Prima Secundae
Lecture 256: The Distinction and Enumeration of the Decalogue

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

The precepts of the Decalogue are suitably distinguished. To the fourth, one goes forward thus. It seems that unsuitably are the precepts of the Decalogue distinguished. For Latria, that's what you do when you worship God, I guess, that's the end of that one, is another virtue from what? Faith. But precepts are given about the acts of virtues. But this that is said in the beginning of the Decalogue, you will not have alien gods before me, pertains to what? Faith. But what is subjoined, you shall not make, what? Statue, I suppose, a sacred cow. And pertains to Latria, right? Therefore, there are two precepts and not one, as Augustine says, huh? The major term here is the precepts are given about the acts of virtues, and here you seem to have two, what? Virtues, huh? Moreover, the affirmative precepts in the law are distinguished from the negative ones. Like, honor your father and mother is affirmative, huh? Thou shalt not kill, that's negative, right? But this that is said, I am the Lord, your God, is affirmative. But what is put underneath that, we shall not have alien gods before me, is negative. Therefore, there are two precepts, and they're not contained under one, as Augustine lays down. Moreover, the apostle, the epistle of the Romans says, I do not know what. Unless the law said it, we shall not covet it. And thus it seems that this precept, you shall not covet it, is one precept. Therefore, it ought not to be distinguished into two. So, distinguishing things is important for Thomas, I guess. Yeah? Against this is the authority of Augustine in the gloss upon Exodus, where he lays down three precepts pertaining to God and seven to their neighbor. Three and seven. I answer it should be said that the precepts of the Decalogue are distinguished in diverse ways by diverse people, right? For has she seen, Leviticus 26, upon that, ten women in one, what? They cooked the breads, right, huh? He says the precept about the observation of the Sabbath is not of the ten precepts because it is not observed according to the letter, according to all, what? Time, huh? He distinguishes four precepts pertaining to God. The first be, I am the Lord your God. The second, that you will not have alien gods before me. And also, Jerome distinguishes these two. In the Ocetena, super illad, popter duus iniquitatis tuas, and kind of your two iniquities. Third precept, he says, is you shall not make a, what? Yeah. The fourth, you will not take the name of God in vain. Retaining to one's neighbor, he says six. The first is, honor your father and mother. The second, you shall not kill. The third, you shall not commit adultery. The fourth, you shall not commit theft. Fifth, you shall not bear false witness. And the sixth, you shall not, what? Yeah, it's putting the coveting together. I find this all the time in sentences. About this, there are diverse opinions. And then he'll get the first opinion, and then he'll get maybe criticized him in the second opinion. It's a fine opinion, fine heel. And therefore, I, he takes up. I can write your doctrinal thesis on this fourth article, right? You know? First, this seems to be, what? Unsuitable, that the precept about the observation of the Sabbath, right, is placed among the precepts of the Decalogue, if in no way it pertains to the Decalogue. That's, that's a, easy enough objection, you'll back and see that, huh? Okay. Second, because, as is written in Matthew 6, no one is able to serve two masters, two lords. Seems to be, what? Of the same reason, and to fall into the same, what? Precept. I am the Lord, your God, and you will not have, what? Yeah, it's kind of like the same thing, huh? Whence Origen, distinguishing also four precepts, ordering us to God, lays down these two for one precept. The second he lays down, you shall not make a, what? Blood and cow? Yeah. Third, you will not assume the name of God in vain. The fourth, remember, yeah, sanctify the day of the Sabbath. The other six, he lays down, is Eshiya stood, right? Of course, Origen, he was a heretic anyway, so. But because to make a statue, or a likeness, is not prohibited, except according, or because of this, that one do not, what? Worship for gods, for in the tabernacle, God be commanded, to serve him, as is in Exodus 25. More soon will be, Augustine lays down, under one precept, you shall not have, alien gods, and you will not, make a, what? Yeah. Likewise, also the concupiscence, of a, alien wife, yeah, yeah, for, yeah, pertains to the concupiscence, of the flesh, but the concupiscence, of other things, which are desired, to be possessed, pertains to the concupiscence, of the eyes, whence also, Augustine, lays down, two precepts, about, not, desiring, an alien thing, and an alien, what? Wife. And thus, he lays down, three precepts, in order to God, and seven, in order to, what? One's neighbor. At hope, melius est, and this is better, right? That's the same number, as the categories of Aristotle, too, I might add, huh? Therefore, it's even more, homelands. To the first, therefore, it should be said, that Latria, is not accepting, certain, what? Protesting, right? Yeah. Whence there are not, other precepts given, about Latria, and others about, what? Faith, huh? But they are more, given about Latria, than about faith, because the precept of faith, is presupposed, to the precepts of Decalogue, just as the precept, of what? Of love, huh? For just as, the first precepts, the common precepts, of the natural law, are per se known, to the one having natural reason, and do not need promulgation. So also, to believe in God, is first in per se known, to the one who has faith, right? For the one approaching God, God is necessary to believe, that he is. As is said, to the Hebrews 11, and therefore, it does not need, another promulgation, except the, what? Pouring in of faith, huh? To the second, should be said, that the affirmative precepts, are distinguished from the negative. that the truth is, that the truth is, that the truth is, when one is not comprehended in the other. Same knowledge of opposites as Aristotle and Plato say. Just as in the honoring of parents is not included that no man should be, what, killed, nor the reverse, right? But when the affirmative is comprehended in the negative and the reverse, they are not given upon it diverse precepts, huh? Just as they're not given another precept about this, which is you should not, what, commit theft, huh? And about this that is to conserve an alien thing or to restore it, right? And for the same reason, there are not diverse precepts about believing in God and about this that one does not believe in what? Yeah, okay. That's the same knowledge of opposites, right? To the third, it should be said that every, what, concupiscentia, coveting, you want to say that? Come together in one common notion. And therefore, the apostle singularly speaks of the command of what? Yeah. Desire. Yeah. Because however, in special, diverse are the reasons for desiring, right, huh? Therefore, Augustine distinguishes diverse precepts about not, what, coveting, huh? For they differ the species of concupiscence according to the diversity of the actions or the things desired, as the philosopher says in the 10th book of the Ethics, huh? So I don't know about this difference of opinion as to whether there's 10 or 9. Weren't you ever saying it was 10 as well, that they were dividing 4 and 6? Yeah. I think they were dividing 4 and 6 for them. Yeah, they combined the last two as 1, because they're both, you know, concupiscence. Yeah, yeah. And then they divided the first ones into 4 instead of 3, I guess. Yeah. Time for one more or not? Uh, just make sure it's very, very long. Okay, you better stop then. Stop there. Oh, it's very, very long in the character. Oh, yeah. You're going to get probably multiple opinions about dividing. Oh, yeah. Yeah. of the father and the son holy spirit amen thank you god thank you guardian angels thank you thomas aquinas dio gracias god our enlightenment guardian angels strengthen the lights of our minds or illumine our images and arouse us to consider more correctly saint thomas aquinas angelic doctor help us to understand what you have written the name of the father so we're up to question 100 article five here to the fifth one goes forward thus it seems that unsuitably the precepts of the decalogue are enumerated huh for sin as ambrose says is the transgression legis divina right transgression the divine law and in obedience of celestial commands i was reading the sentences here he has that the one the three definitions of sin right now of kupa right but sins are distinguished through this that man's sins either in regard to god or in regard to his neighbor or in regard also to himself since therefore in the precepts of the decalogue they're not laid down any precepts ordering man to himself but only ordering him to god like the first three or to his neighbor like glass seven it seems that insufficient is the enumeration of the precepts of the decalogue i asked that to your parish precency yeah that's really kind of a thunderbolt right you know it's a beautiful objection though isn't it huh the hell is tom's going to untie that knot moreover just as to the worship of god pertains the observation of the sabbath so also the observation of the other slendities huh and the offering of what sacrifices but among the priests of the decalogue is one pertaining to the observation of the sabbath therefore there ought to be others right pertaining to other slendities and to the right of what sacrifices huh that's maybe not as hard to answer you know because you could say well this is because of the preeminence right but the third one now let's get me really tight up this is the third one or just as against god to sin by what perjury right so also by blaspheming i would think even more so right or by what lying against the divine what teaching him but there's laid down one precept prohibiting perjury when it said thou shalt not what take the name of god in vain swear by god right therefore the sin of blasphemy and false teaching ought to be prohibited by some precept of the what decalogue right especially from these we professors you know that they shouldn't you should have command there to stop them from all the false teaching that they yeah yeah more fourth objection just as man has natural what love towards his what parents so also we have natural love towards our children and our grandchildren but the command right of charity extends to all our neighbors and approximately those close to us but the pieces of the decalogue are ordered to charity according to that of saint paul and one timothy the end of the command or precept is charity therefore just as there's laid down some precept pertaining to parents like on your father mother so also that to be some laid down pertaining to sons and so on like bring your children up well and so on okay moreover in any genesis sin it happens that one can sin by what one's heart and by one's deed right but in some kinds of sins through it in theft and adultery apart from other things it's prohibited the sin of the doing right you shall not commit adultery you shall not do it with theft and apart from that is sin of what the heart you shall not desire the thing of your neighbor right and you shall not desire the wife of your neighbor therefore also and not to what be placed something you one should not desire to kill your neighbor and have a desire to false testimony right huh beautiful beautiful objections huh he's making a mess of the you know tom i'm making a message of the decalogue yes now the sixth one moreover it just as it happens that sin comes about from the disorder of the concubisable appetite so also from the disorder of the irascible the paper there the other day there the guy was driving he didn't like the guy in front of him was driving too slow right find the guy in front realized he wanted to get by and this guy behind him so he pulled over to the side of the road right and rather than go on you know and pass it on he pulled over the road going out pulling out of the car and started beating him up you know because yeah wow well they arrested him and of course the question of whether you know you're going to be released while you're waiting your trial you know and he was decided he was a dangerous man to the community yeah so i mean this is this is the irascible right now i mean because i'll say yeah i remember one winter time rose who was driving you know and uh it was really a slippery road right so she was you know she doesn't you know go along slowly just but because of the road and of course this guy was so funny he shot by her and of course he slid right off the road like that and into a tree right huh so she stopped to see if he was hurt she wasn't really hurt you know but she always got a conversation with this guy you know yeah well i went to quebec one time rose and i it used to have thanksgiving time you have a little few days off you know i'm up to to warren's place and it was starting to snow right and warren said and now if you don't think you can make it come on back to the house right so we were being careful right and finally got behind a plow truck you know but these crazy french drivers you know they're going over the speed limit for the conditions right and off the road off the road it was just it was ridiculous and rosie could see you know i mean it's just no common sense you know it's not you have to be a philosopher to know you slow down in the winter time you know yeah yeah yeah the other thing i used to try with the thing was the company hill there where i stayed in quebec you know and uh it'd be slippery there you know and they'd spin that wheel making the worst noise you know they'd tell me i'm trying to do this you missed your time is making a mess of the decalogue right i say you missed tom is making a mess of the decalogue here and the objections so we're at the sixth objection here huh but there are sooner precepts prohibiting disorder concubicence as you shall not desire your neighbor's wife and so on therefore there ought to also be pieces of the decalogue that prohibit the disorder of the irascible right because that even leads to to murder i mean you know i was gonna murder that guy okay therefore it does not seem that solubility are the ten pieces of the decalogue enumerated huh okay but against this is what is said in deuteronomy 4 verse 13 i have shown you a what act that commands what you should do right and ten words which i wrote in two stone what tablets right three and seven okay well let's see what thomas says huh interesting the way he proceeds here right because in likeness to human law right huh it's tied up with the city and the community right i answer it should be said that it has been said above just as the precepts of human law order man to the human what community so the precepts of the divine law order men to a certain what community or republican of men under what god now that's very interesting and it takes us the starting point beginning is half a wall right Now, in order that someone might dwell well, in some community, right, two things are required, of which the first is that he has himself well to the one who presides over the community. What? Don't get the cook angry. Yeah. Another that, as a man, he has himself well to the other, what, common socio, consocios, and partakers, right, of the community. Okay. It is necessary, therefore, that in the divine law, first there be given certain precepts, ordering man to God, right, because he's the ruler. The Lord is king in splendor, and the old is the Lord, and the great of all to the strength. So, precepts. Interesting, the priest today was talking about how, you know, God is our father, right, and so on. But you kind of emphasize this more in the New Testament, right? Although in the Old Testament, you have the law of the king and the law of the, what, father, right? And even in our father, you have that kingdom come, so you're implying that he's not only a father, but also he's still a king, too, right? And Thomas is using that aspect of his being a king, right? But you'll find in these psalms that they'll suddenly just touch upon one or the other, right? So it's something that befits the holiness of God's house, right, huh? Well, it's more like the fatherly thing, huh? You call it a house. But you call it a kingdom, you think, well, he's a king, right? He's kind of proceeding here from the idea that God having a kingdom here. It's necessary, therefore, that in the divine law, first there be brought forth certain precepts, ordering man to God, then other precepts ordering man to other, what, neighbors living together with him under God, huh, okay? Now, it's beautiful what he does here. To the prince, right, of the community, to the ruler, to the ruler. Man owes, what, three things. I didn't know that, huh? Two and three, right? Thomas is caught with that, huh? He's consistent, I think. First, faithfulness, right? Secondly, irreverence, huh? And third, service, huh? Now, what does this mean? Well, fidelity to the Lord consists in this, that the honor of the prince is not, what? Yeah, yeah, it's interesting, huh? Okay, yeah. So this piece of music can hail to the chief and it's played only for the president, right, huh? And there's a certain number of, what, cannons that go off, you know? You know, people do for one. There's a certain number of shells, right? I probably wouldn't get even one, but some get a certain number of them. If you get one, one wouldn't be the one wrong. Yeah, yeah. There's certain things, huh? So you don't give the honor of the prince to another one, right? It reminds me of when was Camden eating blackheads. Yeah. And he was criticized for that. Yeah. He kind of got it all like by this image and so on. But that's kind of what's made it related to this. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And it's showing to the president. You mentioned Obama. It brings to mind the words, thou shalt not have strange gods. Yeah. That was in her room. I told you that when the bishop came out to the trivium, you know, one time for graduation, you know, and so on, and kind of before we were downstairs before we muched up and so on, you know, Dr. Schmidt was giving this, do this little thing, you know. I mean, you see DuPont, you don't have to, you know, kiss the bishop's ring. And he said, why not? It would have been very awkward to have him try to kiss the bishop's ring, you know, but he's kind of explaining, you know, what the liberals were. He said, why not? Well, here he's not giving him the honor that's owed to the bishop, right? So, as regards this fidelity, is the first precept when it says, you shall not have, what, alien gods before me, right? Then you would not be faithful to God, right? And God is often complaining that to get these statements from the prophets, right? Reverence to what? The Lord. So, you card, that nothing injurious is committed in him, right? As regards this, is taking the second precepts. We shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in what? Vain, huh? This would be not observing the reverence due to him, huh? And service, huh? So to the Lord, in recompense for the benefits which the ones under him receive from him, right? And to this pertains the third precept about the sanctifying of the Sabbath in memory of the creation of, what, things, huh? That's very interesting that he does those three, huh? Okay, to one's neighbors, proximos, huh? Someone has himself, well, both in special ways and in general ways, huh? Especially as regards those of whom one is a debtor that he rendered to them one's, what, debt. As regards this, this has taken the, what, the precept of the honoring of parents. That's the only one that's what really affirmative, right? So it kind of stands out, huh? Yeah. The first one among the seven, right? And it's the only affirmative, yeah. So Cicero, Cicero's son is quoted now, the son is always in debt to his father. A mother, too, you could add, but I mean, I've got to be careful these days. But I think that's pretty true, you know? Debt here. Generally, however, as regards all, right, that to know should one infer any harm, right, huh? Neither in deed nor in what? Word, yeah. Door. Nor in what? Heart, huh? Okay, one of the other definitions of sin was in terms of a thing desired or said or done, contrary. Now, by deed is infer, one should not infer an argument or harm to one's neighbor in his own person as regards the consistency of that person. He's not chopped off his head like they've been doing there in the East. And this is prohibited through what is said you shall not, what? Kill. Shouldn't chop off an arm or either, right? Yeah. Sometimes in reference to one's what? Joint person, yeah. So you guys are propagating of offspring. And this is prohibited when it's said you shall not commit, what? Okay. Yeah. And sometimes in the thing possessed which is ordered to what? Close. Yeah. And it regards this and one should not, what? Commit theft, right? But harm of voice or word prohibited when it is said you shall not give false testimony, right? Speak false testimony against your neighbor. And the harm of the heart is prohibited when it is said you shall not, what? Lust and the curse is two of those, right? And according to this threefold difference one can also distinguish the three precepts that we spoke about before ordering us in God, right? Of which the first refers to, what? An opus of work where it is said you shall not make a, what? Yeah. Sculpted idol. Secondly to the, what? Mouth you shall not take the name of God your God in vain. Third to the heart which is in the sanctification of the Sabbath according as it is a moral precept there is commanded rest of the heart in God. I was talking to a nun one time and she says and Sunday is set aside she says for resting in the Lord she said. That was very good yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, you can see she's delighted in the fact that they were set aside to rest in the Lord. And that's all you did on that day, really, you know, is to rest in the Lord. That's just your heart. Now he gives the third explanation, right, of the three commandments, the first three commandments. Thomas is more explicit here about the first three. Or according to Augustine, right? And the reference in my footnote here is in this commentary in the psalm. Excuse me, I got the right part here. Yeah, in Psalm 32, yeah, Sermon 1, number 16. That through the first precept, we reverence the unity of the first beginning, right? There's only one God. To the second, the divine, what? Truth. And to the third, his goodness, by which we are made, what? Holy. And in which we rest is in a, what? End, huh? That's really beautiful, the Augustine there. He's a smart guy, the Augustine, you know? Even though he's an African there, right? From Hippo, you know? We've heard of Hippo. Don't tell with the guy. It's beautiful, though, huh? Now let's see if he can untie these knots, huh? Or he's going to drown there. The end of Thomas Aquinas. He's drowned in his own objections, right? We went through all of this just to crash here. Now, as you recall, the first objection was saying that sins, right, huh? Are distinguished by this, that a man sins either in reference to God, in reference to his neighbor, or in reference to himself, okay? And you have the first three commandments in reference to God, the last seven in reference to your neighbor, but who are the ones to yourself, huh? Okay. Now this is a try-low thing here. To the first, therefore, one can respond in two ways, huh? First, because the precepts, the Decalogue, refer to the precepts of what? Love. Love of neighbor and of God. There was given a precept to man about the love of God and of what? Neighbor. Because as regards this, the natural law was obscured on account of what? Sin. But not as regards the love of oneself. Because as regards this, the natural law was still vigorous, right, huh? That's an interesting way he does, right? As if this is because of the defect of man, right, huh? In other words, you know, in the first stage, a man is left to himself, right? He doesn't even know fully the law, right? And then later on he learns the law, but then he doesn't have the grace to, you know. But then the next stage, it's not that people are ignorant that they should love themselves, but that they should love their neighbor, and that they should love God. That's what they're ignorant of, right, huh? So the first three are to the love of God, and the last seven is to love your neighbor, huh? Well, that's one way of seeing it, right, huh? Or, and this is the second one, it's very interesting, too. Because also the love of oneself is included in the love of God and one's neighbor, now. How is that, huh? In this, that man truly loves himself when he orders himself to God, and therefore also in the precepts of the dialogue are laid down, only precepts pertaining to one's neighbor and to God, huh? So in a way they conclude one's. I was thinking, you know, if you had to answer this question, what is a bad will, right? You want to go just a bit beyond saying a will that will something bad, you know, be a little more precise, huh? What is a bad will? What would you say? What would it be that? I was thinking that you might say this, that a bad will is a will whose end or purpose, huh, is something other than God, huh? So it might be the pleasure of eating, right, huh? My friend was interested in fine food, so he joined the gourmet society, see what it was like. He went to the first annual banquet of the gourmet society. All you can eat? No, no, no. We got sitting down to a member of the society, and we were the society who was telling him of the problems they'd run in, you know, and getting all their delicacies, you know, flown in and everything, and he could see that the man was rather, you know, disturbed and worried that they'd almost not gotten this or that delicacy flown in, right? I mean, like his life would be ruined, you know, about this. He said, he quit the society after that. I mean, here's a man whose end might be to eat well, right, huh? And you wonder, maybe there are some of these cooks you see on TV, you know? They seem to enjoy eating, you know? Or then you have Don Giovanni, who's interested in sex, right, the sexual pleasure, and he's made that his end, and that's not good, right? Or someone else might have money, you know? Or Christalian might be power, right, huh? Or it might just be the glorification of oneself in some way, you know, like preeminence in society, and so on. So really what a bad will is, is a will whose end or purpose is something other than God, right? So when you love God and make God your end or purpose, then you're really loving yourself in the way you should, right? So in a sense, in being taught the Three Commandments, you know, the First Three Commandments, right, which order you to God, in particular, or in general, then you really are being taught how to love yourself, right? Or how to be well disposed. Yeah, yeah. If I make myself the center of my world, I really love myself. You don't have to be told about yourself, you're sinning against yourself. We do that sort of love ourselves. That's what he says when we have this disorder. He says we love ourselves in our affections, in our feelings and desires, but in fact we hate ourselves because we're destroying ourselves. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Now I guess this third thing can be said, right, huh? That the priests of the Decalogue are those which immediately the people receive from, what? God, huh? Whence it is said in Deuteronomy, chapter 10, verse 4, huh? I have spoken to you in the, what, tables, right? According to what was written before. Ten words, right? There he's pretty clear that there's ten commandments, right? Ten verbim. Which the Lord spoke to, what? You, huh? Okay. Whence is necessary that the precepts of the dialogue be such that can fall at once into the mind of the, what, people, right? Now this same principle is given sometimes in the account of, what, of creation there, right, huh? Certain things are not said explicitly, right? Because people couldn't understand it, right? Now a precept has the idea of a debt, huh? Now that man of necessity owes something to God or to his neighbor, this easily falls into conception of man, and especially the faithful man. But that something of necessity is owed to the man of those things are pertaining to himself and not to another, this does not appear right away, huh? That I owe myself something, right? Yeah, yeah. They owe God something, they owe my parents something, right, my neighbor something, right? You know, but they owe myself something, you know? Your style of speech shows if there's not justice towards oneself, huh? Justice is towards, what, another, right, huh? You can't owe yourself something, you know? I owe myself a vacation. I owe myself a vacation. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm. It seems at first aspect that someone is free in regard to those things which pertain to himself, right? I can go to bed when I should and get my sleep that I need. But they speak of a sleep debt or something, you know. But you owe yourself, you owe your body some sleep, right? And therefore, precepts by which are prohibited the disorders of man to himself come to the, what, people by means of the instruction of the wise. Once it is not pertained to the Decalogue, right? So all these three answers are interesting, huh? And the first and the third kind of go together a little bit, you know. The second one is kind of more subtle, you know. So, we'll give Thomas a pass on that. That's pretty good, huh? That's pretty smart, though. Yeah. Okay, the second one, I think, is difficult to handle, but anyway. Why, you know, have all these other feasts being denied? I mean, neglected there. All the solemnities of the old law were instituted in commemoration of some divine benefit, right? Or in the past, commemorated or prefigured in the future. On account of this also, all the sacrifices were, what? Offered, right, huh? Now, among all the benefits of God, right? These should be commemorated. First, and especially, is the benefit of what? Creation. Which is commemorated in the sanctification of the Sabbath. Whence is said in Exodus 20, verse 11, huh? For a reason of this precept is laid down. In six days, God made the heaven and the earth, right? Now, among all the future benefits, which were to be prefigured, especially, and the final one, is the rest of the mind in God, right? Or either in the present by grace or in the future through, what? Glory, right? Which is also figured by the observation of the Sabbath. Whence it is said in Isaiah 58. If you turn away from the, what? Sabbath, your foot? Okay. It's been turning yourself away from labor or something that day, right? Yeah. That's what you're trying to say. Yeah. Now, these benefits, first and chiefly, are in the minds of men, most of all the faithful. The other solemnity is celebrated on account of some particularia, some particular benefits, right? Temporarily, what? Passing. As the celebration of the phase, right? Passover, on account of the benefit of the past liberation from Egypt, right? And on account of the future passion of Christ, which temporarily will pass. But in leading us into the rest of a spiritual Sabbath. And therefore, setting aside all the other solemnities and sacrifices about the Sabbath alone, is mentioned, made among the priests of the Decalogue. It's easy to see that this is kind of more primary, yeah, yeah. And both thanking him for the gift of creation, which is underlying every other creation. Even your individual soul is created, right? And then resting in God, right? The beginning, the end, right? He's the Alpha and the Omega, right? The first and the last, the beginning and the end, right? So, in a sense, you're taking him in as the beginning and the end, aren't you? According to this explanation, right? So, that's kind of, it's got some preeminence, that thing. Okay? So, you don't have to, you know? Just like, you know, I mean, say, I should not kill you. I shouldn't chop off your arm or your leg or something like that, right? It doesn't kill you. Okay, I just perjury. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's perjury. Now, the third argument is saying, why not have the law against blasphemy, right, huh? Which is even worse than, what, perjury, right? So, the third should be said, that as the Apostle says, men swear through something greater than themselves, right? In the end of every controversy, it's a confirmation. Confirmation of this is the oath, right, huh? And therefore, because the oath is common to all, on account of this, the prohibition of the disorder about the, what, oath is especially, what, prohibited by a precept to the Decalogue. The sin of a false teaching does not pertain except to the few, huh? People like me. Once it is not necessary that there be about this a mention among the pieces of the Decalogue, huh? Although also, according to some understanding, right, when one says one ought not to take the name of God in vain, false doctrines are, what, prohibited. For one glass expounds, one should not say Christ to be a, what, creature, huh? Okay. Now, I go back to the body of the article there. Does that agree with what Augustine's saying? To the first precept, we reverence the unity of the first beginning. To the second, the divine truth, right? See? So it harmonizes, right? Okay. In my footnotes, in my text here, it just says, they reference to Isidore, right, huh? So it's somebody other than Augustine, right? But it's in harmony with what Augustine was saying, right, huh? Augustine's explanation of the three, right? That's the second commandment, isn't it? Yeah. So I started teaching about the nature of God and of I start saying false things, right? I'm taking the name of God in vain, huh? It makes sense to say that, right? Yeah. You know, here's he's been carrying through everything. It was that atheist there who was saying, you know, that you're trying to kind of defend, you know, the evolutionists, you know, who say that our mind, you know, developed over the course of time, right, huh? And if you want to say, you know, that there's something called God, you know, that designed this and so on, he must well have one hell of a good brain, right? And then how did his brain happen to come about? Yeah, yeah. Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So who designed his, to design it? It's hard to make it, right? Well, he's taking the name of God in vain, right now, because he's imagining God to be like a... He's insulting God because he doesn't know how to use his own brain. Yeah, but it's kind of an anthropomorphic notion of God, right? God is like a man with a huge brain, right? One hell of a big brain that he must... Now, how do you get that brain, you know? Because that... That would be even harder to have... Yeah, how could evolution produce a mind like that, right? If it couldn't produce, you know, human mind by evolution. He's taking the name of God in vain, but anyway. platform today predominantly based on, is it indeterminism, whether it's just random or do they have a more sophisticated sort of foundation for their arguments that not anything is necessarily just random accumulations of matter or atoms? Yeah, they're basically materialists, I would think, you know. Yeah, they can't be. Yeah. Yeah, it's kind of... Because if they're anything more than materialists, they're going to be walking towards God. Yeah. They don't want it. But if they're materialists, does that mean they hold at the ancient Greek notion that everything that matters, the universe has eternally existed? It was supposed to have been disproven back in the 20s with the Big Bang theory, if it's indeed been proven. Yeah, but even the Big Bang, you're starting with something there, right? Right. You know, it's going to explode. Yeah. And I think it's, I was wondering if there's an inconsistency in the foundation of their thinking, speaking of atheists, if they generally assume that the universe is eternally big. Yeah. There's no real beginning. Yeah. But I mean, matter is the kind of cause that's most known to us, right? And I was thinking of the four causes of the students, I would be very simple, right? And I'd come into class and I'd put on the board, C-A-T, I'd print it, you know? And I'd say, what's the most obvious and undeniable dependence that the word cat there in the board has? What does it depend upon for being? Isn't it the letters C-A-T, you know? Now, if you think it doesn't, if you assume it doesn't depend upon C-A-T, raise the C, take away the C, take away the A, take away the T, now, where's the word cat there? See? How can you deny that it depends upon the letters C-A-T? Okay? And that dependence we call dependence upon the kind of cause called matter, right? Because that's the parts out of which it is made, right? Okay? Now, does it depend upon besides C-A-T, that's the most obvious dependence, isn't it? Okay? Well then, I write the word cat back on the board, right? And all we know at this point is it depends upon C-A-T, and then I write next to it A-C-T, right? I say, now, what does that depend upon? Well, the very same letters, though, see? But is the word act the same as the word cat? See, if I'm talking about my favorite animal, I'd say the word cat. Okay. Okay. But then they're forced to say something else, right? It depends upon what? The letters and the order of the letters, right? That's a different kind of cause, right? Okay? The same if you have a wooden table and a wooden chair, right? They obviously depend upon wood. You take all the wood out of the chair, there's no wooden chair left. But this table's made out of wood as well as the chair, maybe not, but you know what this stuff is these days. But you've got a wooden chair and a wooden table. They depend upon the shape, right? So that's like the order. That's the second kind of cause. The order of the form of the thing, right? Okay? Okay. Now you've got a question. How do the same letters get into a different order? Where is Berkowitz on the writer? The mover. You see? The maker. Okay. So Berkowitz put them in the order C-A-T in one case. In the other case, you put them in the order A-C-T, right? You could also put them in the order T-A-C if you wanted to, right? I'm really a marvelous, inventive man. But why did I put them in the order C-A-T rather than the word A-C-T? I wanted to talk about my favorite animal, the cat. I had a pet cat. I had about two pet cats in my life. My daughter had two, and they have one out there now. And if I wanted to teach metaphysics and talk about accurate ability, I would have spelled it A-C-T, right? And if I wanted to talk about my daughter, they referred to Thomas Aquinas College as T-A-C all the time. I would have put T-A-C. And they always referred to it, you know, did you go to T-A-C too? And so my ability to arrange letters doesn't explain why I put them in the letter C. The order C-A-T is my purpose was to talk about my favorite animal, right? Or I used A-C-T because I'm teaching metaphysics now, right? I'm teaching that act is simply before ability and so on, right? Not that the cat is simply before ability. And so now you get all four kinds of clauses, right? But notice how I begin with the clause that is most known, which is the matter out of which something is made, right? The word cat is made out of C-A-T and that's, you know, more obvious, right? It's not until I put the word act, you know, that the whole light dawns upon you, you know, there's something else here involved besides, you know? So I mean, the moderns are kind of stuck with the idea of the early Greeks, right? With the most known clause, right? And so they want to explain everything by matter, right? And therefore they have to come up with something like that, you know? Come up with something? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Some of these things can get mixed together and fall together and, you know? And you know, even the cell, you know, they say it's just too complicated, too great to accept that, right? Yeah. They're very primitive thinkers in some way. In some ways, the ones that don't want God is a different thing. Yeah. They don't want it and that's why they've kind of limited their mind to this. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. If you look at Marx's thesis, his premium or his introduction to his thesis, you know? You can see really there's a pride there, you know? And he doesn't want to accept anything that doesn't accept our mind as the highest divinity, you know? He's really. Really. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay, we're up to the fourth objection, right? Yeah. To the fourth it should be said that at once, huh? Natural reason of man, or dictates to man, that one should do no injury to anybody, right? Yeah. And therefore, the precepts prohibiting harm extend themselves to all, right? But natural reason does not at once dictate that something should be done for another, right? Huh? Except the man who owes something to someone, right? Now, this is just when there was in terms of why not, you know, sons, fathers look after your sons, right? Huh? Okay. Okay. Now, the debt of the son to the father is so manifest that by no, what? Twisting around, can it be, what? Denied, right? In that the father is the beginning of the generation and the being of the, what? Son. And above that of his education and doctrine and not to mention his feeding and so on, right? And therefore, it's not laid down under a precept of the Decalogue that some, what? Benefit or service is, what? Except to parents, huh? That's where you have this greatest load, right? Okay. Just like we said, the third commandment, right? Takes the kind of the greatest thing God did and so on. These are beginning and end. Okay. But parents do not seem to be debtors to their son, huh? On account of some benefits received from them, right? But rather the, what? Reverse, huh? For the son is something of the father, huh? And fathers love their sons as something of themselves. Okay. So Shakespeare says, this will be to be new made when thou art old. And see thy blood warm when thou feel'st it cold. For thou art thy mother's glass, and she in thee calls back the love of April of her prime. A little girl comes next door there, you know, with her mother. And she's selling something for a girl scout there. Candy or something, you know. Her name's Victoria, you know. So I said, I know her name. So I said, oh, hi, Victoria, you know. You're Victoria? And she says, yes. I said, Queen Victoria? No, no, just Victoria. She's a beautiful little girl, you know. She's very stranky, you know. I'm going to ask her mother, did you look this way when you were that age, too? She said, where are you? My wife, where was I come down? What grade are you in? Fourth grade, she says. Well, she's really, really a knockout. She said, you know. I had to buy these two things from her. So the sun is something of the...