OF THE OLD LAW
(In Six Articles)

In due sequence we must now consider the Old Law; and (1) The Law itself; (2) Its precepts.  Under the first head there are six points of inquiry: 

(1) Whether the Old Law was good?

(2) Whether it was from God?

(3) Whether it came from Him through the angels?

(4) Whether it was given to all?

(5) Whether it was binding on all?

(6) Whether it was given at a suitable time?
________________________

FIRST ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 98, Art. 1]

Whether the Old Law Was Good?

Objection 1:  It would seem that the Old Law was not good.  For it is written (Ezech. 20:25):  “I gave them statutes that were not good, and judgments in which they shall not live.”  But a law is not said to be good except on account of the goodness of the precepts that it contains.  Therefore the Old Law was not good.

Obj. 2:  Further, it belongs to the goodness of a law that it conduce to the common welfare, as Isidore says (Etym. v, 3).  But the Old Law was not salutary; rather was it deadly and hurtful.  For the Apostle says (Rom. 7:8, seqq.):  “Without the law sin was dead.  And I lived some time without the law.  But when the commandment came sin revived; and I died.”  Again he says (Rom. 5:20):  “Law entered in that sin might abound.”  Therefore the Old Law was not good.

Obj. 3:  Further, it belongs to the goodness of the law that it should be possible to obey it, both according to nature, and according to human custom.  But such the Old Law was not:  since Peter said (Acts 15:10):  “Why tempt you (God) to put a yoke on the necks of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?” Therefore it seems that the Old Law was not good.

On the contrary, The Apostle says (Rom. 7:12):  “Wherefore the law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”

I answer that, Without any doubt, the Old Law was good.  For just as a doctrine is shown to be good by the fact that it accords with right reason, so is a law proved to be good if it accords with reason.  Now the Old Law was in accordance with reason.  Because it repressed concupiscence which is in conflict with reason, as evidenced by the commandment, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods” (Ex. 20:17).  Moreover the same law forbade all kinds of sin; and these too are contrary to reason.  Consequently it is evident that it was a good law.  The Apostle argues in the same way (Rom. 7):  “I am delighted,” says he (verse 22), “with the law of God, according to the inward man”:  and again (verse 16):  “I consent to the law, that is good.”