Prima Secundae
Lecture 221: Sin as Punishment for Sin and Eternal Punishment

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

Well, can you have one without the other, right? If you don't really have that fear of being mistaken, this fear of making a mistake, right, you're not going to, what, be careful in your pursuit of this difficult good, which is, what, truth, right? So the two have to be kind of balanced with each other, right? But something like what Thomas was saying in the spiritual life, right, that the hope of divine, what, mercy, must be balanced with the fear of divine, what, justice, huh? So these are different things, hope and fear, just like humility and charity are different things, but one requires, what, the other, right, huh? I think that's important to see, you know, how these virtues and things must be, what? Yeah, yeah. That's why I so much admire about Plato's great dialogue there that takes place in the last day of Socrates' life, right? The fatal, right, huh? But again, it's a discussion about the immortality of the soul and so on and difficult things, right, huh? Aristotle says it in the animo, that it's one of the most difficult things in the world to know what the soul is and all the truth about the soul, right? And at one time, you know, they get kind of confident and then some objections come in and then they start to, what, despair, right? And the guy that Plato is recounting this to, you know, he's kind of thinking, feeling, too, what did Socrates do, you know? And Socrates leads them out of their despair, right, huh? And then he starts to reply to the objections, right, huh? And then, of course, the first objection is kind of easy and then the second one is more difficult, right? And, of course, they get very confident. The first one is kind of solved off too much difficulty. In just a minute now, that one's going to be so easy, right, huh? You know? And you see, I see Thomas do it sometimes in disputed questions, you know. You know, he'll kind of solve a more preliminary difficulty, you know, but more serious, you know, more serious thing, right, huh, you know? And what you see Socrates doing is that sometimes you have to, what, encourage the student, right? Other times you've got to kind of warn him, right, and shake him up a bit, right, huh? And I know myself, you know, as I went from Geserich to Deconich to Dionne. Of course, you get more of this fear in Deconich and Dionne, right? And my friend Warren Murray says, you know, on season, Dionne's principal passion is fear. The fear of being mistaken, right, huh? But, I mean, there's got to be a balance there, right? I mean, you have the hope as well as the fear, right? And Geserich, I think, was probably better for me to start out with because he's encouraged me to think more about these things, you know? But, you know, Dionne, you know, I told you always at the time when I came with my outline of my thesis of what I was planning to do, you know, and Dionne looked at it for a little bit, and then he made a little suggestion, you know, which... Once he said, I could see right away, he was correct, and I said, you know, I said, yeah, it's not good the way it is. I can see, you know. And he says, I don't have any evidence, he says. But the little change he came back, I could write the thesis on my own, you know, huh? And there was no problem, you know. But he said balance, right, you know? So it's interesting, you know, to see those things in theology and in philosophy, they're a little different thing, but there's some similarity there, right? Hope in God's mercy and the fear of God's justice must be balanced, right? And in the philosopher, the hope of coming to know the truth and the fear of ending in error and mistake and so on. That's what you find, you know, in the, of course, the modern philosophers, you find this pride, right? Remember, Kastarek would bring out, you know, he'd say, I got a letter from the iconic the other day, he says, he feels like jumping off the bridge. He's going to be in the moderns again. And you see, it's kind of a pride they're in, right, huh? Warren Murray's telling me about the pride of the great scientists sometimes, you know? They don't want to admit God, right? But they kind of admit sometimes, openly, that they're trying to block the way to recognizing God, right? That's going to interfere with them as the wisest people around. But they think they are the wisest people around. It seems that some scientists who are quite prominent who are proud of their atheism, that they always seem to come up with some alternate God. And it's uncanny in a way. It's their religious instinct is intact. It's just a... It's just a lie. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No. go to article two here was it in question 87 whether sin can be the punishment of sin to the second one goes forward thus it seems that sin cannot be the punishment of sin for punishments are brought in so that through them men might be reduced to the good of what virtue so you spank the kid because you hope it's good as is clear through the philosopher in the 10th book of the ethics but to sin a man is not led back to the good of what virtue but to the opposite therefore sin is not the punishment of sin that sounds like a good argument see a similarity between this where thomas is objecting right over here he's objecting to our lord himself where i was objecting to the words of very herself right but makes you stop and think moreover just punishments are from what god as is clear through augustine or by augustine in the book of the 83 questions now you know what those 83 questions are but sin is not from god and is unjust therefore sin cannot be the punishment of sin more it's of the notion of punishment that it be against the will right but sin is in accord with the will right it's from the will this is clear from the foregoing therefore sin cannot be the punishment of sin i'm convinced temporarily i'm very fearful here you see but against this is what the great gregory says in his homily or whatever it is on ezekiel right the prophet ezekiel that some sins are the punishment of what sin well gregory's good enough for me now i'm really tied up answer it should be said that we can speak about sin in two ways how does he see these distinctions that my dim mind doesn't say my dim light doesn't cast much light upon the the thing but this guy yeah going out you see per se and procedence huh i think i've heard that distinction used sometimes before per se in no way is sin able to be the punishment of sin for sin per se is considered according as it goes forth from the will for thus it has the ratio right aspect of what guilt but of the ratio of what punishment is that it be against the will as is had in the first part whence it is manifest that in no way per se loquendals can sin be the punishment of what sin but per accident sin is able to be the punishment of sin in three ways first on the side of the cause which is removing the what thing preventing huh this is one of the famous kinds of what accidental cause so when what's his name there yeah push the thing down he was the fraction cause of the what class yeah because he removed what prohibited the roof from coming down now the causes inclining to what sin are what passions the temptation of the devil and other things of this sort which causes are impeded by the aid of divine what grace which is subtracted by what sin whence since the subtraction of grace is the certain punishment and from god as has been said above it follows that project ends also the sin that follows from this is called a what punishment yeah and then even quotes a text from scripture right this guy knows scripture you know he had a photographic memory right now you ever know guy of the photographic memory first did a class class of 100 yeah he knew everybody's name by by our face just by our truth it's true we face yeah we met a guy in in high school there i forget i remember you know he was in high school they could give him you know a three or four page poem you know and he'd read over once and close the book and recite it and go to a party you know and there's ten girls there he cuts all the names you know hi judy hi great yeah so we are so we are we all kind of yeah he's the same guy you know who said you know when the guy said you know money isn't everything yeah but what it is don't buy but see he used to read the telephone book you know what to do with this memory you know two pages and pages the telephone book but tom has probably had a you know pretty good memory right remember a teacher saying this one got a pretty good memory you know he said how do you remember all those things well i see i imagine a house and i put this in that room and this maybe there's some tricks i don't think it'll work for me yeah in this way the apostle says in the epistle to the romans chapter one the 24th verse on account of this he handed them over god to the what desires of their own hearts right so as he removed his his grace right they follow the desires of their heart to something even what worse right like these terrorists right they seem to be doing something worse each time each day about them which are the what passions of the soul right now because men being what abandoned from the aid of divine grace are captured by their what actions huh and in this way always sin is said to be the punishment of the what in another way on the side of the substance of the act right which induces some what affection would it be an interior act as is clear in anger and envy or an exterior act as when some are what oppressed by some grave what labor and loss or something that you might carry out the act of sin according to that of wisdom five seven we have become what exhausted in the way of iniquity right it looks like he sailed the seven seas yeah he's already sailed the third way on the part of the effect as it some sin is said to be the punishment with respect to an effect what fouling and these last two ways one sin is not only the punishment preceding sin but also of what now to the first therefore it should be said that this also that some are punished by god right when he permits them to what fall down right into some sin flow into is ordered to the good of what virtue right then sometimes to the what good of those who sin right you when some after sin arise more humble and but cautious. Now, watch me with that famous text in Augustine there. He's talking about the early virgins, right? Some that kind of proud because of it, right? And Augustine said it would be better if they fell into the sins of the flesh, right? Because then they would be covered from their pride, right? Always, however, is it for the emendation of others who seeing some, right, going to ruin, right, from sin to sin, right? They are more, what, fear, you might say, to sin, right? And the other two ways is it manifests that sin is in order to the correction of the one that the man who, what, suffers some labor or detriment in sinning is, what, apt to, what, withdraw men to sin, right? So somebody's willing to have an abortion, right? They have really terrible consequences, not just physically, but, you know, mentally, right? And they get very mentally sick, you might say. It's when they go to Rachel or something, yeah. Now, the second objection and the third are taking what is what per se, right, as opposed to paratchitans, right? So he's untied the knots, right? I can go free now. Oh, it's frightening here in Article 3 here. Oh, it's frightening here in Article 3 here. Oh, it's frightening here in Article 3 here. Whether some sin induces or brings about the, what, obligated we said before, right, huh? I think we often have a sense of what, being accused of something, right? Accused of something, that's a little strange way to translate that, as accused in English. To the third one goes forward thus, it seems that no sin induces one to merit, let's put it that way. You can use the word merit there. Eternal punishment, huh? For a just punishment, it must be what? Equal to the what? Guilt. For justice is a what? Yeah. So, that's interesting, huh? The word just, it's equal, right? And even when you use it in another context, then you say, it just fits. What does that mean? Yeah, yeah. You move from one place to another, you know. You wonder if they can fit the bed in or fit the sofa in or something, you know. Ah, it just fits, you know. But, uh, same with clothing, right, huh? Shoot, just fits, huh? Just right. It's the idea of equality, right, no? Well, whence it is said in Isaiah 27, in measure against measure, right? What's the name of Shakespeare's play? Right, yeah. So, the man is condemned, one man, for the very thing that, what, he later on is guilty of, right? Same punishment. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, right? But sin is something temporal. And therefore, it cannot lead into the, what, guilt of eternal punishment, huh? And this is something very hard for people to see, right? And it seems like God is kind of a mean guy, you know? Yeah, yeah. Moreover, punishments are certain medicines, right? As it's said in the second book of the Ethics. But no medicine ought to be infinite. Because it is ordered to some end. But what is ordered to an end is not infinite. Conduction terms there, right? Finis and infinitum, huh? As the philosopher says in the first book of the politics, Therefore, no punishment ought to be infinite. Moreover, no one always does something unless he delights in it for its own sake. But God does not delight in the loss, huh? Perdition of men, right? As is said in Wisdom 1. Therefore, he would not punish men by an eternal punishment. Moreover, nothing that is parachidans is infinite. But punishment is parachidans, For it is not in accordance with the nature of the one who is punished. Therefore, it cannot last forever. Convinced, aren't you? It doesn't take much to convince me, a dim word like me. But against this is what is said in Matthew 25. These will go into eternal punishment. I guess our Lord says this, right? It's just a book I was reading in. It's a valuable book. How many chapters are there, by the way, in Matthew? Now, what's the symbolism of 28? Yeah? Yeah. I mentioned how Thomas begins in the first book of the Summa Contra Gentiles. The consideration of the perfection of God in chapter what? Yeah. A perfect number, right? That's not by chance, is it? No, he told me they divided the Gospels back into the chapters. The University of Paris in the Middle Ages. Those guys are subtle guys. You never know what they're up to, huh? But that is the, what? It's not the logical and understandable division of Matthew, huh? So it's the logical and understandable division. That's the editorial and, what, reference division, we call it, huh? So you divide it into 28 chapters, and each chapter into a number of verses. That's the editorial and reference division. What's the logical and understandable division of Matthew? Into three, yeah. Okay? John is into two, but Matthew's into three, yeah. And Thomas quotes this great guy, he quoted earlier, Gregory, right, huh? Okay? Because Gregory says that in the four animals there, the man represents what? Matthew. The eagle represents, yeah. The ox represents, yeah, because he's a priest. Right. Yeah. And the tribe of Jews. So, as man, he came into the world, right? And that's what you talk about in the first and second chapter. Then he proceeded through the world, huh? Teaching. And that's chapters, what, three through 20. And then he went out of the world, and that's chapters 21 and 28. That's theological and understandable division, right? And in Mark chapter 3, verse 29, it said, He who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, right, will not have remission in aeternum, but he will be, what, subject to eternal, what, punishment, huh? Kind of funny the way they use the word in there, don't they? Sometimes they have that. Yeah. Yeah. Well, is Thomas going to untie these knots? Good luck, Thomas. I was reading in Thomas this morning there where he said that God has no idea of evil. I say, well, gee, well, you know, I could argue, you know, like, Aristotle argues against Pedocles, right? His position, you know, means that we know something God doesn't know, right? That's laughable to Aristotle, that we know something God doesn't know, right? So God has no idea of evil. What the heck? God. How can I get some advantage of that? We force you to go back to the definition of what an idea is in God, right? What Augustine was talking about. There's no idea of evil. That's the equivocation there, too. You know, there are use of the word idea in English, but. I answer, it should be said, this has been said above, that sin from this brings in, right? Or leads into the merit of punishment, right? That it perverts some, what? Order. But the cause remaining, the effect, what? Remains. When so long as the perverseness of the order remains, it's necessary that there remains the, what? There's no need to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to be said to Yeah, but someone perverts an order sometimes in a way that can be what? Repair it, huh? But sometimes in a way that is not able to be repaired, huh? Now, always the defect by which is what? Is irreparable. If, however, one says the beginning, by its power, a defect is able to be what? Repair it, huh? See why this sin against the Holy Spirit, right? It is spoken of as being irreparable. Just as if is corrupted, the principle of what? For seeing, right? There cannot come about a reparation of vision, right? Except by what? Power. If, however, the seeing principle is saved by some impediments, right? Coming to the eye, they are able to be repaired either by nature or by what? All right. Now, of any order, there is some, what? Beginning. Some principle. Through which someone becomes a partaker of that order, right? That's interesting, huh? Where does Aristotle first talk about what order is? Yeah, on the 12th chapter of the categories, right? And I always begin there because there he distinguishes in order, right? And therefore, the senses of order, which means before and what, after, right? And you know my favorite question I used to love to torture my students with? Like, you know, I have a cruel streak in me, you know? In one sense of before, does one sense of before come before another sense of before? And it's what sense of the four central senses he gives. The first sense of before is in time, right? The second sense is in being, when this can be without that, but not face-a-versa. Alongside of that is the sense which is the cause before the effect. And the third sense of before is in the discourse of what? Reason, right? And then the fourth sense is better, huh? So what sense of before does one sense of before come before another sense of before? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Because we name things as we know them, right? That's the principle that Thomas gives. And therefore, the order in naming follows the order in what? In knowing, yeah. And so you begin with the sense of before in time, right? Because that's tied up with what? Motion. Motion is the number of the before and after in motion. And as my friend William Shakespeare says, things in motion, as soon as you catch the eye, the foot not stirs, you know? You want to get somebody's attention, you wave or something, right? There are the students down there, right? I told you there was a joke about the seminary education in the old days, you know, very authoritative, you know? And the student wanted the professor to answer the question, right? So he's going to hand it in front of the professor. Finally, he couldn't ignore it anymore. He says, what's your question? Or, you know, he said, I don't think we've been introduced, he said. Or the other one was, yeah. Or he says, he asks the question, he gets the question off, and they get back up with a text, and he says, doesn't say. That's kind of a joke. Just repeat the book, right? But some people can't even repeat the book, right? Or repeat the lecture, right? Go up to Laval, and it's, you know, when I was at Assumption, I'd go up at Thanksgiving time, Easter break or something, and I'd turn to some students, what's Dion talking about these days? And they start talking. I'm sure. It's not what Dion said, you know? It's like, can't even repeat the lecture, you know? But when Aristotle gets to the fifth book of wisdom, right, he takes up the words used in wisdom, right, and in the axioms, and to some extent everywhere, because they're being very common, and he begins with what word? Yeah. Beginning. And then later on, when he takes up the word before, in the, what, an order, therefore, in the fifth book, right, he recalls the common notion of beginning, right? Why does he do that? Because he sees the connection, right? That every order has some beginning that is the source of the order, huh? So he's a good person to tell you when he says, Every order there is some, what, beginning, which someone becomes a partaker of that, what, order, right? And therefore, if by sin is corrupted the beginning of the order by which the will of man is subject to God, there will be a disorder that of itself is irreparable, although it could be repaired by the divine, what, power. Now, the beginning of this order is the last end. That's a common thing that Aristotle talks about, right? Okay? And Aristotle's always distinguishing these two orders, right? The order of parts to each other and the order of the whole to its end, right? So, say, the end of the chair is, what, sitting, right? And because of the order to sitting, then the parts of an order to each other, right? And the reason why this comes in at a slightly obtuse angle is that it's comfortable to sit in, right, huh? If it came in at an acute angle, you'd have a broken back, you know? You don't make a sit in it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I always say, you know, I have a chair where you can go all the way back to the back leg right now. You have a chair where you can't, you know, your legs, you kind of, you know, then your back gets stuck out of whack, you know? So I always get a chair that's properly ordered the parts, but it ordered properly to what? Yeah. Yeah, yeah. And then, it would kind of, because public lectures, you always sit down, you know? Sit down, relax, just sit down, right? He likes to sit down. The circuit story is, quote, the man sitting becomes wise. Homo sedens fit sapiens, right? Well, he translates it, the man sitting makes wisdom. Because this Latin was worse than mine. So, Aristotle, when he talked about, you know, the whole universe, right? He says that the order of the universe is for the sake of what? God, right? See, he's the exterior end, just like sitting is exterior to the chair, right? But the order of the parts of the chair is an account of the order of the chair to sitting, right? And so the order of what? The universe is an account of the order of the universe to God, right? So God is the beginning of these things. So the end of this order is the last end to which man inheres by, what, charity, by the love of God. So this is extremely important, this love of God. And if you lose that, if you go against that love of God, then you've what? You've lost the beginning of the whole order, right? And therefore, whatever sins turn away from God, taking away what? The caritatem offerentia. Of themselves, right? Lead us into an eternal what? Punishment. Because of themselves, the irreparable. There's no beginning to go back to. You've lost the beginning, right? It would be like the philosopher losing the axioms, right? If he didn't know it longer. You know? There's still a toxinone in the third. There's still a toxinone in the third. There's still a toxinone in the third. There's still a toxinone in the third. There's still a toxinone in the third. There's still a toxinone in the third. There's still a toxinone in the third. The third book there about the principal contradiction, right? If you give this up, you've given up everything, right? You've lost that, right? Yeah, I think something can both be and not be, right? Same time. It says, only alternative is it turns the life of the vegetable, right? Because even the animal makes some distinction between, you know, hot and cold and hard and soft and so on. I told you the story about the, we had these two cats in the house, right? Tabitha and her daughter Moppet there. And there was a place there, a comfortable place to take a snooze. Tabitha liked to go and take a snooze. And one time Moppet went there and was laying down there. And Tabitha went up to, you know, have that nice sleep and so on. And she sees Moppet there and all she did was, let's go. She's expressed her disclosure, you know. That's kind of a... Yeah, what are you doing in mind? It's so kind of funny, you know. Almost human, you know, these animals. So what kind of sin, what are they called those sins that destroy the beginning? Mortal, yeah, yeah. It's like they're taking away the principle of what? Of life, right? So they end up in death, right? Okay. To the first, therefore, it should be said that punishment is proportional to sin according to its what? Yeah. Both in divine judgment as well as in human judgment, he's saying, right? As Augustine says, who is this Augustine? He's quoting all the time. As Augustine says in the 21st book about the city of God, in no judgment is it required that a punishment be equal to guilt according to what? Duration. For not because adultery or homicide is committed in a moment. On account of this, a momentaneous punishment. Yeah. On account of this, it should be punished by a momentaneous. Point of, right? It didn't take me long to kill a man, right? So, by punishment, it should be no longer than time to kill him, right? But sometimes by a perpetual, what? Imprisonment, right? Or exile, right? And sometimes also by, what? Death, right? In which is not considered the, what? Time of the... But rather... But rather that, what? He should be taken away forever from the society of the, what? Living, huh? And this represents, in its own way, the eternity of the punishment inflicted to mine. For it is just, as Gregory says, huh? And that who has sinned in his own eternity, right? Against God would be punished in the eternity of what? God. For someone has said in his own eternity to have sinned, not only according to the continuation of the act and the whole, what, life of man, his life during, but because from this that he constitutes his end or his purpose in this, what, sin. Having the will of what's... Right. Yeah. Now, I was listening to this opera called Don Giovanni, right? You know what happens to him, right? Yeah. Yeah. He can't repent, right? His will is fixed on sexual pleasure, you might say, right? Okay. So down he goes to hell, right? They did a film one time with Don Giovanni there from the Vigana State Opera, you know, and, you know, he had the fire actually, you know, coming up and so on. He goes down, you know, and so on. And, of course, there's a little scene after that, right, you know, where everybody, who's witnessed this in some way, right, in the opera, it said that is going to turn a new leaf, you know, and they're all, each of them sings about this, right, huh? Then once it opens up the heavens, just very briefly, let the light come down, and then there's it twice, you know. And he brings things to a very, you know, impressive end, you know, but he doesn't do like, bam, bam, boom, boom, boom, boom, just the way he just does winter stop, you know, huh? It's, you know, it's like Sherlock Holmes says, you know, in the case there, the builder there, he's trying to frame, you know, somebody, because he had anger with the wife of the, I mean, the mother of the young man. And he almost convinced Sherlock Holmes, right? But then he tried, he made the case a little too much, right? And so afterwards, you know, a lot of times, you know, Sherlock Holmes and Watson, you know, I was talking about the case, about the whole thing, and so on. And Holmes was saying how really clever he had done it, you know, huh? He almost fooled me, you know, huh? He went too far. But what he says is very good. He lacked the, what, supreme gift of the artist, knowing when to stop, huh? And that's something really subtle, you know? I have a book there on the Italian painters and so on, and very good author there. He, talking about Titian, you know, we did master, you know, painting, you know? And he says it right out, above all, he knew when to stop, you know? I said, it is, you know, the same thing that Sherlock Holmes says, you know? It's a marvelous thing. I said, Mozart knows, he knows when to stop, you know? A lot of times when people tell funny stories, like they don't know when to stop, you know, and just get to the tickling line there. You keep on talking, you know, and you kind of lose it a little bit, you know? But you see what these great artists do. So, from this that he constitutes his end in the sin, right, huh? He has the will of sinning forever, right? And Don Giovanni cannot, what, repent, huh? Because he's put his end in, yeah. Whence Gregory says, huh, in the 34th Book of Moralia, that the wicked, right, wish to live without end, right? That they might remain without end forever in their, what? Iniquities, yeah. That's Don Giovanni, right? Don Giovanni is not really a, what, comic opera in a sense, right? It's kind of, of course, when the opera begins, you can tell there's something quite on it, right, differently than there is in the, in the Noci de Figaro or the, what was it? The parallel in Islam as well. Yeah. Their idea of paradox and essentially sort of living in their sins forever. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I guess they're wicked. Yeah, well, I was on the Radio Davis thing there. They're talking about the terrorists there. They got this pornography, you know, right? And when they, when they got to the Monod, you know, they, they, there was evidence in the pornography, right, you know? I mean, they got the idea that you, you know, the, you know, the, the maids up there, you know, and so on. I mean, this is trying to anticipate it, right, huh? You know? And these guys who, you know, the 9-11 thing, that they were, you know, watching pornography, you know, before they did it, you know? So, I mean, they're, they're, they're, they're... Well, that's, that's evidence. I mean, they're, they're, they're, they're deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply, deeply deeply, deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply deeply And Neos has a message, you know, the one that's up there now is, lust dragged you down to hell, right? And they give you some scriptural thing you can look at, you know. I have a question about whether it was the reward in paradise with 72 virgins or 72 raisins. So you could imagine a disillusionment if raisins. But there must be boot raisins. It's kind of funny, basically. We were at a funeral there on Wednesday, right? What about it? We were at a funeral. Oh, yeah. So we went over to St. John's afterwards, you know, where the body was being delivered there. Can't put it on the ground yet until it's well. But coming back, you know, they got a great big mill board, you know, put one of the ones up there advertising this black, this 40 Shades of Grey or whatever it is. Which is what's really a perverse movie, apparently, you know. It's all one, you lost it. He had both sides. You know, you're both sides. I mean, it's... I just said, somebody, I just saw it in the... I was moving this out, right? Yeah, yeah. So that some, I don't know what, some committee for, you know, anti-domestic violence, whatever, they commended the Super Bowl advertisers because they had an ad against domestic violence. Because I guess a lot of the ethnicities, they've grown up with domestic violence and they're guilty of it themselves. So they had to say, I guess, domestic violence. But they also had an ad for this movie that celebrates domestic violence. Make up your mind. Where's it you want? Well, whoever pays the bills. Now, the second objection here about it being medicinal, right? There's a lot of truth to that, right? That it should be medicinal. To the second it should be said that punishment also, which is inflicted according to human laws, right, is not always medicinal to the one who is punished, right? But only to others, right? Like Don Giovanni said, they're all going to, you know, behave themselves from now on. Just as when the, what, the thief is suspended, right? Hung, yeah. Not that he himself might be amended by that, right? But on account of others, at least by the fury of punishment, they might desist from, what, sinning, right? According to that of Proverbs 19, that the pestilent one being whipped, right, the stupid one will be wiser. Thus, therefore, the eternal punishments are inflicted and they're reprobate by God, right, are medicinal to those who consider, right, who by consideration of these punishments abstain from the sins, right, like the other characters there in Don Giovanni, right? According to that is Psalm 59, huh? He gave to those fearing, yeah, that they might flee from the face of the, what, Arcus, what, that they might be, what, that your beloved might be freed, right, by that fear. To the third, it should be said that God does not delight in the punishments on account of themselves, right, huh? So the guy does who tortures, right? But he delights in the order of his, what, justice, which requires this, huh? To the fourth, it should be said that punishment, although it is Perachetan's order to nature, right, per se, nevertheless, is ordered to the, what, lack of the order, and to the, what, yeah, I know you restore the order in a sense, right, by this punishment. And therefore, so long as the disorder remains, always the punishment will what remain. I could choose to explain in the pulpit, for the pulpit. Nice hot variety. St. Bonaventure says that the saints in heaven think about hell. Yeah, what? The saints in heaven think about hell sometimes because they think about what they deserve and how cutting time was. It redoubles their joy. And they find a necessity like that of the resurrected resurrection because all the saints have all the damage to hell in mind. And that's one of those objections. Well, don't you think it'll ruin their day? No, it'll make them thank God all the way more. We'll break now. No, it'll make them thank God all the way more. No, it'll make them thank God all the way. No, it'll make them thank God all the way.