The vestments denote the virtues of God’s ministers.  Now there are four things that are necessary to all His ministers, viz. chastity denoted by the breeches; a pure life, signified by the linen tunic; the moderation of discretion, betokened by the girdle; and rectitude of purpose, denoted by the mitre covering the head.  But the high-priests needed four other things in addition to these.  First, a continual recollection of God in their thoughts; and this was signified by the golden plate worn over the forehead, with the name of God engraved thereon.  Secondly, they had to bear with the shortcomings of the people:  this was denoted by the ephod which they bore on their shoulders.  Thirdly, they had to carry the people in their mind and heart by the solicitude of charity, in token of which they wore the rational.  Fourthly, they had to lead a godly life by performing works of perfection; and this was signified by the violet tunic.  Hence little golden bells were fixed to the bottom of the violet tunic, which bells signified the teaching of divine things united in the high-priest to his godly mode of life.  In addition to these were the pomegranates, signifying unity of faith and concord in good morals:  because his doctrine should hold together in such a way that it should not rend asunder the unity of faith and peace. ________________________

SIXTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 102, Art. 6]

Whether There Was Any Reasonable Cause for the Ceremonial Observances?

Objection 1:  It would seem that there was no reasonable cause for the ceremonial observances.  Because, as the Apostle says (1 Tim. 4:4), “every creature of God is good, and nothing to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving.”  It was therefore unfitting that they should be forbidden to eat certain foods, as being unclean according to Lev. 11 [Cf.  Deut. 14].

Obj. 2:  Further, just as animals are given to man for food, so also are herbs:  wherefore it is written (Gen. 9:3):  “As the green herbs have I delivered all” flesh “to you.”  But the Law did not distinguish any herbs from the rest as being unclean, although some are most harmful, for instance, those that are poisonous.  Therefore it seems that neither should any animals have been prohibited as being unclean.

Obj. 3:  Further, if the matter from which a thing is generated be unclean, it seems that likewise the thing generated therefrom is unclean.  But flesh is generated from blood.  Since therefore all flesh was not prohibited as unclean, it seems that in like manner neither should blood have been forbidden as unclean; nor the fat which is engendered from blood.

Obj. 4:  Further, Our Lord said (Matt. 10:28; cf.  Luke 12:4), that those should not be feared “that kill the body,” since after death they “have no more that they can do”:  which would not be true if after death harm might come to man through anything done with his body.  Much less therefore does it matter to an animal already dead how its flesh be cooked.  Consequently there seems to be no reason in what is said, Ex. 23:19:  “Thou shalt not boil a kid in the milk of its dam.”