Scholion. On Morality Founded in the Nature of the Act

Having assigned the species of morality, which are goodness, malice, and indifference, it remains to inquire whether morality, especially goodness and malice, is sometimes also founded in the nature of the act, ultimately in the divine intellect. Now many non-Catholics assume that goodness and malice are never in any way founded in the nature of the act, but are always and only to be derived either from a human cause, for example from education (Montaigne), or from public opinion and custom (Saint-Lambert), or from the invention of men of great genius and authority (Mandeville); or from the free will of God (the Nominalists, Descartes, Pufendorf). Against all these, it is established:

Proof. Many acts are by their own nature morally good or evil. For morally good by its own nature is what by its own nature agrees with human nature adequately considered, that is, considered insofar as it has essential relations to God and created things; morally evil is what by its own nature is repugnant to human nature so considered. But many acts by their own nature agree with, and many by their own nature are repugnant to, human nature adequately considered. For example, love and worship of God agree with it; hatred of God, blasphemy, etc., are repugnant to it. Added to this is that, if this opinion is denied, God would not necessarily prescribe, for example, love of himself; indeed he could even impose on human beings, for example, hatred of himself. This, however, cannot be reconciled with his divine attributes.