SACRIFICE. — From the Latin *sacra facere* ("to perform a sacred act"), sacrifice, in its most general sense, is that religious act by which the offerer, through the offering or the victim, enters into mystical communion with the Being to whom the sacrifice is directed. For a sacrifice to occur, therefore, the following are required: 1) an offerer, who may be different from the one performing the sacred act; 2) an animate or inanimate object to be offered; 3) the intention, through the sacrificial act, of entering into communion with the Being to whom it is directed.
I. SACRIFICE IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS. — Sacrifice may be bloodless (oblation, libation, offering), as occurs among groups that are economically and culturally most primitive, and bloody when, with the development of even the most elementary occupations of agricultural and pastoral life, domestic animals are offered whose slaughter serves to render the offering effective by withdrawing the soul from profane use and depriving it of that life which one wishes to offer to the divinity, in a deeper and more integral conception of sacrifice itself.
Toward bloody sacrifice, therefore, all peoples, advancing toward more complex and developed cultural conditions and settled within the great political and ethnic societies of the ancient world, have oriented themselves; sacrifice understood not only as homage to the divinity but also as a means of entering into a more intimate communion with it through the victim specially chosen and pre-consecrated, whose blood, as a vehicle of life, serves precisely to establish a mystical contact between the offerer and the divinity itself.
During the Roman imperial period, in accordance with the spiritual tendencies of the time, it was believed that the blood of certain sacrificed animals had the power to deify the souls of the offerers, rescuing them from mortal fate. The belief in the deification of souls, which Arnobius (II, 62) and Servius (ad Aen., III, 68) attribute to the Etruscan Acherontic Books, was, however, in substance already known (Lares, Manes, Deus parens) to ancient Rome (Ribezzo).
1. **Theories on the Origin of Sacrifice.** — Modern ethnology has presented three different hypotheses on the origin of sacrifice. According to E. B. Tylor’s animism, sacrifice is essentially a gift that man makes to the divinity in order to obtain in return both the use of the fruits of the earth and other favors he may need: he conceives these divinities as possessing the same habits, affections, and desires as men. According to the totemic theory, now outdated as a comprehensive explanation of the religious fact, sacrifice would originally be a communion: in that the human group, which considers itself descended from a divine animal, on certain solemn occasions, to renew the bond of kinship with the god and purify its own blood through the ingestion of divine blood, kills the sacred animal (which otherwise is always respected and never killed) and partakes of it ritually. W. Robertson Smith theorized this opinion in an attractive but unconvincing manner, followed by F. B. Jevons, S. Reinach, and E. Durkheim. According to the historical-cultural school of Fr. W. Schmidt (but already Fr. Lagrange had, based on elements from Semitic peoples, supported the same thesis), sacrifice originally consists in the offering of an object that possesses life and serves as a means of sustenance (first fruits), offered by the primitive to the divinity whenever he must make use of the fruits of the earth. This theory, integrated with elements from the higher religions with a mystical orientation, better explains the facts encountered in sacrifice among primitive human groups and among the great ethnic religions (Egypt, Assyria, Israel, India, Greece, Rome, China).
With the evolution of religious spirit parallel to the progress of civilization in economy, politics, and thought—which leads the individual to place greater value on his inner life in contrast to the authoritarian principle of state religion—there arise supranational (universal) religions or those arising from the work of a religious reformer born and living in the full light of history (Buddha, Muhammad) or the religious sublimation of a primitive, generally agrarian, cult, and linked to a mythical founder of divine nature (Dionysus, Osiris, Attis, Mithras). Not these are the so-called mystery religions, because they presuppose a secret initiation and a series of rites in which the initiate (who may be admitted without regard to racial, caste, or national bonds) is assimilated to the god, in the hope of obtaining spiritual benefit in life and securing blessed immortality after death. In these religions, sacrifice assumes its highest value because it produces and commemorates the sacrifice of the god and considers this sacrifice as a sign of salvation for those who wish to avail themselves of its benefit.
2. **The Practice of Sacrifice.** — Sacrifice unfolds in three stages or moments: preparation, action, and conclusion.
a) **Preparation.** — Being the religious act par excellence, sacrifice must take place in an environment that is already sacred or at least rendered such for the occasion through preliminary consecration ceremonies. As for form, one must distinguish between the beneficiary of the sacrifice (the offerer), who may be either an individual or an entire social group, and the expert who performs the sacrificial act (sacrificer, priest, minister). Both must be in a state of ritual holiness (abstention from sexual contact, bathing, new or white garments, fasting, special emblems or tattoos) and maintain this state of separation from the profane world until the sacrifice is completed.
The victim, moreover, is already a sacred animal (totem) or must be rendered sacred through special rites and ceremonies. First of all, it must be without any physical defect; then, chosen and washed, adorned, crowned, it is invited to proceed spontaneously toward the place of sacrifice, sometimes even praised to exalt its value, bring it closer to the divinity, and thus render it a more suitable vehicle for the sharing of life between the offerer and the divinity. This consecration of the victim is concluded by a special ceremony: anointing with butter (India), oil (Israel), or sprinkling with spelt and salt (*mola salsa*, Rome) or barley (*ouxá*, Greece).
b) **Action.** — Once the victim is consecrated, the slaughter takes place, which releases the principle of life enclosed in the animal, which thus, through its blood, becomes an effective means of communion. The victim is exposed to the air, oriented either toward one of the cardinal points or toward the presumed abode of the gods, and in the midst of profound silence, broken only by the sound of a ritual instrument or the murmuring of sacred formulas, it is felled, or cut at the throat, or suffocated, according to the various rituals and the species of the animal. Once on the ground, it is cut open, its entrails or omens are extracted as the portion reserved for the gods, while the rest is divided and consumed by the offerer and those who have participated in the sacrifice.
c) **Conclusion.** — Once the sacrificial act is completed, the participants, before returning to ordinary life, must rid themselves of the sacredness accumulated upon them by the sacrifice through ablutions, the removal of sacred garments, and "purification," that is, the desacralization of the utensils that served the sacrifice.
3. **Various Kinds of Sacrifice.** — According to the classification adopted regarding the various kinds of rites (v.), sacrifices are either connected with rites of passage, or oblations, or propitiatory sacrifices.
a) **Sacrifice in Rites of Passage.** — This category includes sacrifices performed on the most important occasions of domestic cult: birth, naming, death; puberty initiation sacrifices (v.), sacrifices connected with initiation into the mystery cults (v.), threshold sacrifices, boundary sacrifices, hospitality sacrifices, funeral sacrifices.
b) **Oblation Sacrifices.** — These are the most numerous, offered to maintain peace with the gods, acknowledge their dominion, and give thanks for benefits received. The great civilizations of the ancient world practiced this form of sacrifice above all.
c) Sacrifices of propitiation. - These are divided into three main categories: agricultural sacrifices, expiatory sacrifices, and foundation sacrifices.
The agricultural sacrifice is based on the postulate, characteristic of the "mystical" mentality of primitive man, that human action must contribute to the rhythm of the seasons so that the earth may yield its fruit. It also presupposes the belief in spirits that inhabit the cultivated field, possessing a principle of life, which is synthesized in a spirit (spirit of vegetation) that can be embodied in an inanimate object (stone, effigy), an animal (fox, dog, rooster), or a human being. A portion of the harvest, which is rightfully theirs, must be offered to this spirit so that the remainder may be used without harm. This spirit, which would perish after the harvest, must be incorporated into some animal or object and kept alive through sacrificial action. The agricultural sacrifice, therefore, consists of two moments: a) the expulsion of the old spirit of vegetation in the guise of a man or animal; b) the introduction of a new principle of life.
From the agricultural sacrifice it is easy to transition to the sacrifice of a god when the human victim replaces the vegetable offering as the spirit of vegetation, because, losing contact with the vegetative element, the spirit of vegetation loses its autonomy in favor of the human individuality and assumes its name, moral personality, and ultimately even its legend. Once this mythical legend is created, the figure of the god is also fixed, and the periodic agricultural sacrifice becomes the salutary repetition of the sacrificial event that occurred to the god originally, whose reiteration serves to secure for men the benefits (no longer agricultural, but religious) of that primordial immolation. In certain mystery religions (the mysteries of Attis, Adonis, Osiris) it is possible to recognize the sublimation of an ancient agricultural rite (v. MISTERIO).
The expiatory sacrifice arises from the sacred-magical concept that evil (physical or moral) can be transferred from one object to another, which is then removed or killed. A typical case of expiatory sacrifice in Israel was that of the scapegoat, upon which the high priest, dressed in linen and after appropriate purifications, placed both his hands on its head and heaped all the sins of the people, after which it was immediately led away by a man who had to abandon it in a deserted place. The victim of an expiatory sacrifice could also be human, as occurred in antiquity: in Marseilles in the case of a pestilence (Serv., Ad. Aen., III, 57) and annually in Athens during the festival of the Thargelia (v.). Among expiatory sacrifices are also included lustratory sacrifices (v. LUSTRAZIONE).
The foundation sacrifice combines elements of consecration and expiation and is based on the concept of placing the spirit of the sacrificed soul (or man) as a protector of the building to be constructed. Thus, the Batak of Sumatra place corpses on the corner beams of their dwellings; the Bedouins of Moab kill an animal at the point where they plant the main stake of the tent; in ancient Canaan excavations have yielded numerous remains of foundation sacrifices; in Rome, beneath the apse of the Basilica of Porta Maggiore, the remains of the bones of a dog and a pig have been found.
4. The symbolism of sacrifice
Sacrifice is an action, as evidenced by cultic terminology (sacra facere, or simply facere among the Latins; ποιεῖν, φέξειν, δαίω among the Greeks; ἀξάω among the Hebrews) and is a representative action intended to effect what it reproduces. This is most evident in agricultural rites where the spirit of vegetation is understood as a living being (animal or human) that dies and rises again. This representative action gains greater value because it preserves and intensifies the social bond, in that the human group performing the sacrifice knows it is doing so in imitation of their ancestors and in obedience to the tradition they founded, which all predecessors of the group have repeated. This social sense, when the motives of magical symbolism fade due to cultural development, remains as a representation of collective life, which, thanks to it, has been maintained and increased, but sublimates its meaning in a highly moral sense.Nicola Turchi
II. SACRIFICE AMONG PRIMITIVE PEOPLES
5. The sacrifice of first-fruits in original cultures
A distinctive feature of original cultures is the offering of first-fruits of the means of subsistence that man derives from hunting and woman from gathering to the Supreme Being. The offering is made before the rest is consumed. The Pygmies offer a small portion, generally chosen from the best and most vital parts (heart, liver, lungs, stomach, fat). The sacrifice of first-fruits is practiced by almost all truly Pygmy populations, by many Pygmoid groups, by the Bushmen, and by the Vedda. In ancient American culture, it is performed only by Eskimo populations, which belong to the most archaic stratum of ancient culture, by the Algonquins, by some very primitive populations of California, and by the Selknam, who are the least primitive of the three populations of Tierra del Fuego. It is absent throughout primitive southern culture (southeastern Australia and Tasmania).The widespread practice of the sacrifice of first-fruits in original cultures indicates that it probably arose under conditions more prevalent among the Pygmies than in ancient American culture. This is confirmed by the variety of offerings made by the Pygmies and Negritos: game, birds, fish, termites, edible caterpillars, fruit, honey, etc. The Pygmies of Gabon also sacrifice an animal that must be taken alive during the hunt. Another variant among the Pygmies of Gabon is the offering of the right side of the animal's head (i.e., the most prized part). The Bagheli Pygmies offer only vegetables and drinks. In ancient cultures, on the other hand, meat offerings are common, but the sacrifice of vegetable first-fruits is almost entirely absent. This absence is explained by the climate and economy of ancient populations, which subsist predominantly on meat.
There are other characteristics that distinguish the first-fruits sacrifice of the Pygmies from that of the ancient American peoples: the Pygmies generally offer the internal parts of game; the ancient American peoples, on the other hand, offer the unopened head or the long bones, also unopened. Thus the material offered is the brain or the marrow: the head and bones serve rather as the vessel containing the offering. The manner of presenting the offering also varies. The Pygmies cast the first-fruits of vegetation into the forest; only the Baghelli throw them into the fire. The offering of meat varies among different groups of Pygmies: some cast it to the ground, others into the fire, while others, to preserve it from termites and caterpillars, wrap it in a leaf and place it ceremonially in the hollow of a tree. Sometimes, to wrap the offering, they choose a leaf that has not yet been touched, almost to intensify the primacy of the sacrifice.
In ancient American culture, the few vegetable offerings are thrown into the fire or placed on the ground. One of the most characteristic forms of the first-fruits sacrifice in this culture consists in heaping the offered heads and long bones upon an altar. The hunters of the Lower Paleolithic did the same, as revealed by explorations of various caves in Bavaria and Switzerland.
The first-fruits sacrifice arises from the economic, social, and religious conceptions of the original cultures and expresses homage, thanksgiving, and a request to the Supreme Being. In these cultures, humans do not yet produce the means necessary for their sustenance but merely take from nature. The Supreme Being is considered the bestower of life—not only in antiquity but continuously—because He provides the means of subsistence, animals and plants, causes them to grow, and grants their use on the condition that they not be wantonly destroyed or denied to those who cannot procure them. Thus the sustenance of the old, the infirm, and children also has religious value and is inculcated even in the initiations (v.) of the young. The mythology of these peoples attributes the creation of the world to the Supreme Being, who is also regarded as the first owner. These motifs are clear in the mythology of the Pygmies, the Indians of central California, and Tierra del Fuego, and they remain alive among populations belonging to more recent cultures.
The first-fruits sacrifice first acknowledges the creation, preservation, power, and ownership of the Supreme Being over the things of the world and expresses these sentiments by offering Him a small part of the goods received. In the first-fruits sacrifice, the offerer does not so much wish to give as to say something (Schmidt), that is, his subordination and dependence upon the Supreme Being. He may also wish to express other sentiments: to ask forgiveness for having killed animals or destroyed plants He created, to invite Him to the meal to enter into a closer union with Him (an idea very probable given the liberality with which, in original cultures, the tradition of gathering is practiced in Italy, due to a great diversity of cultures, by thanking for the goods received and asking for continued protection). But the central thought is the expression of the feeling of dependence that the creature feels toward the Creator (Schmidt). That the quantity offered is often very small indicates that the sacrificer does not intend to give the Supreme Being something of which he is truly in need, much less to offer Him food because He eats. An offering conceived in this way would be at odds with the concept of spirit that various populations attribute to the Supreme Being. An offering chosen from the best parts of the spoils has symbolic value. Even the formulas that accompany it express these sentiments: “Behold your portion, so that You may be generous with me when I go hunting, for the game is under Your protection.”
2. The expiatory sacrifice in original cultures.
When the Pygmies of Gabon consider that continuous hunting failure is due to some fault, they perform an expiatory sacrifice. A similar sacrifice is practiced by the Semang; in both cases the offerer wounds himself in an arm or leg (Pygmies of Gabon) or near the knee (Semang), mixes the blood that flows with water, and offers the whole as expiation. It is likely that this sacrifice intends to substitute for the offering of life. Indications of a blood expiatory sacrifice are also found among other Pygmy populations. The concept of moral guilt that the Supreme Being may punish—either by directly striking the guilty with death or by withholding means of subsistence—is characteristic of original cultures. Equally alive is the feeling of repentance and supplication toward the offended deity. Thus it is probable that the expiatory sacrifice also belongs to these cultures. Recent research confirms this thesis.
Some Pygmy and Algonquian populations also make sacrifices with offerings to the dead, which result from influences of matriarchal cultures. No population belonging to original cultures practices human sacrifice.
3. The first-fruits sacrifice among the nomadic pastoralists of Asia.
The characteristic sacrifice of this cultural cycle is the great annual horse sacrifice in thanksgiving to God, who grants both humans and animals the power to reproduce.
Thus the sacrifice is made in spring, when foals and calves are born. All the families composing a kinship group gather, and each brings one or more animals. They preferably offer a horse. This sacrifice has particular solemnity even in the manner it is performed: among other things, the horse is adorned and positioned as if it were about to leap toward the sky. This is followed by a kind of sacred meal accompanied by various offerings. In the first-fruits sacrifice of pastoral peoples, even more than in that of original cultures, is expressed the acknowledgment of the supreme authority of Heaven over livestock and thanksgiving to Heaven for granting the herds. The religious concept of these peoples is very elevated, as is also shown by the fact that supplicatory sacrifices have much less importance.
Another characteristic of this culture is the milk sacrifice, an important element in the diet of these peoples. The nomadic pastoralists of Central Asia do not have expiatory sacrifices.
4. The expiatory sacrifice.
Various pastoral populations of Africa and others belonging to the Nilotic group perform expiatory sacrifices, which reveal a high religious sense and a clear concept of moral guilt and the necessity of atonement. In the religion of the Galla, Waka, which means “Heaven,” is the Creator, the absolute Lord of all the world and the regulating center of individual and social life. The religion of the Galla is alive and rich in prayers, religious songs, sacrifices, festivals, and ceremonies for all circumstances of human life. They celebrate with particular solemnity a festival called Wadagia, to obtain from God blessings for families, villages, and territory.
During this ceremony, which is directed by a chief priest and two “deacons,” the assembled make a sacrifice that has the character of supplication and expiation, as is evident from the invocations that accompany II. When all is ready, the chief priest pronounces the invocations (“O Waka, have mercy on us!” etc.), to which all respond in chorus: “Yes, have mercy on us,” etc.
The Galla also offer a bull or a ram on the tomb of the deceased. But this sacrifice is directed to God to obtain happiness and forgiveness of the sins of the deceased.
The Acoli of Uganda particularly fear the soul of one "who died in anger," because it returns to exact vengeance. This soul is called *lacèn* (= "one who returns"). Anyone who has been killed intentionally or unintentionally (e.g., while hunting) may become a *lacèn* if the required compensation is not paid and no expiatory sacrifice is made. However, no soul can return as a *lacèn* unless it has been wronged. Particularly feared are: the soul of a son whose father denied him a dowry for marriage; that of a slave killed for trivial reasons; that of a father, elder, or sick family member denied proper care; that of one left to die of hunger at the door of a hut, even if of another tribe; that of a mother prevented by her son from remarrying after her husband’s death or denied meat; that of one killed in another’s home without the householder avenging the death; that of one who suffered undeserved or disproportionately severe punishment; and that of a wife killed while fleeing to another man because her husband beat her. Even the soul of a dog, killed under certain circumstances, may return as a *lacèn*.
When the *lacèn* comes to kill and begins to sicken a family member or to appear in dreams and make them wander, a sorcerer is summoned. The sorcerer performs a special, essentially expiatory rite directed to the Supreme Being, sacrificing a sheep. Magical accessories are sometimes added to the ceremony. Yet the sorcerer does not always succeed: sometimes the *lacèn* is so enraged that it kills not only the one who wronged it but the entire kinship group—father, mother, child—and even the sorcerer who came to drive it away. This happens because Lubanga (the Supreme Being) mourns the death of one of His own, born from Him, and therefore permits the dead soul to avenge itself on its killer. Even certain wild beasts may become *lacèn*: these are Lubanga’s dogs.
Expiatory sacrifices are also practiced by the Bari of Eritrea and other charismatic, Nilotic, and related peoples. Collective expiation through a live animal taken in the hunt is also attested.
5. Blood sacrifice in matriarchal culture and human sacrifice.
The spiritual conceptions characteristic of this widespread cultural cycle include lunar mythology, a female deity conceived as an earthly divinity (mother goddess) who gradually replaces the cult of the Supreme Being. Another distinctive element is the cult of blood, regarded as the seat of vital force and closely linked to the origin of life itself, since a woman’s conception halts menstruation.
In this cultural cycle, first-fruit offerings are made to the mother goddess or to the dead. Above all, bloody sacrifice develops—first of animals, then of humans. Still within the matriarchal framework is a complex of myths about the life-giving power of blood, so that the blood of victims is used to anoint the sick and sprinkled on plants and fields. Yet it is especially the still-warm human blood that is believed to restore flagging vitality. Animism, populating the world with spirits—seldom beneficent and more often maleficent—who can be appeased only by blood, further increases the number of sacrifices. In matriarchy, the remembrance and cult of the dead and magical practices flourish. The dead receive offerings for their journey to the other world: food, drink, weapons, and tools. Many peoples hold periodic commemorations of the dead (usually annual), combined with sacrifices and offerings.
The spirits that inhabit nature and the dead speak through the mouth of the sorcerer (originally a woman; indeed, the sorcerer often disguises herself as a woman and mimics her voice) to declare why a disease, epidemic, famine, military defeat, or other misfortune has been sent and to demand specific sacrifices. When greatly angered or faced with a public peril, they may demand human victims and insist that the chosen one be put to death slowly and painfully. Human sacrifice, however, developed in secondary cultures—that is, where matriarchy had already merged with other cultural forms. Its origins remain unclear; the belief that vital force resides in blood likely contributed. The earliest human sacrifices were made to the dead by killing slaves and women to accompany the deceased’s soul into the afterlife (later, human victims were also offered to the spirits inhabiting nature). Sometimes the victims were buried alive.
Even more barbarous customs, demanding greater numbers of victims, are found in West Africa, the cultures of the Pacific, the religion of ancient Mexico, and other parts of the world.
Human sacrifice was frequent in Benin. In February 1897, an English trading mission was massacred by the king’s troops. Admiral Rawson organized a punitive expedition that stormed the capital on February 17. When the victors entered the city, they found the ground before the idol altars soaked with fresh human blood and saw hundreds of sacrificial victims lying in heaps. In ancient Mexico, human sacrifices were so frequent that the victims numbered in the thousands each year: fugitive slaves, war captives, children, girls, and women were offered. Victims were often tortured horribly: shaken alive, thrown into a pyre from which they were pulled out charred and led to the sacrificial stone. Others were sacrificed by heart extraction (with an obsidian knife), the heart burned or eaten by priests; some were drowned in lakes, others shut in caves to die of starvation. Women were generally disemboweled. The Peruvians were less ferocious: nonetheless, they offered children to the Sun and buried some of the king’s wives and servants with him; a similar practice was observed for great lords at their death.
Human sacrifice harmed religion alone: it destroyed the concept of God’s fatherhood, replacing it with that of ferocious, bloodthirsty deities; it reinforced cannibalism (which, however, predates human sacrifice), since sacrificial meals often ended in cannibal feasts; and it contributed to the complete loss of freedom and human dignity among victims (war captives, slaves, wives, and sometimes even children). The brutality of these societies is further evident in that the victims often accepted their wretched condition as natural—even in societies that had achieved remarkable technical and artistic development, such as Benin, Mexico, and certain regions of the Pacific.
The belief that vital force resides in blood, combined with magic, gave rise to magical rites often linked to obscene practices or acts of terrifying cruelty. Headhunting, frequently associated with anthropophagy (New Guinea and the Solomon Islands), also aims to offer sacrifices to spirits. The Aztecs periodically waged “flower” or “sacred” wars solely to procure victims for sacrifice. (See also TOTEMISM.)
III. SACRIFICE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
The earliest examples of sacrifice in the Old Testament (Gen. 4:3 ff.; 8:20) clearly show that it is as old as the human race. According to the biblical conception, its original meaning is not the offering of food to a deity—this would be in open contrast with the spirituality of Yahweh—nor is it a communal meal with God, since the first biblical sacrifices (Gen. 4:3 ff.; 8:20; 22:13) are entirely consumed without any sacrificial banquet.Sacrifice in the Bible is essentially an expression of worship and thanksgiving to the Lord, to which is easily joined the imperative intention of further gifts or aid, and, in the case of a guilty conscience, the desire for expiation to propitiate the deity. In fact, however, the expiatory meaning of sacrifice is not attested in the Bible before Moses. Until that time, sacrifice in Israel was a private and voluntary act of worship; but when Israel was chosen to be the priestly and holy people of the true God (Ex. 19:6), it became the perpetual and essential act of official worship, and as such it received its ritual norms in the Sinaitic legislation. Through sacrifice, Yahweh sealed the covenant with His people (Ex. 24:4-8), and in token of His acceptance sent down fire from heaven upon the first sacrifice of Aaron, consuming it (Lev. 9:24).
The various kinds of sacrifice, particularly the holocaust, recur under almost identical names in the Ugaritic tablets (Rās Samrah), which predate Moses by several centuries. The Bible itself mentions various sacrifices outside the chosen people (the Midianite Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, Ex. 18:20; Balaam, Num. 23:1, 13; Job, Job 1:7; 42:8), not to mention the sacrifices practiced among the Canaanite peoples (Lev. 18:21; 20:2-5). Moses therefore regulated and consecrated for the worship of the true God a ceremonial already in use, purging it of superstitious elements. On the other hand, not all the detailed prescriptions regarding sacrifices need necessarily be attributed to Moses: the elaboration of the ritual may, as even Catholic exegetes admit, have undergone a period of evolution that, however, escapes our control due to the scarcity of sources. But without doubt the essential prescriptions, as well as the differentiation of the various sacrifices—including that of expiation (v.)—are of Mosaic origin.
Sacrifices are distinguished according to their material into bloody sacrifices, involving the shedding of blood (Heb. zebhah, Gr. σωχία), and unbloody sacrifices, consisting in the “offering” of food or incense (Heb. minhah, “gift,” from manah, “to give”). The bloody sacrifices, which were the sacrifices par excellence, were subdivided according to purpose and rite into holocausts, peace offerings, and expiatory sacrifices. They were public or private, depending on whether they were offered for the entire community (such as the sacrifices prescribed at various liturgical times) or for the devotion or duty of individual Israelites (the sacrifices offered for the high priest and other priests were virtually public).
The holocaust involved the total burning of the victim and was the sacrificial act par excellence. The peace offering or thank offering (zebhah zelāmîm, or briefly zelāmîm, an intensive plural) was offered in thanksgiving, petition, or fulfillment of a vow: in such a sacrifice, part of the victim was burned (only the fat portions); another part (the breast and thigh, the latter first being “waved” between the altar and the sanctuary) went to the priest; the remainder of the meat belonged to the offerer, who ate it within the sacred precinct and invited relatives and others, especially the poor, to the sacrificial banquet (cf. Deut. 12:12, 18; 16:11 ff.; 1 Sam. 1:4 ff.; Ps. 21:26 ff.): legal purity was required for participation in the sacrificial meal. In the expiatory sacrifice (kipper, probably from an Akkadian root meaning “to remove”), the fundamental idea was expiation or satisfaction for some fault or external transgression of the law, or even for some graver legal impurity (e.g., leprosy); it distinguished between the sin offering (Heb. hāṭā’ah, “sin”) and the guilt offering (Heb. ’āšām, “guilt”); for both there were differences in rites and victims (the reason for the distinction lies in the lesser or greater gravity of the transgression according to the law); expiatory sacrifices were mostly private in character, and in individual cases the quality of the victim was prescribed; the part not burned on the altar was consumed by the priests; but if the expiatory sacrifice was for the high priest, for the priests, or for the community (such as those public sacrifices to be offered at the new moon, Passover, Pentecost, each day of the Feast of Tabernacles, and especially on the Day of Atonement), the meat was burned outside the sanctuary. At the time of the Maccabees, the expiatory sacrifice for the dead is attested (2 Macc. 12:43), though it is presumed to be older.
Bloody sacrifices were often accompanied, as an integral function, by unbloody sacrifices; but these could also be independent acts of worship (such as the daily incense offering, the oil for the lamps, the showbread and the loaves for Pentecost, the sheaves for Passover, the “jealousy” offering, the sin offering by the poor, etc.). Besides the incense offering (for the date of the introduction of incense cf. Rev. bibl. 23 [1914], pp. 161-87), two kinds of unbloody sacrifices were distinguished: offerings of food (properly minhah) and of drink (Heb. nēsekh, Gr. σπανδή = libation). The materials used included fine wheat flour (barley flour only in the jealousy offering [Num. 5:15]), parched grain, cakes and unleavened bread (Lev. 2), the sheaves for Passover and the firstfruits of bread for Pentecost; among liquids, wine and oil. All oblations were seasoned with salt and oil, and some also with incense, which in turn, especially in the daily offering, was sprinkled with other aromatic substances (cf. M. Löhr, Das Rauchopfer im Alten Testament, Halle 1927). Unbloody sacrifices are as old as bloody ones, as evidenced by the examples of Cain and Melchizedek (Gen. 4:3; 14:18).
The victims for sacrifice were only clean and domestic animals, deemed worthy of God and also the most precious and fitting—namely, cattle, sheep, and goats, as well as turtledoves and pigeons; they had to be free from any blemish or defect (23 specific imperfections were listed) and of a young age (bulls generally three years old, calves and lambs not more than one year, rams and he-goats from one to two years); only males were admitted for the Passover, holocaust, and guilt offerings (for peace and sin offerings, animals of both sexes were permitted; among birds, according to the Talmudists, sex was not considered).
Human sacrifices, widely practiced among ancient peoples (Sumerians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Germans), are strictly forbidden in the Bible, which regards them as a Canaanite abomination (Lev. 18:21; 20:1–5; Deut. 12:31; 18:9ff.). Rationalists wrongly cite the example of Abraham: when God commanded the patriarch to sacrifice his own son Isaac (q.v.), it was solely to test his faith and obedience, as explicitly stated (*tentavit*); at the decisive moment, God prevented him from completing the sacrifice and substituted a ram (Gen. 22). The case of Jephthah (q.v.), who sacrificed his daughter in fulfillment of a rash vow (Judg. 11:30ff.), merely shows that this judge lacked a proper understanding of the true worship owed to Yahweh; the Bible does not pronounce on the morality of his act. The redemption of the firstborn (Ex. 13:13) does not contradict the divine prohibition of human sacrifice; since the firstborn of man could not be immolated (unlike the firstborn of animals, except the donkey), they had to be redeemed by an offering. Unfortunately, the example of the Canaanites and neighboring peoples sometimes led Israelites to this abomination, as seen in Hiel’s sacrifice of his two sons during the rebuilding of Jericho (1 Kgs 16:34; cf. Josh. 6:26, where the crime is condemned), and in the practice of some kings who sacrificed children to Molech in Jerusalem, specifically in the Valley of Ben-Hinnom or Gehenna (cf. 2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6). Child sacrifice was particularly common in the northern kingdom (ibid., 17:17), and the prophets identify this crime as one cause of the fall of the Kingdom of Israel. The Bible and the prophets condemn these acts in the strongest terms (cf. Ps. 106:37ff.; Mic. 6:7; Jer. 7:31; 19:5; 32:35; Ezek. 16:20ff.; 20:26).
The ritual for all bloody sacrifices was essentially the same: the victim was brought to the place of sacrifice, in the inner court of the Temple before the altar of burnt offerings; the offerer laid hands on the victim, symbolizing its donation to Yahweh and, in some cases, vicarious representation (the idea of transference of guilt may have applied only to expiatory sacrifices); the animal was slaughtered (usually by a Levite or even the offerer; the priest collected the blood in a bronze basin—flaws in the ritual could invalidate the sacrifice); the blood was sprinkled, the most sacred part of the rite, since the ancients regarded blood as the seat of life (cf. Lev. 17:11ff.—the manner of sprinkling varied according to the type of sacrifice); and the victim was burned (either wholly or partially, depending on the sacrifice). The essential sacrificial act consisted in the effusion and sprinkling of blood, which, together with the burning, signified that the life of the victim was offered directly to God.
During the forty years in the wilderness, the place of sacrifice was the court surrounding the tabernacle. Centralization (cf. Lev. 17:1–9; Deut. 12:5–14) continued around the Ark; when the Temple was built in Jerusalem, it became the only legitimate place for sacrifice (with rare exceptions, such as sacrifices offered by prophets or in places consecrated by a special divine vision: cf. Judg. 6:20–28; 13:8–23; 2 Sam. 24:16–25; 1 Kgs 18:20–38—other cases were abuses). Thus, during the Babylonian exile and definitively after the destruction of Jerusalem, sacrificial worship ceased in Israel.
The sacrifices of the Old Testament had a twofold value: proper and symbolic. The proper value, which might be called quasi-sacramental since it inhered in the rite itself, consisted in the power to remove ritual impurities caused by transgressions or defects and restore ritual or Levitical purity (*emundatio carnis*: Heb. 9:13), enabling the person to participate legitimately in acts of worship. The symbolic value lay in the act as an expression of inner faith, adoration, gratitude, and repentance, from which its spiritual efficacy derived.
Unfortunately, this interior dimension was often neglected, as the people deluded themselves into thinking they could propitiate Yahweh with mere external offerings. The prophets vigorously protested against this formalism. While they sometimes expressed themselves vehemently against erroneous ideologies (cf. Amos 5:21–25; Hos. 6:6; Isa. 1:11–14; Mic. 6:6–8; Jer. 6:20; 7:21ff.; Ps. 49:7–15), they did not thereby reject sacrifices *as such*—which God Himself had commanded—but sought to restore external worship to its true religious and moral meaning. God cannot accept sacrificial offerings and ritual observances when the heart’s tribute and repentance are lacking; what God demands through sacrifice, and indeed prefers to any external act of worship, is justice and obedience to His law, in which the essence of true worship resides.
Moreover, the sacrifices of the Old Testament are recognized as having a typical or prefigurative value in relation to the perfect sacrifice of the New Testament, which is the sacrifice accomplished by the God-Man on the Cross for the sins of all time and the guilt of all humanity (cf. Heb. 9:28; 10:12). In view of and by virtue of this future sacrifice, God in His mercy accepted the ancient, imperfect sacrifices, and through them, where the necessary dispositions were present, effected justification with the remission of sins and the conferral of grace. With the sacrifice of Christ, the ancient sacrifices and the entire ritual economy of the Old Testament—imperfect and transitory—ceased juridically, as foretold by the prophets (cf. Dan. 9:27; Mal. 1:11; cf. Heb. 9:11–10:14).
The most noble of the Old Testament sacrifices was the *holocaust* (Gk. ὁλοκαύτωμα, ὁ ολοκαύτωσις, ὁ ὁλος ε καυτός = entirely burned; Vulg. *holocaustum*, *holocaustum*; Heb. *‘olāh*, from *‘alāh* = to go up), meaning, according to some, that the victim is “brought” up to the altar, or rather that the victim “ascends” to heaven with the sacrificial smoke; it was also called *kālī* (among the Phoenicians, *kālī*; in rabbinic literature, *gēmārā’* = complete offering). The essential feature was the total burning of the victim (except for the hide, which was always excluded from sacrifices; according to Jewish tradition, the sciatic nerve was also excluded, in memory of Jacob [cf. Gen. 32:32]; *Hullin* 7:1).
The ritual is meticulously described in Lev. 1:1–17 and Num. 15:3–9. Larger victims were first cut open, divided into pieces, and washed; then they were placed on the altar to burn as a holocaust, a sweet-smelling offering to Yahweh (Lev. 1:9—an anthropomorphic expression, as elsewhere in Scripture, to be understood figuratively, i.e., the sacrifice was offered as an act of adoration to Yahweh). With the victim’s blood, the priest sprinkled the sides of the altar, while the sacred fire consumed the rest, and the ashes were removed each morning to a clean place outside the sacred precinct (Ex. 29:38, 42; Lev. 6:8–13). According to Josephus, the parts of the victim were sprinkled with salt before burning (*Antiquitates Judaicae* 3.9.1). The holocaust was ordinarily accompanied by unbloody offerings (libations of wine, grain offerings mixed with oil, Num. 15:4–11). Often, a peace offering accompanied the holocaust—a rite of joyful communion following the act of pure adoration of Yahweh (cf. Ex. 18:12; 24:5; Josh. 8:31; Judg. 20:26; 21:4; 1 Sam. 6:14ff., etc.).
For its essential and specific rite, the holocaust was a most solemn act of homage and adoration to God, and it expressed better than any other rite or sacrifice the absolute dependence and perfect dedication of man to the Creator, in the recognition of his own nothingness and God’s supreme dominion (St. Thomas, Sum. Theol., 1a2ae, q. 102, a. 3, ad 8). Therefore, it was the perfect expression of external worship, the act of latreutic worship par excellence.
In the Old Testament, the holocaust could not be lacking at any feast or in the most solemn religious manifestations. Holocausts were either public or private; and these were either obligatory or voluntary. Among the public and solemn ones, the most important was the perpetual sacrifice of a lamb (v.) or kid (two on the Sabbath) to be offered every day, morning and evening (Exod. 29:38 ff.; Num. 28:1–10), independently of any other sacrifice for particular occasions or circumstances. For the principal religious solemnities, the following holocausts were prescribed (cf. ibid. 28–29): the new moon or neomenia, 2 bulls, 1 ram, 7 lambs; Passover, as at the new moon, but for seven continuous days; Pentecost, 1 bull, 2 rams, 7 lambs; Atonement, 1 ram for the high priest and another for the people, plus 1 bull and 7 lambs; Tabernacles, numerous holocausts on each of the eight days of the solemnity (Num. 29:13–38). Special holocausts were offered on exceptional occasions: famous for the number of victims, e.g., those offered by King David for the proclamation of his son Solomon as his successor (1,000 bulls and as many lambs and rams: 1 Chron. 29:21) and by Solomon when he ascended the throne (2 Chron. 1:6) and when he dedicated the Temple (ibid. 7:1–7).
Among private holocausts, some were obligatory (such were those prescribed for the consecration of the Levites, priests, and high priest [Lev. 8]; for purification after childbirth [ibid. 12:6–8]; for the initiation of Nazirites [Num. 6:14–16] and for their purification from contact with a corpse [Num. 6:10 ff.]; for purification from leprosy [Lev. 14:19 ff.]; and for various legal purifications); others were voluntary or of private devotion (to thank God for a notable benefit, to implore some grace, etc.; cf. Num. 15:3, 8). The holocaust could be offered, unlike other bloody sacrifices, even for non-Israelites. — See pl. XCIX.