SECOND ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 103, Art. 2]

Whether, at the Time of the Law, the Ceremonies of the Old Law Had

Any Power of Justification?

Objection 1: It would seem that the ceremonies of the Old Law had the

power of justification at the time of the Law. Because expiation from

sin and consecration pertains to justification. But it is written

(Ex. 39:21) that the priests and their apparel were consecrated by

the sprinkling of blood and the anointing of oil; and (Lev. 16:16)

that, by sprinkling the blood of the calf, the priest expiated "the

sanctuary from the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and from

their transgressions and . . . their sins." Therefore the ceremonies

of the Old Law had the power of justification.

Obj. 2: Further, that by which man pleases God pertains to

justification, according to Ps. 10:8: "The Lord is just and hath

loved justice." But some pleased God by means of ceremonies,

according to Lev. 10:19: "How could I . . . please the Lord in the

ceremonies, having a sorrowful heart?" Therefore the ceremonies of

the Old Law had the power of justification.

Obj. 3: Further, things relating to the divine worship regard the

soul rather than the body, according to Ps. 18:8: "The Law of the

Lord is unspotted, converting souls." But the leper was cleansed by

means of the ceremonies of the Old Law, as stated in Lev. 14. Much

more therefore could the ceremonies of the Old Law cleanse the soul

by justifying it.

_On the contrary,_ The Apostle says (Gal. 2) [*The first words of the

quotation are from 3:21: St. Thomas probably quoting from memory,

substituted them for 2:21, which runs thus: 'If justice be by the

Law, then Christ died in vain.']: "If there had been a law given

which could justify [Vulg.: 'give life'], Christ died in vain," i.e.

without cause. But this is inadmissible. Therefore the ceremonies of

the Old Law did not confer justice.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (Q. 102, A. 5, ad 4), a twofold

uncleanness was distinguished in the Old Law. One was spiritual and

is the uncleanness of sin. The other was corporal, which rendered a

man unfit for divine worship; thus a leper, or anyone that touched

carrion, was said to be unclean: and thus uncleanness was nothing but

a kind of irregularity. From this uncleanness, then, the ceremonies

of the Old Law had the power to cleanse: because they were ordered by

the Law to be employed as remedies for the removal of the aforesaid

uncleannesses which were contracted in consequence of the

prescription of the Law. Hence the Apostle says (Heb. 9:13) that "the

blood of goats and of oxen, and the ashes of a heifer, being

sprinkled, sanctify such as are defiled, to the cleansing of the

flesh." And just as this uncleanness which was washed away by such

like ceremonies, affected the flesh rather than the soul, so also the

ceremonies themselves are called by the Apostle shortly before (Heb.

9:10) justices of the flesh: "justices of the flesh," says he, "being

laid on them until the time of correction."

On the other hand, they had no power of cleansing from uncleanness of

the soul, i.e. from the uncleanness of sin. The reason of this was

that at no time could there be expiation from sin, except through

Christ, "Who taketh away the sins [Vulg.: 'sin'] of the world" (John

1:29). And since the mystery of Christ's Incarnation and Passion had

not yet really taken place, those ceremonies of the Old Law could not

really contain in themselves a power flowing from Christ already

incarnate and crucified, such as the sacraments of the New Law

contain. Consequently they could not cleanse from sin: thus the

Apostle says (Heb. 10:4) that "it is impossible that with the blood

of oxen and goats sin should be taken away"; and for this reason he

calls them (Gal. 4:9) "weak and needy elements": weak indeed, because

they cannot take away sin; but this weakness results from their being

needy, i.e. from the fact that they do not contain grace within

themselves.

However, it was possible at the time of the Law, for the minds of the

faithful, to be united by faith to Christ incarnate and crucified; so

that they were justified by faith in Christ: of which faith the

observance of these ceremonies was a sort of profession, inasmuch as

they foreshadowed Christ. Hence in the Old Law certain sacrifices

were offered up for sins, not as though the sacrifices themselves

washed sins away, but because they were professions of faith which

cleansed from sin. In fact, the Law itself implies this in the terms

employed: for it is written (Lev. 4:26; 5:16) that in offering the

sacrifice for sin "the priest shall pray for him . . . and it shall

be forgiven him," as though the sin were forgiven, not in virtue of

the sacrifices, but through the faith and devotion of those who

offered them. It must be observed, however, that the very fact that

the ceremonies of the Old Law washed away uncleanness of the body,

was a figure of that expiation from sins which was effected by Christ.

It is therefore evident that under the state of the Old Law the

ceremonies had no power of justification.

Reply Obj. 1: That sanctification of priests and their sons, and of

their apparel or of anything else belonging to them, by sprinkling

them with blood, had no other effect but to appoint them to the

divine worship, and to remove impediments from them, "to the

cleansing of the flesh," as the Apostle states (Heb. 9:13) in token

of that sanctification whereby "Jesus" sanctified "the people by His

own blood" (Heb. 13:12). Moreover, the expiation must be understood

as referring to the removal of these bodily uncleannesses, not to the

forgiveness of sin. Hence even the sanctuary which could not be the

subject of sin is stated to be expiated.

Reply Obj. 2: The priests pleased God in the ceremonies by their

obedience and devotion, and by their faith in the reality

foreshadowed; not by reason of the things considered in themselves.

Reply Obj. 3: Those ceremonies which were prescribed in the cleansing

of a leper, were not ordained for the purpose of taking away the

defilement of leprosy. This is clear from the fact that these

ceremonies were not applied to a man until he was already healed:

hence it is written (Lev. 14:3, 4) that the priest, "going out of the

camp, when he shall find that the leprosy is cleansed, shall command

him that is to be purified to offer," etc.; whence it is evident that

the priest was appointed the judge of leprosy, not before, but after

cleansing. But these ceremonies were employed for the purpose of

taking away the uncleanness of irregularity. They do say, however,

that if a priest were to err in his judgment, the leper would be

cleansed miraculously by the power of God, but not in virtue of the

sacrifice. Thus also it was by miracle that the thigh of the

adulterous woman rotted, when she had drunk the water "on which" the

priest had "heaped curses," as stated in Num. 5:19-27.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 669 / 746 题