Reply Obj. 2:  The Scribes and Pharisees erred about the judicial precepts in two ways.  First, because they considered certain matters contained in the Law of Moses by way of permission, to be right in themselves:  namely, divorce of a wife, and the taking of usury from strangers.  Wherefore Our Lord forbade a man to divorce his wife (Matt. 5:32); and to receive usury (Luke 6:35), when He said:  “Lend, hoping for nothing thereby.”

In another way they erred by thinking that certain things which the Old Law commanded to be done for justice’s sake, should be done out of desire for revenge, or out of lust for temporal goods, or out of hatred of one’s enemies; and this in respect of three precepts.  For they thought that desire for revenge was lawful, on account of the precept concerning punishment by retaliation:  whereas this precept was given that justice might be safeguarded, not that man might seek revenge.  Wherefore, in order to do away with this, Our Lord teaches that man should be prepared in his mind to suffer yet more if necessary.  They thought that movements of covetousness were lawful on account of those judicial precepts which prescribed restitution of what had been purloined, together with something added thereto, as stated above (Q. 105, A. 2, ad 9); whereas the Law commanded this to be done in order to safeguard justice, not to encourage covetousness.  Wherefore Our Lord teaches that we should not demand our goods from motives of cupidity, and that we should be ready to give yet more if necessary.  They thought that the movement of hatred was lawful, on account of the commandments of the Law about the slaying of one’s enemies:  whereas the Law ordered this for the fulfilment of justice, as stated above (Q. 105, A. 3, ad 4), not to satisfy hatred.  Wherefore Our Lord teaches us that we ought to love our enemies, and to be ready to do good to them if necessary.  For these precepts are to be taken as binding “the mind to be prepared to fulfil them,” as Augustine says (De Serm.  Dom. in Monte i, 19).

Reply Obj. 3:  The moral precepts necessarily retained their force under the New Law, because they are of themselves essential to virtue:  whereas the judicial precepts did not necessarily continue to bind in exactly the same way as had been fixed by the Law:  this was left to man to decide in one way or another.  Hence Our Lord directed us becomingly with regard to these two kinds of precepts.  On the other hand, the observance of the ceremonial precepts was totally abolished by the advent of the reality; wherefore in regard to these precepts He commanded nothing on this occasion when He was giving the general points of His doctrine.  Elsewhere, however, He makes it clear that the entire bodily worship which was fixed by the Law, was to be changed into spiritual worship:  as is evident from John 4:21, 23, where He says:  “The hour cometh when you shall neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem adore the Father . . . but . . . the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth.”