[II-II.q.140.a.1.arg.1] It seems that the precepts of fortitude are not suitably given in the Divine Law. For the New Law is more perfect than the Old Law. Yet the Old Law contains precepts of fortitude (Deuteronomy 20). Therefore precepts of fortitude should have been given in the New Law also.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod non convenienter in lege divina præcepta fortitudinis tradantur. Lex enim nova perfectior est veteri lege. Sed in veteri lege ponuntur aliqua præcepta fortitudinis, ut patet Deut., xx. Ergo et in nova lege aliqua præcepta fortitudinis danda fuerunt.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.arg.2] Further, affirmative precepts are of greater import than negative precepts, since the affirmative include the negative, but not vice versa. Therefore it is unsuitable for the Divine Law to contain none but negative precepts in prohibition of fear.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, præcepta affirmativa videntur esse potiora præceptis negativis, quia affirmativa includunt negativa, sed non e converso. Inconvenienter ergo in lege divina ponuntur præcepta fortitudinis solum negativa timorem prohibentia.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.arg.3] Further, fortitude is one of the principal virtues, as stated above (123, 2; I-II, 61, 2). Now the precepts are directed to the virtues as to their end: wherefore they should be proportionate to them. Therefore the precepts of fortitude should have been placed among the precepts of the decalogue, which are the chief precepts of the Law.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, fortitudo est una de virtutibus principalibus, ut supra habitum est. Sed præcepta ordinantur ad virtutes sicut ad fines: unde debent eis proportionari. Ergo præcepta fortitudinis debuerunt poni inter præcepta Decalogi, quæ sunt principalia legis præcepta. Sed contrarium apparet ex traditione sacræ Scripturæ.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.sc] stands Holy Writ which contains these precepts.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.co] Precepts of law are directed to the end intended by the lawgiver. Wherefore precepts of law must needs be framed in various ways according to the various ends intended by lawgivers, so that even in human affairs there are laws of democracies, others of kingdoms, and others again of tyrannical governments. Now the end of the Divine Law is that man may adhere to God: wherefore the Divine Law contains precepts both of fortitude and of the other virtues, with a view to directing the mind to God. For this reason it is written (Deuteronomy 20:3-4): \"Fear ye them not: because the Lord your God is in the midst of you, and will fight for you against your enemies.\"
\nAs to human laws, they are directed to certain earthly goods, and among them we find precepts of fortitude according to the requirements of those goods.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod præcepta legis ordinantur ad intentionem legislatoris. Unde secundum diversos fines quos intendit legislator, oportet diversimode præcepta legis institui: unde et in rebus humanis alia sunt præcepta democratica, alia regia, alia tyrannica. Finis autem legis divinæ est ut homo inhæreat Deo: et ideo præcepta legis divinæ tam de fortitudine quam de aliis virtutibus dantur, secundum quod convenit ordinationi mentis in Deum: et propter hoc Deuter., xx, 3, dicitur: Non * formidetis eos, quia Dominus Deus vester in medio vestri est, et pro vobis contra adversarios dimica-bit. Leges autem humanæ ordinantur ad aliqua mundana bona, secundum quorum conditionem præcepta fortitudinis in humanis legibus inveniuntur.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.ad.1] The Old Testament contained temporal promises, while the promises of the New Testament are spiritual and eternal, according to Augustine (Contra Faust. iv). Hence in the Old Law there was need for the people to be taught how to fight, even in a bodily contest, in order to obtain an earthly possession. But in the New Testament men were to be taught how to come to the possession of eternal life by fighting spiritually, according to Matthew 11:12, \"The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent bear it away.\" Hence Peter commands (1 Peter 5:8-9): \"Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about, seeking whom he may devour: whom resist ye, strong in faith,\" as also James 4:7: \"Resist the devil, and he will fly from you.\" Since, however, men while tending to spiritual goods may be withdrawn from them by corporal dangers, precepts of fortitude had to be given even in the New Law, that they might bravely endure temporal evils, according to Matthew 10:28, \"Fear ye not them that kill the body.\"
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod vetus Testamentum habebat temporalia promissa, novum autem spiritualia et æterna, ut Augustinus dicit Contra Faust., lib. IV, c. 11, col. 217, t. 8. Et ideo necessarium fuit ut in veteri lege populus instrueretur, qualiter pugnare deberet etiam corporaliter pro terrena possessione acquirenda; in novo autem Testamento instruendi fuerunt homines, qualiter spiritualiter certando ad possessionem vitæ æternæ pervenirent, secundum illud Matth., xi, 12: Regnum cælorum vim patitur, et violenti rapiunt illud. Unde et Petrus præcipit, I Pet., ult., 8: Adversarius vester diabolus tanquam leo rugiens, circuit quærens quem devoret: cui resistite fortes in fide; et Jacobi iv, 7: Resistite diabolo, et fugiet a vobis. Quia tamen homines ad spiritualia bona ten-dentes, ab eis retrahi possent per corporalia pericula, fuerunt etiam in lege nova danda fortitudinis præcepta ad sustinenda fortiter temporalia mala, secundum illud Matth., x, 28: Nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.ad.2] The law gives general directions in its precepts. But the things that have to be done in cases of danger are not, like the things to be avoided, reducible to some common thing. Hence the precepts of fortitude are negative rather than affirmative.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod lex in suis præceptis habet communem instructionem. Ea vero quæ sunt agenda in periculis, non possunt ad aliquod commune bonum reduci, sicut ea quæ sunt vitanda. Et ideo præcepta fortitudinis magis dantur negative quam affirmative.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.ad.3] As stated above (Question 122, Article 1), the precepts of the decalogue are placed in the Law, as first principles, which need to be known to all from the outset. Wherefore the precepts of the decalogue had to be chiefly about those acts of justice in which the notion of duty is manifest, and not about acts of fortitude, because it is not so evident that it is a duty for a person not to fear dangers of death.
\n[II-II.q.140.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod, sicut dictum est, præcepta Decalogi ponuntur in lege, sicut prima principia, quæ statim debent esse omnibus nota. Et ideo præcepta Decalogi debuerunt esse principaliter de actibus justitiæ, in quibus manifeste videtur esse ratio debiti; non autem de actibus fortitudinis, quia non ita manifeste videtur esse debitum quod aliquis pericula mortis non reformidet.
\n