Thomas Aquinas

Above he admonished husband and wife, which is one bond of the family; here he admonishes father and children, which is the second bond of the household. And first he makes mention of how children ought to conduct themselves toward their parents; second, conversely, how fathers ought to conduct themselves toward their children, at the place "provoke not," etc. The first is divided into two parts. First he sets forth the admonition; second he shows the reason, at "for this is just," etc.

He says therefore: "Children, obey," etc. It should be noted here that fathers ought naturally to instruct their children in morals, while children, when their parents are instructing them, ought naturally to obey them, just as the sick obey physicians. Hence obedience is proper to children. Colossians 3:20: "Children, obey" — namely, your parents — "in all things, for this is well-pleasing to the Lord," etc. But he says "in the Lord," because one is not to obey parents, nor anyone, in those things which are against God. Acts 5:29: "One must obey God rather than men." And by this the authority just now alleged is resolved: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father," etc.; for this is understood insofar as they are against God.

But he assigns the reason from two things, namely from justice and from usefulness. That it is just, however, is evident and is proved, because the divine law commands nothing except what is just. Psalm 18:9: "the justices of the Lord," etc. But this the divine law commands. Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16: "Honor thy father and thy mother," etc. Ecclesiasticus 3:8: "He who fears God honors his father," etc. But honor implies the showing of reverence to those who are above us; but since we have parents above us, he uses the word "honor." He says therefore: "for this is just, honor thy father and mother," etc. Ecclesiasticus 3:7: "He who honors his father shall live a longer life, and he who obeys his father shall bring comfort to his mother." And this is understood in a threefold way, that children ought to honor their parents: because they owe them reverence as to their elders, obedience as to their instructors, and support as to those who nourished them, when they shall be strong.

Then he assigns the dignity of this precept, saying that it is the first commandment. On the contrary: rather the first commandment is that the one God is to be worshipped. I respond: the commandments are contained on two tablets. The first contains those which are ordered toward God; the second, those which are ordered toward one's neighbor; and on this second tablet the first commandment is concerning the honor of parents. And this for a twofold reason.

First, because on that second tablet there is no affirmative precept except this one, since it is natural to us that we should serve our parents, but not so toward other neighbors — therefore there is no other affirmative precept. But nature dictates that man should not inflict harm on his neighbors, and therefore that is forbidden. Since, then, the first has more and a prior claim of debt, therefore it is first.

Second, because God is to be honored as the principle of our being, and because parents are also a principle of our being, and because, as is said in Ethics VI, we have three things from our parents, namely being, living, and upbringing — therefore it is fitting that, after the commandments ordered toward God, the first should be ordered toward parents.

Or, it is first with respect to the promise, because to this one alone is a promise added. And of this there is a twofold reason. One is that men, in the other things which they do, seek their own advantage, and because from parents who are already old they expect no advantage, except that coming from God. The second reason is, lest anyone believe that the honoring of parents is not meritorious because it is natural — therefore he adds "that thou mayest be long-lived upon the earth."

But in the Old Testament temporal promises were promised, because that people was a little one, and therefore was to be graciously instructed under a tutor, as a little one. Yet in those small gifts befitting that little people, great goods were prefigured, namely spiritual goods. And therefore this can be referred, according to the literal sense, to temporal goods. And thus he says in the promise, "that it may be well with thee," that is, that thou mayest abound in the promised goods. For he who is grateful in lesser benefits merits to receive greater ones; but the greatest benefits we have from our parents, namely being, nourishment, and upbringing. When, therefore, someone is grateful for these, he becomes worthy to receive greater things. And therefore he says "that it may be well with thee"; because, as is said in 1 Timothy 4:8: "godliness is useful for all things, having the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come." And therefore he adds "and that thou mayest be long-lived upon the earth," as it were upon the grace and benefit of life which thou hast from thy parents. Proverbs 3:16: "Length of days is in her right hand, and in her left hand riches and glory."

But on the contrary: many who are devoted to their parents die quickly. And therefore it should be known that these temporal things are not goods absolutely, except insofar as they are ordered to spiritual things, and therefore they are good for man only insofar as he is helped by them toward spiritual things. Hence fortune is not to be called good, if it is an impediment to virtue. And therefore length of life is good only insofar as it is ordered to the service of God. And therefore it is sometimes taken away lest it be an impediment. Wisdom 4:11: "He was taken away, lest wickedness should alter his understanding." Or it can be referred to the spiritual sense, "that thou mayest be long-lived in the land of the living." Psalm 142:10-11: "Thy good spirit shall lead me into the right land; for thy name's sake, O Lord, thou wilt give me life."

Consequently, the children having been instructed, the parents are instructed. Concerning this he does two things: first he sets down one prohibitive precept; second, another inductive one, at "but bring them up," etc.

He says therefore: "And you, fathers, provoke not your children to wrath" — not that you should assent to their will in all things. Here it should be noted that the rule of a father over a son is different from that of a master over a slave, because a master makes use of his slave for his own advantage, but a father makes use of his son for the son's advantage. And therefore it is necessary that fathers instruct their children for the children's own advantage, yet not by restraining or subjecting them with threats. And therefore it is said in Colossians 3:21: "Fathers, provoke not your children to indignation," namely so that they do not become fainthearted, because such provocation does not encourage them to the good. How then? He adds: "but bring them up in discipline" — namely of blows — "and correction" — namely of words — that is, rebuke them and bring them up, that they may serve the Lord. Or: "in discipline," by leading them to the good, and "correction," by drawing them back from evils.