Reply Obj. 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.

Reply Obj. 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.

Reply Obj. 3:  As we have stated when speaking of human laws (Q. 96, AA. 1, 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. ________________________

THIRD ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 102, Art. 3]

Whether a Suitable Cause Can Be Assigned for the Ceremonies Which
Pertained to Sacrifices?

Objection 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 Ps. 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.

Obj. 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.

Obj. 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.

Obj. 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.

Obj. 5:  Further, God is the Author of life, not only of men, but also of animals, as is clear from Gen. 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 (Rom. 12:1), to present our bodies “a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God.”