|
Objection 1: It would seem that the ceremonies of the Law were in
existence before the Law. For sacrifices and holocausts were
ceremonies of the Old Law, as stated above (Question 101,
Article 4). But sacrifices and holocausts preceded the Law: for
it is written (Gn. 4:3,4) that "Cain offered, of the fruits
of the earth, gifts to the Lord," and that "Abel offered of the
firstlings of his flock, and of their fat." Noe also "offered
holocausts" to the Lord (Gn. 18:20), and Abraham did in
like manner (Gn. 22:13). Therefore the ceremonies of the Old
Law preceded the Law.
Objection 2: Further, the erecting and consecrating of the altar
were part of the ceremonies relating to holy things. But these
preceded the Law. For we read (Gn. 13:18) that "Abraham .
. . built . . . an altar to the Lord"; and (Gn. 28:18)
that "Jacob . . . took the stone . . . and set it up for a
title, pouring oil upon the top of it." Therefore the legal
ceremonies preceded the Law.
Objection 3: Further, the first of the legal sacraments seems to
have been circumcision. But circumcision preceded the Law, as
appears from Gn. 17. In like manner the priesthood preceded the
Law; for it is written (Gn. 14:18) that "Melchisedech . .
. was the priest of the most high God." Therefore the sacramental
ceremonies preceded the Law.
Objection 4: Further, the distinction of clean from unclean animals
belongs to the ceremonies of observances, as stated above (Question
100, 2, Article 6, ad 1). But this distinction preceded the
Law; for it is written (Gn. 7:2,3): "Of all clean beasts
take seven and seven . . . but of the beasts that are unclean, two
and two." Therefore the legal ceremonies preceded the Law.
On the contrary, It is written (Dt. 6:1): "These are the
precepts and ceremonies . . . which the Lord your God commanded
that I should teach you." But they would not have needed to be
taught about these things, if the aforesaid ceremonies had been already
in existence. Therefore the legal ceremonies did not precede the
Law.
I answer that, As is clear from what has been said (Question
101, Article 2; Question 102, Article 2), the legal
ceremonies were ordained for a double purpose; the worship of God,
and the foreshadowing of Christ. Now whoever worships God must needs
worship Him by means of certain fixed things pertaining to external
worship. But the fixing of the divine worship belongs to the
ceremonies; just as the determining of our relations with our neighbor
is a matter determined by the judicial precepts, as stated above
(Question 99, Article 4). Consequently, as among men in
general there were certain judicial precepts, not indeed established by
Divine authority, but ordained by human reason; so also there were
some ceremonies fixed, not by the authority of any law, but according
to the will and devotion of those that worship God. Since, however,
even before the Law some of the leading men were gifted with the spirit
of prophecy, it is to be believed that a heavenly instinct, like a
private law, prompted them to worship God in a certain definite way,
which would be both in keeping with the interior worship, and a
suitable token of Christ's mysteries, which were foreshadowed also by
other things that they did, according to 1 Cor. 10:11: "All
. . . things happened to them in figure." Therefore there were
some ceremonies before the Law, but they were not legal ceremonies,
because they were not as yet established by legislation.
Reply to Objection 1: The patriarchs offered up these oblations,
sacrifices and holocausts previously to the Law, out of a certain
devotion of their own will, according as it seemed proper to them to
offer up in honor of God those things which they had received from
Him, and thus to testify that they worshipped God Who is the
beginning and end of all.
Reply to Objection 2: They also established certain sacred things,
because they thought that the honor due to God demanded that certain
places should be set apart from others for the purpose of divine
worship.
Reply to Objection 3: The sacrament of circumcision was established
by command of God before the Law. Hence it cannot be called a
sacrament of the Law as though it were an institution of the Law, but
only as an observance included in the Law. Hence Our Lord said
(Jn. 7:20) that circumcision was "not of Moses, but of his
fathers." Again, among those who worshipped God, the priesthood
was in existence before the Law by human appointment, for the Law
allotted the priestly dignity to the firstborn.
Reply to Objection 4: The distinction of clean from unclean animals
was in vogue before the Law, not with regard to eating them, since it
is written (Gn. 9:3): "Everything that moveth and liveth shall
be meat for you": but only as to the offering of sacrifices because
they used only certain animals for that purpose. If, however, they
did make any distinction in regard to eating; it was not that it was
considered illegal to eat such animals, since this was not forbidden by
any law, but from dislike or custom: thus even now we see that certain
foods are looked upon with disgust in some countries, while people
partake of them in others.
|
|