Tertia Pars
Lecture 70: Mary's Sanctification, Sinlessness, Grace, and Virginal Conception

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

Fourth article here, whether through sanctification in the womb, the Blessed Virgin was preserved from every actual sin. To the fourth one goes forward thus, it seems that through the sanctification in the womb, the Blessed Virgin was not preserved from every actual sin. Because, as has been said, after the first sanctification, the foams of sin remained in the Virgin. But the motion of the foams, even if it, what, goes before reason, is a, what, venial sin, although most light, as Augustine says in the book on the Trinity. Therefore, in the Blessed Virgin, there was some venial, what, sin, huh? Moreover, it's said upon that of Luke 2, a sword shall, what, go across your, Yeah, pierce your soul. So, pierce your soul. Transit through, right? Mm-hmm. Okay? And upon this, Augustine says in the book on the questions of the New and the Old Testament, that the Blessed Virgin, upon the death of our Lord, doubted in a certain stupor. Augustine is going to get in trouble, huh? Well, it's an ambrose yesterday. I think it's an ambrose. But to, a doubt, huh, about faith is a sin, right? Therefore, the Blessed Virgin was not preserved, immune from all sin, huh? Moreover, Christendom says upon Matthew, expounding that, Behold, your mother and your brothers are outside standing, seeking you. He says that it manifests that only from vain glory did they do this. And John, and John 2, upon that, they have no wine. The same Christendom says, they wish to what? Yeah. And make herself more brilliant, like her son, huh? And perhaps something human they underwent, just as his father is saying, Manifest yourself to the world, huh? Put down there and take Jerusalem and show them. And afterwards, after a few things, he subjoins. For they did not have about him the opinion they should have. Yeah. Yeah. Which whole stands to be a sin. Therefore, the Blessed Virgin was not preserved, immune from every sin, huh? All these arguments are occasions for error. But against this is what Augustine says in the book on nature and grace. About the Holy Virgin Mary, on account of the honor of Christ, when one, what, considers sin, right? I wish there to be no, what? No question. Question. Okay. That's the text I was referring to earlier there, right? But Augustine, one text I've seen before. Hence, we know that to her, more grace was, what, bestowed to conquering every side sin, so that she might conceive in what merit to bring forth the one who stands to have no sin. I answer, it should be said, that those that God chooses for something, He so prepares and disposes that to it, that to that to which they are, what, chosen, they are found, what, suitable. According to that of 2 Corinthians, He made us suitable ministers of the New Testament. But the Blessed Virgin was chosen divinely that she would be the mother of God. And that's why she was immaculately conceived. And therefore, it should not be doubted that God, through His grace, rendered her, what, suitable for this, right? According to what the angel says to her. You have found grace before God. Behold, you shall conceive, and so on. But she would not have been a suitable mother of God if she had sinned some time. So no original sin either, Thomas. The very words condemn you, in your position here. Also because the honor of parents redounds in the, what? Yeah. According to that of Proverbs chapter 17. That the fathers, the glory of the sons is their, what? Fathers. Whence, by the opposite, the ignominy of the mother redounds to the son, huh? That's the way St. Alphonsus' harvest, right? You know? From these sort of things. Also because she had a singular affinity to Christ, huh? Who took from her, what? Flesh. Flesh, huh? Which convention of Christ to, what? Belial. Yeah. Yeah. Also because in a singular way, the son of God, who is the wisdom of God, and dwelled in him, in her, not only in her soul, but also in her womb, right? Where he said in wisdom, 1-4, in an evil soul, wisdom will not enter, nor will it dwell in a body subject to, but sins. Yeah? He's telling me now. Have your fun, Perkwist, he said. Wait till you get this. Boy. Yeah, you've got to be there a long time. Yeah, sure you won't be here for that, but. Well, and therefore, simply it ought to be confessed that the Blessed Virgin committed no actual sin, right? Neither mortal nor, what? Finial, right, huh? That thus might be fulfilled what is said in Cancels 4. You are holy, beautiful, my friend, and there's no stain in you, right? Why didn't you see it? I don't know, Thomas. To the first, therefore, it should be said that in the Blessed Virgin, after the sanctifying in the womb, there remains the foams, but, what, bound, right? Nay, it break forth in some disordered movement, which would run before reason, huh? And although the grace of sanctification would operate towards this, nevertheless, it would not be sufficient for this, huh? Otherwise, by virtue of that grace that would have been bestowed upon her, that there would be no, what, motion in her sensuality, there could be no motion in sensuality, not, what? Yeah, not gone before, for a reason not to go before. And thus she would not have the foams, which is against the things said above, right? Well, once it's necessary that the complement of this obligation, or time, was from divine providence, right? Which did not permit any disordered motion to come from the foams, huh? Which did not permit any disordered motion, or time, or time, or time, or time, or time, or time, I don't know if the church has said whether the foams were removed in her or bound. The foams are the result of the consequence of Rachel's sin. Yeah. So if she didn't have that. Yeah, so I wonder if that could be corrected. The second one is the text there. It says that that word of what? Simeon. Simeon. And Origen and some other doctors expound about the, what, sorrow which she underwent in the passion of Christ. But Ambrose, through the sword, says this signified prudence. That's interesting. The prudence of Mary. Not being ignorant, is it? Of the heavenly mystery, huh? For the word of God is alive and valid and more acute than the sword of the witch sword. But some understand the sword to be, what, doubter, which nevertheless should not be understood to be the doubt of lack of faith, but the doubt of aberration and of, what, discussion. For Basil says in the epistle to Optimum, huh, that the blessed virgin, assisting at the cross, and, what, regarding each thing, after the testimony of Gabriel, after the ineffable knowledge of the divine conception, after the speakable showing of miracles, the miracles, fluctuated in soul, from one part, seeing him to undergo such abject things, and then from another part, considering his, what, marvelous things, right? So it's more of the, um, to be taxio ad moratio unis, discussio unis. Yeah. Yeah, well, that is it. Sounds very feasible. So it was the infidelitative part. Yeah, that's, our liturgy says that specifically, the conception of Christ, it sort of puts words in the virgin's mouth, when she's talking with the angels, she says. Or at the end of the liturgy says, we're, in the face of this great mystery of the incarnation, we're like the virgin, and something about doubt filled her mind. Oh, was that the announcement? That was it. It was something, she was fearful, and doubt filled her mind. And she says, well, how can this be? She says, I know not man. Well, that's the kind of doubt that's just being... Yeah, because there they distinguish between the doubt of, of her, and the doubt of, uh... Zechariah. Yeah, yeah, because he was punished for it, you know. There's doubt, right, but she was not. Yeah, yeah. And he is, you know, doubting this could take place, right? Because of the age and so on, his wife and so on. And she's, uh, wondering how it will take place. How can a virgin be? Yeah. That's what she's wondering. Yeah, she's wondering how it will take place, but she's not doubting it will take place. But it can take place, right? But she went to his house, that's the thing that could take place. It's above the power, I think, in a certain way. Now, um, in those words, Christendom goes to excess. That's the way she turns a tonic. He went too far. Yeah, he went too far. Goes too far. But they're able to be expounded that one understands in them the Lord to be what? Not in a disordered motion of inane glory, as you guard her, but that which could be thoughts by others, right? And St. Matthew, he was going to give up a Paris one? No, because, oh yeah, that's right, Christendom on John. Oh, that's what he's talking about, because he's correcting her at the wedding days of Canaan. That's where he says, um... He says there was Matthew. Well, both... Both of them are used. But the wedding days, they have no wine, and she wanted to claim her as his power and her own. Yeah, yeah. Now to the fifth one proceeds thus. Yes, it seems that the... Blessed Virgin, through the sanctifying in the womb, did not obtain the fullness of what? Grace, or the perfection of grace. For this seems to be to pertain to a privilege of Christ, according to that of John chapter 1, verse 14. For we saw him as the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and what? Truth. But those things which are private to Christ should not be attributed to another. Therefore the Blessed Virgin did not take on a fullness of grace or receive a fullness of grace in the sanctification. Moreover, to that which is full and perfect, there does not remain anything to be added. Because the perfect is that to which nothing is, what? Lacking. But the Blessed Virgin, afterwards, received an addition of grace, when she, what? Conceived Christ. For he said to her, the Holy Spirit will come over you. And again, when she was assumed in, what? Glory, right? Therefore it seems that there was not in her first sanctification the fullness of graces. Moreover, God does not make anything in vain. As is said in the first book, the Celo del Mundo. According to your story, yes. But in vain, she would have had some graces, since she would never exercise or use their, what? Use them, yeah. For she is not ready to have, what? Taught him, right? Which is an act of wisdom. Or to have made miracles, right? Which is an act of grace, gratis data, right? Therefore, she did not have the fullness of grace, huh? But against all this, that's what the Messenger to her said, huh? Ave, grazia, plena, right? I guess that's what the angel says in the Maria, the Church added. Hail. The first part is, the second part is what the Church added. Holy Mary, Mother of God. Well, I know that part. Even the first part here, you know. Hail Mary, full of grace, we say. Well, hail, full of grace is what the angel said. Right. And the Church added, Mary, right? Yeah. They're like an apostle. Yeah, yeah. That would be. But against this is what the angel says to her. Hail, full of grace. Which Jerome expounded, right? In his Sermon on the Assumption says. Bene, gratia, plena, right? Because to others is bestowed in parts, I guess, huh? But Maria, the whole, totem simo at once. The fullness of grace was poured in, right? Well, I guess it's a principle here, right? I answer it should be said that the more something approaches the beginning in any genus, the more it partakes of the effect of that beginning. Whence Dionysius says in the fourth chapter in the specialarchy that the angels which are nearer to God more partake of the divine goodnesses than men do, right? But Christ is the beginning of grace, huh? According to his divinity, authoritatively, right? As the origin. According to his humanity, instrumentally, right? Whence it is said, John 1.17, grace and truth was made through Jesus Christ, huh? But the Blessed Virgin Mary was nearest to Christ, according to what? Humanity. Because from her, he took on human nature, we see. And therefore, before others, she obtained a what? A greater fullness of grace from what? From Christ, huh? Now, the principle here. To the first, therefore, it should be said that to each one by God is given the grace, according to that to which they are, what? Chosen, right? And because Christ, insofar as he is man, was predestined for this and chosen, that he was predestined the Son of God in the power of, what? Sanctification. This was private to him, that he would have such a fullness of grace that it would, what? Redound, flow over, and do all. According to that of John, chapter 1, verse 16, of his fullness we have all received, right? But the Blessed Virgin obtained such a fullness of grace that would be, she would be most, what, near to the author of grace. Thus, that he who is full of every grace she received in herself, and in bringing him forth, right, she in some way gave rise to grace to what? Yeah, it's almost like the mediatrix of grace, right? So he's not saying the grace of Mary there is equal to Christ, right? But in a sense, it's what? Yeah. She has that fullness of grace such that it can be derived from her to all, right? Now, the second objection here, meaning be added to her grace, right? To the second it should be said that in natural things, First is the perfection of disposition, as when matter is perfectly disposed for form. But the second is the perfection of the form itself, which is more, what, powerful. For the heat is more perfect that comes from the form of fire than that which disposes for the form of, what, fire. But third is perfection of the end, as when fire has most perfectly its qualities and it arrives at its own place. And likewise, in the Blessed Virgin, there is a threefold perfection of grace. First, a dispositive one, to which she was rendered suitable that she might be the mother of Christ. And this was the perfection of the sanctification. Secondly, was the perfection of grace in the Blessed Virgin from the presence of the Son of God in her womb, right? Incarnate in her womb. And third is the perfection of the end, which she had in glory. That's a beautiful little text, isn't it? Never seen that before, huh? Isn't that before? The distinction of those three? That the second perfection is more potent than the first and the third than the, what, second, is clear in one way through the liberation from evil, right? Now, let me get it here for you, Thomas. Now, first, in her sanctification, she was reserved for original sin, right? Yeah, correct me. Perkowitz's decision. Yeah. Secondly, in the conception of the Son of God, she was totally cleansed from the... what phones third in a clarification she was freed from all misery right but in another way in order to the good for first in her sanctification she obtained a grace inclining her to good in the conception of the son of god was consummated huh the grace confirming her in the good and in her glorification is consummated her grace perfecting her in the enjoyment of every what right now who's is that the is that the pain by um the one of the famous one of the assumption there what's the greatest pain in the world isn't it oh marilla no it's the one that's in in venice there raphael raphael oh that's a good one who's the great portrait painter there i have to bring that in too along with the neck yeah please be better though if you took us on photography i mean that's any sense knowledge i've been there at that church in fact i've used that in my little person of shakespeare right he knew when to stop portraying the assumption right it's a great artist right yeah he's at the famous uh story shellac holmes there you know but the norwood builder there tried to make something look like a crime it was not he went too far so at the end you know shellac holmes is is talking to watson he says he had me even fooled for a while so you know he went too far he'd like the supreme gift of the artist knowing when to stop so they often say about mozart right knew when to stop right he always rises gold doesn't know everybody shoots it i always take you know the end of the greatest opera the opera of actors are done so anyway the way he comes down at the end it's just marvelous just doesn't want to stop they do a spellbound you know you know why when the car you know you got to play a phytox symphony boom boom boom and at the end you know boom boom stop the damn thing you know there's there's one of the ball that he has i don't remember which piece it is but it's going on it's going on and then it just stops it's like it stops too soon yeah there's one yeah because greg zabielski's comment on that one was he says all right valli put an end to it that was his comment that he did it's too quick i know you see that modern music it doesn't stop which is it fades away yeah yeah but this this whole uh reply to the second objection there right that you make a whole you know beautiful sermon on on the feast of the assumption there okay now the third thing you know what about you know the christian shouldn't use what the third should be said it should not be doubted but that the blessed virgin received most excellently the what gift of wisdom right and the grace of what the virtues or powers and also the grace of prophecy just as christ had right but she did not uh take these that you would have all the uses of these and of similar graces as christ did but according as it was suitable to her what condition right for she had the use of wisdom in contemplating according to that in luke chapter 2 maria preserved or conserved all these words going over them in her what heart she did not however have the use of wisdom as regards what teaching and it does not what fit the female sex now there might be some people in the modern world who object to that as they know but um i quite agree with you i quite agree this isn't wrong on that point yeah yeah yeah where saint paul says i do not permit the woman to teach right i put sin in the faculty meeting in the i think he says not to teach in church um the use of miracles uh did not what fit her while she was what alive right because uh then was uh because then it was a time i suppose for confirming the teaching of christ by miracles right and therefore to christ alone and to his disciples who were what by the teaching of christ right it belonged to them to do miracles right on account of which also about john the baptist it is said that he didn't know what sign right no miracle that all might but look towards christ right okay um but she had the use of what prophecy as is clear in the canonical she says my soul magnifies the lord right it's interesting the way she understands those words right i've often thought about those words my soul magnifies the lord what does that mean what does that mean it's kind of proclaiming him in a sense like the prophet does yeah yeah you have to stop now and the Son of the Holy Spirit. God, our enlightenment, guardian angels, think from the lights of our minds, order to illumine our images and arouse us to consider more correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas and John I talk to you. Great, great, bless. And help us to understand all that you're written. Father, the Son of the Holy Spirit. Amen. You're up to Article 6 here in Question 27, the last article in Question 27. Of course, we've already corrected Thomas last time, so I'll take this with a grain of salt here. To the sixth, one proceeds thus. It seems that to be made holy in the womb after Christ was private to the Blessed Virgin. For it is said, on account of this, the Blessed Virgin was made holy in the womb that she might be rendered suitable to be the mother of God. Of course, nowadays we would say. That's why she was immaculately conceived, right? But this is private to her. Therefore, she alone was made holy in the womb. Moreover, some seem to have approached more near to Christ than Jeremiah and John the Baptist, who are said to be sanctified or made holy in the womb. For Christ is in a special way said to be the son of David and Abraham, on account of the promise made especially to them about Christ. And Isaiah is also most expressly prophesied about Christ. And the apostles conversed with Christ. But nevertheless, they are not said to have been made holy in the womb. Therefore, also neither to Jeremiah and to John the Baptist does it belong to be made holy in the womb. Of course, we can just leave out the Blessed Virgin because she's immaculately conceived and just see if there's some other people, right, who were not immaculately conceived but were made holy in the womb. Moreover, Job about himself says, from infancy, right, his what? Mercy grew with me. And from the womb, it came out with me. And nevertheless, on account of this, we do not say that he was made holy in the womb. Therefore, also neither John the Baptist and Jeremiah are we forced to say were made holy in the womb. Now, when he said contrary, of course, he has some of these scriptural texts that indicate this to be true about Jeremias and about John the Baptist. But against this is what is said about Jeremias. In Jeremias chapter 1, verse 5, Before you came out of the womb, I have made you what? Holy. Sanctified you. And about John the Baptist is said in Luke 1, verse 15, he was filled with the Holy Spirit even from the womb of his what? Mother, right? So without judging this point whether there might be anybody else, it seems that Jeremias at least and John the Baptist were made holy in the womb. I actually should be said that Augustine in his epistle to Dardinius seems to speak in what? In dubious way about the sanctification of these in the womb. For it could be that the exaltation of John in the womb, as he himself said, was what? A sign of so great a thing, right? To it that a woman would be the mother of God, to be known what? From the greater, not known from the what? Little. Less. Whence in the gospel it is not said, the infant believed in his womb, but he rejoiced. For we see exaltation to be not only of little ones, but also of the beasts. Someone gave my son a dog, and the dog was so excited when he came back. Had him around the house with him for a while, calmed the dog down, he was so excited. But this is unaccustomed to be because in the what? That is in the womb. And therefore, just as miracles are what? Have to come about, so it was done divinely in the infant. Not made what? Human from the infinite. Although also, if to that extent, in the boy, or in the, it's accelerated use of reason and the will, that in the what? Maternal organs, huh? Vissera. He was already able to what? Recognize, to believe and consent. To which, in other little ones, age is expected, right? That they'd be able to. And this, in miracles, to be had, a tributer, I think, belongs to divine power. But because expressly in the gospel, it is said that by the Holy Spirit, he was what? Filled. Still from the womb of his mother, And of Jeremiah's, it's expressly said that before he came out of the womb, I sanctified you. It would seem to be what? To be asserted that they were made holy in the womb, although in the womb they did not have the use of what? Free will. About which Augustine was the question. Just as boys who are sanctified by baptism do not at once have the use of what? Free will. Nor is it to be believed that some other saints, that some others were made holy in the womb about which, or about whom, scripture does not make what? Mention, right? There are some scenes of excluding other ones from that, right? Because these privileges of grace, which are given to some, apart from the common law, common way, are all ordered to the utility or usefulness of others. According to that of 1 Corinthians 12. To each one is given the manifestation of the spirit in a useful way. Because nothing would come from the making holy of some in the womb unless it were made known to the what? Church, yeah? And although of the judgments of God one is not able to assign a reason where for to this one and not to that this gift of grace was conferred, huh? Nevertheless, it seems that both of these were made holy in the womb to prefiguring the sanctification that's going to come about through Christ, huh? First, through his passion, according to that of Hebrews 13. God, or Jesus, that he might sanctify through his blood the people, he underwent or suffered outside the what? Gates of Jerusalem. Which passioned Jeremiah's most openly, most fully for announced in words and mysteries and by his passions most expressly what? Refigured, huh? And secondly, through baptism, but you were washed but made holy to which the baptism of John by his baptism repaired men, right? Thomas is giving what? A reason of those saying, you know, you can't really be too sure about these things, right? But a reason why it might be that Jeremiah's and John the Baptist gets their connection with baptism in the window. passion of Christ, right? You know how St. Paul says that in baptism you're what? Buried with Christ and so on? Very explicit about the signification, especially when they used to immerse the whole person in the water and came up out of the water, that this was signifying in a kind of open way the fact that you're being incorporated into the death of Christ. When it says that they were sanctified, does that ask them that they're going to become made without sin? Yeah, yeah, they're original sin, right? They don't have any actual sin in the womb, I don't think. But they have original sin in the womb and they're purged from, you know, they're washed from that. Does that suggest that they're not going to be able to sin like our lady did? No, no. Does it mean, it's like baptism? But the effect of baptism is not God is not what? Yeah, restricted on bound to to give the effect of baptism only by water. That's a common way in which it is done, right? I've got to correct Thomas here as you apply to the first objection here, right? To the first, therefore, it should be said that the Blessed Virgin who was chosen by God as his mother obtained a more, what? Fuller sanctification, or graceful sanctification than John the Baptist and Jeremiah's, huh? But they say we corrected him with that last week, huh? With the encyclical there of Pius IX. But who were chosen as special, what? Prefigurations of the being made holy of Christ, huh? The sanctification that Christ gave us. a sign of which is that it was given to the Blessed Virgin among others that she would sin neither mortally nor, what? Fenially, right, huh? But we also said that she would also not, what? Sin not contract virginal sin at all, right? She was happily conceived. To others, however, it was given that they would not, what? Sin mortally, divine grace, what? Protecting them, right? So we say about St. Teresa of Dessille, you know, that she never committed a mortal sin, right? There's an excuse here from making some venial sins, right? Okay? That's where St. John says, we have no sin, you know, we're liars, and so on. Now, the second objection about weren't some other people as close to Christ or even more so? To the second, therefore, it should be said as regards others, as regards other things, some saints were, what? More joined to Christ, right? Than Jeremiah and John the Baptist. Whoever were most joined to him as far as an express figure of his, what? Sanctification. So, I guess that's a specialty of Jeremiah, huh? As a prophet is the passion and death of our Lord, huh? Yes, so, yeah. Yeah. Now, the, what? The third objection there, huh? The thing about the, what Job says about himself, huh? To the third is that miseratio, having mercy, I guess, about which Job speaks does not signify infused virtue, but is certain, what? Natural inclination to the act of this, what? Virtue. Yeah. Now, we can go on to the next question here, which is 28, on the, what? Virginity of the Mother of God, huh? I think Thomas would be 100% okay here. I always think of St. Jerome as, you know, among others, but especially St. Jerome being one of the great defenders of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin. Then we ought to consider about the virginity of the Mother of God, huh? And about this thing, or about this four things are asked. First, whether she was a virgin in conceiving, and secondly, whether she was a virgin in, what, giving birth, huh? Whether she remained a virgin after giving birth, and whether she, what, made the vow of, what, virginity, huh? The first one proceeds thus, it seems that the Mother of God was not a virgin in conceiving Christ, huh? For no offspring, huh, who has a father and a mother, right, is conceived from a mother who is a, what, virgin. But Christ is not only said to have a mother, but also a father, for it is said in Luke chapter 2, his father and mother were, what, marveling on those things which were said about him. And below Mary says, behold, I and your father, weeping, souring, have sought you, right? Therefore, Christ was not conceived from his, what, virgin mother. You guys should know how to answer that, huh? Moreover, Matthew 1, it is proved that Christ was the son of Abraham and David, through this that Joseph descended from David, which proof would seem to be nothing if Joseph was not the father of, what, Christ, huh? So that's a question people raised in this genealogy. It talks about the descent to, what, Joseph, right, rather than to Mary. Therefore, it seems that the mother of Christ conceived him from the seed of, what, Joseph. And this does not seem that she was a virgin in conceiving. Moreover, it is said in Galatians chapter 4, God sent his son made from a woman, but a woman, in the custom way of speaking, it said the one who is, what, known by man. Therefore, Christ was not conceived from his virgin, from a virgin mother. Moreover, of those things which are the same species, there is the same way of generation, because generation receives its species, its nature, definition, from its, what, in turn, just as other motions. But Christ is of the same species with other men. He was made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. But other men are generated from the mixture of a man-woman, right? What about Adam, though? What about Adam, huh? What about Eve, huh? Right? It seems, therefore, that Christ also, in a like way, was generated. And thus, it does not seem that he was conceived from a virgin mother, right? Moreover, each natural form has a matter determined to it, outside of which he's not able to be. But the matter of the form, of the human form, would seem to be the seed of the man and the woman, female. If, therefore, the body of Christ was not conceived from the seed of a man, or the male and the female, it would not have been a human body, which is unfitting. It doesn't fit. It seems, therefore, that he was not conceived from the virgin mother. But against this, what is said in Isaiah 7, 14, behold, a virgin shall of what in C's. Well,