Reply Obj. 3:  The sacrifices and sacraments were of course sacred things.  But certain things were sacred, through being dedicated to the Divine worship, and yet were not sacrifices or sacraments:  wherefore they retained the common designation of sacred things.

Reply Obj. 4:  Those things which pertained to the mode of life of the people who worshipped God, retained the common designation of observances, in so far as they fell short of the above.  For they were not called sacred things, because they had no immediate connection with the worship of God, such as the tabernacle and its vessels had.  But by a sort of consequence they were matters of ceremony, in so far as they affected the fitness of the people who worshipped God.

Reply Obj. 5:  Just as the sacrifices were offered in a fixed place, so were they offered at fixed times:  for which reason the solemn festivals seem to be reckoned among the sacred things.  The oblations and gifts are counted together with the sacrifices; hence the Apostle says (Heb. 5:1):  “Every high-priest taken from among men, is ordained for men in things that appertain to God, that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices.” ________________________

QUESTION 102

OF THE CAUSES OF THE CEREMONIAL PRECEPTS
(In Six Articles)

We must now consider the causes of the ceremonial precepts:  under which head there are six points of inquiry: 

(1) Whether there was any cause for the ceremonial precepts?

(2) Whether the cause of the ceremonial precepts was literal or figurative?

(3) The causes of the sacrifices;

(4) The causes of the sacrifices;

(5) The causes of the sacred things;

(6) The causes of the observances.
________________________

FIRST ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 102, Art. 1]

Whether There Was Any Cause for the Ceremonial Precepts?

Objection 1:  It would seem that there was no cause for the ceremonial precepts.  Because on Eph. 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.

Obj. 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.

Obj. 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.