(c.) The meat-offerings — the peace- or thank-offer- ing, the first-fruits, etc. — were simply offerings to (jod of his own best gifts, as a sign of thankful homage, and as a means of maintaining his service and his servants. Whether they were regular or voluntary, individual or national, independent or subsidiary to other offerings, this was still the leading idea. The meat-offering, of flour, oil, and wine, seasoned with salt and hallowed by frankincense, was usually an appendage to the devotion implied in the burnt-offering ; and the peace-offerings for the people held the same place in Aaron's first sacri- fice (Lev. ix, 22), and in all others of special solemnity. The characteristic ceremony in the peace-offering was the eating of the flesh bj' the sacriticer (after the fat had been burned before the Lord, and the breast and shoulder given to the priests). It betokened the en- joyment of communion with God at "the table of the Lord," in the gifts which his mercy had bestowed, of which a choice portion was offered to him, to his ser- vants, and to his poor (see Deut. xiv, 28, 29). To this view of sacrifice allusion is made b}^ Paul in Phil, iv, 18; Heb. xiii, 15, 16). It follows naturally from the other two. See Meat-offering.
It is clear, from this, that the idea of sacrifice is a complex idea, involving the propitiatory, the dedicato- ry, and the eucharistic elements. Any one of these, taken by itself, would lead to error and superstition. The propitiatory alone would tend to the idea of atone- ment by sacrifice for sin, as being effectual without any condition of repentance and faith ; the self-dedicatory, taken alone, ignores the barrier of sin between man and God, and undermines the whole idea of atonement ; the eucharistic, alone, leads to the notion that mere gifts can satisfy God's service, and is easily perverted into the heathenish attempt to "bribe" God by vows and offerings. All three, probably, were more or less im- plied in each sacrifice, each element predominating in its turn : all must be kept in mind in considering the historical influence, the spiritual meaning, and the typ- ical value of sacrifice.
Now, the Israelites, while they seem always to have retained the ideas of propitiation and of eucharistic of- fering, even when they perverted these by half- hea- thenish superstition, constantly ignored the self- dedi- cation which is the link between the two, and which the regular burnt-offering shoidd have impressed upon them as their daily thought and duty. It is, therefore, to this point that the teaching of the prophets is main- ly directed; its key-note is contained in the words of iSamuel — "Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams" (1 Sam. xv, 22). So Isaiah declares (as in i, 10-20) that " the Lord delights not in the blood of bullocks, or lambs, or goats;" that to those who " cease to do evil and learn to do well . . . though their sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow." Jeremiah reminds them (vii, 22, 23) that the Lord did not "command burnt -offerings or sacrifices" under Moses, but said, " Oliey my voice, and I will be your God." Ezekiel is full of indignant protests (see XX, 39-44) against the pollution of God's name by offer- ings of those whose hearts were with their idols. Ho- sea sets forth God's requirements (vi, 6) in words which our Lord himself sanctioned : " I desired mercy and not IX.— P
sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt- offerings." Amos (v, 21-27) puts it even more strong- ly, that God "hates" their sacrifices, unless "judgment run down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream." And Micah (vi, 6-8) answers the question which lies at the root of sacrifice — "Wherewith shall I come before the Lord V" by the words, "What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and love mercy, and walk humbly with thy GodV" All these passages, and many others, are directed to one object — not to dis- courage sacrifice, but to purify and spiritualize the feel- ings of the offerers.
The same truth, here enunciated from without, is recognised from within by the Psalmist. Thus lie says, in Psa. xl, 8-11, " Sacrifice and meat-offering, burnt-of- fering and sin-offering, thou hast not required;" and con- trasts with them the homage of the heart — "IVIine ears hast thou bored," and the active service of life — " Lo ! I come to do thy will, O (iod." In Psa. 1, 18, 14, sacrifice is contrasted with prayer and adoration (comp. Psa. cxli, 2) : " Thinkest thou that I will eat bulls' flesh, and drink the blood of goats'? Offer unto God thanksgiv- ing; and pay thy vows to the ISIost High : and call upon me in the day of trouble." In Psa. li, 16, 17, it is similar- ly contrasted with true repentance of the heart: "The sacrifice of (iod is a troubled spirit, a broken and a con- trite heart." Yet here also the next verse shows that sacrifice was not superseded, but purified : " Then shalt thou be pleased with burnt -offerings and oblations; then shall thej' offer young bullocks upon thine altar." These passages are correlative to the others, expressing the feelings, which those others in God's name require. It is not lo be argued from them that this idea of self- dedication is the main one of sacrifice. The idea of propitiation lies below it, taken for granted by the prophets as by the whole people, but still enveloped in mystery until the Antitype should come to make all clear. For the evolution of this doctrine we must look to the N. T. ; the preparation for it by the prophets was (so to speak) negative, the pointing out the nullity of all other propitiations in themselves, and then leav- ing the warnings of the conscience and the cravings of the heart to fix men's hearts on the better atonement to come.