SIXTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 98, Art. 6]

Whether the Old Law Was Suitably Given at the Time of Moses?

Objection 1: It would seem that the Old Law was not suitably given at

the time of Moses. Because the Old Law disposed man for the salvation

which was to come through Christ, as stated above (AA. 2, 3). But man

needed this salutary remedy immediately after he had sinned.

Therefore the Law should have been given immediately after sin.

Obj. 2: Further, the Old Law was given for the sanctification of

those from whom Christ was to be born. Now the promise concerning the

"seed, which is Christ" (Gal. 3:16) was first made to Abraham, as

related in Gen. 12:7. Therefore the Law should have been given at

once at the time of Abraham.

Obj. 3: Further, as Christ was born of those alone who descended from

Noe through Abraham, to whom the promise was made; so was He born of

no other of the descendants of Abraham but David, to whom the promise

was renewed, according to 2 Kings 23:1: "The man to whom it was

appointed concerning the Christ of the God of Jacob . . . said."

Therefore the Old Law should have been given after David, just as it

was given after Abraham.

_On the contrary,_ The Apostle says (Gal. 3:19) that the Law "was set

because of transgressions, until the seed should come, to whom He

made the promise, being ordained by angels in the hand of a

Mediator": ordained, i.e. "given in orderly fashion," as the gloss

explains. Therefore it was fitting that the Old Law should be given

in this order of time.

_I answer that,_ It was most fitting for the Law to be given at the

time of Moses. The reason for this may be taken from two things in

respect of which every law is imposed on two kinds of men. Because it

is imposed on some men who are hard-hearted and proud, whom the law

restrains and tames: and it is imposed on good men, who, through

being instructed by the law, are helped to fulfil what they desire to

do. Hence it was fitting that the Law should be given at such a time

as would be appropriate for the overcoming of man's pride. For man

was proud of two things, viz. of knowledge and of power. He was proud

of his knowledge, as though his natural reason could suffice him for

salvation: and accordingly, in order that his pride might be overcome

in this matter, man was left to the guidance of his reason without

the help of a written law: and man was able to learn from experience

that his reason was deficient, since about the time of Abraham man

had fallen headlong into idolatry and the most shameful vices.

Wherefore, after those times, it was necessary for a written law to

be given as a remedy for human ignorance: because "by the Law is the

knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20). But, after man had been instructed by

the Law, his pride was convinced of his weakness, through his being

unable to fulfil what he knew. Hence, as the Apostle concludes (Rom.

8:3, 4), "what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the

flesh, God sent [Vulg.: 'sending'] His own Son . . . that the

justification of the Law might be fulfilled in us."

With regard to good men, the Law was given to them as a help; which

was most needed by the people, at the time when the natural law began

to be obscured on account of the exuberance of sin: for it was

fitting that this help should be bestowed on men in an orderly

manner, so that they might be led from imperfection to perfection;

wherefore it was becoming that the Old Law should be given between

the law of nature and the law of grace.

Reply Obj. 1: It was not fitting for the Old Law to be given at once

after the sin of the first man: both because man was so confident in

his own reason, that he did not acknowledge his need of the Old Law;

because as yet the dictate of the natural law was not darkened by

habitual sinning.

Reply Obj. 2: A law should not be given save to the people, since it

is a general precept, as stated above (Q. 90, AA. 2, 3); wherefore at

the time of Abraham God gave men certain familiar, and, as it were,

household precepts: but when Abraham's descendants had multiplied, so

as to form a people, and when they had been freed from slavery, it

was fitting that they should be given a law; for "slaves are not that

part of the people or state to which it is fitting for the law to be

directed," as the Philosopher says (Polit. iii, 2, 4, 5).

Reply Obj. 3: Since the Law had to be given to the people, not only

those, of whom Christ was born, received the Law, but the whole

people, who were marked with the seal of circumcision, which was the

sign of the promise made to Abraham, and in which he believed,

according to Rom. 4:11: hence even before David, the Law had to be

given to that people as soon as they were collected together.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 634 / 746 题