lord, I commend my spirit. And thus the redemption immediately pertains to the man Christ, but as a principal cause to what? God himself, huh? The Lord says this is Lombard's gloss. Yeah. It is not by name, though, I don't know, Lombard. Maybe it is a Lombard. This one's a Bible, I guess it is. I mean, it is a Lombard, yeah, that's it. Yeah, for, you know, an anonymous. Yeah. Only that is a disputed question. Yeah. To the second it should be said, huh? That the price of our redemption Christ immediately paid, right? But by the command of the Father, right? As the primordial, what? Okay, right? There you see, you know, going back to the previous question there, you know, the cause of Christ's suffering is practically his human will, right? Obeying God, right? But it's also the will of God, right? As a remote cause, right? So there's an order among those causes, huh? Father Hardin brings that out very strongly over and over about the Mass being a sacrifice. Not because we need to crucify Christ again, but because he still has a will. We can still offer, make that offering in a certain way for our redemption. As he emphasizes over and over, say, because he says, like, the hinge of sacrifice is always in the will. That's his point. That the passions of the saints help the Church, right? Not by way of, what? Redemption, right, huh? But by way of exhortation and example, huh? According to that of 2 Corinthians, whether we are, what, troubled for your exhortation and salvation, huh? Time's kind of tough there, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting that I teared some of the Article 5 there, right, huh? What he's doing, you know, when he would say the words of concentration, I would just admire us to see, you know. He's a good confessor too, you know, but I'm just struck by the way he would say Mass, you know. So many people, at least I remember reading it with St. Padre Peele, they would go to see him for one reason, to see his Mass. Yeah. That's why they would go to see him. Stigmata, oh yeah, that's of interest and all the rest of the day, but want to see his Mass. That's what they used to look for. Yeah. You know, Warren Murray had a, in his parish, he had some old woman there who wanted to speak German, you know. So who could have taken a confession, you know. Or Father Steiner. Father Steiner was talking about you, it's a little puzzle too by your language. He did his best. At least once in Nova Scotia, a Polish woman came, daughter brought her, she wants to go to confession. Okay, but she doesn't speak English. I said, okay, and the woman, the woman was volunteering to translate for her mother, and I said, well, does she know the Ten Commandments? She asked me, yeah. So if I say one, two, she could say yes or no, yes then. And how many times, she could hold the fingers, yeah, okay, good enough. We went and four, and so there you go, and that's it. I have a nurse at the office, I used to get my heat fever shots, you know. I was talking to her one time, you know. And really, she was a cousin of Father Steiner, you know. Oh, really? I was talking about, you know, when I was back in St. Paul, you know. Most of the time we were talking about, you know, irritation. She was allergic to strawberries, but she loved them. Oh, no. And there was a while, she'd eat strawberries, and she'd break out, you know. Maybe before her comes, and she'll say, hey, your body changes, you know, and she'd break out again, so. But then she'd tell me that, you know. But she tried to be the cousin of Father Steiner, so. What's the last name again? Huh? Steiner, you said? Yeah, yeah. So he's about stung now, obviously. I've been growing up, you know. My senior stinger, he's the one that, when the young priests preached. Polygenism. I don't remember Polygenism, but I remember him coming out afterwards. He was waiting in the sacristy to come out and help with communion, and the young priests preached all about, you know. Lots of Adams and Eves all over the place, and all the blah, blah, blah. And my senior stinger, as soon as he sat down, my senior stinger came out to the next point. He said, what he just preached was heresy, blah, blah, blah, and then, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And suspended, and that was the end of that game. That was my senior stinger. That's a humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Humanity generous, yeah. Okay, so we look at the first and second here now, right? Yeah, yeah. Okay, to the first, therefore, it should be said that the passion of Christ related to the flesh of Christ, right, fits the, what, infirmity assumed, right? But related to his, what, divinity, right? It attains from it an infinite, what, power, right? According to that of 1 Corinthians 1, what is infirm of God is stronger than men, right? Because the infirmity itself of Christ, insofar as it is the infirmity of God, right, has a power exceeding every human power. Okay, so the objection was what? That God's power? Yeah, but he was crucified with weakness, but that weakness is nevertheless, like, in human power, insofar as it's, what, the weakness of God. Kind of strange, the weakness of God, but it is the weakness of God for reason of the hypostatic union. Now, he says, what about a body, acting upon another body by contact? To second, it should be said that the passion of Christ, although it is, what, a bodily passion, right, huh? He nevertheless has a spiritual power being united from his divinity, right? And therefore, through a spiritual contact, it gets its efficacy, right? So it's not a bodily contact, necessarily, right? Though sometimes, you know, that is there of Christ in his miracles, right, to show that it has got this causality. But it doesn't have to go down to the guy's house to cure his son, right? And through faith and the sacraments of faith, according to the apostle, right, huh? That's the way the power of it is applied to us, right? According to the apostle, he proposed a, what, one to offer up for us, right? Through faith in his blood. That's what they often, many of the fathers make reference of that. The woman with the hemorrhage, I can only touch his tassel, but it's what she's really, she doesn't know she touched him by faith, she touched his divinity. Oh, yeah. Through faith. Okay, now the second part. Part of the effect or fruit of the, I think that's the next question, right? That was the mode of the effects, right? Then we ought to consider, question 49 here, about the effects themselves of the Passion of Christ. And about this, four things are asked. First, whether through the Passion of Christ we are liberated from what? Sin. Secondly, whether through it, Passion of Christ, we are liberated from the power of the devil. Third, whether through it we are liberated from being obligated to punishment, right? Fourth, whether through it we are, what, reconciled to God. And fifth, whether through it is open to us the door of heaven. You know, we talk about that in baptism, right? And now, those things are all with reference to us. And the sixth one is divided against the other five, right? Because through it Christ, what, obtained his exaltation, right? Purification of his body and so on. Now first, whether by the Passion of Christ we are liberated from sin. To the first one proceeds thus. Thus, it seems that through the Passion of Christ we are not liberated from sin. For to liberate from sin is something proper to God himself, according to that of Isaiah chapter 43. I am the one, right, who deletes your iniquities on account of myself, right? Christ, however, does not suffer according as he is God, but according as he is man, right? Therefore, the Passion of Christ did not liberate us from what? The sin. But that you may know that the Son of Man has power in earth. That would be the, is that the sin content? Well, anyway. Moreover, the bodily does not act upon the, what, spiritual, right? But the Passion of Christ is something bodily, right? But sin, however, is not except in the, what, soul, which is a spiritual creature, right? And therefore, the Passion of Christ is not able to cleanse us from what? Sin up in the body, act upon the spirit, right? I should have read the last question. No one is, if more, no one is able to be liberated from sin who has not, what? He's not yet committed. But what is going to be, what? Committed afterwards. Yeah. Since, therefore, many sins are committed after the Passion of Christ, right, yeah? And the whole day they are committed. It seems that, through the Passion of Christ, we are not liberated from, what, sin, huh? Moreover, when a sufficient cause is laid down, nothing further is required to bring in the effect. But there are required still other things to the remission of sins, like baptism and penance. That's the sacrament there, I guess. Therefore, it seems that the Passion of Christ is not a sufficient cause in the remission of sins. Well, you've got primary causes and secondary causes and so on. Or chief causes and tools, right? So the sacrament, you're like the tools of Christ and his Passion of death. Moreover, Proverbs 10, it is said, charity covers, what, all sins. And through mercy and faith, sins are, what, purged, huh? So if I'm faithful in mercy, first of all, I'm going to be purged of my sins. But many other things there are about which we have faith and which provoke us to, what, charity. Therefore, the Passion of Christ is not the proper cause, the remission of sins, huh? Against us is what is said in Apocalypse 1.5. He loved us and washed us from our sins in his, what, blood, huh? Apocalypse is the last word, isn't it? I answer, it should be said that the Passion of Christ is the proper cause, the remission of sins, in three ways, huh? It's a very interesting text here. First, by way of provoking us to, what, charity. Because, as the Apostle says, Romans chapter 5, God commended his love for us, right? That when we were enemies, huh? Christ, what, died for us, huh? So he died for his enemies. But to charity, huh? We, what, obtain the forgiveness of sins, according to that of Luke 7. And he said about Mary Magdalene, many sins are, what, forgiven her, because she loved much, right? Secondly, the Passion of Christ causes the remission of sins by way of, what, redemption, huh? Because he is our head, through his Passion, which he sustained from charity and obedience, right, yeah? As it were, through the, what, price of his Passion he redeemed us, right? Just as a man, through some meritorious work, which he exercises by his hand, huh? Redeems himself from the sin that he committed by his feet. You heard about this crazy, uh, church that, that's attacking the, uh, protesting the frunals, the soldiers brought back from Afghanistan? No, God. Well, it's a crazy thing, you know, and, uh, it's terrible, because, you know, the people are trying to get some kind of exposure, you know, from these frunals, for these, uh, soldiers they brought back, and they say, Well, you sinned, and that's why you're, you know, you're dying over there, and so on. I have a picture of one of these crazy women's longsat thing, kicking the American flag, you know? Yeah, there's a thing. So, there's a sister of the foot here, you know? Yeah, no, get a hammer. Whack her in the hand. Yeah. So, he says, um, just as if man, through some meritorious work that he exercises by his hand, redeems himself from the sin that was committed by his feet. And just as the natural body is one, consisting from the diversity of members, right? So, the whole church, which is the mystical body of Christ, is, what, counted as one person with its head, which is what Christ done. And third, by way of, what? Yeah. He's coming back to two of these things in the previous one, right? Insofar as the flesh by which Christ sustained his passion is a tool of his divinity, right? It's the same thing he made in that odd three there, in the previous article, right? Insofar as it is a tool of his divinity, huh? And, you know, in my text there, this is italicized, instrumentum divinitatis, and the footnotes says Damascene in the third book on the orthodox faith, right, huh? So, Damascene said, right, is kind of authoritative, I guess, for saying that the flesh was a tool of his divinity, right? From which his passions and actions work in the divine power to what? Expelling sin, right, huh? That's kind of interesting, that's a very interesting text there. Okay, to the first objection, huh? It's God who says, I am the one who leads. To the first, therefore, it should be said, Though Christ does not suffer according as his God, right? Nevertheless, his flesh is the tool of his, what? Divine nature, huh? And from this, his passion, huh? Had a certain divine power to expelling sin, as has been said, huh? You know that the text there in 6th chapter of John there, where they're kind of, some people are turning away from Christ because of the teaching of the Eucharist, right? And then Christ says something that people misunderstand sometimes, you know? The flesh profits nothing, you know? It's the spirit, right? And people, you know, the heretics say, well, this means that this is to be taken, you know, with a great assault and so on. And, but, it's just kind of what you say, the flesh by itself, yeah, yeah. Yeah, but the flesh, insofar as it's the flesh of God, right, has a, what? Has a power from the divine nature to what? Expelling sin and... Yeah, yeah. I remember, it was a saint, wasn't there, a saint who was, didn't know that his sins were forgiven, right? He was praying a long time under the crucifix, right? And finally a drop of blood fell from the crucifix on him. Oh, wow. And then you knew this in the first word forgiven, right? Yeah, yeah. You know, it's kind of beautiful, I forget, but I read that, but you may have read that story too. I heard the one at St. Margaret Mary. It wasn't exactly this, but she was wondering if her vision was really Christ. Yeah. The devil, and she went to a confessor, and he said, well, you can test it by saying, ask him what your last confession was. Okay, she went, she asked, I had another vision, and she asked, and she came back and confessed and told him, I had another vision. Well, what did he say? He said, well, he said he didn't remember. So he said, if I was the devil, he had to give you a long list of all the things he did, all the things he should have confessed, all the things he forgot to confess, all the things he forgot to confess, all the things he forgot to confess, all the things he forgot to confess, all the things he forgot to confess, all the things he forgot to confess, all the things he forgot to confess, because he says, I don't remember, not because he can't remember, but because he makes it an act of, he doesn't want him, he's forgiven. That's it. Don't remember. The second one now is, objection was saying, how can the bodily act upon the spiritual, right? The second should be said, that the passion of Christ, to go as a bodily suffering, right? It, what? Obtains a certain spiritual power from the divinity, whose, what? Of which it is the flesh, right? Or of whom is, his flesh is united, as an instrument. According to which virtue, or power, the passion of Christ is the cause of the omission of, what? Sin. Now, what about people sitting after him? To the third should be said, that Christ, by his passion, liberated us from sins as a cause, that is, instituting the cause of our liberation, from which, whatever sins are, what? Forgiven, are able to be forgiven, whenever, or, whenever they committed, cause all things look towards the past, present, or the past. That's it. Yeah. Just as if a, a, what, a physician, made a medicine, from which, could be, what? Any sickness could be healed. Yeah, even those in the future, yeah. That's good. Shakespeare's play there, that really, Also, that ends well. The daughter has been left this medicine, you know, that, her father, very famous physician, had left her as a very important one. And so, she's in love with, with the, with the son of the count, or the, the count to be. And, but she's a commoner, so she can't, you know, have him. And then she goes to the court, you know, where he is. And she, the, the king is, suffering, and he's given up on these things. And she offers to cure him, you know, and she reads that, that is there, but the understanding is that, then she can have her choice of a husband, right? And so, then she chooses, return, right? But, of course, he doesn't like to, marriage in those circumstances, so, he had to be, hopefully, he doesn't play. He takes off, right after marriage, I mean, and then he abandons there, and, anyway, let Shakespeare do his own. Yeah, we're going to have it. Untied the knot. They tied the knot, but they, untied it. You get the fourth objection, What do you need to do these sacraments for, if that's, to the fourth, it should be said, that because the passion of, what, precedes as a universal cause of omission of sins, right? It's necessary that it be, what, applied to individuals, right? To, or by individuals, or to individuals, for the deletion of their own sins, right? But it's kind of like, these are what, they're operating sacraments, as tools of what, Christ's passion and death, so they speak of baptism, and buried with Christ, and so on, right? That's a common expression, I remember from theology, is that, the efficacy of the sacraments, is the blood of Christ, right? So he says, this comes about, the baptism and penance, and the other sacraments, which have power, from the passion of Christ, as will be, clear below, when he takes up, the sacraments, right? Now, what about, you know, charity, and faith, and so on? To the fifth, it should be said, that also through faith, is applied to us, the passion of Christ, right? Through perceiving its, what? Fruit. According to that of Romans 3.25, whom God proposed as a, what? Carry on for us, huh? Yeah. Through faith in his blood, right, huh? But the faith, through which we are, cleansed from sin, is not unformed faith, right? Which is able to be, also with sin, but faith that has been formed, through what? Charity. Charity, right? And thus, the passion of Christ, is applied to us, not only as regards, the understanding, but also as regards, the what? The affection, the will. And in this way, the sins are dismissed, from the power, and the passion, of what? Christ, I was mentioning earlier, with their help, you know, and they made these, ways you could gain, plenary indulgence, you know, and the ingredient of indulgences, and even on a daily basis, you know, but you have to fulfill the other requirements. But one was, I think the saying, the rosary, and one was, they're making the station of the cross, and one was reading to your scripture, for at least half an hour, I guess it was, and it's a poor thing to it, that keeps it. But in all those, there's kind of a, what? Faith, which has got to be, this is a formed faith, you know, in which you are, being joined to the passion of Christ, right? Sure. And yeah, I mean, you're meditating on the passion, like in the, Sorrowful Mysteries, and so on, or reading a scripture, you know, it's about Christ, and suffering in a way. So, that's, not a sacrament, but it's like a sacramental, almost, you know, you're being joined in your life, you know, through these things. It's more than, I think, wasn't it true, John Paul II? I know it's true of other popes, when they were dying, they weren't compassionate. Yeah. Well, I remember reading, about John XXIII, they had the crucifixion, you know. I thought, didn't they say it to John Paul II? That he weren't the passionate, from John, I think, but I can't remember. But John, I know, was very traffic, he said someone got between him and the cross, and then, then he got agitated, you know. What's that? They wanted to move? Someone got between him and the cross, you know, it's back to that, you know. Oh, yeah. But he must have been in this, dying bed there, and then the crucifix in the wall, I suppose. So, come between him and this crucifix. I hope so with Fred, that's for sure. At least we got stuck here now. Yeah.