[I-II.q.102.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that there was no cause for the ceremonial precepts. Because on Ephesians 2:15, \"Making void the law of the commandments,\" the gloss says, (i.e.) \"making void the Old Law as to the carnal observances, by substituting decrees, i.e. evangelical precepts, which are based on reason.\" But if the observances of the Old Law were based on reason, it would have been useless to void them by the reasonable decrees of the New Law. Therefore there was no reason for the ceremonial observances of the Old Law.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod cæremonialia præcepta non habeant causam. Quia super illud Ephes., ii: Legem mandatorum decretis evacuans, dicit Glossa interl.: « Id est, evacuans legem veterem quantum ad carnales observantias, decretis, id est præceptis evangelicis, quæ ex ratione sunt. » Sed si observantiæ veteris legis ex ratione erant, frustra evacuarentur per rationabilia decreta novæ legis. Non ergo cæremoniales observantiæ veteris legis habeant aliquam rationem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.arg.2] Further, the Old Law succeeded the law of nature. But in the law of nature there was a precept for which there was no reason save that man's obedience might be tested; as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. viii, 6,13), concerning the prohibition about the tree of life. Therefore in the Old Law there should have been some precepts for the purpose of testing man's obedience, having no reason in themselves.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, vetus lex successit legi naturæ. Sed in lege naturæ fuit aliquod præceptum quod nullam rationem habebat, nisi ut hominis obedientia probaretur, sicut Augustinus dicit, VIII Super Genes. ad litt., cap. vi et xiii, col. 377, t. 3, de prohibitione ligni vitæ. Ergo etiam in veteri lege aliqua præcepta danda erant in quibus hominis obedientia probaretur, quæ de se nullam rationem haberent.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.arg.3] Further, man's works are called moral according as they proceed from reason. If therefore there is any reason for the ceremonial precepts, they would not differ from the moral precepts. It seems therefore that there was no cause for the ceremonial precepts: for the reason of a precept is taken from some cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, opera hominis dicuntur moralia, secundum quod sunt a ratione. Si igitur cæremonialium præceptorum sit aliqua ratio, non differrent a moralibus præceptis. Videtur ergo quod cæremonialia præcepta non habeant aliquam causam; ratio enim præcepti ex aliqua causa sumitur.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.sc] It is written (Psalm 18:9): \"The commandment of the Lord is lightsome, enlightening the eyes.\" But the ceremonial precepts are commandments of God. Therefore they are lightsome: and yet they would not be so, if they had no reasonable cause. Therefore the ceremonial precepts have a reasonable cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur in psal. xviii, 9: Præceptum Domini lucidum, illuminans oculos. Sed cæremonialia sunt præcepta Dei. Ergo sunt lucida; quod non esset, nisi haberent rationabilem causam.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.co] Since, according to the Philosopher (Metaph. i, 2), it is the function of a \"wise man to do everything in order,\" those things which proceed from the Divine wisdom must needs be well ordered, as the Apostle states (Romans 13:1). Now there are two conditions required for things to be well ordered. First, that they be ordained to their due end, which is the principle of the whole order in matters of action: since those things that happen by chance outside the intention of the end, or which are not done seriously but for fun, are said to be inordinate. Secondly, that which is done in view of the end should be proportionate to the end. From this it follows that the reason for whatever conduces to the end is taken from the end: thus the reason for the disposition of a saw is taken from cutting, which is its end, as stated in Phys. ii, 9. Now it is evident that the ceremonial precepts, like all the other precepts of the Law, were institutions of Divine wisdom: hence it is written (Deuteronomy 4:6): \"This is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of nations.\" Consequently we must needs say that the ceremonial precepts were ordained to a certain end, wherefrom their reasonable causes can be gathered.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod cum sapientis sit ordinare, secundum Philosophum in I Metaph., cap. ii, a princ., ea quæ ex divina sapientia procedunt, oportet esse ordinata, ut Apostolus dicit ad Rom., xiii. Ad hoc autem quod aliqua sint ordinata, duo requiruntur: primo quidem quod aliqua ordinentur ad debitum finem, qui est principium totius ordinis in rebus agendis; ea enim quæ casu eveniunt, præter intentionem finis, vel quæ non serio fiunt, sed ludo, dicimus esse inordinata. Secundo oportet quod id quod est ad finem, sit proportionatum fini; et ex hoc sequitur quod ratio eorum quæ sunt ad finem, sumitur ex fine; sicut ratio dispositionis serræ sumitur ex sectione, quæ est finis ejus, ut dicitur in II Physic., text. 88. Manifestum est autem quod præcepta cæremonialia, sicut et omnia alia præcepta legis, sunt ex divina sapientia instituta; unde dicitur Deut., iv, 6: Hæc est sapientia vestra, et intellectus coram populis. Unde necesse est dicere quod præcepta cæremonialia sint ordinata ad aliquem finem, ex quo eorum rationabiles causæ assignari possint.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.ad.1] It may be said there was no reason for the observances of the Old Law, in the sense that there was no reason in the very nature of the thing done: for instance that a garment should not be made of wool and linen. But there could be a reason for them in relation to something else: namely, in so far as something was signified or excluded thereby. On the other hand, the decrees of the New Law, which refer chiefly to faith and the love of God, are reasonable from the very nature of the act.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod observantiae veteris legis possunt dici sine ratione quantum ad hoc quod ipsa facta in sui natura rationem non habebant, puta quod vestis non conficeretur ex lana et lino. Potterant tamen habere rationem ex ordine ad aliud, in quantum scilicet vel aliquid per hoc figurabatur, vel aliquid excludebatur. Sed decreta novæ legis, quæ præcipue consistunt in fide et dilectione Dei, ex ipsa natura actus rationabilia sunt.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.ad.2] The reason for the prohibition concerning the tree of knowledge of good and evil was not that this tree was naturally evil: and yet this prohibition was reasonable in its relation to something else, in as much as it signified something. And so also the ceremonial precepts of the Old Law were reasonable on account of their relation to something else.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod prohibitio ligni scientiae boni et mali non fuit propter est in objectione. hoc quod illud lignum esset naturaliter malum; sed tamen ipsa prohibitio habuit aliquam rationem ex ordine ad aliud, inquantum scilicet per hoc aliquid figurabatur; et sic etiam cæremonialia præcepta veteris legis habent rationem in ordine ad aliud.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.ad.3] The moral precepts in their very nature have reasonable causes: as for instance, \"Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal.\" But the ceremonial precepts have a reasonable cause in their relation to something else, as stated above.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod præcepta moralia secundum suam naturam habent rationabiles causas, sicut: Non occides, Non furtum facies. Sed præcepta cæremonialia habent rationabiles causas ex ordine ad aliud, ut dictum est.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that the ceremonial precepts have not a literal, but merely a figurative cause. For among the ceremonial precepts, the chief was circumcision and the sacrifice of the paschal lamb. But neither of these had any but a figurative cause: because each was given as a sign. For it is written (Genesis 17:11): \"You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, that it may be a sign of the covenant between Me and you\": and of the celebration of the Passover it is written (Exodus 13:9): \"It shall be as a sign in thy hand, and as a memorial before thy eyes.\" Therefore much more did the other ceremonial precepts have none but a figurative reason.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod præcepta cæremonialia non habeant causam litteralem, sed figuralem tantum. Inter præcepta enim cæremonialia præcipua erant circumcisio et immolatio agni paschalis. Sed utrumque istorum non habebat nisi causam figuralem, quia utrumque istorum datum est in signum; dicitur enim Gen., xvii, 11: Circumcidetis carnem præputii vestri, ut sit in signum fæderis inter me et vos! et de celebratione Phase dicitur Exod., xiii, 9: Erit quasi signum in manu tua, et quasi monumentum ante oculos tuos. Ergo multo magis alia cæremonialia non habent nisi causam figuralem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.arg.2] Further, an effect is proportionate to its cause. But all the ceremonial precepts are figurative, as stated above (Question 101, Article 2). Therefore they have no other than a figurative cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, effectus proportionatur suæ causæ. Sed omnia cæremonialia sunt figuralia, ut supra dictum est. Ergo non habent nisi causam figuralem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.arg.3] Further, if it be a matter of indifference whether a certain thing, considered in itself, be done in a particular way or not, it seems that it has not a literal cause. Now there are certain points in the ceremonial precepts, which appear to be a matter of indifference, as to whether they be done in one way or in another: for instance, the number of animals to be offered, and other such particular circumstances. Therefore there is no literal cause for the precepts of the Old Law.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, illud quod de se est indifferens utrum sic vel non sic fiat, non videtur habere aliquam litteralem causam. Sed quædam sunt in præceptis cæremonialibus quæ non videntur differre utrum sic vel sic fiant; sicut est de numero animalium offerendorum, et aliis hujusmodi particularibus circumstantiis. Ergo præcepta veteris legis non habent rationem litteralem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.sc] Just as the ceremonial precepts foreshadowed Christ, so did the stories of the Old Testament: for it is written (1 Corinthians 10:11) that \"all (these things) happened to them in figure.\" Now in the stories of the Old Testament, besides the mystical or figurative, there is the literal sense. Therefore the ceremonial precepts had also literal, besides their figurative causes.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.sc] Sed contra, sicut præcepta cæremonialia 1 Sic omnes codd.; in editis minus recte: « Unde oportet quod assignetur... Phase, quod est signum; et circumcisionis, quod est signum... Abraham; figurabant Christum, ita etiam historiæ Veteris Testamenti; dicitur enim I ad Cor., x, 11, quod omnia in figura contingebant illis. Sed in historiis Veteris Testamenti, præter intellectum mysticum seu figuralem, est etiam intellectus litteralis. Ergo etiam præcepta cæremonialia, præter causas figurales, habebant etiam causas litterales.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.co] As stated above (Article 1), the reason for whatever conduces to an end must be taken from that end. Now the end of the ceremonial precepts was twofold: for they were ordained to the Divine worship, for that particular time, and to the foreshadowing of Christ; just as the words of the prophets regarded the time being in such a way as to be utterances figurative of the time to come, as Jerome says on Hosea 1:3. Accordingly the reasons for the ceremonial precepts of the Old Law can be taken in two ways. First, in respect of the Divine worship which was to be observed for that particular time: and these reasons are literal: whether they refer to the shunning of idolatry; or recall certain Divine benefits; or remind men of the Divine excellence; or point out the disposition of mind which was then required in those who worshipped God. Secondly, their reasons can be gathered from the point of view of their being ordained to foreshadow Christ: and thus their reasons are figurative and mystical: whether they be taken from Christ Himself and the Church, which pertains to the allegorical sense; or to the morals of the Christian people, which pertains to the moral sense; or to the state of future glory, in as much as we are brought thereto by Christ, which refers to the anagogical sense.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut supra dictum est, ratio eorum quæ sunt ad finem, oportet quod a fine sumatur. Finis autem præceptorum cæremonialium est duplex; ordinabantur enim ad cultum Dei pro tempore illo, et ad figurandum Christum; sicut etiam verba prophetarum sic respiciebant præsens tempus, quod etiam in figuram futuri dicebantur, ut Hieronymus dicit Super Osee, v. 3, col. 824, t. 6. Sic igitur rationes præceptorum cæremonialium veteris legis dupliciter accipi possunt: uno modo ex ratione cultus divini, qui erat pro tempore illo observandus; et rationes illæ sunt litterales, sive pertineant ad vitandum idololatriæ cultum, sive ad rememoranda aliqua Dei beneficia, sive ad insinuandum excellentiam divinam, vel etiam ad designandam dispositionem mentis, quæ tunc requirebatur in colentibus Deum. Alio modo possunt eorum rationes assignari, secundum quod ordinantur ad figurandum Christum; et sic habent rationes figurales et mysticas, sive accipiantur ex ipso Christo et Ecclesia, quod pertinet ad allegoriam; sive ad mores populi christiani, quod pertinet ad moralitatem; sive ad statum futuræ gloriæ, prout in eam introducimur per Christum, quod pertinet ad anagogiam.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.ad.1] Just as the use of metaphorical expressions in Scripture belongs to the literal sense, because the words are employed in order to convey that particular meaning; so also the meaning of those legal ceremonies which commemorated certain Divine benefits, on account of which they were instituted, and of others similar which belonged to that time, does not go beyond the order of literal causes. Consequently when we assert that the cause of the celebration of the Passover was its signification of the delivery from Egypt, or that circumcision was a sign of God's covenant with Abraham, we assign the literal cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod, sicut intellectus metaphoricæ locutionis in Scripturis est litteralis, quia verba ad hoc proferuntur ut hoc significent, ita etiam significationes cæremonialum legis, quæ sunt commemorativæ beneficiorum Dei, propter quæ institutæ sunt, vel aliorum hujusmodi, quæ ad illum statum pertinebant, non transcendunt ordinem litteralium causarum. Unde quod assignetur causa celebrationis Phase, quia est signum liberationis ex Ægypto; et quod circumcisio est signum pacti quod Deus habuit cum Abraham; pertinet ad causam litteralem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.ad.2] This argument would avail if the ceremonial precepts had been given merely as figures of things to come, and not for the purpose of worshipping God then and there.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod ratio illa quod pertinet. » Dixi: minus recte; cur enim ex contextu « oportet quod assignetur. » procederet, si cæremonialia præcepta essent data solum ad figurandum futurum, non autem ad præsentialiter Deum colendum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.ad.3] As we have stated when speaking of human laws (96, A1,6), there is a reason for them in the abstract, but not in regard to particular conditions, which depend on the judgment of those who frame them; so also many particular determinations in the ceremonies of the Old Law have no literal cause, but only a figurative cause; whereas in the abstract they have a literal cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod, sicut in legibus humanis dictum est, quod in universali habent rationem, non autem quantum ad particulares conditiones, sed hæc sunt ex arbitrio instituentium; ita etiam multæ particulares determinationes in cæremoniis veteris legis non habent aliquam causam litteralem, sed solam figuralem; in communi vero habent etiam causam litteralelem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.1] It would seem that no suitable cause can be assigned for the ceremonies pertaining to sacrifices. For those things which were offered in sacrifice, are those which are necessary for sustaining human life: such as certain animals and certain loaves. But God needs no such sustenance; according to Psalm 49:13: \"Shall I eat the flesh of bullocks? Or shall I drink the blood of goats?\" Therefore such sacrifices were unfittingly offered to God.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.1] Ad tertium sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod non possit conveniens ratio assignari cæremoniarum quæ ad sacrificia pertinent. Ea enim quæ in sacrificium offerebantur, sunt illa quæ sunt necessaria ad sustentandam humanam vitam, sicut animalia quædam, et panes quidam. Sed Deus tali sustentamento non indiget, secundum illud psal. xlix, 13: Numquid manducabo carnes taurorum, aut sanguinem hircorum potabo? Ergo inconvenienter hujusmodi sacrificia Deo offerebantur.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.2] Further, only three kinds of quadrupeds were offered in sacrifice to God, viz. oxen, sheep and goats; of birds, generally the turtledove and the dove; but specially, in the cleansing of a leper, an offering was made of sparrows. Now many other animals are more noble than these. Since therefore whatever is best should be offered to God, it seems that not only of these three should sacrifices have been offered to Him.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.2] 2. Præterea, in sacrificium divinum non offerebantur nisi de tribus generibus animalium quadrupedum, scilicet de genere boum, ovium et caprarum; et de avibus communiter quidem turtur et columba, specialiter autem in emendatione leprosi fiebat sacrificium de passeribus. Multa autem animalia alia sunt his nobiliora. Cum igitur omne quod est optimum, Deo sit exhibendum, videtur quod non solum de istis rebus fuerint Deo sacrificia offerenda.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.3] Further, just as man has received from God the dominion over birds and beasts, so also has he received dominion over fishes. Consequently it was unfitting for fishes to be excluded from the divine sacrifices.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.3] 3. Præterea, sicut homo a Deo habet dominium volatilium et bestiarum, ita etiam piscium. Inconvenienter igitur pisces a divino sacrificio excludebantur.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.4] Further, turtledoves and doves indifferently are commanded to be offered up. Since then the young of the dove are commanded to be offered, so also should the young of the turtledove.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.4] 4. Præterea, indifferenter offerri mandabantur turtures et columbæ. Sicut igitur mandabantur offerri pulli columbarum, ita et pulli turturum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.5] Further, God is the Author of life, not only of men, but also of animals, as is clear from Genesis 1:20, seqq. Now death is opposed to life. Therefore it was fitting that living animals rather than slain animals should be offered to God, especially as the Apostle admonishes us (Romans 12:1), to present our bodies \"a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God.\"
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.5] 5. Præterea, Deus est auctor vitæ non solum hominum, sed etiam animalium, ut patet per id quod dicitur Gen., 1. Mors autem opponitur vitæ. Non ergo debuerunt Deo offerri animalia occisa, sed magis animalia viventia; præcipue quia etiam Apostolus monet Rom., xii, 1, ut exhibamus corpora nostra hostiam viventem, sanctam, Deo placentem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.6] Further, if none but slain animals were offered in sacrifice to God, it seems that it mattered not how they were slain. Therefore it was unfitting that the manner of immolation should be determined, especially as regards birds (Leviticus 1:15, seqq.).
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.6] 6. Præterea, si animalia Deo in sacrificium non offerebantur nisi occisa, nulla videtur esse differentia qualiter occidantur. Inconvenienter igitur determinatur modus immolationis, præcipue in avibus, ut patet Lev., 1, ubi retorto ad collum capite interfici jubentur.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.7] Further, every defect in an animal is a step towards corruption and death. If therefore slain animals were offered to God, it was unreasonable to forbid the offering of an imperfect animal, e.g. a lame, or a blind, or otherwise defective animal.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.7] 7. Præterea, omnis defectus animalis via est ad corruptionem et mortem. Si igitur animalia occisa Deo offerebantur, inconveniens fuit prohibere oblationem animalis imperfecti, puta claudi, aut cæci, aut aliter maculosi, Levit., xxii.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.8] Further, those who offer victims to God should partake thereof, according to the words of the Apostle (1 Corinthians 10:18): \"Are not they that eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?\" It was therefore unbecoming for the offerers to be denied certain parts of the victims, namely, the blood, the fat, the breastbone and the right shoulder.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.8] 8. Præterea, illi qui offerunt hostias Deo, debent de his participare, secundum illud Apostoli, I Corinth., x, 18: Nonne qui edunt hostias participes sunt altaris? Inconvenienter igitur quædam partes hostiarum offerentibus subtrahebantur, scilicet sanguis et adeps, pectusculum et armus dexter, Levit. iii.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.9] Further, just as holocausts were offered up in honor of God, so also were the peace-offerings and sin-offerings. But no female animals was offered up to God as a holocaust, although holocausts were offered of both quadrupeds and birds. Therefore it was inconsistent that female animals should be offered up in peace-offerings and sin-offerings, and that nevertheless birds should not be offered up in peace-offerings.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.9] 9. Præterea, sicut holocausta offerebantur in honorem Dei, ita etiam hostiæ pacificæ et hostiæ pro peccato. Sed nullum animal feminini sexus offerebatur Deo in holocaustum; fiebant tamen holocausta tam de quadrupedibus quam de avibus. Ergo inconvenienter in hostiis pacificis et pro peccato offerebantur animalia feminini sexus, et tamen in hostiis pacificis non offerebantur aves.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.10] Further, all the peace-offerings seem to be of one kind. Therefore it was unfitting to make a distinction among them, so that it was forbidden to eat the flesh of certain peace-offerings on the following day, while it was allowed to eat the flesh of other peace-offerings, as laid down in Leviticus 7:15, seqq.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.10] 10. Præterea, omnes hostiæ pacificæ unius generis esse videntur. Non ergo debuit poni ista differentia, quod quorumdam pacificorum carne non possent vesci in crastino, quorumdam autem possent, ut mandatur Levit., vii.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.11] Further, all sins agree in turning us from God. Therefore, in order to reconcile us to God, one kind of sacrifice should have been offered up for all sins.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.11] 11. Præterea, omnia peccata in hoc conveniunt quod a Deo avertunt. Ergo pro omnibus peccatis in Dei reconciliationem unum genus sacrificii debuit offerri.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.12] Further, all animals that were offered up in sacrifice, were offered up in one way, viz. slain. Therefore it does not seem to be suitable that products of the soil should be offered up in various ways; for sometimes an offering was made of ears of corn, sometimes of flour, sometimes of bread, this being baked sometimes in an oven, sometimes in a pan, sometimes on a gridiron.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.12] 12. Præterea, omnia animalia quæ offerebantur in sacrificium, uno modo offerebantur, scilicet occisa. Non videtur ergo conveniens quod de terra enascentibus diversimode fiebat oblatio. Nunc enim offerebantur spicæ, nunc simila, nunc panis, quandoque quidem coctus in clibano, quandoque in sartagine, quandoque in craticula, Levit., 11 et VII.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.13] Further, whatever things are serviceable to us should be recognized as coming from God. It was therefore unbecoming that besides animals, nothing but bread, wine, oil, incense, and salt should be offered to God.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.13] 13. Præterea, omnia quæ in usum nostrum veniunt, a Deo recognoscere debemus. Inconvenienter ergo præter animalia, solum hæc Deo offerebantur, panis, vinum, oleum, thus, sal.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.14] Further, bodily sacrifices denote the inward sacrifice of the heart, whereby man offers his soul to God. But in the inward sacrifice, the sweetness, which is denoted by honey, surpasses the pungency which salt represents; for it is written (Sirach 24:27): \"My spirit is sweet above honey.\" Therefore it was unbecoming that the use of honey, and of leaven which makes bread savory, should be forbidden in a sacrifice; while the use was prescribed, of salt which is pungent, and of incense which has a bitter taste. Consequently it seems that things pertaining to the ceremonies of the sacrifices have no reasonable cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.arg.14] 14. Præterea, sacrificia corporalia exprimunt interius sacrificium cordis, quo homo spiritum suum offert Deo. Sed in interiori sacrificio plus est de dulcedine, quam repræsentat mel, quam de mordacitate, quam repræsentat sal; dicitur enim Eccli., XXIV, 27: Spiritus meus super mel dulcis. Ergo inconvenienter prohibebatur, Levit., 11, in sacrificio apponi mel et fermentum; quod etiam facit panem sapidum; et præcipiebatur ibi apponi sal, quod est mordicativum, et thus, quod habet saporem amarum. Videtur ergo quod ea quæ pertinent ad cæremonias sacrificiorum, non habeant rationabilem causam.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.sc] It is written (Leviticus 1:13): \"The priest shall offer it all and burn it all upon the altar, for a holocaust, and most sweet savor to the Lord.\" Now according to Wisdom 7:28, \"God loveth none but him that dwelleth with wisdom\": whence it seems to follow that whatever is acceptable to God is wisely done. Therefore these ceremonies of the sacrifices were wisely done, as having reasonable causes.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Levit., 1, 9: Oblata omnia adolebit sacerdos super altare in holocaustum et suavissimum odorem Domino. Sed, sicut dicitur Sap., VII, 28, neminem diligit Deus, nisi eum qui cum sapientia inhabitat; ex quo potest accipi quod quidquid est Deo acceptum, est cum sapientia. Ergo illæ cæremoniæ sacrificiorum cum sapientia erant, velut habentes rationabiles causas.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.co] As stated above (Article 2), the ceremonies of the Old Law had a twofold cause, viz. a literal cause, according as they were intended for Divine worship; and a figurative or mystical cause, according as they were intended to foreshadow Christ: and on either hand the ceremonies pertaining to the sacrifices can be assigned to a fitting cause.
\nFor, according as the ceremonies of the sacrifices were intended for the divine worship, the causes of the sacrifices can be taken in two ways. First, in so far as the sacrifice represented the directing of the mind to God, to which the offerer of the sacrifice was stimulated. Now in order to direct his mind to God aright, man must recognize that whatever he has is from God as from its first principle, and direct it to God as its last end. This was denoted in the offerings and sacrifices, by the fact that man offered some of his own belongings in honor of God, as though in recognition of his having received them from God, according to the saying of David (1 Chronicles 29:14): \"All things are Thine: and we have given Thee what we received of Thy hand.\" Wherefore in offering up sacrifices man made protestation that God is the first principle of the creation of all things, and their last end, to which all things must be directed. And since, for the human mind to be directed to God aright, it must recognize no first author of things other than God, nor place its end in any other; for this reason it was forbidden in the Law to offer sacrifice to any other but God, according to Exodus 22:20: \"He that sacrificeth to gods, shall be put to death, save only to the Lord.\" Wherefore another reasonable cause may be assigned to the ceremonies of the sacrifices, from the fact that thereby men were withdrawn from offering sacrifices to idols. Hence too it is that the precepts about the sacrifices were not given to the Jewish people until after they had fallen into idolatry, by worshipping the molten calf: as though those sacrifices were instituted, that the people, being ready to offer sacrifices, might offer those sacrifices to God rather than to idols. Thus it is written (Jeremiah 7:22): \"I spake not to your fathers and I commanded them not, in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning the matter of burnt-offerings and sacrifices.\"
\nNow of all the gifts which God vouchsafed to mankind after they had fallen away by sin, the chief is that He gave His Son; wherefore it is written (John 3:16): \"God so loved the world, as to give His only-begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in Him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.\" Consequently the chief sacrifice is that whereby Christ Himself \"delivered Himself . . . to God for an odor of sweetness\" (Ephesians 5:2). And for this reason all the other sacrifices of the Old Law were offered up in order to foreshadow this one individual and paramount sacrifice--the imperfect forecasting the perfect. Hence the Apostle says (Hebrews 10:11) that the priest of the Old Law \"often\" offered \"the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: but\" Christ offered \"one sacrifice for sins, for ever.\" And since the reason of the figure is taken from that which the figure represents, therefore the reasons of the figurative sacrifices of the Old Law should be taken from the true sacrifice of Christ.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut supra dictum est, cæremoniæ veteris legis duplicem causam habebant: unam scilicet litteralem, secundum quod ordinabantur ad cultum Dei; aliam vero figuralem, sive mysticam, secundum quod ordinabantur ad figurandum Christum. Et ex utraque parte potest convenienter assignari causa cæremoniæ quæ ad sacrificia pertinebant. Secundum enim quod sacrificia ordinabantur ad cultum Dei, causa sacrificiorum dupliciter accipi potest: uno modo secundum quod per sacrificia repræsentabatur ordinatio mentis in Deum, ad quam excitabatur sacrificium offerens. Ad rectam autem ordinationem mentis in Deum pertinet quod omnia quæ homo habet, recognoscat a Deo tanquam a primo principio, et ordinet in Deum tanquam in ultimum finem: et hoc repræ- 1 Holocaustomata, idem est ac sacrificia pro peccatis. — 2 Parm.: Christus autem pro peccatis obtusentabatur in oblationibus et sacrificiciis, secundum quod homo ex rebus suis, quasi in recognitionem quod haberet ea a Deo, in honorem Dei ea offerebat; secundum quod dixit David I Paralip., XXIX, 14: Tua sunt omnia, et quæ de manu tua accepimus, dedimus tibi. Et ideo in oblatione sacrificiorum protestabatur homo quod Deus esset primum principium creationis rerum, et ultimus finis, ad quem essent omnia referenda. Et quia pertinet ad rectam ordinationem mentis in Deum, ut mens humana non recognoscat alium primum auctorem rerum nisi solum Deum, neque in aliquo alio finem suum constituat; propter hoc prohibebatur in lege offerri sacrificium alicui alteri nisi Deo, secundum illud Exod., XXII, 20: Qui immolat diis, occidetur, præterquam Domino soli. Et ideo de causa cæremoniarum circa sacrificia potest assignari ratio alio modo ex hoc quod per hujusmodi homines retrahebantur a sacrificiis idolorum. Unde etiam præcepta de sacrificiis non fuerunt data populo Judæorum, nisi postquam declinavit ad idololatriam, adorando vitulum conflatilem; quasi hujusmodi sacrificia sint instituta, ut populus ad sacrificandum promptus hujusmodi sacrificia magis Deo quam idolis offerret. Unde dicitur Jer., VII, 22: Non sum locutus cum patribus vestris, et non præcepi in die qua eduxi eos de terra Ægypti, de verbo holocaustatum et victimarum. Inter omnia autem dona quæ Deus humano generi jam per peccatum lapso dedit, præcipuum est quod dedit Filium suum; unde dicitur Joan., III, 16: Sic Deus dilexit mundum, ut Filium suum unigenitum daret, ut omnis qui credit in ipsum non pereat, sed habeat vitam æternam. Et ideo potissimum sacrificium est, quo ipse Christus tradidit semetipsum Deo in odorem suavitatis, ut dicitur ad Ephes., v, 2; et propter hoc omnia alia sacrificia offerebantur in veteri lege, ut hoc unum singulare et præcipuum sacrificium figuraretur, tanquam perfectum per imperfecta. Unde Apostolus dicit ad Hebr., x, 11, quod sacerdos veteris legis easdem sæpe offerebat hostias, quæ nunquam possunt auferre peccata; Christus autem unam pro peccatis offerens in sempiternum. Et quia ex figurato sumitur ratio figuræ, ideo rationes sacrificiorum figuralium veteris lit unam in sempiternum. legis sunt sumendæ ex vero sacrificio Christi.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.1] God did not wish these sacrifices to be offered to Him on account of the things themselves that were offered, as though He stood in need of them: wherefore it is written (Isaiah 1:11): \"I desire not holocausts of rams, and fat of fatlings, and blood of calves and lambs and buckgoats.\" But, as stated above, He wished them to be offered to Him, in order to prevent idolatry; in order to signify the right ordering of man's mind to God; and in order to represent the mystery of the Redemption of man by Christ.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod Deus non volebat hujusmodi sacrificia sibi offerri propter ipsas res quæ offerebantur, quasi eis indigeret: unde dicitur Isa., 1, 11: Holocausta arietum, et adipem pinguium, et sanguinem vitulorum et hircorum et agnorum nolui. Sed volebat ea sibi offerri, ut supra dictum est, tum ad excludendam idolatriam, tum ad significandum debitum ordinem mentis humanæ in Deum, tum etiam ad figurandum mysterium redemptionis humanæ factæ 1 per Christum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.2] In all the respects mentioned above (ad 1), there was a suitable reason for these animals, rather than others, being offered in sacrifice to God. First, in order to prevent idolatry. Because idolaters offered all other animals to their gods, or made use of them in their sorceries: while the Egyptians (among whom the people had been dwelling) considered it abominable to slay these animals, wherefore they used not to offer them in sacrifice to their gods. Hence it is written (Exodus 8:26): \"We shall sacrifice the abominations of the Egyptians to the Lord our God.\" For they worshipped the sheep; they reverenced the ram (because demons appeared under the form thereof); while they employed oxen for agriculture, which was reckoned by them as something sacred.
\nSecondly, this was suitable for the aforesaid right ordering of man's mind to God: and in two ways. First, because it is chiefly by means of these animals that human life is sustained: and moreover they are most clean, and partake of a most clean food: whereas other animals are either wild, and not deputed to ordinary use among men: or, if they be tame, they have unclean food, as pigs and geese: and nothing but what is clean should be offered to God. These birds especially were offered in sacrifice because there were plenty of them in the land of promise. Secondly, because the sacrificing of these animals represented purity of heart. Because as the gloss says on Leviticus 1, \"We offer a calf, when we overcome the pride of the flesh; a lamb, when we restrain our unreasonable motions; a goat, when we conquer wantonness; a turtledove, when we keep chaste; unleavened bread, when we feast on the unleavened bread of sincerity.\" And it is evident that the dove denotes charity and simplicity of heart.
\nThirdly, it was fitting that these animals should be offered, that they might foreshadow Christ. Because, as the gloss observes, \"Christ is offered in the calf, to denote the strength of the cross; in the lamb, to signify His innocence; in the ram, to foreshadow His headship; and in the goat, to signify the likeness of 'sinful flesh' [An allusion to Colossians 2:11 (Textus Receptus)]. The turtledove and dove denoted the union of the two natures\"; or else the turtledove signified chastity; while the dove was a figure of charity. \"The wheat-flour foreshadowed the sprinkling of believers with the water of Baptism.\"
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod quantum ad omnia prædicta ratio conveniens fuit, quare ista animalia offerebantur Deo in sacrificium, et non alia. Primo quidem ad excludendum idolatriam; quia omnia alia animalia offerebant idololatræ diis suis, vel eis ad maleficia utebantur. Ista autem animalia apud Ægyptios, cum quibus conversati erant, abominabilia erant ad occidenum; unde ea non offerebant in sacrificium diis suis; unde dicitur Exod., vIII, 26: Abominationes Ægyptiorum immolabimus Domino Deo nostro? Oves enim colebant, hircos venerabantur, quia in eorum figura dæmones apparebant; bobus etiam utebantur ad agriculturam, quam inter res sacras habebant. Secundo hoc conveniens erat ad prædictam ordinationem mentis in Deum; et hoc dupliciter: primo quidem quia hujusmodi animalia maxime sunt per quæ sustentatur humana vita; et cum hoc mundissima sunt, et mundissimum habent nutrimentum; alia vero animalia vel sunt silvestria, et non sunt communiter hominum usui deputata; vel, si sunt domestica, immundum habent nutrimentum, ut porcus et gallina; solum autem id quod est purum, Deo est attribuendum. Hujusmodi autem aves specialiter offerebantur, quia habentur in copia in terra promissionis. Secundo quia per immolationem hujusmodi animalium puritas mentis designatur; quia, ut dicitur in Glossa 2 Levit. præf., col. 298, t. 4, « vitulum offerimus, cum carnis superbiam vincimus; agnum, cum irrationales motus corrigimus; hædum, cum lasciviam superamus; colum-bam, dum simplices sumus; turturem, cum castitatem servamus; panes azymos, cum in azymis sinceritatis epulamur. » In columba vero manifestum est quod significatur caritas 3 et simplicitas mentis. Tertio vero conveniens fuit hæc animalia offerri in figuram Christi, quia, ut in eadem Glossa dicitur, « Christus in vitulo offertur, propter virtu-tem crucis; in agno, propter innocentiam; in ariete, propter principatum: in hirco, propter similitudinem carnis peccati; in turture et columba duarum naturarum conjunctio monstrabatur; vel in turture casti-tas, in columba charitas significabatur; in similagine aspersio credentium per aquam baptismi figurabatur. »
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.3] Fish through living in water are further removed from man than other animals, which, like man, live in the air. Again, fish die as soon as they are taken out of water; hence they could not be offered in the temple like other animals.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod pisces, qui in aquis vivunt, magis sunt alieni ab homine quam cætera animalia, quæ vivunt in aere, sicut et homo; et iterum pisces ex aqua extracti statim moriuntur; unde non poterant in templo offerri, sicut alia animalia.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.4] Among turtledoves the older ones are better than the young; while with doves the case is the reverse. Wherefore, as Rabbi Moses observes (Doct. Perplex. iii), turtledoves and young doves are commanded to be offered, because nothing should be offered to God but what is best.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.4] Ad quartum dicendum, quod in turturibus meliores sunt majores quam pulli; in columbis autem e converso; et ideo, ut rabbi Moyses dicit, lib. III Dux errant., cap. xLVII, inter princ. et med.: « Mandantur offerri turtures et pulli columbarum; » quia omne quod est optimum, Deo est attribuendum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.5] The animals which were offered in sacrifice were slain, because it is by being killed that they become useful to man, forasmuch as God gave them to man for food. Wherefore also they were burnt with fire: because it is by being cooked that they are made fit for human consumption. Moreover the slaying of the animals signified the destruction of sins: and also that man deserved death on account of his sins; as though those animals were slain in man's stead, in order to betoken the expiation of sins. Again the slaying of these animals signified the slaying of Christ.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.5] Ad quintum dicendum, quod animalia in sacrificium oblata occidebantur, quia veniunt in usum hominis occisa, secundum quod a Deo dantur homini ad esum; et ideo etiam igni cremabantur, quia per ignem decocta fiunt apta humano esui. Similiter etiam per occasionem animalium significatur destructio peccatorum, et quod homines erant digni occisione pro peccatis suis, ac si illa animalia loco eorum occiderentur ad significandum expiationem peccatorum. Per occasionem etiam hujusmodi animalium significabatur occisio Christi.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.6] The Law fixed the special manner of slaying the sacrificial animals in order to exclude other ways of killing, whereby idolaters sacrificed animals to idols. Or again, as Rabbi Moses says (Doct. Perplex. iii), \"the Law chose that manner of slaying which was least painful to the slain animal.\" This excluded cruelty on the part of the offerers, and any mangling of the animals slain.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.6] Ad sextum dicendum, quod specialis modus occidendi animalia immolata determina-batur in lege ad excludendum alios modos quibus idololatræ animalia idolis immolabant; vel etiam, ut rabbi Moyses dicit, loc. cit., cap. xLIX, ante med., lex eligit genus occisionis quo animalia minus affligebantur occisa, per quod etiam excludebatur et im-audi Joannem de sancto Geminiano in Summa sua de exemplis et similitudinibus rerum, lib. VII, c. VII: « In columba designatur charitas, quia columba felle caret, et volat gregatim. In turture vero designatur castitas. » misericordia offerentium, et deterioratio animalium occisorum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.7] It is because unclean animals are wont to be held in contempt among men, that it was forbidden to offer them in sacrifice to God: and for this reason too they were forbidden (Deuteronomy 23:18) to offer \"the hire of a strumpet or the price of a dog in the house of . . . God.\" For the same reason they did not offer animals before the seventh day, because such were abortive as it were, the flesh being not yet firm on account of its exceeding softness.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.7] Ad septimum dicendum, quod, quia animalia maculosa solent haberi contemptui etiam apud homines, ideo prohibitum est ne Deo in sacrificium offerrentur; propter quod etiam prohibitum erat ne mercedem prostibuli, aut * pretium canis, in domum Dei offerrent; Deut., xxiii, 18. Et eadem etiam ratione non offerebant animalia ante septimum diem, quia talia animalia erant quasi abortiva, nondum plene consistentia propter teneritudinem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.8] There were three kinds of sacrifices. There was one in which the victim was entirely consumed by fire: this was called \"a holocaust, i.e. all burnt.\" For this kind of sacrifice was offered to God specially to show reverence to His majesty, and love of His goodness: and typified the state of perfection as regards the fulfilment of the counsels. Wherefore the whole was burnt up: so that as the whole animal by being dissolved into vapor soared aloft, so it might denote that the whole man, and whatever belongs to him, are subject to the authority of God, and should be offered to Him.
\nAnother sacrifice was the \"sin-offering,\" which was offered to God on account of man's need for the forgiveness of sin: and this typifies the state of penitents in satisfying for sins. It was divided into two parts: for one part was burnt; while the other was granted to the use of the priests to signify that remission of sins is granted by God through the ministry of His priests. When, however, this sacrifice was offered for the sins of the whole people, or specially for the sin of the priest, the whole victim was burnt up. For it was not fitting that the priests should have the use of that which was offered for their own sins, to signify that nothing sinful should remain in them. Moreover, this would not be satisfaction for sin: for if the offering were granted to the use of those for whose sins it was offered, it would seem to be the same as if it had not been offered.
\nThe third kind of sacrifice was called the \"peace-offering,\" which was offered to God, either in thanksgiving, or for the welfare and prosperity of the offerers, in acknowledgment of benefits already received or yet to be received: and this typifies the state of those who are proficient in the observance of the commandments. These sacrifices were divided into three parts: for one part was burnt in honor of God; another part was allotted to the use of the priests; and the third part to the use of the offerers; in order to signify that man's salvation is from God, by the direction of God's ministers, and through the cooperation of those who are saved.
\nBut it was the universal rule that the blood and fat were not allotted to the use either of the priests or of the offerers: the blood being poured out at the foot of the altar, in honor of God, while the fat was burnt upon the altar (Leviticus 9:9-10). The reason for this was, first, in order to prevent idolatry: because idolaters used to drink the blood and eat the fat of the victims, according to Deuteronomy 32:38: \"Of whose victims they eat the fat, and drank the wine of their drink-offerings.\" Secondly, in order to form them to a right way of living. For they were forbidden the use of the blood that they might abhor the shedding of human blood; wherefore it is written (Genesis 9:4-5): \"Flesh with blood you shall not eat: for I will require the blood of your lives\": and they were forbidden to eat the fat, in order to withdraw them from lasciviousness; hence it is written (Ezekiel 34:3): \"You have killed that which was fat.\" Thirdly, on account of the reverence due to God: because blood is most necessary for life, for which reason \"life\" is said to be \"in the blood\" (Leviticus 17:11-14): while fat is a sign of abundant nourishment. Wherefore, in order to show that to God we owe both life and a sufficiency of all good things, the blood was poured out, and the fat burnt up in His honor. Fourthly, in order to foreshadow the shedding of Christ's blood, and the abundance of His charity, whereby He offered Himself to God for us.
\nIn the peace-offerings, the breast-bone and the right shoulder were allotted to the use of the priest, in order to prevent a certain kind of divination which is known as \"spatulamantia,\" so called because it was customary in divining to use the shoulder-blade [spatula], and the breast-bone of the animals offered in sacrifice; wherefore these things were taken away from the offerers. This is also denoted the priest's need of wisdom in the heart, to instruct the people--this was signified by the breast-bone, which covers the heart; and his need of fortitude, in order to bear with human frailty--and this was signified by the right shoulder.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.8] Ad octavum dicendum, quod triplex erat sacrificiorum genus: quoddam erat quod totum comburebatur; et hoc dicebatur holocaustum quasi « totum incensum. » Hujusmodi enim sacrificium offerebatur Deo specialiter ad reverentiam majestatis ipsius et amorem bonitatis ejus; et conveniebat perfectionis statui in impletione consiliorum; et ideo totum comburebatur, ut, sicut totum animal resolutum in vaporem sursum ascendebat, ita etiam significaretur totum hominem et omnia quæ ipsius sunt, Dei dominio esse subjecta, et ei esse offerenda. Aliud autem erat sacrificium pro peccato, quod offerebatur Deo ex necessitate remissionis peccati; et conveniebat statui pœnitentium in satisfactione peccatorum; quod dividebatur in duas partes: nam una pars ejus comburebatur, altera vero cedebat in usum sacerdotum, ad significandum quod expiatio peccatorum fit a Deo per ministerium sacerdotum, nisi quando offerebatur sacrificium pro peccato totius populi, vel specialiter pro peccato sacerdotis; tunc enim totum comburebatur. Non enim debebant in usum sacerdotum venire ea quæ pro peccato eorum offerebantur, ut nihil peccati in eis remaneret; et quia hoc non esset satisfactio pro peccato. Si enim cederet in usum eorum pro quorum peccatis offerebatur, idem esse videretur ac si non offerretur. Tertium vero sacrificium vocabatur hostia pacifica, quæ offerebatur Deo vel pro gratiarum actione, vel pro salute et prosperitate offerentium, ex debito beneficii vel accipiendi vel accepti, et convenit statui proficientium in impletione mandatorum. Et ista dividebatur in tres partes; nam una pars incendebatur ad honorem Dei, alia pars cedebat in usum sacerdotum, tertia vero pars in usum offerentium, ad significandum quod salus hominis proce- Conjungitur cum prostibulo seu meretrice canis dit a Deo dirigentibus ministris Dei, et cooperantibus ipsis hominibus qui salvantur. Hoc autem generaliter observabatur, quod sanguis et adeps non veniebant neque in usum sacerdotum, neque in usum offerebentium; sed sanguis effundebatur ad crepidinem altaris in honorem Dei, adeps vero adurebatur in igne. Cujus ratio una quidem fuit ad excludendam idololatriam. Idololatræ enim libabant de sanguine victimarum, et comedebant adipes secundum illud Deut., xxxii, 38: De quorum victimis comedebant adipes, et bibebant vinum libaminum. Secunda ratio est ad informationem humanæ vitæ; prohibebatur enim eis usus sanguinis ad hoc quod horrerent humani sanguinis effusionem; unde dicitur Genes., Ⅺ, 4: Carnem cum sanguine non comedetis; sanguinem enim animarum vestrarum requiram. Esus vero adipum prohibebatur eis ad vitandam lesciviam; unde dicitur Ezech., xxxiv, 3: Quod crassum erat, occidebatis. Tertio vero ratio est propter reverentiam divinam: quia sanguis est maxime necessarius ad vitam, ratione cujus dicitur anima esse in sanguine; adeps autem abundantiam nutrimenti demonstrat; et ideo, ut ostende deretur quod a Deo nobis est et vita, et omnis bonorum sufficientia, ad honorem Dei, effundebatur sanguis et adurebatur adeps. Quarta ratio est quia per hoc figurabatur effusio sanguinis Christi; et pinguedo charitatis ejus per quam se obtulit Deo pro nobis. De hostiis autem pacificis in usum sacerdotis cedebat pectusculum et armus dexter ad excludendum quamdam divinationis speciem, quæ vocatur spatulamantia, quia scilicet in spatulis animalium immolatorum divinabant, et similiter in osse pectoris; et ideo ista offerentibus subtrahebantur. Per hoc etiam significabatur quod sacerdoti erat necessaria sapientia cordis ad instruendum populum, quod significabatur per pectus quod est tegumentum cordis; et etiam fortitudo ad sustentandum defectus, quæ significatur per armum dextrum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.9] Because the holocaust was the most perfect kind of sacrifice, therefore none but a male was offered for a holocaust: because the female is an imperfect animal. The offering of turtledoves and doves was on account of the poverty of the offerers, who were unable to offer bigger animals. And since peace-victims were offered freely, and no one was bound to offer them against his will, hence these birds were offered not among the peace-victims, but among the holocausts and victims for sin, which man was obliged to offer at times. Moreover these birds, on account of their lofty flight, while befitting the perfection of the holocausts: and were suitable for sin-offerings because their song is doleful.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.9] Ad nonum dicendum, quod quia holocaustum erat perfectissimum inter sacrificia, ideo non offerebatur in holocaustum nisi masculus; nam femina est animal imperfectum. Oblatio autem turturum et columbarium erat propter paupertatem offerentium, quia majora animalia offerre non poterant; et quia hostiæ pacificæ gratis offerebantur, propter impudentiam. — et nullus eas offerre cogebatur nisi spontaneus, ideo hujusmodi aves non offerebantur inter hostias pacificas, sed inter holocausta et hostias pro peccato quas quandoque oportebat offerre. Aves etiam hujusmodi propter altitudinem volatus congruunt perfectioni holocaustorum, et etiam hostiis pro peccato, quia habent gemitum pro cantu.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.10] The holocaust was the chief of all the sacrifices: because all were burnt in honor of God, and nothing of it was eaten. The second place in holiness, belongs to the sacrifice for sins, which was eaten in the court only, and on the very day of the sacrifice (Leviticus 7:6-15). The third place must be given to the peace-offerings of thanksgiving, which were eaten on the same day, but anywhere in Jerusalem. Fourth in order were the \"ex-voto\" peace-offerings, the flesh of which could be eaten even on the morrow. The reason for this order is that man is bound to God, chiefly on account of His majesty; secondly, on account of the sins he has committed; thirdly, because of the benefits he has already received from Him; fourthly, by reason of the benefits he hopes to receive from Him.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.10] Ad decimum dicendum, quod inter omnia sacrificia holocaustum erat præcipuum, quia totum comburebatur in honorem Dei, et nihil ex eo comedebatur. Secundum vero locum in sanctitate tenebat hostia pro peccato, quia comedebatur solum in atrio a sacerdotibus in ipsa die sacrificii. Tertium vero gradum tenebant hostiæ pacificæ pro gratiarum actione, quæ comedebatur ipso die, sed ubique in Hierusalem. Quartum vero locum tenebant hostiæ pacificæ ex voto, quarum carnes poterant etiam in crastino comedi. Et est ratio hujus ordinis, quia maxime obligatur homo Deo propter ejus majestatem, secundo propter offensam commissam, tertio propter beneficia jam suscepta, quarto propter beneficia sperata.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.11] Sins are more grievous by reason of the state of the sinner, as stated above (Question 73, Article 10): wherefore different victims are commanded to be offered for the sin of a priest, or of a prince, or of some other private individual. \"But,\" as Rabbi Moses says (Doct. Perplex. iii), \"we must take note that the more grievous the sin, the lower the species of animals offered for it. Wherefore the goat, which is a very base animal, was offered for idolatry; while a calf was offered for a priest's ignorance, and a ram for the negligence of a prince.\"
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.11] Ad undecimum dicendum, quod peccata aggravantur ex statu peccantis, ut supra dictum est; et ideo alia hostia mandabatur offerri pro peccato sacerdotis et principis, vel alterius privatæ personæ. Est autem attendendum ut rabbi Moyses dicit, lib. III Dux errantium, cap. xlvii, a med., quod « quanto gravius erat peccatum, tanto vilior species animalis offerebatur pro eo. » Unde capra, quod est vilissimum animal, offerebatur pro idololatria, quod est gravissimum peccatum; pro ignorantia vero sacerdotis offerebatur vitulus; pro negligentia autem principis hircus.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.12] In the matter of sacrifices the Law had in view the poverty of the offerers; so that those who could not have a four-footed animal at their disposal, might at least offer a bird; and that he who could not have a bird might at least offer bread; and that if a man had not even bread he might offer flour or ears of corn.
\nThe figurative cause is that the bread signifies Christ Who is the \"living bread\" (John 6:41-51). He was indeed an ear of corn, as it were, during the state of the law of nature, in the faith of the patriarchs; He was like flour in the doctrine of the Law of the prophets; and He was like perfect bread after He had taken human nature; baked in the fire, i.e. formed by the Holy Ghost in the oven of the virginal womb; baked again in a pan by the toils which He suffered in the world; and consumed by fire on the cross as on a gridiron.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.12] Ad duodecimum dicendum, quod lex in sacrificiis providere voluit paupertati offerentium; ut qui non posset habere animal quadrupes, saltem offerret avem; quam qui habere non posset, saltem offerret panem; et si hunc habere non posset, saltem offerret vel farinam vel spicas. Causa vero figuralis est, quia panis significat Christum, qui est panis vivus, ut dicitur Joan., vi; qui quidem erat velut in spica pro statu legis naturæ in fide patrum; erat autem sicut simila in doctrina legis et prophetarum; erat autem sicut panis formatus post humanitatem assumptam; coctus igne, id est formatus Spiritu sancto in clibano uteri virgi-nalis; qui etiam fuit coctus in sartagine, per labores quos in mundo sustinebat; in cruce vero, quasi in craticula adustus, ut dicit Glossa ex Hesychio.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.13] The products of the soil are useful to man, either as food, and of these bread was offered; or as drink, and of these wine was offered; or as seasoning, and of these oil and salt were offered; or as healing, and of these they offered incense, which both smells sweetly and binds easily together.
\nNow the bread foreshadowed the flesh of Christ; and the wine, His blood, whereby we were redeemed; oil betokens the grace of Christ; salt, His knowledge; incense, His prayer.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.13] Ad decimum tertium dicendum, quod ea quæ in usum hominis veniunt de terræ nascentibus, vel sunt in cibum, et de his offerebantur panis; vel sunt in potum, et de his offerebatur vinum; vel sunt in condimentum, et de his offerebatur oleum et sal; vel sunt in medicamentum, et de his offerebatur thus, quod est aromaticum et consolidativum. Per panem autem figuratur caro Christi; per vinum autem sanguis, ejus per quem redempti sumus; oleum figurat gratiam Christi; sal scientiam, thus orationem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.14] Honey was not offered in the sacrifices to God, both because it was wont to be offered in the sacrifices to idols; and in order to denote the absence of all carnal sweetness and pleasure from those who intend to sacrifice to God. Leaven was not offered, to denote the exclusion of corruption. Perhaps too, it was wont to be offered in the sacrifices to idols.
\nSalt, however, was offered, because it wards off the corruption of putrefaction: for sacrifices offered to God should be incorrupt. Moreover, salt signifies the discretion of wisdom, or again, mortification of the flesh.
\nIncense was offered to denote devotion of the heart, which is necessary in the offerer; and again, to signify the odor of a good name: for incense is composed of matter, both rich and fragrant. And since the sacrifice \"of jealousy\" did not proceed from devotion, but rather from suspicion, therefore incense was not offered therein (Numbers 5:15).
\n[I-II.q.102.a.3.ad.14] Ad decimum quartum dicendum, quod mel non offerebatur in sacrificiis Dei; tum quia consueverat offerri in sacrificiis idolorum, tum etiam ad excludendam omnem carnalem dulcedinem et voluptatem ab his qui Deo sacrificare intendunt. Fermentum vero non offerebatur ad excludendam corruptionem; et forte etiam quia in sacrificiis idolorum solitum erat offerri. Sal autem offerebatur, quia impedit corruptionem putredinis; sacrificia autem Dei debent esse incorrupta; et etiam quia in sale significatur discretio sapientiæ, vel etiam mortificatio carnis. Thus autem offerebatur Deo ad designandam devotionem mentis, quæ est necessaria offerentibus; et etiam ad significandum odorem bonæ famæ; nam thus et pingue est et odoriferum. Et quia sacrificium zelotypiæ non procedebat ex devotione, sed magis ex suspicione, ideo in eo non offerebatur thus.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that no sufficient reason can be assigned for the ceremonies of the Old Law that pertain to holy things. For Paul said (Acts 17:24): \"God Who made the world and all things therein; He being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made by hands.\" It was therefore unfitting that in the Old Law a tabernacle or temple should be set up for the worship of God.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod cæremoniarum veteris legis, quæ ad sacra pertinent, sufficiens ratio assignari non possit. Dicit enim Paulus, Act., xvii, 24: Deus qui fecit mundum et omnia quæ in eo sunt, hic cæli et terræ cum sit dominus, non in manufactis templis habitat. Inconvenienter igitur ad cultum Dei tabernaculum vel templum in lege veteri est institutum.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.2] Further, the state of the Old Law was not changed except by Christ. But the tabernacle denoted the state of the Old Law. Therefore it should not have been changed by the building of a temple.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, status veteris legis non fuit immutatus nisi per Christum; sed tabernaculum designabat statum veteris legis; non ergo debuit mutari per aedificationem alicu-jus templi.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.3] Further, the Divine Law, more than any other indeed, should lead man to the worship of God. But an increase of divine worship requires multiplication of altars and temples; as is evident in regard to the New Law. Therefore it seems that also under the Old Law there should have been not only one tabernacle or temple, but many.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, divina lex, præcipue debet homines inducere ad divinum cultum. Sed ad augmentum divini cultus pertinet quod fiant multa altaria et multa templa, sicut patet in nova lege. Ergo videtur quod etiam in veteri lege non debuit esse solum unum templum aut unum tabernaculum, sed multa.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.4] Further, the tabernacle or temple was ordained to the worship of God. But in God we should worship above all His unity and simplicity. Therefore it seems unbecoming for the tabernacle or temple to be divided by means of veils.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.4] 4. Præterea, tabernaculum seu templum ad cultum Dei ordinabatur. Sed in Deo præcipue oportet venerari unitatem et simplici-tatem. Non videtur igitur fuisse conveniens ut tabernaculum seu templum per quædam vela distingueretur.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.5] Further, the power of the First Mover, i.e. God, appears first of all in the east, for it is in that quarter that the first movement begins. But the tabernacle was set up for the worship of God. Therefore it should have been built so as to point to the east rather than the west.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.5] 5. Præterea, virtus primi moventis, quæ est Deus, primo apparet in parte Orientis, a qua parte incipit primus motus. Sed tabernaculum fuit institutum ad Dei adorationem. Ergo debebat esse dispositum magis versus Orientem quam versus Occidentem.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.6] Further, the Lord commanded (Exodus 20:4) that they should \"not make . . . a graven thing, nor the likeness of anything.\" It was therefore unfitting for graven images of the cherubim to be set up in the tabernacle or temple. In like manner, the ark, the propitiatory, the candlestick, the table, the two altars, seem to have been placed there without reasonable cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.6] 6. Præterea, Exod., xx, 4, Dominus præcepit ut non facerent sculptile, neque aliquam similitudinem. Inconvenienter igitur in tabernaculo vel in templo fuerunt sculptæ imagines cherubim. Similiter etiam et arca, et propitiatorium, et candelabrum, et mensa, et duplex altare sine rationabili causa ibi fuisse videntur.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.7] Further, the Lord commanded (Exodus 20:24): \"You shall make an altar of earth unto Me\": and again (Exodus 20:26): \"Thou shalt not go up by steps unto My altar.\" It was therefore unfitting that subsequently they should be commanded to make an altar of wood laid over with gold or brass; and of such a height that it was impossible to go up to it except by steps. For it is written (Exodus 27:1-2): \"Thou shalt make also an altar of setim wood, which shall be five cubits long, and as many broad . . . and three cubits high . . . and thou shalt cover it with brass\": and (Exodus 30:1-3): \"Thou shalt make . . . an altar to burn incense, of setim wood . . . and thou shalt overlay it with the purest gold.\"
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.7] 7. Præterea, Dominus præcepit, Exod., xx, 24: Altare de terra facietis mihi; et iterum: Non ascendes ad altare meum per gradus. Inconvenienter igitur mandatur postmodum altare fieri de lignis auro vel aere contextis, et tantæ altitudinis, ut ad illud nisi per gradus ascendi non possit. Dicitur enim Exod., xxvii, 1: Facies altare de lignis Sethim, quod habebit quinque cubitos in longitudine, et totidem in latitudine, et tres cubitos in altitudine, et operies illud ære; et Exod., xxx, 1, dicitur: Facies altare ad adolendum thymiamata de lignis Sethim, vestiesque illud auro purissimo.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.8] Further, in God's works nothing should be superfluous; for not even in the works of nature is anything superfluous to be found. But one cover suffices for one tabernacle or house. Therefore it was unbecoming to furnish the tabernacle with many coverings, viz. curtains, curtains of goats' hair, rams' skins dyed red, and violet-colored skins (Exodus 26).
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.8] 8. Præterea, in operibus Dei nihil debet esse superfluum, quia nec in operibus naturæ aliquid superfluum inventur. Sed uni tabernaculo vel domui sufficit unum operientum. Inconvenienter igitur tabernaculo fuerunt apposita multa tegumenta, scilicet cortinæ, saga cilicina, pelles arietum rubricatæ, pelles hyacinthinæ.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.9] Further, exterior consecration signifies interior holiness, the subject of which is the soul. It was therefore unsuitable for the tabernacle and its vessels to be consecrated, since they were inanimate things.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.9] 9. Præterea, consecratio exterior interio-rem sanctitatem significat, cujus subjectum est anima. Inconvenienter igitur tabernaculum et ejus vasa consecrabantur, cum essent quædam corpora inanimata.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.10] Further, it is written (Psalm 33:2): \"I will bless the Lord at all times, His praise shall always be in my mouth.\" But the solemn festivals were instituted for the praise of God. Therefore it was not fitting that certain days should be fixed for keeping solemn festivals; so that it seems that there was no suitable cause for the ceremonies relating to holy things.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.arg.10] 10. Præterea, in psal. xxxiii, 4, dicitur: Benedicam Dominum in omni tempore, semper laus ejus in ore meo. Sed solemni-tates instituuntur ad laudandum Deum. Non ergo fuit conveniens ut aliqui certi dies statuerentur ad solemnitates peragendas. Sic igitur videtur quod cæremoniæ sacro-rum convenientes causas non haberent.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.sc] The Apostle says (Hebrews 8:4) that those who \"offer gifts according to the law . . . serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. As it was answered to Moses, when he was to finish the tabernacle: See, says He, that thou make all things according to the pattern which was shown thee on the mount.\" But that is most reasonable, which presents a likeness to heavenly things. Therefore the ceremonies relating to holy things had a reasonable cause.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod Apostolus dicit ad Hebr., viii, 4, quod illi qui offerunt secundum legem munera, exemplari et umbræ deserviunt cælestium, sicut responsum est Moysi, cum consummaret tabernaculum: Vide, inquit, omnia facito secundum exemplar quod tibi in monte monstratum est*. Sed valde rationabile est quod imaginem cælestium repræsentat. Ergo cæremoniæ sacrorum rationabilem causam habebant.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.co] The chief purpose of the whole external worship is that man may give worship to God. Now man's tendency is to reverence less those things which are common, and indistinct from other things; whereas he admires and reveres those things which are distinct from others in some point of excellence. Hence too it is customary among men for kings and princes, who ought to be reverenced by their subjects, to be clothed in more precious garments, and to possess vaster and more beautiful abodes. And for this reason it behooved special times, a special abode, special vessels, and special ministers to be appointed for the divine worship, so that thereby the soul of man might be brought to greater reverence for God.
\nIn like manner the state of the Old Law, as observed above (2; 100, 12; 101, 2), was instituted that it might foreshadow the mystery of Christ. Now that which foreshadows something should be determinate, so that it may present some likeness thereto. Consequently, certain special points had to be observed in matters pertaining to the worship of God.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod totus exterior cultus Dei ad hoc præcipue ordinatur ut homines Deum in reverentia habeant. Habet autem hoc humanus affectus, ut ea quæ communia sunt, et non distincta ab aliis, minus revereatur: ea vero quæ habent aliquam excellentiæ discretionem ab aliis, magis admiretur et revereatur. Et inde etiam hominum consuetudo inolevit ut reges et principes, quos oportet in reverentia haberi a subditis, et pretiosioribus vestibus ornentur, et etiam ampliores et pulchriores habitationes possideant. Et propter hoc oportuit ut aliqua specialia tempora, et speciale tabernaculum, et specialia vasa, et speciales ministri, ad cultum Dei ordinarentur, ut per hoc animi hominum ad majorem Dei reverentiam adducerentur. Similiter etiam status veteris legis, sicut dictum est, institutus erat ad figurandum mysterium Christi. Oportet autem esse aliquid determinatum id per quod aliquid figurari debet, ut scilicet ejus aliquam similitudinem repræsentet; et ideo oportuit etiam aliqua specialia observari in his quæ pertinent ad cultum Dei.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.1] The divine worship regards two things: namely, God Who is worshipped; and men, who worship Him. Accordingly God, Who is worshipped, is confined to no bodily place: wherefore there was no need, on His part, for a tabernacle or temple to be set up. But men, who worship Him, are corporeal beings: and for their sake there was need for a special tabernacle or temple to be set up for the worship of God, for two reasons. First, that through coming together with the thought that the place was set aside for the worship of God, they might approach thither with greater reverence. Secondly, that certain things relating to the excellence of Christ's Divine or human nature might be signified by the arrangement of various details in such temple or tabernacle.
\nTo this Solomon refers (1 Kings 8:27) when he says: \"If heaven and the heavens of heavens cannot contain Thee, how much less this house which I have built\" for Thee? And further on (1 Kings 8:29-30) he adds: \"That Thy eyes may be open upon this house . . . of which Thou hast said: My name shall be there; . . . that Thou mayest hearken to the supplication of Thy servant and of Thy people Israel.\" From this it is evident that the house of the sanctuary was set up, not in order to contain God, as abiding therein locally, but that God might be made known there by means of things done and said there; and that those who prayed there might, through reverence for the place, pray more devoutly, so as to be heard more readily.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod cultus Dei duo respicit; scilicet Deum qui colitur, et homines colentes. Ipse igitur Deus qui colitur nullo corporali loco clauditur; unde propter ipsum non oportuit speciale tabernaculum fieri aut templum. Sed homines ipsum colentes corporales sunt; et propter eos oportuit speciale tabernaculum vel templum instrui ad cultum Dei, propter duo. Primo quidem, ut ad hujusmodi locum convenientes cum hac cogitatione quod deputetur ad colendum Deum, cum majori reverentia accederent. Secundo, ut per dispositionem talis templi vel tabernaculi significentur aliqua pertinentia ad excellentiam divinitatis vel humanitatis Christi. Et hoc est quod Salomon dicit, III Reg., viii, 27: Si cælum et cæli cælorum te capere non possunt, quanto magis domus hæc, quam ædificavi; et postea subdit: Sint oculi tui aperti super domum hanc, de qua dixisti: Erit nomen meum ibi, ut exaudias deprecationem servi tui, et populi tui Israel. Ex quo patet quod domus sanctuarii non est instituta ad hoc quod Deum capiat, quasi localiter inhabitantem; sed ad hoc quod nomen Dei inhabitet ibi; id est, ut notitia Dei ibi manifestetur per aliqua quæ ibi fiebant vel dicebantur; et quod propter reverentiam loci orationes fierent ibi magis exaudibiles ex devotione orantium.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.2] Before the coming of Christ, the state of the Old Law was not changed as regards the fulfilment of the Law, which was effected in Christ alone: but it was changed as regards the condition of the people that were under the Law. Because, at first, the people were in the desert, having no fixed abode: afterwards they were engaged in various wars with the neighboring nations; and lastly, at the time of David and Solomon, the state of that people was one of great peace. And then for the first time the temple was built in the place which Abraham, instructed by God, had chosen for the purpose of sacrifice. For it is written (Genesis 22:2) that the Lord commanded Abraham to \"offer\" his son \"for a holocaust upon one of the mountains which I will show thee\": and it is related further on (Genesis 22:14) that \"he calleth the name of that place, The Lord seeth,\" as though, according to the Divine prevision, that place were chosen for the worship of God. Hence it is written (Deuteronomy 12:5-6): \"You shall come to the place which the Lord your God shall choose . . . and you shall offer . . . your holocausts and victims.\"
\nNow it was not meet for that place to be pointed out by the building of the temple before the aforesaid time; for three reasons assigned by Rabbi Moses. First, lest the Gentiles might seize hold of that place. Secondly, lest the Gentiles might destroy it. The third reason is lest each tribe might wish that place to fall to their lot, and strifes and quarrels be the result. Hence the temple was not built until they had a king who would be able to quell such quarrels. Until that time a portable tabernacle was employed for divine worship, no place being as yet fixed for the worship of God. This is the literal reason for the distinction between the tabernacle and the temple.
\nThe figurative reason may be assigned to the fact that they signify a twofold state. For the tabernacle, which was changeable, signifies the state of the present changeable life: whereas the temple, which was fixed and stable, signifies the state of future life which is altogether unchangeable. For this reason it is said that in the building of the temple no sound was heard of hammer or saw, to signify that all movements of disturbance will be far removed from the future state. Or else the tabernacle signifies the state of the Old Law; while the temple built by Solomon betokens the state of the New Law. Hence the Jews alone worked at the building of the tabernacle; whereas the temple was built with the cooperation of the Gentiles, viz. the Tyrians and Sidonians.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod status veteris legis non fuit immutatus ante Christum quantum ad impletionem legis, quæ facta est solum per Christum; est tamen immutatus quantum ad conditionem populi, qui erat sub lege. Nam primo populus fuit in deserto non habens certam mansionem; postmodum autem habuerunt varia bella cum finitimis gentibus; ultimo autem, tempore David regis et Salomonis, populus ille habuit quietissimum statum. Et tunc primo ædificatum fuit templum in loco quem designaverat Abraham ex divina demonstratione ad immolandum. Dicitur enim Genes., xxii, 2, quod Dominus mandavit Abraham ut offerret filium suum in holocaustum super unum montium quem monstravero tibi; et postea dicit quod appellavit nomen illius* loci: Dominus videt; quasi secundum Dei prævisionem esset locus ille electus ad cultum divinum. Propter quod dicitur Deut., xii, 5: Ad locum quem elegerit Dominus Deus vester, venietis, et offeretis holocausta et victimas vestras. Locus autem ille designari non debuit pro ædificatione templi ante tempus prædictum, propter tres ra-tiones, quas rabbi Moyses assignat: prima est, ne gentes appropriarent sibi locum illum. Secunda est, ne gentes ipsum destruerent. Tertia vero ratio est, ne quælibet tribus vellet habere locum illum in sorte sua; et propter hoc orirentur lites et jurgia. Et ideo non fuit ædificatum templum, donec haberent regem, per quem posset hujusmodi jurgium compesci. Antea vero ad cultum Dei erat ordinatum tabernaculum portatile per diversa loca, quasi nondum existente determinato loco divini cultus. Et hæc est ratio litteralis diversitatis tabernaculi et templi. Ratio autem figuralis esse potest, quia per hæc duo significatur duplex status. Per tabernaculum enim, quod est mutabile, significatur status præsentis vitæ mutabilis; per templum vero quod erat fixum et stans, significatur status futuræ vitæ, quæ omnino invariabilis est; et propter hoc in ædificatione templi dicitur, III Reg., vi, 7, quod non est auditus sonitus mallei vel securis, ad significandum quod omnis perturbationis tumultus longe erit a statu futuro. Vel per tabernaculum significatur status veteris legis; per templum autem a Salomone constructum status novæ legis; unde ad constructionem tabernaculi soli Judæi sunt operati; ad ædificationem vero templi cooperati sunt etiam gentiles, scilicet Tyrii et Sidonii.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.3] The reason for the unity of the temple or tabernacle may be either literal or figurative. The literal reason was the exclusion of idolatry. For the Gentiles put up various times to various gods: and so, to strengthen in the minds of men their belief in the unity of the Godhead, God wished sacrifices to be offered to Him in one place only. Another reason was in order to show that bodily worship is not acceptable of itself: and so they restrained from offering sacrifices anywhere and everywhere. But the worship of the New Law, in the sacrifice whereof spiritual grace is contained, is of itself acceptable to God; and consequently the multiplication of altars and temples is permitted in the New Law.
\nAs to those matters that regarded the spiritual worship of God, consisting in the teaching of the Law and the Prophets, there were, even under the Old Law, various places, called synagogues, appointed for the people to gather together for the praise of God; just as now there are places called churches in which the Christian people gather together for the divine worship. Thus our church takes the place of both temple and synagogue: since the very sacrifice of the Church is spiritual; wherefore with us the place of sacrifice is not distinct from the place of teaching. The figurative reason may be that hereby is signified the unity of the Church, whether militant or triumphant.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod ratio unitatis templi vel tabernaculi potest esse et litteralis et figuralis. Litteralis quidem est ratio ad exclusionem idololatriæ, quia gentiles diversis diis diversa templa constituebant. Et ideo ut firmaretur in animis hominum fides unitatis divinæ, voluit Deus ut in uno loco tatum sibi sacrificium offerretur; et iterum ut per hoc ostenderet quod corporalis cultus non propter se erat ei acceptus; et ideo compescebantur ne passim et ubique sacrificia offerrent. Sed cultus novæ legis, in cujus sacrificio spiritualis gratia continetur, est secundum se Deo acceptus; et ideo multiplicatio altarium et templorum acceptatur in nova lege. Quantum vero ad ea quæ pertinebant ad spiritualem cultum Dei, qui consistit in doctrina legis et prophetarum, erant etiam in veteri lege diversa loca deputata, in quibus conveniebant ad laudem Dei, quæ dicebantur synagogæ, sicut et nunc dicuntur ecclesiæ, in quibus populus christianus ad laudem Dei congregatur. Et sic Ecclesia nostra succedit in locum et templi et synagogæ, quia ipsum sacrificium Ecclesiæ spirituale est; unde non distinguitur apud nos locus sacrificii a loco doctrinæ. Ratio autem figuralis esse potest, quia per hoc significabatur unitas Ecclesiæ vel militantis vel triumphantis.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.4] Just as the unity of the temple or tabernacle betokened the unity of God, or the unity of the Church, so also the division of the tabernacle or temple signified the distinction of those things that are subject to God, and from which we arise to the worship of God. Now the tabernacle was divided into two parts: one was called the \"Holy of Holies,\" and was placed to the west; the other was called the \"Holy Place\" [Or 'Sanctuary'. The Douay version uses both expressions], which was situated to the east. Moreover there was a court facing the tabernacle. Accordingly there are two reasons for this distinction. One is in respect of the tabernacle being ordained to the worship of God. Because the different parts of the world are thus betokened by the division of the tabernacle. For that part which was called the Holy of Holies signified the higher world, which is that of spiritual substances: while that part which is called the Holy Place signified the corporeal world. Hence the Holy Place was separated from the Holy of Holies by a veil, which was of four different colors (denoting the four elements), viz. of linen, signifying earth, because linen, i.e. flax, grows out of the earth; purple, signifying water, because the purple tint was made from certain shells found in the sea; violet, signifying air, because it has the color of the air; and scarlet twice dyed, signifying fire: and this because matter composed of the four elements is a veil between us and incorporeal substances. Hence the high-priest alone, and that once a year, entered into the inner tabernacle, i.e. the Holy of Holies: whereby we are taught that man's final perfection consists in his entering into that (higher) world: whereas into the outward tabernacle, i.e. the Holy Place, the priests entered every day: whereas the people were only admitted to the court; because the people were able to perceived material things, the inner nature of which only wise men by dint of study are able to discover.
\nBut regard to the figurative reason, the outward tabernacle, which was called the Holy Place, betokened the state of the Old Law, as the Apostle says (Hebrews 9:6, seqq.): because into that tabernacle \"the priests always entered accomplishing the offices of sacrifices.\" But the inner tabernacle, which was called the Holy of Holies, signified either the glory of heaven or the spiritual state of the New Law to come. To the latter state Christ brought us; and this was signified by the high-priest entering alone, once a year, into the Holy of Holies. The veil betokened the concealing of the spiritual sacrifices under the sacrifices of old. This veil was adorned with four colors: viz. that of linen, to designate purity of the flesh; purple, to denote the sufferings which the saints underwent for God; scarlet twice dyed, signifying the twofold love of God and our neighbor; and violet, in token of heavenly contemplation. With regard to the state of the Old Law the people and the priests were situated differently from one another. For the people saw the mere corporeal sacrifices which were offered in the court: whereas the priests were intent on the inner meaning of the sacrifices, because their faith in the mysteries of Christ was more explicit. Hence they entered into the outer tabernacle. This outer tabernacle was divided from the court by a veil; because some matters relating to the mystery of Christ were hidden from the people, while they were known to the priests: though they were not fully revealed to them, as they were subsequently in the New Testament (cf. Ephesians 3:5).
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.4] Ad quartum dicendum, quod, sicut in unitate templi vel tabernaculi repræsentabatur unitas Dei vel unitas Ecclesiæ, ita etiam in distinctione tabernaculi vel templi repræsentabatur distinctio eorum quæ Deo sunt subjecta, ex quibus in Dei venerationem consurgimus. Distinguebatur autem tabernaculum in duas partes: in unam quæ vocabatur Sancta sanctorum, quæ erat occidentalis; et aliam quæ vocabatur Sancta, quæ erat ad orientem. Et iterum ante tabernaculum erat atrium. Hæc igitur distinctio duplicem habet rationem. Unam quidem, secundum quod tabernaculum ordinatur ad cultum Dei; sic enim diversæ partes mundi in distinctione tabernaculi figurantur. Nam pars illa quæ Sancta sanctorum dicitur, figurabat sæculum altius, quod est spiritualium substantiarum; pars vero illa quæ dicitur Sancta, exprimebat mundum corporalem; et ideo Sancta a Sanctis sanctorum distinguebantur quodam velo, quod quatuor coloribus erat distinctum, per quos quatuor elementa designantur: scilicet bysso, per quod designatur terra, quia byssus, id est, linum, de terra nascitur; purpura, per quam significatur aqua; fiebat enim purpureus color ex quibusdam conchis, quæ inveniuntur in mari; hiacyntho, per quem significatur aer, quia habet aereum colorem; et cocco bis tincto, per quem designatur ignis: et hoc ideo, quia materia quatuor elementorum est impedimentum, per quod velantur nobis incorporales substantiae. Et ideo in interius tabernaculum, id est in Sancta sanctorum, solus summus sacerdos, et semel in anno introibat, ut designaretur quod hæc est finalis perfectio hominis, ut ad illud sæculum introducatur: in tabernaculum vero exterius, id est in Sancta, introi-bant sacerdotes quotidie, non autem populus, qui solum ad atrium accedebat; quia ipsa corporalia populus percipere potest; ad interiores autem eorum rationes soli sapientes per considerationem attingere possunt. Secundum vero rationem figuralem, per exterius tabernaculum, quod dicitur Sancta, significatur status veteris legis, ut Apostolus dicit ad Hebr., Ⅺ; quia in illud tabernaculum semper introibant sacerdotes sacrificiorum officia consummantes. Per interius vero tabernaculum, quod dicitur Sancta sanctorum, significatur vel cælestis gloria, vel etiam status spiritualis novæ legis, qui est quædam inchoatio futuræ gloriæ, in quem statum nos Christus introduxit; quod figurabatur per hoc quod summus sacerdos semel in anno solus in Sancta sanctorum introibat. Velum autem figurabat spiritualium occultationem sacrificiorum in veteribus sacrificiis; quod velum quatuor coloribus erat ornatum: bysso quidem, ad designandam carnis puritatem; purpura autem ad figurandum passiones quas sancti sustinuerunt pro Deo; cocco bis tincto ad significandum charitatem geminam Dei et proximi; hyacintho autem significabatur cælestis meditatio. Ad statum autem veteris legis aliter se habebat populus, et aliter sacerdotes: nam populus ipsa corporalia sacrificia considerabat, quæ in atrio offerebantur; sacerdotes vero rationem sacrificiorum considerabant, habentes fidem magis explicitam de mysteriis Christi. Et ideo intrabant in exterius tabernaculum; quod etiam quodam velo distinguebatur ab atrio, quia quædam erant velata populo circa mysterium Christi, quae sacerdotibus erant nota; non tamen erant eis plene revelata, sicut postea in Novo Testamento, ut habetur Ephes., Ⅲ.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.5] Worship towards the west was introduced in the Law to the exclusion of idolatry: because all the Gentiles, in reverence to the sun, worshipped towards the east; hence it is written (Ezekiel 8:16) that certain men \"had their backs towards the temple of the Lord, and their faces to the east, and they adored towards the rising of the sun.\" Accordingly, in order to prevent this, the tabernacle had the Holy of Holies to westward, that they might adore toward the west. A figurative reason may also be found in the fact that the whole state of the first tabernacle was ordained to foreshadow the death of Christ, which is signified by the west, according to Psalm 67:5: \"Who ascendeth unto the west; the Lord is His name.\"
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.5] Ad quintum dicendum, quod adcidentem fuit introducta in lege ad excludendam idololatriam; nam omnes gentiles in reverentiam solis adorabant ad orientem. Unde dicitur Ezech., Ⅷ, 16, quod quidam habebant dorsa contra templum Domini, et facies ad orientem, et adorabant ad ortum solis. Unde ad hoc excludendum tabernaculum habebat Sancta sanctorum ad occidentem, ut versum occidentem adorarent. Ratio etiam figuralis esse potest, quia totus status culum, » etc. Ita melioris notæ codices cum edit. Patav. et Nicolaï. Al.: « Et ideo quia materia quatuor elementorum est impedimentum per quod velantur nobis spirituales substantiæ, in interius tabernaprioris tabernaculi ordinabatur ad significandum mortem Christi, quæ figuratur per occasum, secundum illud psal. LXVII, 5: Qui ascendit super occasum, Dominus nomen illi.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.6] Both literal and figurative reasons may be assigned for the things contained in the tabernacle. The literal reason is in connection with the divine worship. And because, as already observed (ad 4), the inner tabernacle, called the Holy of Holies, signified the higher world of spiritual substances, hence that tabernacle contained three things, viz. \"the ark of the testament in which was a golden pot that had manna, and the rod of Aaron that had blossomed, and the tables\" (Hebrews 9:4) on which were written the ten commandments of the Law. Now the ark stood between two \"cherubim\" that looked one towards the other: and over the ark was a table, called the \"propitiatory,\" raised above the wings of the cherubim, as though it were held up by them; and appearing, to the imagination, to be the very seat of God. For this reason it was called the \"propitiatory,\" as though the people received propitiation thence at the prayers of the high-priest. And so it was held up, so to speak, by the cherubim, in obedience, as it were, to God: while the ark of the testament was like the foot-stool to Him that sat on the propitiatory. These three things denote three things in that higher world: namely, God Who is above all, and incomprehensible to any creature. Hence no likeness of Him was set up; to denote His invisibility. But there was something to represent his seat; since, to wit, the creature, which is beneath God, as the seat under the sitter, is comprehensible. Again in that higher world there are spiritual substances called angels. These are signified by the two cherubim, looking one towards the other, to show that they are at peace with one another, according to Job 25:2: \"Who maketh peace in . . . high places.\" For this reason, too, there was more than one cherub, to betoken the multitude of heavenly spirits, and to prevent their receiving worship from those who had been commanded to worship but one God. Moreover there are, enclosed as it were in that spiritual world, the intelligible types of whatsoever takes place in this world, just as in every cause are enclosed the types of its effects, and in the craftsman the types of the works of his craft. This was betokened by the ark, which represented, by means of the three things it contained, the three things of greatest import in human affairs. These are wisdom, signified by the tables of the testament; the power of governing, betokened by the rod of Aaron; and life, betokened by the manna which was the means of sustenance. Or else these three things signified the three Divine attributes, viz. wisdom, in the tables; power, in the rod; goodness, in the manna--both by reason of its sweetness, and because it was through the goodness of God that it was granted to man, wherefore it was preserved as a memorial of the Divine mercy. Again, these three things were represented in Isaiah' vision. For he \"saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated\"; and the seraphim standing by; and that the house was filled with the glory of the Lord; wherefrom the seraphim cried out: \"All the earth is full of His glory\" (Isaiah 6:1-3). And so the images of the seraphim were set up, not to be worshipped, for this was forbidden by the first commandment; but as a sign of their function, as stated above.
\nThe outer tabernacle, which denotes this present world, also contained three things, viz. the \"altar of incense,\" which was directly opposite the ark; the \"table of proposition,\" with the twelve loaves of proposition on it, which stood on the northern side; and the \"candlestick,\" which was placed towards the south. These three things seem to correspond to the three which were enclosed in the ark; and they represented the same things as the latter, but more clearly: because, in order that wise men, denoted by the priests entering the temple, might grasp the meaning of these types, it was necessary to express them more manifestly than they are in the Divine or angelic mind. Accordingly the candlestick betokened, as a sensible sign thereof, the wisdom which was expressed on the tables (of the Law) in intelligible words. The altar of incense signified the office of the priest, whose duty it was to bring the people to God: and this was signified also by the rod: because on that altar the sweet-smelling incense was burnt, signifying the holiness of the people acceptable to God: for it is written (Apocalypse 8:3) that the smoke of the sweet-smelling spices signifies the \"justifications of the saints\" (cf. Apocalypse 19:8). Moreover it was fitting that the dignity of the priesthood should be denoted, in the ark, by the rod, and, in the outer tabernacle, by the altar of incense: because the priest is the mediator between God and the people, governing the people by Divine power, denoted by the rod; and offering to God the fruit of His government, i.e. the holiness of the people, on the altar of incense, so to speak. The table signified the sustenance of life, just as the manna did: but the former, a more general and a coarser kind of nourishment; the latter, a sweeter and more delicate. Again, the candlestick was fittingly placed on the southern side, while the table was placed to the north: because the south is the right-hand side of the world, while the north is the left-hand side, as stated in De Coelo et Mundo ii; and wisdom, like other spiritual goods, belongs to the right hand, while temporal nourishment belongs on the left, according to Proverbs 3:16: \"In her left hand (are) riches and glory.\" And the priestly power is midway between temporal goods and spiritual wisdom; because thereby both spiritual wisdom and temporal goods are dispensed.
\nAnother literal signification may be assigned. For the ark contained the tables of the Law, in order to prevent forgetfulness of the Law, wherefore it is written (Exodus 24:12): \"I will give thee two tables of stone, and the Law, and the commandments which I have written: that thou mayest teach them\" to the children of Israel. The rod of Aaron was placed there to restrain the people from insubordination to the priesthood of Aaron; wherefore it is written (Numbers 17:10): \"Carry back the rod of Aaron into the tabernacle of the testimony, that it may be kept there for a token of the rebellious children of Israel.\" The manna was kept in the ark to remind them of the benefit conferred by God on the children of Israel in the desert; wherefore it is written (Exodus 16:32): \"Fill a gomor of it, and let it be kept unto generations to come hereafter, that they may know the bread wherewith I fed you in the wilderness.\" The candlestick was set up to enhance the beauty of the temple, for the magnificence of a house depends on its being well lighted. Now the candlestick had seven branches, as Josephus observes (Antiquit. iii, 7,8), to signify the seven planets, wherewith the whole world is illuminated. Hence the candlestick was placed towards the south; because for us the course of the planets is from that quarter. The altar of incense was instituted that there might always be in the tabernacle a sweet-smelling smoke; both through respect for the tabernacle, and as a remedy for the stenches arising from the shedding of blood and the slaying of animals. For men despise evil-smelling things as being vile, whereas sweet-smelling things are much appreciated. The table was place there to signify that the priests who served the temple should take their food in the temple: wherefore, as stated in Matthew 12:4, it was lawful for none but the priests to eat the twelve loaves which were put on the table in memory of the twelve tribes. And the table was not placed in the middle directly in front of the propitiatory, in order to exclude an idolatrous rite: for the Gentiles, on the feasts of the moon, set up a table in front of the idol of the moon, wherefore it is written (Jeremiah 7:18): \"The women knead the dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven.\"
\nIn the court outside the tabernacle was the altar of holocausts, on which sacrifices of those things which the people possessed were offered to God: and consequently the people who offered these sacrifices to God by the hands of the priest could be present in the court. But the priests alone, whose function it was to offer the people to God, could approach the inner altar, whereon the very devotion and holiness of the people was offered to God. And this altar was put up outside the tabernacle and in the court, to the exclusion of idolatrous worship: for the Gentiles placed altars inside the temples to offer up sacrifices thereon to idols.
\nThe figurative reason for all these things may be taken from the relation of the tabernacle to Christ, who was foreshadowed therein. Now it must be observed that to show the imperfection of the figures of the Law, various figures were instituted in the temple to betoken Christ. For He was foreshadowed by the \"propitiatory,\" since He is \"a propitiation for our sins\" (1 John 2:2). This propitiatory was fittingly carried by cherubim, since of Him it is written (Hebrews 1:6): \"Let all the angels of God adore Him.\" He is also signified by the ark: because just as the ark was made of setim-wood, so was Christ's body composed of most pure members. More over it was gilded: for Christ was full of wisdom and charity, which are betokened by gold. And in the ark was a golden pot, i.e. His holy soul, having manna, i.e. \"all the fulness of the Godhead\" (Colossians 2:9). Also there was a rod in the ark, i.e. His priestly power: for \"He was made a . . . priest for ever\" (Hebrews 6:20). And therein were the tables of the Testament, to denote that Christ Himself is a lawgiver. Again, Christ was signified by the candlestick, for He said Himself (John 8:12): \"I am the Light of the world\"; while the seven lamps denoted the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost. He is also betokened in the table, because He is our spiritual food, according to John 6:41-51: \"I am the living bread\": and the twelve loaves signified the twelve apostles, or their teaching. Or again, the candlestick and table may signify the Church's teaching, and faith, which also enlightens and refreshes. Again, Christ is signified by the two altars of holocausts and incense. Because all works of virtue must be offered to us to God through Him; both those whereby we afflict the body, which are offered, as it were, on the altar of holocausts; and those which, with greater perfection of mind, are offered to God in Christ, by the spiritual desires of the perfect, on the altar of incense, as it were, according to Hebrews 13:15: \"By Him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise always to God.\"
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.6] Ad sextum dicendum, quod eorum quæ in tabernaculo continebantur, ratio reddi potest et litteralis et figuralis: litteralis quidem per relationem ad cultum divinum; et quia dictum est, quod per tabernaculum interius, quod dicebatur Sancta sanctorum, significabatur sæculum altius spiritualium substantiarum, ideo in illo tabernaculo, tria continebantur: scilicet arca testamenti, in qua erat urna aurea habens manna, et virga Aaron, quæ fronduerat, et tabulæ, in quibus erant scripta decem præcepta legis. Hæc autem arca sita erat inter duos cherubim, qui se mutuis vultibus respiciebant; et super arcam erat quædam tabula 1 quæ dicebatur propitiatorium super 2 alas cherubim, quasi ab ipsis cherubim portaretur, ac si imaginaretur, quod illa tabula esset sedes Dei; unde et propitiatorium dicebatur, quasi exinde populo propitiaretur ad preces summi sacerdotis; et ideo quasi portabatur a cherubim, quasi Deo obsequentibus. Arca vero testamenti erat tanquam scabellum sedentis supra propitiatorium. Per hæc autem tria designabantur tria quæ sunt in illo altiori sæculo: scilicet Deus, qui super omnia est, et incomprehensibilis omni creaturæ: et propter hoc nulla similitudo ejus ponebatur ad repræsentandam ejus invisibilitatem, sed ponebatur quædam figura sedis ejus; quia scilicet natura comprehensibilis est, quæ est subjecta Deo, sicut sedes sedenti. Sunt etiam in illo altiori sæculo spirituales substantiae, quæ angeli dicuntur; et hi significantur per duos cherubim mutuo se respicientes, ad designandam concordiam eorum ad invicem, secundum illud Job, xxv, 2: Qui facit concordiam in sublimibus. Et propter hoc etiam non fuit unus tantum cherubim, ut designaretur multitudo cælestium spirituum, et excluderetur cultus eorum ab his quibus præceptum erat ut solum unum Deum colerent. Sunt etiam in illo intelligibili sæculo rationes omnium eorum quæ in hoc perficiuntur, quodam modo clausæ, sicut rationes effectuum clauduntur in suis causis, et rationes artificiatorum in artifice; et hoc significabatur per arcam, in qua repræsentabantur per tria ibi contenta tria quæ sunt potissima in rebus humanis: scilicet sapientia, quæ repræsentabatur per tabulas testamenti; potestas regiminis, quæ repræsentabatur per virgam Aaron; vita, quæ repræsentabatur per manna, quod fuit sustentamentum vitæ. Vel per hæc tria significabantur tria Dei attributa, scilicet sapientia in tabulis, potentia in virga, bonitas in manna, tum propter dulcedinem, tum quia ex Dei misericordia est populo suo datum; et ideo in memoriam divinæ misericordiae conservabatur. Et hæc tria etiam figurata sunt in visione Isaiæ, cap. vi. Vidit enim Dominum sedentem super solium excelsum et elevatum, et seraphim assistentes, et domum impleri a gloria Dei; unde et seraphim dicebant: Plena est omnis terra gloria ejus. Et sic similitudines seraphim non ponebantur ad cultum, quod prohibebatur primo legis præcepto, sed in signum ministerii, ut dictum est. In exteriori vero tabernaculo, quod significabat præsens sæculum, continebantur etiam tria: scilicet altare thymiamatis, quod directe erat contra arcam; mensa autem propositionis, super quam duodecim panes apponebantur, erat posita ex parte aquilonari; candela brum vero ex parte australi. Quæ tria videntur respondere tribus quæ erant in arca clausa; sed magis manifeste eadem repræsentabant. Oportet enim rationes rerum ad manifestiorem demonstrationem perduci, quam sint in mente divina et angelorum, ad hoc quod homines sapientes eas cognoscere possint, qui significantur per sacerdotes ingredientes tabernaculum. In candelabro igitur designabatur, sicut in signo sensibili, sapientia, quæ intelligibilibus verbis exprimebatur in tabulis. Per altare vero thymiamatis significabatur officium sacerdotum, quorum erat populum ad Deum reducere; et hoc etiam significabatur per virgam; nam in illo altari incendebatur thymiama boni odoris, per quod significabatur sanctitas populi acceptabilis Deo. Dicitur enim Apoc., vii, quod per fumum aromatum signi- 1 Ita codd. Alcanitiensis, Venetus SS. Joannis et Pauli, Salmanticensis, et octo vetustissimi Parisienses quos habui præ manibus. Perperam ad-dunt: «lapidea.» Mala fide hujus erroris D. Thomam incusavit Theophilus Raynaudus, auctor cujusdam libelli famosi contra Dominicanos. Hunc præmo-nuerat ipse P. Nicolaï. 2 In edit.: «subter.» ficantur justificationes sanctorum 1. Convenienter autem sacerdotalis dignitas in arca significabatur per virgam, in exteriori vero tabernaculo per altare thymiamatis; quia sacerdos mediator est inter Deum et populum, regens populum per potestatem divinam, quam virga significat; et fructum sui regiminis, scilicet sanctitatem populi, Deo offert 2, quasi in altari thymiamatis. Per mensam autem significatur temporale nutrimentum vitæ, sicut et per manna; sed hoc est communius et grossius nutrimentum, illud autem suavius et subtilius. Convenienter autem candelabrum ponebatur ex parte australi, mensa autem ex parte aquilonari; quia australis pars est dextra pars mundi, aquilonaris autem sinistra, ut dicitur in II De cælo et mundo, text. 15. Sapientia autem pertinet ad dextram, sicut et cætera spiritualia bona; temporale autem nutrimentum ad sinistram, secundum illud Prov., 16: In sinistra illius divitiæ et gloria. Potestas autem sacerdotalis media est inter temporalia et spiritualem sapientiam; quia per eam et spiritualis sapientia, et temporalia dispensantur. Potest autem et horum alia ratio assignari magis litteralis. In arca enim continebantur tabulæ legis ad tollendam legis oblivionem; unde dicitur Exod., xxiv, 12: Dabo tibi duas tabulas lapideas, et legem, ac mandata quæ scripsi, ut doceas filios Israel. Virga vero Aaron ponebatur ibi ad comprimendam dissensionem populi de sacerdotio Aaron. Unde dicitur Num., xvii, 10: Refer virgam Aaron in tabernaculum testimonii, ut servetur in signum rebellium filiorum Israel. Manna autem conservabatur in arca ad commemorandum beneficium quod Dominus præstitit filiis Israel in deserto; unde dicitur Exod., xvi, 32: Imple gomor ex eo, et custodiatur in futuras retro generationes, ut norint panes quibus alui vos in solitudine. Candelabrum vero erat institutum ad honorificentiam tabernaculi; pertinet enim ad magnificentiam domus quod sit bene luminosa. Habebat autem candelabrum septem calamos, ut Josephus dicit, lib. III Antiquit., cap. vii et viii, ad fin., ad significandum septem planetas, quibus totus mundus illuminatur. Et ideo ponebatur candelabrum ex parte australi, quia ex illa parte est nobis planetarum cursus. Altare vero thymiamatis erat institutum, ut jugiter in tabernaculo esset fumus boni odoris, tum propter venerationem tabernaculi, tum etiam in remedium fætoris, quem oportebat accidere ex effusione sanguinis et occisione animalium. Ea enim quæ sunt fætida despiiuntur quasi vilia; quæ vero sunt boni odoris, homines magis appretiantur. Mensa autem apponebatur ad significandum quod sacerdotes templo servientes in templo victum habere debebant. Unde duodecim panes superpositos mensæ, in memoriam duodecim tribuum, solis sacerdotibus edere licitum erat, ut habetur Matth., xii. Mensa autem non ponebatur directe in medio ante propitiatorium, ad excludendum ritum idololatriæ. Nam gentiles in sacris lunæ proponebant mensam coram idolo lunæ; unde dicitur Jerem., vii, 18: Mulieres conspergunt adipem ut faciant placentas reginæ cæli. In atrio vero extra tabernaculum continebatur altare holocaustorum, in quo offerebantur Deo sacrificia de his quæ erant a populo possessa. Et ideo in atrio poterat esse populus, qui hujusmodi Deo offerebat per manus sacer-dotum; sed ad interius altare, in quo ipsa devotio et sanctitas populi offerebatur, non poterant accedere nisi sacerdotes, quorum erat Deo offerre populum. Est autem hoc altare extra tabernaculum in atrio constitutum ad removendum cultum idololatriæ; nam gentiles intra templa altaria constituebant ad immolandum idolis. Figuralis vero ratio omnium horum assignari potest ex relatione tabernaculi ad Christum qui figurabatur. Est autem considerandum, quod ad designandam imperfectionem legalium figurarum diversæ figuræ fuerunt institutæ in templo ad significandum Christum. Ipse enim significatur per propitiatorium, quia ipse est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris, ut dicitur I Joan., ii, 2. Et convenienter hoc propitiatorium a cherubim portabatur, quia de eo scriptum est: Adorent eum omnes angeli Dei, ut habetur Hebr., i, 6. Ipse etiam significatur per arcam; quia sicut arca erat constructa de lignis Sethim, ita corpus Christi de membris purissimis constabat. Erat autem deaurata, quia Christus fuit plenus sapientia et charitate, quae per aurum significatur. Intra 1 Nihil simile in cap. vii; at in xix, 8: Byssinum enim justificationes sunt sanctorum. 2 Ita codd. Alcan., Parisiensis, aliique; forte « offerens. » arcam autem erat urna aurea, id est, sancta anima, habens manna, id est, omnem plenitudinem sanctitatis et divinitatis. Erat etiam in arca virga, id est, potestas sacerdotalis, quia ipse est factus sacerdos in aeternum. Erant etiam ibi tabulæ testamenti ad designandum quod ipse Christus est legis dator. Ipse etiam Christus significatur per candelabrum, quia ipse dicit, Joan., viii, 12: Ego sum lux mundi; per septem lucernas septem dona sancti Spiritus. Ipse etiam significatur per mensam, quia ipse est spiritualis cibus, secundum illud Joan., vi, 51: Ego sum panis vivus. Duodecim etiam panes significant duodecim apostolos, vel doctrinam eorum. Sive per candelabrum et mensam potest significari doctrina et fides Ecclesiæ, quæ etiam illuminat et spiritualiter reficit. Ipse etiam Christus significatur per duplex altare, scilicet holocaustorum et thymiamatis, quia per ipsum oportet nos Deo offerre omnium virtutum opera; sive illa quibus carnem affligimus, quæ offeruntur quasi in altari holocaustorum; sive illa quæ majore mentis perfectione per spiritualia perfectorum desideria Deo offeruntur in Christo, quasi in altari thymiamatis, secundum illud ad Hebr., ult., 15: Per ipsum ergo offeramus hostiam laudis semper Deo.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.7] The Lord commanded an altar to be made for the offering of sacrifices and gifts, in honor of God, and for the upkeep of the ministers who served the tabernacle. Now concerning the construction of the altar the Lord issued a twofold precept. One was at the beginning of the Law (Exodus 20:24, seqq.) when the Lord commanded them to make \"an altar of earth,\" or at least \"not of hewn stones\"; and again, not to make the altar high, so as to make it necessary to \"go up\" to it \"by steps.\" This was in detestation of idolatrous worship: for the Gentiles made their altars ornate and high, thinking that there was something holy and divine in such things. For this reason, too, the Lord commanded (Deuteronomy 16:21): \"Thou shalt plant no grove, nor any tree near the altar of the Lord thy God\": since idolaters were wont to offer sacrifices beneath trees, on account of the pleasantness and shade afforded by them. There was also a figurative reason for these precepts. Because we must confess that in Christ, Who is our altar, there is the true nature of flesh, as regards His humanity--and this is to make an altar of earth; and again, in regard to His Godhead, we must confess His equality with the Father--and this is \"not to go up\" to the altar by steps. Moreover we should not couple the doctrine of Christ to that of the Gentiles, which provokes men to lewdness.
\nBut when once the tabernacle had been constructed to the honor of God, there was no longer reason to fear these occasions of idolatry. Wherefore the Lord commanded the altar of holocausts to be made of brass, and to be conspicuous to all the people; and the altar of incense, which was visible to none but the priests. Nor was brass so precious as to give the people an occasion for idolatry.
\nSince, however, the reason for the precept, \"Thou shalt not go up by steps unto My altar\" (Exodus 20:26) is stated to have been \"lest thy nakedness be discovered,\" it should be observed that this too was instituted with the purpose of preventing idolatry, for in the feasts of Priapus the Gentiles uncovered their nakedness before the people. But later on the priests were prescribed the use of loin-cloths for the sake of decency: so that without any danger the altar could be placed so high that the priests when offering sacrifices would go up by steps of wood, not fixed but movable.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.7] Ad septimum dicendum, quod Dominus præcepit altare construi ad sacrificia et munera offerenda in honorem Dei et sustentationem ministrorum qui tabernaculo deserviebant. De constructione autem altaris datur a Domino duplex præceptum: unum quidem in principio legis, Exod., xx, ubi Dominus mandavit quod facerent altare de terra, vel saltem de lapidibus non sectis; et iterum quod non facerent altare excelsum, ad quod oporteret per gradus ascendere; et hoc ad detestandum idololatriæ cultum. Gentiles enim idolis construebant altaria ornata et sublimia, in quibus credebant ali-quid sanctitatis et numinis esse. Propter quod etiam Dominus mandavit, Deut., xvi, 21: Non plantabis lucum et omnem arbo-rem juxta altare Domini Dei tui. Idololatræ enim consueverant sub arboribus sacrificare, propter amœnitatem et umbrositatem. Quorum etiam præceptorum ratio figuralis fuit: quia in Christo, qui est nostrum altare, debemus confiteri veram carnis naturam quantum ad humanitatem, quod est altare de terra facere; et quantum ad divinitatem debemus in eo confiteri Patris equalitatem, quod est non ascendere per gradus ad altare. Nec etiam juxta Christum debemus admittere doctrinam gentilium ad lasciviam provocantem. Sed facto taberna-culo ad honorem Dei, non erant timendæ hujusmodi occasiones idololatriæ. Et ideo Dominus mandavit quod fieret altare holocaustorum de ære, quod esset omni populo conspicuum; et altare thymiamatis de auro, quod soli sacerdotes videbant. Nec erat tanta pretiositas æris, ut per hoc populus ad aliquam idololatriam provocaretur. Sed quia, Exod., xx, 26, ponitur pro ratione hujus præcepti: Non ascendes per gradus ad altare meum, id quod subditur: Ne reveletur turpitudo tua; considerandum est quod hoc etiam fuit institutum ad excludendam idololatriam; nam in sacris Priapi sua pudenda gentiles populo denudabant. Postmodum autem indictus est sacerdotibus feminalium usus ad tegmen pudendorum. Et ideo sine periculo institui poterat tanta altaris altitudo, ut per aliquos gradus ligneos non stantes sed portatiles in hora sacrificii sacerdotes ad altare ascenderent sacrificia offerentes.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.8] The body of the tabernacle consisted of boards placed on end, and covered on the inside with curtains of four different colors, viz. twisted linen, violet, purple, and scarlet twice dyed. These curtains, however, covered the sides only of the tabernacle; and the roof of the tabernacle was covered with violet-colored skins; and over this there was another covering of rams' skins dyed red; and over this there was a third curtain made of goats' hair, which covered not only the roof of the tabernacle, but also reached to the ground and covered the boards of the tabernacle on the outside. The literal reason of these coverings taken altogether was the adornment and protection of the tabernacle, that it might be an object of respect. Taken singly, according to some, the curtains denoted the starry heaven, which is adorned with various stars; the curtain (of goats' skin) signified the waters which are above the firmament; the skins dyed red denoted the empyrean heaven, where the angels are; the violet skins, the heaven of the Blessed Trinity.
\nThe figurative meaning of these things is that the boards of which the tabernacle was constructed signify the faithful of Christ, who compose the Church. The boards were covered on the inner side by curtains of four colors: because the faithful are inwardly adorned with the four virtues: for \"the twisted linen,\" as the gloss observes, \"signifies the flesh refulgent with purity; violet signifies the mind desirous of heavenly things; purple denotes the flesh subject to passions; the twice dyed scarlet betokens the mind in the midst of the passions enlightened by the love of God and our neighbor.\" The coverings of the building designate prelates and doctors, who ought to be conspicuous for their heavenly manner of life, signified by the violet colored skins: and who should also be ready to suffer martyrdom, denoted by the skins dyed red; and austere of life and patient in adversity, betokened by the curtains of goats' hair, which were exposed to wind and rain, as the gloss observes.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.8] Ad octavum dicendum, quod corpus tabernaculi constabat ex quibusdam tabulis in longitudine erectis; quæ quidem interius tegebantur quibusdam cortinis ex quatuor coloribus variatis, scilicet de bysso retorta, et hyacintho, ac purpura, coccoque bis tincto. Sed hujusmodi cortinæ tegebant solum latera tabernaculi. In tecto autem tabernaculi erat operimentum unum de pellibus hyacinthinis, et super hoc aliud de pellibus arietum rubricatis, et desuper tertium de quibusdam sagis cilicinis, quæ non tanum operiebant tectum tabernaculi; sed etiam descendebant usque ad terram, et tegebant tabulas tabernaculi exterius. Horum autem operimentorum ratio litteralis in communi erat ornatus et protectio tabernaculi, ut in reverentia haberetur. In speciali vero secundum quosdam per cortinas designabatur cælum sidereum, quod est diversis stellis variatum; per saga, aquæ quæ sunt supra firmamentum; per pelles rubricatas, cælum empyreum, in quo sunt angeli; per pelles hyacinthinas, cælum sanctæ Trinitatis. Figuralis autem ratio horum est, quia ast non agitur hic de coper tabulas, ex quibus construebatur tabernaculum, significantur Christi fideles, ex quibus construitur Ecclesia. Tegebantur autem interius tabulæ cortinis quadricoloribus, quia fideles interius ornantur quatuor virtutibus; nam « in bysso retorta, » ut Glossa ord. Exod., xxvi, dicit, « significatur caro castitate renitens; in hyacintho mens superna cupiens; in purpura caro passionibus subjacens; in cocco bis tincto mens inter passiones Dei et proximi dilectione præfulgiens. » Per operimenta vero tecti designantur prælati et doctores in quibus debet retineri cælestis conversatio, quod significatur per pelles hyacinthinas; promptitudo ad martyrium, quod significant pelles rubricata; austeritas vitæ et tolerantia adversorum, quæ significantur per saga cilicina, quæ erant exposita ventis et pluviis, ut Glossa dicit, loc. cit.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.9] The literal reason for the sanctification of the tabernacle and vessels was that they might be treated with greater reverence, being deputed, as it were, to the divine worship by this consecration. The figurative reason is that this sanctification signified the sanctification of the living tabernacle, i.e. the faithful of whom the Church of Christ is composed.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.9] Ad nonum dicendum, quod sanctificatio tabernaculi et vasorum ejus habebat causam litteralem, ut in majori reverentia haberetur, quasi per hujusmodi consecratio nem divino cultui deputatum. Figuralis autem ratio est, quia per hujusmodi sanctificationem significatur spiritualis sanctificatio viventis tabernaculi, scilicet fidelium, ex quibus constituitur Ecclesia Christi.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.10] Under the Old Law there were seven temporal solemnities, and one continual solemnity, as may be gathered from Numbers 28 and 29. There was a continual feast, since the lamb was sacrificed every day, morning and evening: and this continual feast of an abiding sacrifice signified the perpetuity of Divine bliss. Of the temporal feasts the first was that which was repeated every week. This was the solemnity of the \"Sabbath,\" celebrated in memory of the work of the creation of the universe. Another solemnity, viz. the \"New Moon,\" was repeated every month, and was observed in memory of the work of the Divine government. For the things of this lower world owe their variety chiefly to the movement of the moon; wherefore this feast was kept at the new moon: and not at the full moon, to avoid the worship of idolaters who used to offer sacrifices to the moon at that particular time. And these two blessings are bestowed in common on the whole human race; and hence they were repeated more frequently.
\nThe other five feasts were celebrated once a year: and they commemorated the benefits which had been conferred especially on that people. For there was the feast of the \"Passover\" in the first month to commemorate the blessing of being delivered out of Egypt. The feast of \"Pentecost\" was celebrated fifty days later, to recall the blessing of the giving of the Law. The other three feasts were kept in the seventh month, nearly the whole of which was solemnized by them, just as the seventh day. For on the first of the seventh month was the feast of \"Trumpets,\" in memory of the delivery of Isaac, when Abraham found the ram caught by its horns, which they represented by the horns which they blew. The feast of Trumpets was a kind of invitation whereby they prepared themselves to keep the following feast which was kept on the tenth day. This was the feast of \"Expiation,\" in memory of the blessing whereby, at the prayer of Moses, God forgave the people's sin of worshipping the calf. After this was the feast of \"Scenopegia\" or of \"Tents,\" which was kept for seven days, to commemorate the blessing of being protected and led by God through the desert, where they lived in tents. Hence during this feast they had to take \"the fruits of the fairest tree,\" i.e. the citron, \"and the trees of dense foliage\" [Douay and A.V. and R.V. read: 'Boughs of thick trees'], i.e. the myrtle, which is fragrant, \"and the branches of palm-trees, and willows of the brook,\" which retain their greenness a long time; and these are to be found in the Land of promise; to signify that God had brought them through the arid land of the wilderness to a land of delights. On the eighth day another feast was observed, of \"Assembly and Congregation,\" on which the people collected the expenses necessary for the divine worship: and it signified the uniting of the people and the peace granted to them in the Land of promise.
\nThe figurative reason for these feasts was that the continual sacrifice of the lamb foreshadowed the perpetuity of Christ, Who is the \"Lamb of God,\" according to Hebrews 13:8: \"Jesus Christ yesterday and today, and the same for ever.\" The Sabbath signified the spiritual rest bestowed by Christ, as stated in Hebrews 4. The Neomenia, which is the beginning of the new moon, signified the enlightening of the primitive Church by Christ's preaching and miracles. The feast of Pentecost signified the Descent of the Holy Ghost on the apostles. The feast of Trumpets signified the preaching of the apostles. The feast of Expiation signified the cleansing of the Christian people from sins: and the feast of Tabernacles signified their pilgrimage in this world, wherein they walk by advancing in virtue. The feast of Assembly or Congregation foreshadowed the assembly of the faithful in the kingdom of heaven: wherefore this feast is described as \"most holy\" (Leviticus 23:36). These three feasts followed immediately on one another, because those who expiate their vices should advance in virtue, until they come to see God, as stated in Psalm 83:8.
\n[I-II.q.102.a.4.ad.10] Ad decimum dicendum, quod in veteri lege erant septem solemnitates temporales, et una continua, ut potest colligi Numer., xxviii et xxix. Erat enim quasi continuum festum, quia quotidie mane et vespere immolabatur agnus; et per illud continuum festum jugis sacrificii repræsentabatur perpetuitas divinæ beatitudinis. Festorum autem temporalium primum erat quod iterabatur qualibet septimana; et hæc erat solemnitas sabbati, quod celebrabatur in memoriam creationis rerum, ut supra dictum est. Alia autem solemnitas iterabatur quolibet mense, scilicet festum Neomeniæ, quod celebrabatur ad commemorandum opus divinæ gubernationis; nam hæc inferiora præcipue variantur secundum motum lunæ; et ideo celebrabatur hoc festum in novitate lunæ, non autem in ejus plenitudine, ad evitandum idololatrarum cultum, qui in tali tempore lunæ sacrificabant. Hæc autem duo beneficia sunt communia toti humano generi; et ideo frequentius iterabantur. Alia vero quinque festa celebrabantur semel in anno: et recolebantur in eis beneficia specialiter illi populo exhibita. Celebrabatur enim festum Phase primo mense ad commemorandum beneficium liberationis ex Ægypto. Celebrabatur autem festum Pentecostes post quinquaginta dies, ad recolendum beneficium legis datæ. Alia vero tria festa celebrabantur in mense septimo, qui quasi totus apud eos erat solemnis, sicut et septimus dies. In prima enim die mensis septimi erat festum Tubarum in memoriam liberationis Isaac, quando Abraham invenit arietem hærentem cornibus, quem repræsentabant per cornua, quibus buccinabant. Erat autem festum Tubarum quasi quædam invitatio, ut praparent se ad sequens festum, quod celebrabatur decimo die; et hoc erat festum expiationis, in memoriam illius beneficii quo Deus propitiatus est peccato populi de adoratione vituli ad preces Moysi. Post hoc autem celebrabatur festum Scenopegiæ, id est Tabernaculorum, septem diebus, ad commemorandum beneficium divinæ protectionis et deductionis per desertum, ubi in tabernaculis habitaverunt. Unde in hoc festo debebant habere fructum arboris pulcherrimæ, id est citrum, et lignum densarum frondium, id est, myrtum, quæ sunt odorifera, et spatulas palmarum, et salices de torrente, quæ diu retinent suum virorem, et hæc inveniuntur in terra promissionis, ad significandum quod per aridam terram deserti eos deduxerat Deus ad terram deliciosam. Octavo autem die celebrabatur aliud festum, scilicet Coetus atque Collectæ, in quo colligebantur a populo ea quæ erant necessaria ad expensas cultus divini; et significabatur adunatio populi, et pax præstita in terra promissionis. Figuralis autem ratio horum festorum est quia per juge sacrificium agni figuratur perpetuitas Christi, qui est agnus Dei, secundum illud Hebr., ult., 8: Jesus Christus heri et hodie, ipse et in sæcula. Per sabbatum autem designatur spiritualis requies nobis data per Christum, ut habetur ad Hebr., iv. Per Neomeniam autem, quæ est incensio novæ lunæ, significatur illuminatio primitivæ Ecclesiae per Christum, eo prædicante et miracula faciente. Per festum autem Pentecostes significatur descensus Spiritus sancti in Apostolos. Per festum autem Tubarum significatur prædicatio Apostolorum. Per festum autem Expiationis significatur emundatio a peccatis populi christiani. Per festum autem Tabernaculorum, peregrinatio eorum in hoc mundo, in quo ambulant in virtutibus proficiendo. Per festum autem Coetus atque Collectæ significatur congregatio fidelium in regno cælorum; et ideo illud festum dicebatur sanctissimum esse. Et hæc tria festa erant continua ad invicem, quia oportet expiatos a vitiis proficere in virtute, quousque perveniant ad Dei visionem, ut dicitur in psalmo lxxxiii.
\n