Pints With Aquinas - 162: Aquinas on sexual desire W/ Fr. Jacob Janczyk

Episode Date: June 11, 2019

Today I chat with Dominican priest Fr. Jacob Bertrand Janczyk about what Aquinas had to say about sexual desire and how our lower desires can help us become a saint. SPONSORS EL Investments: https://www.elinvestments.net/pints Exodus 90: https://exodus90.com/mattfradd/  Hallow: http://hallow.app/mattfradd  STRIVE: https://www.strive21.com/  GIVING Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mattfradd This show (and all the plans we have in store) wouldn't be possible without you. I can't thank those of you who support me enough. Seriously! Thanks for essentially being a co-producer coproducer of the show. LINKS Website: https://pintswithaquinas.com/ Merch: https://teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: https://www.strive21.com/ SOCIAL Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mattfradd Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattfradd Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mattfradd MY BOOKS  Does God Exist: https://www.amazon.com/Does-God-Exist-Socratic-Dialogue-ebook/dp/B081ZGYJW3/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586377974&sr=8-9 Marian Consecration With Aquinas: https://www.amazon.com/Marian-Consecration-Aquinas-Growing-Closer-ebook/dp/B083XRQMTF/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586379026&sr=8-4 The Porn Myth: https://www.ignatius.com/The-Porn-Myth-P1985.aspx CONTACT Book me to speak: https://www.mattfradd.com/speakerrequestform

Welcome to Paisa Kindness. My name is Peter Phan. If you can sit down, I'll order a pipe of beer with Thomas Akinis and ask him, anyone question, what would it be? Legitimately the cutest thing ever! My family and I have listened to that clip from my four-year-old Peter about 500 times. I thought it was great. Hey, g'day. So look, Peter, we're about to drink beer. What do you want? You want a beer too? All right, wait there.

So we're going to talk with Dominican priest, Father Jacob Bertrand Jansink, about our desires and about how our lower desires can make us holy. We're going to be talking about chastity and our desire for sex, our desire for food, Aquinas' understanding of the fact that we're kind of a body-soul composite and yeah, a lot of that kind of stuff. And we're looking directly at some texts from Thomas Aquinas. So this is a great episode. You're going to bloody love it. Get a beer or don't if you're not into that. Get a beer. A little whiskey. Get a whiskey. Okay, here we go. What's up? Welcome back to Pints with Aquinas.

Or as you all say in America, Pints with Aquinas. That's probably not how you say it. I was just down in Australia. Got to speak in Melbourne and Brizzy and Auckland. It was awesome. Had a bloody fantastic time. To all of you Australians listening, I want you to know that I love you. to all of you Australians listening, I want you to know that I love you. And even though I live here now, it's only because my wife is better looking than you.

All right? And she's American. It's not because I prefer America necessarily. Although America is bloody fantastic, despite the craziness everywhere in the political landscape but other than that you know gorgeous country why am i telling you about this shut up matt frad let them hear the show okay father jacob bertrand jancic great to have you on pints with aquinas thanks for having me it's a pleasure to be here um how long have you been a dominican for when were you ordained It's a pleasure to be here. How long have you been a Dominican for? When were you ordained? I was ordained a priest, I guess, just almost two years ago in May of 2017.

I entered the order in 2010 and then finished formation in 2017. So coming up on two years next month. Very cool. And you're at the Dominican House of Studies? Yeah, I work there at the Dominican House of Studies. I'm the vocation director for our province. So offices are out of there. So I'm here in Washington, DC. Look at that. I've got the vocations director. That's me. Yeah. A lot of young men listen to this show. That's great. Yeah. No, I had to put in the plug for that, of course.

Are you getting a lot of vocation interest from young men? of course, you know. Are you getting a lot of vocation interest from young men? Yeah, we are, you know, we're kind of blessed in that area, and we have been for a little bit of time. There's sort of a regular stream of serious interest, which is really great. Keeps me busy, that's for sure. Always on the run. Yeah. Do you find that when you guys are faithful to your calling as Dominicans that the vocations come? Simple way of putting it. Yeah, I think that's the case. I know when I entered the order right out of college and when I was considering priesthood and religious life,

one of the things that I was looking for was an authentic community. I don't know if as a junior in college, I knew what that meant. But yeah, faithfulness to the charism, to the tradition, to the mission of the order that, in our case, that Dominic set up for us, that was very attractive to me, and I think still is for me and for other men, too. Yeah, I know when I was discerning religious life, sometimes it felt like there were religious orders that were almost throwing themselves at me, like, please, please save our dying order, you know? But it was always those orders that seemed to radically live out their mission that I found most appealing, you know? Yeah, and with the order of preachers, we're really blessed, like a number of orders that have been around for a number of centuries where we

have this kind of rich tradition, this patrimony that really undergirds everything that we do. So, preaching, you know, may take all different types of forms throughout the centuries, but it's still that same mission, which is reassuring. There's something bigger than an individual person there. And did you say you did your thesis or dissertation on chastity generally? Yeah, that's right. I generally in chastity and specifically St. Thomas's treatment of human anthropology, how he understands the person, but particularly as a sexual being, a rational sexual being. And then, of course, you know, that naturally leads into questions of virtue of chastity and also with sexual attraction. That was kind of the general look that the thesis gave.

Fascinating. Seems like he has a less than positive view on sex in a way that we, having been blessed very conscious of the reality of the fall and of sin and how after the fall, our passions wildly took over and took control of our reason. And he's very critical and very harsh, I think, in that area with respect to warning against the passions, the danger of the passions. But at the same time, warning against the passions, the danger of the passions, but at the same time, he's, you know, even more abundantly clear and eloquent when he speaks about grace and how grace reorders that disorder introduced by sin. So I don't think it's a condemnation of sex or sexual desires or sexual attraction, but a realization that we're in a tough place because of sin. And those, those, the, the most base attractions in us for food, sex, and drink, um, somehow grab us the most quickly and, and keep grasp on us, uh, you know, in a very severe way. So he's very cautious about that. Uh, so I also think it's

kind of a realistic approach. I think if we look at our culture, people have been the same throughout the centuries pretty much, that sex is a pretty pervasive thing in the media and the culture and the way people live their lives. So, yeah, I don't think he's down on a human, you know, this sexuality of man. sexuality of man. Yeah. I'm just trying to, before we get into the specifics of this and the kind of detail of this, I want to talk about some, perhaps things that he's spoken about specifically regarding sexuality. So, I mean, I love the fact that he addresses wet dreams in the Summa Theologiae. I think that's just brilliant. No one expects him to do that. Yeah, he doesn't shy away from anything. In some respect, you know, when you read through the Summa in particular, just that sort of methodical scholastic, you know, working through things, he kind of covers all the details, sort of the glorious and the less than glorious kind of aspects of both the supernatural and the natural. So, what else did he speak about that people might be interested in? Like, so just for our listeners, he says that if you have a sexual dream or a nocturnal pollution, I think that's what he called it, I forget exactly, but you know,

that you're not sinning because you're obviously not consciously willing those images and willing to masturbate or anything like that. But other, what else did he talk about that people might be like, oh, wow, he addressed that? Well, with respect to sexuality and the human person, of course, one thing that I always find interesting with him is his account of biology in these things, of how the body works. Now, most of it is not accurate. You know, it's not the 13th century medical and biological understanding of the person has changed drastically. But it's interesting to read what he thinks of fertilization and sort of the gestation process and how a child grows in the womb. He talks a lot about sexual sin. So a whole host of, you know, he just addresses the way in which

He just addresses the way in which people sin, but also kind of ranks the gravity of sin as it pulls one away from God, as it pulls one away from our end in Him. So those are all I find to be quite interesting, to be quite fascinating. If memory serves when he's addressing wet dreams, he says something like that eating meat or something can can lead to us yeah i haven't i i haven't read that section in a while and so i don't i can't you know speak to it but i remember yeah yeah but i do remember there being and that's sort of where the biology kind of you know thing comes in perhaps you know their wives tales or whatever faulty medieval biology but but it's interesting nonetheless. And then another thing I remember him addressing in the Summa is the objection that, you know, sexual relations are inappropriate because there's a sort of ecstasy that occurs in sexual relations, and you kind of go out of your mind, as it were, and just like it's wrong

to be out of your mind through alcohol, it's wrong to go out of your mind through sex, and his response to that is, yes, it is ecstatic, but there is the rational intention prior to the ecstasy, so it's not improper. Right, yeah, there was sort of a, I wouldn't attribute this in any way to St. Augustine, but following Augustine, the sort of, you know, kind of uber, the understanding of like an uber depravity of man that even the sexual act in itself entailed some sort of venial sin or some or even, you know, some grave sin because of this, because you lose your the faculty of reason in in the sexual act. But Thomas recognizes that, you know, that's that's part of our sexuality, that that enjoyment of the sexual act, but Thomas recognizes that, you know, that's part of our sexuality, that enjoyment of the sexual act. It's also when he speaks about our sexuality being ordered to an end, to the natural end of procreation, and then also the good of the spouses, as the Church now says, that the enjoyment of the act is what leads one to desire it, and especially,

even more so, when properly ordered. If I'm remembering correctly, and not in his virtue, not in his section on virtue in the Summa, but in his section on creation, so in the first part of the Summa, when he talks about Adam and Eve and their creation, he actually says, now I'd have to go back and find the exact... I know where you're going with this. I remember the same thing, yeah. Yeah, see, that they, Adam and Eve, would be the ones who would have enjoyed sex the most. Yes. Because they were not corrupt. Well, this is before the fall, of course, because they weren't corrupted by sin.

So, their reason was perfectly guiding them. Their passions were perfectly in line. They were perfectly ordered to God, all in grace. So, when the ordering of the person is perfect, you can enjoy what it means to be human perfectly, which is incredible. I remember reading that for the first time and sort of having to read it twice, kind of being blown away by that, because it's not just an acknowledgement of a sort of historical reality, but, you know, if that's where grace and Christ is, you know, where we're moving in Christ, that there's a beauty and a fullness to our humanity that includes our sexuality. And if I remember correctly, he was

saying all of this in response to the objection that it was sex that led to the fall, rather than it, you know, preceding it and being a good. Right. Yeah, exactly. When he's asking what drew people away, what drew Adam and Eve away from God, was it sort of the base desires? And he has, I mean, he doesn't have to say no, but when you follow the logic, you have to say no there because in Adam and Eve, those passions, those lower desires, the non-rational faculties were in line with reason. So, it would seem that the highest faculty would have had to go astray in that for the fall. So, why don't we just address the issue of chastity in general? Like, what is that virtue?

How do we make it appealing to ourselves and to just modern man, I guess? Yeah, that's a tough question. That's a tough question, especially the appealing part, because it really seems, I think, to be in many ways an unappealing virtue or an unappealing. I mean, I would imagine that most people wouldn't, you know, particularly outside of a Christian context or those who aren't well catechized, wouldn't even think of it as a virtue, as something good. And certainly certain cultures historically, you know, wouldn't view a chaste man in particular to be particularly virtuous. and in particular to be particularly virtuous.

But the whole sort of notion of virtue, particularly with sex, drink, and food, those passions and vices that temperance, the virtue of temperance governs, or chastity falls under the cardinal virtue of temperance, the cardinal virtue of temperance, they all seem, I think, at first blush to really be a sort of suppressing of natural desires in the human person. And that really couldn't be further away from the truth. But that's, I think, how people view it, that I have these desires, I have this desire for sex. It's natural, sure, yeah, of course. And to sort of temper it or to tame it or to control it is foreign to me. I think that's the attitude. So it's unappealing, right? Because we want to do what we want to do. We're kind of prideful in that. But if we think about it in the way that Thomas and the tradition and the church wants us to think about it, it's not really

a sort of suppression of who we are, but really a self-mastery so that we can be fully human. The virtues allow us to exercise our humanity, to flourish as men and women. So when we talk about the virtue of chastity, it's less about suppressing those desires and more about orienting them properly so that they can be lived well. All of this, I don't know if I'm going to take a step too far back, but all of this presupposes an understanding, sort of the anthropological understanding of what the human person is. And Thomas, the human person, what the human person is. And Thomas, he really talks about that when he speaks about the person being a hylomorphic being, which is unique, that we're both body and soul, two forms from the Greek, hylomorphe, it's the word there. And he talks about this in

the first part of the Suman question 76 in particular, but the whole understanding of the human person is predicated on the fact that we are both body and soul. And what we do in our body and what we do in our soul interact. There's this sort of synergy between that. So Thomas understands then chastity, the living of our sexuality, to have implications, not just with respect to the body, not just procreation, not just bodily pleasure, but also with respect to the soul. With respect to that part of us that's eternal, that perdures. So this is when we think about the human person as what I do in my body affects my soul, then the sort of the consequences seem to be much heavier than simply, you know, a one night stand or sort of a foray into pornography or something like that, you know, for some gratification. I'm thinking too, you know, to try and break this down for modern man, maybe he doesn't like the language of soul right now, but even if you were to talk about like your true self and who you are and because you think like if I'm not my body, then I guess whatever I do with it doesn't affect me. So, I can have a one-night stand.

I can be a pornography performer or a prostitute. This isn't actually having an impact on me or i guess you know the the flip side of that is um somehow we we we were if we're only our body and if that's all we are and there is you know then then uh maybe we seek to to glorify it or to uh to to exalt it above yeah yeah i don't know yeah no there's with all things you're sort of sailing between the two pitfalls you know you're walking that tight line of um of sort of a hyper dualism where you can just separate what you do in your body you know to think that the one i stand the pornography the masturbation sort of thing has no bearing on who you are as a person on your

self-worth i mean even those sorts of things we we can talk about self-worth and self-respect and, you know, those kind of things that what we do does affect us. I think one of the things perhaps, you know, more for to get out of the kind of scholastic, hylomorphic talk, but one of the things that we don't like to face, and it's very true, is that our actions shape our character. This is Thomistic, but this is also, you know, a secular notion. You could look at secular philosophers, the great ancients, you know, all that. But what we do makes us who we are. You know, so a liar is a liar because he lies. And just the opposite, a truth teller is a truth teller because he tells the truth. Same thing in, with respect to, you know, chastity. Somebody who respects women, who doesn't objectify women,

is, you know, doesn't objectify women because he behaves that way. Not because he touts it in the way he speaks, but because that's how he lives. So I think that's a way to sort of enter that conversation of, well, how do you act? Because that makes you the man or the woman that you are, that's your character. What do we mean by character? I'm not asking for a kind of philosophical, intense definition, but just, you know, virtues and vices and behaviors affect, what do we mean by character? Is that a disposition towards things and life? I think it's, I think when we talk about character, I think it's, you know, it's the question that we all ask ourselves if we want to be honest with

ourselves, you know, kind of when we look in the mirror, who am I? You know, are we happy with who we are and why? what are the reasons why, or are we not? And I don't think it's ever black and white. I don't think anybody can say truthfully that, you know, I'm a complete disappointment or there's not, there's absolutely nothing wrong with, with me, with what I do with, you know, we're, we're complicated, but I think it's kind of what, what do you, you know, what do you aim for as a human being? What are those things that contribute to your being a good human being in that sense? Yeah.

You know, it's interesting. You remember the Christmas story about Scrooge, right? He lives – it's almost – obviously, grace can intervene. Yeah. And we can become virtuous, I suppose. But it's almost like the opposite of what we're talking about here, because with Scrooge, he lives this terribly selfish life. He then has this vision and he wakes up and seems to find it incredibly easy to be generous. I think most of us are kind of hoping for something like that to happen. So maybe we're lustful, and we hope that we'll pray and have some sort of experience that will take away all of the behaviors that we've been engaged in

and all that we've learned from them. But as you say, and this is very Aristotelian, isn't it, that we become the sorts of people based on how we act? Right, yeah. There's this really fascinating sort of spectrum that Aquinas talks about, and perhaps his commentators put it together more, because when you look in the Summa, the various positions or places on the spectrum, they're not in one question. You can find it throughout the second part of the Summa when he's speaking about the virtues and the vices. the second part of the summa when he's speaking about the virtues and the vices. But I always use this when I'm teaching RCIA or when I'm introducing somebody to the moral life. I always use this example of the sort of spectrum of vice to virtue. So I don't

know if you're familiar with it, but there's sort of four stages, right? And at the sort of depraved or the bad end, you have what the tradition calls the, the vicious person. Right. So the vicious person does the bad thing as if it were the good thing. He has no concept that what he's doing is wrong. Uh, he just does it. Uh, you know, so I always use the example of the, um, the frat guy who goes out to, to get wasted on at a party on the weekend. You know, he just does this because as if that's the good thing to do, that's what I should be doing on a Friday night. So that's that's the vicious person. But as you move towards the good, the virtuous, the right thing to

do there, it's not as you were just saying, like the Scrooge, where you where you woke, wake up and now it's fixed, right? There's there's sort of a progression. So as you move, there's the next sort of level would be what, what is called the incontinent person. The incontinent person still does the wrong thing, but there's sort of a moral, uh, qualm in his mind, you know, should I go out or should I not go out and drink myself, uh, away? But he still does it, you know, but at least there's the, there's the prick of conscience. Uh, there's something going on there. If keep moving then you get to the to the continent person the continent person differs from the incontinent person only not only but in in as much as he does the good thing though he still struggles so it's the same battle should i should i not go out

drinking on friday night but he doesn't he you, he doesn't drink to excess. He does the good act. And often that's where we think that virtue sits. That's the fullness of virtue. And that's mistaken. The struggle is, is not the end for a lot of, you know, for, for us, we're as, as human beings, we're going to struggle through our lives. You know, we have to build the habit. We have to build that character of doing the good thing. So that's true. And you could do those virtuous acts and you could live virtuously, but that's not the fullness. That's not the end. For Thomas and for the tradition and the Thomistic tradition, the fullness of virtue is the person who does the good thing joyously, promptly, and easily. He takes joy in not drinking to excess, because it's the good thing. It's the same reason why Adam and Eve could enjoy the sexual act so

much, because they were doing the good, you know, they weren't corrupted by sin. They were doing it joyfully, promptly, and easily. It was what was right to do. Same thing with chastity. You know, most of us in the world will fight, We're tempted. Those sorts of the struggles there. And, you know, you may be the continent person who doesn't fall, but the struggles are there. But the end is to be chased promptly whenever there's a temptation easily and joyously. easily and joyously. And I think that shouldn't sort of be a point of despair for us in thinking, well, I'm never going to get there, because it's not our doing, it's grace that transforms us and that brings us along. But it really should be a great source of hope that the struggle isn't forever. That's not the end. We won't struggle in heaven. And, you know, God willing, there'll be a time here too, by his grace, that we won't struggle or not struggle as much. You know, there's this growth there.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with a good mate of mine when I was living in Brisbane. He was just about to be married, and he had lived a rather immoral life, kind of like a vicious person like we're talking about. But he began to practice his faith and to grow in virtue. And I remember the two of us were sitting over coffee, you know, and we're talking about his upcoming marriage. And he looked at me and he went, Matt, like, I'm at the point where if somebody's like, here's a bunch of cash and like, you can, you know, live with a bunch of women or have prostitutes. He was just thinking of the most depraved example possible. He's like, I actually wouldn't want it. And he said it as if he was stunned,

but he had gotten to a point where he's like, no, I don't want that. I know that's not the path of happiness. Yeah. Yeah, no, that's exactly what the goal is of the Christian life. And I remember, uh, I don't remember who told me this, but I know the friar who was, it was, it was not a friar who told me the story after, but it was a friar who he interacted with. And he had gone to confession

to this friar, uh, a great old Dominican, still alive, a really great man. Um, one of those, one of those men you look at and you think, well, he's lived religious life for about 70 years and he's walking proof that it works. Uh, but, uh, so he, I don't, I don't know what this man, you know, what this guy said in confession, but he said after this, this Dominican said, uh, you just have to fight. And he sort of got in his face and kind of put up his fist and you have to fight, fight, fight against those temptations. And it's true. Sometimes we have to fight. But we have to remember that's not the end. That's not what Christ died for. It's not that we fight forever. It's that we're made whole and holy. And that includes our sexuality. Yeah, this reminds me of probably my favorite line in the Catechism. It says, the alternative is clear.

Either man governs his passions and finds peace, or he allows himself to be dominated by them and becomes unhappy. And this gets back to what we were kind of talking about in the beginning, about how do you make this attractive to modern man? And maybe at first it isn't attractive, but I think most people, even non-religious people, attractive. But, you know, I think most people, even non-religious people recognize that it's not good to be totally dominated by your passion for food and not to regulate how and when you eat it. Nor would you be a healthy person if you were sleeping all of the time and laying on couches, and you couldn't regulate when you rested. But it's interesting, like we live in this society, but for some reason, the sexual passion, we're like, well, full license, full license there, you know, so long as you're not infringing on another person's freedom, that's totally okay. But it's not, it's actually really unattractive,

and it's not a sign of freedom. Right, yeah. You know, the whole notion of the Christian life, and what, you know, what's on offer there. And just as you were saying, with respect to food and drink and sleep and sort of the other kind of things that are kind of, you know, more base in us, not necessarily, not bad, but just like, you know, simpler, they're not the most glorious acts of man, you know, taking a nap is not really the height. It might feel glorious, but it isn't. Certainly, yeah. But find me a statue of a man taking a nap somewhere. But that's not really what we laud in the end.

But you're right. With sex, it's sort of this thing we put up on a pedestal that nobody else can touch. No one can say anything about what we do with our sexuality and our actions. But what I was saying is that, you know, what's on offer is not simply, it's not really a control, right? It's not, here's the church or here's whoever, parents, whatever, priest, whoever, trying to control me. It's not, you know, the whole thing, stay out of my bedroom. That was more with birth control and that sort of thing. Trust me, I don't want to be there. I'm not trying to be there.

I got stuff I got to do. I'm really not interested in being here. I got a full calendar. So I don't want to be there. It's not a control of that, but it's a presentation of the transformation that leads to our happiness, that leads to our fulfillment, that leads to, yeah, what truly will sustain our happiness. I think, you know, I think in this, in these sorts of conversations, the hardest thing to convince people of is that there's something worth living for, there's happiness, there's there's something worth living for there's there's happiness

there's fulfillment beyond what we experience in the immediate um so with respect to chastity or sex that i think the hard part is trying to get people to understand trying to present it trying to convince them that your sexuality can and should contribute to not just like a prolonged happiness in a relationship, but an eternal happiness in heaven. And that's actually more fulfilling and more true and more good than the pleasure and the excitement and all of that, then that you would get from, you know, doing whatever you want from the one night stand from even from having, you know, having sex with, you know, your, your

girlfriend or boyfriend that you're dating, these sorts of things that there's something more. I think that's, that's the, you know, the immediate gratification sort of, of our culture is, is really pervasive. And I think that's the challenge often is to get people to sit down and listen to you for a minute and say, well, Hey, this is what I, you know, let me make a logical and coherent kind of presentation. Maybe not sexy, but it will be logical. Yeah. Give me two minutes. Let me offer it at least before you yell at me and call me, you know, or dismiss me or whatever. So it's, no, it's certainly a challenge. And I think that that's the challenge

the church faces too, is how do we talk about this in an attractive way and that draws people in because it's good, because it's good. So. I would love to look at here the first, you sent me this reference here, how the lower passions become rational by participation and help us to be holy. And so the first part of the second part, 24. I don't know if you have that in front of you, do you? Yeah, I'm just opening right to it. So, yeah, the phrase rational by participation is not Thomas's, and it's not mine. So it's used by other theologians.

So I stole it, and they used it to describe what Thomas is sort of getting at. So yeah, in this part of the Summa, Thomas is talking about the good and evil and the passions. So how does something that's really—so the question is really, how does something that's natural, how does that behave well, or how does it behave or act poorly, right? And what's behind this is the reality that moral judgment, saying that something is good or bad, that someone has sinned or not sinned, has to take into account a human act, the will. You know, being tempted, this is also, you know, this is simple, but something I think hearing confessions and that sort of thing that people don't realize that being tempted is not sinful. Christ was tempted. We're all tempted. It's how do we respond to that temptation? Do we dwell on it? Do we think about it? Do we pursue it in physical ways? You know, how does the will act? So,

with respect then to the passions, our desires for food, sex, strength, those base desires, where does good and evil, where does sin, when do we sin, when do we not sin? That's the question that he's getting at. Would it help? I'd love to read some of this. Yeah, please. What do you think we should do? Take a look at the respondio, or is there a certain part that you want to read? So, the third article is the one that is particularly interesting to me. Yeah, that's what I'm looking at. And particularly the first reply. Okay, so why don't I read the first objection and first reply, and then you can help us understand. Would that be okay? Yeah, that works. He says, so this is the objection. This is what Aquinas wants to respond to for those listening. It would seem that every passion decreases the goodness of a moral action for anything that hinders the judgment of reason

on which depends the goodness of a moral act, consequently decreases the goodness of the moral act. But every passion hinders the judgment of reason. For salust, how do you say that? Salust? Salust? I don't know. Says? I've lost my place. Oh, no. Yeah, I got that right. All those that take counsel about matters of doubt should be free from hatred, anger, friendship, and pity. Therefore, passion decreases the goodness of a moral act. So, do you want to just help us understand that before we look at the response? Yeah, this goes back, you know, to, I was thinking of what you were saying

earlier, that the sort of criticism of the sexual act, that people sort of lose the ability to reason when they're, you know, when they're having sex. So that, because of that, it's bad. And you know, when they're having sex. So because of that, it's bad. And what this kind of bridges on, so I think Thomas is setting up two things here. First, he wants to show the disorder introduced by sin. So if we look at the person before the fall, it's in theological terms, it's called rectitude, that when a person is properly ordered, and there's sort of three levels, that the person's ordered to God as their primary and as their good, that the will and reason are in line, and that the lower passions, the lower desires are following reason, that reason has the lead. Because of sin, what happened is that those things are flipped, sort of on their head, so that the passions now govern.

And this is what I was talking about earlier, that the passions, our desire for sex, our desire for sleep, our desire for food, for drink, they begin to take center stage here. So that's one thing I think that Thomas is getting at here. The other thing then is what follows from that is that because of that, uh, there, this is, I would say not a despairing objection, but one that borders on a sort of despair, right? That, that there's no hope that the passions can be integrated into the person that they just run or run astray, do what they want, our desire for food, sex, drink, have no sense of contributing to who the person is. And in some ways that can be true, but it forgets grace, which is what he'll talk about in the reply. Is he also saying that if you feel motivated to do a particular good, then that kind of passion or motivation decreases the good of what you've done because it was less selfless?

Yeah, I hadn't thought of that. I guess if you flip it over, that would be the case because – yeah, because in the objection, I was just looking at it quickly. in the objection, I was just looking at it quickly again, he's talking about the decreasing the goodness, but also with respect to, you know, doing a good thing simply out of a passion. You know, I guess that would be the case. It's sort of a leading question, or at least it leads me to give away a bit of the answer, but I'm just going to say the reply. Let's have a look. Yeah, so let's jump there. Yeah. He says, this is Aquinas answering, the passions to himself. You know you're really

smart when the only person you can argue with is yourself. Okay. He says, the passions of the soul may stand in a twofold relation to the judgment of reason. First, antecedently, and thus, since they obscure the judgment of reason on which the goodness of the moral act depends, they diminish the goodness of the act. For it is more praiseworthy to do a work of charity from the judgment of reason than from the mere passion of pity. In the second place, consequently, and this in two ways. First, by way of redundance, because to wit. I don't know what that means. You've got to tell me what that means.

He always says to wit, and I've got no idea what he means. To wit, when the higher part of the soul is intensely moved to anything, the lower part also follows the movement, and thus the passion that results in consequence in the sensitive appetite is a sign of the intensity of the will, and so indicates greater moral goodness. Secondly, by way of choice, when to wit, a man by judgment of his reason chooses to be affected by passion in order to work more promptly with the cooperation of the sensitive appetite and thus a passion of the soul

increases the goodness of an action. That is so cool. Yeah, there's a lot there. So, to wit, it's very British, isn't it? I feel like I have to. I don't know. I think it is. I don't think I've ever used the phrase to wit in conversation in my life. What does it mean? I think I always read it as like that is or like IE.

Oh, okay. IE. Oh, I see. I could be completely wrong. So if somebody is listening and says, no, he's wrong, I see. sort of stepwise. So let's sort of try to simplify. So he talks about in two ways that the passions may affect reason. Uh, the first way is antecedently or before. So if the passions, um, cause the person to act, then the moral goodness is, uh, is decreased. So if, you know, if you, if you're lusting, if you end up having sex with somebody because you lust after

them, you're led by your passions. It's less bad than if you were to plot it out. Correct. Right. Exactly. Which is why there's a big difference between, and obviously neither are good and both are gravely sinful, but there's a difference between clicking around on Facebook, something pops up and you're feeling lost and then you get let into it as opposed to, oh, we're going to meet up at this time and we are going to commit adultery. Exactly. Right. It's premeditated versus non-premeditated. I don't know what's the opposite, non-premeditated. Reflexively, yeah. Yeah. So that's the first. And I think that's perhaps, you know, we got that, right? That's understood.

The second way is consequently or afterwards. Although, do you mind if I just stop for one sec? But then the flip side of this is it sounds like he's saying, you know, if you give because you have a passion of pity, it's less good. So, we may be on board with Aquinas when he tells us that lust might reduce the sinfulness of an act, but we might not want to be on board with him, or some people might not when they hear that he's saying the passion of pity that overwhelms me when I see this person decreases the goodness of the act. Is that what he's saying? Yeah, he is. Yeah. So the question that he's asking, you know, each article, the article that we're reading from each article is a question,

whether passion increases or decreases the goodness or the malice of an act. So he's looking at the gradation of, remember, because we're made to be perfect, right? As human beings, it's the pursuit of perfection and perfect charity. So he's looking at where, where, you know, what faculty of the soul, what part of the soul is moving the person because the highest way or the greatest way that a human being acts is when we act in, in, with our reason and our will, you know, our reason in forming our will. So, Thomas, because that's the Imago Dei, that's how we image God, that's the image and likeness in which we're created, with the ability to know using the intellect, and then the ability to love using through the will.

That's what God does, that's who God is. He knows and he's a knower, the perfect knower and the perfect lover. That's how we image God. So Thomas is looking at, well, how do we then, created in that image and likeness, how do we pursue by his grace that perfection? So the most perfect way, and he talks about this when we're talking about this, the second ways, is when reason guides everything. The passions, the will, our desires, our attractions, our movements, when reason is in charge. Okay. So if that's the perfect, so what are sort of the gradations? Well, what if, um, we do a good thing, but because of a less than perfect, you know, cause less than perfect catalyst as in the passion of pity, well, you're still doing a good thing. Thomas isn't're still doing a good thing.

Thomas isn't saying that's a bad thing. And in fact, doing those good things moved by the passions ought to contribute to then, you know, the furthering and the development of a habit or habitus and leading to virtue, hopefully, you know, aided by grace. But it's not perfect. It sounds like, and I must be wrong here, that he's pitting the two against each other. Because obviously, it's a false dilemma to say either you give out of pity or you give out of reason. Like, hopefully, you would have both. I mean, someone who is just totally stoic in the face of somebody suffering and then gives to them, that seems unnatural too. Yeah, I think here when Thomas is speaking about the passion of pity, it's probably not the same understanding that we would have here, or at least he's using a more specific nuanced understanding of what pity is. That simply you're moved because you see

something without reflecting on what that something is or what the reality of that situation is. You're just simply moved by observing something. Again, he's not saying it's not good. He's just saying it's not as perfect as it could be. Okay. So it's not a black and white thing. And this is, this is kind of interesting, I guess, right? Because when we think about sort of Catholic moral teaching or, you know, these, or St. Thomas, that it's very, very clear cut, like human action is, is either good or it's bad,

but you know, really what he's talking about is that, that no, there, there are a lot of things that, that play in here. Um, the, the. The situation, what the person's doing, the act, what motivates them, all of these things play. And that doesn't mean that there aren't some things that are always good and some things that are always evil. But when we talk about it, the person's complicated, and there's a lot going on. So I think that's simply what he's saying.

Well, what's the most perfect way? What are other good ways that are less perfect? And then moving down the scale towards what's not good. Sweet. Okay. And then that was antecedently. Now we move on to the second place, consequently. Yeah.

So consequently, so that reason is the moving factor, right? That reason is the thing that makes the person act. So there are two ways here that he talks about. But ultimately, it's both reason, both that highest faculty that is in charge, as it were, that's at the steering wheel. The first is what he calls redundance. And what I think he means there is that there's a movement of the passion, both the passion and reason are moved in the same way. So they're both doing the same thing. They recognize the same thing. They're moved in the same way. So it's redundance, not in a bad way, but that they're just observing the same thing that trying to think of a good example here. And I, I wasn't able to come up with one, but, um, you know, that, that we intellectually understand something in the same way as, as we're moved in, in the same way. So it's kind of redundant in that sense that the whole person is, is moving. I think sometimes we think redundancy as it being unnecessarily the same, like i've already done

that you know that's that's great i've already seen that movie i don't need to see it again that's redundant or i've heard you explain this already um it's redundant um but i think here it's just saying that these are both acting in concert that they're doing the same thing the other one the the second one by choice it it's that the passion moves, you know, we're moved by our passions and reason says, yeah, that's good and pursues it. And then the will pursues it. So in a sense, we're moved first by the passion, but it's the way it's reason that moves us to act, not the passions. And this is where it's particularly interesting. This is where that phrase, rational by participation, comes in. It sounds kind of like a mouthful or like there's a lot there, but it's really, I think this is where Thomistic moral theology, the Thomistic moral life, the life of virtue, is really different than anything else out there.

Cool. This is kind of the hinge point in my mind. Yeah. Explain it. Other people might disagree, but this is, this is what I think. So, uh, what Thomas is saying is that by grace, that living a life of virtue, the passions become quasi rational. My desire for sex becomes quasi rational. My desire for food, my desire for drink becomes quasi rational. Not that it adopts the faculty of reason, but that it is so informed by grace and reason that it acts as if it were reasonable itself. So, um, what does that, what, I guess, what does that mean in sort of less redundant terms? Uh, it means that the mind is, these are desires for, uh,

for sex, food, and drink become virtuous habits that one desires sex, one desires food, one desires drink virtuously, reasonably, as the virtuous person in that spectrum of the vicious, incontinent, continent-virtuous person would. You know, at that, that it becomes second nature to live out our sexuality in its fullness. Hmm. I want to know... Yeah, sorry, I didn't catch up. Yeah, go ahead, no, ask, yeah. to live out our sexuality in its fullness. I want to know... Yeah, sorry, I didn't catch you. Yeah, go ahead, no, ask, yeah. Okay, I'm just trying to understand this.

This is an interesting line here. He says, when by the judgment of his reason, he chooses to be affected by a passion in order to work more promptly with the cooperation of the sense of appetite that's an interesting line there chooses to be affected by a passion what does that mean right how is that different to what we were talking about earlier well i guess you you clarified that with the pity not being perhaps what we're thinking of but yeah like in the case let's let's just use that example that Aquinas gave, when you give because you know

it's praiseworthy, but you also experience a sort of empathy with the suffering of this other person. What does that mean? Yeah, the choice here is really what all of moral theology hinges on. It's choice. Because choice requires an act of the will. Because choice requires an act of the will. And that's, as we were talking about, that's where any sort of judgment, any sort of good or bad enters.

It's what do you do? What do you choose to do in a particular situation? So what he's talking about here, when by judgment of his reason, chooses to be affected by a passion in order that he worked more promptly, et cetera. Take, you know, a sexual temptation or, well, let's use a sexual temptation and then we can talk about the giving. But, you know, that a person feels this desire for sex, there, you know, there is objectively this reality that happens now then what takes over what informs that the choice of action is it simply that that that desire over which we have no control do we give into that that has that that thing that we have no control over um that is not not human i was going to say not in the

sense of it's it's alien but in the sense of it's not fully human you know it doesn't like irrational like the irrational exactly yeah exactly do we give into that or do we allow reason then to say to make a judgment here you know am i am i tempted what is that what is this desire is this desire to you know what you were talking about I tempted? What is the, what is this desire? Is this desire to, you know, what you were talking about to have sort of have this, this random hookup to sort of troll through pornography, or is this, is this desire, uh, legitimate in the sense that, you know, is this a married man who desires to have sex with his wife? You know, these are very different things, but it's, it's a reason it's our judgment that has to make that decision.

And then do we decide to be moved by that passion? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And this also sheds light on what we said earlier about the kind of antecedent thing. Because I guess when he was talking about like pity when you give, how that reduces the morality of the act. Honestly, if you had have used the example of the sexual act, that would have made a lot more sense to me because you could see, you know, a husband making love to his wife, not necessarily out of lust, but certainly overtaken by passion.

He's doing a good thing, but what he's doing is less good than if he had have intended it perhaps more rationally or something. I could see something, yeah. And then also... No, go ahead, please. Well, when aquinas means passion he that comes what is he's usually the word passio is that like more like an emotion or because when we say passion we're talking about something we're going passionate right right whereas he's talking about something we're being affected by yeah he's so i uh he's talking about what is, when he talks about the soul, and this is,

he talks about the sort of powers of the soul or the parts of the soul. And I think powers is at least a more helpful word. I think traditionally parts is the language that is used, but word. I think traditionally parts is the language that is used, but parts may lend us to think that there are parts. The soul is one thing. When we talk about parts or powers, we're just talking about the various. We can look at how the person acts and then say, well, this is how the soul governs that action. So we can say there's the rational part or the rational power or the passions are, are those, um, are those desires or those like lowest powers or parts of the soul for the lowest kind of goods, the goods that we share, those things that we share with other living beings, you know, what is animalistic, you know, it's not rational. The rational powers are different than these animalistic powers. And then the passions are those things that affect those lower powers. So, you know, all animals desire food,

sex, and drink. We share that with all animals. And the passions are those things that kind of govern those, or the appetite sometimes, you know, that's kind of a different thing, but that's kind of lumped in the same area of what is sort of the motivating thing in the person. It's, it's the passion. So it's not in the matter, modern or the contemporary sense of he's a passionate person or, um, that, that kind of thing, but, or he has passion for this as if he, you know, cares about it a lot. It's more something of what's motivating the person. It's more foundational. Yeah, exactly. More foundational than that.

Yeah. I think we give it a higher sort of understanding of passion. You know, somebody's passionate. There's passion in that. That's not really what Thomas is talking about. So just to kind of sum this, perhaps the point, one of the main points you wanted to make from this article and what you brought up to me was that the lower passions can help us to become holy. So how has that been shown in this? Yeah.

So the lower passions, exactly. And that's exactly sort of the takeaway with all of this is that Thomas understands that aided by grace, and this is in direct opposition to that objection that you read, that all passions will decrease the goodness of an act. This is an exact opposite of that, that Thomas understands that by grace, and you have to understand when Thomas talks about grace, this is all in the sacramental economy. So that in receiving the sacraments, the Eucharist, confession, all these, you know, of course, baptism, that in that whole sort of economy of salvation, that these things that are that are lower in us, these things that kind of have an effect on us without us even thinking, maybe that's a good way of talking about the passions that they have an effect on us without

our thinking, um, that these things that can, and these things that can really govern us. I mean, I would imagine that we all know people that are pretty much, uh, ruled by their desire for sex. That's all I think about. That's all they do. That's all they kind of pursue or drink. You know, unfortunately, it's a reality. But that these things that we would tend to think either dominate a person in that way, or at best, we simply have to control and kind of white knuckle and fight against. Thomas says, no, I mean, you do have to fight against them. But in the end, they become by our our doing the good thing over and over, by us practicing what it means to be chaste, by us, like that Dominican priest said in the confessional, that by us fighting, fight, fight, fight, he said, that over time, our sort of building of the habit, our building of that character that we were talking about,

transformed by grace, these passions stop, not only stop dictating what we do, desires for sex stop being at the fore, but they're wrapped up in what it means to be created in God's image and likeness. They're wrapped up in what it means to be rational, such that they act in concert with our reason. And what this means then is that if, you know, we're doing good things and we're using our reason to do good things, and that's informing our will, that it contributes to our sanctification. So to boil all that down really quickly, Thomas believes and teaches that our sexuality makes us holy, that informed by grace, all of these things, our desire for sex, our sexuality when lived properly and transformed by grace actually make us saints, contribute to our sanctification. make us saints contribute to our sanctification, which is when, when I, when I first heard that,

I don't think I'd ever heard that before. You know, that's, I don't think that's something that we hear. Um, and I think this is particularly unique to Thomas that, that this idea that, you know, our, the, the things that are basis, most base, that's not a word, but most, the lowest parts of us, the things that we share with animals, informed by reason and transformed by grace, make us saints. And that's kind of the takeaway. I want to know what you mean by transformed by grace, because I know atheists who have found sobriety after years of looking at pornography. And we could point to virtuous pagans who aren't explicitly receiving grace for the sacraments or praying for it necessarily. Yeah. Well, I think one thing that's important there is that we have to remember that, you know, our Lord desires the salvation of all. So, He's working in mysterious ways,

but in people's lives. So, certainly, we wouldn't say that, you know, atheists or the non-baptized are receiving grace in the sure and uncompromised way, as it were, of the sacraments. Of course, we don't want to conflate those sacramental reality and sacramental grace. But when we talk about transformed by grace, it's that rectitude that we spoke about, the proper ordering of who we are as human beings, of being continually transformed into the image of Christ. That's only by grace. One of the things too, and perhaps this is a, you know, a conversation for, for another time, but the difference, this sort of theological differences between some theologians, Thomas believes that there are things there, the virtues can either be habitual in that we practice them or infused in that God gives them to us. Um, and that's, that's that's, like I said, a whole other can of worms. But certainly the virtuous pagan, there are people who live rightly, who do good things, and whose lives are transformed. But it's always with, you know, we can't leave Christ out of the equation

here. We can't leave the supernatural out. You know, we're always called to more, we're always called to a deeper and truer perfection, and that's only available in Christ and with His grace. Okay, maybe one final question. We've talked a lot about kind of growing in the freedom to do good and how Christ didn't die, to quote Christopher West, to merely give us coping mechanisms for our sin. Right. But at the same time, I think it's also true that we will always experience concupiscence to a degree in this life, the disordered passions, etc.

And we won't be fully free until heaven. So, talk about that tension a little. Because I think there are some people out there who doubt that you can ever be free of these sorts of temptations. And if somebody says they no longer look at Paul, they must be lying. You know, they're very suspicious because they haven't received healing in their own life. But at the same time, maybe sometimes people speak about a sort of a level of freedom that actually is unattainable in this life. freedom that actually is unattainable in this life? Yeah, you know, that's a great question, and also something that I think can be dangerous, at least in the spiritual life,

and dangerous in this sense. And that's the sort of the looking around and comparing, you know, where one person is in their spiritual life, in their relationship with Christ, in their pursuit of holiness and the virtues, and using other people as sort of the litmus test to see, well, where I am. Or, you know, they can't be there because, you know, they can't be not struggling with this because I am. Yeah, that's not helpful in the end. But I think the principle is always beatitude. The principle is always heaven. What are we made for ultimately? And that has to be the guiding light in this, is what will we be like in heaven and after the second coming?

Now, are we going to experience that now, here here fully? No, because we're not there yet. But that doesn't mean, you know, that doesn't rule out growth or progression or, you know, real transformation, real sort of relief from temptation in this life. For some, it comes. For others, you know, it's a fight, and it will always be a battle. And that's, you know, I don't, I don't want to supernaturalize it or spiritualize it, I mean, and just say, well, that's in the mind of God and, you know, attempt not to give any sort of thought to it. But in a real sense, it is, you know, our Lord tempts us or allows us, our Lord doesn't tempt us, our Lord allows us to be tempted in certain ways to strengthen us, to keep us close to Him. So, I think the hope, we can't be too earthly focused, but heavenly focused, you know, where are we sort of reaching in our mind's eye, in our soul,

in our heart. So, I don't know if that really answers the question, but... No, it definitely begins to, and I think this is why the Church's teaching on chastity is good news, right? So, and tell me if this sums it up well, all right? Growth in holiness is not a growth in the repression of the bad things we want to do, but rather it's a growth in freedom to do the good that we were made to do. but rather it's a growth in freedom to do the good that we were made to do. So, it's... That's exactly right. It opens us up. It's a much... And I mean, you just have to look at a saint and then look at somebody who's addicted to any of this stuff. It's very clear who's fully alive and free and joyful.

You know, like, it's amazing to me whenever I meet religious people like yourself, or especially religious sisters. I've never met a religious sister I haven't fallen in love with. I think they're all beautiful, you know. They're dangerous. They're dangerous for sure. They're glorious and they glow and you're like, wow, you're not even doing CrossFit every day. And like, you don't like, you don't have sex and like, you know, you're probably not just binging on Netflix and yet there is a joy in you and I look out in the world, I'm like, it's not there. So it's, I don't know why we're not catching on sooner, but anyway. Yeah, no, the sisters have, they're a great example. They put us to shame. They put the friars to shame, that's for sure. They're amazing.

Ground of creation, man. Yeah. That's right. Yeah, that's right. Well, we got to close by asking you to give a vocation plug. So young men, lots of young men listen to this show. They're definitely looking at the Dominicans, hopefully. What's the next step? How would they get in contact with you? What would you recommend? Yeah, you know, the sort of short piece of advice that I like to give guys if they're thinking about a vocation with us or religious anywhere, priesthood, is that the question has to be fundamentally,

not or less so, what does God want me to do? Less of a functional question and more of who has God made me to be? It's an ontological question. It's about who God has made you to be. And the functioning of what you're doing comes later. Only a Dominican uses the word ontological in his elevator vocation speech. Continue. There you go. Yeah, of course, you have to put in the plug for that. So, it's that question, who has God made you to be? How has he made you to receive his love and mercy, to live in that, and then to share that with others? Now, with, you know, I'm a Dominican, I'm the vocation director for the province of St. Joseph, so the Dominican plug, you know, St. Dominic 800 years ago set up a life, a contemplative life of friars living in common,

studying and praying together for the sake of preaching for the salvation of souls, for preaching the gospel. That mission is as new today as it has been for 800 years. The world needs Christ, and the world needs to know Christ, not as some idea, but as the human person, or as the God-man who came to save us. That's the mission of the Dominican Order. If you're interested, check out our vocation website, opeast.org slash vocations, and there's a bunch of great information about the Order and the province of St. Joseph and vocations there. My contact information for my office is there. Check it out. Shoot me an email if you have questions. Happy to help and to answer whatever questions that I might be able to do for you.

And presumably there's opportunities throughout the year for some people to come on come and see weekends. Yeah, exactly. We have four come and see weekends during the year, two in the fall semester and two in the spring semester. We just had our last one for the year last weekend. So the next we'll be looking for September. The dates are online for that. And then we also have a few events coming up in the summer, three vocation days, one in Providence, Rhode Island, one in New York City and one in Cincinnati, Ohio in July and August. So those dates will be posted shortly online. So if you're interested, check out those events, be in touch, and yeah, we'll get you plugged in with some friars. Just like when you set a couple up, you say you need to name your firstborn after me. If there's anyone who becomes a Dominican,

you better take the name Matthew and name yourself after me okay good there you go well thank you so much for your time Father Jacob this has been really fun yeah I've enjoyed it a lot thank you very much ah that was a fantastic episode I learned a lot and it was super cool to get to know Father Jacob and I hope you learned a lot as well hey I am doing so much cool stuff right now because you guys are making it possible on Patreon. I told you a while back that I wanted to go to Uganda for free, you know, so they didn't have to pay me and bring some apologetics material down and stuff like that. That's happening this year. Next year, I'm going to India to do something similar. Yeah, glory to God. What a fantastic thing. I am loving doing Pints with Aquinas. I'm loving

doing the Matt Fradd Show. We're thinking about making the Matt Fradd Show kind of twice a month soon instead of just once a month. All of this stuff costs money. Sorry. I know I'm sniffing and that makes you want to vomit, especially because it's in your ears. Sorry. But if you want to support me and you love this work, I need you to support me. Like, it's like a need thing because like lots of people drop out and that's why I have to continually ask people to be faithful supporters. So, if you're out there and you're like, okay, I could buy you a coffee once a month, that's like five bucks a month, do that and just bless this show and so I can keep growing it and keep doing this awesome work. This is so much fun and none of it happens without you. So thank you very much for believing in what I'm doing and for supporting me. You can support

me in two ways. Go to patreon.com slash Matt Fradd or go to pineswithaquinas.com slash donate if you don't like Patreon. And then you'll see there a list of all the free things that I give you. And everyone likes free things. I'm not even going to tell you what they are. But they're really, really cool. So go check them out. Patreon.com slash Matt Fradd. Or pintswithacorns.com slash donate.

Cheers. Appreciate it. I love you, America. You too, Australia. To carry you. And I would give my whole life. To carry you. To carry you. To carry you. To carry you. To carry you.

There were birds in your tears falling from the sky Into a dry riverbed that began to flow down to A cross tower high up above the water And maple trees surrounded it leaves caught flame with golden embers.