Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut Damascenus dicit, in IV libro, quia ex duplici natura compositi sumus, intellectuali scilicet et sensibili, duplicem adorationem Deo offerimus, scilicet spiritualem, quae consistit in interiori mentis devotione; et corporalem, quae consistit in exteriori corporis humiliatione. Et quia in omnibus actibus latriae id quod est exterius refertur ad id quod est interius sicut ad principalius, ideo ipsa exterior adoratio fit propter interiorem, ut videlicet per signa humilitatis quae corporaliter exhibemus, excitetur noster affectus ad subiiciendum se Deo; quia connaturale est nobis ut per sensibilia ad intelligibilia procedamus. I answer that, As Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iv, 12), since we are composed of a twofold nature, intellectual and sensible, we offer God a twofold adoration; namely, a spiritual adoration, consisting in the internal devotion of the mind; and a bodily adoration, which consists in an exterior humbling of the body. And since in all acts of latria that which is without is referred to that which is within as being of greater import, it follows that exterior adoration is offered on account of interior adoration, in other words we exhibit signs of humility in our bodies in order to incite our affections to submit to God, since it is connatural to us to proceed from the sensible to the intelligible. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod etiam adoratio corporalis in spiritu fit, inquantum ex spirituali devotione procedit, et ad eam ordinatur. Reply Obj. 1: Even bodily adoration is done in spirit, insofar as it proceeds from and is directed to spiritual devotion. Ad secundum dicendum quod sicut oratio primordialiter quidem est in mente, secundario autem verbis exprimitur, ut supra dictum est; ita etiam adoratio principaliter quidem in interiori Dei reverentia consistit, secundario autem in quibusdam corporalibus humilitatis signis, sicut genu flectimus nostram infirmitatem significantes in comparatione ad Deum; prosternimus autem nos quasi profitentes nos nihil esse ex nobis. Reply Obj. 2: Just as prayer is primarily in the mind, and secondarily expressed in words, as stated above (Q. 83, A. 12), so too adoration consists chiefly in an interior reverence of God, but secondarily in certain bodily signs of humility; thus when we genuflect we signify our weakness in comparison with God, and when we prostrate ourselves we profess that we are nothing of ourselves. Ad tertium dicendum quod etsi per sensum Deum attingere non possumus, per sensibilia tamen signa mens nostra provocatur ut tendat in Deum. Reply Obj. 3: Though we cannot reach God with the senses, our mind is urged by sensible signs to approach God. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum adoratio requirat determinatum locum Whether adoration requires a definite place? Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod adoratio non requirat determinatum locum. Dicitur enim Ioan. IV, venit hora quando neque in monte hoc, neque in Ierosolymis adorabitis patrem. Eadem autem ratio videtur esse et de aliis locis. Ergo determinatus locus non requiritur ad adorandum. Objection 1: It would seem that adoration does not require a definite place. It is written (John 4:21): The hour cometh, when you shall neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, adore the Father; and the same reason seems to apply to other places. Therefore a definite place is not necessary for adoration. Praeterea, adoratio exterior ordinatur ad interiorem. Sed interior adoratio fit ad Deum ut ubique existentem. Ergo exterior adoratio non requirit determinatum locum. Obj. 2: Further, exterior adoration is directed to interior adoration. But interior adoration is shown to God as existing everywhere. Therefore exterior adoration does not require a definite place. Praeterea, idem Deus est qui in novo et veteri testamento adoratur. Sed in veteri testamento fiebat adoratio ad occidentem, nam ostium tabernaculi respiciebat ad orientem, ut habetur Exod. XXVI. Ergo, eadem ratione, etiam nunc debemus adorare ad occidentem, si aliquis locus determinatus requiritur ad adorandum. Obj. 3: Further, the same God is adored in the New as in the Old Testament. Now in the Old Testament they adored towards the west, because the door of the Tabernacle looked to the east (Exod 26:18 seqq.). Therefore for the same reason we ought now to adore towards the west, if any definite place be requisite for adoration. Sed contra est quod dicitur Isaiae LVI, et inducitur Ioan. II, domus mea domus orationis vocabitur. On the contrary, It is written (Isa 56:7): My house shall be called the house of prayer, which words are also quoted (John 2:16). Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, in adoratione principalior est interior devotio mentis, secundarium autem est quod pertinet exterius ad corporalia signa. Mens autem interius apprehendit Deum quasi non comprehensum aliquo loco, sed corporalia signa necesse est quod in determinato loco et situ sint. Et ideo determinatio loci non requiritur ad adorationem principaliter, quasi sit de necessitate ipsius, sed secundum quandam decentiam, sicut et alia corporalia signa. I answer that, As stated above (A. 2), the chief part of adoration is the internal devotion of the mind, while the secondary part is something external pertaining to bodily signs. Now the mind internally apprehends God as not comprised in a place; while bodily signs must of necessity be in some definite place and position. Hence a definite place is required for adoration, not chiefly, as though it were essential thereto, but by reason of a certain fittingness, like other bodily signs. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod dominus per illa verba praenuntiat cessationem adorationis tam secundum ritum Iudaeorum adorantium in Ierusalem, quam etiam secundum ritum Samaritanorum adorantium in monte Garizim. Uterque enim ritus cessavit veniente spirituali Evangelii veritate, secundum quam in omni loco Deo sacrificatur, ut dicitur Malach. I. Reply Obj. 1: By these words our Lord foretold the cessation of adoration, both according to the rite of the Jews who adored in Jerusalem, and according to the rite of the Samaritans who adored on Mount Garizim. For both these rites ceased with the advent of the spiritual truth of the Gospel, according to which a sacrifice is offered to God in every place, as stated in Malach. 1:11. Ad secundum dicendum quod determinatus locus eligitur ad adorandum, non propter Deum, qui adoratur, quasi loco concludatur, sed propter ipsos adorantes. Et hoc triplici ratione. Primo quidem, propter loci consecrationem, ex qua spiritualem devotionem concipiunt orantes, ut magis exaudiantur, sicut patet ex adoratione Salomonis, III Reg. VIII. Secundo, propter sacra mysteria et alia sanctitatis signa quae ibi continentur. Tertio, propter concursum multorum adorantium, ex quo fit oratio magis exaudibilis, secundum illud Matth. XVIII, ubi sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi sum ego in medio eorum. Reply Obj. 2: A definite place is chosen for adoration, not on account of God Who is adored, as though He were enclosed in a place, but on account of the adorers; and this for three reasons. First, because the place is consecrated, so that those who pray there conceive a greater devotion and are more likely to be heard, as may be seen in the prayer of Solomon (3 Kgs 8). Second, on account of the sacred mysteries and other signs of holiness contained therein. Third, on account of the concourse of many adorers, by reason of which their prayer is more likely to be heard, according to Matt. 18:20, Where there are two or three gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them. Ad tertium dicendum quod secundum quandam decentiam adoramus versus orientem. Primo quidem, propter divinae maiestatis indicium quod nobis manifestatur in motu caeli, qui est ab oriente secundo, propter Paradisum in oriente constitutum, ut legitur Gen. II, secundum litteram Septuaginta, quasi quaeramus ad Paradisum redire. Tertio, propter Christum, qui est lux mundi et oriens nominatur, Zach. VI; et qui ascendit super caelum caeli ad orientem; et ab oriente etiam expectatur venturus, secundum illud Matth. XXIV, sicut fulgur exit ab oriente et paret usque ad occidentem, ita erit adventus filii hominis. Reply Obj. 3: There is a certain fittingness in adoring towards the east. First, because the Divine majesty is indicated in the movement of the heavens which is from the east. Second, because Paradise was situated in the east according to the Septuagint version of Gen. 2:8, and so we signify our desire to return to Paradise. Third, on account of Christ Who is the light of the world, and is called the Orient (Zech 6:12); Who mounteth above the heaven of heavens to the east (Ps 67:34), and is expected to come from the east, according to Matt. 24:27, As lightning cometh out of the east, and appeareth even into the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. Quaestio 85 Question 85 De sacrificiis Sacrifices Deinde considerandum est de actibus quibus aliquae res exteriores Deo offeruntur. Circa quos occurrit duplex consideratio, primo quidem, de his quae Deo a fidelibus dantur; secundo, de votis, quibus ei aliqua promittuntur. In due sequence we must consider those acts whereby external things are offered to God. These give rise to a twofold consideration: (1) Of things given to God by the faithful; (2) Of vows, whereby something is promised to Him. Circa primum, considerandum est de sacrificiis, oblationibus, primitiis et decimis. Circa sacrificia quaeruntur quatuor. Under the first head we shall consider sacrifices, oblations, first-fruits, and tithes. About sacrifices there are four points of inquiry: Primo, utrum offerre Deo sacrificium sit de lege naturae. (1) Whether offering a sacrifice to God is of the law of nature? Secundo, utrum soli Deo sit sacrificium offerendum. (2) Whether sacrifice should be offered to God alone? Tertio, utrum offerre sacrificium sit specialis actus virtutis. (3) Whether the offering of a sacrifice is a special act of virtue? Quarto, utrum omnes teneantur ad sacrificium offerendum. (4) Whether all are bound to offer sacrifice? Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum offerre sacrificium Deo sit de lege naturae Whether offering a sacrifice to God is of the law of nature? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod offerre sacrificium Deo non sit de lege naturae. Ea enim quae sunt iuris naturalis communia sunt apud omnes. Non autem hoc contingit circa sacrificia, nam quidam leguntur obtulisse in sacrificium panem et vinum, sicut de Melchisedech dicitur, Gen. XIV; et quidam haec, quidam illa animalia. Ergo oblatio sacrificiorum non est de iure naturali. Objection 1: It would seem that offering a sacrifice to God is not of the natural law. Things that are of the natural law are common among all men. Yet this is not the case with sacrifices: for we read of some, e.g., Melchisedech (Gen 14:18), offering bread and wine in sacrifice, and of certain animals being offered by some, and others by others. Therefore the offering of sacrifices is not of the natural law. Praeterea, ea quae sunt iuris naturalis omnes iusti servaverunt. Sed non legitur de Isaac quod sacrificium obtulerit, neque etiam de Adam, de quo tamen dicitur, Sap. X, quod sapientia eduxit eum a delicto suo. Ergo oblatio sacrificii non est de iure naturali. Obj. 2: Further, things that are of the natural law were observed by all just men. Yet we do not read that Isaac offered sacrifice; nor that Adam did so, of whom nevertheless it is written (Wis 10:2) that wisdom brought him out of his sin. Therefore the offering of sacrifice is not of the natural law. Praeterea, Augustinus dicit, X de Civ. Dei, quod sacrificia in quadam significantia offeruntur. Voces autem, quae sunt praecipua inter signa, sicut idem dicit, in libro de Doct. Christ., non significant naturaliter, sed ad placitum, secundum Philosophum. Ergo sacrificia non sunt de lege naturali. Obj. 3: Further, Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x, 5, 19) that sacrifices are offered in signification of something. Now words which are chief among signs, as he again says (De Doctr. Christ. ii, 3), signify, not by nature but by convention, according to the Philosopher (Peri Herm. i, 2). Therefore sacrifices are not of the natural law. Sed contra est quod in qualibet aetate, et apud quaslibet hominum nationes, semper fuit aliqua sacrificiorum oblatio. Quod autem est apud omnes, videtur naturale esse. Ergo et oblatio sacrificii est de iure naturali. On the contrary, At all times and among all nations there has always been the offering of sacrifices. Now that which is observed by all is seemingly natural. Therefore the offering of sacrifices is of the natural law. Respondeo dicendum quod naturalis ratio dictat homini quod alicui superiori subdatur, propter defectus quos in seipso sentit, in quibus ab aliquo superiori eget adiuvari et dirigi. Et quidquid illud sit, hoc est quod apud omnes dicitur Deus. Sicut autem in rebus naturalibus naturaliter inferiora superioribus subduntur, ita etiam naturalis ratio dictat homini secundum naturalem inclinationem ut ei quod est supra hominem subiectionem et honorem exhibeat secundum suum modum. Est autem modus conveniens homini ut sensibilibus signis utatur ad aliqua exprimenda, quia ex sensibilibus cognitionem accipit. Et ideo ex naturali ratione procedit quod homo quibusdam sensibilibus rebus utatur offerens eas Deo, in signum debitae subiectionis et honoris, secundum similitudinem eorum qui dominis suis aliqua offerunt in recognitionem dominii. Hoc autem pertinet ad rationem sacrificii. Et ideo oblatio sacrificii pertinet ad ius naturale. I answer that, Natural reason tells man that he is subject to a higher being, on account of the defects which he perceives in himself, and in which he needs help and direction from someone above him: and whatever this superior being may be, it is known to all under the name of God. Now just as in natural things the lower are naturally subject to the higher, so too it is a dictate of natural reason in accordance with man’s natural inclination that he should tender submission and honor, according to his mode, to that which is above man. Now the mode befitting to man is that he should employ sensible signs in order to signify anything, because he derives his knowledge from sensibles. Hence it is a dictate of natural reason that man should use certain sensibles, by offering them to God in sign of the subjection and honor due to Him, like those who make certain offerings to their lord in recognition of his authority. Now this is what we mean by a sacrifice, and consequently the offering of sacrifice is of the natural law. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, aliqua in communi sunt de iure naturali quorum determinationes sunt de iure positivo, sicut quod malefactores puniantur habet lex naturalis, sed quod tali poena vel tali puniantur est ex institutione divina vel humana. Similiter etiam oblatio sacrificii in communi est de lege naturae, et ideo in hoc omnes conveniunt. Sed determinatio sacrificiorum est ex institutione humana vel divina, et ideo in hoc differunt. Reply Obj. 1: As stated above (I-II, Q. 95, A. 2), certain things belong generically to the natural law, while their determination belongs to the positive law; thus the natural law requires that evildoers should be punished; but that this or that punishment should be inflicted on them is a matter determined by God or by man. In like manner the offering of sacrifice belongs generically to the natural law, and consequently all are agreed on this point, but the determination of sacrifices is established by God or by man, and this is the reason for their difference. Ad secundum dicendum quod Adam et Isaac, sicut et alii iusti, Deo sacrificium obtulerunt secundum sui temporis congruentiam, ut patet per Gregorium, qui dicit quod apud antiquos per sacrificiorum oblationes remittebatur pueris originale peccatum. Non tamen de omnibus iustorum sacrificiis fit mentio in Scriptura, sed solum de illis circa quae aliquid speciale accidit. Potest tamen esse ratio quare Adam non legitur sacrificium obtulisse, ne, quia in ipso notatur origo peccati, simul etiam in eo sanctificationis origo significaretur. Isaac vero significavit Christum inquantum ipse oblatus est in sacrificium. Unde non oportebat ut significaret quasi sacrificium offerens. Reply Obj. 2: Adam, Isaac and other just men offered sacrifice to God in a manner befitting the times in which they lived, according to Gregory, who says (Moral. iv, 3) that in olden times original sin was remitted through the offering of sacrifices. Nor does Scripture mention all the sacrifices of the just, but only those that have something special connected with them. Perhaps the reason why we read of no sacrifice being offered by Adam may be that, as the origin of sin is ascribed to him, the origin of sanctification ought not to be represented as typified in him. Isaac was a type of Christ, being himself offered in sacrifice; and so there was no need that he should be represented as offering a sacrifice. Ad tertium dicendum quod significare conceptus suos est homini naturale, sed determinatio signorum est secundum humanum placitum. Reply Obj. 3: It is natural to man to express his ideas by signs, but the determination of those signs depends on man’s pleasure. Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum soli summo Deo sit sacrificium offerendum Whether sacrifice should be offered to the most high God alone? Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non soli summo Deo sit sacrificium offerendum. Cum enim sacrificium Deo offerri debeat, videtur quod omnibus illis sit sacrificium offerendum qui divinitatis consortes fiunt. Sed etiam sancti homines efficiuntur divinae naturae consortes, ut dicitur II Petri I, unde et de eis in Psalm. dicitur, ego dixi, dii estis. Angeli etiam filii Dei nominantur, ut patet Iob I. Ergo omnibus his debet sacrificium offerri. Objection 1: It would seem that sacrifice should not be offered to the most high God alone. Since sacrifice ought to be offered to God, it would seem that it ought to be offered to all such as are partakers of the Godhead. Now holy men are made partakers of the Divine nature, according to 2 Pet. 1:4; wherefore of them is it written (Ps 81:6): I have said, You are gods: and angels too are called sons of God, according to Job 1:6. Thus sacrifice should be offered to all these. Praeterea, quanto aliquis maior est, tanto ei maior honor debet exhiberi. Sed Angeli et sancti sunt multo maiores quibuscumque terrenis principibus, quibus tamen eorum subditi multo maiorem honorem impendunt, se coram eis prosternentes et munera offerentes, quam sit oblatio alicuius animalis vel rei alterius in sacrificium. Ergo multo magis Angelis et sanctis potest sacrificium offerri. Obj. 2: Further, the greater a person is the greater the honor due to him from man. Now the angels and saints are far greater than any earthly princes: and yet the subjects of the latter pay them much greater honor, by prostrating before them, and offering them gifts, than is implied by offering an animal or any other thing in sacrifice. Much more therefore may one offer sacrifice to the angels and saints.