Chapter XIV. To Offer Animals to the Gods is Unlawful and Injurious and Unjust and Unholy, and Subject to Execration

[PORPHYRY] ‘But when the sacrifices of first-fruits were allowed by mankind to run into great disorder, they began to adopt the most dreadful offerings full of cruelty, so that the curses formerly denounced against us seemed now to have received accomplishment, by men cutting the victims’ throats, and defiling the altars with blood, from the time that they experienced famines and wars, and had recourse to bloodshed. Therefore the deity, as Theophrastus says, indignant at these several crimes, seems to have inflicted the suitable punishment, inasmuch as some men have become atheists, while others would more justly be called evil-minded than impious, because they believed the gods to be in their nature vile and no better than ourselves. Thus some of them, it appears, came to differ no sacrifices, while others offered evil sacrifices and had recourse to unlawful victims.’

Again the same author adds this also:

‘Which things being so, Theophrastus rightly forbids those who wish to be really pious to sacrifice things with life, making use of other arguments of this kind.’ [1]

He further says:

‘Moreover we ought to offer such sacrifices as shall injure no one, for a sacrifice above all things ought to be harmless to all. But if any one should say that God has given us animals for our use no less than the fruits of the earth, yet at all events when he sacrifices animals he inflicts some harm upon them, inasmuch as they are robbed of their life. These then we must not sacrifice, for by its very name sacrifice is something holy; but no one is holy who renders thank-offerings out of things belonging to another, whether grain or plants, if taken against his will. For how can it be a holy thing, when wrong is done to those who are robbed? But if he who lays hands even upon another man’s crops makes not a holy offering, most certainly it is not holy to take things more precious than these from any, and offer them: for thus the harm becomes greater. And far more precious than the fruits of the earth is life, which man ought not to take by sacrificing living things.’ [2]

And he adds:

‘We must abstain therefore from offering living things in our sacrifices.’ [3]

And again he says:

‘What therefore is neither holy nor of little cost must not be offered in sacrifice.’ [4]

And presently:

‘So that if we are to sacrifice animals to the gods, even these we must offer for some of the following purposes: for whatever we sacrifice is sacrificed for some one of these purposes. Would then any one of us, or would any god think that he received honour, when by what we consecrate we are at once shown to be doing wrong? Or would he not rather think that such a deed was a dishonour? But surely we confess that by slaying in our sacrifice those animals which do no wrong we shall do wrong to them: so that we must not sacrifice any of the other living beings for the sake of honouring the gods: no, nor yet as rendering thanks to them for their benefits. For he that would render just recompense for a benefit, and a worthy return for a kind deed, ought to provide these gifts without doing evil to any. For he will be thought to make no better return, than a man would if he were to seize his neighbour’s property to crown any persons by way of repaying them with gratitude and honour. Nay, nor yet (may we offer animals) because of any need of good things. For if a man seeks to gain good treatment by unjust conduct, it is suspected that, even if well treated, he will not be grateful.

‘So that not even in hope of benefit must we sacrifice animals to the gods: for in so doing one might perhaps deceive man, but to deceive God is impossible. If therefore sacrifice should be offered for some one of these purposes, and if we must not offer animals for the sake of any of them, it is manifest that we must not offer such sacrifices to the gods at all.’ [5]

And again he adds:

‘For both nature and the whole feeling of man’s soul were pleased with offerings of the former kind: [6]

“When with pure blood of bulls no altar dripped, But this was held by men the foulest crime, To rend the life, and feed upon the limbs.”’ [7]

And after other matters he says:

‘But when a young man has learned that gods delight in costliness, and, as is said, in feasts upon kine and other animals, when would he ever choose to be thrifty and temperate? And if he believes that these offerings are pleasing to the gods, how can he avoid thinking that he has license to do wrong, being sure to buy off his sin by his sacrifices? But if he be persuaded that the gods have no need of these sacrifices, but look to the moral disposition of those who approach them, receiving as the greatest offering the right judgement concerning themselves and their affairs, how can he fail to be prudent, and just, and holy? [8]

‘The best sacrifice to the gods is a pure mind and a soul free from passions; but also congenial to them is the offering of other sacrifices in moderation, not carelessly however, but with all earnestness. For their honours must be like those paid in the case of good men, such as chief seats in public assemblies, rising up at their approach, and honourable places at table, and not like grants of tribute.’ [9]

Hereby then it was clearly acknowledged, according to the Greeks and their philosophers, that nothing endued with life can rightly be sacrificed to the gods, for the act is unholy, and unjust, and hurtful, and not far from a pollution. He was no god then nor yet a truthful and good daemon----that oracle-monger of whom we heard just now as exacting drink-offerings of blood and burnt-offerings; nor yet all those to whom the oracle commanded animals to be sacrificed. A deceiver therefore and a cheat and an utterly wicked daemon must we call him who so lied, and called them gods who are not, and enjoined the sacrifice of animals not only to the terrestrial and infernal gods, but also to the gods of heaven and ether and the stars. What then, if not gods, we ought to suppose all those before mentioned to be, the writer himself shall explain again in what follows.