Tertia Pars
Lecture 98: Christ's Observance of the Law and Temptation in the Desert

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

According to the law, I guess, conversate, to turn around, I guess, hmm, converse, to turn around, well it comes in the same way as conversion, right, but revolves around it, I'd say, right, should Christ's life revolve around the law, right, in the way he did, I mean, since he observed something, to the fourth one goes forward thus, it seems that Christ was not, what, conversed with the law, according to the law, for the law commanded that nothing be done on the Sabbath, right, as God on the seventh day rested from every work that he had done, but he, in the Sabbath, cured man, and he commanded him to take up his, what, bed, therefore it seems he was not living according to the law. Some people don't. Moreover, Christ did and taught the same things according to that of Acts 1, Jesus began to do and to what he did teach, but he himself taught that it was not what comes into the mouth, what comes out of it, that what comes in the mouth doesn't stain the man, which is against the precept of the law, which through eating and contacting certain animals said that the man became unclean, as it said in the Leviticus, therefore it seems that he was not living according to the law, would I have already eaten pork, I don't know, moreover, the same judgment is, seems to be the one doing and consenting to do it, and doing of it, for not only those who do, as it said in Romans, but those who consent to this on abortion, so, but Christ consents to the disciples, what, dissolving the law, and that they, what, took their, grains, yeah, excusing them, as it said in Matthew 12, therefore it seems that Christ was not living according to the law, but against all this is what is said in Matthew chapter 5, do not think that I have come to dissolve the law, or the prophets, right, perfect them, which Persistim expounding says, he fulfilled the law, right, first, in going beyond nothing of the legal things, right, secondly, by justifying through faith, that the law, the letter, was not strong enough to do. I answer, it should be said that Christ in all things, according to the precepts of the law, was, was living, right, in sign of which also he wished to be, what, circumcised, huh, for the circumcision is a certain, uh, protesting, or, well, that's not the word protesting, but, uh, yeah, yeah, okay, yeah, of, of fulfilling the law, right, according to that of Galatians 5, I testify to every man, circumcising himself, that he becomes a, indebted to, or bound to, the carrying out of the universal law. Um, Christ, however, uh, wished or willed to live according to the law, first, that he might approve of the, um, old law, secondly, that by observing it in himself, he might consummate and terminate it, showing that, in fact, it was ordered to, what, himself, yeah, third, that he might subtract from the Jews the occasion of calamity, and fourth, that he might liberate men from the servitude to the law, according to that of Galatians 4, that God sent his son, made under the law, that those who are under the law, he might, what, redeem, huh, now to the first, huh, that the Lord, upon this, excused himself from transgression of the law in three ways, right, in one way, because through the precept about the sanctifying, or the keeping hold of the Sabbath, is not forbidden, uh, a divine work, but human work. So, although God, on the seventh day, ceased from, uh, making new creatures, nevertheless, he always works for the conservation and the governing of things. But that Christ did miracles was of a, what, divine, whence he himself said, my father, till now, works, and I also work, huh? Second, he excused himself through this, that by that precept was not prohibited works which are a necessity of, what, bodily safety. So you can cook, I guess, on Sunday? Your mother's not in trouble for cooking on Sunday? Whence he himself says, huh, uh, each one of you, right, uh... On the Sabbath. Oh, he doesn't, he doesn't, I'm sorry, he doesn't violate the Sabbath. Yeah, he doesn't... Or leading his animals. From the ditch, right? Right. Or whose, uh, ass or ox falling in the... No, this is the, the manger doesn't lead him away to water, he said food. Oh, okay. Lead him to water. Yeah, leading him from the pre, yeah, from the nest, I mean, from the pen or something. Yeah. And leads him to aquarius. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm still looking at the first quote. I didn't see. Yeah, and then the one, the ass or the thing falls into the piton, and he's not continually draw it out from the dead Sabbath. For it manifests that the works of the miracles that Christ did pertain to the salvation of the body and the soul, right, huh? So the doctor can, uh, save you on the, uh, Sunday, huh? I hope so. Can't operate today, it's Sunday. I have to wait tomorrow. Hope you'll last. We'll pray for you. Third, because by that precept are not prohibited works which pertain to the, uh, worship of God, right? When she says, Matthew 12, have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple violate the Sabbath? And they're without what? Crime. Crime. How do you violate the Sabbath? Like killing animals or what? Maybe so much. Oh, no, they, they do, what was the other thing? I, I don't know. And John 7, they said that man takes what? Subcision. You see, subcision on the Sabbath. That however Christ commanded to the paralytic one that he carried his bed on the Sabbath, right? Pertains to the worship of God. That is to the praise of the divine Father. That's beautiful. And it's clear that he did not, what? Deal. Although to this the Jews falsely objected, right? Saying, this man is not from God who does not guard or keep the, what? Sabbath, huh? Sabbath, huh? That's kind of interesting, those three reasons, huh? Usually you think of the second one there sometimes, you know, usually you think of the necessity, but can you teach on Sunday? That's kind of thing. That's kind of thing. That's kind of thing. I don't see why not. It's not a manual work. It's an opus divinum, opus divinum. It's disposing you for the contemplation of truth. I should do theology on Sunday rather than geometry, right? Maybe. I mean Aristotle said, didn't he? I heard it. He said in the parts of the animals that you shouldn't be squeamish about those things because it would help you see the wisdom of the maker. Yeah, he quotes Eric Clydus there about, there are gods even in the kitchen, right? There you go. There you go. That's because he's out in the kitchen and he doesn't want to come out there in the kitchen. He says, there are gods even in the kitchen. Eric Clydus says things so well, you know. He's talking about this, you know, statues they had up as gods, you know. If a man should shout it to his house, he says. Talk to his house, right? There's no god in the house there. There's no god in the statue. And then he speaks ironically, you know, that Homer, you know, has a god doing things which if meant to them would be most disgraceful. Yes, it doesn't mean that. You can see the episode of that. There's ladies saying some gods he can't keep on the porch, right? To the second it should be said, huh? That Christ wished to show through those words that man is not rendered unclean in his soul from the use of any, what, foods, according to its nature, right? But only according to a certain signification. That however in the law some foods are said to be unclean. This is not on account of their nature, but on account of their signification, right? When Cucustin says against Faust, huh? If about the pig and the, what, lamb is required, whether by nature it is clean, because every creature of God is, what, good, right, huh? But by certain signification, the lamb is clean, the pig is unclean, right? Because it was in the public theory, you know, where they proposed a certain city, but it doesn't really have anything truly human in it, you know? And Sarkis says, this is a city for pigs. So he said, ideally, you know, that the pig is an unclean animal in its signification, right? In preparation for Mass, he says, what would the church be without the Eucharist? It's got a herd of pigs rushing off a cliff. They're talking about Europe there, and saying, you know, it's clear that in Europe now God is dead, right? And I said, you know, this thing that got started is God is dead, theology is dead, articles, you know, Time magazine and so on. It was kind of a popular way of saying, but you shouldn't say God is dead, you know, you should say, you know, that the European soul is dead, right? You know, Cucustin says, you know, when the soul leaves the body, the body is dead, and God leaves the soul, then the soul is dead, right? So God is not dead, but the souls of Europeans now are dead, right? And it's the... Yeah, yeah. Isn't it? But even as you're just reading, you know, even the last 10 years or so, you know, church tents have gone down from like 27 to 4 percent, some like that in France. It's a horrible number, you know, going down so that they're really kind of... Yeah, but it's kind of, you know, as if, you know, what we do determines what is real, you know. Oh, is that what it is? Yeah. And God is... I mean, it's only if we, you know, decide to... We're the measure of it. Yeah, yeah. So I know, personally, I don't say I'm misusing this, but I mean, that's not to be the way that things are. I mean, God's not affected by us. He doesn't ever die by us. His life is quite independent of our life. But our life is not independent of Him. It depends upon Him. So that you can see that the European soul is dead now, you know. We got a book there. We just did it. The BJ's there, you know, the books in. We had one of the cathedrals right here, but like $15. We had a lot of pictures in it, you know. So I like, you know. But I thought it was pretty good for that price, you know. And he's going to look at all these beautiful things. He was talking about the text of the two, about the different styles of cathedrals and so on. They're really beautiful buildings, right? Yeah. And I remember even Rosalie's grandmother there, you know, saying, you know, the only thing to see in Italy is with the churches, right? And those are the buildings that are worth seeing, you know, and so on. So you get all these beautiful churches over Europe that took sometimes, you know, more than a century to build. And they show their devotion to people and their perseverance, you know, and so on. And all these are kind of a witness, you know, to what they've given up, you see. In France, I guess, I think the government itself keeps up physically the churches, right, because they're church directions or something. They're part of the history of France, you know. But I mean, nobody goes to them, you know. Nobody, the speaker, I mean, goes to these churches. And so they're kind of witnesses, you know, where we've fallen off, right? I know when my daughter, we were first studying in Rome, you know, she stayed with that, you know, that place. Jewish convert, right? I guess he'd gone over there as an artist to study, you know, in Florence. Finally struck, you know, by the fact that there must be something to religion that would inspire all these beautiful books of art, right? And this is kind of an occasion for him, you know, to go start on the road to being a Catholic. Like, I don't know, you'd think of them walking around saying, what are these beautiful buildings around there for? Well, why did people spend, you know, a century building one of these things, you know? They must be missing something, you know? And they have such beautiful buildings, you know, compared to what? Yeah. Box. You know, my brother Mark and I lived in California there, you know, kind of an apartment building, you know. So, all these things like boxes. We dated Boxville. Boxville. That's not very beautiful about it. You know, Boxville, you know. Go back to Boxville at night. Let's look at the last adjiction here. So the disciples are, when they're eating the, what, grain there? Seeds on the Sabbath. They're excused from tradition of the law on account of the necessity of their, what, famine, right? Just as David was not a transgressor of the law when an account of the necessity of famishing, he ate the breads, which he was not, what, listening to. That's kind of a fortiori, the example there of David, right? Because it seems more questionable, right, than eating these grainage to go through the, you know. I was just saying to me, was it in France? I mean, it was in Spain, you know, where, you know, people are allowed to pick out, you know, an orange thing from the tree, you know. It's kind of understood. But first, some of these, some of the orange trees are the ones that are used for making marmalade, right? And they're actually a bit of orange, right? So you have to go, it's deliciously orange. Yeah, it's kind of a bitter... Mm-hmm. In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas. Deo gratias. God, our enlightenment, guardian angels, do the lights of our minds, or the illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly St. Thomas Aquinas, Angelic Doctor. Help us to understand what you have written. So what's the second commandment of love? Now, does that include your guardian angel? See, your neighbor? Yeah, you know, think of it easily. You know, think of your neighbor as simply, you know, other human beings, right? But I always think that the angels would be included in that. But if this is neighbor, doesn't it? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh, does that mean there's a guardian guardian angel? Yeah, yeah. That's a lot of angels. Well, if there's that many people, angels take up less space than people. Church Father speaks of the angels assisting at Mass, too. That's a common thought among them, huh? I was reading the chapters 39 through 45 there of Thomas, there in the second book of the Samukandu Gentiles, where he's talking about the distinction over the universe and how this is an effect of God, right? Of course, he goes through, you know, all the wrong ideas about what the cause is and shows at the end that it pertains to God. But God makes everything for the sake of what? Himself, huh? He's the beginning and the end of all things. But he doesn't get anything out of this, right? Okay? His goodness doesn't depend upon the universe, and it doesn't get any improvement upon it. So, what is God really up to, you see, in making all things for the sake of Him? Well, He's trying to make creatures like Himself, huh? He's trying to... And that's in the end of the universe, right? Well, when Thomas is explaining the inequality of creatures, huh? He says, well, if there wasn't this inequality of creatures, then no creatures would be like God in perfecting others. So, I was thinking, you know, of how we say about the word, this is the light that enlightens every man that comes into this world. So, God enlightens everybody. But, you know, it can also say that Thomas Aquinas, say, or our guardian angel, that they enlighten us, huh? And so, in that respect, like, what? God in that way, right? So, God wants creatures to be not only like themselves and having some perfection in themselves, but also some of them to be like Him in perfecting others, huh? Although in a partial way compared to the way He does it, right? So, that's why God made you and me so inferior to Thomas Aquinas or Augustine or somebody like that or even Euclid in geometry. So, we could be enlightened by these men, right? Like, Euclid has enlightened me about squares and circles and triangles and angles and Aristotle has enlightened me about the soul and about God and Thomas Aes and so on, Augustine. So, that's marvelous, right? So, that's the way it should be, right? Rather than all of us thinking for ourselves. No one would like to think anybody else, huh? Okay, let's start question 41 here. Then we're not to consider about the temptation of Christ. And about this, four things are asked. First, whether it was suitable for Christ to be tempted. Secondly, about the place of the temptation. Third, about the time of the temptation. And then fourth, about the way and order of the temptations, huh? So, to the first, one goes forward thus. It seems that it's not suitable for Christ to be tempted. Because to tempt is to get, what? Experience, to take experience. Which is not except about something unknown. But the power of Christ was known even to the, what? Demons. For it is said in Luke chapter 4. That he did not allow the demons to speak. Because they knew him to be the, what? Christ. Therefore, it seems that it was not befitting for Christ to, what? Be tempted, huh? Moreover, Christ came for this purpose. That he might dissolve the works of the devil. According to that of 1 John 3. In this, the Son of God appeared, that he might dissolve the works of the devil. But it is not of the same to dissolve the works of someone and to suffer them, undergo them. And therefore, it seems unsuitable that Christ would suffer or allow himself to be tempted by the, what? Moreover, there is a threefold temptation from the flesh, from the world, and from the devil. But Christ was not tempted by the flesh, nor by the world. Therefore, neither should he have been tempted by the, what? Devil, huh? Jericho would call it exemplary, right? From one particular to another particular. The weakest of the arguments. The weakest of the four arguments. But against this is what is said in Matthew chapter 4. That Jesus was led by the Spirit, and that's the Holy Spirit, huh? Into the desert, that he might be tempted by the, what? Devil. Now, he says, I answer, it should be said, that Christ willed to be tempted, right? And he's going to give now four reasons. First, that he might give aid to us against, what? Temptations. Whence Gregory says in a homily. What's a homily, by the way? What's the English word for homily? We made a word out of the Greek word, but does it actually mean homily? So, isn't it a word? What? Word? I think it means talk, huh? Talk. Yeah. Yeah. So, it's a little bit less formal than a lecture, right, huh? Sermon. Sermon. It makes it English. Yeah, but the Greek word, I think I looked it up the other day, or I saw it. It meant talk, I think, huh? So, it's a little more casual, if you wish, yeah, yeah. But, of course, it's quite a little substance to these homilys, huh? It was not a dignified, right, for our Redeemer, that he wished to be, what, tempted, who came also to be, what, killed. That thus he might overcome our temptations by his temptations, just as he overcame our death by his death, huh? That's quite a trick to do that, right? But that's a nice proportion there that Gregory has, right? So, Plato and Aristotle talk about the importance of being able to see a proportion in the fourth tool of dialectic, huh? Now, the second reason he gives, on account of what? A caution for us, huh? A warning for us. That no one, no matter how holy he is, huh? Should think himself to be secure and immune from, what, temptation. That's a beautiful, interesting argument, right, huh? Whence also, after baptism, he wished to be, what, tempted, huh? Because, as Hilary says upon Matthew, in those made holy, right, most of all, right, the temptations of the devil are, what, made abundant, right, or weighed down. What? Okay. Big rock is in the back, though. Yeah, because victory is more desired over the what? Saints, right, huh? So if he can make a saint sin, right, then he has greater, what, joy in hell over it. Successful temptation, right, huh? Whence it is said in the book of Ecclesiastes, of course, that, son, when you are approaching the service of God, stand in, what, justice and in fear, and prepare your soul to, what, what, temptation, huh? Okay? So when the guy was coming in, was into the trappist there, you know, in the first confession, so he came in there, and he says, you're going to be tempted to leave here some day. That's kind of the first thing to say, right? You're going to be tempted to leave here some day. So this is a very good reason that Thomas gives here, right? It's in caution, huh? I remember a Dominican saying that, you know, it's like, I've been keeping my body in subjection all these years, you know, but it's like a, you know, an old guy you can't quite trust, you know, looking for an opportunity. And all the, what's the missionary, right? Yeah, yeah. Third, on account of what? An example, right, huh? That he might instruct us how we are to overcome the temptations of the devil, right? Well, what did Aristotle say in the book on the poetic art, huh? He says that man is the most, what, imitative of all the animals. And at first, he says, we learn by imitation, huh? So that's part of the reason why Plato wrote these dialogues, right? Where he gives you an imitation of philosophical conversation, huh? For you to imitate. And then I can imitate Mary, I guess, huh? The way the last chapter is in it, on the church there, is about Mary, huh? And so she's kind of a model, huh? I was thinking of the beginning of the Magnificat the other day, because I was reading Luke, you know, again. And she says, my soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God, my Savior, right? What's the connection between those two things, right, huh? Because in a sense she's saying, my soul magnifies the Lord, my soul, what, praises in a way God, right, huh? And why does she say, my spirit rejoices in God, my Savior? Why does that follow from that, huh? Well, I was thinking of those words of Augustine, right, where he's talking about the next world, huh? He's talking about the connection between love and praise, huh? And he says, amari and laudibus, to love and praises, and laudari amore, to praise and love, right? Now, why do those two go together, right, huh? Well, it's because you praise somebody because there's something good in that person, right? As you know from your study of the treatise on love, you were there when you did that. The object of love is the cause of love, right? And the good is the object of love, therefore it's the what? Cause, yeah. So that's why praise and love go together, right, huh? Praise him in love and love him in praise, huh? Well, now if you love God, then that's going to give rise to what? Yeah. That's going to give rise to what? Joy in the Lord, right, huh? Okay? Because we only take, what? Joy in what we like, right? I take no joy, usually, in eating fish. Because I don't like fish much, right, right? But I take joy in eating steak or something, which I like, see? I take joy in Shakespeare, yeah. You don't sing the praises of fish. No, no, no, no, no, no. You only cook fish, right? Yeah. Yeah, yeah, right. Very definite, very definite, very definite. Very definite. You have more than H for the problem. Opposite to turn. I know. We first had a cat out at the lakeside place, and we cleaned some fish, right? And then some of that paper was in the wastewater basket, and the cats jumped into the wastewater basket. It's just because of the smell of the paper that's in there. So Mary's got a thing there. What is it? They say the principal hours are lodges and vespers, right? Of course, lodges is named from what? Praise. Vespa, I guess it's a name for the time of day. But lodges gives it away, right, huh? And so when you're praising God, you should be praising God in love and loving him in praise. And then you should, like Mary, then what? Rejoice in the Lord, right? That psalm there was at 99. He enters his gates with thanksgiving, his courts with praise. Give thanks to him, bless the Lord. For he is good, right? But there you see the connection between the good and praise, right? I was reading, you know, this praise of the, what, play there at Shakespeare before class. And I would assume that he rather likes the play, the way he praises it, right? You know, see? We tend to praise somebody that we really, what, like? We praise something that we like, huh? I was listening to Don Giovanni a little bit there the other day. And he said, it's actually amazing. This is the opera of opres, right? Mm-hmm. And I was listening to a little bit of the Marriage of Figaro. And some of them were describing, some famous writer there describing. And then going to the old Vic for a performance of, you know, the Nonce de Figaro, the Marriage of Figaro. The vindication of opera. That's kind of a marvelous thing, right? You know? A lot of people don't like opera, but this is the vindication of opera. And opera would be really something great, you know? So Brahms, the other words of Brahmin, he said, I can't understand you, but he could say something as perfect as Marriage of Figaro, right? But there's never a light down. Just every number is perfect. Very mixed. Of course, the highest thing in Mozart is when you get these, you know, maybe, you get six different singers, you know? Singing together, you know? Kind of a, you know, single things and duos and so on. You have these things where you have six tables, six people singing and, oh, it's just incredible what he does. But anyway, so if you praise these things, if you praise them, the opera of operas, you must like the opera, right? Okay, so this is the third reason, then, on account of example, right? But because man has to learn by example. Once Augustine says in the fourth book about the Trinity, that Christ gave himself up to be tempted by the devil, that he might be the mediator in, what? Overcoming temptations. Not only by his aid, right? But also through his, what? Example, huh? And fourth, that he might give us hope or confidence about his, what? Mercy being bestowed, huh? Whence it is said in Hebrew fourth, we do not have a high priest who is not able to compassion with our infirmities. For he is tempted in all things, of likeness, but without, what? Sin, huh? So that's the four good reasons why Christ is tempted, right? That's kind of interesting. That's the whole sermon itself, right, huh? Yeah. They say you're only supposed to make three points in the sermon, I guess, huh? That's the old rule. I'm sure you could probably arrange this and divide it into two ways. To the first, therefore, it should be said, it's kind of interesting what he says here about the devils. You never are too sure exactly, what do they know about this man here? To the first, therefore, it should be said, as Augustine says in the ninth book about the city of God, that Christ, to that extent, was made known to the devils as much as he willed, right? Not through that, that he is eternal life, right? But through some temporal things, there were effects of his power, right? And then, did they know from this? No. From which they had a certain, and this is the Latin word for guess, right? From which they had a certain, what? Guess. That Christ was the Son of God, right? But because, again, in him, they saw certain signs of, what? Human infirmity. Not for certain, right? Did they know him to be the Son of God? They didn't know in the strict sense, right? The story remains of yes. And therefore, they wanted to tempt him, right? And this is signified in Matthew chapter 4, where it is said that after he hungered, he saw this weakness in Christ, this human weakness of hunger. The temptator, a tempter. approached him, right? Because, as Haley says, the devil would not have dared to tempt Christ unless through, what, the infirmity of hunger, right? He recognized him to be a man, right? That brings out man. And this also is clear from his way of tempting when he says, if you are the son of God, right? Which the great Gregory expounding says, what does such a beginning of his speech wish except that, what, he knew the son of God to be coming, right? But he did not think he came to the infirmity of, what, the body being a little more relaxed, a little more glorious or something, right? So he kind of, not getting sure of the devil, right? You know, when they talk about Mary being betrothed and so on, right? Well, it's part, you know, to save God or honor, but also keep the devil kind of ignorant of what this... Yeah. Yeah. Maybe this is just another human birth, you know? However excellent it might be. Now, the second point that Thomas makes in reply to the second objection here, how you can overcome the devil, right? Thomas makes his point in other places I've seen it, huh? He wants to overcome the devil not so much by his power as by justice, right? And so in the devil, you know, this is seen most of all in the, what, crucifixion and so on, right, huh? Because the devil is being unjust, right, huh? Then he merits, shall we say, to lose his, what, authority, to lose his kingdom, huh? Okay? But also because Christ doesn't want you to be a lover of, what, power. The second should be said that Christ came to dissolve the works of the devil not by, what, acting in a powerful way, right? Potestative. But more by suffering from his, what, members of the devil. That he might overcome, that justice might overcome the devil. That he might overcome the devil by justice, not by, what, power. As Augustine says in the 13th book of the Trinity, that the devil was not, what, to be overcome by the power of God, but by, what, justice, huh? And therefore, about the temptation of Christ, it should be considered what he did by his own will and what he, what, suffered from the devil. For that he offered himself to the tempter was of his own will, right? Whence it is said in Matthew chapter 4, that Jesus was led into the desert by the spirit, that he might be tempted by the, what, devil. Which Gregory understood to be said about the Holy Spirit, right? That the Holy Spirit led him there where he knew that the evil spirit, right, would find him to tempt. But from the devil he was, what, undergoing that he be taken either on the pinnacle of the temple or also in the high mountain, right? The other two temptations taking place. Nor is Marvis at Gregory says that from him he permitted to be led into the mountain, who permitted himself to be crucified by the members of that same devil, right, huh? He's understood to be taken by the devil, not as aware of necessity, but because, as Origen says, he follows out temptation as an athlete, huh? Proceeding spontaneously, huh? That's kind of a nice image that Origen has, huh? Now, what about Christ being tempted by the devil but not by the flesh and so on? Well, he's going to apply to that in the third objection. To the third, it should be said that the apostle, as the apostle says, Christ willed to be tempted in all things but without, what, sin. Now, the temptation which is from the enemy can be without, what, sin. Because it comes about only through exterior, what, suggestion. But the temptation which is from the flesh is not able to be without sin, without, at least, what, venial sin, right? Because this temptation comes about through pleasure and desire. And as Augustine says, there is some sin when the flesh, what, lusts against the spirit, huh? And therefore, Christ willed to be tempted by the enemy but not by the, what, flesh and so on? Now. The place and the time, right? Of course, the fourth article will be the most important about the way and the order of the temptations, right? Thomas, you know, takes up each detail, right? Even the place and the time. I was thinking to imitate the Blessed Virgin, you know, on the way up a little bit now, saying, kind of a humorous way, you know, that don't let the wine run out. If you get the Blessed Virgin, you'll make sure the wine doesn't run out. Always invite her to your face. Make sure you get a wine. That's an example I can follow. Well, we know that when you're in purgatory, you're just going to be no wine. Until you get to the big piece. Yep. The second one goes forward thus. It seems that Christ ought not to be tempted in the desert, right? For Christ's will to be tempted for our example, right? But an example ought to be proposed, manifested to those who are to be informed by the example. Therefore, he ought not to have been tempted in the desert. It may be in the temple or someplace like that where people could see him being tempted, right? It's kind of an interesting objection, huh? The man. Okay. Moreover, Christendom says upon Matthew that then, most of all, the devil is insistent upon tempting when he sees us to be what? Yeah. Whence in the beginning he tempted the woman without the man, or finding her without the man, right? That's very interesting, you know, that he points that out there, that she was more susceptible to the temptation, you know, to succumbing to the temptation, being by herself, right? And thus it seems to this that he went into the desert, that he might be tempted, that he exposed himself to what? Temptation. Since therefore his temptation is our example, it seems that others ought also to what? Go into receiving these, yeah, to cast themselves into undergoing these temptations, right? Which nevertheless seems to be what? Dangerous. Yeah. Because we ought more to avoid occasions of what? Temptations, huh? Just going to go to the body house or something like that, right? Okay. I think it's kind of interesting thing that I've seen sometimes. I remember a conversation between my cousin Don and my mother one time, right? We were talking about some sage, you know, and all these horrible things that I underwent, right? And my mother felt like, could I undergo these things, right? And when you think about what these things suffered, you know, these Isaac Job here at the Indians and so on. And I say, yeah, which he was, you know. Well, all my cousin Don said, well, if you get in that situation, he says, God will give you the grace, right? And, but the point is, maybe one shouldn't dwell too much upon those horrible things, right? Because that's like a temptation to, what? To stairs. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And it's a little more different than the temptation you have, you know, to be on chase or something like that, right? That was obvious, you know? But here, it's something like, you know, well, I hope I don't have to undergo this, but if I do, I'll rely upon God's grace and rely upon my own, but I'm not going to dwell upon it and say, gee, let's quiz, you know. You know, what did I do, you know? That seemed to be the lesson that Father Sizzick went in. Yeah. He had just been in the shop. Yeah. He was going to take on the whole Communist Party himself. Yeah, yeah. And then he found out that they kind of, they physically, they broke him. Yeah. They were emotionally mentally broke him. But then he sort of recovered from that by the grace of God. No. That wasn't the right. Mm-hmm. I know one too, is the North American Mars. I think it's, I don't know if it's fine, there's one of the ones, he was actually, he was actually weaker than, I think he was a companion of the other group. He was actually weaker than the other ones. He ended up enduring even worse than the stronger ones. Yeah. And that was kind of interesting. And anyway, reading the story, it's evident that it was a special divine grace. Okay, moreover, Matthew 4, 5, the second temptation of Christ by which the devil took Christ to the holy city, right? And put him upon the pinnacle of the temple, which was not in the desert, right? Therefore, he was not tempted only in the, what? Desert. Desert, huh? But again, this is what is said in Mark chapter 1, that when Christ was in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights and he was tempted by what? Yeah. So he shouldn't spend 40 days there fasting, you know, during lunch. He might be tempted exposing himself to... So, I answer it should be said, this has been said, that Christ by his own will exhibited himself to the devil to be tempted. Just as by his own will exhibited to the devil's members, right? To be killed, right? Now, the devil more pays attention to someone when he is what? When he's solitary, right? Right. Because, as is said in Ecclesiastes, chapter 4, if someone prevails against one, two can what? Resist him, huh? And it's like Alcoholics Anonymous or something, right? Yeah. I see? Okay. Yeah. Okay. And hence it is that Christ went out into the, what, desert as it were to the field of struggle, right? Battle. That there he might be tempted by the, what, devil, right, huh? Whence Ambrose says upon Luke that Christ went into the desert by counsel, right, huh? that he might provoke the, what, devil. For unless he had fought against the devil, right, Christ would not have, what, conquered, right? He adds over also other reasons, saying that Christ, what, did this in mystery, right, huh? That he might liberate Adam from exile, right? Who from paradise was ejected into the desert. By example, that he might show us that the devil envies us, right, when we tend to greater things, huh? Okay. So envy is sometimes spoken of the second sin of the devil, right? The first sin is pride, you know? But then there's envy towards us as still being capable of the attitude, so envy is a devilish thing, right? Now what about this first objection? Why didn't he do so in an open way, right? The first, therefore, it should be said that Christ is proposed for us as an example by faith, huh? According to that of Hebrews chapter 12, looking upon the author and the consummate, the finisher of faith, right? Namely Jesus, huh? But faith, as it's said in Romans 10, is ex auditu. Thomas never forgets that, right? Not over, ex visu. Moreover, it is said in John 20, blessed are those who have not seen and believed, right? Like he says to Thomas there, And therefore, in order that the temptation of Christ might be for us an example, it was not necessary that it be seen by men, but it was enough that it be, what? Heredity to men. So it would be through your ear that you would know about Christ. But Thomas has a great respect to that ear, right? So it's like, Yeah, just like the Ubers, that's what I'm saying. What? Visus, doctors, gustus, you can take a lot of sit-ups. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean, Thomas says Rhythmus, yeah. Yeah. Which is a greater sense, sight or earth. It's a great sense, but it may be more useful for us hearing it, that's kind of thing. We don't see it yet. But to see it will be greater than just to hear that. Yeah, but you know, I used to say to students, if you had to choose between being blind or deaf, which would you choose? Yeah, most students would choose to be deaf rather than blind. It's a sign that they've got to say this higher, right? But I had one student who was very much in love of our music and playing the organ song. She'd rather be deaf than both. I mean, being blind than deaf, but yeah, I guess some students give you trouble. Yeah. I always maintain, you know, I have to argue with people, which is a greater art, music, or painting. Yeah, I think so. It's kind of obvious to me, but, you know, it's... But most people would think of it in turn of the impact as in their senses rather than what's required in the artists. Yeah. But if music is higher than painting, then this would be harder to see. Say that the year is better. Yeah. This dude was using schizy, you know? And if I admit that music is better, greater and greater than that. But maybe in terms of the art, it might be harder to imitate something. Yeah, yeah. And imitate it, perhaps something that... Well, you do. You know, Muir Stahl talks about that in the Eighth Book of the Politics, right? Yeah. That you imitate the emotions and you imitate also the virtues, huh? So, in Mozart's last five symphonies, you know, I think I mentioned this before, but he has that same symmetry that you have in the Mass, that you have in Shakespeare's Summer Night's Dream, right? That you have in the Dialogues Around the Death of Socrates. And I've spoken about that symmetry of the five, you know, where... Just to put it in letters, you know, it would say A, B, C, A. That's symmetrical, isn't it? So, like in the Mass, you have five things that are sung. Kyrie Eleison, the Gloria, the Creed, the Sanctus and Benedictus, and then August Day. Well, the Kyrie Eleison and August Day are both asking for God's mercy. So they're both prayers. The Gloria and the Sanctus are more praise of God. And the Credo is the odd guy, right? That's the Confession of the Faith. So it's A, B, C, B, A, right? As I say, you have this in Midsummer Night's Dream where it begins in the Court of Athens. Then it goes to the House of the Peasants, right? And then you have all this mix-up in the forest, right? Then it goes back to the House of the Peasants and find back the court. So you have that same symmetry in Shakespeare. Well, you have this in the Dialogs around the Plato, right? The Death of Socrates, where you have the Mino, Euthyphro, and then the Apology, right? Then the Crito, and then the, what? The Phaedo, yeah. And, of course, the odd word is the Apology, which is not really a Dialog. It's more the Defensive Side of the Court, right? Well, the Crito and the Euthyphro are much shorter, right? And then the Mino and the Phaedo are much longer, right? But in the Mino, you get a reduction to logic, right? And then in the Phaedo, you get the, what? We get an argument about arguments, right? First, the Manic and the History. And then in the Mino, you get an argument for the immortality of the soul, right? Which is recalled in Phaedo and then improved upon the Phaedo, right? So it's kind of, you know, like that. In the Euthyphro, you have this long discussion about Phaedo and so on. And then in the Crito, you have the example of Socrates' Phaedo in the city of Athens, but he's not going to escape, you know? And so there's a certain parallel, right? Well, you take the last five symphonies of Mozart, right? Which are the 36th. There's no 37th, you know, but Mozart. And the 38th. And the, what? 39th. And the 40th. And the 41st. Now, these are the last five, huh? So what about 37th? Well, there's no 37 symphony for Mozart. Well, what happened was that his friend, the brother of Joseph Haydn, Michael Haydn, right? Wrote a symphony, and he asked Mozart to write a deduction to it. So Mozart wrote some kind of deduction to the symphony. And they thought the whole symphony is by Mozart, it's actually by Michael Haydn. And so it was numbered 37, so they kept the numbers, right, huh? That's right, yeah. See? So the five last symphonies then are 36, 38, 39, 40, and 41, right? Uh-huh. But sometimes when they find some early symphony Mozart that he might be by him, they'll give the number 42, but don't finish that. But this is the chronological, right? Now, as Thomas explains, and he talks about emotions, and going back to Plato and Aristotle, you have two groups of emotions, the concubiscible emotions and the what? The irascible. The irascible emotions. And concubiscible emotions are the ones concerned with what is pleasing or displeasing to the sense of some. So you have love and hate and desire and aversion and pleasure and pain, right, or joy and sadness, right? And then the irascible ones are the ones where you're pursuing something for the sake of something else, right? Like you fight in order to keep your food or eat your womb or something. And you have hope, you know, for some of the difficulties to get to something. Well, as Thomas points out, the irascible is more, what? Closer to reason, right? So, in these two symphonies, in these two symphonies, you represent the irascible, right? In the case of 36 and 41, what you're representing is magnanimity, right? And the greatest of the virtues. The virtue that does great things and all the virtues, right? And this is in D major and this is in C major, right? Appropriate keys for those purposes, huh? Of course, the 36 symphony's got its own introduction, you know? I always remember reading someone saying, if all that had survived the Mozart was the introduction of the 36 symphony, it would be enough to establish his greatness. The first time I heard the 36 symphony was at the St. Paul Public Library, the room they had to listen to there. And it was a beautiful day. And these huge windows go up, like two stories, yeah? And there's a beautiful blue sky with these puffy, making these clouds, hearing this 36 symphony the first time. So, the 41st symphony is a representation, it's called Jupiter's symphony, right? It's a representation of magnanimity, right? I thought, what Shakespeare, I mean, what Mozart does in the last movement there, right? I remember first when Warren Murray was part of the Southerby. He says, you know what he does at the end there? And he says, well, no, kind of. Yeah. Well, he's got about four or five melodies, and he combines them all together, right? You see? He gives a impression of just tremendous, you know? You know? Magnanimity, right? And he actually kind of tones it down, you know? He's the idea that he's, you know, to keep confidence there, right? So, magnanimity is... So, magnanimity is... So, magnanimity is... So, magnanimity is... So, magnanimity is...