Prima Secundae
Lecture 274: Cessation of Ceremonial Precepts in Christ

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

that because because there are certain professings of faith which would clean from what sin don't we teach even in in the modern uh church you know that the um present church that you can if you intend to confess your sins right you're sometimes forgiven before you even go to it right now you have the intention and you have the right you know well in the sense they could do this in the old i mean it seems the idea that you get a human approach in baptism and be in the state of grace before each baptize yeah baptism of desire maybe before before before he's actually immersed yeah but to get this and this also the law itself uh insinuates right from its way of speaking for he said in leviticus four and five that in the offering of the host right for his sins the priests what prays for him right and it's dismissed he's free from the sin right as a word that sin is dismissed not from the power of the strength of the sacrifices themselves right but from the faith and the devotion of them offering right it was offering them it should be known nevertheless that the fact that the ceremonies of the old law expiated from corporeal or bodily uncleanliness like he said before was in figure of the expiation from sins that came about through what christ it signified that thus therefore it is clear that the ceremonies in the old law did not have the virtue or power of justifying right now to the first it should be said that that sanctification of priests and of their sons and of their what clothing right and of other things through the sprinkling of blood right now was nothing other than a what deputatio deputing setting them up right for the divine worship and the remotion of the impediments for the what cleansing of the flesh as the apostle says right in nevertheless prefiguring right of that sanctification by which jesus through his own blood would sanctify his what people right the expiation the expiation however also for the removal of these bodily and cleanliness should be what referred to that right not to the emotion of what guilt when salsa sanctuary is said to be expiated which could not even be the subject of what guilt to the second it should be said that the priest pleased god in the ceremonies why an account of their obedience and their devotion and the faith of the thing what yeah not however an account of the things considered by themselves so i couldn't say considerate some to the third it should be said that those ceremonies which instituted in the cleansing of the leper were not ordered to taking away the uncleanliness of the infirmity of leprosy which is clear from this that they were not what until it's already cleansed right so christ said go show yourself to the priest right didn't he say that when once it is said in leviticus chapter 14 that the priest having gone out from the what camps when he found a what leper leprosy to be cleansed he commanded that what they be purified the offer up which is clear that the priest constituted the judge of the cleansed of the cleansed leprosy not of one to be cleansed right so he's recognizing that yeah we don't see that in confession no yeah yeah they applied these ceremonies to taking away the uncleanness of irregularity right they see however that sometimes if it happened that the priest urged in judging miraculously the leprosy was the leper was cured by god right by divine power not over by reason of the power of the what sacrifices themselves just as miraculously the what yeah having drunk waters in which what yeah i don't know what that's all about you're gonna break okay you Okay, we're ready to go here with Article 3. St. Thomas has cut down the number of objections, you know. He has a length of the applies. To the third, then, one goes forward this. It seems that the ceremonies of the old law did not cease in Christ's advent. How the hell is he going to argue this way? I don't know. For it is said in Baruch 4, This is the book of the commands of God and the law, which is in aeternum. In aeternum, in aeternum. But to the law pertains the ceremonies of the law. Therefore, the ceremonies of the law would endure in aeternum, forever. Moreover, the offering of the leprosy pertains to the ceremonies of the law. But also in the gospel is commanded to the leper cleansed from these ovations. That he offered these ovations, rather. So Christ himself is violating the law, right? If it's not to be done. Therefore, the ceremonies of the old law do not cease with Christ coming, right? He's come now and he's telling them to go, right? But Thomas says he fulfills the old law until his, what? Resurrection, right? Until his death and resurrection. It's really when his death takes over. Remaining the cause remains the effect. But the ceremonies of the old law have certain, what? Reasonable causes. Insofar as they are ordered to the divine worship. Even apart from the fact that they are ordered in the figure of Christ. Therefore, the ceremonies of the old law should not, what? They're reasonable, right? Yeah. Moreover, circumcision was instituted as a sign of the faith of Abraham. And the observation of the Sabbath to recalling the benefit of what? Creation. And other ceremonies of the law to recalling other benefits of God. But the faith of Abraham should be always imitated even by us. He's the father of us in faith, isn't he? He said to be that. And the benefit of creation, you should always be thankful to that. And the other benefits of God, right? Should be always recalled, right? Therefore, at least circumcision and solemnity is a law not to cease, right? But against this is what the apostle says, the epistle of the Colossians. Let no one, what? Lead you into, what? Judge you in food or in drink, huh? Or in part of the festival day or the new moon or the Sabbaths, which are the, what? Umbra of the future things. And the Hebrews 8 said that, in saying the New Testament, the first one is, what? Aged. What is antiquated and grows old is near to, what? It's in there. My answer, it should be said, Thomas says, that all the ceremonial precepts of the old law are ordered to the worship of God, as has been said above. Now, the outside worship ought to be proportioned to the inside worship, which consists in faith, hope, and what? Charity, huh? Hence, according to the diversity of the inward worship, ought to be diversified the exterior worship. Now, there can be distinguished a threefold status of the interior worship. That's new to me. I never know that. Did you ever know that? One, according to which we have faith and hope, both about, what, celestial goods, and about those through which we are led into celestial things, about both of them, as by some things that are, what, in the future. And such was the status of faith and hope in the old, what, law. Another is the status of the inward worship, in which is had faith and hope, about celestial goods, as about some things, what, future, but about those things which were introduced into celestial things, as of things present or, what, past. And this is the status of the new law, right? Christ said, what, do this in memory of me, at the time of the Eucharist, and be past. The third status is that in which both are had as present, and nothing is believed as absent, nor is hoped for in the future. And this is the status of the blessed. Well, I think I'll take the third here. I'm tired of this world. In that state, therefore, the blessed, nothing is figural, signifying, right, pertaining to the divine cult, but only the action of thanksgiving and the voice of what? Yeah. Well, now he's got the same order that I have in that psalm, right? Enter his gates with thanksgiving, his courts with praise, where the thanksgiving is given first. Grazie arom aksio, and the voice of praise. It seems to me, you know, in heaven, you will be knowing God and loving him, and then thanking him and praising him. And therefore, it is said in the book of the Apocalypse, the book of Revelations there, about the city of the blessed. One does not see a temple, what, in it, huh? For the Lord God himself, the omnipotent God, is the, what? The temple of it, and the lamb, right? And for a similar reason, the ceremonies of the first status, to which are figured both those of the second and the third, coming to second status, ought to cease, huh? And other ceremonies to be brought in, which belong to the status of the divine culture, or worship, for that time, in which the celestial goods are future, but the benefits of God, to which we are led into celestial things, are now, what? Present, huh? Now, to the first therefore, it should be said that the old law is said to be in a terrenum, according to the moralia, right? The moral ones. Simpliciter, simply, without qualification, absolute to them. But according to ceremonial, as regards the truth of them, figured to them, right? But not in their, what, ancient status, right? We wonder how the Jews think about the fact they don't have any sacrifices in the world, do they? How do they think that they're fulfilling their commands of God, then, if they think they're still in the old status? Hmm? How do they get out of that, though, you know, huh? See? I mean, we can say, we don't do it because of the reasons he gives here in the body of the article, right? Why don't they do it? Yeah, I mean, how wouldn't they still be commanded to give these sacrifices, right? You know? I don't know how they, how they, yeah. The more contemporary, you know, progressive kind of thing, the more progressive ones, like they, what is it, the conservatives? The more traditional ones would be because they consider themselves a king to those Jews in exile. But, um... Um... But some of the more contemporary ones, I would say, you know, we probably evolved beyond all this, just from my experience in Jordan with the Lord and Fred's. Why don't they rebuild the temple like they did when they came back from the Babylonian captivity? Didn't they rebuild the temple? Let's start World War III. You know, it's in the history anyway, they tried to rebuild the temple back in the 3rd century, 4th century AD, you know, all kinds of supernatural things happened to prevent it. It's in some of the fathers. They mentioned, you know, that they used that together and they wanted to rebuild it, but a bunch of things happened. Yeah, which is possible. Well, that happened then. Don't you think there's a sign that they're not the end-all and be-all? Well, according to Richard John Newhouse, I think I've said this numerous times in our creation, so forgive me for mentioning this again, but the first things he had said, according to the numbers, that he was able to find, I guess, 2 3rds of the Jews throughout the Mediterranean to convert to Congolism, so, within the first few generations. I've heard another thing that 90% of the current Jews are atheists. Yeah. I don't know if that's right, but in case, you know, a lot of non-Jews don't believe in God or anything. Yeah, but that does not prevent us from being Jewish. That's right. That's one of those bizarre things, because Freud was apparently a very atheist, he considered himself a good Jew. He didn't go to Zingar, though. No. What's interesting, too, is that a very old wise man pointed out that with the secular Jews, you can see that they still have their God-given sense of mission, but one of the problems is that they're applying it wrongly. They're not applying it for secular and materialistic. You know, that's kind of a socialist kind of thing. The Frankfurt School, which had such a big impact with the Jewish integration in the York area. I don't know how to do the uncommon, right? Jewish and socialism in general. The other layers of socialism. We had a friend there, a little through high school there, who's Jewish, right? I know my friend Warren went with him one time, and they went to some shop, and the guy was offering him a special deal under the counter, right? He was so embarrassed that Warren was seeing this, you know, because any time he got offered to Warren, he thought that he was worth it too, you know? But I remember one time coming home from vacation there, and my father said that he was going to take us out to dinner in a restaurant, right? Because, you know, my mother tried to go home and fix it, you know, with the thing back. And some business association of my father's comes in, you know, and, oh! He takes us all in. He buys dinner for all of us, you know? And my father lets him pay for it. And I was kind of surprised. I said, after him, I said, why did you let him pay for it? He says, well, he's Jewish, he says. He doesn't want to be known as being stingy or being, you know, like that. And so he likes to be, goes out on his way to be generous. And he'd be insulted if I didn't let him pay for, you know, the whole, all five of us, you know? That's kind of funny, you know, huh? He was doing that just to overcome, you know, this idea that they're grasping for money all the time, you know? That they're like, you know, what's his name? Shylock, yeah. Okay, where are we now? Yeah. So the old law is said to be in eternity, according to Moralia, right? Simply and absolutely, according to ceremonial, as regards the truth figured through them, right? The second should be said that the mystery of the redemption of the human race was completed in the passion of what? Christ, huh? Whence then the Lord said it is consummated, huh? It's kind of his last words on the cross, isn't it? And therefore, totally, they ought to seize the, what? The legal things, right? As a word, the truth, now, what? Consummated, huh? In the sign of which, in the passion of Christ, the veil of the temple was said to be ripped, yeah. Matthew 27. And therefore, before the passion of Christ, Christ preaching and making miracles, they ran together the law and the gospel, right, huh? Because already the mystery of Christ was begun, right? But not yet, what? Consummated. An account of this, the Lord commanded before his passion to the leper, right? That he observed the legal, what? Ceremonies, huh? And he himself, you know, observed the Paschal dinner and so on, right? The third should be said that the literal reasons of the ceremonies assigned above refer refer to the divine worship, which worship was in the faith to, what? Come. And therefore, coming that which was to come, the worship, what? Ceased. And all the reasons ordered to this, what? Worship, huh? To the fourth, it should be said that the faith of Abraham was commended in this that he believed in the divine promise about the future seed in which should be blessed all the what nations. And therefore, when this was future, it was necessary to protest the faith of Abraham in circumcision. But after it was already perfect, it was necessary to declare it by another sign, to wit by baptism, which in this succeeded to circumcision, huh? According to that of the apostle, the epistle of the Colossians, huh? You were circumcised by circumcision, not made by hand, right? In the expolation of your body, flesh, but in the circumcision of our Lord Jesus Christ, buried with him in what? Baptism, huh? The Sabbath, which signifies the first creation, was changed to the, what? Lord's Day, in which is commemorated the new creature begun in the resurrection of Christ. And similar to the other solemnities of the old law, the solemnities succeed. Because the benefits shown to that people signified the benefits conceded to us through Christ. Whence the Fest of the Passover succeeds the Feast of the Passion of Christ and the Resurrection. To the Feast of the Pentecost, in which was given the old law, succeeds the Festival of the Pentecost, which is given the law of the Spirit of Life. To the Feast of the Neominia, the new moon, succeeds the Feast of, what? The Blessed Virgin? Thank goodness. In which first appears the illumination of the, what? Sun that is of Christ through the fullness of grace, huh? To the Feast of the Trumpets succeeds the Feast of the Apostle. To the Feast of Expiation succeeds the Feast of the Martyrs and Confesses. To the Feast of Tabernacles, the Feast of the Consecration of the Church. To the Feast of the Chetusatset, the Feast of the Angels, or also the Feast of all the Saints. There's quite a little summary there, huh? All further in mind, huh? You mean the Old Testament, huh? They do recall the Feast of the Church. There's also a call on the Mount Tamer, the Transfiguration. Is there some connection between the Tabernacle and Transfiguration? Yeah, because the Spineboat brings it up, about how they would have the thatched roof of the Tabernacle that they were to build, so that they could see the stars, to keep their eyes on Heaven and the Transfiguration. Because the key points out that that's when Peter was talking about building the Tabernacle. The Boots. The Boots. Right. And Christ was giving them the foretakes of Heaven. But even, I think, in John, it kind of historically took place around the Feast of Tabernacle. Yeah. That's why he's talking about us, but still it could be. Mary, what are you talking about? Some connection between the people? So where's Feast of the Old Teaching now? Is he teaching? He's at a seminary in St. Louis, I think. Well, you're very good at him when you're down there. Yeah, what's the name of him? I've emailed him a couple of times. I'm pretty sure his name was. Yeah, Mary might have some contact with him. I can't remember. I'll have to talk to her again. So is she in contact with him? I don't know. She might have. That's what I'm trying to remember now. There's a track of these things. And he was with the Ave Maria for a long time. His wife's been from St. Louis. He's from that area, so. Well, I'll be going down to Missouri now. Come next Thursday, I'll be in Missouri. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. God, our enlightenment, guardian angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, Lord, illumine our images and arouse us to consider more correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor, help us to understand all that you have written. I was mentioning how I was reading the first book of Summa Congentilis. It was out with my kids there. And the last three chapters are on the Bialyfoot of God, right? So the first of the three chapters is God blessed, right? Well, Thomas begins by saying, blessedness, the attitude, is the chief good of something that understands, right? So he says, nor for this to be the chief good, for things necessary. It's beautiful the way Thomas orders it, right? But what's the first thing he says? It's going to have to be some doing, right? And that is not a making or a, what? Moving of things. It's got to be a doing that remains in the, what? Yeah. And what's the reason for that? Why must the chief good of us, or God himself, be that kind of an activity? It doesn't produce anything. It doesn't move anything. Why is, let's say, listening to the music of Mozart, right, better than making a chair? Why is it perfecting me more than making a chair? Well, listening to the music of Mozart, which is the most beautiful and the most perfect music ever written, right, is perfecting my, what, ear, right? Okay. I'm hearing the most beautiful thing my ear could hear, right? Okay. If I'm making a chair, what am I perfecting? Yeah. So when you make something, right, and you have an exterior product, that's the end or purpose, right? And that's what's being perfected, right? So it's accidental to the maker that he be perfected in any way by making something, right? And especially God, right, who knows how to make things without a need. He doesn't learn from making anything, right? There's no one giving you any instructions, right? Yeah, yeah. So that's the first thing it's got to be, right? It's got to be an activity that remains in the doer and doesn't have anything outside of it, rather than the perfection of something else rather than the doer, right? Then the second thing, it's got to be an activity of his highest, what, power, right? Well, the highest power of one who understands is his mind, his understanding, his reason, right? There's got to be an activity of God's, what, understanding. What's the third thing required, huh? He's talking about what's most essential, you see. It's got to be an activity of the understanding, but its object has got to be the best thing to what? Yeah. Which happens to be God himself, right? Now what's the fourth thing required, right? Yeah, this is the form of the act, right? And he says four things, right? It's got to be what? Perfect act, right? It's got to be what? Easy. It's got to be firm, right? Not pleading. It's got to be pleasant, enjoyable. And so God's understanding of himself has all of those things, right? He understands himself perfectly. He understands himself, what? Huh? Easily, yeah. He has, he firmly does, right? It's eternal, his understanding of himself, right? He's not flitting it out and off or something like that. And because of the perfection of the act, it's the most pleasant, right? So that's what God's attitude is, right? Well, it kind of strikes me because in the, that's where he ends the first book of the Summa Gentiles. But that's about God in himself, right? In the second book, he talks about God as the beginning of things other than himself, right? As the maker of other things, right? The creator of things. And then in the third book, he talks about God as being the end or purpose of all things other than himself. And he's moving all things to himself as an end, right? Well, in the second and the third books, you're talking about the activity of God that is affecting something outside of himself, right? Making something other than himself and moving something other than himself, right? So that's perfecting something outside of God, right? So it's appropriate that he end up the first book by talking about the, what? The attitude of God. And so the first chapter is to show what God's attitude is, right? The second one is to show that God is his attitude itself. And the third is that I was beatitude, you know, excels in the other beatitude that there is, huh? Okay? Now, I was thinking, you know, of the distinction there between the meaning of a name, what the name is placed upon, and that from which the name is taken. Have you met that distinction before? The id, a, quo, nomen, imponitur, that from which the name is placed upon something, and what the name is actually placed upon, not the same thing. And Thomas mentions this example in the Summary Gentiles, one place he mentions it. He takes up the fact that God is universally perfect, right? Well, the word perfect comes from per factu, see? Yeah. Well, God isn't made, right, huh? See? But that's, that from which the, what? Yeah, yeah. But something is not perfect unless it's fully made, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And, uh, so you gotta, you don't confuse that from which the name is taken, and that we just placed upon, right? Okay? We're now coming back, you know, to the word beatitude there, right, huh? I know when I first read the Nicomarckian Ethics, huh? I first maybe read it in English, right, in the Oxford edition there, right? And then I started to read Thomas' commentary, right, huh? And then I started to learn the Greek words and so on, right? Well, in the English text they called it happiness, the end or purpose of man, in the Latin they called it, what, felicitas, and in the Greek they called it eudaimonia, right? Well, these were used as synonyms in the translating, but they all were different in that from which the name was taken. And happiness was taken from the worst, right? From half, right? Like Shakespeare talks about that, huh? You meet with good happiness, which should be partaker of your happiness, and so on. The two gentlemen of Rona. Felicitas is taken from fruitful, right? That makes more sense, doesn't it, huh? Because fruit is a natural result of what? The development of the plant, right? The apple produced, right? Or the banana, or the whatever it is. And a fruitful life, right? It's a good life, right? And it's not by luck, you know, that an apple tree produces apples. And as Thomas says in one place, you know, that virtue is the road to happiness and vice is the road to misery, right? So happiness is a natural result of virtuous behavior, right? And misery is a natural behavior, you know, result of vicious behavior, right? As you can see in the newspaper every day of the week, right? And it's meaning people are visible, right? For something they've done or done to them. So, but you've got to be careful, too, because we're more used to the word happier and happiness than we are to blessedness or something, right? So, I mean, you could say God is happy, right? That would be chapter 100 in the Supercard Gentiles. And then chapter 101 in book 1 would be what? He's happiness itself. He's not just happy, but he's happiness itself. And then finally, God's happiness excels out of all this. Any other happiness, right? Anybody else has. Even though you had a quonomenal point here, it's not so good, right? But it makes it more clear it was, right? You know, you know, rather than say God is blessed, God is blessedness itself, right? He's the word beatitude, right? Now, let's come back to the seven wise men of Greece, right?