|
Objection 1: It would seem that the precepts of the decalogue are
unsuitably distinguished from one another. For worship is a virtue
distinct from faith. Now the precepts are about acts of virtue. But
that which is said at the beginning of the decalogue, "Thou shalt not
have strange gods before Me," belongs to faith: and that which is
added, "Thou shalt not make . . . any graven thing," etc.
belongs to worship. Therefore these are not one precept, as
Augustine asserts (Qq. in Exod. qu. lxxi), but two.
Objection 2: Further, the affirmative precepts in the Law are
distinct from the negative precepts; e.g. "Honor thy father and thy
mother," and, "Thou shalt not kill." But this, "I am the
Lord thy God," is affirmative: and that which follows, "Thou
shalt not have strange gods before Me," is negative. Therefore
these are two precepts, and do not, as Augustine says (Qq. in
Exod. qu. lxxi), make one.
Objection 3: Further, the Apostle says (Rm. 7:7): "I had
not known concupiscence, if the Law did not say: 'Thou shalt not
covet.'" Hence it seems that this precept, "Thou shalt not
covet," is one precept; and, therefore, should not be divided into
two.
On the contrary, stands the authority of Augustine who, in
commenting on Exodus (Qq. in Exod. qu. lxxi) distinguishes three
precepts as referring to God, and seven as referring to our neighbor.
I answer that, The precepts of the decalogue are differently divided
by different authorities. For Hesychius commenting on Lev.
26:26, "Ten women shall bake your bread in one oven," says
that the precept of the Sabbath-day observance is not one of the ten
precepts, because its observance, in the letter, is not binding for
all time. But he distinguishes four precepts pertaining to God, the
first being, "I am the Lord thy God"; the second, "Thou shalt
not have strange gods before Me," (thus also Jerome distinguishes
these two precepts, in his commentary on Osee 10:10, "On thy"
"two iniquities"); the third precept according to him is, "Thou
shalt not make to thyself any graven thing"; and the fourth, "Thou
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain." He states
that there are six precepts pertaining to our neighbor; the first,
"Honor thy father and thy mother"; the second, "Thou shalt not
kill"; the third, "Thou shalt not commit adultery"; the fourth,
"Thou shalt not steal"; the fifth, "Thou shalt not bear false
witness"; the sixth, "Thou shalt not covet."
But, in the first place, it seems unbecoming for the precept of the
Sabbath-day observance to be put among the precepts of the decalogue,
if it nowise belonged to the decalogue. Secondly, because, since it
is written (Mt. 6:24), "No man can serve two masters," the
two statements, "I am the Lord thy God," and, "Thou shalt not
have strange gods before Me" seem to be of the same nature and to form
one precept. Hence Origen (Hom. viii in Exod.) who also
distinguishes four precepts as referring to God, unites these two
under one precept; and reckons in the second place, "Thou shalt not
make . . . any graven thing"; as third, "Thou shalt not take the
name of the Lord thy God in vain"; and as fourth, "Remember that
thou keep holy the Sabbath-day." The other six he reckons in the
same way as Hesychius.
Since, however, the making of graven things or the likeness of
anything is not forbidden except as to the point of their being
worshipped as gods---for God commanded an image of the Seraphim to
be made and placed in the tabernacle, as related in Ex.
25:18---Augustine more fittingly unites these two, "Thou
shalt not have strange gods before Me," and, "Thou shalt not make
. . . any graven thing," into one precept. Likewise to covet
another's wife, for the purpose of carnal knowledge, belongs to the
concupiscence of the flesh; whereas, to covet other things, which are
desired for the purpose of possession, belongs to the concupiscence of
the eyes; wherefore Augustine reckons as distinct precepts, that
which forbids the coveting of another's goods, and that which
prohibits the coveting of another's wife. Thus he distinguishes three
precepts as referring to God, and seven as referring to our neighbor.
And this is better.
Reply to Objection 1: Worship is merely a declaration of faith:
wherefore the precepts about worship should not be reckoned as distinct
from those about faith. Nevertheless precepts should be given about
worship rather than about faith, because the precept about faith is
presupposed to the precepts of the decalogue, as is also the precept of
charity. For just as the first general principles of the natural law
are self-evident to a subject having natural reason, and need no
promulgation; so also to believe in God is a first and self-evident
principle to a subject possessed of faith: "for he that cometh to
God, must believe that He is" (Heb. 11:6). Hence it needs
no other promulgation that the infusion of faith.
Reply to Objection 2: The affirmative precepts are distinct from
the negative, when one is not comprised in the other: thus that man
should honor his parents does not include that he should not kill
another man; nor does the latter include the former. But when an
affirmative precept is included in a negative, or vice versa, we do
not find that two distinct precepts are given: thus there is not one
precept saying that "Thou shalt not steal," and another binding one
to keep another's property intact, or to give it back to its owner.
In the same way there are not different precepts about believing in
God, and about not believing in strange gods.
Reply to Objection 3: All covetousness has one common ratio: and
therefore the Apostle speaks of the commandment about covetousness as
though it were one. But because there are various special kinds of
covetousness, therefore Augustine distinguishes different prohibitions
against coveting: for covetousness differs specifically in respect of
the diversity of actions or things coveted, as the Philosopher says
(Ethic. x, 5).
|
|