(2) It was, however, on the theoretical side tbnr the projihetical protest went deepest, and uu>st loudly challengetl the existing order, (a) It de- manilcd a revision of the popular estimate of tlie place of the cultus in religion, and in a minor degree of the place of sacrihco in the cultus. The current
536
SACRIFICE
SACRIFICE
conception was that religious ordinances were the grand means of pleasing God, and to this the prophets sliarply opposed the doctrine that in God's view ceremonies are unimportant in comparison with morality. Latent in Mosaism, this view found strikin" expression in a saj^ing already quoted — ' to ohey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams,' 1 S 15-^. It is the main burden of the prophecy of Amos, and finds its classic expression in the ' what doth the Lord require of thee?' of Micah (G"*-, of. Hos 6«, Pr 17' 21'). The secondary importance of the cultus, in fact, was the obvious consequence of the soteriology of the prophets. According to tlieir teaching it wa.s only on condition of right- eousness, after backsliding on condition of repent- ance and amendment, that the Divine favour could be ensured ; failing the fulfilment of this condi- tion, ceremonial religion only provoked the Di^^ne anger ; and it was therefore out of the question to treat the two as of co-ordinate rank. And, further, even within the sphere of the cultus it is not granted that it is the all-important form of 'service.' Hosea attaches high importance to the teaching function of the priests (4*), while in more than one passage preference is manifestly exhibited for the exercises of prayer (' calves of the lips,' Hos 14-) and for sacred song (Ps 27').
(i) The significance of sacrifice for the prophets remains to be considered. With the cultus thus depreciated, and the pre-eminence of sacrifice in the cultus challenged, in what sense was it possible to maintain its efficacy ? After what has been already said, it is inconceivable that they supposed it to be acceptable to God In the capacity of a gift. The God who claimed the whole life for duty was not likely to be influenced hy a present or a meal. And from the point of view of their high theology the Gift-theory fell to the ground as untenable, even ridiculous. In the first place, God did not experience the wants which the ofl'er- ings supplied ; in the second place, even if He did, the oiterings were already God's property, not man's to present (condensed in Ps 51)'"). If sacri- fice had any efficacy at all, it needed another explanation for those who had realized the true God. This it possessed as a vehicle for the ex- pression of the sentiments, and for the revelation of the spirit of the life, of those who sincerely served or sought God. Its efficacy, in short, was neither more nor less than that of prayer, which, on its part, is of value not as an act considered in itself, but in virtue of the aspirations and the sincerity which find voice in it. That in the pro- phetic valuation the function of sacrifice was identical with that of prayer, cannot indeed be conclusively proved, but it is the view which best harmonizes with their religious theory ; and it derives confirmation from several considerations. In the patriarchal narratives, which embody a measure of the prophetic spirit, it is usually associated closely with the prayer of adoration and petition, suggesting that the spoken word serves the purpose of making the action articu- late. In the case of the sacrifice of Abel, again, the ground of accejitance manifestly was the disposition of the worshipper, which disposition prayer equally with sacrifice would have served to bring to expression. Especially significant is the fact that in certain passages the ofl'ering of words is demanded (Hos 14-) — the implication being that they served the same purpose as sacri- fice in making the ap[>e.il of i>rayer to God, and that they were preferable in that they were less likely to foster evil practices and to encourage superstition.
The Dcnteronomic Reformation made the influ- ence of the prophetic school to tell along another line
on the development of the sacrificial system. The suppression of the local sanctuaries, and the con- solidation of worship in Jerusalem, which had its spring in prophetic inspiration, had far-reaching consequences. One immediate consequence was to detach sacrifice from the everyday life of the people, and to reduce it in the main to an element in the worship in which national religion found expression. Naturally also the Sacrificial Feast ceased to be as practicable as when it had been observed in their several districts by the smaller units of the family and the clan, and it tended to give place to the type of the holocaust in which the people looked on at the consumption of the offerings in the service of God, whether directly or by His priests. With the decay of the Sacri- ficial Feast, moreover, the spirit of worship was altered — the joy of the table being swallowed up in a deepening sense of the solemnity of the col- lective worship, and of the more imposing rites to which it gave prominence (Wellh. Proleg. Eng. tr. p. 76 fi'.; Nowack, Arch. ii.).
Sacrifice in Deuteronoiny. — \AliiIe in general Deut. rf fleets the prophetic doctrine of the superiority of morality to csreniony. It is far from representing the abolitionist standpoint ascribed to Amos. Its list of offerings includes burnt-offerinjs-s, peace- olTerings, heave-offerings, votive-offerings, free-will offerings, first-fruits, while it prohibits human sacrifices (181*5), t^e drink- ing of blood (12'.^), hair-offerings and mutilations {14iX Among its leading interests are to conserve somewhat of the jojous char- acter of sacrifice in spite of the centralization of worship (12^, and to ensure a sufficient portion to the priestjs from the sacrifices, — in the case of animal offerings the shoulder, two cheeks, and the maw (183). The animal victim, it is also emphasized, must be without blemish (171). The sacrifice in expiation of an uncertain murder (21^) is interesting for its peculiar ritual, manifestly antique, while it is obviously excepted from the centralization of the worship.