Info

Pints With Aquinas

If you could sit down with St. Thomas Aquinas over a pint of beer and ask him any one question, what would it be? Every episode of Pints With Aquinas revolves around a question, a question that St. Thomas addresses in his most famous work, The Summa Theologica. So get your geek on, pull up a bar stool, and grab a cold one. Here we go!
RSS Feed
Pints With Aquinas
2017
June
May
April
March
February
January


2016
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March


All Episodes
Archives
Now displaying: February, 2017
Feb 28, 2017

Be awesome and support PWA here: www.patreon.com/pwa Give $5 or more and you'll get access to the entire audio book of Aquinas' meditations for Lent.

---

Back when I worked as an apologist with Catholic Answers we received a lot of questions around this time of year. Perhaps the most common was, “are Sunday’s excluded from Lent?”

The answer is . . . are you ready for this?

No. Sunday’s are not excluded from Lent. According to the General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar, “Lent runs from Ash Wednesday until the Mass of the Lord’s Supper exclusive” (28).

No exceptions are given for Sunday’s during Lent. In fact, a couple of paragraphs later the GN says: “The Sundays of this season are called the First, Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Sundays of Lent. The Sixth Sunday, which marks the beginning of Holy Week, is called Passion Sunday (Palm Sunday)” (30).

So there you have it. Now, does that mean that we cannot choose to allow ourselves the things we voluntarily gave up for lent? No, it doesn’t. These voluntary fasts are personal devotions. Because they have been voluntarily taken up, we can choose to set them aside.

That said, be awesome and sacrifice this Lent. What my P.E coach told me in middle-school applies to Lent also, “mate, if it’s not hurting, you’re not doing it right.”

Link to GN here: https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWLITYR.HTM

---

Thanks to the following patrons of Pints With Aquinas

Jed Florstat

Daniel Szafran

Phillip Hadden

Katie Kuchar

Phillipe Ortiz

Malcolm Paul MacDonald

Nick Sungenis

Kevin Donaoe

Dennis Mahoney

Katherine Szojka

Shawn Pierce

Feb 27, 2017

Today I chat with Dr. Robert Delfino about Thomas' 5th argument for God's existence.

---

PintsWithAquinas.com

Patreon.com/PWA

---

Here is the translation from the Fathers of the English Dominican Province (ST 1, Q. 2, A. 3.):

"The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God."

Here's Delfino's translation: 

The fifth way is taken from the governance of things. For we see some things that lack knowledge, namely natural bodies, act for the sake of some end. This is apparent from the fact that they always or most often act in the same way and achieve what is best [i.e., what fulfils their natural needs]. From this it is obvious that they achieve their end not by chance but by natural inclination (ex intentione). But those things that lack knowledge do not tend toward an end except under the direction of something with knowledge and intelligence, as in the case of an arrow from an archer. Therefore there is some intelligent being by whom all natural things (omnes res naturales) are ordered to an end, and this we call God.

---

Defino's 10 step argument:


1. We see in nature that non-intelligent things act for a goal that is good with regularity. For example, it is in the nature of an electron to be attracted to protons, which helps to form atoms.

2. If electrons did not have this natural inclination then none of the elements on the periodic table you studied in Chemistry would form, which would mean that none of the physical life forms we know (including yourself!) would exist anywhere in the physical universe. But that would be bad, because life is good.

3. In the case of electrons being attracted to protons, we cannot ascribe such behavior to chance or to biological evolution. In the case of chance, chance would not explain why the electrons act with such regularity because chance refers to what happens rarely.

4. In the case of biological evolution, this is because the regularity of action in the case of electrons exists prior to biological evolution and is necessary in order to make biological evolution possible.

5. An intelligent cause can direct something for a goal that is good with regularity. For example, consider an archer who, with routine success, directs his arrows towards the animals he is hunting for food. However, these regular actions of the arrows, which are made of wood, do not represent the natural actions of wood. Instead, they represent something imposed on the wood of the arrows by the archer. This is similar to how a puppeteer imposes movement on a puppet, and how a watchmaker orders the part of a watch to tell time.

6. An intelligent cause is able to do this because having intelligence allows one to envision something mentally that does not yet exist physically (for example, envisioning a watch before it was invented). Non-intelligent matter cannot order itself to an end that is good precisely because it is incapable of thought.

7. However, human intelligence cannot explain why an electron has, within its own nature, an inclination to be attracted to protons because electrons exist prior to humans and humans could not exist without electrons already having these natural inclinations.

8. In our attempt to explain why electrons, as non-intelligent beings, have a natural inclination to be attracted to protons, which makes life possible, we have ruled out the material aspect of the electron, chance, biological evolution, and human intelligence.


9. Therefore, there must be some non-human intelligence that is responsible for the natural inclinations of electrons.

10. This non-human intelligence cannot achieve this by imposing activity on the electron in a manner similar to a puppeteer or a watchmaker. Instead, this non-human intelligence must be capable of endowing an electron with its being and nature.

Conclusion: We call this non-human intelligence God.

---

Thanks to the following patrons of Pints With Aquinas

 

Jed Florstat

Daniel Szafran

Phillip Hadden

Katie Kuchar

 

Phillipe Ortiz

Malcolm Paul MacDonald

Nick Sungenis

Kevin Donaoe

Dennis Mahoney

Katherine Szojka

Shawn Pierce

Feb 21, 2017

PintsWithAquinas.com

---

As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei i, 13): "If a father's coat or ring, or anything else of that kind, is so much more cherished by his children, as love for one's parents is greater, in no way are the bodies themselves to be despised, which are much more intimately and closely united to us than any garment; for they belong to man's very nature." It is clear from this that he who has a certain affection for anyone, venerates whatever of his is left after his death, not only his body and the parts thereof, but even external things, such as his clothes, and such like. Now it is manifest that we should show honor to the saints of God, as being members of Christ, the children and friends of God, and our intercessors. Wherefore in memory of them we ought to honor any relics of theirs in a fitting manner: principally their bodies, which were temples, and organs of the Holy Ghost dwelling and operating in them, and are destined to be likened to the body of Christ by the glory of the Resurrection. Hence God Himself fittingly honors such relics by working miracles at their presence.

ST III, Q. 25, A. 6.

---

Thanks to the following patrons of Pints With Aquinas

 

Jed Florstat

Daniel Szafran

Phillip Hadden

Katie Kuchar

 

Phillipe Ortiz

Malcolm Paul MacDonald

Nick Sungenis

Kevin Donaoe

Dennis Mahoney

Katherine Szojka

Shawn Pierce

Feb 14, 2017

I chat with my mate, Gomer, about what St. Thomas (and the Catholic Church teaches) about grace.

---

Support the show: www.patreon.com/pwa 

Learn more: www.pintswithaquinas.com

---

Learn more about my guest Gomer - http://www.layevangelist.com/

And his podcast Catching Foxes here - http://www.layevangelist.com/catchingfoxes/

---

Thanks to the following patrons of Pints With Aquinas

Jed Florstat

Daniel Szafran

Phillip Hadden

Katie Kuchar

 

Phillipe Ortiz

Malcolm Paul MacDonald

Nick Sungenis

Kevin Donaoe

Dennis Mahoney

Katherine Szojka

Shawn Pierce

Feb 7, 2017

Support the show here - www.patreon.com/pwa

Learn more about PWA here - PintsWithAquinas.com

---

Huge thanks to Philipe Ortiz and Katie Kuchar in particular for supporting to the show!

---

Today I read from The Aquinas Catechism. You can get that book here: https://www.amazon.com/Aquinas-Catechism-Explanation-Catholic-Theologian/dp/1928832105

 ---

Thanks to the following patrons of Pints With Aquinas

 

Jed Florstat

Daniel Szafran

Phillip Hadden

Katie Kuchar

Phillipe Ortiz

Malcolm Paul MacDonald

Nick Sungenis

Kevin Donaoe

Dennis Mahoney

Katherine Szojka

Shawn Pierce

 

Feb 2, 2017

www.PintsWithAquinas.com

Here's the article I read in the show: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/31/saint-thomas-aquinas-opposed-open-borders/

Here's the link to the closed FB group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/193832791087931/

The Catechism:

Here's what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say about welcoming foreigners:

"The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens" 2241.

The Summa

Here's what I read from Thomas:

"Man's relations with foreigners are twofold: peaceful, and hostile: and in directing both kinds of relation the Law contained suitable precepts.

For the Jews were offered three opportunities of peaceful relations with foreigners.

First, when foreigners passed through their land as travelers.

Secondly, when they came to dwell in their land as newcomers. And in both these respects the Law made kind provision in its precepts: for it is written (Exodus 22:21): "Thou shalt not molest a stranger [advenam]"; and again (Exodus 22:9): "Thou shalt not molest a stranger [peregrino]."

Thirdly, when any foreigners wished to be admitted entirely to their fellowship and mode of worship. With regard to these a certain order was observed. For they were not at once admitted to citizenship: just as it was law with some nations that no one was deemed a citizen except after two or three generations, as the Philosopher says (Polit. iii, 1).

The reason for this was that if foreigners were allowed to meddle with the affairs of a nation as soon as they settled down in its midst, many dangers might occur, since the foreigners not yet having the common good firmly at heart might attempt something hurtful to the people.

Hence it was that the Law prescribed in respect of certain nations that had close relations with the Jews (viz., the Egyptians among whom they were born and educated, and the Idumeans, the children of Esau, Jacob's brother), that they should be admitted to the fellowship of the people after the third generation; whereas others (with whom their relations had been hostile, such as the Ammonites and Moabites) were never to be admitted to citizenship; while the Amalekites, who were yet more hostile to them, and had no fellowship of kindred with them, were to be held as foes in perpetuity: for it is written (Exodus 17:16): "The war of the Lord shall be against Amalec from generation to generation."

1