[ 0 → 4] If some people are going to hang around later after [ 4 → 8] I'm available. Some of you might have to go home [ 8 → 12] I suppose. But we're getting through [ 12 → 14] slowly. We've got three days, right? [ 23 → 24] In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. [ 24 → 30] In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. [ 30 → 34] In the name of the Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen. [ 35 → 37] Seed of wisdom. Pray for us. [ 37 → 38] Pray for us. [ 39 → 49] So it's already the last conference. Wow. [ 49 → 49] Wow. [ 57 → 60] Can we hang around here until when? [ 60 → 61] When do they kick us out? [ 62 → 63] Never? Okay. [ 70 → 72] Well, we'll just keep going. [ 73 → 75] We're almost finished with this section. [ 89 → 89] So, [ 90 → 96] we saw [ 96 → 98] the first part, then. [ 103 → 105] I've got too much stuff here. [ 105 → 106] There it is. [ 114 → 115] When the word was. [ 116 → 117] He was in the beginning. [ 117 → 119] Now we have to see where he was. [ 120 → 122] Well, he was with God. [ 122 → 123] That's where he was. [ 123 → 124] So, he's going to explain this. [ 124 → 146] Firstly, note that Deus, he was Apudeum, he was with God, signifies the divinity concretely. [ 146 → 148] It's not like divinitas, which is an abstract term. [ 148 → 149] It's not like divinitas, which is an abstract term. [ 149 → 150] It's not like divinitas, which is an abstract term. [ 150 → 150] It's not like divinitas, which is an abstract term. [ 150 → 151] It's not like divinitas, which is an abstract term. [ 151 → 152] He was with the divinity. [ 152 → 152] No. [ 152 → 155] He was with God, which is a concrete term. [ 156 → 158] It's something, well, something concrete. [ 160 → 165] Signifies the divinity concretely as a thing existing and not abstractly like divinity. [ 167 → 172] And that's when it is said here, Apudeum, where he was with God. [ 172 → 175] The word God signifies the person of the Father. [ 177 → 180] Because the preposition with. [ 180 → 183] signifies a distinction with the word. [ 185 → 187] Okay, so when it says, and the word was with God, [ 188 → 189] where he means God means [ 189 → 192] Father, the Father. [ 192 → 193] Okay? [ 197 → 200] Now he's going to talk about the actual preposition [ 200 → 202] with. [ 203 → 204] He was with the Father. [ 207 → 209] The preposition with [ 209 → 213] implies a certain conjunction of the thing [ 213 → 215] signified directly, here the word, [ 216 → 219] with the thing signified obliquely, [ 220 → 220] God. [ 221 → 222] So the word is what signified [ 222 → 224] directly, [ 224 → 229] and in relation to the word, you have God. [ 229 → 229] He was, [ 230 → 231] the word [ 231 → 232] was with God. [ 232 → 234] So he's saying about the word, well, he was with God. [ 237 → 238] With God is [ 238 → 239] obliquely, [ 239 → 243] signified, God is signified obliquely, that is, in his relationship with the word. [ 247 → 249] The preposition in [ 249 → 251] also signifies a conjunction, [ 251 → 255] but it signifies an intrinsic conjunction, [ 256 → 257] while with [ 257 → 260] signifies an extrinsic conjunction. [ 263 → 266] Both are said of divine things. [ 268 → 269] The Son is in the Father, [ 270 → 272] intrinsically, [ 272 → 274] by consubstantiality, [ 274 → 277] and he is with the Father extrinsically. [ 280 → 280] Okay? [ 281 → 284] He's in the Father because he's consubstantial with the Father, [ 285 → 288] but he's with the Father because he's distinct from the Father. [ 289 → 289] There's a distinction. [ 295 → 297] By a personal distinction alone, [ 299 → 302] Since the Son is distinguished from the Father [ 302 → 304] only by origin. [ 305 → 307] And when you study De Trinitate, [ 307 → 308] it's all about that origin. [ 311 → 312] That's what makes distinction [ 312 → 315] in the Trinity is origin. [ 316 → 317] Either you're the principle of origin [ 317 → 319] or you're what has been originated. [ 320 → 321] And it's the same with the third person, [ 321 → 322] the Holy Ghost. [ 324 → 326] And that's where the relations come from. [ 327 → 329] You're either the principle of something [ 329 → 331] or you've been principled by something. [ 332 → 334] You're originated or you're origin. [ 340 → 342] Thus, the evangelist uses [ 342 → 344] with here [ 344 → 347] to indicate the distinction of the person [ 347 → 349] of the Son from the Father. [ 350 → 351] And he says, [ 352 → 354] and the word was with God. [ 355 → 357] That is, the Son was with the Father [ 357 → 359] as one person with another. [ 359 → 368] Okay, that's what this added thing is. [ 368 → 369] And the word was with God [ 369 → 371] is to indicate that there's a distinction of persons. [ 373 → 375] We say, in the beginning was the Word. [ 376 → 377] So the Word exists. [ 377 → 378] Secondly, we say, [ 378 → 380] he's distinct from the Father. [ 380 → 382] And the Word was with God. [ 389 → 395] Then he goes into [ 395 → 399] a long description [ 399 → 401] of the different kinds of [ 401 → 403] senses of this word, with. [ 406 → 408] I'm going to have to skip it [ 408 → 410] because we're not getting very fast. [ 411 → 411] We're not going very fast. [ 411 → 412] The day's going to be over [ 412 → 414] and we're not even done the first instruction. [ 414 → 415] That doesn't work. [ 416 → 417] We've got other things to say. [ 419 → 421] But if anyone wants to know more about it, [ 421 → 423] I can talk to them. [ 424 → 424] It's, [ 424 → 427] it would just take a long time. [ 431 → 432] So we've gone into the third part. [ 434 → 435] What he was. [ 439 → 440] And the word was God. [ 442 → 443] Edeus erat verbum. [ 447 → 448] He says, [ 448 → 449] it might seem strange, [ 449 → 450] that the evangelist [ 450 → 452] only now speaks of what the word was [ 452 → 454] after having spoken [ 454 → 456] of when and where it was. [ 460 → 462] For a thing has to be what it is [ 462 → 465] before being in a time and place. [ 466 → 467] Right? [ 467 → 468] Because he talked at the beginning [ 468 → 469] of when it was [ 469 → 470] and then he said where it was. [ 470 → 471] But then only now [ 471 → 472] he's going to talk what it was. [ 472 → 474] Well, what it was [ 474 → 475] comes before where it was [ 475 → 476] and when it was. [ 478 → 478] It says to, [ 479 → 480] it's a question. [ 481 → 482] But there's a reason for this. [ 483 → 484] Quincy Domes gives it. [ 487 → 489] This is true with regard to created things. [ 490 → 493] That they have to be before they are, [ 493 → 495] before when and where. [ 496 → 497] But the word of God [ 497 → 499] is not said to be with God [ 499 → 501] as he is with men. [ 504 → 505] He is with men [ 505 → 506] as perfecting them [ 506 → 507] and making them wise and good. [ 507 → 509] And so he has to be first. [ 509 → 514] But he's not with the Father in this way. [ 515 → 517] As if the Father were perfected [ 517 → 519] and illumined by him. [ 521 → 523] So the word has to be [ 523 → 525] before he can [ 525 → 528] perfect [ 528 → 531] man. [ 535 → 536] Because that's what he does. [ 537 → 538] He perfects man. [ 538 → 539] So he has to be first. [ 539 → 541] But he's not with the Father [ 541 → 542] as perfecting the Father. [ 543 → 544] On the contrary. [ 546 → 548] Rather, he is with the Father, [ 548 → 549] with God, [ 550 → 552] in receiving natural divinity [ 552 → 553] from him who speaks the word. [ 554 → 556] And from him he owes the fact [ 556 → 557] that he is one God with him. [ 561 → 562] Therefore, because of the fact [ 562 → 564] that he is with God by origin, [ 565 → 567] it was necessary first to show [ 567 → 569] that the word was in the Father [ 569 → 570] and with the Father [ 570 → 571] before showing that he was God [ 571 → 572] because he is God [ 572 → 574] by the fact that he is in the Father [ 574 → 574] and with it. [ 577 → 577] See? [ 581 → 584] He was with the Father first [ 584 → 586] before he says that he was [ 586 → 588] because he is [ 588 → 589] because he was with. [ 592 → 593] Because he comes from the Father. [ 594 → 595] Make sense? [ 597 → 597] Sort of. [ 599 → 607] Okay. [ 612 → 613] Then fourthly, [ 613 → 615] explains the last part. [ 617 → 619] This was in the beginning with God. [ 619 → 620] This meaning the word. [ 621 → 622] The word was in the beginning. [ 622 → 622] This, hoc, [ 623 → 624] erat in principio, [ 624 → 624] abudem. [ 629 → 635] And he explains how this is just an epilogue [ 635 → 637] of the whole, what he just said. [ 641 → 643] The first word, this, meaning [ 643 → 648] which refers to what he just said. [ 649 → 651] And the word was God. [ 651 → 652] Well, this word that was just God [ 652 → 655] was in the beginning, [ 655 → 656] which goes back to the very first part. [ 656 → 657] In the beginning was the word. [ 659 → 661] And this was in the beginning. [ 661 → 662] With God goes to the second part [ 662 → 662] where he said, [ 662 → 663] and the word was with God. [ 664 → 665] So it's like an epilogue [ 665 → 666] of the whole thing. [ 666 → 667] He says the whole thing together. [ 668 → 669] This was in the beginning with God. [ 670 → 670] It's like [ 670 → 672] teaching a child. [ 674 → 674] God's nice. [ 675 → 676] He repeats it over again. [ 677 → 678] In the beginning was the word. [ 680 → 681] And the word was God. [ 682 → 683] And the word was God. [ 684 → 686] So, no, he's just, [ 686 → 687] I'll repeat that again. [ 687 → 689] This was in the beginning [ 689 → 689] with God. [ 690 → 691] So it's simple. [ 693 → 694] Okay. [ 694 → 694] Okay. [ 699 → 701] Now, [ 703 → 709] let's go on [ 709 → 713] to simple. [ 716 → 718] Where's simple? [ 719 → 721] Oh, where's simple? [ 722 → 722] I didn't bring simple. [ 722 → 723] We won't go into simple. [ 724 → 724] Easy, easy. [ 725 → 726] St. Paul is back in the house. [ 727 → 727] I guess. [ 728 → 729] It doesn't matter. [ 733 → 733] We can have, [ 733 → 734] we'll do St. Paul tomorrow. [ 735 → 737] It's probably better to be St. Paul separately. [ 738 → 740] Since we're on the [ 740 → 743] wavelength of St. John, [ 744 → 745] maybe it's probably better [ 745 → 746] we go on with St. John. [ 749 → 755] So this is the text [ 755 → 756] I was talking about before. [ 758 → 759] From the Contra Gentiles. [ 759 → 759] Contra Gentiles. [ 762 → 763] It's the fourth book. [ 772 → 774] There's four books [ 774 → 777] in the Summa Contra Gentiles [ 777 → 777] which was written [ 777 → 778] in the first book, [ 778 → 778] the Second Book, [ 778 → 778] the Second Book, [ 778 → 778] which was written [ 778 → 778] in the First Book. [ 778 → 778] I don't know if you know [ 778 → 785] especially against the Muslims the first three books are philosophical books [ 785 → 791] because you know obviously they don't have the faith so you have to talk about [ 791 → 799] things that everybody can know about the faith so he argues against some of their [ 799 → 808] errors that way because there are plenty of errors in their religion do you know [ 808 → 815] that story what is the name again the price to pay anybody read that book it's [ 815 → 824] this Muslim in Iraq who was converted because he talked to he was in our army [ 824 → 831] barracks with this Catholic because you know they all used to be over there not [ 831 → 838] what I'm left but yeah yeah he was a high-ranking [ 838 → 838] leader [ 838 → 854] person anyway this he ended up being the same barracks with this Catholic and he [ 854 → 857] said well and he thought well I'm always this Catholic how did what he because he [ 857 → 863] was a noble guy this and he was first disgusted they put him with a Christian [ 863 → 868] then he said he's a pretty good guy I said yeah he's sweet I'm gonna try to [ 868 → 878] convert him he's such a good guy and so going into discussions with him and the [ 878 → 883] the Catholic just had him read the Quran because he had never really read it you [ 883 → 886] know he just got to read the Quran and he read the Quran he said this is [ 886 → 894] ridiculous so he stopped believing in Muslim being a Muslim Muslim that was the [ 894 → 897] first stage [ 898 → 902] and then afterwards see the guy didn't want to convert him because he knows he'd [ 902 → 907] really got in trouble if he did but finally he just well you can read this [ 907 → 916] you want to give him a gospel and he read the gospel and converted but it it [ 916 → 919] just shows how he's stupid their religion is really and that's what st. [ 919 → 926] Thomas does in the first three books and the fourth book well he shows the [ 926 → 934] The reasonability of these certain supernatural doctrines of the Catholic faith, which the [ 934 → 935] Muslims attack. [ 935 → 939] And someone was just telling me that some Muslims are talking about the Trinity. [ 939 → 940] Well, the Trinity, I mean, come on. [ 940 → 942] Can you believe that? [ 942 → 945] Well, here's St. Thomas is going to explain how we can believe that. [ 945 → 950] He's going to explain how we can believe it. [ 950 → 958] So the question he asks is, this is chapter 11 of the fourth book of the Conflict of Gentiles. [ 958 → 963] How generation is to be understood in the divinity? [ 963 → 966] And what is said of the Son of God in Scripture? [ 966 → 972] Because, you know, that's their big thing, the Muslims, that God has a son. [ 972 → 976] Well, God can't have a son. [ 976 → 980] And that's if, you know, in Jerusalem, the big temple that they built, or mosque they [ 980 → 980] put up. [ 980 → 980] Yeah. [ 980 → 982] Where the temple was. [ 982 → 988] On the dome, it's written, God has no son. [ 988 → 989] God has no son. [ 989 → 990] God has no son. [ 990 → 991] God. [ 991 → 992] It's pure blasphemy. [ 992 → 997] Because they think it's blasphemous to say that. [ 997 → 1001] They think it's blasphemy to say that God has a son. [1001 → 1010] So it's one of the questions, obviously, he has to deal with his arguments against the [1010 → 1011] world. [1011 → 1012] So hang on. [1012 → 1025] Following a diversity of natures, one finds a diverse manner of emanation in things. [1025 → 1032] And the higher a nature is, the more intimate to the nature is that which emanates from [1032 → 1033] it. [1033 → 1034] So emanation, right? [1034 → 1035] It's manare, means to flow. [1035 → 1038] E manare means to flow from. [1038 → 1039] Ex manare. [1039 → 1040] Ex manare. [1040 → 1041] Ex manare. [1041 → 1044] To emanate, the word emanate in English. [1044 → 1045] So that's the principle. [1045 → 1055] The higher a nature is, the more intimate to the nature is that which emanates from [1055 → 1056] it. [1056 → 1057] And he's gonna explain that. [1057 → 1069] That as you go higher up on the level of natures, the higher they are, the more intimate is [1069 → 1070] to the nature. [1070 → 1076] to that nature what emanates from it. And he starts with the lowest level, which is [1076 → 1084] inanimate bodies. There can be no emanations in these inanimate bodies except by the action [1084 → 1093] of some one upon another. For this is the way in which fire is generated by fire, which [1093 → 1099] is an extraneous body, excuse me, when an extraneous body is changed by fire and brought [1099 → 1112] to the quality and species of fire. You know, so it's like Star Wars, you know, or Rocky, [1112 → 1119] you know, you get that guy. And that's the level a lot of people just stay on their whole [1119 → 1122] life. That's the little boys playing those games, right? But some people, that's what [1122 → 1122] they do. [1123 → 1127] They stay on their whole life. That's all they do. They just bang, bang. That's the [1127 → 1134] lowest level. When the emanation is simply the action of one thing on another. See, and [1134 → 1139] in fact, that's, people think that's a big deal. That's, most of the time, you know, [1139 → 1149] I've got power. I can smash this other thing. But that's the lowest level. The next highest [1149 → 1150] level is plants. [1152 → 1152] There, the emanation is simply the action of one thing on another. [1152 → 1166] The emanation starts from inside. It's, the plant moves itself. It doesn't move something [1166 → 1175] else. It grows. It's life. You know, that's the definition of life, right? Very simple. [1175 → 1182] Life is motusui, motion of oneself. If a thing moves, [1182 → 1188] itself, it's alive. You know, and that's just common sense, right? You see a snake [1188 → 1192] lying on the ground. If you want to know if it's alive, you kick it and see if it moves [1192 → 1201] itself. If it doesn't, well, it's dead. Motusui. And a plant has a motusui. It develops itself. [1202 → 1211] But, this emanation finishes outside. You have this whole development of the flower [1211 → 1212] and the seed, and then the seed goes out. [1212 → 1223] The term of this movement starts inside but ends out outside. The next level is animals. [1223 → 1232] I was talking about, wasn't I talking about the cat? Seeing the thread. It's incredible [1232 → 1242] when you think about it. The cat sees it. It gets it. So, there's something that ends [1242 → 1249] inside this motion starts in the outside but it goes inside the cat it ends up [1249 → 1257] inside the cat the cat sees that's that's life that's a higher level of [1257 → 1263] life that's sensitive life the cat sees [1263 → 1274] see but it's not completely motu sui because it has to start from outside [1274 → 1286] this thing which is sensation so the principle is different the principles [1286 → 1292] outside and the term is inside you know he's up seeing the string so that's [1292 → 1293] inside [1293 → 1305] but it starts outside so it's not completely motu sui also a cat cannot [1305 → 1316] know itself it just sees the it doesn't reflect on itself it doesn't have a [1316 → 1320] self-consciousness all its because it has sense knowledge it doesn't know [1320 → 1322] itself it knows so being outside itself [1322 → 1323] with me [1323 → 1331] which is sensible. So again, it's not suey. It's not itself. It knows something outside [1331 → 1343] itself, which is great. It knows, so there's a certain movement of life. You know, light [1343 → 1351] goes on inside, which is amazing. You know, a plant can't do that. A rock can't do that. [1351 → 1359] You know, your pet rocks. Well, that's just a joke. I mean, they're dead. But a cat's [1359 → 1368] not dead. It's not. But its life is imperfect because it's not completely, even though the [1368 → 1376] term of the movement is inside, the principle is outside. And it can't reflect on itself. [1378 → 1380] All it knows is sensible things outside. [1381 → 1388] The next level is the intelligence. The intelligence can reflect on itself. It can [1388 → 1400] know itself. Without, well, but there's different degrees of intelligent life. The first is [1400 → 1410] men, who can know themselves. They can reflect on their own being, a self-awareness. Whereas [1410 → 1411] a cat can do that. [1411 → 1421] They can just be aware of the threat outside of them. But, like the cat, this, to be aware [1421 → 1426] of himself, he first has to know something outside of himself. Because, as Aristotle [1426 → 1435] already said, the human mind is like a blank sheet that has nothing on it until it's put [1435 → 1440] into act by knowing something outside of itself. Once the intellect knows something through [1440 → 1441] its senses, it can know itself. And that's the intelligence. And that's the intelligence. [1441 → 1449] The intellect is put into act. And once it's in act, then it can see itself. But it's not [1449 → 1454] in act until it knows something outside itself. So, it's not perfect motus sui. It knows itself, [1454 → 1459] and not just the string. But it first has to know the string so they can be in act, so [1459 → 1460] they can know itself. [1461 → 1467] The next level is the angel. Because the angel, well, it doesn't know things outside itself. [1468 → 1471] You know, it doesn't have senses. It has the direct knowledge of itself. And that's the [1471 → 1476] higher sui. So, it's a higher sui. It's higher because it's more sui, because it doesn't [1476 → 1481] need anything outside itself to know itself. It doesn't have to be put into act by knowing [1481 → 1490] something by its senses. It's an act already. But, an angel is not its act of intellection, [1491 → 1498] like we saw in the goddess. In God, there's no difference between his knowing himself [1501 → 1508] and his being. So, that motion is completely sui, because there's no difference for God [1508 → 1521] between knowing and being. The angel has to be, and then know. So, his knowledge is not [1521 → 1527] him. So, it's less of a knowledge, it's a motus sui. Whereas God, it's the same thing, [1527 → 1531] as we said before. His knowledge of himself is himself. So, it's less of a knowledge of [1531 → 1539] himself. It's the same thing. He doesn't have to add another act on top of him knowing [1539 → 1545] himself to be. I mean, his being is his knowing of himself. It's the same thing. So, it's [1545 → 1552] a perfect motus sui. His motion of knowing himself is him. Whereas with the angel, it's [1552 → 1558] not. His knowledge of himself is something added on to his being. Okay? It's really pretty [1558 → 1559] simple. [1561 → 1561] Okay. [1579 → 1583] So, I'll just read the last, what St. Thomas says about this last thing, last stage. [1584 → 1590] Nonetheless, their life, the life of angels, does not attain the ultimate perfection. [1591 → 1597] For although the intention understood, that we talked about before, this intentio intellecta, [1598 → 1610] which is this concept that the intelligence produces when it knows, right? Intentio, intentio [1610 → 1620] is simply an act, an internal act that's directed to something. Tendere, where? It's directed [1620 → 1621] towards. [1621 → 1630] So, in this case, it's this act of our intellect towards what it knows. And that's what intention [1630 → 1635] is. And intention understood is precisely this concept that's produced when you know [1635 → 1636] something. [1646 → 1651] In the angels, that happens. [1651 → 1672] Intentio intellecta, by which he knows himself, is him. It's the same thing, as we just said [1672 → 1673] before, right? [1675 → 1680] So, he's, that's the most motus sui, because the motion itself is not different from him. [1681 → 1687] Whereas in an angel, it is. When an angel knows himself, it doesn't start outside himself. [1687 → 1694] He knows himself directly, but his knowledge of himself isn't him. Whereas in God, it is. [1694 → 1700] So it's as sui as you can get. [1700 → 1707] So that's the highest stage of life, because light is motus sui. And that's why the Lord [1707 → 1708] says, I am the life. [1711 → 1719] He is the spiritual energy, the object, and the whole. [1719 → 1722] Aristotle always said something a little bit like that. He said, God is thought thinking [1722 → 1723] itself. [1723 → 1729] That's good for a pagan. [1729 → 1736] See, he didn't think that God knew anything except himself, the world all that. [1736 → 1741] He believed it existed. We saw that this morning. [1741 → 1743] You think there is something between being and nothing, [1743 → 1745] but God doesn't know it because who cares? [1745 → 1748] I mean, we know that God knows it, [1748 → 1750] but he knows it because he makes it. [1752 → 1753] And Aristotle didn't know that [1753 → 1755] because he didn't know that God made things. [1756 → 1757] He didn't know where things came from, [1757 → 1758] but he didn't have this idea of creation, [1759 → 1762] which is Christian. [1763 → 1764] Well, it's in the Bible, right? [1765 → 1765] Moses. [1767 → 1770] But God knows everything else [1770 → 1771] other than himself [1771 → 1773] because he knows himself. [1773 → 1774] And knowing himself, [1774 → 1775] he knows those things [1775 → 1777] because he's the one who makes them. [1778 → 1780] So he knows them because he makes them. [1780 → 1781] He doesn't know them directly, [1781 → 1781] as I said before. [1782 → 1783] He doesn't, [1784 → 1785] because then he would be in potency [1785 → 1786] to those things. [1786 → 1788] But he knows them because he makes them. [1791 → 1793] Okay, now, that's just the beginning. [1800 → 1802] He explains this idea, [1802 → 1804] which is really key, [1806 → 1808] of intentio intellecta, [1809 → 1814] which really touches the essence [1814 → 1816] of who the second person of the Blessed Trinity is. [1818 → 1819] The word. [1820 → 1821] You see, we basically talked about this before, [1821 → 1822] but he goes in. [1822 → 1822] This is more detailed. [1824 → 1827] Now, I mean by the intention understood, [1827 → 1830] which, again, is this, [1830 → 1831] specie as expressa, right? [1834 → 1835] I mean by this, [1835 → 1837] what the intellect conceives in itself [1837 → 1838] of the thing understood. [1839 → 1840] It's very clear. [1841 → 1843] That's what I've been saying over and over again, [1843 → 1843] but that's, [1844 → 1845] I couldn't put it more clearly. [1845 → 1847] I mean by the intention understood, [1848 → 1850] what the intellect conceives in itself [1850 → 1851] of the thing understood. [1852 → 1854] Okay, it's the word. [1856 → 1857] To be sure, [1857 → 1857] anas, [1857 → 1859] this is neither the thing which is understood, [1860 → 1864] nor the very substance of the intellect, [1865 → 1868] but is rather a certain likeness of the thing understood, [1868 → 1869] conceived in the intellect, [1869 → 1871] and which the exterior word signify. [1874 → 1877] And thus, the intention itself is named the interior word, [1878 → 1879] which is signified by the exterior word. [1879 → 1881] It's the same thing we saw before, right? [1882 → 1884] When we know, we have this word that we express, [1884 → 1888] and that's what the exterior word means, it refers to. [1888 → 1888] Okay. [1888 → 1889] So, [1890 → 1893] and thus, the intention itself is named the interior word. [1893 → 1894] Okay, so that's what he said. [1894 → 1897] Indeed, that the intention aforesaid is not within us, [1897 → 1900] the thing understood is clear from that, from this. [1900 → 1905] So, there's a difference between this intention intellect [1905 → 1911] and the thing understood because it is one thing [1911 → 1913] to understand a thing and another [1913 → 1916] to understand the intention understood itself, [1918 → 1919] which is about the intellect, which is, [1919 → 1919] which is about the intellect, which is about the intellect, [1920 → 1921] what the intellect does when it reflects on its own work. [1921 → 1923] Now, that's really getting complicated, [1923 → 1925] but that's what logic is about. [1926 → 1931] In logic, you study, I mean, real logic, not just as for games, [1931 → 1932] games you play with arguments and all that. [1932 → 1934] It's kind of not very interesting logic. [1934 → 1936] That's called formal logic. [1936 → 1940] Material logic, real logic, which formal logic is kind [1940 → 1945] of linked to it, but is when you study what happens [1945 → 1949] when you know, you're studying the concept themselves. [1949 → 1949] You're not studying things. [1949 → 1949] You're studying the concept itself. [1949 → 1954] You're studying the object of your knowledge is the concepts. [1954 → 1967] And his point is that because in us, logic is different [1967 → 1973] from science, that means that there's a difference [1973 → 1975] between what we know and what we are. [1975 → 1979] Because what we know, the object of logic, is a different subject [1979 → 1982] than studying about ourselves. [1983 → 1984] So, it's not the same thing. [1984 → 1986] In other words, that's, okay. [1987 → 1994] Anyway. Now, that the intention understood is not the very [1994 → 1997] intellect within us is clear from this. [1998 → 2001] The being of the intention understood consists [2001 → 2003] in the very act of being understood. [2004 → 2005] The being of our intellect does not so consist. [2005 → 2007] Its being is not its act of understanding. [2007 → 2008] I know this is getting really complicated, but. [2008 → 2011] Again, he's just repeating the same thing. [2013 → 2019] The being of our idea is not the same thing as the being [2019 → 2019] of our intellect. [2020 → 2021] It's added onto it. [2021 → 2025] But in God, it's not like that. [2027 → 2028] The being of his intellect is the same thing [2028 → 2030] as the understanding of his intellect. [2032 → 2033] This act of understanding. [2033 → 2034] He intends to be understood. [2034 → 2038] It's the same thing, because you can't have a difference in God [2038 → 2041] because then you'd have to have something added [2041 → 2045] that's somehow adding to his intellect. [2047 → 2048] Where did the word, it couldn't come from anywhere [2048 → 2050] because he's the first mover. [2053 → 2057] So, his word, by which he knows himself, [2058 → 2059] is the same thing as himself. [2059 → 2061] It's not something added to him. [2062 → 2063] Okay. All right. [2064 → 2066] It's just saying the same thing we saw, but. [2068 → 2074] And so, St. Thomas goes on to explain about what happens in God. [2075 → 2078] Since in God, therefore, being and understanding are identical. [2080 → 2080] Okay. Here's what I'm saying. [2082 → 2084] Being and understanding is the same thing. [2085 → 2087] Understanding is something added onto him. [2087 → 2088] It's the same thing. [2091 → 2095] The intention understood in him is his very intellect. [2098 → 2101] There's no difference between his intellect and his idea. [2101 → 2107] His idea is an added on to his intellect. [2107 → 2108] Oh, he got an idea. [2108 → 2111] No, it's the same thing, because that's, it's impossible [2111 → 2113] for God to add something on. [2115 → 2117] So, his very intellect is the same thing [2117 → 2119] as his understanding, act of understanding. [2124 → 2127] Okay. And this is, if you're with me so far, hang on. [2127 → 2128] This is going to be. [2128 → 2128] Go on. [2128 → 2129] take us another step [2129 → 2134] and because the intellect in him [2134 → 2135] is the thing understood [2135 → 2139] what he understands is himself [2139 → 2141] he doesn't understand things all the time [2141 → 2144] especially in the beginning there was nothing but him [2144 → 2150] and because the intellect in him is the thing understood [2150 → 2155] it follows that in God [2155 → 2158] understanding himself [2158 → 2163] you know thought thinking himself [2163 → 2164] as Aristotle used to say [2164 → 2168] then the intellect [2168 → 2171] the thing understood which is the intellect [2171 → 2175] and the intention understood [2175 → 2178] which is this word that is always produced [2178 → 2180] when there is some sort of action but in this case [2180 → 2182] because it's perfect understanding [2182 → 2184] it's exactly the same thing [2184 → 2185] as what it understands [2185 → 2187] understood [2187 → 2190] all those three things are the same [2190 → 2191] the intellect [2191 → 2192] the thing understood [2192 → 2194] because it's the intellect understanding itself [2194 → 2195] and the intention [2195 → 2196] understood [2196 → 2204] are identical [2204 → 2205] elementary [2205 → 2207] right [2207 → 2215] okay [2215 → 2215] now [2215 → 2219] I'm going to apply all this to the word [2219 → 2228] the procession of the word which he calls divine generation [2228 → 2236] which is what scripture calls it [2236 → 2239] now this is not like generation in inanimate things [2239 → 2241] like the fire that produces fire [2241 → 2242] like in rocky [2242 → 2243] okay [2243 → 2244] it's not like that [2244 → 2245] it's not like that [2245 → 2245] it's not like that [2245 → 2245] it's not like that [2245 → 2248] because that's material [2248 → 2250] and the sun [2250 → 2253] the generation of the sun and the father [2253 → 2254] obviously is material [2254 → 2258] neither is it like a generation of plants or animals [2258 → 2261] because the term of the generation of the sun [2261 → 2266] is not separated as in plants [2266 → 2266] right [2266 → 2267] when the generation of plants [2267 → 2268] well the term is outside [2268 → 2271] and also [2271 → 2273] it's not like the generation [2273 → 2274] the [2274 → 2275] emanation of the sun [2275 → 2278] emanation and sensation where [2278 → 2279] the term is inside [2279 → 2281] but the principle is outside [2281 → 2283] you know which you know is outside [2283 → 2286] and that starts this movement of sensation [2286 → 2287] where the term is inside [2287 → 2288] but the principle is outside [2288 → 2290] well that's not the case [2290 → 2296] because the principle of this knowledge [2296 → 2298] that God has himself is in himself [2298 → 2299] it's not that he knows something outside [2299 → 2304] so it's not like sensation either [2304 → 2305] so it must be an intellectual imagination [2305 → 2308] so it must be an intellectual emanation [2308 → 2308] okay [2308 → 2311] so then he goes on to talk about this [2311 → 2312] intellectual procession [2312 → 2315] of the word [2315 → 2317] in God [2317 → 2324] it is manifest on the book [2324 → 2325] basically book one [2325 → 2327] that God understands himself [2327 → 2330] he talks about in the first book of the Contra Gentile [2330 → 2332] now whatever is understood [2332 → 2335] must in support of the word of God [2335 → 2337] as far as it is understood [2337 → 2340] be in him who understands [2340 → 2343] for the significance of the very act of understanding [2343 → 2345] is this [2345 → 2349] the apprehension of that which is understood by an intellect [2349 → 2352] that is that's what it means to know [2352 → 2354] is that the thing out that you know [2354 → 2357] becomes [2357 → 2359] in you [2359 → 2360] the form that makes the thing be what it is [2360 → 2363] becomes a form of your intellect [2363 → 2364] that's what we call apprehension [2364 → 2365] you bring it to yourself [2365 → 2369] so [2369 → 2376] he goes on [2376 → 2379] hence even our intellect [2379 → 2381] understanding itself [2381 → 2382] is within itself [2382 → 2386] because understanding means that the thing you understand is in you [2386 → 2388] or when you understand your very intellect [2388 → 2388] understanding [2388 → 2389] excuse me [2389 → 2390] understand your very intellect [2390 → 2391] well your intellect is in you [2391 → 2392] as being understood [2392 → 2394] as well as being [2394 → 2394] there [2394 → 2395] because of that [2395 → 2395] because of that [2395 → 2395] because it is [2395 → 2396] okay [2396 → 2398] that's what he said [2398 → 2404] hence even our intellect [2404 → 2405] understanding itself [2405 → 2406] is within itself [2406 → 2406] not only as [2406 → 2408] identified with itself [2408 → 2409] by its essence [2409 → 2411] but also as apprehended by itself [2411 → 2413] in the act of understanding [2413 → 2415] because your intellect [2415 → 2416] is in itself [2416 → 2417] as being understood [2417 → 2418] as well as being [2418 → 2420] okay [2420 → 2425] so all this isn't just [2425 → 2426] whistling dixie [2426 → 2427] this is [2427 → 2429] the basis of [2429 → 2431] well the blessed trinity [2431 → 2432] and so of everything [2432 → 2440] but the thing understood [2440 → 2442] in him who understands [2442 → 2444] is the intention understood [2444 → 2446] and the word [2446 → 2448] which is what we were talking about before [2448 → 2450] so god is in himself as being understood [2450 → 2452] well that's what it means to be the word [2452 → 2454] so that's why he called him the word [2454 → 2455] so that's why he called him the word [2455 → 2456] he's the institute [2456 → 2458] the thing understood [2458 → 2459] in him who understands [2459 → 2460] is the intention understood [2460 → 2461] in the word [2461 → 2462] see [2462 → 2462] now that would have been [2462 → 2463] complete nonsense [2463 → 2465] a couple hours ago [2465 → 2466] but hopefully now [2466 → 2467] it makes some sense [2467 → 2470] you know you go back home [2470 → 2470] and you know [2470 → 2471] tell your friends [2471 → 2474] did you know [2474 → 2475] that the thing understood [2475 → 2475] in him who understood [2475 → 2476] can all look at it [2476 → 2480] but the thing understood [2480 → 2480] in him who understands [2480 → 2481] is the intention understood [2481 → 2482] and the word [2482 → 2483] there is therefore in god [2483 → 2484] understanding himself [2484 → 2485] the word of god [2485 → 2485] and the word of god [2485 → 2487] as it were god understood [2487 → 2488] again understood [2488 → 2489] in the sense of being produced [2489 → 2493] not a passive understanding [2493 → 2494] god understood [2494 → 2498] meaning produced as a concept [2498 → 2499] just as the word of the stone [2499 → 2499] is in the intellect [2499 → 2503] and the stone understood [2503 → 2504] and to this point [2504 → 2505] is a saying of john [2505 → 2507] the word was with god [2507 → 2508] so now he's going to start taking [2508 → 2511] these different things we've seen [2511 → 2514] in the prologue [2514 → 2515] using these [2515 → 2517] fundamental notions [2517 → 2519] to explain why [2519 → 2520] what he's talking about [2520 → 2523] well that [2523 → 2524] now we can see what he means [2524 → 2525] the word was with god [2525 → 2527] because [2527 → 2529] the intention understood [2529 → 2531] or the word [2531 → 2533] is in god [2533 → 2534] that's what it is [2534 → 2536] in god understanding himself [2536 → 2537] the word as a god [2537 → 2538] as god [2538 → 2540] as it were god understood [2540 → 2545] is in god [2545 → 2546] just as the stone understood [2546 → 2551] is in the intellect understands [2551 → 2553] and so that's why the word was with god [2553 → 2555] because he's in god [2555 → 2556] as god understanding [2556 → 2560] well it's not really that hard [2560 → 2564] once you get used to the tune [2564 → 2567] because it's always the same tune [2567 → 2572] he's always saying the same thing [2572 → 2573] then he draws another conclusion [2573 → 2574] namely the conclusion that god is in god understanding himself [2574 → 2576] that the word was in god from all eternity [2576 → 2580] because god does not pass from potency to act [2580 → 2581] it's sort of the same thing we saw [2581 → 2582] in the commentary [2582 → 2584] on saint john [2584 → 2587] because he was always understanding [2587 → 2588] his word [2588 → 2591] so the word's been there forever [2591 → 2592] that's why in the beginning [2592 → 2594] what is he going to say [2594 → 2596] and so he writes [2596 → 2598] his word then is co-eternal with god [2598 → 2600] and is not added to him in time [2600 → 2602] as to our intellect is added in time [2602 → 2603] the interiorly conceived word [2603 → 2604] which is the intention understood [2604 → 2606] hence is the saying in john [2606 → 2608] in the beginning was the word [2608 → 2612] and he goes no further [2612 → 2618] recalling a point he had explained earlier [2618 → 2619] in book one [2619 → 2621] namely that the divine intellect [2621 → 2623] is not always in act [2623 → 2627] but is act itself [2627 → 2628] it's pure act [2628 → 2630] because again if it [2630 → 2631] if something [2631 → 2634] if it's different from pure act [2634 → 2634] well then [2634 → 2634] if it's not in act [2634 → 2639] it's not [2639 → 2641] it's not the [2641 → 2643] there would have to be something else [2643 → 2645] that added the act [2645 → 2646] to it [2646 → 2649] god is pure act [2649 → 2651] and he's one [2651 → 2655] it's what kajudin calls [2655 → 2657] the ipsa ratio deitatis [2657 → 2657] it's the very [2657 → 2660] reason [2660 → 2662] notion of deity [2662 → 2664] it's one [2664 → 2666] thing [2666 → 2669] which we cannot express [2669 → 2670] it's inipable [2670 → 2671] literally [2671 → 2672] inipable [2672 → 2676] we can express [2676 → 2676] certain [2676 → 2678] aspects of it [2679 → 2680] but it's one [2680 → 2681] it's one [2681 → 2684] and we can't [2684 → 2686] express the whole thing [2686 → 2691] that's what the word is [2691 → 2692] it's the expression of the whole thing [2692 → 2694] but [2694 → 2696] but that's him, that's not us. [2705 → 2707] So the divine intellect has to be [2707 → 2708] its very active understandings, [2708 → 2709] which is what we talked about before. [2709 → 2710] There's no difference. [2711 → 2713] It's the same thing. [2714 → 2716] Divine intellect is the same thing [2716 → 2717] as its active understanding. [2719 → 2720] We conceive of it differently, [2720 → 2723] and both of those things are there, in a sense, [2723 → 2724] because the intellect is there, [2724 → 2725] and his intellect is an act, [2726 → 2727] but his act and his intellect is the same thing. [2731 → 2733] But, St. John's goes on, [2735 → 2736] the being of the word, [2738 → 2739] interiorly conceived, [2740 → 2742] or the intention understood, [2742 → 2749] is the very act of being understood, [2749 → 2751] again, produced actively. [2751 → 2753] So the being of this word, [2753 → 2756] is to be understood, [2756 → 2757] that is, to be produced. [2757 → 2758] That's what the word is. [2762 → 2764] Therefore, the being of the divine word [2764 → 2768] is identical with that of the divine intellect. [2769 → 2770] Because what the divine word is, [2770 → 2771] is this being understood. [2773 → 2776] And that is the same thing as the intellect, [2776 → 2777] because there's no difference between the intellect [2777 → 2778] and its act. [2779 → 2781] So, the being of the divine word [2781 → 2782] is identical with that of the intellect. [2782 → 2784] It's identical with the being of the divine intellect. [2788 → 2788] And consequently, [2789 → 2790] with that of God himself, [2790 → 2791] who is his own intellect? [2794 → 2795] So the being of the word [2795 → 2796] is the same as the being [2796 → 2798] of the intellect, [2798 → 2800] and the intellect is the same thing as God, [2800 → 2802] so the word is God. [2803 → 2804] Okay? [2806 → 2807] Say it again. [2807 → 2807] Okay? [2807 → 2814] The being of this word [2814 → 2822] is simply the act of understanding, [2823 → 2824] again, in the positive sense. [2826 → 2829] And so, the being of the word [2829 → 2832] is the same thing as the divine intellect, [2832 → 2833] which is its act. [2837 → 2840] So, the being of the word [2840 → 2841] is the same as the intellect, [2841 → 2842] and the intellect is the same as God, [2843 → 2844] because there's no difference between God [2844 → 2845] and his intellect and him. [2845 → 2846] So, the word is God. [2848 → 2850] He has the nature of God. [2851 → 2852] He is God. [2853 → 2855] Because God's being and his nature [2855 → 2856] is the same thing, too. [2858 → 2860] I am who I am, right? [2861 → 2861] So. [2864 → 2864] All right. [2865 → 2866] We're almost done. [2867 → 2869] I think you're probably almost done, too. [2872 → 2873] When, therefore, this is said, [2874 → 2874] the word was God, [2875 → 2876] it is shown that the divine word [2876 → 2878] is not merely an intention understood, [2878 → 2879] like our word, [2879 → 2880] a concept that we produce, [2881 → 2884] but is also a thing existing [2884 → 2886] and subsisting in nature. [2895 → 2897] For the true God is a subsisting thing, [2897 → 2897] so the being of the word [2897 → 2897] is the same thing, too. [2897 → 2899] Since he is the highest degree being, per se. [2904 → 2905] If he's God, [2905 → 2907] well, he's subsisting in nature. [2909 → 2911] You know, he has subsistence. [2912 → 2913] You know, like a man subsists. [2913 → 2914] He stands on his own two feet. [2915 → 2916] He exists separately from everything else. [2921 → 2922] In other words, [2922 → 2923] he has personality. [2924 → 2926] Because personality is simply [2926 → 2927] a subsistence that exists [2927 → 2929] and has an intellectual nature. [2930 → 2932] So the word is a person [2932 → 2936] because he subsists. [2939 → 2940] I mean, he's a thing that exists. [2945 → 2946] It's not just a thought. [2950 → 2951] But it's God himself. [2951 → 2951] So. [2951 → 2957] But then, [2957 → 2959] isn't this against monotheism? [2959 → 2960] We have more than one God now. [2960 → 2961] We've got God, [2961 → 2962] and then we have the word. [2962 → 2963] Who's God? [2963 → 2963] Well, [2965 → 2966] see, this is where the Muslims [2966 → 2967] come in and say, [2967 → 2968] what's going on? [2970 → 2972] And this is where the mystery starts, too, really. [2977 → 2978] St. Thomas' response. [2981 → 2983] But the nature of God [2983 → 2984] is not in the word of God [2984 → 2987] as being one in species [2987 → 2988] and differing in number. [2990 → 2991] For example, men, [2991 → 2991] they're one in species. [2992 → 2992] We're all one in species. [2992 → 2993] We all have the human nature. [2995 → 2996] But we're different in number. [2997 → 2997] There's more than, you know, [2997 → 2999] we're not the same thing. [3001 → 3002] So we're the same in species [3002 → 3003] what we differ in number. [3005 → 3006] So when we say the word is God, [3008 → 3010] it doesn't mean that he differs from God. [3011 → 3017] It's not just that he has the same species [3017 → 3018] like we have the same species. [3019 → 3020] He also, he's the same thing. [3021 → 3022] He's the same in number. [3025 → 3025] Right? [3027 → 3029] Now, there's an easy proof for this [3029 → 3029] that he gives after, [3031 → 3032] which is in anything [3032 → 3034] that's not material, [3035 → 3039] if there's no matter in it, [3039 → 3040] there's only one, [3041 → 3042] thing that has that species. [3043 → 3044] For example, the angels [3044 → 3046] all have different species. [3051 → 3052] They have a different nature. [3053 → 3054] Because the only thing [3054 → 3054] that makes them different [3054 → 3055] is their nature. [3057 → 3058] So if they don't, [3058 → 3060] there can only be one thing [3060 → 3061] of that nature [3061 → 3062] because there's nothing else [3062 → 3063] to make it different than nature. [3064 → 3065] Whereas with us, [3066 → 3069] we don't have just nature. [3069 → 3070] We don't have just our species. [3071 → 3074] Our nature, our species, [3075 → 3076] we have matter as well. [3076 → 3078] So we can have the same nature [3079 → 3080] and yet be different [3080 → 3082] because our matter is different. [3082 → 3084] But angels don't have any matter. [3085 → 3086] So there's nothing to make them different [3086 → 3087] except nature. [3087 → 3089] So the nature is what it is. [3090 → 3091] So if it's different, [3091 → 3093] well, it's a different nature [3093 → 3094] or it wouldn't be different. [3094 → 3096] Right? [3096 → 3098] And the same thing is true of God. [3098 → 3099] There's only, [3099 → 3101] there can only be one God, God. [3101 → 3102] There can only be one thing [3102 → 3104] that has a divine nature. [3104 → 3105] So if the word has a divine nature, [3107 → 3110] well, he's one God with God [3110 → 3112] because there's only one God. [3112 → 3114] There can only be one God. [3114 → 3116] Just like it can only be one angel [3116 → 3118] because God doesn't have any matter. [3119 → 3120] Okay? [3120 → 3121] Yeah? [3121 → 3122] Make sense? [3122 → 3123] Then that's an easy argument. [3129 → 3130] I guess I'll try to give you the other argument. [3131 → 3132] Which is kind of deeper. [3132 → 3133] We'll finish with that. [3134 → 3137] And I may well finish you off completely with this, but. [3140 → 3141] So he goes on. [3142 → 3143] For the nature of God is not in the word of God [3143 → 3146] as being one in species and differing in number. [3147 → 3149] Like with us. [3149 → 3150] For the word has a nature of God [3152 → 3156] just as God's active understanding is his very being [3158 → 3159] as we said. [3161 → 3163] That's what we saw. [3163 → 3164] The word has God's nature [3164 → 3167] because the word is God's understanding. [3167 → 3168] Right? [3168 → 3170] The word is God's understanding. [3172 → 3176] And God's understanding is not different from his being [3176 → 3180] because in him to know and to be is the same thing. [3180 → 3183] So since the word is God's understanding of himself [3183 → 3186] and his understanding is the same thing as his being [3188 → 3190] and his being is the same thing as his nature. [3190 → 3192] Then there's no difference [3194 → 3196] between the word and the nature. [3196 → 3199] God and the word, the word has God's nature. [3206 → 3207] Okay. [3207 → 3209] So again, the word has God's nature [3209 → 3211] because the word is God's active understanding [3211 → 3211] which is his being. [3215 → 3218] But God's active understanding is his very being itself. [3218 → 3219] That's the key to understanding. [3219 → 3220] It can only be. [3220 → 3225] There's no, there's not, there's not any difference [3227 → 3229] between the word and God [3232 → 3235] because it's the same, [3237 → 3238] it's the same being. [3243 → 3244] I'll read this again. [3244 → 3245] The word has God's nature [3245 → 3247] because the word is God's active understanding [3249 → 3250] which is his being. [3250 → 3251] Okay. [3251 → 3252] That's what we said before. [3253 → 3255] The word is God's active understanding [3255 → 3257] and the same thing as his being. [3257 → 3259] And his being is the same thing as nature. [3261 → 3265] But God's active understanding is his very being itself. [3268 → 3271] Therefore, it is also his very nature itself [3271 → 3273] because God's being and his nature [3273 → 3275] are absolutely the same thing. [3275 → 3276] That it is, there's no, [3276 → 3279] this act, this, I don't know, even. [3279 → 3280] I see God twice. [3280 → 3283] The word's being is this being intelligent [3283 → 3287] and being understood in an active sense. [3288 → 3291] And that active intellection, which is being understood, [3292 → 3293] is the same thing as being. [3294 → 3298] So the word is God's being itself. [3304 → 3306] So that's who he is. [3306 → 3308] I mean, there's nothing else. [3312 → 3315] Divine being is absolutely one, in other words. [3316 → 3319] He has God's nature because he has his being, [3319 → 3321] but his being is only one being in God. [3324 → 3328] Therefore, the word, if it has God's nature, [3328 → 3330] it's not something else. [3332 → 3332] Okay. [3336 → 3340] This divine being is absolutely one. [3340 → 3341] It's not distinguished from his nature, [3341 → 3343] but identified with it completely. [3344 → 3346] And so since the word has God's nature [3346 → 3349] by means of its identity with this divine being, [3350 → 3354] it is absolutely divine nature itself [3354 → 3355] in number and his being. [3355 → 3357] The word is God's being, [3357 → 3358] and this being is the same thing as his nature. [3360 → 3364] There's not another nature that God has [3364 → 3365] that's separate from his being, [3365 → 3367] but the word is the same as the being. [3367 → 3372] So he says it's all one nature, one numerical nature, [3373 → 3374] which is why it's hard to understand, okay? [3377 → 3378] But that's the mystery of trinity. [3379 → 3380] That's what theology does, you know. [3381 → 3384] It tells us where what we don't understand is. [3384 → 3388] And that takes a lot of thinking [3388 → 3391] to see what you don't understand exactly. [3392 → 3395] But that's where the mystery is, that you can, [3395 → 3395] that everything is. [3395 → 3398] And you have to have in God [3398 → 3400] these two subsistences, [3402 → 3403] but one being. [3405 → 3407] There's one God, and yet there's, [3407 → 3409] well, we've shown two persons already, [3410 → 3413] but there's, you know, there's three. [3414 → 3415] Okay, we'll finish. [3415 → 3415] We'll finish. [3422 → 3424] Oh, we probably won't actually. [3425 → 3425] We are probably, [3425 → 3426] you're still reading. [3430 → 3432] Yeah, we'll have to stop there. [3433 → 3434] That was tough. [3434 → 3436] That's the hardest part, probably. [3436 → 3437] We'll probably do, but. [3439 → 3442] Is it any easier after? [3444 → 3447] Yeah, well, see, tomorrow we're going to talk about St. Paul. [3447 → 3451] No, not for us, for you, giving it the lecture. [3452 → 3454] Does it get any easier as I give it? [3454 → 3454] Yeah. [3455 → 3455] Yeah, I guess. [3455 → 3459] So, I mean, it's never easy. [3459 → 3461] I mean, it's mysterious, but. [3462 → 3465] Well, see, St. Paul is not as tough. [3466 → 3467] That's why I was thinking of doing St. Paul, [3467 → 3468] but I forgot to bring him, [3469 → 3472] because it's a little bit of a rest from this, [3472 → 3475] but at least it's done. [3475 → 3477] Not completely done, but we're basically, [3478 → 3479] it's downhill from there. [3482 → 3484] Maybe we can say the Angelus now. [3484 → 3485] It's a little bit early. [3485 → 3489] It's a little bit early, but way to finish. [3491 → 3493] The angel of the Lord declared unto Mary. [3493 → 3495] Jesus and the Holy Ghost. [3495 → 3497] Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. [3497 → 3502] Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. [3502 → 3506] Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. [3506 → 3506] Amen. [3507 → 3508] Behold the handmaid of the Lord. [3508 → 3510] Be adorned with thee according to thy word. [3510 → 3513] Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. [3513 → 3515] Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. [3515 → 3521] Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. [3521 → 3522] Amen. [3522 → 3523] And the word is with thee. [3523 → 3524] And the word is with thee. [3524 → 3525] Amen. [3525 → 3527] And the word is with thee. [3527 → 3530] Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. [3531 → 3535] Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. [3535 → 3535] Amen. [3536 → 3537] Pray for us, Holy Mother of God. [3537 → 3540] That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ. [3540 → 3541] Let us pray. [3541 → 3544] Forthforth we beseech thee, O Lord, that grace enter our hearts, [3544 → 3545] that we return to the incarnation of Christ, [3545 → 3548] that as the Son was made known through the message of the angel, [3548 → 3551] may by his passion and cross be brought to the glory of his resurrection. [3551 → 3553] Through the Son, Christ our Lord. [3553 → 3554] Amen.