|
Objection 1: It seems that the third precept of the decalogue,
concerning the hallowing of the Sabbath, is unfittingly expressed.
For this, understood spiritually, is a general precept: since Bede
in commenting on Lk. 13:14, "The ruler of the synagogue being
angry that He had healed on the Sabbath," says (Comment. iv):
"The Law forbids, not to heal man on the Sabbath, but to do
servile works," i.e. "to burden oneself with sin." Taken
literally it is a ceremonial precept, for it is written (Ex.
31:13): "See that you keep My Sabbath: because it is a sign
between Me and you in your generations." Now the precepts of the
decalogue are both spiritual and moral. Therefore it is unfittingly
placed among the precepts of the decalogue.
Objection 2: Further, the ceremonial precepts of the Law contain
"sacred things, sacrifices, sacraments and observances," as stated
above (FS, Question 101, Article 4). Now sacred things
comprised not only sacred days, but also sacred places and sacred
vessels, and so on. Moreover, there were many sacred days other than
the Sabbath. Therefore it was unfitting to omit all other ceremonial
observances and to mention only that of the Sabbath.
Objection 3: Further, whoever breaks a precept of the decalogue,
sins. But in the Old Law some who broke the observances of the
Sabbath did not sin---for instance, those who circumcised their
sons on the eighth day, and the priests who worked in the temple on the
Sabbath. Also Elias (3 Kgs. 19), who journeyed for forty
days unto the mount of God, Horeb, must have traveled on a
Sabbath: the priests also who carried the ark of the Lord for seven
days, as related in Josue 7, must be understood to have carried it
on a Sabbath. Again it is written (Lk. 13:15): "Doth not
every one of you on the Sabbath day loose his ox or his ass . . .
and lead them to water?" Therefore it is unfittingly placed among the
precepts of the decalogue.
Objection 4: Further, the precepts of the decalogue have to be
observed also under the New Law. Yet in the New Law this precept
is not observed, neither in the point of the Sabbath day, nor as to
the Lord's day, on which men cook their food, travel, fish, and do
many like things. Therefore the precept of the observance of the
Sabbath is unfittingly expressed.
On the contrary, stands the authority of Scripture.
I answer that, The obstacles to true religion being removed by the
first and second precepts of the decalogue, as stated above (Articles
2,3), it remained for the third precept to be given whereby man is
established in true religion. Now it belongs to religion to give
worship to God: and just as the Divine scriptures teach the interior
worship under the guise of certain corporal similitudes, so is external
worship given to God under the guise of sensible signs. And since for
the most part man is induced to pay interior worship, consisting in
prayer and devotion, by the interior prompting of the Holy Ghost, a
precept of the Law as necessary respecting the exterior worship that
consists in sensible signs. Now the precepts of the decalogue are, so
to speak, first and common principles of the Law, and consequently
the third precept of the decalogue describes the exterior worship of
God as the sign of a universal boon that concerns all. This universal
boon was the work of the Creation of the world, from which work God
is stated to have rested on the seventh day: and sign of this we are
commanded to keep holy seventh day---that is, to set it aside as a
day to be given to God. Hence after the precept about the hallowing
of the Sabbath the reason for it is given: "For in six days the
Lord made heaven and earth . . . and rested on the seventh day."
Reply to Objection 1: The precept about hallowing the Sabbath,
understood literally, is partly oral and partly ceremonial. It is a
moral precept in the point of commanding man to aside a certain time to
be given to Divine things. For there is in man a natural inclination
to set aside a certain time for each necessary thing, such as
refreshment of the body, sleep, and so forth. Hence according to the
dictate of reason, man sets aside a certain time for spiritual
refreshment, by which man's mind is refreshed in God. And thus to
have a certain time set aside for occupying oneself with Divine things
is the matter of a moral precept. But, in so far as this precept
specializes the time as a sign representing the Creation of the world,
it is a ceremonial precept. Again, it is a ceremonial precept in its
allegorical signification, as representative of Christ's rest in the
tomb on the seventh day: also in its moral signification, as
representing cessation from all sinful acts, and the mind's rest in
God, in which sense, too, it is a general precept. Again, it is a
ceremonial precept in its analogical signification, as foreshadowing
the enjoyment of God in heaven. Hence the precept about hallowing the
Sabbath is placed among the precepts of the decalogue, as a moral,
but not as a ceremonial precept.
Reply to Objection 2: The other ceremonies of the Law are signs of
certain particular Divine works: but the observance of the Sabbath is
representative of a general boon, namely, the production of all
creatures. Hence it was fitting that it should be placed among the
general precepts of the decalogue, rather than any other ceremonial
precept of the Law.
Reply to Objection 3: Two things are to be observed in the
hallowing of the Sabbath. One of these is the end: and this is that
man occupy himself with Divine things, and is signified in the words:
"Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day." For in the Law
those things are said to be holy which are applied to the Divine
worship. The other thing is cessation from work, and is signified in
the words (Ex. 20:11), "On the seventh day . . . thou
shalt do no work." The kind of work meant appears from Lev.
23:3, "You shall do no servile work on that day." Now servile
work is so called from servitude: and servitude is threefold. One,
whereby man is the servant of sin, according to Jn. 8:34,
"Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin," and in this sense
all sinful acts are servile. Another servitude is whereby one man
serves another. Now one man serves another not with his mind but with
his body, as stated above (Question 104, Articles 5,6, ad
1). Wherefore in this respect those works are called servile whereby
one man serves another. The third is the servitude of God; and in
this way the work of worship, which pertains to the service of God,
may be called a servile work. In this sense servile work is not
forbidden on the Sabbath day, because that would be contrary to the
end of the Sabbath observance: since man abstains from other works on
the Sabbath day in order that he may occupy himself with works
connected with God's service. For this reason, according to Jn.
7:23, "a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath day, that the
law of Moses may not be broken": and for this reason too we read
(Mt. 12:5), that "on the Sabbath days the priests in the
temple break the Sabbath," i.e. do corporal works on the Sabbath,
"and are without blame." Accordingly, the priests in carrying the
ark on the Sabbath did not break the precept of the Sabbath
observance. In like manner it is not contrary to the observance of the
Sabbath to exercise any spiritual act, such as teaching by word or
writing. Wherefore a gloss on Num 28 says that "smiths and like
craftsmen rest on the Sabbath day, but the reader or teacher of the
Divine law does not cease from his work. Yet he profanes not the
Sabbath, even as the priests in the temple break the Sabbath, and
are without blame." On the other hand, those works that are called
servile in the first or second way are contrary to the observance of the
Sabbath, in so far as they hinder man from applying himself to Divine
things. And since man is hindered from applying himself to Divine
things rather by sinful than by lawful albeit corporal works, it
follows that to sin on a feast day is more against this precept than to
do some other but lawful bodily work. Hence Augustine says (De
decem chord. iii): "It would be better if the Jew did some useful
work on his farm than spent his time seditiously in the theatre: and
their womenfolk would do better to be making linen on the Sabbath than
to be dancing lewdly all day in their feasts of the new moon." It is
not, however, against this precept to sin venially on the Sabbath,
because venial sin does not destroy holiness.
Again, corporal works, not pertaining to the spiritual worship of
God, are said to be servile in so far as they belong properly to
servants; while they are not said to be servile, in so far as they are
common to those who serve and those who are free. Moreover,
everyone, be he servant or free, is bound to provide necessaries both
for himself and for his neighbor, chiefly in respect of things
pertaining to the well-being of the body, according to Prov.
24:11, "Deliver them that are led to death": secondarily as
regards avoiding damage to one's property, according to Dt.
22:1, "Thou shalt not pass by if thou seest thy brother's ox or
his sheep go astray, but thou shalt bring them back to thy brother."
Hence a corporal work pertaining to the preservation of one's own
bodily well-being does not profane the Sabbath: for it is not against
the observance of the Sabbath to eat and do such things as preserve the
health of the body. For this reason the Machabees did not profane the
Sabbath when they fought in self-defense on the Sabbath day (1
Macc. 2), nor Elias when he fled from the face of Jezabel on the
Sabbath. For this same reason our Lord (Mt. 12:3) excused
His disciples for plucking the ears of corn on account of the need
which they suffered. In like manner a bodily work that is directed to
the bodily well-being of another is not contrary to the observance of
the Sabbath: wherefore it is written (Jn. 7:23): "Are you
angry at Me because I have healed the whole man on the Sabbath
day?" And again, a bodily work that is done to avoid an imminent
damage to some external thing does not profane the Sabbath, wherefore
our Lord says (Mt. 12:11): "What man shall there be among
you, that hath one sheep, and if the same fall into a pit on the
Sabbath day, will he not take hold on it and lift it up?"
Reply to Objection 4: In the New Law the observance of the
Lord's day took the place of the observance of the Sabbath, not by
virtue of the precept but by the institution of the Church and the
custom of Christian people. For this observance is not figurative,
as was the observance of the Sabbath in the Old Law. Hence the
prohibition to work on the Lord' day is not so strict as on the
Sabbath: and certain works are permitted on the Lord's day which
were forbidden on the Sabbath, such as the cooking of food and so
forth. And again in the New Law, dispensation is more easily
granted than in the Old, in the matter of certain forbidden works, on
account of their necessity, because the figure pertains to the
protestation of truth, which it is unlawful to omit even in small
things; while works, considered in themselves, are changeable in
point of place and time.
|
|