The Cambridge Handbooks of Liturgical Study
GENERAL EDITORS:
H. B. SWEET, D.D.
J. H. SRAWLEY, D.D.
THE CHURCH YEAR AND KALENDAR
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
London: FETTER LANE, E.C.
C. F. CLAY, MANAGER
[Illustration]
Edinburgh: 100, PRINCES STREET
Berlin: A. ASHER AND CO.
Leipzig: F. A. BROCKHAUS
New York: G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
Bombay and Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD.
_All rights reserved_
[Illustration: Kalendar of Peterborough Psalter (March)
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (MS. 12). Cent. xiii.]
THE CHURCH YEAR AND
KALENDAR
BY
JOHN DOWDEN, D.D.,
Hon. LL.D. (Edinburgh), late Bishop of Edinburgh
Cambridge:
at the University Press
1910
Cambridge:
PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A.
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
NOTE BY THE EDITORS
The purpose of _The Cambridge Handbooks of Liturgical Study_ is to offer
to students who are entering upon the study of Liturgies such help as may
enable them to proceed with advantage to the use of the larger and more
technical works upon the subject which are already at their service.
The series will treat of the history and rationale of the several rites
and ceremonies which have found a place in Christian worship, with some
account of the ancient liturgical books in which they are contained.
Attention will also be called to the importance which liturgical forms
possess as expressions of Christian conceptions and beliefs.
Each volume will provide a list or lists of the books in which the study
of its subject may be pursued, and will contain a table of Contents and
an Index.
The editors do not hold themselves responsible for the opinions expressed
in the several volumes of the series. While offering suggestions on
points of detail, they have left each writer to treat his subject in his
own way, regard being had to the general plan and purpose of the series.
H. B. S.
J. H. S.
[The manuscript of the present volume was sent to the press only a few
weeks before the lamented death of the author, and therefore the work
did not receive final revision at his hands. In its original draft the
manuscript contained a somewhat fuller discussion of some of the topics
handled, _e.g._ the work of the mediaeval computists, and such technical
terms as ‘Sunday Letters,’ ‘Epacts,’ etc., as well as a fuller treatment
of the various Eastern Kalendars. Exigencies of space, however, and the
scope of the present series, made it necessary for the author to curtail
these portions of his work, while suggesting books in which the study of
these topics may be pursued by the student. The Editors have endeavoured,
as far as possible, to verify the references and to supplement them,
where it seemed necessary to do so. In a few cases they have added short
additional notes, enclosed in brackets, and bearing an indication that
they are the work of the Editors.]
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION xi
A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY xxi
I. THE ‘WEEK’ ADOPTED FROM THE JEWS. The Lord’s Day: early
notices. The Sabbath (Saturday) perhaps not observed by
Christians before the fourth century: varieties in the
character of its observance. The word _feria_ applied
to ordinary week days: conjectures as to its origin.
Wednesdays and Fridays observed as ‘stations,’ or days
of fasting 1
II. DAYS OF THE MARTYRS. Local observances at the burial places
of Martyrs. Early Kalendars: the Bucherian; the Syrian
(Arian) Kalendar; the Kalendar of Polemius Silvius; the
Carthaginian. The Sacramentary of Leo; the Gregorian
Sacramentary. All Saints’ Day; All Souls’ Day. The days
of Martyrs the dominant feature in early Kalendars: the
Maccabees 12
III. ORIGINS OF THE FEASTS OF THE LORD’S NATIVITY AND THE
EPIPHANY. Festivals associated with the Nativity in
early Kalendars 27
IV. OTHER COMMEMORATIONS OF THE LORD. The Circumcision;
Passiontide, Holy Week; mimetic character of
observances. The Ascension. The Transfiguration.
Pentecost 37
V. FESTIVALS OF THE VIRGIN MARY. Hypapante (the Purification),
originally a festival of the Lord. The same true of the
Annunciation. The Nativity and the Sleep (_Dormitio_)
of the Virgin. The Presentation. The Conception. The
epithet ‘Immaculate’ prefixed to the title in 1854.
Festivals of the Theotokos in the East 47
VI. FESTIVALS OF APOSTLES, EVANGELISTS, AND OTHER PERSONS
NAMED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. St Peter and St Paul.
St Peter’s Chair,—the Chair at Antioch. St Peter’s
Chains. St Andrew. St James the Great. St John: St John
before the Latin gate, a Western festival. St Matthew.
St Luke. St Mark. St Philip and St James. St Simon
and St Jude. St Thomas. St Bartholomew. St John the
Baptist; his Nativity, his Decollation. The Conversion
of St Paul. St Mary Magdalene. St Barnabas. Eastern
commemorations of the Seventy disciples (_apostles_).
Octaves. Vigils 58
VII. SEASONS OF PREPARATION AND PENITENCE. Advent: varieties
in its observance. Lent: its historical development;
varieties as to its commencement and its length. Other
special times of fasting: the three fasts known in the
West as _Quadragesima_. Rogation days. The Four Seasons
(Ember Days). Fasts of Eastern Churches 76
VIII. WESTERN KALENDARS AND MARTYROLOGIES: Bede, Florus, Ado,
Usuard. Old Irish Martyrologies. Value of Kalendars
towards ascertaining the dates and origins of
liturgical manuscripts. _Claves Festorum._ The modern
Roman Martyrology 93
IX. EASTER AND THE MOVEABLE COMMEMORATIONS. Early Paschal
controversies. Rule as to the full moon after the
vernal equinox. Hippolytus and his cycle: the so-called
Cyprianic cycle; Dionysius of Alexandria. Anatolius.
The Council of Nicaea and the Easter controversy.
Later differences between the computations of Rome and
Alexandria. Festal (or Paschal) Letters of the Bishops
of Alexandria. _Supputatio Romana._ Victorius of
Aquitaine. Dionysius Exiguus. The Nineteen-year Cycle.
The Paschal Limits. The Gregorian Reform. The adoption
of the New Style 104
X. THE KALENDAR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH OF THE EAST. The
Menologies. I. Immoveable Commemorations. The twelve
great primary festivals; the four great secondary
festivals. The middle class, greater and lesser
festivals. The minor festivals, and subdivisions.
Explanation of terms used in the Greek Kalendar. II.
The Cycle of Sundays, or Dominical Kalendar 133
APPENDIX I. The Paschal Question in the Celtic Churches 146
APPENDIX II. Note on the Kalendars of the separated Churches of
the East 147
APPENDIX III. Note on the history of the Kalendar of the Church
of England since the Reformation 149
PLATES
1. KALENDAR OF THE PETERBOROUGH PSALTER _to face Title_
2. THE SYRIAC MARTYROLOGY ” _p. 15_
3. KALENDAR OF THE WORCESTER BOOK ” _p. 93_
4. KALENDAR OF THE DURHAM PSALTER ” _p. 99_
INTRODUCTION
The Church’s Year, as it has been known for many centuries throughout
Christendom, is characterised, first, by the weekly festival of the
Lord’s Day (a feature which dates from the dawn of the Church’s life
and the age of the Apostles) and, secondly, by the annual recurrence of
fasts and festivals, of certain days and certain seasons of religious
observance. These latter emerged, and came to find places in the Kalendar
at various periods.
In order of time the season of the Pascha, the commemoration of the
death, and, subsequently, of the resurrection of the Saviour, is the
first of the annual observances to appear in history. Again, at an
early date local commemorations of the deaths of victims of the great
persecutions under the pagan Emperors were observed yearly. And some of
these (notably those who suffered at Rome) gradually gained positions
in the Church’s Year in regions remote from the places of their origin.
Speaking generally, little as it might be thought probable beforehand,
it is a fact that martyrs of local celebrity emerge in the history of
the Kalendar at an earlier date than any but the most eminent of the
Apostles (who were also martyrs), and earlier than some of the festivals
of the Lord Himself. The Kalendar had its origin in the historical events
of the martyrdoms.
So far the growth of the Kalendar was the outcome of natural and
spontaneous feeling. But at a later time we have manifest indications of
artificial constructiveness, the laboured studies of the cloister, and
the work of professional martyrologists and Kalendar-makers. To take,
for the purpose of illustration, an extreme case, it is obvious that the
assignment of days in the Kalendar of the Eastern Church to Trophimus,
Sosipater and Erastus, Philemon and Archippus, Onesimus, Agabus, Rufus,
Asyncretus, Phlegon, Hermas, the woman of Samaria (to whom the name
Photina was given), and other persons whose names occur in the New
Testament, is the outcome of deliberate and elaborate constructiveness.
The same is true of the days of Old Testament Patriarchs and Prophets,
once, in a measure, a feature of Western, as they are still of Eastern
Kalendars. But even all the festivals of our Lord, save the Pascha,
though doubtless suggested by a spontaneous feeling of reverence, could
be assigned to particular days of the year only after some processes of
investigation and inference, or of conjecture. Whether the birthday of
the Founder of the Christian religion should be placed on January 6 or
on December 25 was a matter of debate and argument. Commentators on the
history of the Gospels, the conjectures of interpreters of Old Testament
prophecy, and such information as might be fancied to be derivable from
ancient annals, had of necessity to be considered. The assignment of the
feast of the Nativity to a particular day was a product of the reflective
and constructive spirit.
It is not absolutely impossible that ancient tradition, if not actual
record, may be the source of June 29 being assigned for the martyrdom
of St Peter and St Paul; but a more probable origin of the date is that
it marks the translation of relics. Certainly the days of most of the
Apostles (considered as the days of their martyrdoms) have little or no
support from sources that have any claim to be regarded as historical.
They find their places but gradually, and, it would seem, as the result
of a resolve that none of them should be forgotten.
Commemorations which mark the definition of a dogma, or which originated
in the special emphasis given at some particular epoch to certain
aspects of popular belief and sentiment, have all appeared at times
well within the ken of the historical student. Thus, ‘Orthodoxy Sunday’
(the first Sunday in Lent) in the Kalendar of the Greek Church is but
little concerned with the controversies on the right faith which occupied
the great Councils of the fourth and fifth centuries. It commemorates
the triumph of the party that secured the use of images over the
iconoclasts; this was the ‘orthodoxy’ which was chiefly celebrated;
and we can fix the date of the establishment of the festival as A.D.
842. Again, the commemoration of All Souls in the West was the outcome
of a growing sense of the need of prayers and masses on behalf of the
faithful departed. The ninth century shows traces of the observance
of some such day; but it was not till the close of the tenth century,
under the special impetus supplied by the reported visions of a pilgrim
from Jerusalem, who declared that he had seen the tortures of the souls
suffering purgatorial fire, that the observance made headway. We then
find Nov. 2 assigned for the festival, which came to be gradually and
slowly adopted. The feast of Corpus Christi, which now figures so largely
in the popular devotions of several countries of Europe, and is marked
as a ‘double of the first class’ in the service-books of the Church of
Rome, emerges for the first time in the thirteenth century, and was not
formally enjoined till the fourteenth. The feast of the Conception of St
Mary the Virgin seems to have originated in the East, and to have been
simply a historical commemoration, even as the Greeks commemorate the
conception of St John the Baptist. The Eastern tradition represents Anna
as barren and well stricken in years, when, in answer to her prayers
and those of Joachim her spouse, God revealed to them by an angel that
they should have a child. This conception was according to the Greek
Menology ‘contrary to the laws of nature,’ like that of the Baptist.
In the West the festival of the Conception appears at the end of the
eleventh or beginning of the twelfth century. The controversies as to its
doctrinal significance form part of the history of dogma, and are full
of instruction: but they cannot be considered here. Up to the year 1854
the name of the festival in the Kalendars of the authorised service-books
of the Roman Church was simply _Conceptio B. Mariae Virginis_. It was as
recently as Dec. 8, 1854, by an ordinance of Pope Pius IX, that the name
was changed into _Immaculata Conceptio B. Mariae Virginis_. It will thus
be seen how changes in the Kalendar illustrate the changes and accretions
of dogma, facts which are further exhibited by the changes in the rank
and dignity of festivals of this kind, at first only tolerated perhaps,
and of local usage, but eventually enjoined as of universal obligation,
and elevated in the order and grade of festal classification. Again,
the considerable number of festivals of the Greek and Russian Churches
connected with relics and wonder-working _icons_ throws a light on the
intellectual standpoint and the current beliefs in these ancient branches
of the Catholic Church.
Not less instructive in exhibiting the extraordinary growth in the
_cultus_ of the Blessed Virgin in the West are the inferences which may
be gathered from a knowledge of the fact that no festival of the Virgin
was celebrated in the Church of Rome before the seventh century, when we
compare the crowd of festivals, major and minor, devoted to the Virgin in
the Roman Kalendar of to-day. But considerations of this kind are only
incidentally touched on in the following pages; and they are referred to
here simply with a view to show that the study of the Kalendar is not an
enquiry interesting merely to dry-as-dust antiquaries, but one which
is intimately connected with the study of the history of belief, and is
inwoven with far-reaching issues.
In the enquiry into the origins of ecclesiastical observances the
discovery within recent years of early documents, hitherto unknown in
modern days, enforces the obvious thought that our conceptions on such
subjects must be liable to re-adjustment from time to time in the light
of new evidence. Until the day comes, if it ever comes, when it can be
said with truth that the materials supplied by the early manuscripts
of the East and West have been exhausted, there can be no finality.
The document discovered some ten or twelve years ago, in which a lady
from Gaul or Spain, who had gone on pilgrimage to the East, records her
impressions of religious observances which she had witnessed at Jerusalem
towards the close of the fourth century, has furnished some important
light on the subject before us, as well as on the history of ceremonial.
In the following pages this document is referred to as the _Pilgrimage
of Silvia_ (‘Peregrinatio Silviae’), without prejudice to the question
relating to the true name of the writer. The period when the work was
written is the important question for our purposes; and those who are
most competent to express an opinion consider that it belongs to the time
of Theodosius the Great, and to a date between the years 383 and 394.
The influence of the early mediaeval martyrologists, Bede, Florus,
Ado, and Usuard, upon the mediaeval Kalendars, is unquestionable; but
the relations of their works to one another, the variations of the
different recensions and the sources from which they were drawn, are
still subjects of investigation. In addition to the brief notices of the
martyrologists which will be found in the following pages, the enquirer
who desires further information should not fail to study with care the
recent treatise of Dom Henri Quentin, of Solesmes, _Les Martyrologes
historiques_.
Of necessity a general outline sketch of the formation of the Kalendar
is all that can be attempted in the following pages. Local Kalendars,
more especially, for most of our readers, those of the service-books of
England, Scotland, and Ireland, present many interesting and attractive
features; but it has been impossible to deal with them in an adequate
manner. Some space has, however, been devoted to the consideration of
the Kalendar and Ecclesiastical Year of the Orthodox Church of the East,
including the peculiar arrangement of the grouping of Sundays; and brief
notices are given of the fasts and festivals of some of the separated
Churches of the East.
The questions concerning the determination of Easter will form the main
trial of the patience of the student.
The early controversies on the Paschal question are not free from
obscurity; and the interests attaching to the construction of the various
systems of cycles, intended to form a perpetual table for the unerring
determination of the date of Easter, are mainly the interests which
are awakened by the history of human ingenuity grappling more or less
successfully with a problem which called for astronomical knowledge and
mathematical skill. Religious interests are not touched even remotely.
Profound as are the thoughts and emotions which cluster around the
commemoration of the Lord’s Resurrection, they are quite independent of
any considerations connected with the age of the moon and the date of the
vernal equinox. The scheme for a time seriously entertained by Gregory
XIII of making the celebration of Easter to fall on a fixed Sunday,
the same in every year, has much to commend it. Had it been adopted we
should, at all events, have been spared many practical inconveniences,
and the ecclesiastical computists would have been saved a vast amount of
labour. But we must take things as they are.
If anyone contends that the safest ‘Rule for finding Easter’ is ‘Buy
a penny almanack,’ I give in a ready assent. It has in principle high
ecclesiastical precedent; for it was exactly the same reasonable plan of
accepting the determinations of those whom one has good reason to think
competent authorities, which in ancient times made the Christian world
await the pronouncements as to the date of Easter which came year by
year from the Patriarchs of Alexandria in their Paschal Epistles: while
for the date of Easter in any particular year in the distant past, or
in the future, there are few who will not prefer the Tables supplied in
such works as _L’Art de vérifier les Dates_, or Mas Latrie’s _Trésor de
Chronologie_, to any calculations of their own, based on the Golden
Numbers and Sunday Letters[1]. In the present volume the limits of space
forbid any detailed discussion of the principles involved and the methods
employed in the determination of Easter by the computists both ancient
and modern. A brief historical sketch of the successive reforms of the
Kalendar is all that has been found possible. Those who seek for fuller
information can resort to the treatises mentioned above or in the course
of the volume. The chapter on Easter has for convenience been placed near
the conclusion of this volume.
In dealing with both Eastern and Western Kalendars the student will bear
in mind that only comparatively few of the festivals affected the life
of the great body of the faithful. A very large number of festivals were
marked in the services of the Church by certain liturgical changes or
additions. Many of them had their special _propria_; others were grouped
in classes; and each class had its own special liturgical features. Only
comparatively few made themselves felt outside the walls of the churches.
Some of them carried a cessation from servile labour, or caused the
closing of the law courts, or, as chiefly in the Greek Church, mitigated
in various degrees (according to the dignity of the festival) the rigour
of fasting. The distinction between _festa chori_ and _festa fori_ is
always worthy of observation. A relic of the distinction is preserved in
an expression of common currency in France, when one speaks of a person
as of insignificant importance, _C’est un saint qu’on ne chôme pas_.
Although the general scope of the following pages is wide in intention,
the origins of the Kalendar and the rise of the principal seasons
and days of observance have chiefly attracted the interest of the
writer. Later developments are not wholly neglected, but they occupy a
subordinate place.
The enactments of civil legislation under the Christian Emperors and
other rulers, in respect to the observance of Sunday and other Christian
holy days, is an interesting field of study; but it has been impossible
to enter upon it here in view of the limits of space at our disposal.
The study of Kalendars brings one into constant contact with hagiology,
the acts of martyrs, and the lives of saints. It would however have been
obviously vain to deal seriously in the present volume with so vast a
subject, even in broadest outline.
A short Bibliography of some important or serviceable works dealing with
various branches of the subject before us is prefixed.
A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY
ACHELIS, H. _Die Martyrologien, ihre Geschichte und ihr Werth._ (Berlin,
1900.)
ACTA SANCTORVM. [Of the Bollandists. This vast collection, of which
the first volume appeared in 1643, had attained by the middle of the
nineteenth century, after various interruptions in the labours of the
compilers, to 55 volumes, folio, and the work is still in process,
having now reached the early days of November. Various Kalendars
and Martyrologies have been printed in the work. The Martyrology of
Venerable Bede, with the additions of Florus and others, will be found
in the second volume for March; the metrical Ephemerides of the Greeks
and Russians in the first volume for May; Usuard’s Martyrology in the
sixth and seventh volumes for June, and also an abbreviated form of
the Hieronymian. The second volume for November contains the Syriac
Martyrology of Dr Wright edited afresh by R. Graffin with a translation
into Greek by Duchesne. The same volume contains the Hieronymian
Martyrology edited by De Rossi and Duchesne.]
ASSEMANUS, JOSEPHUS SIMON. _Kalendaria Ecclesiae Universae, in quibus tum
ex vetustis marmoribus, tum ex codicibus, tabulis, parietinis, pictis,
scriptis scalptisve Sanctorum nomina, imagines, et festi per annum dies
Ecclesiarum Orientis et Occidentis, praemissis uniuscujusque Ecclesiae
originibus, recensentur, describuntur, notisque illustrantur._ 4to, 6
tom. Romae, 1755. The title raises hopes which are not verified. [This
work of the learned Syrian, who for his services to sacred erudition was
made Prefect of the Library of the Vatican, was planned on a colossal
scale, but it was never completed, and indeed we may truly say only
begun. The six volumes which alone remain are wholly concerned with the
Slavonic Church. The first four volumes, together with a large part of
the fifth, are devoted mainly to the history of Slavonic Christianity.
The concluding part of the fifth and the whole of the sixth volume deal
with a Russian Kalendar, commencing the year, as in the Greek Church,
with 1 September. This is treated very fully, but the work ends here.]
BAILLET, ADRIEN. _Les Vies des Saints._ 2nd Ed. 10 vols. 4to. 1739. [The
ninth volume on the moveable feasts abounds in valuable information; and,
generally, this work may be consulted on the history of the festivals
with much profit.]
BINGHAM, JOSEPH. _Origines Ecclesiasticae, or the Antiquities of the
Christian Church_, etc. [Of the numerous editions of this important
work, which has been by no means superseded, the most serviceable is the
edition to be found in Bingham’s _Works_, 9 vols. 8vo. (1840) ‘with the
quotations at length in the original languages.’ The editor is J. R.
Pitman. Volume 7 contains most of what is pertinent to the antiquities of
the feasts and fasts of the early Church.]
BINTERIM, A. J. _Die vorzüglichsten Denkwürdigkeiten der Christ-Kathol.
Kirche._ Vol. V. (Mainz, 1829.)
CABROL, FERNAND. _Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie._
Paris, 1907 (in process of publication).
D’ACHERY, LUCAS. _Spicilegium._ Tom. II. fol. Paris, 1723. [This contains
the Hieronymian Martyrology; the metrical Martyrology attributed to Bede;
the Martyrology known as _Gellonense_ (from the monastery at Gellone,
on the borders of the diocese of Lodève in the province of Narbonne),
assigned to about A.D. 804; the metrical Martyrology of Wandalbert the
deacon, of the diocese of Trèves, about A.D. 850; and an old Kalendar
(A.D. 826) from a manuscript of Corbie.]
DUCHESNE, L. _Origines du Culte chrétien._ 3rd Ed. 8vo. Paris, 1902.
[There is an English translation by M. L. McClure, London (S.P.C.K.),
1903. The merits of Duchesne are so generally recognised that it is
unnecessary to speak of them here.]
GROTEFEND, H. _Zeitrechnung des deutschen Mittelalters und der Neuzeit._
4to. 2 vols. Hanover, 1891, 1892-8. [Besides exhibiting in full a large
collection of Kalendars of Dioceses and Monastic Orders, not only of
Germany, but also of Denmark, Scandinavia, and Switzerland, this work
contains an index of Saints marking their days in various Kalendars,
including certain Kalendars of England. There is also a Glossary,
explaining both technical terms and the words of popular speech and
folk-lore in connexion with days and seasons.]
HAMPSON, R. T. _Medii Ævi Kalendarium, or dates, charters, and customs
of the middle ages, with Kalendars from the tenth to the fifteenth
century; and an alphabetical digest of obsolete names of days: forming
a Glossary of the dates of the middle ages, with Tables and other aids
for ascertaining dates._ 8vo. 2 vols. London, 1841. [The first volume is
mainly occupied with ‘popular customs and superstitions’; but it also
contains reprints of various Anglo-Saxon and early English Kalendars.
The second volume is given over wholly to a useful, though occasionally
somewhat uncritical glossary.]
HOSPINIAN, RUDOLPH. _Festa Christianorum, hoc est, De origine, progressu,
ceremoniis et ritibus festorum dierum Christianorum Liber unus_ (folio).
Tiguri, 1593. [This is a work of considerable learning for its day,
written from the standpoint of a Swiss Protestant. A second edition,
in which replies are made to the criticisms of Cardinal Bellarmine and
Gretser, appeared, also at Zurich, and in folio, in 1612.]
IDELER, LUDWIG. _Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen
Chronologie._ 8vo. 2 vols. Berlin, 1825-26. [Ideler was Royal Astronomer
and Professor in the University of Berlin. His discussion of the Easter
cycles cannot be dispensed with. This and his account of the computation
of time in the Christian Church will be found in Vol. 2 (pp. 175-470).
The Gregorian reform is well dealt with.]
KELLNER, K. A. HEINRICH. _Heortology: a history of the Christian
Festivals from their origin to the present day._ Translated from the
second German edition. 8vo. London, 1908. [Dr Kellner is Professor of
Catholic Theology in the University of Bonn. An interesting and useful
volume, though occasionally exhibiting, as is not unnatural, marked
ecclesiastical predilections. It contains prefixed a useful bibliography.]
LIETZMANN, H. _Die drei ältesten Martyrologien._ E. tr. 8vo. Cambridge,
1904. [This little pamphlet of 16 pages exhibits conveniently the
texts of (1) what is variously known as the Bucherian, or Liberian,
or Philocalian Martyrology, (2) The Martyrology of Carthage, and (3)
Wright’s Syrian Martyrology.]
MACLEAN, ARTHUR JOHN (Bishop of Moray). The article ‘Calendar,
the Christian’ in Hastings’ _Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels_
[admirable, generally, for the early period.]
MACLEAN, ARTHUR JOHN (Bishop of Moray). _East Syrian Daily Offices._
London, 8vo., 1894. [An appendix deals with the Kalendar of the modern
Nestorians (Assyrian Christians).]
NEALE, JOHN MASON. _A History of the Holy Eastern Church. General
Introduction._ London, 8vo., 1850. [Vol. II. gives information at
considerable length on the Kalendars of the Byzantine, Russian, Armenian,
and Ethiopic Churches.]
NILLES, NICOLAUS. _Kalendarium Manuale utriusque Ecclesiae Orientalis et
Occidentalis, academiis clericorum accommodatum._ 2 tom. 8vo. Oeniponte,
1896, 1897. [N. Nilles, S.J., Professor in the University of Innsbruck,
deals mainly in these volumes with the ecclesiastical year in Eastern
Churches.]
QUENTIN, HENRI. _Les Martyrologes historiques du moyen age, étude sur la
formation du Martyrologe romain._ 8vo. Paris, 1907.
SAXONY, MAXIMILIAN, PRINCE OF. _Praelectiones de Liturgiis Orientalibus._
Tom. I. 8vo. Friburgi Brisgoviae, 1908. [This volume is mainly concerned
with the Kalendars and Liturgical Year of the Greek and Slavonic
Churches. It is lucid and interesting.]
SEABURY, SAMUEL, D.D. _The Theory and Use of the Church Calendar in the
measurement and distribution of Time; being an account of the origin and
use of the Calendar; of its reformation from the Old to the New Style;
and of its adaptation to the use of the English Church by the British
Parliament under George II._ 8vo. New York, 1872. [Excellent on the
restricted subject with which it deals. It does not deal with Christian
Festivals beyond the question of the determination of Easter, but is
largely concerned with matters of technical chronology, the ancient
cycles, golden numbers, epacts, etc.]
SMITH, WILLIAM, AND CHEETHAM, SAMUEL. _A Dictionary of Christian
Antiquities._ 2 vols. London, 1875, 1880. [The articles contributed by
various scholars, as was inevitable, vary much in merit. Those on the
festivals by the Rev. Robert Sinker are particularly valuable. This work
is cited in the following pages as _D. C. A._]
WORDSWORTH, JOHN, Bishop of Salisbury. _The Ministry of Grace._ London,
8vo., 1901. [This learned work, under a not very illuminative title,
discusses, _inter alia_, with a thorough knowledge of the best and most
recent literature of the subject, the development of the Church’s fasts
and festivals. It stands pre-eminent among English works dealing with the
subject.]
[GASQUET, ABBOT, AND BISHOP, EDMUND. _The Bosworth Psalter._ London,
1908. Contains valuable information about some Mediaeval Kalendars, with
discussions of them. Edd.]
CHAPTER I
THE WEEK
The Church of Christ, founded in Judaea by Him who, after the flesh, was
of the family of David, and advanced and guided in its earlier years by
leaders of Jewish descent, could not fail to bear traces of its Hebrew
origin. The attitude and trend of minds that had been long familiar with
the religious polity of the Hebrews, and with the worship of the Temple
and the Synagogue, showed themselves in the institutions and worship of
the early Church. This truth is observable to some extent in the Church’s
polity and scheme of government, and even more clearly in the methods
and forms of its liturgical worship. It is not then to be wondered at
that the same influences were at work in the ordering of the times and
seasons, the fasts and festivals, of the Church’s year.
_The Week and the Lord’s Day._
Most potent in affecting the whole daily life of Christendom in all ages
was the passing on from Judaism of the Week of seven days. Inwoven, as
it is, with the history of our lives, and taken very much as matter of
course, as if it were something like a law of nature, the dominating
influence and far reaching effects of this seven-day division of time are
seldom fully realised.
The Week, known in the Roman world at the time of our Lord only in
connexion with the obscure speculations of Eastern astrology, or as
a feature, in its Sabbath, of the lives of the widely-spread Jewish
settlers in the great cities of the Empire, had been from remote times
accepted among various oriental peoples. It would be outside our province
to enquire into its origin, though much can be said in favour of the view
that it took its rise out of a rough division into four of the lunar
month. But, so far as Christianity is concerned, it is enough to know
that it was beyond all doubt taken over from the religion of the Hebrews.
It is not improbable that at the outset some of the Christian converts
from Judaism may have continued to observe the Jewish Sabbath, the
seventh or last day of the week: and that attempts were made to fasten
its obligations upon Gentile converts is evident from St Paul’s Epistle
to the Colossians (ii. 16). But it is certain that at an early date
among Christians the first day of the week was marked by special
religious observances. The testimony of the Acts of the Apostles and the
Epistles of St Paul shows us the first day of the week as a time for
the assembling of Christians for instruction and for worship, when ‘the
breaking of bread’ formed part of the service, and when offerings for
charitable and religious purposes might be laid up in store[2]. The name
‘the Lord’s day,’ applied to the first day of the week, may probably be
traced to New Testament times. The occurrence of the expression in the
Revelation of St John (i. 10) has been commonly regarded as a testimony
to this application[3].
In the _Epistle of Barnabas_ (tentatively assigned by Bishop Lightfoot to
between A.D. 70 and 79, and by others to about A.D. 130-131) we find the
passage (c. 15), ‘We keep the eighth day for rejoicing, in the which also
Jesus rose from the dead.’ The date of the _Teaching of the Apostles_ is
still reckoned by some scholars as _sub judice_. But, if it is rightly
assigned to the first century, its testimony may be cited here. In it is
the following passage:—‘On the Lord’s own day (κατὰ κυριακὴν δὲ Κυρίον)
gather yourselves together and break bread, and give thanks, first
confessing your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure’ (c. 14).
The next evidence, in point of time, is a passage in the _Epistle of
Ignatius to the Magnesians_ (cc. 8, 9, 10), in which the writer dissuades
those to whom he wrote from observing sabbaths (μηκέτι σαββατίζοντες)
and urges them to live ‘according to the Lord’s day (κατὰ κυριακὴν) on
which our life also rose through Him.’ It is impossible to suppose
that in early times the Lord’s day was held to be a day of rest. The
work of the servant and labouring class had to be done; and it has been
reasonably conjectured that the assemblies of Christians before dawn
were to meet the necessities of the situation. Lastly, the passage from
the _Apology_ of Justin Martyr (_Ap._ i. 67) is too well known to be
cited in full. He describes to the Emperor the character and procedure
of the Christian assemblies on ‘the day of the sun,’ which we know from
other sources to have been the first day of the week. Writings of the
Apostles or of the Prophets were read: the President of the assembly
instructed and exhorted: bread, and wine and water were consecrated and
distributed to those present and sent by the Deacons to the absent:
alms were collected and deposited with the President for the relief of
widows and orphans, the sick and the poor, prisoners and strangers. Later
than Justin we need not go, as the evidence from all quarters pours in
abundantly to establish the universal observance of ‘the first day of the
week,’ ‘Sunday,’ ‘the Lord’s day,’ as a day for worship and religious
instruction[4].
_The Sabbath (Saturday)._
Lack of positive evidence prevents us from speaking with any certainty
as to whether there was among Christians any recognised and approved
observance of Saturday (the Sabbath) in the first, second and third
centuries. There is no hint of such observance in early Christian
literature; and there are passages which rather go to discountenance the
notion[5].
Duchesne, whose opinion deservedly carries much weight, comes to the
conclusion that the observance of Saturday in the fourth century was not
a survival of an attempt of primitive times to effect a conciliation
between Jewish and Christian practices, but an institution of
comparatively late date[6]. Certainly one cannot speak confidently of the
existence of Saturday as a day of religious observance among Christians
before the fourth century.
Epiphanius[7], in the second half of the fourth century, speaks of
synaxes being held _in some places_ on the Sabbath; from which it may
probably be inferred that it was not so in his time in Cyprus.
In the Canons of the Council of Laodicea (which can hardly be placed
earlier than about the middle of the fourth century, and is probably
later) we find it enjoined that ‘on the Sabbath the Gospels with other
Scriptures shall be read’ (16); that ‘in Lent bread ought not to be
offered, save only on the Sabbath and the Lord’s day’ (49); and that ‘in
Lent the feasts of martyrs should not be kept, but that a commemoration
of the holy martyrs should be made on Sabbaths and Lord’s days’ (50).
Yet it was forbidden ‘to Judaize and be idle on the Sabbath,’ while,
‘if they can,’ Christians are directed to rest on the Lord’s day. The
_Apostolic Constitutions_ go further; and, under the names of St Peter
and St Paul, it is enjoined that servants should work only five days
in the week, and be free from labour on the Sabbath and the Lord’s day
‘with a view to the teaching of godliness’ (viii. 33). Uncertain as are
the date and origin of the _Constitutions_ they may be regarded as in
some measure reflecting the general sentiment in the East in the fifth,
or possibly the close of the fourth century[8]. From these testimonies
it appears that the Sabbath was a day of special religious observance,
and that in the East it partook of a festal character. Falling in
with this way of regarding Saturday we find Canon 64 of the so-called
_Apostolic Canons_ (of uncertain date, but possibly early in the fifth
century[9]) declaring, ‘If any cleric be found fasting on the Lord’s
day, or on the Sabbath, except one only [that is, doubtless “the Great
Sabbath,” or Easter Eve], let him be deprived, and, if he be a layman,
let him be segregated[10].’ The _Apostolic Constitutions_ emphasise the
position of the Sabbath by the exhortation that Christians should ‘gather
together especially on the Sabbath, and on the Lord’s day, the day of the
Resurrection’ (ii. 59); and again, ‘Keep the Sabbath and the Lord’s day
as feasts, for the one is the commemoration of the Creation, the other
of the Resurrection’ (vii. 23³). We find also that one of the canons of
Laodicea referred to above is in substance re-enacted at a much later
date by the Council in Trullo (A.D. 692) in this form, that except on the
Sabbath, the Lord’s day, and the Feast of the Annunciation, the Liturgy
of the Pre-sanctified should be said on all days in Lent (c. 52).
In the city of Alexandria in the time of the historian Socrates the
Eucharist was not celebrated on Saturday; but other parts of Egypt
followed the general practice of the East. Socrates says that Rome agreed
with Alexandria in this respect[11].
It is certain that very commonly, though not universally, in the East
the Sabbath was regarded as possessing the features of a weekly festival
(with a eucharistic celebration) second in importance only to the Lord’s
day. And Gregory of Nyssa says, ‘If thou hast despised the Sabbath, with
what face wilt thou dare to behold the Lord’s day.... They are sister
days’ (_de Castigatione_, Migne, _P.G._ xlvi. 309).
In the West we find also that the Sabbath was a day of special religious
observance; but there was a variety of local usage in regard to the
mode of its observance. At Rome the Sabbath was a fast-day in the time
of St Augustine[12]; and the same is true of some other places; but the
majority of the Western Churches, like the East, did not so regard it.
In North Africa there was a variety of practice, some places observed
the day as a fast, others as a feast. At Milan the day was not treated as
a fast; and St Ambrose, in reply to a question put by Augustine at the
instance of his mother Monnica, stated that he regarded the matter as one
of local discipline, and gave the sensible rule to do in such matters at
Rome as the Romans do[13]. In the early part of the fourth century the
Spanish Council of Elvira corrected the error that every Sabbath should
be observed as a fast[14].
As to the origin of the Saturday fast we are left almost wholly to
conjecture. It has been supposed by some to be an exhibition of
antagonism to Judaism, which regarded the Sabbath as a festival; while
others consider that it is a continuation of the Friday fast, as a kind
of preparatory vigil of the Lord’s day. It is outside our scope to go
into this question.
A relic of the ancient position of distinction occupied by Saturday may
perhaps be found in the persistence of the name ‘Sabbatum’ in the Western
service-books. Abstinence (from flesh) continued, ‘de mandate ecclesiae,’
on Saturdays in the Roman Church. For Roman Catholics in England it
ceased in 1830 by authority of Pope Pius VIII.
This seems a convenient place for saying something as to
the use of the word _Feria_ in ecclesiastical language to
designate an ordinary week-day. The names most commonly
given to the days of the week in the service-books and other
ecclesiastical records are ‘Dies Dominica’ (rarely ‘Dominicus’)
for the Lord’s Day, or Sunday; ‘Feria II’ for Monday; ‘Feria
III’ for Tuesday, and so on to Saturday which (with rare
exceptions) is not Feria VII but ‘Sabbatum.’
Why the ordinary week-day is called ‘Feria,’ when in classical
Latin ‘feriae’ was used for ‘days of rest,’ ‘holidays,’
‘festivals,’ is a question that cannot be answered with
any confidence. A conjecture which seems open to various
objections, though it has found supporters, is as follows: all
the days of Easter week were holidays, ‘feriatae’; and, this
being the first week of the ecclesiastical year, the other
weeks followed the mode of naming the days which had been used
in regard to the first week. A fatal objection to this theory,
for which the authority of St Jerome has been claimed, is
that we find ‘feria’ used, as in Tertullian, for an ordinary
week-day long before we have any reason to think that there was
any ordinance for the observance of the whole of Easter week by
a cessation from labour[15].
Another conjecture, presented however with too much confidence,
is that put forward on the authority of Isidore of Seville[16]
by the learned Henri de Valois (Valesius). He alleges that the
ancient Christians, receiving, as they did, the week of seven
days from the Jews, imitated the Jewish practice, which used
the expression ‘the second of the Sabbath,’ ‘the third of the
Sabbath,’ and so on for the days of the week: that ‘Feria’
means a day of rest, in effect the same as ‘Sabbath,’ and that
in this way the ‘second Feria’ and ‘third Feria,’ etc., came to
be used for the second and third days of the week[17].
The astrological names for the days of the week, as of the Sun,
of the Moon, of Mars, of Mercury, etc., were generally avoided
by Christians; but they are not wholly unknown in Christian
writers, and sometimes appear even in Christian epitaphs.
In the ecclesiastical records of the Greeks the first day of
the week is ‘the Lord’s day’; and the seventh, the Sabbath,
as in the West. But Friday is _Parasceve_ (παρασκευή), a
name which in the Latin Church is confined to one Friday in
the year, the Friday of the Lord’s Passion, which day in the
Eastern Church is known as ‘the Great Parasceve.’ With these
exceptions the days of the week are ‘the second,’ ‘the third,’
‘the fourth,’ etc., the word ‘day’ being understood.
It is worth recording that among the Portuguese the current
names for the week-days are: _segunda feira_, _terça feira_,
etc.
_Wednesday and Friday._
Long prior to any clear evidence for the special observance among
Christians of the last day of the week we find testimonies to a religious
character attaching to the fourth and sixth days.
The devout Jews were accustomed to observe a fast twice a week, on the
second and fifth days, Monday and Thursday[18]; and these days, together
with the Christian fasts substituted for them, are referred to in the
_Teaching of the Apostles_ (8), ‘Let not your fastings be with the
hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week; but
do ye keep your fast on the fourth and parasceve (the sixth).’ In the
_Shepherd of Hermas_ we find the writer relating that he was fasting and
holding a _station_[19]. And this peculiar term is applied by Tertullian
to fasts (whether partial or entire we need not here discuss) observed on
the fourth and sixth days of the week[20]. Clement of Alexandria, though
not using the word _station_, speaks of fasts being held on the fourth
day of the week and on the parasceve[21].
At a much later date than the authorities cited above we find the
_Apostolic Canons_ decreeing under severe penalties that, unless for
reasons of bodily infirmity, not only the clergy but the laity must fast
on the fourth day of the week and on the sixth (_parasceve_). And the
rule of fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays still obtains in the Eastern
Church[22].
These two days were marked by the assembling of Christians for
worship. But the character of the service was not everywhere the same.
Duchesne[23] has exhibited the facts thus: In Africa in the time of
Tertullian the Eucharist was celebrated, and it was so at Jerusalem
towards the close of the fourth century. In the Church of Alexandria the
Eucharist was not celebrated on these days; but the Scriptures were read
and interpreted. And in this matter, as in many others, the Church at
Rome probably agreed with Alexandria. It is certain, at least as regards
Friday, that the mysteries were not publicly celebrated on these days at
Rome about the beginning of the fifth century. The observance of Friday
as a day of abstinence is still of obligation in the West.