Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 13.djvu/364

 SACRIFICE

318

SACRIFICE

never have imprinted the stamp of hoUness on a ritual composed of pagan fragments without the pure paganism peeping through the seams and join- ings. One must therefore, both before and after the Priest's Code (save for later additions and accom- modations to new circumstances), regard the sacri- ficial tlwra as truly Mosaic, and see in them the expression not only of human nature, but also of the Divine will. A remarkable exception from the general rule is Islamism, which knows neither sacri- fice nor priest ; sacrifice is replaced by a strict ritual of prayer, with which rehgious ablutions and alms- giving* are associated. Again, while genuine Bud- dhism rejects sacrifice, this rule was far from obtaining in practice, for Lamaism in Tibet has sacrifices for the dead, and the average Buddhist of the people offers unbloody sacrifices to his buddha. The Hindu ofi"ers flowers, oil, food, and incense to his idols, and slays victims to the god Shiva and his spouse. And not even the believing Protestant is without a sacrifice, since, in spite of his rejection of the Mass, he at least recognizes Christ's death on the Cross as the great sacrifice of Christianity. (2) Species of Sacrifice. — The two chief kinds of sacrifice, the bloody and the unbloody, were sug- gested to mankind by nature itself, and were thus known in the earliest times. To which of the two historical priority is to be conceded, can scarcely be decided. For the greater antiquity of the un- bloody sacrifice equally good grounds can be offered as for that of the bloody sacrifice. The earliest his- torical mentions of sacrifice found in the Bible would make them coeval, for Cain as the husband- man oflfered the fruits of the field, while his brother Abel as the shepherd offered bloody victims (Gen., iv, 3 sq.). As regards pagan religions, many histo- rians of religion plead for the priority of the unbloody sacrifice. Porphyrins and Theophrastus also ex- pressed the view that the first sacrifices consisted of plants and flowers, which were burned in honour of the Deity. The soma-haoma, a drink-offering common to both Indian Vedism and Iranian Parsee- ism, must be dated back to primeval times, when the Indians and the Iranians still formed one great people. How the Indians came to offer their very ancient horse sacrifice is unknown. It is a mere surmise to suppose that perhaps the general transi- tion from a vegetable to a flesh diet, as related by Noe (cf. Gen., ix, 3 sqq.), occasioned the rise of animal sacrifices. The rare occurrence of slaying an animal was turned into a festival, which was cele- brated with sacrific(s. Among the earliest Hebrews sebach (bloody sacrifice) was a "slaying festival", with which bloody sacrifice was inseparably asso- ciated. The introduction of bloody sacrifices among the Iranians is more easily explained, since, espe- cially in Zoroastrianism, it was esteciricd a great merit to destroy the harmful animals belonging to the wicked god Ahriman, and eventually to sacrifice them to the good god CJrmuzd. Further than sur- mises, however, we are unable to go. That the unbloody sa^;rifice wa« practised among the ancient Greeks, cla-ssical archaeologists maintain with good reawjn, arguing that in Homer the word O^eiv (Lat. suffire) did not mean "to .slay" or "to offer as a bloody sacrifice" (as it did in post-Homeric Greek), but rather to "offer a smoking sacrifice" (incense). It in not impossible that evc^n the cruel and volup- tuous cults of Anterior Asia also offered at first only vegetable sacrifices, since the fundamental idea of their religion, the death and rtmascence of nature, is expressed most evidently anfl impressively in the plant world. All this is however purely h ypot hct ical. The observation that human sacrifice onc(^ extended over the whole earth, leaves room also for the siif)- position that the bloody sacrifice in the form of slaughtered men claims chronological priority, the hid-

eous custom being replaced, as civilization advanced, by the sacrifice of animals. But among many peo- ples (e. g. the Chanaanites, Phoenicians, and the ancient Mexicans) not even the possession of a high culture succeeded in abohshing the detestable human sacrifices. But, whatever view may be taken of the priority question, it is undoubted that both the bloody and the unbloody sacrifices reach back to prehistoric times.

Not without its significance for the scientific idea of sacrifice is the fact that the material of the bloody and unbloody sacrifices was regularly taken from things used as food and drink, and indeed from the best of these commodities. This very general cir- cumstance affords evidence that the sacrificial gift must be taken from the belongings of the sacrificer and must be associated, as a means of sustenance, with his physical life. The independent sacrifice of incense alone requires another explanation; this is supphed by the fragrant odour, which symbolizes either the sweetness of the ascending offering of prayer or the gracious acceptance of the sacrifice by the Deity. The bloody sacrifice, on account of its symbohcal connexion with the life of man, was especially expressive of complete self -oblat ion to the Divinity. In the cruder views of naive natural man, the ascending odour of the incense offering soothed the olfactory organs of the gods. Especially crude was this unworthy materializing of sacrifice in Indian Vedism (the soma drink) and in the Babylonian story of the Flood, where it is said: "The gods suck in the fragrant odour; like flies, the gods gathered over the sacrificer." Even the Old Testament expression, "a sweet savour for God" {odor suavitaiis), was originally an accommoda- tion to the ingenuous ideas of the uncultured nomadic people (cf. Gen., viii, 21; Lev., i, 17, etc.), an anthro- pomorphism which was ever more clearly recognized as such according as the Israelites progressed in their ethical refinement of the idea of God. Not on the greatness or material worth of the sacrificial gifts should store be laid, since Jahweh was above necessity, but on the true sentiment of sacrifice, without which, as declared by the Prophets (cf. Is., i, 11 sqq.; Osee, iv, 8; Mai., i, 10), all external sacrifices were not only worthless, but even repre- hensible.

(3) Rites of Sacrifice. — While sacrifice itself origi- nates spontaneously in the natural prompting of rehgious-minded man, the particular rites, dependent on law and custom, display a manifold variety at different times and places. Among the different peoples the ceremonial of sacrifice offers indeed a very variegated picture. If we emphasize only that which was general and common to all, the simplest sacrificial rite consists in the men^ exposition of th<! gifts in a holy place, as for exanii)le the sliow-hread (panis proposilionis) of the Lsraclifcs and Hal)yIonians, or the votive offerings {annlhcindhi) of tlie Greeks. Fre- quently the idea of eritcrtaiiiiiig the gods or the dead is evidently associatcul with the offering of food and drink, e. g. among th(! Indians, Egyptians, and Greeks. Even in the oldest history of Israel this idea of entertainment, although spiritualized, is perceptible (Judges, vi, 17 sqq.; xiii, 15 sqq.). As true sacrifices in the strict sense were regarded only tho.se in which a real alt(Tation was eff(!cted in the sacrificial gift at the time of offering it. By this immutation the gifts were not only withdrawn from all profane usage, but wcire also completely given over to t he service and pos.session of God or the gods. With this object in view edibles or sacrificial victims were either completely or partly burned, while libations were poured out as <lrink offerings. The earliest form seems to have been t.he whole or burnt - offering (holocaust). While only special portions of the victims (for the most part the best portions) were