Wisdom (Metaphysics 2016)
Lecture 8: The Natural Road of Knowledge and God as First Cause

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

Now, Aristotle would often call each kind of philosophy, each part of philosophy, a methodos, as I mentioned. And methodos comes from two words in Greek. Meta, which means after or over. And odos, which means road, right? So methodos means over or road, right? That's why I translated this in the text, you know. But he's calling philosophy over a road. Philosophy is knowledge over a road. Knowledge that what? Follows a road, right? Now, the word road is not the first meaning of it right here. The first meaning of it is the way I got here. But there's a before and after on that road, right? And so when you carry the word road over to knowledge, right, you drop out the cement or the tar or whatever it is, but you keep the idea of a before and after, right? So if someone asks me, what is a road in our knowledge, right? It's a before and after in our knowledge, right? So to understand a road, you have to understand the before and after that is in that road. Now, when you talk about the first road in our knowledge, this is the natural road because nature is what's first in the thing. And the nature of man is to be an animal that has reason, right? So because we are animals, we have what? The senses, right? And what's generic in a thing develops before what is what's specific? So our road, the natural road begins with the senses and it goes into eventually what? Reason. So my first description of the natural road is to say it's the road from the senses into reason, right? Now, what does Aristotle teach us here about the order in the road from the senses into reason? Well, he teaches us the order in which different kinds of knowing come along this road, right? Now, obviously, what comes first along the road is sensing, hearing, seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching, and so on, right? And then what comes second along the road is memory of your senses, right? I remember how licorice tastes, right? I remember how green apple tastes, right? Nice green apple there in Minnesota. Crisp apple. And I remember what, you know, the wound looks like and so on, right? Holy senses. Well, then, after memory, what comes along the road, huh? Experience, yeah. And experience is a result of bringing together many memories of the same kind of thing. And they form, in a way, one experience, which is a collection of many memories. Yeah, I guess. Joshua! Joshua! I'm back to work there. You're back! Yes. So good! I just finally had that close to my car now, so... Oh, good. Did you have the reading? Oh, uh... No, I don't know if you have that. There's another... Yeah. The price is $3. They're $10. They're $10 apiece. $3. That's what we charge us, $3. So we're talking here about the order and the first road in our knowledge, right? The road from the senses into reason. And in the first reading here, Aristel says that the road is from sensing to memory and then to experience, and then from experience to what? Yeah. But using art in kind of a broad sense, right? For a knowledge of the... What? Universal. Okay? So this man has two ears, and that man has two ears, and this man has two ears, and this man... Hey, everybody, I guess, seems to have two ears, right? So man is a two-eared animal. Okay? Aristel usually says a two-legged animal, right? A biped animal, okay? Well, then, this is the end, you might say, of the road, right? Okay, okay? Now, there are other before and afters along this road you can point out, right? Just to touch upon these a bit. There's an order in which different things are known along this road. And the most obvious before and after is that sensible things are known before things that are what? Not sensible. They can be known at all, right? And things that are more sensible before things that are less sensible, right? And therefore, you could say that material things are known before what? Immaterial things, huh? And that's why natural philosophy comes before wisdom, right? Because natural philosophy is about material things, huh? It's things that are subject to motion, right? And immaterial things are known much later, huh? And then you could say that, for the most part, effects are known before what? Causes, huh? And if there is a cause of the cause, as there often is, that's going to be even less known, right? So this is another aspect of the before and after, right? Effects are, for the most part, known before causes. And causes before the causes of the cause, right? And therefore, the last thing to be known would be what? The first cause, yeah. So you can see why wisdom, if it's about causes, and not just any cause, but about the first cause, is going to come where in the order of our knowledge. Now you know where the Jesuits are wrong in teaching metaphysics before natural philosophy. When I, you know, interview somebody for a position in philosophy at the Assumption College, right? I'd ask them about natural philosophy, and they're not even sure what that means, you know? Let alone have they studied it, right? The two best teachers at Laval, of course, the two greatest teachers were Charles de Kahnik and Senior de Young. And Charles de Kahnik always taught, what, courses in natural philosophy. He never taught a course in metaphysics. Well, Senior de Young is teaching the logic and things of that sort, right? But they realized these things were fundamental, right? And they had to lay a foundation, okay? Now, there's another order to be seen besides this. And that is the order in which even the same thing is known, right? Now, Aristotle talks about this in various places, but two things you could say about it, two or three things, huh? One is, of course, what Goetheus says, that a thing is singular when sensed and universal when understood, right? So the singular comes before the universal, right? So, then you could say we know things in a, what, outward way before we know them, what, inwardly, right? So, then you could say we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a, what, outward way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we know things in a way before we Now I was learning the definition of sacrament, huh? Great school. It was defined as an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace. But when you said outward sign, what kind of a sign did you mean? Yeah, yeah. Outward was like a synonym for what? Sensible, yeah. So we know things in an outward way before we know them what? Yeah, inwardly, right? And that's one likeness, one magnificence of the Italian word there. Not the Italian word, the Latin word, sir. For understanding, right? What is the Latin word for understanding there? Our Greek scholar, our Latin scholar. Yeah, what's the Latin word? Yeah, intelligere, right? Okay. But what is the etymology of intelligere? Yeah. Yeah, intelligere, to read within, right? That kind of sign, right? You go from the senses into reason, right? You go from an outward knowledge to a, what? Inward knowledge, right? That's what excellence that the Latin word has that the word understanding doesn't have. But word understanding, though, indicates that there's something, what? Hidden underneath, right? In the beginning of our knowledge, and then we gradually come to understand, yeah. Yeah, yeah. Penetrating mind, right? Yeah. Sharp mind, yeah. Okay. And then in the premium there to the eight books of natural hearing, right? The so-called physics, huh? Aristola points out that we know things in a, what? Confused way before distinctly. And this is both in our senses and in our, what? Reason, right? Even the senses are knowing things in a confused way before distinctly, right? So when you taste somebody's salad dressing, and this is good, what do you use in your salad dressing, right? Well, it might be a secret of the house, so they won't tell you maybe sometimes. And, you know, if you have a painting on the wall there, and you look at it from time to time, you start to notice things you didn't notice, what? Before. And sometimes somebody else points out something you didn't see, right? Oh, yeah. Yeah. I look down that painting on the right side, looking down the canal, right? I go over to the left side of the room, looking down the canal again, you know? Talking about this painting I had in my room as a bachelor. And I used to discover that, you know? So things you didn't see right away, right? I hear Mozart's Jupiter Symphony, and I've heard it many times. And my friend Warren Murray says, you know what he does at the end of the last movement there? And I says, well, kind of. Well, he combines five melodies together. I said, he does! And I've been listening to this now. Back and listen more carefully, right? You know, and see if I can see the way he puts these together, right? Well, what does that show about my hearing? It's indistinct, right? Confused, huh? And after a while, maybe, you know? Sometimes I listen to a piece, and what instruments are playing, right? Huh? I'm not too good at that thing, but... And then the reason, what? It has to define things to know distinctly what they are. Here's Dallas says, the child calls all men father and all women mother, and then distinguishes, right? I suppose, in a big Greek household, you see this, right? Because there'd be many women around the house, right? And they're all mamas, right? I remember my children, they're very little. They're looking out the window, and there's a woman going into the house across the street, right? Say, look at the mama! Look at the mama! Well, she may not be a mama, but what do they mean by mama? Yeah, something, yeah, yeah. But the fact that they use the word, you might say incorrectly, right? Using mother to mean woman, right? Is a sign that they know things in an indistinct way, huh? And sometimes it's your little child call a cat, a dog, or vice versa, right? Because what they understand is a little four-footed animal, furry animal, right? And they don't really see the distinction between dog and cat, right? So that's the order in which even the same thing is known, right? So there's the order in which different kinds of knowing come along this road, right? The order in which different things are known, right? And the order in which even the same thing is known, right? So there's a lot to be seen. But Aristotle here, he's talking about the order in which different kinds of knowing comes, right? Because he's looking for what comes last in our knowing, right? And he points out that the, what, man of art or science, right, not only knows the universal, but he's trying to know why things are so. He's trying to know the cause, right? And so you get insight into the fact that maybe what comes at the end of our knowledge will be a knowledge of the, what, not just the cause, but the very first cause, right? Right? Okay? Now, do we get to the end of the first reading? Did we get that far? Yeah. We don't want to rush that. But look at the last paragraph now on page two, right? And then look before and after at the first and the last lines, right? But that for the sake of which we have now made a discourse is this, that all hold what is called wisdom to be about the first causes and beginnings, huh? Now, he's using cause and beginning there as kind of interchangeable, right? But in the fifth book of wisdom, right, he points out that beginning is more general than cause. Every cause is a beginning in some way, but not every beginning is a, what, cause, huh? So that as has been said before, the experienced man seems to be wiser than any of those having just sensation, you might add, right? But the artist, then the man is experienced because he knows why, right? And the chief artist is wiser than the handicrafts man because he knows, in a sense, the cause of the cause, and the looking sciences more than the making, right? And of course, he developed it later on to point out that wisdom is looking knowledge. If you want to speak Greek, it would be theoretical. If you want to speak Latin, it's speculative. If you want to speak English, which I do, I call it the looking sciences, right? That's the last sentence now. Thus, it is clear that wisdom is about beginnings and causes. He's almost backtracking, right? Because at the beginning of the paragraph, he says, it's about the first causes. And now he's just saying it's about beginnings and causes. Like he wants to come back and go more slowly over the fact that wisdom is about, what, the first causes. So in the second reading, he's going to, as he says in the very first paragraph of the second reading, he's going to say, now, we know that wisdom is about beginnings and causes, right? Now, about what beginnings and causes is it about? And he's going to develop that more slowly, huh? Wonderful thing he does, huh? No wonder they called Thomas the Demox, right, huh? So notice the first paragraph now of the second reading. Since we seek such knowledge, we seek this knowledge that comes at the end of our knowledge, huh? This ought to be considered. About what sort of cause? and about what sort of beginnings is wisdom the knowledge perhaps this is known as philosophical modesty perhaps it would become clearer if one took the thoughts that we have about the wise man as I used to say to students that's not the editorial week that we Aristotle alone have right but did men in general kind of have about the wise man okay say try this question these people they say LBJ when he was you know leader of the Senate and he's got a vote you know it's got to make sure he's gonna have votes to get what he wants passed and so on he'd say to senator so-and-so senator so-and-so and come let us reason together he'd say me of course I might persuade you or twist your arm you know it's about this way or that way right so I say come let us reason together right come let us look before and after okay now don't be too precise you know kind of be simple by hearing you answer this question does God love the saints because they're good I'd say no you don't say yes probably in the average person I think would say yes sounds reasonable but if God is the first cause does he have any cost before himself does he have anything before him as a cause before an effect now when you say that God loves the Saints because they are good what you're saying it's a shocking now is it the goodness of the Saints is the cause right of God loving them can the first cause have a cause now if it's the first cause you guys are not looking before and after right huh let me show you how evil really your answer was huh how terrible it was huh okay take a little discourse here about the famous word have right now it's the haver and what he has are they the same thing doesn't seem so right now the easiest examples of haver and had are things like your possessions right for example I have a car out house does that house me I have a lot of books those books me we have an expression in English the haves and the have-nots they're talking about your possessions right now I have some money in my pocket some dollar bills but it's not me right now okay so clearly in the case of these kinds of havers and what they have they're not the same thing because one is outside right now now it's a little more difficult when you get inside like I have some knowledge of triangles and squares and circles which I got from my teacher Euclid of Alexandria but am I that knowledge that I have of triangles and squares and circles and I have some little bit of virtue here and there you know I have a reluctance to steal from people for some reason I don't know why remember that I remember that and you know if a kid took a kids take a piece of candy there you know from the store and make them bring it back you know and but am I that a little bit of justice that I have am I that I have some knowledge of logic knowledge of the syllogism and predication and so on is that me now it's a little harder to see right that I'm not that knowledge that I have if I have some health in my body if I have some strength in my body could lift the glass at least am I health am I strength if I was health itself could ever be sick if I was strength itself could ever be weak I felt a big week after mowing the lawn the other last week that's what happened to me hmm so again in these cases the haver and the had are not the same thing right now a more difficult case is um I have a body and I have a soul am I a body am I a soul or are these parts of me when put together I'm a put together thing by the way I put together from a body and a soul but if my body and my soul are parts of me you know as Thomas points out Saint Peter is not in heaven right the soul of Saint Peter is in heaven right Saint Peter will be in heaven after the resurrection so when Pius XII I guess was getting ready to was to define the mystery of the assumption right make it official teaching he had many theologians come talk to him right teacher Deconic went to Pius XII right and he said well if Mary's body was not assumed into heaven right Mary would not be in heaven I was very impressed with that darn good reason you know in defense of the mystery of the what assumption right that's interesting right strictly speaking my soul is not me but a part of me right not the whole Dwayne Berkwist Dwayne Berkwist will be dead even though his immortal soul will survive his death right Dwayne Berkwist will not survive his death death. Unless you want to call part of me, me, right? Okay, but even here, the distinction between the haver and the had is found, right? Because the distinction between the haver and the had, right? Is the part and the whole the same thing? So when you say that the whole has a part, right? There's still a distinction, right? You wouldn't say that the whole is the part, would you? No, but you're getting closer, right? Now in God, can we speak of God as having something? Well, the first thing in the Summa Theologiae you learn about the substance of God is that he's not put together in any way, right? There's no composition, right? No putting together in God. So if God had something, right, there'd be some kind of it seems, what? Composition, right? Or else you'd have to use the word have in a, what? Very different sense, right? You'd have to say, you know, to safeguard yourself from heresy and making God composed, right? You'd have to say that, what? God is whatever he has, okay? Now, our Lord there at the Last Supper, right? He says, I am the, what? Road. He translates the word, the word way, right? I am the way, the truth, and the, what? Life, huh? Now, as my teacher, Thomas Aquinas taught me, when he says, I am the road, the hodas is the Greek word, right? Same word that Aristotle has, hodas. He's saying this insofar as he's mad. And if you look at the third part of the Summa Theologiae, which is, begins with the, you know, incarnate word, it goes to the sacraments and so on. He says, this is about Christ, who as man is the via, tendendia deum, right? The way of getting to God, right? So I am the road as man, and the road to myself as what? God, right? So as man, he's the road to follow, right? To get to God. But as God, he's life itself and truth. He doesn't say, I'm living or I have life, but I am life and I am what? Truth. Which is because of his simplicity, right? He doesn't say, I have the truth. I have to be very careful if he said that, right? Because that might imply that he and the truth are two different things, right? You know, I got the truth about the, the right angle triangle, you know, I got the Pythagorean theorem, right? You do too, I bet, huh? I don't know about these guys, but not the truth about the, but Christ says, I am the truth itself, life itself, right? So sometimes you see, for example, that they'll say that God is love, right? They don't say that God has love, although they could say that, but you have to be very careful what you're saying there, right? It's contrary to all the earlier meanings of has, but God is love itself. There's no distinction, right? Okay. Is God wise in the sense of he has wisdom that is something other than himself? Now, they tell me like me, whatever wisdom I have is not me. That sounds very incriminating, right? But that's true about all my knowledge. Whatever knowledge Dwayne Berquist has is not Dwayne Berquist. In A. Fort Siori, Dwayne Berquist is not knowledge itself, because then he'd know everything, right? Because knowledge is that of which everything that is known is known. So if I was knowledge itself, I would have all knowledge, right? And if I was wisdom itself, right? My goodness, if I was truth itself, right? I have some truths in my mind, I think. The whole is larger than the part. I think that's true. But Christ says I am what? Life itself, truth itself, right? Now, coming back to the thing I was saying before, if you say that God is what? Love, not just has love, right? If you say God loves the saints because they are good, right? You'd say the goodness of the creatures, of the saints, that is to say, is the cause of God's love, but God's love is God himself. Therefore, you're now saying this is the horrible sin or falsehood you've followed into, gentlemen. You're saying that what? The goodness of the saints is the cause of God's existence because he's love itself, right? I've got to rescue you from this terrible error or mistake into which you've fallen, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Now, one mistake leads on to another mistake, right? It's a fundamental mistake. So, if you continue to think that God loves the saints because they are good, right? Then you'd probably say he hates the sinners because they are what? Bad, right? Although my friend St. Paul, my oldest son is named Paul, my name is St. Paul, he says that God wants all men to be saved and to come to acknowledge the truth. But you might think, you know, that God hates the sinners because they're bad, right? You've got to be kind of careful about that, right? So, since God is the first cause, Thomas points out the difference between God's love and our love, right? We start to love another person, you know, usually, because we, what? See something good in them, right? The woman is beautiful, so we begin to love her, right? Beauty is something good, right? I was in sophomore year of high school there, and I was in biology class, Professor Gatto. He was a tough guy, Gatto. Numskulls, he'd say. He'd slap the desk. Don't you know anything? But there's one guy who seemed to know the answer, always. Murray. And so he'd slap him and say, okay, Murray, tell him the answer. He said, this attracted my love of Mr. Murray, right? So he knows something, right? We're, ways to our houses are halfway on the same way, you know, so we talk, you know, going down there, right? I found out we, politically, we're compatible too. So I saw much good in this man, right? So I began to like him or love him, right? Okay. So we're used to having our, what, love be aroused, right, by the good we see in somebody, right? But that's not true about God's love. God's love is the cause of whatever good is in other things. It's not an effect. of the goodness and other things, but it's the cause, right? So we talked about looking before and after. In this whole discourse, we're looking before and after in the sense of the fifth sense that Aristotle gives, right? Which is laid alongside the second sense. The sense which is the cause before the effect, right? Well, the goodness in somebody that I began to like in this world is a cause of my liking them, right? It arouses a liking in me for them, right? But this is not true about God's love of anything else than himself, right? Rather, his love is the cause of whatever is good in them. Okay? Too much for Joshua. Do you see that? It's involved in the idea of his being the very first cause, right? There's no cause before you. Why do you got saints and sinners then, right? If God's love is the cause, right? You'd be apt to say, well, then his hate must be the cause of the badness of the sinners. But that's obviously not true, right? Why are some men good, the saints, and some men bad, the sinners, right? If God's love is what? The cause of the good in riches, and why are some men bad then, right? If God's love? It's not because he hates them that they're bad. What would you say? Well, take my little prayer. Do you see it at the beginning of class? They might shout. Okay, we'll see it then. God, our enlightenment, help us, God, to know and love you. Guardian angels, strengthen the lights of our minds, pour and illumine our images, and arouse us to consider them correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor, help us to understand what you've written. And he's written that the, what, God's love is the cause, right, of the goodness and creatures, as opposed to our love, right? It's just the reverse, you might say, right? So, a little prayer that I give there, help us, God, to know and love you. Sometimes I change the word a little bit and I say, move us, God, to know and love you. But does God move us by necessity to love him? No. He respects the, what, nature of our will. He's given us free will, right? So we can refuse his movement in that sense, right? We can not cooperate with his grace, right? I was thinking of the saints there and Mother Teresa and so on. Teresa the canonized. I said, I think the saints must know, right? That the good in them, whatever good is in them, is from God. God is always, God's love is always before the good that is in them. As a cause is before an effect. But they freely, right, cooperated with the movement that God began in them, right? They freely cooperated with, what, his grace that he gave them, right? And that's why they turned out so well. Why the sinners did not, what, cooperate, right? With the grace that he gave them. With the inspirations he gave them and so on, right? They're always quoting out this, I mean, the Old Testament there, you know. It gives you life and death, which you're going to choose. So on, okay. It's kind of a mystery, right, huh? And I'll give you a second one here. Give me a second thing here to think about. When I was a little boy there at the Nativity Grade School there, St. Paul, Minnesota, Sisters of St. Joseph. You know, I learned the act of contrition, right? And still you said, my God, I'm hardly sorry for having offended thee. And I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell. But most of all, because of the offending, my God, who art all good and deserving of all my love. Let's stop there. He's all good. He's deserving of all my love. In other words, I should give him all my love, right? I suppose I succeed in giving God all my love, right? Which that seems to be required, right, huh? This would be perfection of my confession, right, huh? Okay, that's my fear of hell and so on. If I give all my love to God, I have no love left for my neighbor. Yeah. So, you know, I've got both commands, right? We're supposed to love our neighbor. You know, that's one of the commandments of love. And I give all my love. All means all, right? I mean, it doesn't mean some or part or something, right? Even the greater part, it means all. So if I give all my love to God as I should, I've got no love left for my neighbor. I've got a problem, right? If I don't give all my love to God, I am not a saint. And if I give all my love to God, I can't be my neighbor, and then I can't be a saint either. I've got one hell of a thing, you know? There's a reason for him. What? You'd be hurt. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Now, if you read these little articles on Mother Teresa, right, it gives you a hint there as to the solution to this terrible problem, right? How can you give all your love to God and have none left to love your neighbor? It's a terrible dilemma, right? You know? And how does Mother Teresa's example there are some other saint? Yeah. She sees Christ in this miserable creature on the street there or something, right? You know? What you did to these little ones, you did unto me, right? That's a hard thing to understand, though, right? I've seen the saints say sometimes like this. You have to love your neighbor in God, right? You've heard that, huh? That's a hard thing to understand, right? But that's the way in which God loves us. He loves himself so much that he wants to, what? Yeah, yeah. Thomas says if you love something very much, you want to multiply it, right? This were to be new made when thou art old, and see thy blood warm when thou feelest it cold, right, huh? Did you ever read the play of the poet? The poet called Two Gentlemen of Verona. As you may know about Sylvia there, you know, a very attractive young lady. There's some competition about Sylvia. But anyway, when they sing the hymn, you know, outside a window, right? Who is Sylvia that all our swains do commend her? Heaven lent her such graces that she might admire her be. Now, I've always said, I was always struck by the word lent, right? Heaven lent her such graces that she might be. Why does he say, Heaven lent her such graces that she might admire her be? Why didn't he say, Nature gave her such graces that she might admire her be? Why does he say lend, you know? You know, when my father-in-law would lend me a tool that I needed around the house with him like that, he wanted it back. He'd say, do you see what it says there? And I'd say, yeah. Well, it's his name, right? It wasn't there. But that was, it's kind of why he reminded me that he wanted the tool back, right? He'd want me to keep the tool, right? So, is he giving me the tool? Strictly speaking, you know, he was lending the tool, right? I mean, lending is, in a way, giving, but it's giving with what? it's going to come back right so why does the poet say heaven lent her such graces that she might admire be right she's got in a sense borrowed beauty you might say right you know why does he say that he is the poet he's the master of the english language and nobody equal to shakespeare right it's to thank and glorify god and love him all the more when we see these manifestations of beauty he is beauty is love but uh yeah but there's a more simple explanation i think of this huh you know does a woman's beauty stay no it's to disappear as you get older right huh so god in a sense is taking away what he gave right so he's lending her beauty right huh she'll have for some time right she catches the husband and eventually she's going to what lose it huh well great but not notice huh what's the famous words uh more like the beauty of the woman the daughter the art their mother's glass right now glass there means what a mirror about their mother's glass and she indeed calls back the lovely april of her prime but she's calling back the lovely april of her prime because that's over that's over you know i have a volume at home there of uh of essays by scientists who worked with niels bohr you know it was a great you know in some ways he was he and einstein were kind of dominating the scene right then and uh of course there's a showdown you know that solve a congresses between uh bohr and einstein because einstein didn't like the copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory so named for where bohr worked and uh einstein would give a uh thought experiment you know against it you know and so on and bohr would stay up the night and come back and refute the thing and uh they tell the the last time einstein tried to do this to destroy it here rather you know it's been very devastating you know thought experiment and uh war was extremely worried right and i see the picture of them coming out of the thing you know where einstein's looking kind of you know smile almost like you know i've got it this time you know and he's kind of you know and bohr is kind of looking kind of you're worried just coming up to him well bohr is up one night and he found that einstein had failed to apply his own theory and now he had einstein he came back and in fact he had ignored the consulate his own theory and that was the last time einstein ever tried to publicly attack the copenhagen determination you know but uh they had in this book you know with different essays but people work with bohr right they had a picture of bohr's bride you know beautiful beautiful and a picture later on the book you know you know in the old age you know but she still kept something of her beauty you know because it wasn't quite the same you know but it's amazing you to see how much she had kept in it you know kind of amazing thing you know dignity to the beautiful thing but generally speaking there aren't these their mother's glass and she calls back the lovely april of her prime that's in her memory right he sees herself again so i always quote that in the other phrase this would to be new made when thou art old and see thy blood warm now feels too cold one of my daughter maria is one of her little girls is called sometimes you know they call her little maria because she has some resemblance to her her mother in particular now i mean they all do something but i mean this one of them in particular but uh you can see how excellent shakespeare is with this choice of words there right who is sylvia the door sways to commend her right heaven lent her such graces that she might admired be didn't say give but this is incredible shakespeare so but all the good that is in creatures right beauty of being one form of good right is from god right now do you know um i haven't looked at it for a long time now uh but augustine's confessions right at one point there in the beginning of it the early part of the confessions do you remember this where he says um he's kind of regretting his his slow conversion you might say right he says about god too late have i come to know thee thou ancient beauty doesn't he call god beauty right see it's like calling him truth itself or life itself right love itself okay so the beauty of creatures is an effect of god right god's love of mary is not an effect of her beauty but her beauty is an effect of what is love yeah and to some extent she says that in the magnetic god right huh my soul magnifies the lord my spirit rejoice in god may save her okay he says you guard the lotus of his handmaid well there's i think he's being influenced by that which you know kind of human way of looking at it but then he says she's done he's done great things for me right huh you know so she seems to be like a saint should be aware right of that uh the good is in is from god right make a good use of it huh why is it that's that's the the uh aviba trying to get that name down but there's something like rex i didn't even know yeah okay so let's go back now to the second reading here now