HEORTOLOGY
A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN FESTIVALS FROM
THEIR ORIGIN TO THE PRESENT DAY
BY
DR K. A. HEINRICH KELLNER
PROFESSOR OF CATHOLIC THEOLOGY IN
THE UNIVERSITY OF BONN
TRANSLATED WITH THE AUTHOR’S PERMISSION FROM
THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION
BY
A PRIEST OF THE DIOCESE OF WESTMINSTER
LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRÜBNER & CO., LIMITED
DRYDEN HOUSE, GERRARD STREET, W.
1908
_NIHIL OBSTAT_
FR. OSMUND, O.F.M.,
Censor deputatus.
_IMPRIMATUR_
✠ GULIELMUS,
Episcopus Arindelensis, Vicarius Generalis.
Westmonasterii,
_die 24 Feb., 1908_.
_IMPRIMATUR TO THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION_
✠ THOMAS,
Archiepp̄s.
Friburgi Brisgoviæ,
_die 8 Maii, 1906_.
AUTHOR’S PREFACE TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITION
In older works on liturgy, the festivals of the Church have been
generally dealt with as forming part of a greater whole, while in more
recent times various questions relating to them have been discussed in
separate articles in encyclopædias and reviews. The time seems now to
have come when the cycle of ecclesiastical festivals ought to be regarded
as a definite department of study by itself. The older works, besides
being difficult of access, do not come up to the standard of modern works
on the same subject, and the independent investigations of recent date,
although throwing much new light upon some points, have left others
untouched, with the result that the reader is unable to gain a clear
conception of the matter as a whole.
The solid results gained by investigations into this branch of study in
earlier and later times must now be collected, and systematised, and
brought up to the level demanded by modern science. Much remains to be
done in this department owing to the fresh light that has been thrown
upon it by the publication of documents hitherto inaccessible, among
which we may mention the so-called Peregrinatio Silviæ discovered by
Gamurrini, the Lectionaries of Silos, and the critical edition of the
so-called Martyrologium Hieronymianum of de Rossi and Duchesne. The
last-named document has so far been more of a hindrance than a help in
this branch of study, some attributing too much importance to it, and
others none at all.
It has seemed to the author that the time for gathering together the
ascertained results derived from these and similar books has come. It
is chiefly for theological students and the younger clergy that the
following book is intended. Such a work as would make it easy to deal
with the subject in sermons and catechetical instructions, and, at the
same time, would give clearly and briefly all the information necessary
for dealing with the question from the historical standpoint, avoiding
equally uncritical credulity and sceptical unbelief—such a work seems to
the author demanded by the circumstances of the time.
Moreover, the Minister of Public Worship in Prussia has recently
(12th Sept. 1898) required from candidates for the office of catholic
teacher in higher grade schools, a considerable acquaintance with the
ecclesiastical year among their other qualifications.
This is the reason why the author has confined his attention solely to
the worship of the Roman Catholic Church, merely alluding occasionally
to the usages of other religious bodies. For the same reason, in
accordance with the meaning of the term “Heortology,” he has concerned
himself with those festivals alone which are publicly celebrated, or
were so celebrated formerly. The majority of these afford no features of
historical interest, owing, as they do, their origin to the action of
authority. In cases which do not here come under discussion, reference
may be made to separate works and to the Bollandists in general. In a
matter of such practical interest as this, it cannot fail that some
points have been omitted; still, I think, the amount of material
collected in the following pages is sufficient for the end I have had
in view. In support of the views herein expressed, a somewhat detailed
account is given in the third part of the documents which serve as
the sources of our information. It has not seemed practical to print a
selection from the large number of these documents by way of supplement,
since to have done so would have interfered with the object of this book.
BONN, _All Saints’, 1900_.
AUTHOR’S PREFACE OF THE SECOND GERMAN EDITION
This second (revised and enlarged) edition—from which Dr A. Mercati,
Professor in the Seminary of Reggio, Emilia, has made the Italian
translation—is in substance the same as the first. The sections dealing
with the dedication of churches and the feast of the patron saint, with
the feast of the Immaculate Conception, with the feasts of St Mary
Magdalen, St Cecilia, and St Catherine, and the two concluding sections
have been added, and some appendices.
BONN, _May 1906_.
TRANSLATOR’S NOTE
In this translation, the excursus on the German Protestant
“Buss-und-Bettage” and on St Ursula have been omitted as being of less
general interest, and a few notes have been added.
LONDON, _April 1908_.
BOOKS QUOTED AND REFERRED TO
(A) MEDIÆVAL WORKS, WHICH IN SOME DEGREE ARE OF THE NATURE OF ORIGINAL
SOURCES
ISIDORE of Seville († 658).—_De Officiis Ecclesiasticis._ MIGNE, _Patr.
Lat._, lxxxiii.
AMALARIUS SYMPHOSIUS (“chor-episcopus” at Metz, † between 850 and
853).—_De Officiis Ecclesiasticis libri quattuor._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,
cv.
RABANUS MAURUS (Abbot of Fulda, later Archbishop of Mainz, † 856).—_De
Officiis Ecclesiasticis._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cvii.
ADO (Bishop of Vienne, † 875).—_Libellus de Festivitatibus SS. Apost._
MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxiii.
JOHANNES ABRINCENSIS (Bishop of Rouen, † 1079).—_De Officiis
Ecclesiasticis._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlvii. _Ordinarius Canonicorum
Reg._, _ib._ 188-191.
PSEUDO-ALCUIN (middle of the eleventh century).—_De Officiis
Ecclesiasticis._ Incomplete in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ci. 1175. According
to Bäumer, Amalarius Fortunatus is really the author.
BERNO of Reichenau († 1045).—_De Officio Missæ_, and two small tracts on
Advent and the Embertides. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlii.
LANFRANC († 1089).—_Decreta pro Ord. S. Benedicti._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,
cl.
BERNOLD of Constance († 1100). According to Bäumer, the author of the
_Micrologus_. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cli.
_De Cærimoniis, Sacramentis, Officiis et Observantionibus Ecclesiæ libri
tres_, by HUGO (Canon of St Victor in Paris, † 1118), or by ROBERTUS
PULLUS. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clxxvii. 381.
RUPERT of Deutz († 1135).—_De Divinis Officiis._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,
clxx.
GUIGO I. DE CASTRO (Prior of the Grande Chartreuse about
1137).—_Consuetudines Carthusienses._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clii. 631-759.
HONORIUS of Autun († _circ._ 1145).—_Gemma Animæ._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,
clxxii.
JOHANNES BELETH (Professor of Theology at Paris, † 1190).—_Rationale
Divinorum Officiorum._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccii.
_Consuetudines Farfenses_, ed. B. Albers. Stuttgart, 1900. Older editions
in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, c. 4, and (HERGOTT) _Vetus Disciplina Monast._
Paris, 1776.
SICARDUS (Bishop of Cremona, † 1215).—_Mitrale._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,
ccxiii.
INNOCENT III. (Pope, † 1216).—_De S. Altaris Mysterio libri sex._ MIGNE,
_Patr. Lat._, ccxvii.
ODERICUS (Canon of Siena, 1213).—_Ordo Officiorum Eccl. Senensis._ Ed.
Trombelli. Bononiæ, 1766.
CODINUS.—_Curopalates s. de Officialibus Palatii Constantinopolitani et
de Officiis Magnæ Ecclesiæ._ Rec. Imm. Bekker. Bonn, 1839.
(B) MORE RECENT WORKS EMPLOYED OR REFERRED TO
(_a_) BY CATHOLIC AUTHORS
ALLATIUS, LEO.—_De Dominicis et Hebdomadibus Græcorum Recentiorum._ Col.,
1648.
ARENS, FRANZ.—_Der Liber Ordinarius der Essener Stiftskirche_, Essen,
1901.
ASSEMANI, JOS. SIM.—_Kalendaria Ecclesiæ Univ._ Romæ, 1730. Six vols.
BAILLET, ADRIEN († 1706).—_Les Vies des Saints._ Paris, 1703; second ed.
1739, in ten vols. 4to. Vol. ix. contains a history of the movable feasts.
BÄUMER, SUITB.—_Geschichte des Breviers_, etc. Freiburg, 1895.
BENEDICT XIV. (Prosper Lambertini).—_De Festis D.N. Jesu Christi et B.
Mariæ Virginis libri duo._ Patavii, 1756.
⸺ _Commentarius de Festis B. Virg. Mariæ_, etc. Dillingen, 1754.
BINTERIM, ANTON. JOS.—_Denkwürdigkeiten der Kathol. Kirche._ Mainz, 1829,
especially vol. v. part i: “Die kirchichle Heortologie und Chronologie.”
⸺ _Pragmatische Geschichte der deutschen Konzilien._ Mainz, 1836.
CHEVALIER, UL.—_Bibliothèque Liturgique. Ordinaires de l’Eglise cath.
de Laon._ Paris, 1897.—_Sacramentaire et Martyrologe de S. Remy et de
Reims._ Paris, 1900. _Ib._ of Bayeux. Paris, 1903.
COMBEFIS, FR., O.S.D. († 1679).—_Bibliotheca Patrum Concionatoria._
Paris, 1662. Eight vols. A collection of sermons of the Fathers and older
scholastics up to St Thomas Aquinas for the whole ecclesiastical year and
the principal saints’ days.
DUCHESNE, L.—_Origines du Culte Chrétien._ Third ed. Paris. [Engl.
transl. by M. L. Maclure, London, 1903.]
GAVANTUS, BARTH. (Mediol.).—_Thesaurus Sacrorum Rituum._ Romæ, 1628.
Amstelod., 1634.
⸺ _Id. op._, with _Novæ observationes et additiones_, etc., by C. M.
MERATI. Romæ, 1735. Aug. Vind., 1740.
GRETSER, JAC., S. J.—_De Festis Christianorum libri duo._ (Ingolstadii,
1612), with Auctarium.
GUÉRANGER, PROSP.—_L’Année Liturgique._ Translated anonymously into
German, with a Preface by J. B. HEINRICH. MAINZ, 1888-1894. Thirteen vols.
GUYET, CAR.—_Heortologia._ Venetiis, 1729. Almost entirely occupied with
the rubrics.
HOEYNCK, F. A.—_Gesch. der kirchl. Liturgie des Bistums Augsburg._
Augsburg, 1889.
HOLWECK, F. G.—_Fasti Mariani._ Frib. Brisg., 1892.
MABILLON, JOH.—_De Liturgia Gallicana libri tres._ Paris, 1685, and in
MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii.
MARTÈNE, EDMUND.—_De Antiquis Ecclesiæ Disciplinis._ Antwerp, 1737.
MARZOHL, J., and J. SCHNELLER.—_Liturgia Sacra oder Gebräuche und
Altertümer der Kathol. Kirche._ Five vols. Lucerne, 1841. Vol. iii. pp.
55-172 deals with the ecclesiastical year and festivals.
MIGNE, ABBÉ.—_Diction. des Cérémonies et des Rites Sacrés._ German
transl. by E. Schinke and Jos. Kühn. Breslau, 1850.
MORCELLI, SEPH. A.—Μηνολόγιον τῶν Ἐυαγγελίων Ἑορταστικῶν, _sive
Kalendarium Eccl. Constantinopolitanæ Mille Annorum Insigne_. Romæ, 1788.
MURATORI, L. A.—_Liturgia Rom. Vetus, tria Sacramentaria complectens
Leon., Gel., et Antiquum Gregor. Accedunt Missale Francorum, Gothicum et
Galicana duo_, etc. Venetiis, 1748. The Preface and the _Gelasianum_ are
printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv.
NICKEL, MARC. AD.—_Die heiligen Zeiten und Feste nach ihrer Geschichte
und Feier._ Six vols. Mainz, 1825-1838.
NILLES, NIC. S. J.—_Kalendarium Manuale utriusque Ecclesiæ Orient. et
Occid._ Ed. Altera. Two vols. Œniponte, 1896.
PILGRAM.—_Kalendarium Chronol. medii potissimum ævi monumentis
accomodatum._ Vienna, 1781.
PROBST, FERD.—_Die ältesten Römischen Sakramentarien und Ordines
erläutert._ Paderborn, 1892.
SCHMID, FRZ. X.—_Liturgik der christkathol. Religion._ Three vols.
Passau, 1831. Vol. iii. pp. 441-610 deals with the festivals.
SCHULTING, CORN.—_Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica._ Col. Agr., 1599. Tom. i. c.
9-17 and tom. ii.
THOMASSIN, LOUIS (Cong. Orat. Presb.)—_Traité des Festes de l’Eglise._
The second vol. contains “Traités Historiques et Dogmatiques sur divers
Points de la Discipline de l’Eglise et de la Morale Chrétienne.” Paris,
1683.
TOMASI, GIUS. MARIA (Cardinal, † 1731).—_Opera._ Ed. Vezzosi. Rome, 1748,
etc.
VEITH, P. ILDEFOUS.—On the Latin Martyrologies in the _Hist.-pol.
Blätter_, 1895 and 1896. On the Greek Martyrologies in _Studien und
Mitteilungen aus dem Benediktinerorden_, 1896 and 1897. See the
_Katholik_, 1894, ii. 314 _et seqq._
(_b_) BY NON-CATHOLIC AUTHORS
ACHELIS, HANS.—_Die Martyrologien, ihre Geschichte und ihr Wert._ Berlin,
1900.
ALT, HEINRICH (Preacher of La Charité).—_Das Kirchenjahr._ Berlin, 1860.
AUGUSTI, J. CHR. WILH.—_Denkwürdigkeiten._ Leipzig, 1817, etc. Vols.
i.-iii.: “Die Feste der alten Christen für Religionslehrer und gebildete
Laien aller Konfessionen.” (The author gives one or two sermons from the
Fathers for each feast as an appendix.)
DANIEL, HENR. ADALF.—_Codex liturgicus ecclesiæ universæ._ Four vols.
Lipsiæ, 1847.
DRESSER, MATTH.—_De festis et præcipius anni partibus._ Lipsiæ, 1584.
ERBES.—_Das Syrische Martyrologium und der Weihnachtsfestkreis_ in
Brieger’s “Zeitschr. für Kirchengesch,” 1905, iv., and 1906, i.
HALTAUS, CHR. GOTTLOB.—_Jahrzeitbuch der Deutschen des Mittelalters._
Translated by G. A. Scheffer. Erlangen, 1797.
HOSPINIANUS (WIRTH), RUD.—_De Festis Christianorum._ Genevæ, 1574.
Turici, 1593.
MALTZEW, A. VON.—_Fasten- und Blumen-Triodion_, etc. Berlin, 1899.
The Introduction deals with the ecclesiastical year of the Orthodox,
Armenian, and Roman Catholic Churches.
RANKE, E.—_Das Kirchl. Perikopensystem aus den ältesten Urkunden der
römischen Liturgie dargelegt und erläutert._ Berlin, 1847.
STRAUSS, FRIEDR.—_Das evangelische Kirchenjahr in seinem Zusammenhange
dargestellt._ Berlin, 1850.
USENER, HERM.—_Religionsgeschichte Untersuchungen._ Das Weihnachtsfest.
Bonn, 1889.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECT. PAGE
PART I
THE CHURCH’S FESTIVALS IN GENERAL
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. SUNDAY AND ITS OBSERVANCE AS A DAY OF REST 6
3. THE CLASSIFICATION OF FESTIVALS 13
4. THE GRADUAL INCREASE OF FESTIVALS. THEIR DECREASE IN THE
LAST THREE CENTURIES. THE PRESENT POSITION 16
PART II
CHAPTER I.—THE CHURCH’S YEAR
_A._ EASTER, AND THE SACRED SEASONS CONNECTED WITH EASTER
1. EASTER, ITS NAME AND HISTORY 37
2. THE CONNECTION OF THE CHRISTIAN FESTIVAL WITH THE JEWISH 41
3. THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH LED TO EASTER BEING A MOVABLE FEAST 46
4. THE FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE DATE OF EASTER, AND THE
ATTEMPTS MADE TO COMMEMORATE THE DAY OF THE MONTH
ON WHICH CHRIST DIED 52
5. THE LITURGICAL CELEBRATION OF HOLY WEEK AND EASTER 59
PALM SUNDAY 66
MAUNDY THURSDAY 69
GOOD FRIDAY 73
HOLY SATURDAY 79
EASTER AND THE EASTER OCTAVE 84
6. THE PREPARATION FOR EASTER—QUADRAGESIMA AND THE FAST 88
7. THE SEASON OF PREPARATION AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE
CHURCH’S YEAR 100
8. THE TRANSFIGURATION 105
9. THE ASCENSION 106
10. WHITSUNDAY 109
11. TRINITY SUNDAY 116
12. CORPUS CHRISTI. THE FORTY HOURS’ PRAYER. THE FESTIVAL
OF THE SACRED HEART 119
_B._ CHRISTMAS AND THE CHRISTMAS SEASON
1. CHRISTMAS 127
2. ADVENT AND THE SUNDAYS UNTIL SEPTUAGESIMA 158
3. THE OCTAVE OF CHRISTMAS. THE CIRCUMCISION. THE NEW YEAR 163
4. THE EPIPHANY 166
5. THE PURIFICATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY (CANDLEMAS) 173
6. THE SUNDAYS OF THE CHURCH’S YEAR AS FORMING CONNECTING
LINKS BETWEEN THE PRINCIPAL FEASTS 176
_C._ OTHER INCIDENTS IN THE CHURCH’S YEAR
1. THE EMBERTIDES 183
2. LITANIES OR ROGATIONS 189
3. THE DEDICATION OF A CHURCH AND THE FESTIVAL OF THE PATRON
SAINT 194
CHAPTER II.—THE SAINTS’ DAYS
1. THE ORIGINS OF THE CULTUS OF THE SAINTS AND THE GROUNDS
ON WHICH IT RESTS 203
2. THE FESTIVALS OF ST JOHN THE BAPTIST AND ST STEPHEN THE
PROTO-MARTYR 217
3. FESTIVALS OF OUR BLESSED LADY IN GENERAL 225
4. THE THREE ANCIENT FESTIVALS OF OUR BLESSED LADY—THE
NATIVITY, THE ANNUNCIATION, THE ASSUMPTION 230
5. INSTITUTION AND SPREAD OF THE FESTIVAL OF THE IMMACULATE
CONCEPTION 239
6. THE LESSER FEASTS OF OUR LADY—
i. The Name of Mary 264
ii. The Presentation of Our Lady in the Temple 265
iii. The Visitation 266
iv. The Feast of the Holy Rosary 268
7. THE FEAST OF ST JOSEPH. THE CULTUS OF SS. JOACHIM AND ANNE 272
8. THE FESTIVALS OF THE APOSTLES IN GENERAL 277
9. THE FESTIVALS OF THE APOSTLES AND EVANGELISTS IN PARTICULAR 282
i. St Peter and St Paul 282
ii. The Feast of St Peter’s Chains 287
iii. The Conversion of St Paul 288
iv. St Andrew and St Luke the Evangelist 289
v. St James the Great 291
vi. St Philip and St James the Less 293
vii. St John 296
viii. St Simon and St Jude (Thaddeus) 298
ix. St Mark the Evangelist 300
x. The Feast of St Peter’s Chair 301
10. THE FESTIVALS OF ST MARY MAGDALEN, ST CECILIA, AND ST
CATHERINE—
i. St Mary Magdalen 309
ii. St Cecilia 315
iii. St Catherine 321
11. THE FESTIVAL OF ALL SAINTS 323
12. THE COMMEMORATION OF ALL SOULS 326
13. THE FESTIVALS OF THE ANGELS 328
14. THE TWO FESTIVALS IN HONOUR OF THE HOLY CROSS 333
PART III
THE MATERIAL UPON WHICH THE HISTORY OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL
YEAR IS BASED
1. THE DOCUMENTARY SOURCES IN GENERAL 342
2. THE EARLIEST CHRISTIAN CALENDARS 347
3. THE ARIAN CALENDAR OF THE FOURTH CENTURY 352
4. THE SO-CALLED MARTYROLOGIUM HIERONYMIANUM 363
5. THE LECTIONARY AND MARTYROLOGY OF SILOS 378
6. EGYPTIAN (COPTIC) CALENDARS AND SYNAXARIA 381
7. THE MENOLOGY OF CONSTANTINOPLE 387
8. THE MENOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR BASIL II., AND THE SYRIAN
LECTIONARY OF THE ELEVENTH CENTURY 390
9. THE KALENDARIUM MARMOREUM OF NAPLES 394
10. WESTERN AUTHORITIES FROM THE SIXTH TO THE EIGHTH CENTURIES 396
11. THE MARTYROLOGIES OF BEDE, FLORUS, WANDELBERT, AND ŒNGUS 401
12. THE MARTYROLOGIES OF ADO, USUARDUS, RABANUS MAURUS, AND
NOTKER BALBULUS 405
13. IMPORTANT CALENDARS FROM THE EIGHTH TO THE ELEVENTH
CENTURIES 410
CONCLUSION 419
APPENDIX
I. CLASSIFICATION OF FEASTS IN THE ROMAN CALENDAR 421
II. ON SOME LISTS OF FESTIVALS 421
III. THE FESTIVALS OF OBLIGATION AS OBSERVED IN DIFFERENT
COUNTRIES 423
IV. LITURGICAL VESTMENTS 428
V. THE WORD MASS AS A NAME FOR THE SACRIFICE OF THE ALTAR 430
VI. ON THE DATE FOR CHRISTMAS IN HIPPOLYTUS 437
VII. CHRISTMAS IN ENGLAND DURING THE COMMONWEALTH 439
VIII. EXCURSUS ON THE THREE HOLY KINGS 441
IX. THE GREEK ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR 442
X. ENGLISH WRITERS AND THE FEAST OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION 445
XI. EXCURSUS ON THE SO-CALLED TYPICA 447
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 449
INDEX 457
HEORTOLOGY
PART I
THE CHURCH’S FESTIVALS IN GENERAL
1. _Introduction_
The external worship of God, if it is not to remain vague and indefinite,
finds expression on the one hand through certain elements belonging to
the senses, such as signs and words, and on the other it is connected
with places and times. By the changes of day and night, of seasons
and years, Creation calls upon man to raise his mind to God at stated
times and to enter into communion with Him. The day with its brightness
is suited for work, night with its stillness invites man to turn his
thoughts in upon himself. The change of day and night calls upon us to
begin the day’s work with God, and to commend ourselves to His keeping
in the darkness of the night. The course of the seasons, too, matures
the fruits of the earth necessary for our support, and the succession of
years reminds us of the fleeting nature of everything earthly, for our
whole life is composed of successive years. Consequently the civilised
peoples already in remote antiquity have found a call to the worship of
God in the changing seasons and times, and so have introduced sacred
seasons. Sacred times and places are common to all religions in general.
The change of times, bringing with them corresponding changes in nature,
made a religious impression upon mankind. In turn, man sanctified certain
times and dedicated them to God, and these days thus consecrated to God
became festivals.
The worship of God takes precedence over the daily affairs of common
life, and accordingly displaces such of them as are not necessary for
the support of natural life or the wellbeing of society. Thus it came
to pass that the ordinary affairs of life gave place to the worship of
God, and rest from labour became an essential part of the worship paid to
Him. Man abstained from his wonted tasks on certain days, which received
in consequence a higher consecration. And so among the ancient Romans,
the idea of a day of rest and a holy day were intimately connected and
received the name of _feria_. But it was among the Hebrews that the days
set apart for the worship of God received the most distinctive character
as days of rest.[1]
The Christian Church on her part, in wishing that the day set apart
for the worship of God should be observed as far as possible as a day
of rest from labour, acts in accordance with ideas and customs which
nature itself has planted in the human race, and which need no other
justification. The term _sabbatismus_ (Sabbath rest) soon entered into
the theological language of Christendom, and in public life the Christian
holy days, at first only Sundays, gradually, even in secular legislation,
became recognised as days of rest, sometimes in a larger and sometimes in
a smaller number.
The entire number of ecclesiastical holy days and seasons is actually
codified for us in the different Church Calendars. Their contents fall
into two essentially different divisions, each possessing an entirely
different origin and history. The first division consists of festivals
of our Lord, distributed over the year, regulated and co-ordinated
in accordance with certain laws. The second division consists of
commemorations of the saints in no wise connected with the festivals of
our Lord or with one another. Occupying to some extent an intermediate
position between these two chief divisions come the festivals of our
Blessed Lady, which have this in common with the festivals of the
saints, that they fall on fixed days, but, on the other hand, they are
to a certain extent connected with each other, and with some feasts of
our Lord. This is carried out in such a way that they are distributed
throughout the entire Church’s year, and are included in each of the
festal seasons.
The former of these two divisions is the most important, and its chief
feasts are also the oldest. The festivals of our Lord, Easter and
Pentecost especially, compose what is called the Church’s year in the
stricter sense, and, if they coincide with a saint’s day, they take
precedence. The Church’s year is built upon a single basis and according
to one plan, which did not originate in the mind of any one person, but
developed out of the historical conditions resulting from the connection
of Christianity with Judaism.
In the course of the ecclesiastical year, the Church brings before us the
chief events in our Lord’s life and the most striking instances of His
work of redemption. The central point of the whole is the commemoration
of His death and resurrection—_i.e._ Easter—to which all other events are
related, whether those which reach backward to Christmas, or those which
reach onwards to the completion of His redemptive work at Whitsuntide.
In addition, there is, on the one hand, Advent, as a time of preparation
for our Lord’s coming, reminding us of the four or five thousand years
which intervened between the Creation and that event, and, on the other,
the Sundays after Pentecost, representing the period after the foundation
of the Church, and devoted to the consideration of the redemption won for
us, along with its doctrines and blessings. The weeks of the year form
the links of the chain, each Sunday marking the character of the week
which follows it.
The sacred seasons, as they pass in orderly succession, give outward
expression to the spirit which animates the Church, and are of the
utmost importance from the point of view of her worship, since they form
one of the chief elements in the instruction of mankind in the truths
of Christianity. By them one easily becomes familiar with Christianity
itself.
Every religion has its festivals, but none has so rich and so carefully
thought out a system of feasts as the Catholic Church. If we may compare
it to some artistically constructed edifice, we can regard the festivals
of our Lord as forming the piers which support all the rest, the lesser
feasts as contributing the decorations, and the Sundays, with their
attendant weeks, as the stones of which the walls are built. Naturally
all this did not exist at first, but, like many other things in the
Church, has grown up into its present proportions from small beginnings.
We are not told that the Divine Founder of the Church appointed a single
festival or left behind Him any instructions on the matter; still the
germ, destined by Providence to develop afterwards into the system of
festivals with which we are familiar, existed from the beginning. The
subsequent rich and varied development of this system was not the work
of individuals, but was due to the working of the spirit which ever rules
the Universal Church, and ever renews itself within her. Love towards the
Redeemer and gratitude for what He has done for us called the round of
Christian festivals into being. The authorities in the Church have played
the part of the gardener, pruning away superfluous shoots and branches.
In view of the numerous institutions of this kind, some of which date
back to remote antiquity, it was not a mere figure of speech which
Tertullian made use of when, referring to the numerous heathen festivals,
he addressed the Christians of his time with the words, “You have your
own ‘_fasti_’” (“_Habes tuos fastos._”—_De Corona_, c. 13).
The outline of the ecclesiastical year was prefigured in the Old Law,
while the synagogue furnished the fundamental elements in its festivals,
the Sabbath in particular, and in the division of the year into weeks.
This renders a glance at the religious year of the Jews necessary, for,
apart from it, it is impossible to understand the essential character of
the Christian year.
The Jewish festivals in the time of Christ were instituted either in
commemoration of events connected with the divine covenant, such as the
Passover, or they were of an agrarian character or commemorated some
national event, as the dedication of the Temple, Purim, Jom Kippar, etc.
According to the dates of their origin they fall into two classes:—
(_a_) The ancient festivals instituted by Moses: the Passover, the Feast
of Weeks, in the earlier part of the year; the Feast of Trumpets, the
Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Tabernacles, in autumn, _i.e._ on the
first, seventh, and fifteenth days of the month Tizri.
(_b_) The more recent festivals instituted by the Synagogue, such as the
Dedication of the Temple on the 25th Chisleu; Purim, or the Feast of
Haman, on the 14th Adar. To these were added four fast days as days of
national humiliation.
Consequently, since the death of Christ took place on the first day of
the feast of the Passover (15th Nisan), and since the Descent of the Holy
Ghost followed on the day of Pentecost, the chief Jewish feasts served
as the foundation of the Christian ecclesiastical year, and the Apostles
could join with the Jews in their Passover celebration. Certainly the
object of their feast was very different from that of the Jews, yet,
outwardly there was no separation from the synagogue.
2. _Sunday and its Observance as a Day of Rest_
The Sabbath and the week of seven days, by their appointment in the
ancient Law, formed already a necessary element of the ecclesiastical
year and maintained their position in the Church. The division of the
year into weeks is not specifically Jewish, but rather Semitic, since we
find it in existence in ancient Babylon, though there a new week began
with the first day of every month, and the first, seventh, fourteenth,
twenty-first, and twenty-eighth days of the month were always days of
rest.[2] This system of dividing time into weeks received a religious
consecration among the Jews, inasmuch as the Sabbath rest was enjoined
by the Law under the severest sanctions. All servile work of whatsoever
kind must be laid aside on the Sabbath, according to the Jewish law. It
was not even permitted to light a fire or prepare food. Important as
was the place given to rest, it was, however, only one part, and that a
subordinate part of the Sabbath festival. The most important part was the
performance of the acts of divine worship God enjoined upon the people,
that is to say the sacrifice of a holocaust, consisting of two yearling
lambs, along with “flour tempered with oil and the libations.”[3]
There is no evidence of the Sabbath having been abrogated by Christ or
the Apostles, but St Paul declared its observance was not binding on
Gentile converts, who soon formed the majority of those converted to the
faith; and in Col. ii. 16, he classes it along with the feasts of the new
moon. Accordingly, the observance of the Sabbath fell more and more into
the background, yet not without leaving some traces behind.[4] It appears
at first to have rather existed side by side with Sunday.[5] Among the
Christians, the first day of the Jewish week, the _prima sabbati_, the
present Sunday, was held in honour as the day of our Lord’s resurrection
and was called the Lord’s Day.[6] This name took the place of the name
_dies solis_, formerly in use among the Greeks and Romans. The different
days of the week were named after the heavenly bodies, which in turn
took their names from the chief divinities of heathen mythology. Thus
the names _dies solis_, _lunæ_, _Martis_, etc., were very general and
widespread in antiquity. The Christians did not employ these titles
for liturgical purposes, but called the week-days simply _feriæ_, and
distinguished them merely by numbers.[7] In the romance languages the
ecclesiastical name for Sunday, _dies dominica_, has quite taken the
place of all others.
These names were already in use in the Apostolic period, and Sunday
was the day on which the eucharistic worship of God was performed.[8]
Christian worship in the earliest time consisted of two parts. Already,
in the letters of Pliny, we find mention of a nocturnal service of
preparation at which psalms were sung, prayers recited, and passages
read from Holy Scripture. The eucharistic part of the service followed
at dawn. These two parts appear sharply distinguished, especially in
the diary of Silvia (or Etheria). The vigil service developed out of
the first part. The second part in Silvia’s diary usually bears the
name of _Oblatio_, while the term _missa_ denotes merely the dismissal
of the faithful and the respective divisions of the psalmody.[9] There
also seems to have been a general confession of sins at the commencement
of the service, which explains the exhortation of the “Teaching of the
Apostles,” that the faithful should confess their sins on Sunday. At
any rate, Eusebius plainly refers to the practice, and adds, “We, the
adherents of the New Covenant, are constantly nourished by the Body of
Christ; we continually partake of the Blood of the Lamb, and celebrate
every week on Sunday the mysteries of the true Lamb, by Whom we have been
redeemed.”[10] Upon the cessation of persecution, the present arrangement
of divine service soon became established—that is to say, Mass and Sermon
at nine A.M., with Vespers and Compline as popular devotions in the
afternoon.
Besides Sunday, at least in Tertullian’s time, the liturgy was performed
on Wednesday and Friday, the so-called Station Days. In the East, on
the other hand, it was performed only on Saturdays, at least in many
places.[11] To put on one’s best clothes for attendance at worship was
a custom of the heathen, which the Christians retained, and which has
survived to the present day.[12]
As to the grounds for celebrating Sunday, the Fathers are unanimous from
the earliest times—it was kept as a festival because Christ rose again on
the first day of the Jewish week.[13] A clear indication of this is given
by the practice observed in Jerusalem in the fourth century of reading at
the psalmody on each of the Sundays in Quinquagesima, the Gospel of the
resurrection of Jesus.[14]
The first Christian Emperor did his best to promote the observance of
Sunday and to show it all respect as a day of prayer. He gave leave
to the Christian soldiers of his army to be absent from duty in order
that they might attend divine service. The heathen soldiers, however,
had to assemble in camp without their arms, and offer up a prayer for
the Emperor and his family.[15] Eusebius, in his “Life of Constantine,”
mentions in detail these pious endeavours of the Emperor, yet his
information must have been incomplete, since Sozomen[16] informs us that
Constantine also forbade the law-courts to sit on Sunday. It has been
attempted to throw doubt on the veracity of this information because of
the silence of Eusebius; but Sozomen was an advocate, and must have been
better up in the existing legislation than Eusebius, and, moreover, a
clear grasp of the point at issue along with a lucid representation of
all the facts concerned is not one of the excellences of Eusebius. The
information given by Sozomen is further supported by the fact that a law
of Constantine’s directed to the same end is in existence.[17]
The prohibition of the transaction of legal business on Sunday was
frequently renewed by his successors, and extended so as to suspend the
courts of arbitration, and to prohibit summonses for debt.[18]
A law of Valentinian II., in A.D. 425, forbade games in the Circus, and
all theatrical representations on Sunday. To the honour of the Emperors
it must be said that they suppressed these representations more than
once.[19] The Emperor Leo also renewed the law concerning the Sunday
rest, and went so far as to forbid music on Sundays,[20] but his law is
not included in the general collection of statutes, having been repealed
after a short time.
As regards working on Sunday, the Church very carefully avoided the
adoption of a pharisaical observance of the day; but, from the beginning,
there was a consensus of Christian opinion against the continuance
of all work which rendered the attendance of the faithful at divine
worship impossible—as, for instance, the labours of slaves or the
work of servants. In course of time this was extended so as to exclude
all kinds of work out of keeping with the dignity of the day. As to
details, different views prevailed to a great extent in different places
and times.[21] The first Christian Emperor had already, according to
Eusebius,[22] made a law prescribing throughout his Empire rest on
Sundays, and even on Fridays as well. Ecclesiastical legislation on its
part maintained that slaves must have sufficient free time to attend
divine worship and receive religious instruction in church. Attendance
at this was regarded as the duty of all grown up Christians.[23] For
the rest, the prohibition of work on Sunday was not always regarded in
antiquity as of general obligation. Thus, for example, the Council of
Laodicea forbade Christians on the one hand to celebrate Saturday in the
Jewish manner, and, on the other, enjoined rest from labour only “in so
far as it was possible.”[24]
That the establishment of rest from labour had special reference to
slaves is shown by the so-called Apostolic Constitutions. In them we
have (8, 33) the days on which slaves were to be free from labour once
more enumerated in detail, and the limits of the earlier legislation
considerably extended.
Days of rest for slaves were to be: Saturday and Sunday, Holy Week
and Easter Week, the Ascension, Whitsunday, Christmas, Epiphany, all
festivals of Apostles, St Stephen’s Day, and the feasts of certain
martyrs. Naturally the object of this ordinance was not to make all
these days festivals in the strict sense of the word.
In his anxiety to do honour to the holy days of the Church, the first
Christian Emperor went still further. He desired to make Friday, the
day of Christ’s death, a day of rest and devotion as well.[25] We have
no information as to how far this regulation took practical effect
during his life. No trace of such a custom exists at a later date except
among the Nestorians. How earnest he was in securing the execution of
these decrees is shown by the fact that he commanded the prefects of
the provinces not only to observe Sundays, but also to celebrate the
commemorations of the martyrs, within their jurisdictions.[26]
It has been already observed that Saturday as well as Sunday had
its liturgical observance. In certain Eastern countries it attained
to a position almost equal to that of Sunday. For, in the Apostolic
Constitutions, it is laid down that the faithful shall attend divine
service on this day also, and abstain from servile work,[27] although the
rank of Sunday was acknowledged to be higher.[28] The Council of Laodicea
forbade indeed, as we have observed above, the abandonment of work on
Saturday, but it enjoined the reading of the Gospel as on Sunday (Can.
16). Traces of this pre-eminence of Saturday among the week-days exists
at the present time in the Churches of the East.[29]
In conclusion, it is to be noticed that, in the Middle Ages, the rest
from labour commenced, contrary to our present custom, with the Vespers
of Saturday. Pope Alexander III., however, decreed that local custom
should retain its prescriptive right, and so it came to pass that the
practice of reckoning the feast day from midnight to midnight became
general.[30]
3. _The Classification of Festivals_
According to the points of view taken, festivals may be divided into
different classes:—
1. According to the object of the festival, into festivals of our Lord
and festivals of the saints.
The former fall into three divisions: (_a_) movable feasts—Easter,
Pentecost, etc.; (_b_) immovable feasts—Christmas, Epiphany, etc.; (_c_)
such as are not included in the above cycles and are immovable, _e.g._,
the Transfiguration, Invention of the Cross, etc.
The saints whose feasts are celebrated are either Old Testament
personages—although these do not appear in the Roman Calendar as they
do in others, especially those of the Oriental Churches—or Apostles,
martyrs, virgins, confessors, angels, and, finally, the Mother of our
Lord.
2. With regard to their observance, festivals may be either local or
general.
3. According to their character, we may theoretically divide the
festivals into commemorative and devotional festivals. Commemorative
festivals are those which celebrate a historical event, _e.g._, the
birth, and death of Jesus, the death of an Apostle, of a martyr,
etc. These, in many cases, are celebrated on the actual day of the
event commemorated. As devotional festivals, we may rank those which
celebrate some mystery of the Faith, _e.g._, the Holy Trinity, or those
which, although they commemorate a particular event, such as the
Transfiguration, do not celebrate it on the day on which it actually
happened.
Since the number of festivals altered much in the course of centuries,
and their objects are so various, they are distinguished from one another
by differences of rank and a whole series of gradations has arisen.
In the first place there are purely ecclesiastical festivals whose
celebration is confined within the four walls of the Church (_festa
chori_), and festivals which have their bearing upon the common life of
the people, chiefly on account of the rest from labour which is conjoined
with them (_festa fori_).
The so-called _feriæ_ and the festivals strictly so called are clearly
distinguished from one another. According to the practice of the Church,
the ordinary days of the year have their place in the liturgy, and share
to a certain extent in the festal character of the season, although
distinguished from those days on which is commemorated some mystery of
our redemption or the memory of a saint. These latter are holy days
(_festa_) in a higher sense.
These holy days again are divided into greater or lesser feasts—in the
language of the rubrics, into _festa duplicia_ and _simplicia_, with
an intermediate class, the _semi-duplicia_. This is more marked in the
arrangements of the Breviary than in the Missal. This does not exhaust
the differences between festivals, for there are further distinctions
in their rank, especially in the case of the festivals of our Lord and
of the chief mysteries of our redemption, _i.e._ _duplicia majora_,
and _duplicia primæ_ and _secundæ classis_. The _festa duplicia primæ
classis_ are usually kept up for eight days—the so-called octave; so too
some of the _secundæ classis_.
The different rank of feasts is not so elaborate among the Greeks
and Russians, for they divide their festivals simply into greater,
intermediate, and lesser, which are marked in their Calendars by special
signs.
The octave which belongs to the chief festivals has its origin in
Judaism, for the Jews prolonged for eight days the festivals which
commemorated the two chief religious and political events in their
history—the Exodus from Egypt or the Passover, and the Dedication of the
Temple.[31] With regard to the Passover, there was another reason for
prolonging the feast during eight days. Since many Jews, after the Exile,
remained scattered throughout various countries, there was a risk, owing
to the uncertain character of the Jewish Calendar, that the correct date
of the feast might not be known to all. In order to avoid the misfortune
of celebrating the feast on a wrong day, the feast was prolonged for
eight days, one of which would certainly be the right day. The first,
second, seventh, and last days were especially regarded as festivals.[32]
Then Pentecost and Christmas were also observed with an octave, and so
matters remained for a long period. It was owing to the influence which
the Franciscan Order exerted in liturgical affairs that the number of
octaves was increased. The Franciscans provided an inordinate number
of festivals with octaves in their Breviary, and observed each day of
the octave with the rite of a _festum duplex_. In this way a number of
saints’ festivals, in addition to the feasts of our Lord, were provided
with octaves. According to the ancient Roman rite, the observance of
the octave consisted merely in a simple commemoration of the festival
inserted in the office on the eighth day, without taking any notice of
the festival on the intervening six days.[33] A single example of this
ancient custom still exists in the Breviary in the _festum S. Agnetis
secundo_.
Formerly saints’ festivals were not distinguished from one another in
rank, but all were kept with the rite of a _festum simplex_, as it
is now called, and also were provided with one lection only, as the
Breviary developed. An alteration in this respect was introduced by
Gregory VII., who appointed that the commemoration of Popes who were also
martyrs should be celebrated as _festa duplicia_.[34] Next, Boniface
VIII., in 1298, ordered that the feasts of the Apostles, Evangelists,
and four great doctors of the Western Church should be advanced to the
same rank.[35] The Franciscans brought about a complete revolution by
celebrating in their Breviary and in their churches all festivals of the
saints as _duplicia_, and by adding a number of new saints.[36] Pius
V. reduced the rank of many feasts, but over and above the _duplicia_
he permitted doubles of the first and second class. To the ordinary
_duplex_, or _duplex simpliciter per annum_, Clement VIII. added yet
another species, the _duplex majus_.[37] Thus, according to the present
regulations, feasts are ranked either as _simplex_, _semiduplex_,
_duplex_, _majus_, _duplex II._ and _I. classis_.[38]
4. _The Gradual Increase of Festivals. Their Decrease in the Last Three
Centuries. The Present Position_
It is a recognised fact in history that the festivals of the Church in
the course of centuries considerably increased in number, and that, when
this increase had reached its highest point, their number began again to
diminish. This was partly effected by means of legislation and without
disturbance, but partly by the violent proceedings attendant upon the
French Revolution. The stages in this process will be best understood
from an account of the secular and ecclesiastical legislation by which
they were brought about.
Tertullian[39] is the first ecclesiastical writer who enumerates the
feasts celebrated among the Christians. The only festivals known to him,
and to Origen after him, are Easter and Pentecost.[40] His statement
is all the more noteworthy, because the exigencies of his controversy
with Celsus required he should specify all the festivals by name. These
are, besides Sundays, the Parasceve, Easter, and Pentecost. Tertullian
and Origen are witnesses respectively for the East and West, and since
their evidence coincides, it is certain that in the third century only
the first germs existed of that Church-life which subsequently was to
reach so rich a development. The cessation of persecution removed those
hindrances which up to then had stood in the way of its evolution.
The increase of festivals can now be traced with the assistance of
secular legislation, inasmuch as the Christian Emperors prohibited the
sitting of the law-courts and games in the circus on certain days. It
has been already shown that Constantine, as early as 321, appointed that
no legal business should be transacted on all Sundays of the year. In a
proclamation concerning the regulation of legal vacations, put forth by
Valentinian II. and his colleague in the Empire, and dated from Rome on
the 7th August 389, the seven days before and after Easter are added to
the Sundays.[41] In the same way as special sittings of the law-courts
were abolished on Sundays, so, later on, the proceedings before the judge
of arbitration were forbidden.
When a day became recognised as exempt from legal business, this did
not at once render it a festival or holy day, otherwise, according to
the law of 389, there would have been fifteen consecutive holy days.
The prohibition of legal proceedings in the courts on a given day, had
regard, in the first place, to the removal of all hindrances which
might interfere with attendance at divine worship on the part of those
employed therein. In the second place, however, it must be remembered
that in those days the sittings of the criminal courts almost always
implied the application of torture; and such proceedings on holy days
seemed especially out of place. This must also have been the reason why
Valentinian and his colleague forbade prosecutions in the criminal courts
throughout the whole of Lent. He certainly did not aim at changing all
the days of Lent into feast-days. This law was renewed by Justinian.[42]
The legislation concerning Christmas and Epiphany exhibits a good
deal of vacillation, probably connected with the fact that these two
festivals were not yet generally celebrated and recognised everywhere
in the fourth century. They seem to have been originally mentioned in
the law of 389, but to have been struck out by the redactors of the
_Codex Theodosianus_.[43] It was only through the inclusion of the law
in question in the Code of Justinian that they were finally marked
as days on which the law-courts did not sit. This privilege had been
already taken away from heathen festivals by a law of Valentinian and his
colleague in 392.[44]
Alongside these laws we find others forbidding games in the Circus and
in the theatres. These interfered with the attendance of many persons
at divine service as much as, or even more than, the proceedings in the
law-courts, for they began early in the morning and lasted the whole
day. Valentinian II. and his colleague, on the 19th June 386, re-enacted
one of their earlier laws forbidding the performance of such plays on
Sundays.[45] Through later legislation, it came to pass that the same
held good for the seven days before and after Easter as well, and in 395
were added all the days of the year which were regarded as _feriæ_.[46]
Finally, a law of Theodosius II. of 1st February 425, gives a list of
all those days on which these spectacles (_theatrorum atque circensium
voluptas_) were forbidden. These were all the Sundays of the year,
Christmas, Epiphany, and the whole period from Easter to Pentecost.[47]
In A.D. 400 Arcadius and Honorius forbade races on Sundays, plainly for
the reason that they drew away the people from divine service.[48]
In order to illustrate the increase in the number of festivals, we make
use, as we have said, of the official decrees on the subject put forth by
the authorities both in Church and State, where such are at our disposal.
The service-books, which do not always give the distinction between
_festa in choro_ and _in foro_ with precision, will be consulted when
necessary.
A list of feasts and sacred seasons appears for the first time in the
fifth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, viz. the Birthday of our Lord
(25th December), Epiphany, Lent, the Holy Week of the Passover, the
Passover of the Resurrection, the Sunday after Easter, on which is read
the Gospel of unbelieving Thomas, Ascension, and Pentecost. This gives
the festivals in the fourth century. Other evidence of the same period,
_i.e._ the sermons of Chrysostom and others, affords certain proof for
the existence of five or six festivals only, according as Good Friday is
included among them or not, viz. Christmas, Epiphany, the Passion, the
Resurrection, the Ascension of Christ, and Pentecost.[49]
A list of the festivals celebrated at Tours and in the neighbouring
Abbey of St Martin’s during the fifth century, is given us by Perpetuus
(461-91), the sixth bishop of the see.[50] In this is shown the days on
which the principal service is held in the cathedral, and those on which
it is held in other churches in the town:—
_Natalis Domini._ _In ecclesia._
_Epiphania._ _In ecclesia._
_Natalis S. Joannis_ (24th June). _Ad basilicam domni Martini._
_Natalis S. Petri episcopatus_ (22nd February). _Ad ipsius
basilicam._
_VI._ (_al. V._) _Cal. Apr. Resurrectio Domini Nostri J. Chr._
_Ad basilicam domni Martini._[51]
_Pascha._ _In ecclesia._
_Dies Ascensionis. In basilica domni Martini._
_Dies Quinquagesimus_ (Pentecost). _In ecclesia._
_Passio S. Joannis._ _Ad basilicam in baptisterio._
_Natalis SS. Apostolorum Petri et Pauli._ _Ad ipsorum basilica._
_Natalis S. Martini_ (_i.e._ the day of his consecration as
bishop, the 4th July). _Ad ejus basilicam._
_Natalis S. Symphoriani_ (22nd July). _Ad basilicam domni
Martini._
_Natalis S. Litorii_ (13th September). _Ad ejus basilicam._
_Natalis S. Martini_ (11th November). _Ad ejus basilicam._
_Natalis S. Brictii_ (13th November). _Ad basilicam domni
Martini._
_Natalis S. Hilarii_ (13th January). _Ad basilicam domni
Martini._
The regulations for festivals contained in the statutes of Sonnatius,
Bishop of Reims (614-31), show a further development. It marks as
festivals: _Nativitas Domini_, _Circumcisio_, _Epiphania_, _Annunciatio
Beatæ Mariæ_, _Resurrectio Domini cum die sequenti_, _Ascensio Domini_,
_dies Pentecostes_, _Nativitas beati Joannis Baptistæ_, _Nativitas
apostolorum Petri et Pauli_, _Assumptio beatæ Mariæ_, _ejusdem
Nativitas_, _Nativitas Andreæ apostoli et omnes dies dominicales_. These
thirteen days were to be celebrated “_absque omni opere forensi_.”[52]
The omission of Candlemas Day is remarkable. The day after Easter appears
for the first time as a holy day. The Council of Maçon, however, had
already gone further and forbidden (Can. 2) servile work throughout the
whole of Easter week. This extension of the festival was probably at that
time unique, while we often meet with it in the ninth century, when it
had probably become general.
According to this document, the number of days which in the course
of the year were exempt from labour did not exceed sixty-three in
the seventh century. Their number was considerably increased in the
subsequent period. In the notes on festivals ascribed to St Boniface, it
has increased to seventy-one, including the two Sundays on which Easter
and Pentecost fall. These notes are included in the collection known as
_statuta quædam S. Bonifacii_,[53] and even if they do not owe their
origin to St Boniface, they belong without doubt to his period. Days in
which rest from labour (_sabbatismus_) is enjoined in this document are
Christmas (four days), the Circumcision, Epiphany, Purification, Easter
(four days), Ascension, Nativity of St John the Baptist, the festival of
SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, the Nativity of Our Lady, St Andrew’s
Day (30th November). Pentecost is passed over because it has already been
mentioned in the thirty-fourth canon, but it was to be celebrated in the
same manner as Easter, that is, during four days with a vigil.
In the Frankish Empire, during the ninth century, the regulations for
holy days were everywhere reduced to order, and in consequence we
possess numerous ordinances bearing on the subject. With the exception
of festivals of local saints and patrons, they present little variety.
With regard to the _Assumptio B.V.M._ alone, there seems to have been
some fluctuations in France at the beginning of the ninth century,
as a statement of the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle in 809 proves. The
Council enumerates the following festivals: _Natalis Domini_, _natales
S. Stephani_, _S. Joannis Evangelistæ_, _SS. Innocentium_, _octabas
Domini_ (the Circumcision), _Epiphania_, _Purificatio S. Mariæ_, _Pascha
dies octo_, _Litania major, scensa Domini_, _Pentecoste_, _natales S.
Joannis Baptistæ_, _SS. Petri et Pauli_, _S. Martini_, _S. Andreæ_.
_De Assumptione S. Mariæ interrogandum reliquimus._[54] The Council of
Mainz in 813, however, in its thirty-sixth canon, includes this last
festival along with the others, as well as the _litania_ with four days,
_i.e._ including the preceding Sunday. It also directs that, besides the
commemoration of those martyrs and confessors whose relics repose within
the diocese, the anniversary of the dedication of the church shall also
be celebrated.[55] About the same time, _i.e._ in 827, Bishop Hetto of
Basle put out a statute, in the eighth chapter of which the festivals
entailing rest from servile work (_dies feriandi_) are enumerated:
Christmas and the three following days, _Octava Domini_, _Theophania_,
_Purificatio S.M._, _Pascha_ (which, according to the seventh chapter,
was prolonged for eight days), the three Rogation days, the Ascension,
the Saturday before Pentecost, St John Baptist, the festivals of the
Apostles, _Assumptio S. Mariæ_, St Michael, the Dedication of the Church,
and the Feast of the patron saint, these two last to be observed locally.
Three other days, _i.e._ St Remigius, St Maurice, and St Martin, were
not exempt from servile work.[56] This arrangement differs from the
preceding, inasmuch as it includes all the Apostles, while the other
mentions only SS. Peter and Paul, and St Andrew. The festivals of the
Apostles are also absent from the list given by the Council of Mainz in
809.
The Council of Mainz in 813, and the statutes of Bishop Rudolph of
Bourges and Bishop Walter of Orleans in the same century, prescribe
eight days for the festival of Pentecost, as well as for Easter,
and mention in addition the Nativity of our Lady and St Remigius as
festivals.[57] The Council of Ingelheim in 948 retained the Easter octave
but reduced the festival of Pentecost to four days, which were finally
reduced to three by the Council of Constance.[58] A few additions to
these festivals are given in the collections of canons put out at a
subsequent period by Burchard of Worms[59] and Ivo of Chartres.[60]
The Canon Law contains two lists of festivals, the one representing the
state of things in the twelfth, the other that in the thirteenth century.
The former, in the decretal of Gratian,[61] enumerates all the Sundays
in the year from Vespers to Vespers, and then, throughout the year, the
following days are exempt from servile work: Christmas and the three
following days, St Silvester, _Octava Domini_, _Theophania_, _Purificatio
S. Mariæ_, Easter and the entire Easter week, the three Rogation days,
the Ascension, the days of Pentecost (probably three), St John the
Baptist’s Day, all the Apostles, St Lawrence, _Assumptio_ and _Nativitas
B.M.V._, the Dedication of the Church, St Michael and All Saints, and,
finally, the festivals approved by the bishop of the diocese. This list
exhibits a further increase on its predecessors.
The decretal of Gregory IX., _Conquestus est nobis_, of the year
1232,[62] is important for the Middle Ages, although it does not
represent the highest point in the development. According to it, legal
business was not to be transacted on the _Natalis Domini, S. Stephani,
Joannis Evangelistæ, SS. Innocentium, S. Silvestri, Circumcisionis,
Epiphaniæ, Septem Diebus Dominicæ Passionis, Resurrectionis cum septem
Sequentibus, Ascensionis, Pentecostes cum duobus qui sequuntur,
Nativitatis Baptistæ, Festivitatum omnium Virginis Gloriosæ, Duodecim
Apostolorum et præcipue Petri et Pauli, Beati Laurentii, Dedicationis
Beati Michælis, Sollemnitatis omnium Sanctorum ac Diebus Dominicis
ceterisque sollemnitatibus, quas singuli episcopi in suis diæcesibus
cum clero et populo duxerint sollemniter celebrandas_. Setting down the
number of Our Lady’s feasts as five, and the Apostles’ as eleven, we have
here ninety-five days in the year on which no legal proceedings took
place, not counting the particular festivals of the country and diocese.
The above-mentioned decretal is silent concerning servile work. We may
assume that there were ten out of the fifteen days exempt from legal
proceedings on which servile work was permitted, and thus the total of
days exempt from labour must have amounted to eighty-five in the course
of the year, omitting the festivals proper to the diocese.[63]
With this, the highest point of development was almost attained, for
only a very few festivals were added later, such as _Corpus Christi_,
and, for certain localities, the Conception of Our Blessed Lady,
and one or two more, but the number of local festivals might, under
certain circumstances, be largely augmented. Between the thirteenth
and the eighteenth centuries there were dioceses in which the number
of days exempt from labour reached or even exceeded a hundred, so
that, generally speaking, in every week there was another day besides
the Sunday on which ordinary occupations were laid aside.[64] In some
dioceses[65] the number of festivals observed exceeded those proscribed
by lawful authority.[66]
In the Byzantine Empire the number of days exempt from legal proceedings
was even more considerable than in the West. A distinction was made
between whole holidays and half holidays. The Emperor Manuel Comnenus
reduced their number by a constitution, dated March 1166. According
to this, the first-class comprised no fewer than sixty-six days, not
including Sundays, and the second comprised twenty-seven.
From the Calendar of Calcasendi,[67] we learn what were the festivals
observed by the Copts in Egypt, in the eighth century, under Mahomedan
rule. They distinguished between greater and lesser festivals, and kept
seven of each.
The greater festivals are:—
1. _Annuntiatio_, Calcasendi adds: _Innuunt per eam
annuntiationem consolatoris, qui ipse est juxta eorum
disciplinam Gabriel, Mariæ, super quam sit pax, de nativitate
Jesu, super quam sit misericordia Dei._ The festival was held
on 29th Barchamoth—25th March.
2. _Olivarum s. festum palmarum in die solis postremo jejunii
illorum_, _alias_ _festum Alschacaniu_ (a corruption of
Hosanna), Palm Sunday.
3. _Pascha celebrant die solutionis jejunii eorum._
4. _Feria quinta quadraginta_ (_scil._ _dierum_), _i.e._
_festum ascensionis_.
5. _Festum quinque_ (_scil._ _decadum dierum_), _i.e._
_pentecoste_.
6. _Nativitas Domini._
7. _Immersio_, _i.e._ _baptismus Domini_, Epiphany.
The lesser festivals are:—
1. _Circumcisio Domini._
2. _Quadragesima_ (_scil._ _dies_, reckoned from Christmas),
Candlemas Day; the date 8th Mesori is given.
3. _Feria quinta confœderations sive testimonii_, Maundy
Thursday.
4. _Sabbatum Luminis_, Holy Saturday.
5. _Festum claudens s. terminans est octiduo post pascha_, Low
Sunday.
6. _Festum transfigurationis_ (6th August).
7. _Festum crucis_, on the 14th September.
For the Egyptian Christians, Good Friday was not a festival of either the
first or second class. In this it stood in marked distinction from the
preceding and following days—Maundy Thursday and Holy Saturday, which
were regarded as festivals of the second class.
The festivals observed in the latter period of the Byzantine Empire under
the Paleologi are found in the treatise of an official of the palace,
George Codinus, _De Officiis Palatii_, in which detailed information is
given of the costume, insignia, etc., with which the Emperor and his
courtiers attended divine service in the different churches of the
capital. Beside the great festivals—Christmas, Epiphany, Hypapante,
Easter, and Pentecost—the following days were distinguished by the
attendance of the Court at divine service: the First Sunday in Lent,
called by the Greeks Orthodox Sunday, Palm Sunday, Holy Saturday and the
Easter Octave, the 1st September being New Year’s Day. To these were
added a great number of saints’ days, _i.e._ 1st January, St Basil;
23rd April, St George; 21st May, Constantine; 24th June, Nativity of St
John the Baptist; 30th June, the Feast of the Apostles; 8th August, the
Transfiguration; 15th August, the Assumption (κοίμησις τῆς ὑπεραγίας
θεοτόκου); 29th August, the Beheading of St John the Baptist; 31st August
or 2nd July, the Translation of Our Lady’s garment to the Church of the
Blachernæ; 8th September, the Nativity of Our Lady; 14th September, the
Invention of the Cross (ὕψωσις τοῦ σταυροῦ); 26th October, Feast of the
Martyr Demetrius Myroblyta; 13th November, St Chrysostom; 21st November,
the Presentation of Our Lady in the Temple; and, finally, the day of
the Resurrection of Lazarus, which was kept on the Saturday before Palm
Sunday. The Court did not attend divine service on Good Friday, although
it did on Holy Saturday. No mention is made of the Ascension.
The large increase in festivals in the Middle Ages was due to the fact
that the bishops exercised the right given them by Canon Law,[68] of
introducing new feasts within the limits of their dioceses. This arose
from the ancient custom, that it belonged to them to watch over the
cultus of the martyrs, and it depended upon their authorisation whether
or not a given martyr should be recognised and venerated as such. Later,
when the religious orders became widespread and influential, it usually
happened that some monastery began to venerate a mystery or a saint, and
then, as this cultus was taken up by the people, other monasteries, or
the whole Order, adopted the festival,[69] and, finally, the bishops gave
their approbation to the institution of the holy day in question. Lastly,
the civil power and the Roman See intervened, and the new holy day was
in this way fully sanctioned. Things, however, did not always proceed so
far, for in many cases the festival was confined to a single diocese, the
result being great variety in particulars and general uncertainty. These
abuses became more deeply felt in course of time, and so Urban VIII.,
in his constitution _Universa per orbem_, published in 1642, warns the
bishops not to use their rights in this respect for the future, and at
the present day these rights, without having been abrogated, are regarded
as antiquated.[70]
The fact that formerly the bishops enjoyed the right of introducing
festivals into their dioceses, or of excluding them, must constantly be
borne in mind, because, if it is left out of sight, the institution and
development of even a single festival cannot be understood, much less
the historical development of the whole festal cycle. When we realise
that this principle was acted upon from the beginning, and for more than
a thousand years, during a period remarkable for its rich development
in many directions, the wonder is that the result is as harmonious and
systematic as it is. No departure was made from the natural basis upon
which the whole was built up, and the attempts of the Councils were all
in the direction of uniformity.
The abuses resulting from the excessive multiplication of holy days was
remarked upon even in Catholic times, especially by John Gerson, at a
provincial synod at Reims in 1408, and by Nicholas de Clemangiis, who,
in a work[71] devoted to that purpose, published about 1416, spoke out
boldly against the introduction of any more festivals. In the sixteenth
century, the Protestants in their _Gravamina_ denounced the great number
of festivals, and already in 1524 the legate Campeggio settled their
number, and so put an end to their arbitrary increase for the future.[72]
By the introduction of diocesan and local festivals, the number of holy
days became excessive in some localities, and great uncertainty arose
as to which festivals should be celebrated by all, in accordance with
the general precepts of the Church, and which should not. This, and the
complaints of the poor that they were prevented by the number of holy
days from gaining their livelihood, while others again took advantage
of them to indulge in laziness or the pursuit of pleasure, was the
ground which Gerson had already adduced in his time. The same reasons
now induced Pope Urban VIII. to regulate the arrangements of festivals
and to fix limits for the whole Church beyond which it would not be
lawful to go. For this purpose, he published, on the 24th September
1642, the important constitution _Universa per orbem_, in which the
following holy days are prescribed: 1. Feasts of our Lord—Christmas,
Easter and Pentecost, with the two following days, New Year, Epiphany,
the Ascension, Trinity, Corpus Christi, the Invention of the Cross. 2.
Feasts of Our Lady—Candlemas, the Annunciation, the Assumption, and the
Nativity. 3. Saints’ Days—St Michael (8th May), Nativity of St John the
Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, St Andrew, St James, St John, St Thomas,
SS. Phillip and James, St Bartholomew, St Matthew, SS. Simon and Jude,
St Matthias, St Lawrence, St Silvester, St Joseph, St Anne, All Saints’,
and the patron saint of the country. The actual reduction was small, and
concerned chiefly the lesser saints days, such as St Mary Magdalene, St
Cecilia, St Catherine, St Martin, etc. A more important consequence of
this constitution was, that the original right of the bishop to appoint
festivals, although recognised by the Council of Trent, was rendered
practically ineffective.
In the eighteenth century, the hatred against the Church which showed
itself at the Courts of the Bourbon sovereigns, and the so-called advance
of culture, necessitated fresh regulations on this point. First of
all, at the request of the provincial synod of Tarragona in 1727, Pope
Benedict XIII. consented to the reduction of the number of festivals for
a part of Spain. From this arose the distinction between half and whole
holy days.[73] Rest from servile work was maintained only on the Sundays
and seventeen festivals, _i.e._ half the number given in the list above,
and for the other seventeen days it was enjoined that the faithful assist
at Mass only. After attendance at divine service, all kinds of work were
to be permitted. This permission was extended in 1748, by Benedict XIV.,
to Naples, Sicily, and several Spanish dioceses.
The same Pope extended this reduction of festivals to Austria in 1754,
inasmuch as only fifteen complete holy days besides Sundays were left;
while on the other days, which were to be observed according to the
provisions of the bull, _Universa per orbem_, it was enjoined that Mass
should be heard and the fast kept on their vigil. This last injunction
soon fell into disuse, and even assistance at Mass on the suppressed holy
days was not strictly observed. Accordingly, the Empress Maria Teresa
desired an alteration, and Pope Clement XIV. issued a new brief in 1771.
In this, the direction to keep a fast on the vigil of the suppressed
festivals, and to attend mass, was set aside, and the following festivals
were prescribed to be kept as complete holy days; Christmas, St Stephen’s
Day, New Year, Epiphany, Easter (two days), the Ascension, Pentecost (two
days), Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, All Saints, the five principle
feasts of our Lady, and the festival of the patron saint of the country,
_i.e._ eighteen days in addition to the Sundays. A similar arrangement
was introduced, in 1772, into the then electorate of Bavaria, in 1775,
into Poland and East Prussia, and in 1791, into the whole of Spain.[74]
Under Pius VI. permission was frequently given for the reduction of the
number of festivals at the request of certain dioceses and districts as
appears from the _bullarium_ of this Pope.
It became necessary to make new arrangements concerning festivals for
Prussia, after the incorporation of Silesia. This was effected by a brief
of Clement XIV. of the 24th June 1772, especially granted to the diocese
of Breslau, but applying to all Prussia as it then existed. The festivals
retained were: Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas (each two days), the
Circumcision, Epiphany, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, five feasts of Our
Lady, (_i.e._ the Purification, Annunciation, Assumption, Nativity, and
Conception), SS. Peter and Paul and All Saints. Where there were several
patron saints, only one, the principal, was to be celebrated.
These regulations remained in force only until 1788, for King Frederick
William II. requested a further reduction in the number of festivals
through his agent in Rome, Ciofani. In consequence of this, Pius VI.
transferred the feasts of the Assumption and Nativity of our Lady to the
Sundays following, and, at the express wish of the King, appointed that
the Wednesday in the third week after Easter, one of the Protestant days
of penitence and prayer, should rank as a festival, an order that all
might implore the same God for a fruitful harvest. In compensation for
the suppressed festivals of the Apostles and other Saints, there was to
be observed the commemoration of all the Apostles on the 29th June, and a
similar commemoration of all the holy martyrs on the 26th December. These
had already been appointed by Clement XIV.[75]
These regulations remained in force for Prussia, and were even extended
to its newly acquired territories by a brief of Leo XII., dated 2nd
December 1828. By this means, the districts on the left bank of the
Rhine, which, while under French dominion had only kept the four holidays
prescribed by the Code Napoleon, again enjoyed a notable increase in
the number of festivals. In order that this might not interfere with
the livelihood of the industrial classes, who had to compete with
Protestants, it was conceded at the representations of Archbishop
von Spiegel that, in the industrial districts, servile labour might
be performed after attendance at Mass on the festivals introduced
in obedience to the brief of Leo XII. Owing to the deeply religious
character of the district in question, very little use was ever made of
this concession, and it has accordingly become obsolete. This is the
origin of the regulations for Catholic festivals at present in force in
Prussia. In one point, however, an alteration has been made, for when the
Protestant day of penitence in prayer which falls in November, was fixed
by authority in 1893, the Catholics fell in with the arrangement, and now
celebrate the Presentation of our Lady in the Temple as a movable feast
on the same day.
The greatest alterations in respect of the Church’s holy days was caused
by the French Revolution. By a decree of the Convention on 5th October
1793, the Christian mode of reckoning was abolished and a new mode
substituted for it. The years were to be reckoned from the establishment
of the French Republic on 22nd September 1792. The division of time into
weeks was also abolished and the months, now uniformly of thirty days,
were divided into the decades. The French observed this mode of reckoning
until 1st January 1806. While it was in force, Napoleon undertook the
re-establishment of ecclesiastical affairs in France, and as far as the
regulations for holy days are concerned, traces of the then existing
state of things survives until the present day. For the Church had
to fall in with the reckoning then in force, to the extent of either
abolishing all holy days which fell in the week, or of transferring
them to the Sunday. According to the ordinance of the Cardinal Legate
Caprara, dated Paris, 9th April 1802, only four holy days were left,
_i.e._ Christmas, Ascension, the Assumption (because the 15th August was
Napoleon’s name-day), and All Saints. This ordinance affected all France
as it was then, that is including the Netherlands, and the whole left
bank of the Rhine.
In the Appendix[76] will be found a detailed list of the festivals
observed in different countries upon which servile work is forbidden. A
list of this kind, in addition to its practical value, is instructive
as showing how the interests of religion are affected by the culture
and social conditions of each country at a given period, and also how
politics have intruded themselves into the sphere of religion. The latter
fact is especially prominent in Protestantism. From the beginning,
Protestantism was affected by two opposing streams—one favourable to the
observance of festivals, prevailing among the Lutheran, the other opposed
to it, prevailing among the Calvinists. Luther wished to retain all
feasts of our Lord, and even Epiphany, Candlemas, the Annunciation found
favour with him as such. Saints days and the two festivals of the Holy
Cross were alone to be abolished. Certain secular governments tolerated
even more festivals, such as St Michael and St John the Baptist. The
Church Order of Brandenburg retained the feasts of Apostles, and even
Corpus Christi, but without a procession, and the Assumption—this last
for the sake of the peasants.[77] The same regulations were observed
in Saxony and Würtemburg. Strict Calvinism retained only Christmas,
Easter, and Pentecost; its spread and increasing influence manifested
itself gradually in the regulations concerning festivals. The Prussian
Union, and the _Agenda_ of the so-called Evangelical State Church of
1895 recognise as holy days of obligation only the three principal
festivals, each with two holidays, _i.e._ the Sunday and the Monday,
New Year, Epiphany, Good Friday, the Ascension, along with the days
of penitence and prayer. Contrary to the principles of Calvinism, the
Established Church of England possesses a Calendar richly furnished with
festivals.[78]
PART II
CHAPTER I
THE CHURCH’S YEAR
A. EASTER, AND THE SACRED SEASONS CONNECTED WITH EASTER
1. _Easter, its Name and History_
Were it our object to deal with the Church’s year as affording material
for a series of doctrinal instructions, we should begin with Christmas,
the festival of Christ’s birth, for, so viewed, the ecclesiastical year
becomes chiefly a compendium of the chief acts in the drama of our
salvation, and recalls in orderly succession the principal events in our
Saviour’s life. But if we make the Church’s year in itself the object of
our studies, especially if we deal with it historically, we are bound
to commence with Easter, because, in order of time, it existed from the
first and formed the natural starting-point for all the rest. It did
not, as other festivals, come into existence gradually, but formed a
connecting link with the Old Testament, and was, in the strictest sense
of the words, the appointment of a Higher Power, providentially ordering
all things according to Its good pleasure. Easter owes its origin not to
human wisdom, or piety: it comes to us with higher sanctions.
Easter is the chief festival of Christendom, the first and oldest of all
festivals, the basis on which the Church’s year is built, the connecting
link with the festivals of the Old Covenant, and the central point on
which depends the date of the other movable feasts. At an early date,
the Fathers mention Easter as the most important of the festivals, as,
for example, St Leo the Great,[79] on the grounds that the incarnation
and birth of the Son of God served as a prelude to the mystery of the
Resurrection, and that Christ had no other purpose in being born of
a woman than that He should be nailed to the Cross for us.[80] Other
Fathers and the Roman martyrology call it the feast of feasts (_festum
festorum_).
With regard to the name, the English word “Easter” comes from Eastre,
in German “Ostra,”[81] the goddess of Spring worshipped by the ancient
Saxons and Angles, whose name survives in many place-names, such as
Osterode, Osterberg, etc. In her honour fires, known as the Easter
fires, were kindled in spring. In Latin, we find at first _dominica
resurrectionis_ alone used in the liturgy, never _Pascha_. _Pascha_ has
no connection with the Greek πάσχω, but is the Aramaic form of _pesach_,
to pass over, פַּסְחָח for פֶּסַח. In Christian times, the
similarity in the sound of the words easily suggested, by a sort of play
upon the words, that which to Christians is the chief object of the
Easter festival. In the Pentateuch, _pascha_ is only found in the strict
sense of _transitus_, _phase_.[82]
The points to be dealt with regarding Easter are its antiquity, and its
connection, in point of view of time and of signification, with the
Jewish Passover, with which it is connected by the death of Christ, as
well as by the day on which that death took place. Then, the character
and duration of the feast, the preparatory solemnity of Lent, and the
subsequent Octave must be dealt with.
With regard to Easter and its antiquity in early ecclesiastical
literature, the Apostolic Fathers, owing to the questions dealt with in
their writings, do not mention it. Only in the interpolated letter of
Ignatius to the Philippians (c. 14) is Easter mentioned. The passage
is directed against the Quartodecimans, which of itself is proof
of its later date. Nothing is to be found in the Didaché or in the
pseudo-Clementine Homilies. When we come to the apologists, we find no
reference to Easter in Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho (c. 40), and nothing
in either of his Apologies. Clement of Alexandria speaks only of the
Jewish passover, without referring to the Christian feast. Melito of
Sardis, however, wrote an entire treatise on the festival of Easter, in
the year when Servilius Paulus was Pro-Consul of Asia, for at that time
a disagreement concerning Easter had broken out in Laodicea. Clement
of Alexandria replied to Melito, who had written in defence of the
Quartodeciman practice.[83]
In 198, when the difference between Asia and the rest of the Church
concerning Easter came under discussion, an exchange of letters took
place between the leading authorities of the Church, Pope Victor, Bishop
Narcissus of Jerusalem, Polycrates of Ephesus, Bacchylus of Corinth,
Irenæus, and others taking part. Irenæus composed a special treatise _De
Paschate_, sometimes called _De Schismate_, unfortunately lost. In the
fragments falsely attributed to him, Easter is referred to in the third
and seventh.
References to Easter are frequent in Tertullian. With regard to the name,
it is to be noticed that with him _pascha_ denotes, not the single day
of the Easter festival, but a longer period of time, in which a fast
was observed and baptism administered,[84] in other words, Passion-tide
and the Easter Octave.[85] Moreover, for the actual day of our Lord’s
death, he uses the word, _parasceve_.[86] The festival of Easter, as he
further relates, was kept in the first month (_i.e._ March),[87] and was
prefigured by the Jewish Passover.[88] We possess a treatise on Easter,
of the year 243 A.D., formerly attributed wrongly to St Cyprian, but,
probably, a translation of work of Theophilus of Cæsarea. It is entitled
_De Paschate Computus_, and was written elsewhere than at Rome, in the
interest of the Easter cycle of sixteen years drawn up by Hippolytus. The
remarks of Hippolytus on the Quartodecimans afford us important evidence
for the Ante-Nicene period. “These,” he says, “agree with the Church
in preserving all the apostolic traditions, but differ from her in one
point, inasmuch as, out of contentiousness, wilfulness, and ignorance,
they maintain that the Christian feast must always be kept on the 14th
Nisan, no matter on what day of the week it falls.”[89]
If the Arabic Canons ascribed to Hippolytus, especially the
twenty-second, are really his, it would appear that he held Easter might
be kept in the same week as the Jewish Passover, but on the Sunday, and
should be preceded by a week’s fast on bread and water.[90] This date
coincides with the Easter cycle of sixteen years drawn up by Hippolytus,
and which, after all, is only the Jewish cycle of eight years doubled.
The seventh and sixty-ninth of the so-called Apostolic Canons refer
to Easter and its preparatory fast. The seventh is also important on
account of what it says about the period within which Easter may fall:
“Whosoever keeps Easter with the Jews before the vernal equinox, let him
be anathema.” From which it appears that the Jewish Passover could fall
before the vernal equinox. The last day of Nisan alone must never precede
the equinox, and, consequently, the Passover must frequently have fallen
before the 21st March, and may have done so in the year of our Lord’s
death.
Of Eusebius’ treatise on Easter,[91] dedicated to the Emperor, only a
portion remains and this contains nothing either about Easter or its
date. Constantine gratefully accepted the dedication in a letter which
Eusebius, not without vanity, incorporated in his _Vita Constantini_ (4,
35). The Emperor’s encyclical,[92] communicating to the churches the
conclusions concerning Easter arrived at by the Nicene Council, would
have been more deserving of a place in the same work.
2. _The Connection of the Christian Festival with the Jewish_
The connection between the Christian and the Jewish feasts is both
historical and ideal—historical because our Lord’s death happened on the
15th Nisan, the first day of the Jewish feast; ideal, because what took
place had been prefigured in the Old Testament by types of which it was
itself the antitype.
The Jewish Passover was a repetition of what had taken place on the
evening of the exodus from Egypt. On that occasion, the children of
Israel had killed a lamb and marked their doorposts with its blood in
order that the destroying angel might pass over their houses. Then,
dressed for the journey, they had consumed the lamb at a ceremonial meal.
This last meal of which the Israelites partook in Egypt on the eve of
their departure, _i.e._ on the 14th Nisan, was of a religious character,
and was, on this account, to be repeated every year on the same day, and
at the same hour, as a memorial feast, at which each father of a family
had to instruct his household in the signification of the rites they were
performing.[93]
The manner of celebrating the feast was minutely prescribed. Each
householder, for example, had to choose a lamb without blemish of the
first year, on the 10th of the first month, _i.e._ Nisan, as it came to
be called later, or, if he had none in his own herd, he must procure one
from elsewhere and keep it in readiness for the feast on the evening of
the 14th Nisan. The lamb was to be killed, roasted, and eaten by the
household, who remained standing, along with unleavened bread, and bitter
herbs, nothing being allowed to remain over.[94] From this onwards to
the 21st Nisan inclusive, unleavened bread was alone to be eaten, and
hence the period from the 15th to the 21st Nisan was called the days
of unleavened bread. The first and last days, the 15th and the 21st,
were regarded as especially sacred, and servile work was forbidden on
them.[95] During the whole week, holocausts, meat offerings, and sin
offerings were offered daily in the Temple on behalf of the entire
people, as well as offerings presented by individual believers on their
own behalf. The 16th Nisan was marked by an offering of a special kind,
that of the first-fruits of harvest, consisting of the presentation of
a sheaf of ripe barley along with the offering of a yearling lamb.[96]
This offering of the first ripe fruits served also to mark the time when
the Passover was to be celebrated, for, owing to the fact that the Jewish
year did not begin on a fixed date, this had to be in some way determined
by a stated event in the order of nature. In Palestine the barley was
already ripe by March.
Several of the actions prescribed at the offering of this lamb pointed
forward to the atoning death of the Messias, such as the sprinkling of
the doorposts with its blood, in order that the destroying angel might
pass over the house, and the direction that none of the lamb’s bones
were to be broken. There were also several other small particulars which
emphasised and completed the ideal connection between the sacrifice of
the Passover and that of the Cross, as certain Fathers perceived at an
early date.
Isaias, speaking in his prophecy, of the sufferings of the Messias, calls
Him the Lamb chosen by God, who bears the iniquity of others.[97] St
John the Baptist pointed out Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the
sins of the world, and by the writers of the New Testament the same idea
is frequently employed. St John the Evangelist expressly refers to the
typical character of the Passover rites, when he applies the passage, “A
bone of it shall not be broken,”[98] to Christ on the Cross, and sees
its fulfilment in the fact that the soldiers refrained from breaking
His limbs. St Paul declares in general that the sacrifice of Christ
replaces the Passover, and sees a typical signification in the unleavened
bread.[99] It appears, he had no objection to Christians holding a
Passover supper, although, elsewhere he expresses himself strongly
against their continuing to observe Jewish practices, such as Sabbaths
and new moons.[100] As to the Fathers, it is sufficient, to quote Justin
and Tertullian,[101] who in particular see in the fact that the Passover
lamb was transfixed in two pieces of wood arranged cross-wise, a figure
of the Cross in which Christ was stretched. Speaking generally, there
is no doubt the Jewish Passover was taken over into Christianity, and
thereby its typical ceremonies found their true fulfilment.
Apart from the relation of the sacrifice of Christ’s death to the Jewish
Passover, and its dogmatic signification, sentiment and mere human
feeling would have led Christians to regard with reverence the day on
which our Lord, the Founder of the Church, died, and to keep the day
sacred in each succeeded year on which He had offered the sacrifice of
Himself. But for this it was necessary, in the first place, to know on
what day exactly His death had taken place.
For the Jews, this was easy; it was the 15th Nisan in their Calendar,
but for Christians of other countries, it was very difficult. In the
Roman Empire, to which they all belonged, different methods of reckoning
time and different calendars were in use. Since 45 B.C., the Romans
themselves used the revised Julian Calendar, leaving at the same time
perfect freedom to subject nations either to adopt it, or continue their
own methods.[102] Chief among the existing systems were the Egyptian,
the Syro-Macedonian, and the Semitic, each with its own way of dating
the year. The two first systems admitted of being brought into agreement
with the Roman Calendar, with more or less difficulty, since, according
to them, the year began on a fixed date, but with the Jewish Calendar it
was not so, for its was based on the lunar year, and never synchronised
with the solar year as to the beginning of months and years. The Egyptian
year, at the commencement of the Christian era, began on the 29th August,
and consisted of twelve months of thirty days each, and five additional
days (ἐπαγόμεναι) belonging to no month. Every fourth year was a
leap-year, namely the third, seventh, eleventh, fifteenth year, according
to the Julian reckoning. The Syro-Macedonian Calendar commenced with the
autumnal equinox. The Syrians, however, later on, partially adopted the
Julian Calendar in a somewhat modified form.[103] The Egyptian system
of introducing additional days was essentially the same as the Roman,
except that their leap-year was always one year in advance of the Roman
leap-year. To their usual five additional days, they added yet one more,
making a total of six. Consequently the next year, _i.e._ the fourth,
eighth, twelfth, sixteenth, etc., began on the 30th instead of the 29th
August.[104] For reckoning years, the Egyptians made use of the years of
the sovereign’s reign, but as they began the year with the 1st Thoth,
preceding the proclamation of the sovereign’s accession, it often
happened that more years than he was entitled to were set down to one
sovereign, while another who had reigned for less than a year was simply
passed over.[105]
It was extremely difficult for those nations, whose Calendars were
arranged on a different system, to fix the day of Christ’s death by their
own chronology, for the Jewish 15th Nisan might fall on widely different
days, sometimes in March, sometimes in April. How difficult it was to
discover, the days on which the death and resurrection of Christ ought to
be commemorated, will become more obvious from what follows.
3. _The circumstances which led to Easter being a movable Feast_
To the real and historical connection between the Christian Easter and
the Jewish Passover, is due the explanation of a striking peculiarity
in the Church’s year, viz., the movable feasts, of which Easter is the
starting-point. Easter falls on no fixed date, because the Jewish 15th
Nisan, unlike the dates of the Julian and Gregorian Calendars, varied
year by year. The extent and nature of this discrepancy are caused by the
Semitic Calendar. At the commencement of the Christian era, this Calendar
was not only used by the Jews, but also extensively followed in Syria,
Arabia, Mesopotamia, Babylon, Armenia, Osrhoëne, and in a great part of
Asia Minor, although other nationalities in these countries kept each to
its own Calendar. Thus, for example, the Greeks in Antioch followed the
Syro-Macedonian Calendar, and so on. Where a mixed population existed in
any place, different Calendars would be found in use.
The special features of the Semitic, or Jewish Calendar, which concern us
in this connection are the following:—
1. The Jewish day ended at sunset, and so the evening hours, from about
six p.m. belonged to the following day. This caused difference in dates,
for what happened according to Roman ideas at ten p.m. for example, was
regarded by the Jews as happening on the following day.
2. The Jewish year was a variable lunar year, _i.e._ it consisted of
twelve months, each of which began with the new moon, the full moon
consequently falling on the 14th of each month. The moon completes her
orbit round the earth in twenty-nine and a half days, or two orbits in
fifty-nine days. The Jewish months, accordingly, varied from twenty-nine
to thirty days alternately (Tischri and Nisan having thirty days), it
being impossible to commence a month in the middle of a day. Thus the
twelve months of the Jewish year make up 354 days. Eleven and a quarter
days were required to make up the length of a solar year. Had this
discrepancy not been rectified in some way, every Jewish month, and the
new year as well, would, in the course of thirty years, have made the
circle of the year. For, if in one year, the 1st Nisan coincided with the
1st March, in the next it would fall on the 12th, and so on.
The Semites brought about the necessary adjustment, not by leap-years,
but by the insertion of an additional month. For example, eight solar
years have a total of 2920 days, not counting the addition days of leap
years. The same number of days make up ninety-nine lunar months, or, in
other words, eight lunar years and three intercalary months, are equal to
eight solar years. Thus, in eight years, three additional months must be
introduced, making the number of days almost equal with the days of eight
solar years, except for a small discrepancy, caused by the additional
day in leap year. When these additional days had reached the number of
thirty, they could be accounted for by the introduction of a further
additional month. In regulating these points, the equinoxes were of the
utmost importance, and, in the second place, the ceremonial oblation of
the first fruits.
If it was evident that the month Nisan would terminate before the vernal
equinox—its beginning and middle had to precede the equinox, as well as
the _quarta decima lunæ_—and if the barley was not in ear by the 14th,
then it was considered the discrepancy had to be set right. This was done
by prolonging the last month of the expiring year, Adar, for twenty-nine
days longer than usual. In other words, an additional month was added to
the year, designated merely as Veadar. This was the intercalary month.
This, happening thrice in eight years, brought the lunar and solar
years into agreement by a very simple expedient. The equinox could be
controlled by help of the Zodiac, for, on the 20th March, the sun enters
Aries, and, on the 23rd September, Libra.
Had the Jews followed out this method scientifically, _i.e._, had the
introduction of the intercalary months followed fixed laws and been
ruled by astronomical observations and calculations, then, though still
difficult, it would have been possible to make the Jewish Calendar
synchronise with others. But the introduction of these additional days
was, so to speak, arbitrary and dependent upon the good pleasure of the
priests. Thus we can never say for certain that such and such a year was
a leap year with the Jews, and accordingly no date in the past can with
certainty be made to synchronise with a date in the Julian or any other
Calendar.[106]
Until their dispersion after the Jewish war in A.D. 70, and even much
later, the Jews reckoned their new moons and leap years, and also the
beginning of each year, not by strictly astronomical data, but by the
method just described. The rule was that the month began with the day on
the evening of which the new moon first became visible, and also that
the passover should be kept when the sun was in Aries.[107] Maimonides,
agreeing with what we have said above, informs us that a second Adar
was interposed if the vernal equinox fell on the 16th Nisan or later.
But it would be a great mistake to think that a scientifically accurate
system, founded on these principles, was employed for calculating the
new moons and leap years, such as would make it possible to bring the
dates of the Jewish year into certain correspondence with the Julian
Calendar. Still we must not think no attempts were made to reduce the
Calendar to order on the basis of some cyclic system, but the caprice of
the Sanhedrin always succeeded in rendering these attempts unavailing.
Ideler (i. 512) shows how the new moons were treated, and Maimonides
tells us that the Sanhedrin was influenced by many considerations in the
choice of leap years. The Talmud preserves a remarkable letter written by
Rabbi Gamaliel, the teacher of St Paul, to the Jews of Babylon and Media,
which may appositely be quoted here. “We herewith inform you that we, in
conjunction with our colleagues, have deemed it necessary to add thirty
days to the year, since the doves (to be offered in sacrifice) are still
too tender, and the lambs (for the passover) too young, and the time of
Abib (the barley harvest) has not arrived.”
This passage may well serve as a warning to those who, whenever they
find a fixed date in ancient Jewish writings, forthwith, with the aid of
lunar tables, transpose it into a date according to the Julian method of
reckoning, and possibly flatter themselves they have found a fixed point
which will form a basis for further calculations.
In consequence of what we have said, it seems natural that Jewish
converts to Christianity in apostolic times in the East should have fixed
the date of Easter by Jewish methods, without departing, in this respect,
from Jewish customs, especially as they formed the majority in the
Church. This was all the more natural since in Syria and in many parts
of Asia Minor, a Calendar drawn up on similar principles to the Semitic,
was in use alongside the Greek (_i.e._ Roman) Calendar. This custom,
however, although retained by the Quartodecimans, was never widespread,
and did not long survive. The principal consideration, which demanded
a departure from Jewish methods, was, that from the Christian point of
view, the Resurrection, and not the day of Christ’s death, formed the
chief feature of the commemoration; the latter, although a day to be had
in remembrance, could not well be kept as a joyous festival. But the
Resurrection took place on the Sunday after the 15th Nisan, and so this
Sunday came to be the chief day of the Christians’ feast.
Through the gradual spread of Christianity in non-Semitic lands in the
West, the necessity must soon have arisen of fixing the day of the
Resurrection by the Julian Calendar, and of deciding according to it the
day on which Easter had to be celebrated. But, as we have said, it is
very difficult to transfer a date from the Jewish to the Julian Calendar,
and, in most cases, quite impossible when the date is that of an event
already long past.
Let us apply all this to the point in question.
If it was asked, “On what day did Christ die?” the answer was, “On the
15th Nisan.” But if it was asked again, “On which day of the Roman
Calendar does the 15th Nisan fall?” the reply must be, “Who can tell? In
one year it may fall in March, in another in April; sometimes on one day
of our Calendar, sometimes on another.”
The reply, “On the 15th Nisan,” conveyed nothing either to the Romans or
to the Egyptians; it was intelligible to the Semites alone. Thus, where
the Semitic Calendar was not understood, it was necessary to fix the day
by some other method. In the choice of methods, the Church of Alexandria,
and, most of all, the Church of Rome, took the lead. The simplest plan
would have been to discover on which day of March or April the 15th Nisan
had fallen in the year of Christ’s death, _i.e._ 782 U.C. But it was
impossible to do this with certainty after a few decades had elapsed.
Another starting-point had to be sought, and this was naturally given by
the spring full moon, _i.e._ the full moon nearest to the vernal equinox,
for the 15th Nisan must fall either on this full moon or thereabouts.
Thus in Rome and Alexandria, all the principles which are in force at the
present day were gradually adopted, _i.e._ Easter is to be celebrated on
the Sunday after the full moon following the vernal equinox. There is
evidence that this rule for determining the date of Easter was followed
in Rome from the time of Pope Sixtus I., possibly even earlier. The
further developments do not concern us here.
Here and there in the West, there was a tendency to commemorate the death
and resurrection of Christ on fixed days in the Julian Calendar—on the
25th and 27th of March, for example—but it never became general. For
the most part, the data for the calculation of Easter were the same as
those employed for calculating the Jewish passover; that is to say, the
full moon on the one hand, and the vernal equinox on the other, Sunday
being introduced as an additional factor in the calculation, since our
Lord had risen on that day of the week. In this way the above rule was
established, and so, in the date of Easter as determined at the present
day, the variable Jewish lunar year has left a trace behind it, and,
also, the connection in which Christianity stands to Judaism receives a
practical expression deserving of being preserved to the end of time.[108]
4. _The Final Settlement of the date of Easter and the Attempts made to
commemorate the day of the Month on which Christ died_
The manner in which the commemoration of our Lord’s passion and death
admitted of being celebrated in agreement with the Jewish Calendar, is
due to the minuteness with which the fourth Evangelist describes the
events of Holy Week.
On the 9th Nisan our Lord arrived at Bethania. The next day, the 10th,
took place the triumphal entry into Jerusalem[109]—Palm Sunday.
11th Nisan, Monday. Curse pronounced on the barren fig-tree,
and second, cleansing of the Temple.
12th Nisan, Tuesday. Conferences between our Lord and the
Pharisees and Sadducees; the widow’s mite; attempts of the
Greeks to see our Lord.
13th Nisan, Wednesday. Judas betrays our Lord to the Chief
Priests.
14th Nisan, Thursday. The Last Supper and the Betrayal.
15th Nisan, Friday. Condemnation and Death of Jesus.[110]
16th Nisan, Sabbath. The body of Jesus in the sepulchre.
17th Nisan, Sunday. The Resurrection.
In this way, these events could be annually commemorated on the same
days in the Jewish Calendar, the day of the week, however, varying, as
it does in the case of the Jewish passover. That this was actually done
is recognised by Isidore of Seville, when he says,[111] “Formerly the
Church kept Easter with the Jews on the fourteenth day of moon, no matter
on what day of the week it fell.” But where the Julian, or even the
Egyptian, Calendar was in force, if a man wished to proceed accurately
in this way, without being tied down to fixed days of the week (_i.e._
Friday for the day of our Lord’s death, and Sunday for the Resurrection),
he would nevertheless have to learn on what day of his own Calendar the
15th Nisan of the Jews fell in the year of our Lord’s death. For it was
quite impossible for him to look for it at one time in March, at another
time in April, according to his own Calendar.
Hence arose a striking divergence at the very beginning, which did not
admit of being adjusted. Obviously, another method for fixing the date
of Easter had to be devised for Gentile converts and for those districts
where the Julian, or, at any rate, a non-Jewish, Calendar was in force.
At the same time, it is also quite credible, because resting on clear
proof, that in Syria and Asia Minor, the Apostles fixed the date of
Easter on Quartodeciman principles, while at Rome and Alexandria another
method obtained from the beginning. Granted that the Roman Church, during
the Apostle’s lifetime, consisted only of converts from Judaism, still
the Jews as a whole were such a small minority in Rome that they must
have conformed to the Roman method of reckoning time, and were probably,
most of them, unfamiliar with the Jewish Calendar. It was different in
Asia Minor where the Jews were very numerous and free to follow their own
customs, and where a Calendar closely allied to the Jewish was used by
the native population.
When the Christians of Asia Minor claimed for this practice the
ordinance of the Apostles, especially St John and St Philip,[112] their
appeal is as much deserving of credit as the claim of the Romans to base
_their_ practice on the ordinance of St Peter. That they actually did so,
we learn from the Festal Letters of St Athanasius,[113] who says: “The
Romans lay claim to a tradition from the Apostle Peter, forbidding to go
beyond the 26th Pharmuthi (the 21st April), on the one hand, and the 30th
Phamenoth (the 26th March), on the other.” Here we have also the limits
of the period within which Easter at that time fell, the 25th March being
reckoned as the day of the vernal equinox.
The Churches which had never followed the Quartodeciman practice,
surpassed the others in number and influence, so much the more as Egypt,
where the Church had been organised by a disciple of St Peter, and also
Greece, were among their number. When strife arose over this point, the
numerically weaker party ought to have yielded, but rather than this,
they separated from the Catholic Church under the form of Ebionitism.
Irenæus traces the opposition of the Roman Church to the Quartodeciman
Easter back to Sixtus I. (116-125). “The Roman Bishops,” he says
according to Eusebius,[114] “neither observed the Passover in this way
themselves, nor allowed those under their authority so to observe it.”
Should the thought here arise in the mind that the Roman practice came
into existence first under Sixtus, it is contradicted by the letter of
Polycrates to Pope Victor where it is said that Rome appealed to the
Apostles Peter and Paul in support of her custom.
The chief reason why the Jewish Quartodeciman practice of the other
Churches finally succumbed, was that Christians desired to commemorate
not merely the day of our Lord’s death alone, which was linked to the
15th Nisan, but also His Resurrection. The Resurrection had a close
connection with His death in point of time, and its commemoration was
already firmly established in apostolic times in the form of Sunday (see
above, p. 5). It was thus impossible to pass over the Sunday, and so
practically an entire week was occupied by the commemoration. The events
of Holy Week given above could not be separated from each other; they
must be kept in connection. The Jews, as Epiphanius[115] remarks in his
polemic against the Audians, keep their passover on a single day, while
the Christians required a whole week for their Easter commemorations. And
so, although they took the date of the Jewish passover as the basis of
their calculations, they nevertheless did not limit the duration of their
feast to that one day. Finally, another point which had weight, was that
the Christians of the fourth century had a fixed idea that the 14th Nisan
must not fall before the vernal equinox.[116]
Along with this generally observed custom of commemorating in the Church
the passion and death of our Lord, repeated attempts were made to
discover and establish a fixed date for the solemnity. Already in the
third century it was thought this had been successfully achieved, and in
Tertullian we find 782 U.C. given as the year of Christ’s death, and the
15th Nisan identified with the 25th March. This date would be incorrect
in any case, even if 782 were really the year of Christ’s death, for in
that year, the Jewish passover could only have fallen on either the 19th
March or the 17th April of the Julian Calendar. Nevertheless the 25th
March met with no small acceptance, being accepted, amongst others, by
Hippolytus, Augustine, and Perpetuus of Tours, who accordingly marked
the 27th March in his Calendar as the true day of the Resurrection. It
appears also in the spurious acts of Pilate. In the Carolingian period
this date constantly occurs in the martyrologies, as, for instance, in
the _Gellonense_ of 804, in that of Corbie of 826, in Wandelbert of Prüm,
in the different recensions of the so-called martyrology of Jerome, and
others. Whether this day was liturgically observed, or had merely an
historic interest, cannot be decided from the Calendars, but the former
is probable.
Finally, it may not be without interest to observe how in subsequent
centuries attempts were made to explain the fact that Easter, unlike
other festivals, was movable. It is conceivable that in course of time,
the true explanation, viz., the connection of the Christian with the
Jewish feast and its consequent dependence on the Jewish Calendar, was
forgotten, and attempts began to be made to account for the fact on other
grounds, typical or otherwise.
After the observance had everywhere become well established, it must
have struck people that the day of our Lord’s death was very differently
commemorated in the Church from the day of His birth, viz. as a movable
feast. Among the questions which Januarius submitted to St Augustine,
there was one bearing on this point. Augustine[117] replied that our
Lord’s birthday was merely a commemorative festival, while Easter had a
mystical connection with the Jewish passover, as also its name is of
Hebrew, not Greek, origin. Easter is the fulfilment of our redemption
which consists in an inward renewal of mankind, and with this idea
of renewal, the first month of the Jewish and ancient Roman year
corresponds. Afterwards, however, Augustine forsakes this safe path and
loses himself in the symbolism of numbers and in forced astronomical
interpretations.
Shorter and more to the point is the explanation given by Martin, Bishop
of Dumio (561-572), who died Bishop of Braga in 580. In his treatise
_De Paschate_,[118] he says many people only add to the confusion by
their unsuccessful attempts to explain why the date of Easter is fixed
by the moon, after the Jewish custom. So, too, the attempts recently
made by many bishops of Gaul to celebrate the Resurrection on a fixed
day (the 25th March) cannot be approved. Now the passion of Christ is
the redemption of the creature. The creation of the world took place in
Spring (c. 4), and, consequently, the renewal of the world must also take
place in Spring, in the first month of the year. Two things had to be
taken into consideration with regard to this festival—the day of the week
and the phase of the moon. In order to be right in both, ecclesiastical
antiquity had appointed that Easter should not be kept before the 23rd
March or after the 21st April (c. 7).
The most important passage in this treatise bearing upon the history of
Easter is the remark that many Gallic bishops about 570 commenced their
celebration of the festival on the 25th March as an immovable feast. This
is also confirmed by Bede,[119] who had a distinctly clearer insight
into the nature of the question, and thus expresses himself concerning
the dispute about Easter. “Originally the Apostles kept Easter on the
full moon in March, on whatever day it fell. After their death different
customs prevailed in different provinces. The Gauls kept the festival
on the 25th of March. In Italy, some fasted twenty days, others seven,
but the Easterns remained faithful to the custom of the Apostles.” To
remedy this state of things, Pope Victor put himself in communication
with Theophilus of Cæsarea, who held a Synod which decided that the
Resurrection should be commemorated on a Sunday, so fixing the day of the
week on which it was to be kept.
5. _The Liturgical Celebration of Holy Week and Easter_
The Christian passover, as originally limited to Holy Week and Easter
Week, was consecrated in the first place to the remembrances of Christ’s
passion, death, and resurrection, and to this the religious ceremonies,
in so far as they differed from the ordinary services, owed their special
character. But, in the second place, it is to be observed that so long
as the Catechumenate remained in existence, and even to some extent
afterwards, Easter was the only season regularly appointed for baptism.
At Easter, the labours of the Catechists came to an end, the course of
preparation was finished, the Catechumens received the sacraments of
baptism, confirmation, and the Holy Eucharist. To this fact, in the
second place, the Easter services owe much of their special character,
and even now, long after the practice of the Church has changed, rites
connected with the administration of baptism are to be found in the
ritual of the Easter festival. Thus, the consecration of the font on Holy
Saturday, first of all, and then the consecration of the Holy Oils on
Maundy Thursday, must be owing to the fact that they were required for
the administration of Baptism and Confirmation. On this ground, as well
as because of the importance of the feast in itself, it is obvious that
Easter, from the liturgical point of view, is conspicuous among all the
other festivals, and that a number of rites are then performed which are
not repeated in the course of the whole year.[120]
To these rites belong the reading of the Passion on Palm Sunday, and
on the Tuesday and Wednesday in Holy Week, the procession on Palm
Sunday, the Consecration of the Holy Oils on Maundy Thursday, the _missa
præsanctificatorum_ on Good Friday. More than the others, Holy Saturday
is conspicuous for a number of rites peculiar to itself, viz.:—
1. The blessing of the fire from which the other lights in the
Church are lit, and the blessing of the five grains of incense
for the pascal candle: both ceremonies being performed outside
before the door of the Church.
2. The procession thence into the Church.
3. The blessing of the pascal candle by the singing of the
_Exsultet_ or _præconium paschale_.
4. The reading of the prophecies from the Old Testament.
5. The blessing of the baptismal font, in which the pascal
candle is employed.
6. The baptism of catechumens, if there are any.
7. The chanting of the Litany of the Saints during the _humi
prostratio_.
8. The mass of Holy Saturday without introit, and with the
threefold Alleluia, _i.e._, instead of Vespers.
9. In many places Easter festivities take place on the evening
of Holy Saturday, but these are not liturgical.
10. On Easter morning, the lifting up of the Crucifix from the
sepulchre; procession, opening of the doors, and entry into the
church. The gospel being St Mark xvi. 1-7.
In the Middle Ages other special ceremonies and forms of rejoicing took
place.
That Easter was the special season for the baptism of those catechumens
whose preparation had extended over the whole of the preceding year,
is made prominent only at a comparatively later date, in special laws,
when the catechumenate was already dying out, as, for example, in the
seventh canon of the Roman Synod of 402, the fourth Canon of Gerunda,
the eighteenth Canon of Auxerre, where it is expressly laid down that
outside the Easter season, baptism must be given to none save the sick.
By the time of the Second Synod of Maçon (585), the custom of baptising
all the year round on any day had already become very common. This Synod,
however, endeavoured to reinstate the ancient custom and also prescribed
rest from work for the whole Easter week.[121] However, as late as the
seventh and eighth centuries, Easter continued to be the regular season
for baptism, at least in Rome, as the so-called scrutinies[122] show,
and even the Synod of Neuching (772), in its eighteenth canon, wished to
restrict baptism to only two dates in the year.[123]
At an early date, Holy Week had already received a special name,
_septimana major_, which appears already in the fourth century,[124] and
which it still retains in liturgical books. The German name (Karwoche)
comes from the old German _chara_ or _kara_, sadness or lamentation, and
served to mark the character of the time, always and everywhere regarded
in the Church as a time of sadness.
The description of the liturgical ceremonies of Holy Week is best
introduced by the account of a pilgrim from Gaul in the fourth century.
To the account of her travels, written between 383 and 394, at the end of
a pilgrimage extending over three years, she added a description of all
that took place during Holy Week in Jerusalem at that period. There, the
Holy places themselves suggested devotional practices which were imitated
throughout the Church, and have partially survived to the present day,
as, for example, the procession of palms and the _adoratio crucis_.
Liturgical scholars, being ignorant of this source of information,
formerly sought the origin of these practices in a wrong quarter: it is
now beyond doubt that they originated in Jerusalem.
To begin with, students of the liturgy used to be divided over the
question when and where the palm procession originated, and various
conjectures were put forth. Binterim thought Bishop Peter introduced
the blessing of palms at Edessa in 397, while Martène, attributed its
origin to the eighth or ninth century. As a matter of fact, not a trace
of the blessing of palms is found in the Gregorian sacramentary.[125] We
shall certainly not be mistaken if we look for the origin of the palm
procession in Jerusalem, for the Gallic pilgrim gives us the following
account: On the Sunday, at the beginning of Holy Week, the usual Sunday
morning services were held in the larger church on Golgotha, then called
the _Martyrium_, but at the seventh hour of the day (about one P.M.) all
the people assembled on the Mount of Olives, where was the cave in which
the Lord used to teach. There for two hours, hymns and antiphons were
sung and lections from the Scriptures were read. At the ninth hour, they
ascended to the summit, whence the Lord ascended to heaven. Here again,
hymns were sung, lections suitable to the place and day were read, and
prayers were offered up. At the seventh hour, when the gospel account
of Christ’s entry into Jerusalem had been read, all rose up, and with
branches of palm or olive in their hands, and, singing _Benedictus qui
venit_, proceeded from the hill down into the city, and continued their
procession until they reached the Church of the Anastasis where vespers
were sung, and an _oratio ad crucem_ offered up.[126]
It was quite in keeping with the dramatic character of Catholic worship
to represent, in some marked way, Christ’s memorable entry into Jerusalem
at the last passover. On the very scene of the event especially, one
was, so to speak, drawn on to do so without any special exercise of the
inventive faculty being required.
However, we must follow the pilgrim’s description to the end. On Tuesday,
there was another procession to the Mount of Olives, where the Bishop
read the gospel, St Mark xxv. 3 _et seqq._ On Wednesday, the account of
the treason of Judas was read as the gospel, and during it, the people
wept and lamented. On Maundy Thursday, the psalmody began at cock-crow;
at four P.M.,[127] mass was said in the _Martyrium_ by the Bishop, at
which the people communicated. Towards seven o’clock in the evening, the
people assembled in the Eleona, as the church which then stood on the
Mount of Olives was called, and, towards eleven o’clock, ascended to the
summit of the mount, praying and singing. This lasted until cock-crow the
following day. Then, about three A.M., the assembly broke up and a start
was made for the Garden of Gethsemani, where they found the beautiful
church lit up by two hundred lamps. Here the bishop said a prayer; a
suitable psalm followed, and then the reading of the gospel, St Matt.
xxvi. 41 _et seqq._, which narrates the capture of Christ in Gethsemani.
Then the procession slowly descended the mount into the city, and passed
on until it reached the place of the crucifixion. Here the gospel
narrative of Christ’s trial was read: the bishop addressed the people
and dismissed them with an exhortation to return about seven o’clock,
for the adoration of the Holy Cross. Whereupon, the people proceeded to
Mount Sion to pray at the column of the flagellation, and then returned
to their homes.
At seven o’clock, the bishop took his seat on his throne in the chapel of
the Holy Cross. Before him was placed a table covered with a white linen
cloth, round which the deacons took up their position. Then the silver
shrine containing the wood of the Holy Cross was brought in. It was
opened and the Holy Cross itself, along with the inscription (_titulus_)
laid upon the table. The faithful and catechumens approached, knelt,
kissed the Cross, and touched it with their forehead and eyes, but
not with their hands. In this way, they passed by, one by one, while
the deacons kept watch. Then the deacons exhibited also to the people
Solomon’s ring and the horn with which the Jewish kings used to be
anointed: these also were kissed.
At the sixth hour, noon, the service proceeded in the following manner.
The people assembled in the open court between the chapel of the Holy
Cross and the Church of the Anastasis; the bishop took his seat on the
throne, and then lections from the Scriptures were read continuously,
until the ninth hour. These related to the passion, and were taken from
the Old Testament, from the psalms and prophets, as well as from the New
Testament. At the ninth hour, the passage from St John xix. 30, which
speaks of the death of Jesus, was read and the assembly was dismissed.
The service was then immediately resumed in the chief church (the
_Martyrium_), and continued until the reading of the passage (St John
xix. 38), describing the descent from the Cross, and then again a prayer
was recited and the blessing of the catechumens took place. With this,
the service for the day concluded and the people were dismissed. The
younger clerics, however, remained throughout the night watching in the
church.
With regard to the liturgy for Good Friday, the pilgrim found that the
ceremonies she saw in Jerusalem differed not at all from what she was
familiar with in her own country. She only observes that the baptised
children were conducted by the bishop first to the Church of the
Resurrection and then to the principal church (the _Martyrium_).[128]
This is the earliest complete description of the ceremonies of Holy Week
which we possess. We now pass to the usages of a later date.
PALM SUNDAY
The Sunday next before Easter is commonly called Palm Sunday (_Dominica
in ramis palmarum_, Gr. κυριακὴ τῶν βαΐον). At an earlier date it was
also called _Dominica competentium_, because on it catechumens requested
baptism. In some sacramentaries it is called _in capitilavio_,[129] from
the washing and shaving of the head in preparation for baptism.
Among the characteristic ceremonies of this day, is the procession, at
which branches of palm, or of some other similar tree, are carried. In
the Middle Ages, this was fairly common; not so, however, the blessing
of the palms.[130] In the Roman ritual, this blessing is performed with
much ceremony. It resembles in form the _ordo missæ_, consisting of an
introit, collect, epistle, gospel, another prayer and a preface, followed
by the actual blessing comprising five more prayers, sprinkling with holy
water and incensation. Upon this, the procession starts, which passes out
of the church, the doors of which are then closed. They are reopened when
the deacon has knocked with the staff of the processional cross, and the
procession enters, recalling the entry of our Lord through the gates of
Jerusalem. In the Mass which follows, the Passion according to St Matthew
is read or sung.
In the oldest Roman sacramentaries, however, nothing is found relating
to the blessing and procession of palms, but the ritual for them is
minutely described in the Ordos, xii. c. 9 (of Cencio Savelli), and
xv. c. 53 _et seq._ These clearly belong to the Middle Ages. The first
trace of the practice of holding palm-branches during divine service,
as far as the rituals of the Roman Church are concerned, is found in
the later recension of the Gregorian sacramentary used in Gaul in the
ninth and tenth centuries. Among the prayers for the day is found one
for the blessing, not of the palms, but of those who carried them. In
the Gelasian and Gregorian sacramentaries, the Sunday is at any rate
called _Dominica in Palmas_, but only in the title. It seems as if people
were satisfied at first with holding palms during the Mass, and that the
palm procession only took shape later. In the Gotho-Gallican missal,
the Sunday has no special name and no mention is made of palms. On the
other hand, the name appears in the lectionaries of Silos and Luxeuil.
Everything points to the blessing of the palms, and, probably, also the
procession, having become customary in the second half of the ninth
century.[131] Isidore of Seville[132] is familiar with the name _dies
palmarum_, but not with the procession. Amalarius,[133] on the contrary,
mentions the custom of carrying palm branches through the church and of
shouting Hosanna.
There was, however, a rite, universally observed on Palm Sunday, which
had reference to the administration of baptism. As is well known, the
catechumens in primitive times were instructed in Christian doctrine
during Lent, and even for a longer period. The instruction of catechumens
and the solemn administration of baptism took place only once a year.
The former began eight weeks before Easter, and ended with the baptism
which was administered on Easter Eve. The concluding part of this course
of instruction was composed of the so-called mystagogical instructions
treating of the sacrifice of the Mass, and the three sacraments of
baptism, confirmation, and the Holy Eucharist. The words of the Creed,
so the _disciplina arcani_ enjoined, were the last, not the first thing
to be imparted. The catechumens learnt the Creed for the first time on
Palm Sunday. This was the custom in Spain,[134] Gaul,[135] Milan,[136]
probably also in Rome. There seems, however, to have been divergences
as to the choice of the day, for it was necessary, at any rate in Gaul,
to enjoin uniformity, since the Synod of Agde (506) prescribes in its
thirteenth canon: In every diocese, the Creed shall be imparted in church
to the catechumens on one and the same day, _i.e._ eight days before
Easter Sunday. This ceremony was called the _traditio symboli_.
The manner in which this was done is fully described in the Gelasian
sacramentary, although at that date the catechumenate, strictly speaking,
no longer existed. After some introductory remarks from the priest, an
acolyte rehearsed the Creed to the candidates for baptism, who were
exhorted to impress it on their minds and hearts.[137] The rite, at all
events, was the same as in earlier times. In the Gregorian sacramentary
these practices are already omitted. A similar practice was followed with
regard to the Our Father. It was first taught _verbatim_ to the baptised
after their baptism.[138] This ceremony formed the chief characteristic
of the Sunday next before Easter, in service-books in which the name Palm
Sunday was as yet unknown. Accordingly, in the Gallican missal the Mass
for the day is called, _Missa in Traditio Symboli_.
During the Middle Ages, in various places, and especially in Germany,
Christ’s entry into Jerusalem was represented in a somewhat naïve manner
by carrying round in the procession a wooden figure representing the
Saviour seated on an ass. Afterwards it was brought into the Church and
placed in a conspicuous position. While suitable hymns were being sung,
the clergy and people venerated it on their knees, and there it remained
for the rest of the day. Figures of the so-called “Palmesel” are still
numerous in museums, as, for example, at Basel, Zurich, Munich, Nürnberg,
etc.
MAUNDY THURSDAY
The fifth day of Holy Week, the day on which Christ partook of the last
Passover with His disciples and instituted the memorial of His Passion,
is generally called _Cœna Domini_ in service-books. The Greeks, however,
call it merely ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη πέμπτη, the Great and Holy Thursday.
In the Calendar of Polemius Silvius is found, under the 24th March, the
remarkable note _Natalis Calicis_. This is owing to the fact that at that
period the 25th March was regarded as the day of Christ’s death, and the
27th as the day of His resurrection. The day of the institution of the
Holy Eucharist and of the Sacrifice of the Mass was not passed over in
even such an imperfect list of the Church’s festivals as that contained
in this Calendar. The day had something of a festival character belonging
to itself. Indeed, among the Copts it appears as a regular festival.
The name _Natalis Calicis_ seems to have been common in southern and
western Gaul, for it is found in Avitus of Vienne, and in Eligius of
Noyon, in the sixth and seventh centuries. The same writers mark the day
as a festival, _sollemnitas_, on which those who had been put to public
penance were everywhere received back into the Church, and on which the
Chrism was consecrated.[139]
The most unlikely of the many attempts to explain the German name for the
day is that which connects it with St Luke xxiii. 31, and makes the name,
Green Thursday, signify that the withered branches, sinners, by their
reception again into the bosom of the Church once more grow green.[140]
Apart from the fact that this interpretation is far-fetched, it savours
too much of the study to have ever given rise to the name among the
common people. The fact is that red vestments were worn at the reception
of the penitents on Maundy Thursday, but green vestments at the Mass,
and this gave rise to the name.[141] The older service-books, however,
drawn up before liturgical colours had been introduced and their use
had become regulated, do not specify the colour for the vestments, but
content themselves with prescribing the use of festal vestments (_vestes
sollemniores_) in general. Later on, the Roman custom of wearing white
vestments on this day became general.[142]
It was only to be expected that the Church should keep with special
solemnity the day on which Christ had celebrated the last passover with
His apostles, and had instituted the mystery of His Body and Blood. In
fact, Holy Saturday alone of the days of Holy Week can vie with it in
this respect. It frequently ranks as a Church festival, and is expressly
called a _sollemnitas_.[143]
The ritual directions for Maundy Thursday, of which we possess a
considerable number dating from the Middle Ages, naturally begin with
the Psalmody. This began at midnight, and its distinguishing feature
was, that the lights lit at its commencement did not remain burning,
but were extinguished, one at a time, after each psalm, until, at the
concluding prayers, the church was in total darkness. The number of
candles varied in different places, between fifteen, twenty-four, thirty,
and thirty-four.[144] Such was the “dark mattins,” _tenebræ_.
The second characteristic ceremony of the day was the reconciliation of
the penitents. These had to remain prostrate on the ground while the
Miserere and other prayers were recited over them and their absolution
pronounced. On this occasion, as we have remarked above, red vestments
were worn. The reconciled penitents were admitted to communion with the
rest of the congregation at the Mass which followed.
This Mass was of a festal character, and, in many places, in primitive
times, two Masses were celebrated, one at the usual hour in the morning,
and the other towards evening at the time of vespers. In other places,
on the contrary, there was only one Mass, at which all the faithful
communicated.[145] These different customs in course of time became a
cause of astonishment and offence, and so Bishop Januarius enquired of
St Augustine what ought to be done. The reply was, that each ought to
follow the custom of his own diocese. In Rome also, at the period when
the Gelasian sacramentary was in use, two Masses were still celebrated,
for the sacramentary gives a _Missa ad Vesperum_.[146] The same authority
notices only the reconciliation of penitents and the consecration of
the Holy Oils among the other ceremonies performed on Maundy Thursday.
The Gregorian sacramentary gives only the latter, as also does Ordo I.,
the earliest of the sixteen ancient Roman ordos.[147] In liturgical
writings relating to our subject which belong to the Middle Ages,
especially in the pseudo-Alcuin, the consecration of the Holy Oils is
given at considerable length.[148] St Cyprian had already spoken of the
consecration of oil required for ritual purposes without saying on what
day it took place.[149]
At the conclusion of the Mass, the altar was washed by the bishop or
officiating priest, and, in the afternoon, the washing of the feet was
performed, at which the Superior washed the feet of his subjects, or the
bishop the feet of twelve old men representing the twelve apostles. In
the Middle Ages, the usual name for this ceremony was _Mandatum_.[150]
The washing of the altar and the consecration of the Chrism is spoken of
by Isidore of Seville.[151] In the later Middle Ages, to these ceremonies
was added the reading of the Bull in _Cœna Domini_, containing a list of
errors condemned by the Church under pain of excommunication. The reading
of this Bull continued from the fourteenth to the end of the eighteenth
century.
Finally, in some countries, the public ceremonial recitation of the
Creed by the catechumens (_redditio symboli_) was prescribed for Maundy
Thursday, as by the forty-sixth canon of the Synod of Laodicea, and by
the sixty-eighth Trullan canon. This, however, in Rome, was done on
Holy Saturday by each person in turn from some conspicuous place in the
church.[152]
GOOD FRIDAY
The day of our Lord’s Passion was universally regarded as a day of
mourning—“_dies amaritudinis_,” St Ambrose calls it, “on which we
fast.”[153] A fast day, on liturgical principles, can never be a
festival, though, _vice versâ_, a festival can fall on a fixed day of
fasting or abstinence, as, for example, the Annunciation.
When, at an early date, the Roman emperor made a law forbidding the
Courts to sit on Good Friday, this did not make it a festival. On the
contrary, the Church Order of the period of Constantine expressly
declares that “both it and Holy Saturday are days of sorrow, and not
feasts.”[154] Accordingly, there was enjoined upon all whose health
enabled them to observe it, an unbroken fast lasting over the two days,
directly based upon St Mark ii. 20. For, as the eighth canon of the
fourth Synod of Toledo says, “The whole Church is wont to spend Good
Friday in fasting and sorrow, on account of our Lord’s Passion.” There
is scarcely any other point on which such liturgical agreement exists
in all lands and in all periods of Christian antiquity as on this. The
above-named Synod mentions with reprobation a mistaken expression of
grief, _i.e._ in many places the churches were shut up for the whole day,
and no services, neither divine office nor sermon, were held (seventh
canon). The Synod does not blame the omission of Mass, for this was
universal. This sentiment of sorrow was outwardly manifested, after the
introduction of liturgical colours, by the fact that on Good Friday,
black vestments were worn.[155] In the Middle Ages, discussion arose over
the question why the days of the saints’ deaths were kept as festivals,
but Good Friday as a day of mourning. The monk Helperich, who lived at St
Gall at the end of the ninth century, replied; Christ, unlike the saints,
attained to no higher degree of glory through His death. He died not for
His own sake but for us. The Jews, His enemies, rejoiced over His death,
but the apostles bewailed and lamented.[156]
It may be observed here that in Würtemburg, Mecklenburg, Saxony, Reuss ä.
L., Altenburg, and Lippe, Good Friday is one of the days of penitence and
prayer, but, on the other hand, wherever Calvinism is in the ascendent,
the dogmatic significant of the day, as the day of our redemption has
been partially changed. There it ranks as a Church festival, and in other
respects is given up to excursions and entertainments, just as if someone
would pass the day of his father’s death in rejoicings, because a rich
inheritance had fallen to him.
The Good Friday services began at night with mattins, at which the lights
were extinguished in the same manner as on the previous day. In addition,
the low tone in which the devotions were pitched, and the omission of the
_Gloria Patri_ at the end of the psalms, gave outward expression to the
sentiment of sorrow.
The liturgy proper to Good Friday, according to the rite now in use,
begins with the prostration (_humi prostratio_) of the celebrant on the
steps of the altar. Then, without their title being given out, follow
lections from the prophets, in which the death of the Messias and its
virtue were foretold. These sufferings themselves are described in
the words of the Passion according to St John, which are said or sung
immediately afterwards. Then follow the general intercessions, at the
conclusion of which, the Host, consecrated on the previous day, is
brought to the altar from the place where it has been reserved. The
paternoster is then sung followed by the elevation of the Host and the
communion of the celebrant. This _missa præsanctificatorum_ is nothing
more than an elaborate rite of communion. It is preceded by the _Adoratio
Crucis_, and followed by the laying of the Cross in the sepulchre, which
dates from about the tenth century.
At an earlier period, the ceremonies were simpler, and even restricted
to psalmody, for Innocent I., says,[157] that in his time, generally
speaking, Mass was not celebrated on Good Friday and Holy Saturday.
This is still the custom among the Greeks and Russians. Their Good
Friday service consists of the singing of psalms and the veneration of
a representation of our Lord on the Cross, similar to our _adoratio
crucis_. At the evening service, that is, a painted, not carved,
representation of the dead Christ is brought in and venerated.[158]
These expressions must be taken quite literally, in the sense that on
Good Friday not even the _missa præsanctificatorum_ was celebrated, nor
the now usual Mass on the morning of Holy Saturday. For the Gelasian
sacramentary gives no Mass for either of these days but only the
various prayers, so too the old Gallic missal,[159] and the same must
be understood when we hear of the Churches in parts of Spain not being
opened on Good Friday. Sermons, however, were preached on Good Friday,
for we possess several of Leo I., and Gregory the Great preached on this
day. It is difficult to say what was the custom as to Holy Communion.
In France, the people seem to have communicated, but not in Rome or in
Germany; at least Rabanus Maurus is silent on the point.[160]
According to the evidence afforded by the ancient service-books, it may
be conjectured that the adoption of the _missa præsanctificatorum_, as
well as the striking insertion of the Greek passages in the Reproaches,
is due to Greek influence. That alterations were made at a considerably
later date in these parts of the rite will be noticed elsewhere.
With regard to the service-books of the Roman Church in particular, we
find a rubric in the Gelasian sacramentary, directing that the Holy
Cross be placed on the altar, and then that the priests and attendant
clerics take their position at the altar in silence and begin the solemn
intercessions for the whole Church, for all estates of men, etc.; the
intercessions being prefaced by the summons to kneel (_flectamus genua_).
The genuflection seems at that time to have been made also before the
prayer for the Jews, for the rubric directs the deacon to proceed “_ut
supra_.”[161] The prayers are the well-known Good Friday prayers.
There is no mention at this point of the _Adoratio Crucis_, but at the
conclusion of the intercessions, the sacred Species, in both kinds, which
had been consecrated the previous day were brought from the sacrarium by
the deacons and placed on the altar. The priest consumed them, having
first adored and kissed the Cross. Whereupon all present adored the Cross
and communicated. It must not be forgotten, in this connection, that the
Gelasian sacramentary does not represent the Roman rite in its purity,
but embellished with numerous Gallican additions, which probably owe
their origin to Alcuin or his contemporaries. The same is true of the
edition of the Gregorian sacramentary employed in France.
In this last we find the general intercessions recurring twice in Holy
Week, on Wednesday and again on Good Friday,[162] but they are not
placed at the beginning of the liturgy, as they are in the Gelasian
sacramentary. After the bishop has taken his seat, the tract, _Domine
audivi_, a lection from the Scriptures, and then another tract followed
in succession. The Passion according to St John came next, and then the
prayers in question. At their conclusion the altar was stripped. The
solemn adoration of the Cross before the altar by clergy and people
took place at the time of vespers, and, during it, the antiphon, _Ecce
lignum crucis_, was sung. The _missa præsanctificatorum_ proceeded in
essentially the same manner as at present, except that the elevation is
not expressly mentioned. The altar remained bare from the afternoon of
Maundy Thursday until Good Friday morning. The Gregorian sacramentary in
its original form knew nothing of these rites. It proscribed nothing more
for Good Friday than the nine prayers still in use and a blessing of the
catechumens.
A full description of the whole ritual for Holy Week is to be found in
the first of the ancient Roman Ordos edited by Mabillon, which gives
both the psalmody and the special ceremonies. Mabillon attributes
this ordo to the ninth century.[163] According to it, the psalmody
began at midnight. As on the previous day, the candles were gradually
extinguished, and the sad character of the service was indicated by
the low tone taken for the prayers and by the omission of the _Gloria
Patri_. The consecrated Host was brought back from the place where it
had been reserved the day before, and the _missa præsanctificatorum_
commenced. This consisted of preface, Our Father, the prayer _Libera
me_, the pax, and communion of the people. This last is omitted from the
existing Roman rite. The adoration of the Cross preceded the Mass, as at
present. In monasteries a procession took place within the cloister. The
ceremonies of the Mass here described agree in all essential points with
the Frankish edition of the Gregorian sacramentary, as, for instance,
in the recitation of the _orationes sollemnes_ on both Wednesday and
Good Friday. Thus the earlier liturgical services for Good Friday were
replaced in the ninth century by an elaborate ritual, which agrees in all
important respects with that in use at the present day.[164]
HOLY SATURDAY
This too is a day of mourning, as appears also from the fact that, in the
Eastern Church, it is numbered among the fast days, although originally
in the East no Saturday was kept as a fast. But the sadness of the day is
already modified by the approach of the Resurrection, and the Alleluia,
which has not been heard since Septuagesima, is sung again at the
Mass.[165]
The solemnity begins, as on the preceding days, with the night office,
at which the lights are again extinguished. This custom is very ancient,
but the use of the triangle with the _lumen Christi_ is of later
introduction.[166]
Mediæval writers begin their description of the other ceremonies with
the blessing of the fire, which, even then, was performed early in the
morning. Concerning the origin of this rite, it has been held that it
took place not only on Holy Saturday, but every evening at Vespers.[167]
Still the evidence for this is not sufficiently strong, and, on the other
hand, this rite harmonises in an especial way with Holy Saturday as the
appointed date for the administration of baptism, for which a favourite
name was illumination (_illuminatio_, φωτισμός). The name _illuminandi_
was common also for those about to be baptised.
To the same association of ideas, the Paschal candle certainly owes
its origin. It is not yet clear where we are to look for the origin of
this custom. In Spain, there is evidence to show that the blessing of a
candle or lamp (_lucerna_) on Easter night was common. The fourth synod
of Toledo (633), in its ninth canon, recommends the adoption of this
practice to the churches of Galicia. The Paschal candle is a symbol of
Christ, and is blessed through the chanting of the _præconium paschale_
or _Exsultet_, a grand song of triumph, said to have been composed by St
Augustine. This candle, placed in its own candlestick near the altar, is
lit at High Mass throughout Eastertide. Two prefaces for its blessing are
found in the writings of Bishop Ennodius of Pavia († 521), and mediæval
liturgical writers generally attribute the blessing of the Paschal candle
to Pope Zosimus.[168]
At an earlier period, the special ceremonies of Holy Saturday commenced
in the afternoon, the forenoon being devoted to decorating the church
and preparing for the festival.[169] These ceremonies are, the blessing
of the Paschal candle, the lections from the Old Testament, and the
blessing of the baptismal font, all of which are only preparatory to the
solemn administration of baptism. As has been said, these ceremonies
only commenced towards evening and continued into the night, which was
observed as a vigil (_pervigilium paschale_). When they were concluded,
the neophytes were baptised, and then, also in the night, followed the
Mass of the day. To this the newly baptised, along with the people and
clergy, proceeded in a solemn procession from the baptistery, when there
was one, to the principal church. The Emperor Constantine allowed the
streets and squares of the capital to be illuminated on this night.
He himself as a catechumen passed the night in prayer in his private
chapel, and hallowed the Easter festival by the bestowal of rich alms.
The Mass is entitled in the service-books, _in vigilia paschæ_. Since it
came after midnight, the Alleluia could be sung at it. This arrangement
as regards the time of the Mass still held good in the eleventh century,
for Rupert of Deutz (_De div. Off._, 7, 11) still speaks of it as being
the established practice, and only later on were the above-mentioned
ceremonies and the Mass transferred to the afternoon of Saturday, the
Alleluia thus coming before its time. Upon this followed the psalmody
of Easter, which had to be made as short as possible on account of the
length of these ceremonies. Sermons also were usually short at Easter,
for the same reason.[170]
In the early centuries, the Roman rite was much simpler. The festival
commenced with the recitation of the creed by the candidates for baptism
and a prayer by the Pope over them. Then followed the other preparations
for baptism, the renunciations, four lessons from the Old Testament,
the singing of Psalm xli., two prayers, the blessing of the baptismal
water, the baptism itself, and the confirmation of the baptised. The Mass
concluded the function.[171]
We must now see what special features the other liturgical documents
contained. In the _missale Gallicanum_,[172] we find, after the prayers
for each of the hours, the _Exsultet_, and the blessing of the Paschal
candle, then the general intercessions for all estates of Christian
men, concluding with intercessions for the neophytes and _competentes_.
Upon this follows the baptismal rite (_opus ad baptizandum_), viz., the
exorcisms, the blessing of the baptismal water, the washing of the feet,
and the baptism itself. Then come the prayers for the Mass. The rite in
the _Missale Gothico-Gallicanum_ is exactly the same.[173]
The Gelasian sacramentary prescribes the following rite for Holy
Saturday: Early in the morning, the exorcisms shall be made over the
catechumens, and, after they have made their solemn renunciations, they
shall repeat the creed (_redditio symboli_). About the eighth hour, the
clergy shall assemble in the _sacrarium_, commence the litanies there,
and proceed to the altar; at the _Agnus Dei_, the Paschal candle is to
be lighted and blessed, but without the chanting of the _Exsultet_. Then
the lections from the Old Testament are read, each with a prayer, and
after them takes place the blessing of the font and the baptism of the
neophytes.
According to the edition of the Gregorian sacramentary used in France,
the clergy and people assemble in the church about the eighth hour,
_i.e._ about 2 P.M., according to present reckoning. Two candles were
then lit, which were held by notaries, one on the right, the other on
the left of the altar; while a lector from the pulpit read the Old
Testament lections, each of which concluded with a prayer. Thereupon the
clergy and the bishop proceeded in procession, the notaries with the
candles leading the way, to the baptistery, where the baptismal water was
blessed. After the blessing of the water, which was the same as that now
in use, the baptism followed, at which it is to be observed a distinction
is made between children and those who are grown up. The former were
confirmed also immediately after baptism, the ritual and significance
of confirmation being here clearly shown.[174] After the baptism, the
litanies are sung in the church by singers, who then intoned the _Gloria
in Excelsis_. The Mass of the day brought the function to a close.
Just as the Church marked the anniversary of the dedication of a church
and of ordination by a special festival, so was the anniversary of their
baptism a day of joy and thanksgiving for the baptised. It was also a
day for renewing their baptismal vows, and for serious self-examination.
The Church provided for this inasmuch as she was accustomed to celebrate
this anniversary, and appointed a special Mass for it. It was called the
_pascha annotina_.[175] A festival of this nature had a _raison d’être_
only so long as it was customary to baptise people when they were grown
up. When it became general to baptise little children immediately after
their birth, this festival fell out of use. The _pascha annotina_,
however, appears in the _Homilarium_ compiled by Paul the Deacon by
command of Charlemagne, about 785-90, and in the Sacramentary of Essen,
composed between 850 and 874.
EASTER AND THE EASTER OCTAVE
If one wishes to form a correct idea of the festival of Easter, one must
always bear in mind its close connection with the solemn administration
of baptism. The preliminary ceremonies began on Saturday afternoon and
lasted throughout the night. When the number to be baptised was very
large, the administration of baptism and the Easter festival could be
combined. This connection was lost at only quite a late date, in days
when all remembrance of the grounds for it had died out, and people had
no longer any idea of the catechumenate. The chief and most striking
ceremonies were then transferred to the forenoon, and it is much to be
regretted that, in those centuries, no creative force was forthcoming
to form something in keeping with the altered conditions of the time.
Owing to the alteration in the hour, many of the ceremonies are rendered
meaningless.
The interval thus produced was occupied by the festival commemoration of
the Resurrection, and by a great procession. The latter can easily be
traced back to the solemn procession of the catechumens and clergy from
the baptistery to the cathedral, which took place in primitive times
after baptism. It was probably ignorance of this custom which led later
writers to trace the origin of this procession to the words of Christ to
His disciples: “I will go before you into Galilee” (St Matt. xxvi. 32;
xxviii. 16),[176] directing them to go to Galilee after His resurrection.
The Easter ceremonies varied in different countries and in different
dioceses. The earliest mention of them appears in the _Ordo Romanus_
belonging to the thirteenth century which goes by the name of Cardinal
James Cajetan.[177] It would lead us too far from our subject to describe
them and the other customs formerly observed on Easter Day; besides,
such special points of ritual are better dealt with in connection with
the liturgy itself. We shall here only mention the blessing of food,
especially those kinds of food which, after having been forbidden in
Lent, again become lawful, such as flesh meat in particular, eggs,
cheese, butter, and other things as well. The original object of this
blessing of food was plainly to check the tendency to over-indulgence
which might assert itself after a prolonged period of self-denial.[178]
We must now return to the account of the Gallic pilgrim. She speaks of
processions to the different churches and to the Mount of Olives as
having taken place in Jerusalem not only on Easter Day, but on the other
days of the octave as well. She finds no other points to notice in which
the customs at Jerusalem differed from those observed at her own home.
On the Saturday and Sunday after Easter, the narrative of St Thomas’s
unbelief formed the Gospel, as at the present day.[179]
With regard to the Easter octave, the two first days rank as festivals
of the first class. On Monday, the supper at Emmaus is commemorated, the
Gospel being St Luke xxiv. 13-35; on Tuesday, the appearance of our Lord
and His apostles, narrated in St Luke xxiv. 36-47; on Wednesday, His
appearance by the Sea of Tiberias to Peter and the others, as they were
fishing, St John xxi. 1-14; on Thursday, His appearance in the garden
to Mary Magdalen, St John xx. 11-18; on Friday, His appearance on the
mountain in Galilee, St Matt. xxviii. 16-20; on Saturday, the Gospel
contains the account of the first appearance of Jesus to Mary Magdalen
immediately after His resurrection, St John xx. 1-9.
The following Sunday forms the conclusion of the Easter octave, and,
accordingly, was formerly called simply _octava paschæ_, or _pascha
clausum_, later it was called White Sunday, _dominica in albis_, _scil._
_deponendis_, because the neophytes wore their white baptismal garments
until this day. When Easter ceased to be the day for baptisms, it was
appointed, as being in harmony with White Sunday, that children should
receive their first communion, and renew their baptismal vows. Rabanus
Maurus[180] further observes that in his time confirmation was given on
White Sunday. The prayers during the Easter octave contain references
to the two great sources of festal gladness, the resurrection of our
Lord and the increase in the number of the faithful. The prayers for the
third, fifth, and sixth ferias are specially concerned with the latter,
while the Gospels throughout are occupied with the appearances of our
Lord after His resurrection to His disciples. The Epistles, however, are
either for the most part taken from the Acts, or describe that spiritual
renewal of mankind which follows upon the work of redemption. The prayers
for the whole octave, with the exception of two on Monday, are the same
at the present day as those in the Gregorian sacramentary.[181] For
the following Sundays, until Whitsunday, they only occasionally agree
with the prayers of this sacramentary, being taken bodily, with two
unimportant exceptions, from the Gelasian. The Sundays lead up to the
fulfilment of Christ’s redemptive work and His return to the Father.
The Gospels from the third to the fifth are accordingly taken from the
sixteenth chapter of St John.
Right in the middle of the period anciently called _quinquagesima_, that
is to say on the twenty-fifth day after Easter, or, in other words, on
the Wednesday of the fourth week after Easter, the event recorded in St
John vii. 1 was formerly commemorated in certain churches. In the midst
of the feast of Tabernacles, Christ went up into the Temple and taught
(St John vii. 14). On the last day of the feast, He stood in the Temple
and cried, referring to the usual libation of the Jews on this day,[182]
“If any man thirst, let him come to Me and drink” (v. 37). On this day,
in the Eastern Churches, the rite of blessing the waters still takes
place, which is not to be confused with that which is performed on the
6th January, in honour of the baptism of Jesus in Jordan (_missa aquæ_).
This commemoration is called by the Greeks μεσοπεντεκοστή, _festum mediæ
pentecostes_. The name, as we have already observed, belongs to the
oldest ecclesiastical terminology, according to which Pentecost meant not
Whitsunday but the whole period from Easter to Whitsunday.[183]
6. _The Preparation for Easter—Quadragesima and the Fast_
The chief festivals are usually preceded by a time of preparation,
consisting in many cases of only a single day, the vigil, but the
preparation for Easter extends over nine weeks, and is composed of two
parts, Lent, the more immediate preparation, and the three preceding
Sundays, as a more distant and merely liturgical preparation.
In Lent, it is the fast which plays the chief part, and presents itself
as the essential feature of the whole time of preparation. From it, also,
the other developments take their rise.[184]
There are indications that, in the earliest times, Christians fasted on
all Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year. This pious custom seems
to have been so generally observed that, without having been enjoined
by any formal enactment, it had, so to speak, the force of law. It is
mentioned in the Didaché, in Hermas, and by Tertullian.[185] The latter
calls these fasts “station-fasts,” and mentions that the fast lasted
until 3 P.M. The custom had possibly been adopted from the Jews, for the
Pharisees and Jewish ascetics in the time of Christ were wont to fast
twice a week, on Monday and Thursday.[186]
With regard to the East, Clement of Alexandria mentions[187] Wednesday
and Friday as fast days, and, which is especially remarkable, these days
were also so observed in the period after Constantine, at least for a
great part of the year. The _Didascalia_ enjoins that these days be kept
as fasts in the time after Whitsunday. The preceding season, the fifty
days between Easter and Whitsunday, was a season of unmixed gladness, and
so, according to the _Didascalia_, in Whitsun Week, these days were not
fasts. We are led to the conjecture that this custom fell out of use in
proportion as fasting became otherwise regulated, and the fast of forty
days before Easter became a general law.
That fasting should form an essential feature in the commemoration of
Passion-tide had already been indicated in our Lord’s words (St Matt.
ix. 15): “Can the children of the bridegroom mourn, as long as the
bridegroom is with them?” To which question He Himself replied, “The days
will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then
shall they fast.” The days when the Bridegroom was taken away were held
from the first to be those in which He lay in the grave, Good Friday and
Holy Saturday. In the earliest times, these days were everywhere kept as
fasts, and were observed by all, with exception of the quartodecimans, as
obligatory fasts of the strictest kind.[188]
This fact is supported by a remark of St Irenæus, in an official letter
addressed to Pope Victor (189-99), on the occasion of the second dispute
about Easter. It is given, for the most part, by Eusebius in his history
of the Church.[189] This is the earliest evidence for the fast before
Easter. It shows that the practice had not yet received a fixed and
special form. Some, for instance, thought only one day ought to be kept
as a fast, Good Friday; others fasted for two days, Good Friday and Holy
Saturday—the two days, as Tertullian says, on which the Bridegroom was
taken away. Others again fasted for more than two days (unfortunately, it
is not said for how many), and others reckoned as their fast day, forty
consecutive hours. That is to say, they kept a continuous fast for forty
hours night and day, and regarded this as their fast day.[190] Which
these forty hours were is easy to say, for our Lord lay in the grave
for about forty hours, from the afternoon of Good Friday until Easter
morning, or from Good Friday morning to the evening of Saturday.
Irenæus and Tertullian know nothing as yet of the fast of forty days,
although in their days it was the universal custom to fast, and that
very strictly, on the two last days of Holy Week. About the middle of
the third century, a week’s fast was customary in many places—the entire
Holy Week being fasted on water and bread and salt, while on the last
two days nothing whatever was eaten. The _Didascalia_ describes the fast
in the same way, and also the Apostolic Constitutions (5, 15). After
this manner, accordingly, the fast was observed in Syria, and Dionysius
witnesses to the same practice in Alexandria.[191]