The terminology employed by the official organs of the Church is

naturally of weight in this matter. When the authorities of the Church

made use of a term so little expressive of the nature of the thing as

_missa_, which had already taken the popular fancy, it was inevitable

that it should become the only recognised name for the Mass; and this

is just what happened. On glancing through the canons of the ancient

Councils of the West, we find all the terms with which we are already

familiar—_oblatio_ by the Council of Arles in 314 (Canons 5 and 19), and

_sacrificium_ by the Councils of Carthage (that of 390, Canon 8; that

of 397, Canon 14), etc. We also find the term _missæ_ applied to the

particular parts of the Psalmody,[856] and to the other services composed

of Psalmody and Mass together.[857] As a term clearly and unmistakably

applied to the Mass by itself, _missa_ appears for the first time in the

fourth Synod of Arles in 524 (Canon 4), and then in sundry other Gallic

synods of the sixth century.

On the other hand it must be stated once for all that _missa_ in the

sense of Mass is not to be found in the fourth century. The one solitary

instance which for a long time seemed to countenance such a view is

in a letter of St Ambrose,[858] in which he tells his sister of the

attempts made by the Arians on Palm Sunday 385 to gain possession of the

principal church of Milan. Ambrose was performing divine service, the

homily was concluded, and he was just on the point of dismissing the

catechumens, when the alarming news arrived that the Arians has seized

a basilica situated outside the walls; he did not allow himself to be

upset by the news, but remained where he was, dismissed the catechumens,

and commenced the Mass, during which he received further information

concerning the tumult. The question turns upon the words, “Ego tamen

mansi in munere, missam facere cœpi. Dum offero,” etc. Hitherto _missa_

has here been always taken in the sense of Mass, but it has really the

sense of dismissal. For on Palm Sunday in Milan, the so-called _traditio

symboli_ to the more advanced class of catechumens was performed with

much ceremony, something like a first Communion with us; on this day a

twofold dismissal of the catechumens was necessary, the first of the

lower class of catechumens, because they must not yet learn the creed

which was now to be recited by the more advanced, and then followed the

dismissal of the more advanced catechumens, the _competentes_, because

these, as being still unbaptised, could not yet assist at the Mass.

Against this interpretation it has been urged[859] that _missa_ must

mean Mass, because, the act of dismissal being so short, Ambrose

could scarcely have said, “Missam facere cœpi,” had he meant only the

dismissal of the catechumens. How long an act must continue in order

that its beginning, middle, and ending may be observable depends upon

circumstances, but the dismissal of the _competentes_ was sometimes far

from brief. The Apostolic Constitutions, for instance, give a formula

for this act, and the prayers used cover three printed pages (_Constit.

Apost._, 8, 5, § 6 to 6, § 4). At the dismissal of the candidates for

baptism, three prayers were recited (_ib._ 8, 7, § 2, to c. 7, § 1), one

by the deacon, one by the catechumens, and one by the bishop, who then

gave his blessing. Then followed an address by the bishop, of which we

have two examples, in the 215th and 216th of the sermons of St Augustine.

The act lasted long enough to have a beginning, middle, and ending.

From what has been said, we conclude, _missa_ appears in the fourth

century as a technical name for the various parts of divine service,

especially for the canonical hours. During the sixth and seventh

centuries it became a technical term for the Mass, and gradually usurped

the place of other names for the Mass. These, however, survived in

isolated instances until the ninth century, but disappeared entirely in

the Middle Ages.

VI

(p. 142)

ON THE DATE FOR CHRISTMAS IN HIPPOLYTUS

Considering the uncertainty as to the day of our Lord’s birth shown by

Clement of Alexandria, and the reserve which Irenæus and Tertullian

maintain on the same point, it is surprising to find the most precise

data given for its determination by a writer very little posterior to

those just mentioned. In the commentary of Hippolytus on Dan. iv. 23 (in

Bratke’s ed., 19), we read in the text discovered in 1885; “The first

Advent of our Lord in the flesh, when He was born in Bethlehem, happened

on the eighth day before the calends of January, on a Wednesday, in the

forty-second year of Augustus, in the year 5500, reckoning from Adam. He

suffered in His thirty-third year, on the eighth day before the calends

of April (25th March), on a Friday, in the eighteenth year of Tiberius,

when Rufus and Rubellius were consuls.”[860]

Not merely the astonishing minuteness of the data, but also the

circumstance that this passage is to be found in a shorter form in a

fragment, long well known to scholars, preserved in the Chigi Library in

Rome, coupled with the fact that ancient ecclesiastical writers quote

from it the year of world alone,[861] must give rise to doubts concerning

the longer form of the passage in itself, as well as concerning the

separate data of which it is composed.

If we turn our attention first to these separate data, we find the names

of the consuls wrongly given; their names are Fufius and Rubellius, not

Rufus and Rubellius. Mistakes in the names of consuls are certainly

not rare in Eastern writers, but in the case of a man like Hippolytus,

who lived in Rome, such a mistake is very astonishing, since he could

easily have found out the right names. Next, according to the authentic

Hippolytus, our Lord’s life lasted only thirty-one years, and not

thirty-three; this appears from the passage in the so-called _Liber

Generationis_ representing in a Latin translation part of the “Chronicle”

which, according to the inscription on his statue, Hippolytus had

composed.[862] Again, the eighteenth year of Tiberius is also wrong. The

forty-second year of Augustus and the two week-days may be correct (see

_Comm. Dan._, 4, 9; in Bratke 8), for the latter appear also in the same

connection in the inscription on the statue. Wednesday found acceptance

as the day of Christ’s birth owing to the Messias being called in Malachy

iv. 2, “the Sun of Justice,” from which it was inferred that He must have

been born on the same day of the week as that on which the visible sun

had been created (Gen. i. 19).

But, moreover, the days of the week have been interpolated into the text,

since they do not fit in with the sequence of thought but rather disturb

it. The aim of Hippolytus was here to calm the Christians agitated by

the persecution of Severus; many went so far as to think that the last

day was close at hand, and Hippolytus opposed himself to this alarm by

declaring God had created the world in six days, with God a thousand

years are as one day (Ps. lxxxix. 4), and thus the world would last six

thousand years. Until the birth of Christ only five thousand five hundred

years had passed, and so the end of the world was not to be expected yet.

In such a train of thought, what place is there for days of the week

and consulates? The late origin of the passage is also betrayed by the

parallel grouping of the data given, for elaborate attempts of this kind

were popular in the Middle Ages, but not in primitive times. Accordingly

only the year 5500 of the world, and perhaps also the forty-second year

of Augustus, belong to the original form of the passage in Hippolytus,

all the rest having being added by a later hand.[863]

VII

(p. 158)

CHRISTMAS IN ENGLAND DURING THE COMMONWEALTH

Christmas was abolished in England in the seventeenth century during

the reign of the Puritans, and its prohibition was strictly enforced.

In 1644, after the overthrow of the monarchy, when the Puritans came

into power, an Act of Parliament forbade all observance of Christmas,

for it was held that Christmas was not originally a Christian festival

at all, but was of heathen origin. Parliament directed that the 25th

December, “which had hitherto been commonly called Christmas Day,” was

to be kept as a fast. This law remained in force for sixteen years,

and during this period the enactment was repeated and made still more

stringent. No church dare be opened, no service of any kind held; the

law expressly enacted that on Christmas Day everyone was to go on as

usual with his work, and every merchant who shut his shop on this day

was brought before the judge and punished. Markets were held on this day

which had hitherto been held on other days, merely to make it impossible

to keep the day as a festival. Plum-pudding and mince pies were branded

as heathenish inventions. The soldiers were charged to break into houses

in order to see that no one had food in his home such as used to be

eaten at Christmas and when anything of this kind was discovered, the

soldiers were to seize it and the people were punished into the bargain.

There were naturally some who refused to abstain from the celebration

of Christmas in obedience to these directions of the Parliament; many

ministers performed service in their churches and several of them were

taken before the judge and punished. In different places disturbances

broke out, especially owing to the orders of Parliament that markets

were to be held on Christmas Day while they were forbidden on other days

of the week. In Canterbury, for instance, there was a general riot; the

whole town was divided into two parties—those who observed Christmas

and their opponents, and the festival of peace ended in a general row;

many houses of the town were totally destroyed and some set on fire.

Charles II. made it his aim to revoke as quickly as possible the laws

passed during the Commonwealth, and so before long Christmas was once

more observed as before. The Nonconformists, however, long held by

their determination not to celebrate Christmas, and they kept a sharp

look-out that at least their ministers should eat no Christmas pudding

or mince pies; they called Yuletide Fooltide. In Scotland, Christmas

is still regarded as something heathenish; the Presbyterians will have

nothing whatever to do with its celebration, and throughout the country

no special notice is of it as a religious feast. [This, of course, only

refers to the Protestants of Scotland. Trans.]

VIII

(p. 173)

EXCURSUS ON THE THREE HOLY KINGS

Epiphany is a feast of our Lord and not the feast of the Three Holy

Kings, although it is popularly called so, and, in the liturgy for the

day, they are referred to. In a small number of dioceses, and only at a

late date, they have been the object of a cultus, but in the calendars

and menologies of the principal Churches they find no place; ancient

ecclesiastical literature and tradition has also nothing to relate of

them. Only in the twelfth century did they emerge from oblivion when

the imperial chancellor, Rainald von Dassel, afterwards Archbishop of

Cologne, translated their reputed relics to Cologne, 23rd July 1164,

having received them as a gift from Frederick Barbarossa after the

destruction of Milan. Until this time they had rested in the little

Church of St Eustorgius at Milan, to which they are said to have been

brought from Constantinople. The life of St Eustorgius, Bishop of Milan,

315-331, relates how this happened:—there lived in Constantinople a pious

man called Eustorgius, a Greek by birth, and a favourite and adviser of

the emperor. (The name of the emperor is passed over in silence by the

author.) He sent Eustorgius as ambassador—the purpose of the embassy is

not disclosed—to the province of Liguria, of which the capital is called

Milan—which, however, is a mistake. Eustorgius won the affections of the

Milanese to such a degree that they desired to have him as their bishop;

after long resistance he consented, and went to the emperor in order

to obtain his approval. The emperor rejoiced over the love which his

ambassador had inspired, as Gratian had rejoiced over the appointment

of St Ambrose, ratified the election, and forthwith remitted all taxes

to the Milanese (!). Eustorgius was unwilling to return empty-handed

and begged for some relics from the emperor with which to enrich his

bishopric. The emperor allowed him to take whatever he liked, and he

chose the relics of the Three Holy Kings, which had been sent from the

East by Helena. A church was now built in Milan in which the relics were

laid, where they attracted a great concourse of pilgrims and devotees.

The author regrets that he is not in a position to give us further

information concerning the doings of Bishop Eustorgius, but he merely

tells us that he died on the 18th October and was succeeded by Dionysius.

This is incorrect for Protasius came first. The author of this document

must have lived in Milan, for he gives some correct dates in the

ecclesiastical history of Milan; nevertheless, gross blunders against

historical truth and other indications show that we are dealing with a

thoroughgoing fabrication of the eleventh century based upon events in

the life of St Ambrose. The names Gaspar, Melchior, Baltassar make their

first appearance here. A still more naïve account is given in a sermon

belonging to the end of the twelfth century, Eustorgius being made a

contemporary of the Emperor Comnenus; this is printed in Floss.

Contemporaries who had the opportunity of seeing the relics, state that

the remains were embalmed and incorrupt; to judge from the face and hair,

one of the bodies was that of a boy of about fifteen years; they were

in an excellent state of preservation considering their age. The story

of their translation to Milan is obviously a romance and the search for

their bodies by Helena is formed upon the recognised model according

to which Helena steps in to effect what cannot be otherwise explained.

And so there is no doubt that we are face to face with a remarkably

successful fabrication, such as were, unfortunately, by no means rare in

the Middle Ages. In Cologne, the Three Holy Kings—all three of them—were

at once set down as martyrs, although it is difficult to see how they

would have suffered, granting them to have been kings. The Carmelite John

of Hildesheim composed a popular _Vita Trium Regum_, composed in a simple

style, which was widely read. See USENER, ii. 7-10, and the instructive

treatise of H. J. Floss, “Dreikönigenbuch,” Cologne, 1864. The _Vita

Eustorgii_ is only to be found in Mombritius, _Sanctuarium_, i. 166.

IX

(p. 182)

THE GREEK ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR

The Greek ecclesiastical year begins not with Advent but with Easter, or

rather with the season preparatory to Easter, _i.e._ according to our

phraseology, with Septuagesima Sunday.[864]

Κυριακὴ τοῦ τελώνου καὶ φαρισαίου. The Sunday of the Publican

and the Pharisee; so called on account of the Gospel for the

day, St Luke xviii. 9-14.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ ἀσώτου or προσφωνήσιμος. The Sunday of the Prodigal

Son, the Gospel being St Luke xv. 11-32.

Κυριακὴ ἀπόκρεως,[865] corresponds with Septuagesima Sunday of

the Latins, and is called Abstinence Sunday because with it

Lent with its abstinence from flesh-meat commences. The week

following is called Butter-Week by the Russians, because the

use of _lacticinia_ is still permitted. The Gospel, St Matthew

xxv. 31-46, refers to Christ’s return at the last judgment. On

this account, the Sunday is also called κυριακὴ τῆς παρουσίας.

Κυριακὴ τῆς τυροφάγου. Sunday of Cheese-Eating, because

from henceforth the use of _lacticinia_ is also forbidden

(Sexagesima of the Latins).

Κυριακὴ πρὼτη τῶν νηστειῶν ἢτοι ὀρθοδοξίας. The first Sunday in

Lent, called Orthodox Sunday in memory of the conclusion of the

iconoclastic controversy (corresponding to Quinquagesima).

Κυριακὴ δευτέρα, τρίτη, τετάρτη, πέμπτη τῶν νηστειῶν. The

second to the fifth Sundays in Lent, corresponding to the first

to the fourth of the Latins.

Κυριακὴ τῶν βαΐων: Palm Sunday from βαΐς a palm.

Ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη πέμπτη: Maundy Thursday.

Ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη παρασκευή: Good Friday.

Τὸ ἅγιον καὶ μέγα σάββατον: Holy Saturday.

Ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη κυριακὴ τοῦ πάσχα: Easter Day; ἡ ἕβδομας

διακαινήσιμος, _i.e._, the Week of Renewing, Easter Week.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάσχα καινή: Whitsunday, called also νέα

κυριακὴ τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου Θωμᾶ, as the Gospel relates St

Thomas’s unbelief, St John xx. 19 _seqq._ At the end of mass

blessed bread is distributed to the people.

Κυριακὴ τῶν ἁγίων μυροφόρων γυναικῶν καὶ Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ δικαίου: the

Sunday of the Women who brought incense and Joseph the Just.

See St Mark xvi. 1-7; St Luke xxiv. 1-10.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ παραλύτου: the Sunday of the palsied man. See Acts

ix. 32 _seqq._

Κυριακὴ τῆς Σαμαρείτιδας or Μεσηπεντηκοστῆς: the Sunday of the

Samaritan woman, from the Gospel St John iv. 1-42.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ τυφλοῦ: the Sunday of the man born blind; the

Sunday before the Ascension.

Τῇ πεμπτῇ τῆς Ἀναλήψεως with the following week, ἕβδομας

άναλήψιμος.

Κυριακὴ τῶν ἁγίων 318 θεοφόρων πατέρων τῶν ἐν Νικαίᾳ

συνελθέντων, dedicated to the commemoration of the first

general council; the Sunday after Christ’s Ascension.

Κυριακὴ τῆς ἁγίας πεντηκοστῆς, Whitsunday.

Κυριακὴ τῶν ἁγίων πάντων: our Trinity Sunday is among the

Greeks kept as the festival of All Saints, and is preceded by a

fast. From this onwards until the exaltation of the Holy Cross,

the 14th September, the gospels for the Sundays are taken from

St Matthew. Hence the sixteen following Sundays are called

Matthew-Sundays.

Κυριακὴ δευτέρα to δεκάτη τετάρτη τοῦ Ματθαίου.

Κυριακὴ πρὸ τῆς ὑψώσεως: Sunday before the Exaltation of the

Holy Cross (the 15th after Matthew).

Κυριακὴ μετὰ τὴν ὕψωσιν: Sunday after the Exaltation of the

Holy Cross (the 16th after Matthew).

Κυριακὴ πρώτη τοῦ Λουκᾶ to κυριακὴ δωδεκάτη τοῦ Λουκᾶ, also

called the Sunday of the Holy Patriarchs (τῶν προπατόρων).

Κυριακὴ πρὸ τὴς Χριστοῦ γεννήσεως: the Sunday before Christmas,

also called the Sunday of all the Holy Fathers.

Ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ γέννησις: Christmas.

Κυριακὴ μετὰ τὴν Χριστοῦ γέννησιν: Sunday after Christmas.

Ἡ τοῦ κυρίου περιτομή: the Circumcision.

Κυριακὴ πρὸ τῶν φώτων: the Sunday of Lights. See above, page

168. The Sunday before Epiphany. Among the Latins a _dominica

vacans_.

The remaining four Sundays of the Greek ecclesiastical year serve to fill

up the inequality due to Easter falling earlier or later, in the same

manner as in the Latin rite. One, two, or all four of them, as occasion

requires, are inserted after Epiphany. They are the Sundays (1) κυριακὴ

μετὰ τὰ φῶτα, the first after Epiphany, which is pressed into use when

Easter falls in March; (2) the twelfth Sunday after St Luke; (3) the

fifteenth after St Luke (the two Sundays in the Christmas season are

reckoned as the thirteenth and fourteenth after St Luke since their

gospels are taken from that evangelist); (4) the seventeenth Sunday after

St Matthew. All four are required when Easter falls on the 22-25 April.

In this way the gaps between the end of the old ecclesiastical year and

the beginning of the new are filled up.

As far as the immovable feasts are concerned, the Greeks divide all

feasts, both movable and immovable, into four classes. The first and

highest class contains: Christmas, Epiphany (6th January), Candlemas (2nd

February, ὑπαπάντη τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν), the Annunciation (ὁ εύαγγελισμός),

Easter, Palm Sunday, the Ascension, Pentecost, the Transfiguration,

the Assumption (ἡ κοίμησις, 15th August), our Lady’s Nativity (8th

September), the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (14th September), and the

_Presentatio B.M.V._ (21st November).

Somewhat lower in rank are the _Circumcisio_, _Nativitas S. Joannis

Bapt._ (24th June), SS. Peter and Paul (29th June), and the _Decollatio

S. Joannis Bapt._ (29th August). It is not necessary here to enumerate

the remaining feasts.

X

(p. 248)

ENGLISH WRITERS AND THE FEAST OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

The well known Doctor of the Church, Anselm, was born of a German stock,

as his name implies, at Aosta in 1036. In 1053 he entered the Benedictine

order at Bec in Normandy where Lanfranc was at that time abbot. In 1078

he was himself elected abbot of the monastery, and in this capacity was

brought into relation with William the Conqueror and William Rufus.

During an illness of the latter, he was chosen Archbishop of Canterbury

at the end of 1093 and his appointment was confirmed by the king. Serious

misunderstandings soon arose between them on the questions of investiture

and Church property, and Anselm was obliged to go to Rome, where he

remained until the king’s death. Further misunderstandings, moreover,

soon arose between him and William’s successor, Henry I., which detained

him in France, until an agreement was arrived at in 1106, by which he was

enabled to return to England and to his bishopric. He died there on the

21st April 1109.

His nephew, Anselm the younger, came from Lombardy, and as a youth

had entered the monastery of St Michael at Chiusa, and received his

theological training from the Benedictines of Canterbury.[866] After

his uncle’s death, he was for a short time abbot of St Saba in Rome. In

1115 he was chosen by the pope to bring the pallium to the newly elected

Archbishop of Canterbury, Radulf. As legate, he strongly maintained the

rights of the pope in the election of bishops, and consequently fell

under King Henry’s displeasure, and had to retire to France until a

reconciliation had been effected between the King and Pope Calixtus II.

He was then elected abbot of Bury St Edmond’s and confirmed as such in

1121. Here he remained until his death on the 11th January 1148. The

attempt of a section of the chapter of St Paul’s in 1136 to make him

bishop led to no result, but rather caused him much annoyance.

The Anglo-saxon, Eadmer or Edmer, was a disciple and faithful attendant

of the older Anselm. Born in Kent, he entered the monastery at Canterbury

and accompanied Anselm in his banishment to Rome. After Anselm’s death,

he lived in retirement from which he emerged for a short time in 1120

to be Bishop of St Andrews in Scotland. But after a year he resigned

and returned to his monastery, where he died after 1124. He wrote a

history of England, a number of lives of English saints, and some

theological treatises, two of which were in praise of the Mother of God

(_De Excellentia Virg. Mariæ_ and _De Quatuor Virtutibus Mariæ_). It

has been recently conclusively proved that he is also the author of a

treatise on our Lady’s conception (_De Conceptione S. Mariæ_), hitherto

generally attributed to one or other of the two Anselms.[867] In his

work on the Excellences of our Lady, in which her share in the work and

sufferings of Christ is brought into prominence, Eadmer adopts a neutral

position with regard to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and

admits the possibility that she was purified from original sin only

at the Annunciation. In the last-named composition, however, which

advocates the introduction of the festival, he endeavours to establish

the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and defends it warmly, and

not unskilfully, against many objections, having, as he says, upon more

mature consideration of the matter, recognised its correctness. The

circumstance that this is the first treatise which aims especially and

avowedly at defending this opinion, endows it with a special interest.

XI

(pp. 243, 347)

EXCURSUS ON THE SO-CALLED TYPICA

The term _Typicum_ is used first of all by Greek liturgists and

rubricists to denote those short parts of the liturgy which are composed

of verses from the psalms in connection both with the Canonical Hours

and with the Mass, there is nothing exactly corresponding in the Western

rite. (Leo Allatius, _De Libris Eccl. Græc._, 14, 15. Daniel, _Thes.

Lit._, iv. 313, 319). _Typicum_ is also used as a technical term, in

the Eastern Church especially during the Byzantine period, in the sense

of statute, regulation, etc. It was applied chiefly to two kinds of

documents. First, it designated the catalogues of the possessions of

ecclesiastical establishments and corporations, especially in so far

as they were based upon testamentary donations, along with the duties

entailed by them upon the clergy. _Typica_ of this kind were called

(κτητορικά), and correspond to the chartularies and “traditiones” of

Western monasteries and bishoprics. Secondly, _typicum_ was a term of a

liturgical character, and as such must be considered here. _Typica_, in

this sense, were the lists of the feasts recurring in the course of the

year, of liturgical observances, fasts, etc., such as were to be observed

in one of the larger churches or monasteries, along with detailed

descriptions of each; they correspond to the _consuetudines_ of Western

monasteries and cathedrals.

_Typica_ of this last kind exist in large numbers, although only a

few of them have been published, and these not in editions useful for

critical purposes. The best known and most important are: (1) the

_Typicum S. Sabæ_; (2) that belonging to the monastery of the Studium at

Constantinople; and (3) that formerly belonging to the famous Monastery

of St Auxentius in Bithynia, now Ka-ish-dagh, dating from the time of

Michael Paleologus († 1268).

The _typicum_ of St Sabas is sometimes valuable as a source of liturgical

information, and for its references to the festivals of the Church, but

it is only to be used with the greatest caution. It derives its name not

so much from St Sabas himself as from the monastery called after him near

Jerusalem. Leo Allatius gives the following account of its origin from

a dialogue of Simeon of Thessalonica; St Sabas drew up an order for the

canonical hours and divine service to be observed in his monastery; this

“_diatyposis_” was destroyed owing to the ravages of the Saracens, but

was re-established by the patriarch Sophronius from memory, and retouched

by St John Damascene; later on it was altered yet again to meet the

requirements of the time. In the sixteenth century it was printed for

practical purposes, as, for example, in Venice in 1545. In this form the

_typicum_ contains the order for divine service throughout the year for

monasteries following the rule of St Sabas, rubricks for the canonical

hours, the fasts and festivals, with information as to the liturgy to

be used, the gospels and epistles, the menology, instructions on the

canonical hours, etc., also rules of life and statutes for the monks

and selected passages from the Greek Fathers. It received its present

form apparently from John _Grammaticus_ in Constantinople in the twelfth

century, and cannot, of course, be regarded as a work of St Sabas. This

cannot be appealed to for evidence concerning ecclesiastical customs in

use before the twelfth century.

In the Eastern Church _typica_ are issued from time to time, somewhat

corresponding to our directories.

With regard to the literature on this point, it is well to mention:

Theodoras Toscanus, _Ad Typica Græcorum Animadversiones_, Romæ, 1864.

Pitra in _Spicil. Solem._, iv. 466 _seqq._ Ehrhard, _Röm. Quartalschr._,

1893. Krumbacher, _Byzant. Zeitschr._, ii. 348; iii. 167 _seqq._ Waldemar

Nissen, _Die Diataxis des Michael von Attalia von 1077_, Jena, 1894.

Meyer in the _Theol. Literaturztg._ of Shürer and Harnack, 1894, 588

_seq._, and 1896, No. 10. Gedeon, Μιχαὴλ τοῦ Παλαιολὸγου τυπικόν, etc.,

Constantinople, 1895.

FOOTNOTES

[1] The Greek word ἑορτή had become associated with the ideas of paganism

and mere enjoyment. Christians called the week-days following on a Sunday

_feria secunda_, etc. This use was already established in Tertullian’s

time.

[2] J. BARTH, _Babel und das israel. Religionswesen_, Berlin, 1902. See

SCHMID, _Die Kirche und die Sonntagsruhe_: Innsbr. Zeitschr. f. Kath.

Theol., 1901, 436 _et seq._ LINZER, Theol. Quartalschrift, 1900, 12.

[3] Num. xxviii. 9, 10; Ezec. xlvi. 3, 4.

[4] See the article “Sonnabendfeier,” by KRÜLL, in Kraus’

_Realenzyklopädie_.

[5] Heb. iv. 9; Acts xiii. 27; xviii. 4.

[6] Apoc. i. 10; 1 Cor. xvi. 2.

[7] EUSEB., _De Mart. Pal._ 1; see BAILLET, IX. x.-xiv.

[8] Acts xx. 7 _seq._; 1 Cor. xvi. 2.

[9] _E.g._, “Et facta oblatione fit missa” (c. 38, p. 68).

[10] EUSEB., _De Pasch._, c. 7; see c. 12a. E. MONTFAUCON, _Introduction

to Eusebius’ Commentary on the Psalms_, Paris, 1707. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._,

xxiii. 51.

[11] TERT., _De Orat._, 14. SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, 6, 8. DUCHESNE,

218-22.

[12] OVID, _Fasti_, i. 79. LEO M., _Sermo_, 41, 1. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,

liv. 272; BINTERIM, v. 134.

[13] BARNABAS, _Epist._, 15. IGNATIUS, _Ad Magn._, 9. JUSTIN, _Apol._, i.

67.

[14] _Peregr. Silviæ_, 102, 71 cod.; ed. Geyer, c. 44, 2.

[15] EUSEB., _Vita Const._, 4, 19, 20.

[16] _Hist. Eccl._, i. 18, towards the end: ἐνομοτέθησε, τῶν δικαστηρίων

καὶ τὼν ἂλλων πραγμάτων σχολὴν ἂγειν.

[17] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, _de feriis_ 1. Law of 321.

[18] _Op. cit._, 2, 8, 18; 8, 8, 3; 11, 7, 13. In these laws Sunday is

still called “dies solis,” but with the addition, “quem dominicum rite

dixere majores.”

[19] _Op. cit._ 15, 5, 5, _de spectaculis_.

[20] _Chron._, _Pasch._, ad a 467.

[21] For instances, see BAILLET, ix. art. 1, c. 5 _et seq._

[22] _Vita Const._, 4, 18.

[23] _Constit. Apost._, 2, 59; 5, 20; 7, 23 and 30; 8, 33. TERT., _De

Orat._, 20.

[24] _Laod. can._, 29: εἴγε δύναιντο σχλάζειν. This Council was held

between 343 and 381. For further particulars, see BINTERIM, v. 134-52.

[25] EUSEB., _Vita Const._, 4, 19.

[26] _Op. cit._ 4, 23.

[27] _Const. Apost._, 2, 59; 8, 33.

[28] _Op. cit._ 7, 37.

[29] THOMASSIN, i. 2, c. 2, 176 _seqq._

[30] Council of Rouen (650), Can. 15. _Decr. Grat._, Can. 1, dist. 3,

de consecr.; Can. 10, _de feriis_, 3, 9. For the variations in the

observance of the Sabbath, see ALT., 10 _seqq._

[31] Lev. xxiii. 24.; 3 Kings viii. 65.; 2 Chr. xxix. 17.; xxx. 22.

[32] IDELER, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i., Berlin, 1825, 515.

[33] BÄUMER, 325 _et seq._

[34] _Micrologus_, 43. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cli. 1010. There are,

however, still exceptions to this rule, _e.g._, St Cornelius, St

Silverius, etc. Moreover, the above regulation only took effect in the

city of Rome.

[35] BÄUMER, 314, 354.

[36] _Op. cit._ 325.

[37] _Op. cit._ 499.

[38] Appendix i.

[39] _De Bapt._, 19.

[40] _C. Cels._, 8, 22.

[41] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 1, 19.

[42] _Cod. Justin._, 3, 12, No. 6.

[43] _Op. cit._ 3, 12, No. 7, compared with _Cod. Theod._ 2, 8, 19.

[44] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 20.

[45] _Op. cit._ 15, 5, 2.

[46] _Op. cit._ 2, 8, Nos. 20, 21, 25.

[47] _Op. cit._ 15, 5, No. 5, compared with 2, 8, 24.

[48] _Op. cit._ 2, 8, 23.

[49] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 13-20; compare 8, 13. CHRYS., _Hom. 4 Pentec._

PROCLUS, _Or._ 3, 1. PHILASTRIUS (_De Hær._, 141) enumerates eight

festivals, because he adds the Wednesday in Holy Week.

[50] GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. Franc._, 10, 5. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxi. 566.

[51] The 27th or 28th March was frequently regarded in the Gallic Church

as the actual date of the resurrection of Christ, and the 25th March as

the date of His death.

[52] SONNATIUS, _Statuta_, c. 20. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxx. 446.

[53] HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, i. 73. HARD., iii. 1944. MANSI, xii. 383.

[54] _Conc. Aquisgr._, Can. 19. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvii. 326.

BINTERIM, _Conc._ ii. 331.

[55] BINTERIM, _op. cit._ 466. HARD., iv. 1241. MANSI, xiv. 393.

[56] _Capit. Hettonis._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 763. BINTERIM, _Denkw._,

v. 302.

[57] HARTZHEIM, _Conc._, l. 44. See also ii. 612, 692.

[58] _Op. cit._ iii. 221, Can. 6. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxviii. 832.

[59] BURCHARD, _Decreta_, 2, 77. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxl. 640. IVON.,

_Decret._, 4, 14. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxli. 260.

[60] See Appendix ii. (a).

[61] Can. 1, dist. 3, _de Consecr._, taken from a Council of Lyons.

[62] Can. 5, x., _de Feriis_ 2, 9. The feasts of Our Lady are the same as

in _Decretum Grat._

[63] See Appendix ii. (b).

[64] In the diocese of Lyons, for example, in 1577 there were no fewer

than ninety-nine days of this kind, including Sundays, Easter and

Pentecost being observed each for three days. See MIGNE’S _Handbook_, 347.

[65] BINTERIM, _Conc._, vi. 118 and 524; _Denkw._, v. 1, 303, etc.

BINTERIM and MOOREN, _Die Erzdiözese Köln im Mittelalter_, i., Köhn,

1892, 526. HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, v. 106; vi. 498. Further information

is contained in the collections of Church Councils. See the Council of

Szabolcs in Hungary, 1092 (i. cap. 37 and 38; MANSI, xx. 757); Oxford,

1222, can. 8; Toulouse, 1229, cap. 26; Worcester, 1240; the statutes of

Le Mans (MANSI, xxiii. 764); the Councils of Liège, 1287; Würtzburg,

1298; Utrecht, 1347; Prague, 1355 (HARTZHEIM, iii. and iv.), and BAMBERG,

1491 (tit. 36; HARTZHEIM, v. 619), which, with fifty-four holy days of

obligation besides Sundays, represents the _non plus ultra_ in this

direction.

[66] See Appendix ii. (c).

[67] Printed by SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii., Amstel. 1679, c. 15, 204.

[68] Dist. 3, _de Conscr._, Can. 1 Conquestus, _de Feriis_. See also

Matisconense, Can. 10.

[69] THOMASSIN, i. 131 _seqq._

[70] FERRARIS, _Prompta Bibl._, iii., art. Festa, §§ 2 and 3.

[71] _De Novis Festivitatibus non Instituendis._

[72] HOSPINIANUS, 18. THOMASSIN, i. c. 11; _De la diminuation du nombre

des fêtes_.

[73] J. FESSLER, Concerning the suppressed Holy Days, in the _Archiv

für Kirchenrecht_, v. (1860) 194. SCHÜCH-GRIMMICH, _Handbuch der

Pastoraltheol._, 10th ed., 338 _seqq._

[74] _Bull. Rom. Contin._, ix., Romæ, 1846, 120.

[75] These briefs of Clement XIV., Pius XI., and Leo XII., are printed in

DUMONT, _Sammlung kirchl. Erlasse für d. Erzd. Köln_, 2nd ed., 199 _seqq._

[76] See Appendix iii.

[77] Alt., 454.

[78] This Calendar contains twenty-six days in addition to the chief

feasts. See the table in the Book of Common Prayer.

[79] _Sermo_ 47, in Exod. In omnibus solemnitatibus Christianis non

ignoramus paschale sacramentum esse præcipium.

[80] _Sermo_ 48, c. 1.

[81] BEDA, _De rat. Temp._, 1, 5.

[82] Exod. xii. 11; Num. xxviii. 16.

[83] EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 4, 33.

[84] _De Orat._, c. 18.

[85] By Pascha, TERTULLIAN probably understands Holy Week and Easter Week

together, as a time during which each day had its liturgical celebration,

“collecta,” which was not the case generally. Similarly, Quinquagesima

means the period from Easter to Whitsunday.

[86] _Adv. Mar._, 4, 12; _De Jeiun._, 14. _Cf._ _De Bapt._, 19; _De Cor._,

3.

[87] _De Jeiun._, 14.

[88] _Adv. Marc._, 5, 7.

[89] _Philos._, 8, 18.

[90] _Can. Arab._, 22.

[91] MAI, _Nova Coll. Vet. Script._, iv. 208; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._ xxiv.

694.

[92] _Vita Const._, 3, 17, _seqq._

[93] Exod. xii. 42.

[94] Exod. xii. 6-8.

[95] Lev. xxiii. 7, 8.

[96] _Ibid._ ver. 10 _et seqq._

[97] Isa. liii. 7 _et seq._

[98] Exod. xii. 46; St John xix. 36.

[99] 1 Cor. v. 7, 8.

[100] Col. ii. 16.

[101] JUSTIN, _Dial._, c. 40, 111. TERT., _Adv. Marc._, 4, 40; 5, 7.

[102] The Greeks of the province of Asia, for example, voluntarily

adopted the Julian Calendar under Augustus, according to an inscription

discovered at Priene. _Révue Archéol_, 1900, 357. Mitteil. des kaiserl.

archäol. Instits at Athens, 1899.

[103] IDELER, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i. 433.

[104] _Op. cit._ 142.

[105] IDELER, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i. 113, 117, 119.

[106] So IDELER, who is certainly an authority, _Handbuch der Chronol._,

i. 570 _et seq._

[107] JOSEPHUS, _Ant._, i. 1, 3: ἐν χρίῳ τοῦ ἡλίου χαθεοτῶτος. IDELER,

_op. cit._ 401, 514, 570.

[108] Nilles (p. 286) expressly declares himself opposed to the feast of

Easter being fixed on a stated Sunday in April. According to information

given in the _Kölnischen Volkszeitung_ for the 22nd May 1894, the

Barnabite Cæsar Tondini is said to be at work upon a reform of the

Calendar, the chief features of which are the giving a fixed date for

Easter and the transferring of the extra day in leap year to the end of

the year. He is of opinion that this reform will be acceptable to the

Russians also.

[109] St Luke xix. 29 _seqq._; St John xii. 1 _seqq._

[110] Among the Fathers, St Ambrose, more especially, deals with the

question of the day of the week and day of the month on which the Last

Supper took place. _Cf._ _Epist._ 23, written in 386. He says the Last

Supper was held on the 14th Nisan which was a Thursday, on the 15th,

Christ was crucified, and, on the 17th, He rose again. The day of His

death must be kept in sorrow and fasting. Therefore the two events

cannot be commemorated on the same day, and Christ’s death cannot be

commemorated on a Sunday. If the 15th Nisan falls on a Sunday, Easter

must be postponed to the following week. When Johannes Philoponus, in the

treatise _De Paschate_ (ed. C. Walter, Leipzig, 1899) makes our Lord keep

the Last Supper on the 13th Nisan and celebrate not the old, but a new

mystical passover, and then says: Τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων (St Mark xxvi. 17)

means τῇ πρώτῃ πρὸ τῶν ἀζύμων.

HARNACK and SHÜRER, _Theol. Literaturztg._, 1900, No. 4.

[111] _Etymol._, 6, 17, 10; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxii. 247.

[112] EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 4, 21; 5, 27.

[113] Twenty-first Festal Letter, for the year 349, in Larsow 33.

[114] _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 27.

[115] _Adv. Hær._, 70, c. 12: Μία γὰρ ἡμέρα παρ’ ἐκείνοις ζητεῖται, παρ’

ἡμῖν δὲ οὐ μία ἀλλὰ ἕξ, ἐβδομὰς πληρεστάτη, etc.

[116] _loc. cit._ c. 11.

[117] _Ep. ad Januarium._, 55, c. 1-3.

[118] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 47-51.

[119] _De Ord. Fer._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xc. 607.

[120] For a full account of the ceremonies, etc., belonging to this part

of the Church’s year, see _Lent and Holy Week_, by H. THURSTON, S.J.,

London, 1904. [Trans.]

[121] _Matiscon_, 2, 3.

[122] _Cf._ _Ordo I._, 7. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 954, 994 _et

seqq._

[123] HEFELE, _Konciliengesch._, 2nd ed., Freiburg, 1877, iii., 36, 42,

577, 596.

[124] _Peregrinatio Silviæ_, c. 30, ed. Geyer, 67 cod., and CHRYSOST.,

_Hom. 30 in Gen._, 10 t. 4. fol. 29. BINTERIM (_Denkw._ v. 179) prefers

to derive “Karwoche” from “carena,” which in the Romance languages has

taken various forms (carême carenzia) and also in the old German is found

as Karina, in reference to the strict fast then observed.

[125] Nor in the Antiphonarium Greg., to which BINTERIM (_Denkw._ v. 174)

refers.

[126] _Peregr. Silviæ_, c. 30, 31, ed. Geyer, 64 cod. Since the pilgrim,

in describing the size and strength of the Euphrates (c. 18, p. 61, 11),

recalls the Rhone, it seems certain she belongs to Southern France. I use

the expression, “Gallic pilgrim,” as her name may have been either Silvia

or Egeria. She travelled in the East between 378 and 394.

[127] Hora decima. _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 35.

[128] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 36-38, p. 67-69 cod.

[129] The name was usual in Spain. MABILLON, _De Lit. Gal._, 32. MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 186, quotes for it ISIDOR., _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 28.

[130] According to MIGNE (_Handbuch_, 671) in several dioceses of France

it is not even yet the custom.

[131] I have arrived at the conclusion that in the missal in the

cathedral library at Cologne (cod. 88), the _benedictio palmarum_ has

been added by another hand. In the Essen cod. D.I., it appears in the

first part (fol. 45), but in neither of the other parts.

[132] _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 28. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxiii. 763. ISIDORE

makes no mention of carrying palm branches in the church, as DUCHESNE (p.

237) implies, but he does speak in this passage of the _traditio symboli_

and of the _capitilavium_ which in Spain were both performed on Palm

Sunday.

[133] _De Off. Eccl._, 4, 10. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 1008.

[134] ISIDOR., _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 27.

[135] MABILLON, _Lit. Gall._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 265. _Cf._ Synod

of Agde (506), can. 13.

[136] AMBROSIUS, _Epist._, 20, c. 4.

[137] _Sacr. Geb._, 1, 35, 36. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1088.

[138] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 58, c. 11. “Ideo die sabbati”: _Sermo_, 212, c.

1, 2.

[139] Avitus († 518), in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lix. 302, 309, 321-326.

Eligius († between 640 and 659), _Hom._, 10. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,

lxxxvii. 628.

[140] _Kirchenlexikon_, v., 2nd ed., 1309, art. Gründonnerstag by PUNKES.

[141] MARTÈNE, iii., 237, 346, 352. Incipiat cantor cum cappa _viridi_

missam, presbytero, diacono et subdiacono indutis ornamentis _viridibus_,

etc. Also WICKHAM LEGG, whose pamphlet on the _History of the Liturgical

Colours_ (London, 1882) is only concerned with the last three centuries,

shows (p. 21) that green was used in many places, in Mainz among others.

[142] _Cf._ App. iv.

[143] _e.g._ by GREG. of Tours, _Hist. Franc._, 8, 43; festa Dominicæ

Cœnæ.

[144] MARTÈNE, _De Ant. Eccl._, iv. 22; ed. Antw. 1727, iii. p. 227

_seqq._, where the prayers over the penitents are given in full.

[145] An offerendum sit mane et rurus post cœnam ... an jeiunandum et

post cœnam tantummodo offerendum, an etiam jeiunandum et post oblationem

sicut facere solemus cœnandum. AUGUSTIN., _Epist._, 54 _ad Januarium_, c.

4; 11, 302.

[146] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1102.

[147] MURATORI, ii. 55 and _Ordo I._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 951.

[148] _Pseudo-Alcuin._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ci. 1205 _et seq._

[149] Oleum in altari sanctificatum. CYPRIAN, _Epist._, 70, c. 2.

[150] So called from St John xiii. 34: mandatum novum do vobis. The

washing of the feet preceded vespers. Each monk had to wash the feet

of the poor, and, lastly, the abbot and prior washed the feet of the

brethren. _Consuet. Farf._, 49. [Hence the English name for the day.

Trans.]

[151] _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 29. _Lit. Mozar._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv.

406.

[152] ST AUGUSTIN., _Conf._, 8, 5; de loco eminentiori.

[153] _Epist._, 23, c. 12. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 1030.

[154] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 18; ἡμέρα, γάρ εἰσι πένθους ἀλλ’ οὐχ ἑορτῆς.

[155] This is also the custom in the Russian Church. “The priests wear

black vestments during the whole service on Good Friday, as a sign of

grief for the death of the Redeemer.” (MALTZEW, lxxxiv.) By the law of

2nd Sept. 1899, in Prussia, Good Friday was made a general public holiday.

[156] His dissertation is incorporated in the treatise, _De Divinis

Officiis_ of the pseudo-Alcuin (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ci., 1211 _et

seqq._). He is also the author of the short treatise _De Computo_ (MIGNE,

cxxxvii. 18 _seqq._). Trithemius wrongly locates him in the eleventh

century.

[157] _Epist. ad Decentium Eng._, 25, c. 2: Constat apostolos biduo isto

in mœrore fuisse et propter metum Judæorum occuluisse. Quod utique non

dubium est, in tantum eos jeiunasse biduo memorato, ut traditio ecclesiæ

habeat, isto biduo sacramenta penitus non celebrari. Sacramenta here

means masses, as well as Sacramentarium Missale. It appears that the

two last days of each week in Lent were without a celebration of the

liturgy, for the Pope continues: Quæ utique forma per singulas tenenda

est hebdomadas, etc.

[158] MALTZEW, lxxxvi. _et seqq._

[159] _Missale Gothico-Gallic._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 267.

[160] AMALARIUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 15; Et inde communicet populus. De

qua observatione interrogavi Romanum archidiaconum et ille respondit:

In statione ubi apostolicus salutat crucem, nemo ibi communicat. MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, cv. 1032. _Ordo Rom. I._ (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii.

954) has the general communion (et communicant omnes cum silentio).

RABANUS MAURUS (_De Cleric. Instit._, 2, 37) mentions the other

ceremonies (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cvii. 349).

[161] Adnuntial diaconus ut supra. _Sac. Gelas._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,

lxxiv. 1105.

[162] _Liber Sacramentorum_, ed. Menard. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii.

79, 86 _et seq._

[163] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 57.

[164] _Vide_ Appendix iv.

[165] Among the Greeks it is continued during Lent. MALTZEW, lxxxvi.

[166] It first appears in _Ordo Rom._, xiv. _n._ 94 (13th cent.). MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 1218. BINTERIM, _Denkw._ v. 221.

[167] This view is maintained by THOMASSIN, 330 _seq._ Against this

BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 214) rightly defends the opinion that the blessing

of the new fire was unknown in Rome in the eighth century. This appears

from the answer of Pope Zacharias to the inquiry of St Boniface on the

point. It was only introduced at Rome by Leo IV. The ecclesiastical rite

seems to have been moulded on the “Osterfeuer” in use among the Germans.

The most ancient Roman sacramentaries know nothing of it.

[168] In the life of Zosimus († 418) it only says: “Per parrocia concessa

licentia cereum benedici.” It is doubtful if these obscure words refer to

the Paschal candle. _Cf._ DUCHESNE, _Lib. Pont._, i. 225.

[169] “Hoc autem die inclinante ad vesperam statuta celebratio noctis

Dominicæ in ecclesia incipitur,” etc. (RABANUS MAURUS, _De Cleric.

Instit._, 2, 38; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cvii. 350). “Post nonam (3

p.m.) vestiantur omnes qui ad sacram aliquid habuerint legendi,” etc.

(_Consuet. Farf._, ed. Albers, 55). The _Constit. Lanfranci_ give the

same hour (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._ cl. 466). According to _Ordo Rom._, x.

App., No. 16, the ceremonies began at hora sexta (noon). The Greeks and

Russians have their Mass after their evening service or Vespers. MALTZEW,

xciii.; HEFELE, _Beiträge_, ii. 291.

[170] _Cf._ AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 228 in die paschæ V._: “Post laborem noctis

præteritæ ... diu vos tenere sermone non debeo.” In Africa the baptism

took place in the night between Saturday and Sunday, _Sermo 214_, c. 1.

[171] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 61-66.

[172] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 364-71.

[173] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 268-77.

[174] MIGNE, lviii. 90. _Ordo Rom. I._ (_ib._ 951 _et seqq._) gives the

later ritual directions for the three last days of Holy Week.

[175] BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 247) thinks it was not observed when the

anniversary of the previous Easter fell on Lent.

[176] So DURANDUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 6, 88. In the _Consuet. Farf._ (ed.

Albers), 58, a solemn procession of the monks in the monastery and in the

church is also mentioned.

[177] _Ordo Rom._, xiv. c. 95; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 1219. Some

of the customs approached the dramatic, _e.g._, MARTÈNE, iii. 483, 506

_et seq._

[178] THALHOFER, _Liturgik_, ii. 2, 551. For ancient and popular customs,

see MIGNE, _Handbuch_, 662 _et seqq._

[179] _Peregr. Silviæ._, ed. Geyer, c. 39 and 40. In many dioceses of

France processions were made throughout the entire week (MARTÈNE, iii.

510).

[180] _De Cleric. Instit._, 2, 39; KNÖPFLER, 138.

[181] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 67-75. The designation of the

several days of Easter week differs only in form from that now in

use. The ferias are called “feriæ in albis,” the Sunday after Easter,

“Dominica post albas, scil. depositas.”

[182] This consisted in pouring out at the altar water drawn from the

pool of Siloe (WINER, _Bibl. Realw._, ii. 8).

[183] Athanasius, translated by LARSOW, 94, and for the whole subject,

Nilles: Innsbr. _Zeitschr. für kath. Theol._, 1895, 169 _seqq._

[184] The history of fasting, abstinence, and kindred subjects is

excellently given by BAILLET (ix. 37-130), according to the information

at his disposal. Of more recent works, FUNK, _Die Entwicklung des

Osterfastens in seinen kirchengeschichtlichen Abhandlungen_, Paderborn,

1897, 241-70.

[185] _Didaché_, c. 8; HERMAS, _Simil._, 5, 1; TERT., _De Jej._, c. 2,

10, 14.

[186] “Jejuno bis in sabbato” (St Luke xviii. 12); DUCHESNE, _Orig._,

218; FUNK, _Anm. zur Didaché_, 8, 1.

[187] _Strom._, 7, 74, ed. Sylburg.

[188] TERTULLIAN, _op. cit._ 2, 13, 14.

[189] EUS., _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 24, 11-18.

[190] Οἱ δὲ τεσσαράκοντα ὥρας ἡμερινάς τε καὶ νυκτερινὰς συμμετροῦσι

τὴν ἡμέραν αὐτῶν (EUSEB., _op. cit._). FUNK, _op. cit._ 242 _et seq._,

defends the above interpretation of the passage against Probst.

[191] Origen cannot be quoted for the fast of forty days, for the

evidence attributed to him is really that of his translator, Rufinus.

_Cf._ FUNK, _op. cit._

[192] Ἀπονηστίζεσθαι δεῖ οὗ ἂν ἐμπέσῃ κυριακή. This passage is not

quoted in the treatise of Funk already referred to. His conclusions must

accordingly be modified.

[193] LARSOW, _Festbriefe deshl. Athanasius_, 62.

[194] _Op. cit._ 69.

[195] _Op. cit._ 127.

[196] LARSOW, _Festbriefe deshl. Athanasius_, 149.

[197] _De Paschate_, c. 4.

[198] _Peregr. Silviæ._, ed. Geyer, c. 27, 28 (60-62 cod.).

[199] _De Elia._, c. 10.

[200] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 13.

[201] _Op. cit._ 5, 18, 19.

[202] _Op. cit._ 5, 15, § 1.

[203] LEO M., _Sermo_ 40, 5.

[204] _Sermo_ 48, 1.

[205] _Sermo_ 44, 2; 47, 1.

[206] _Aurel. I._, A.D. 511, can. 24; _Aurel. IV._, A.D. 541, can. 2.

[207] AUGUSTIN., _Epist. ad Januarium_, c. 4; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ii.

202.

[208] _Trull._, 55.

[209] _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 22. SOZOMEN (7, 19) and CASSIODORUS (_Hist.

Misc._, 9, 38) have merely copied Socrates.

[210] TERT., _De Jej._, 2, 10, 13, 14, etc.

[211] _Didaché_, c. 8; CLEMENS ALEX., _Strom._, 7, 12; ORIGEN, _C.

Celso._, 8, 21.

[212] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 15, 20; 7, 23; _Can. Apost._, 69 (68).

[213] _Can. Arab._, 20.

[214] _Alt._, 123.

[215] AUGUSTIN., _Epist._, 36, _n._ 8; INNOC. I., _Epist._, 25, 7; MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, xx. 555; PRUDENT., _Perist._, 6, 52.

[216] RAHMANI, _Test. I. Chr._, 1, 22, 33; 36, 71.

[217] GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. Franc._, 10, 51; AMALARIUS, _De Off. Eccl._,

4, 37; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 1250.

[218] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, ii. 589.

[219] _De Jej._, c. 1, 2, 5, 9, 12, 17.

[220] HIERONYMUS, _Epist. 27 ad Marcellam_.

[221] _Can. Arab._, 22.

[222] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 18.

[223] _Peregr. Silviæ_, c. 28, 4.

[224] _Hom. de Statius_, 3, 4.

[225] _Decr. ad Bulg. Epist._ 97, c. 4; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvii. 980.

BINTERIM, _Denkw._ v. 2, 160 _seqq._ Dist. 3, de consecr. de esu carnium.

Dist. 5, c. Quia dies.

[226] FERRARI, _Prompta Bibl._, art. Abstinentia, 1, 42.

[227] Since the fasts were very strictly observed in the Middle Ages, it

was a custom to have an especially good meal in the day or evening before

they began. Hence the German expression “Fastnacht.” Unfortunately the

Fastnacht is not limited nowadays to one night, but lasts for three days,

and even, where possible, right into Ash-Wednesday.

[228] The rubric, according to which Vespers, from the First Sunday in

Lent onwards, are to be said _ante comestionem_, also belongs to the more

primitive arrangement.

[229] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1065.

[230] _Hom. I._ 16 _in Evang._, c. 5; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxvi. 1137.

[231] _Sacram. Gelas._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1076 _et seqq._

[232] See, however, fer. iv. after _Lætare_: “Effundam super vos aquam

mundam,” and the Saturday before Passion Sunday: “Sitientes venite ad

aquas.”

[233] LANFRANC, _Decreta_, sectio 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 453; RUPERT

TUIT., _De Div. Off._, 4, 9; HONORIUS AUG., _Gemma_, 3, 46; DURANDUS,

_Rationale_, 1, 3 (this last speaks of two such curtains—cortinæ).

HEUSER, _Art. Fastentuch_, in _Kirchenlex_., iv., 2nd ed., 1255;

SCHRIVER, _Der Dom zu Osnabrück_, etc., 1901; MALTZEW, _Triodion_, vi.

[234] For the Transfiguration, see BAILLET, v. 104; BÄUMER, _Gesch. des

Breviers_, 299, 355; MARZOHL U. SCHNELLER, iv. 653 _seqq._

[235] Πανέορτος ἡμέρα: EUSEB., _De Sol. Pasch._, c. 5; MIGNE, _Patr.

Gr._, xxiv. 699; SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, 7, 26: πάνδημος ἑορτή. On can.

43 of Elvira, _cf._ p. 110.

[236] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 18.

[237] _Epist. ad Januarium_, 54, c. 1; _Sermo_ 261-65.

[238] CYRILL. HIEROS., _Catech._, 14, c. 23.

[239] _Peregr. Silviæ_, 70 cod., ed. Geyer, c. 42.

[240] ADAMNAN., _De Locis Sanctis._, 1, 22; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,

lxxxviii. 803.

[241] CHRYSOST., _Sermo in Ascens._, ed. MONTFAUCON, ii. 2, 420.

[242] St Luke xxiv. 60, where εἰς βηθανίαν means, in the direction of

Bethania. Acts i. 12; Heb. vi. 14; ix. 24; Eph. iv. 9; Col. iii. 1.

[243] _Cf._ the commentary of Schanz, _in loc._

[244] When CHRYSOSTOM (_Hom. in Acta Apost._, 3, 1) places our Lord’s

Ascension on Saturday, it may be that he reckoned the interval after

the Resurrection as consisting of forty full days. One is not justified

in concluding, as some do, that in Antioch the Ascension was kept on

Saturday.

[245] TERT., _De Orat._, c. 23; _De Cor._, 3.

[246] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, b. 41 (69 cod.).

[247] The aim of the forty-third canon of Elvira seems to be the

abolition of this custom. A later addition to the canon adds: “post

pascha quinquagesima teneatur, non quadragesima.” The date of this

addition is unknown. HEFELE-KNÖPFTER, _Konziliengesch._ ii., 2nd ed.,

174. Dr HERBST (_ibid._) thought the reference was to the Montanists, but

even if there were any Montanists in Spain at that period, their heresy

could scarcely be called “Nova.”

[248] _Cf._ MURATORI, ii. 750-58, and 873.

[249] Exod. xxxiv. 22; Deut. xvi. 10.

[250] 2 Mac. xii. 32; Acts ii. 1; Joseph., _Antt._, 3, 10, 6.

[251] LEO M., _Sermo 75 in Pentec._; AUGUSTIN., _Epist. 56_, c. 16 _Ad

Disqu. Januarii_, 2, 218.

[252] TERT., _De Cor._, 3, and _De Bapt._, 19, where probably “latissimum

spatium,” and not “lætissimum,” is the correct reading.

[253] TERT., _De Bapt._, 19; _De Idol._, 14; CASSIAN., _Coll._, 21, 11,

19; _Bened. Regula_, 15.

[254] TERT., _De Jej._, 14.

[255] TERT., _De Bapt._, 19: “pentecoste qui est proprie dies festus.”

[256] _Can. Arab._, 22.

[257] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 43 [70] cod.; _cf._ 44, 2.

[258] MARTÈNE, _De Ant. Eccl. Rit._, iv. 28, 441-543.

[259] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 272 ad infantes_.

[260] MARTÈNE, iv. 28, 441-543.

[261] According to the _Consuet. Farf._ (ed. Albers, 73), a Mass for

the dead was to be celebrated in the forenoon; at mid-day the brethren

were to rest, and then about 2 P.M. begin the lesser hours, which were

followed by the High Mass. Afterwards came a meal.

[262] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 20, 7: Τὴν πεντεκοστὴν ἐορτάσατε μίαν

ἑβδομάδα.

[263] _De Off. Missæ_, c. 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlii. 1062.

[264] _Conc. Mogunt._, A.D. 818, can. 36.

[265] MURATORI, ii. 95: Die dominica vacat; ii. 164: Dominica prima

post pentecosten; ii. 321: Dominica octavæ pentecosten (sic). For the

_Gelasian Sac._, _cf._ i. 606.

[266] C. 59 and 60; MIGNE, cli, 1019.

[267] Vid. the _Præfatio_ of Froben to Alcuin 11 in MIGNE, cl. 440.

Similar votive Masses for each day—Sunday, in honour of the Trinity, and

on the week-days in honour of the angels, of the wisdom and of the love

of the Holy Ghost, of the Holy Cross, and of our Blessed Lady—are found

in the _Liturgia Fontavellanensis_ (MIGNE, cli. 938).

[268] BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 270) rejects the view that Alcuin had

anything to do with the matter, and considers that the festival was

introduced not through him, but through a certain Catulfus at the court

of Charlemagne. The well-meant but rather obscure letter of this Catulfus

is printed in MIGNE, xcvi. 1363. Careful consideration of the passage in

question shows he is speaking of the honour of the Trinity in general,

and not of any festival of the Holy Trinity.

[269] _Cf._ the so-called Mass of Alcuin (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 445).

The circumstance that the present preface of the Trinity appears in the

Vatican MSS. used by Muratori, and is printed in his _Liturgia Rom.

Vetus_ (11, 285, and 321), can easily have given rise to mistakes.

[270] Potho of Prüm (1152) has an interesting remark to which Hospinian

draws attention: “Miramur satis, quod visum fuerit hoc tempore

quibusdam monasteriis mutare colorem optimum novas quasdam inducendo

celebritates.... Quæ igitur ratio hæc festa celebrandi nobis induxcit,

festum videlicet s. trinitatis et festum transfigurationis Domini?

Additur his a quibusdam, quod magis absurdum videtur, festum conceptionis

S. Mariæ” (_De Statu Domus Dei lib._; DE LA BIGNE, _Magna Bibl. Vet.

Patrum_, ix. 588). One must make allowances for Potho’s standpoint. He

set himself energetically against the monks having the cure of souls or

any say in the administration of the Church, as detrimental to their

vocation to the contemplative life. On the same grounds, he set himself

against all alterations in the rule, and all innovations in the festivals

of the Church’s year.

[271] Cap. 2, x. _de feriis_, 2, 9, § 3.

[272] BAILLET (ix. 2, 158) considers this office was then a new

one, though based upon one of the three ancient offices. BINTERIM,

265 _seqq._, and BÄUMER, 298 (where, however, a few statements need

correcting) take a different view.

[273] _Vita S. Julianæ ab auctore coævo conscr._, 1, c. 2, in Acta SS.

Boll., April 1, 473-75, with its _Prolegg._, 442.

[274] The letter of this synod is printed in BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 1,

276 _et seqq._ For the original office so far as it is extant, _cf._

_ibid._ 284.

[275] The bull “Transiturus” is contained in the Constitution of Clement

V. in 1311 (_Clementini_, 3, 16). It is also in Labbe’s Councils (xi.

1, 817). _Cf._ Bened. XIV., _Institutiones Constit._, v. 20, for the

procession.

[276] BINTERIM has brought forth fresh evidence in favour of the fact,

which many have questioned (_op. cit._ 282, and vii. 1, 77).

[277] HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, iii. 699.

[278] LANFRANCI, _Decreta_, sec. 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 456 _et

seq._ [_Cf._ GASQUET, _Parish Life in Med. England_, viii. 171.—Trans.]

[279] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, vii. 3, 367 _et seqq._; J. GRETSER, _De

Processionibus_, 2, 19; BINTERIM, _Geschichte der Konzilien_, _etc._,

v. 368. The synod of Cologne in 1452 forbade the Blessed Sacrament to

be carried round the church in a monstrance on other days than Corpus

Christi (_op. cit._ vii. 486).

[280] _Acta Vetera Eccl. Rotom._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlvii. 123.

[281] P. JOERRES, _Beiträge zur Gesch. des Fronleichnamsfestes_;

_Römische Quartalschrift_, 1902, 170 _et seq._; SDRALEK, _Die

Strassburger Diözesansynoden_, _Strassb. theol. Studien_, ii. 1, 121.

[282] HOEYNCK, _Gesch. d. K. Liturgie des Bist. Augsburg_, 229 _et seq._

[283] MAUREL, _Ablässe_, Paderborn, 1874, 238.

[284] HOEYNCK, _op. cit._ 231. For a description of the Roman use, _cf._

MIGNE, _Handbuch_, 304 _et seqq._

[285] The oldest pictorial representation of the Corpus Christi

procession is probably that contained in the chronicle of the Council of

Constance, by ULRICH of Richental (49 _et seqq._). The original MS. is

in the Rosgarten Museum at Constance; it is reproduced in No. 158 of the

_Stuttgart Literar. Verein_ of 1882 (Photolitographie by H. Bach). It

represents the procession as it took place during the council in the year

1415. The monstrance is carried by two ecclesiastics on a sort of small

platform.

[286] _Cf._ BENED. XIV., _Institutiones_, 30, 206, and the article of P.

NORBERT, “Ord. Cap.,” in the _Katholik_ for August 1898, 151.

[287] NILLES, _De rationibus festorum SS. Cordis Jesu et Pur. Cordis

Mariæ libri quattuor_, 5th ed., Œniponte, 1885; NIX, art. “Herz Jesu und

Mariä” in the _Kirchenlexikon_, v., 2nd ed., 1921 _et seqq._; BÄUMER, 525

_et seq._

[288] CASSIAN, _Coll._ 10, c. 2: “Mos antiqua traditione servatus.”

[289] USENER, i. 1, 320, has investigated the circumstances which

attended the introduction of Christmas in different countries, and his

conclusions have met with entire recognition from HARNACK, _Theol.

Literaturztg._, 1889, 199, _et seqq._, and from DOM SUITBERT BÄUMER,

_Katholik_, 1890, i. 1-15. Exception was taken to certain points by

DUCHESNE, _Bull. Critique_, 1890, No. 3. These circumstances have been

already dealt with by BAILLET, viii. 582 _et seqq._

[290] EPIPHANIUS, _Adv. Hær._, 2, 1; _Hær._, 51, c. 16 and 24.

[291] _Cf._ c. 26, ed. Geyer, 60; ed. Gamurrini, 84.

[292] C. 49, ed. Geyer; ed. Gamurrini, 109.

[293] LAMY, _Ephræmi Syri hymni et sermones_, i., Mechl., 1882, 10, on

the Benedictus, 2, 415. This hymn is translated into German by Zingerle

in the _Kempten Bibl. d. Kirchenväter_, ii. 27.

[294] _Cf._ HEFELE, _History of Councils_, vi., 1st ed., 504, 575, etc.

[295] GREGOR, _Naz. Hom. 38 in Theophania_; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xxxvi.

[296] John, Bishop of Nicea, in COMBEFIS, _Hist. Hær. Monoth._, Paris,

1648, 306. BAUMSTARK (_Oriens Christ._, 1902, 441-446) is in favour of

the date 398 to 400.

[297] GREGOR, Nyss., _Or. Fun._; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xlvi. 789. _Cf._

_ib._, 701 and 725. Basil was dead before 1st January 379.

[298] The date 386 depends upon the order of the sermons referred to.

Usener, who places them at unnecessary wide intervals, gives 388, Clinton

387, Combefis, Montfaucon, and Tillemont 386. The period from February to

December is ample for the above sermons.

[299] CHRYSOST., _Hom. in Nativ. I. Chr._; MONTFAUCON, ii. 352; MIGNE,

_Patr. Gr._, x. 2, 351.

[300] Τὸ ταχέως οὔτω πανταχοῦ περιαγγελθῆναι. Ταχέως does not contradict

ἄνωθεν, for Chrysostom distinguishes between the knowledge of the day

of Christ’s birth and its solemn celebration. The former had been known

for ages in Rome, but the celebration of the festival, on the contrary,

had spread rapidly in all directions, and this rapid diffusion of the

festival shows in its turn that the 25th December is really the day of

Christ’s birth.

[301] _Cod. Justin._, 3, 12, 6.

[302] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 27. _Cf._ the law of the year 425, _ib._, 15,

5, 5.

[303] COMBEFIS, _Hist. Hær. Monoth._, 304: Ἐξ ἐκείνου δὲ ἔλαβεν ἀρχὴ ἡ

τῶν Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησία τὴν ἡμὲραν τῶν γενεθλίων τοῦ σωτῆρος. Combefis was

the first to discuss the question, and his disquisition is excellent,

though now forgotten. _Cf._ MIGNE, viii. 964-968. Combefis has also

collected all the material for the history of Christmas in his _Bibl.

Patrum Conc._, 300 _et seq._

[304] COMBEFIS (_Hist. Hær. Monoth._, 302 and 314, A. 4) considered it

suspicious.

[305] RONCALLI, _Chronica Vetustiora_, Introd., xxix.

[306] Bucherius, in its Latinized form.

[307] JOS. STRZYGOWSKI, _Die Kalenderbilder des Chronographen vom Jahre

354_, with 30 plates, Berlin, 1888, published for the Archeological

Institute. The rest is to be found in _Mon. Germ. Hist. Auctores

Antiquissimi_, t. ix., vol. i., fasc. i., Berol., 1891. The Natales

Cæsarum and the Calendar are printed in the _Corp. Inscr. Lat._

[308] MOMMSEN, _Abhandl. der Sächs. Akademie d. Wissensch._, 1850, 1,

618. The figure XIII. signifies the Epact. This proves that the 1st

January fell on a Saturday, and that B was the dominical letter.

[309] _L’Art de vérifier les Dates dep. J. Chr._, I. 111.

[310] [This refers to the ancient practice of dating the years of an

emperor’s reign, not from the actual date of his accession, but from the

New Year’s Day either preceding or following his accession. The years

of the emperor’s reign were thus brought into artificial agreement with

the calendar year. Numbering the years of the emperor’s reign from the

actual date of his accession is, in Mommsen’s phrase, taking them as

_effektiv_.—Trans.]

[311] I have attempted to show how this difference is to be explained in

an article in the _Innsbr. Zeitschr. für Kath. Theologie_, xv. (1891),

519 _et seqq._

[312] Vid. Appendix vi.

[313] St Luke i. 5, 8.

[314] 1 Esdr. vi. 18.

[315] _Antiq._ vii. 14, 7.

[316] _Antiq._ vii. 11, 7, 1; 12, 6, 4; 7, 6. 1 Mach. i. 57; iv. 18.

[317] So LAMY (_Apparatus Chronol. et Geogr._, 61) referring to the

Tractate _Erachin and Taanit_.

[318] JOS., _Bell. Jud._, 4, 8, 5; 4, 5. According to IDELER (i. 400,

433) Josephus employs the Syro-Macedonian names of the months, not with

the intention of adjusting them to the Julian Calendar, but merely as

Greek names for the Jewish months.

[319] The attempt to fix the time of Christ’s birth by the help of

the course of Abia was undertaken by Scaliger, abandoned as useless

by Petavius, resumed by B. Lamy. In modern times, it was resumed by

SEYFFARTH (_Chronol. Sacra_, Leipsig, 1846, 97 _et seqq._), WEIGL

(_Theol. und Chronol. Abhandlungen über das wahre Geburts- und Sterbejahr

Christi_, Sulzbach, 1848), and STAVARS (_Tüb. Theol. Quartalschr._, 1866,

201 _et seq._).

[320] HIERON, _Opera_, ed. Migne, xi. 220. It is evident from St Jerome’s

commentary on Ezechiel that his views on the subject were not those of

the preacher of this sermon. The sermon for the 25th December, published

by Morin (_Anecdota Mareds._, iii. 2, 392, _et seqq._), agrees with the

sermon quoted above.

[321] CLEMENS ALEX., _Strom._, i., ed. Sylburg, 340.

[322] CYPRIANI, _Opera_, ed. Hartel, ii. 266.

[323] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_ 190, 1; 192, 3; 196, 1.

[324] Luke ix. 13 _seqq._

[325] AMBR., _De Virg._, 3, 1; MIGNE, xvi. 219.

[326] PAULINUS, _Vita Ambr._, c. 4, and his life in the Benedictine

edition of his works, c. 7. The chronology of the youthful period of St

Ambrose’s life is unfortunately obscure.

[327] _Conc. Cathag._, iii. can. 4; BRUNS, i. 123.

[328] USENER (272 _seqq._) starts with the preconceived opinion that

Liberius delivered his address on the 6th Jan. 353, and so is of opinion

that Christmas was celebrated for the first time in Rome on the 25th

Dec. 353. On the other hand, DUCHESNE (_Bull. Crit._, 1890, No. 3, p. 41

_seq._), having the circumstance in view that the Depositio Episcoporum

begins the year with the 27th Dec. and the Depositio Martyrum with the

25th Dec., thinks he has proof for holding that the 27th Dec. for a long

time already, indeed even from about 243, had been a marked day in the

Church’s Calendar, and, accordingly, that the 25th Dec. had been kept as

the Natalis Domini as early as the third century. We leave these points

to the reader’s discretion. Christmas was kept in Rome certainly before

353.

[329] MOMMSEN, _Röm. Gesch._, v. 481.

[330] MARQUARDT-MOMMSEN, _Röm. Altert._, vi., 2nd. ed., 588.

[331] Hospinian (fol. iii.) and others held that the 25th December was

chosen purposely in order to supplant the Saturnalia. But the Saturnalia

did not last over the 25th, although Maximus of Turin seems to think it

did.

[332] _De Orat. Dom._, 35.

[333] SERMO, 7, 1, 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvii. 614.

[334] ZENO VER., _Tract._, 2, 9, 2, calls Christ “Sol noster, sol verus.”

GREGOR. I., _Hom._, 29 _in Evang._, c. 10: “Quis solis nomine nisi

Christus designatur?” PRUD., _Cathem._, 11, 1: “Quid est, quod arctum

circulum sol jam recurrens deserit?” GREGOR. NAZ., _Orat. in S. lumina_,

calls Christ the sun.

[335] On the Vigil: “Sidus refulget jam novum”; at Lauds: “Orietur sicut

sol salvator mundi”: in the Preface: “Per incarnati Verbi mysterium nova

mentis nostræ oculis lux tuæ claritatis infulsit”: on the octave: “Tu

lumen et splendor Patris”; in the hymn: “In sole posuit tabernaculum

suum”; in the antiphons: “Hodie descendit lux magna in terris. In sole

posuit tabernaculum suum,” etc.

[336] MAXIMUS TAUR., _Hom._, 103; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lvii. 491.

[337] _Peregr. Silv._, 82 (59 cod.), ed. Geyer, c. 25.

[338] _Peregr. Silv._, 84 (60), ed. Geyer, 77. In c. 49, No. 3, the chief

festivals are Easter and Epiphany.

[339] In Ezech. 1, 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xxv. 18, written about A.D.

411.

[340] COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES, ed. Galland. Bibl., xi. 461; MIGNE,

lxxxviii. 198.

[341] So USENER, who quotes a passage from a sermon of Basil of Seleucia.

MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 469.

[342] COSMAS, _op. cit._ 462.

[343] _Evangeliarium Hierosol._, 482, 494. See USENER, 323, 327.

[344] COMBEFIS, _Hist. Hær. Monoth._, 314 A, 4.

[345] _Peregr. Silv._, 84 (60), ed. Geyer, 77.

[346] GREGOR TUR., _Microl._, 1, 88; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxi. 783.

[347] COMBEFIS, _op. cit._ 302 E.

[348] _Opera_, ZENONIS VER., ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xi. lib. 2, tract

7-9. Lib. i. tract 13 may be spurious.

[349] _Sermo 10 de sanctis_ according to the old enumeration, _sermo 220

inter suppos._ according to the new.

[350] _Peregr. Silv._, 84 (60).

[351] See Append. vii.

[352] MATISCON. 1, can. 9; TURON., 11, can. 27. _Cf._ GREGOR. TUR.,

_Hist. Franc._, 10, 31.

[353] _Synaxarium_ of MICHAEL of Atriba, under 15th November.

[354] GREGOR. M., _Hom. in Evang._, 1, 1, 6, 7, and 20. MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, lxxvi. 1078 _et seqq._ CABROL (_Révue Bénéd._, 1905, 1, 1),

thought he had discovered traces of Advent in the fifth or even in the

fourth century. It is best to reserve judgment until clearer evidence is

forthcoming.

[355] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 133-135 and 342-346.

[356] Printed by Gerbert, _Lit. Allem._, 410-416, which also contains

the _Evangelarium_ of SPIRES, 8th Cent., 417-444, and _Kalendarium_ of

FRONTEAU, 155 _et seq._

[357] AMALARIUS, _De Eccl. Off._, 3, 40; 4, 30. ABBO, _Apolog._ MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, cxxxix. 472.

[358] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 139. BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 167.

[359] Thus the Comes Pamelii in RANKE’S supplement and the old

lectionaries of Cologne, Treves, and Münster. See SCHUE, _Die bibl.

Lesungen_, etc., Treves, 1861, 129 _et seqq._

[360] Since 1893, the third Sunday after Epiphany has also a special

character owing to the Feast of the Holy Family falling on it.

[361] See the critical edition of C. A. WILSON (Oxford, 1894), p. 9.

[362] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 198_, c. 1. “Vos quasi solemniter hodie convenire

conspicimus.”

[363] _Turon._, 2, can. 17, 22; _Antissiod._, can. 1.

[364] TOLET., 4 (633), can. 11; _Lex Visigoth._, ii. tit. i. 12, and xii.

3, 6; Mon. Germ. Leges Sect. 1, tom. i. 1, 59 and 434. MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, lxxxi. 478.

[365] MIGNE, i. 212, col. 70-73 for the text. See HEUSER,

_Kirchenlexikon_, iv., 2nd ed., 1395 _seqq._ The so-called Feast of

Asses, about which so much has been written, was a harmless affair. It

took its name from semi-theatrical performances inspired by passages of

Scripture which happen to mention an ass.

[366] In this document it is called “Natale S. Mariæ.”

[367] WIEGAND, 27.

[368] _Tractat._, 1, 13.

[369] LEO I., _Sermo 2 de Epiph._ FULGENTIUS, _Sermo_. MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, lxv. 732.

[370] AMMIANUS MARCELL., 21, 2.

[371] CLEMENS ALEX., _Strom._, i. 21, § 45; ed. Potter, 407; Sylburg, 340.

[372] In the edition of BONWETSCH and ACHELIS, Leipsig, 1897, No. 22, p.

255 _et seq._, ACHELIS and others regard it as spurious but without just

reason. It is translated by PROBST, _Lehre und Gebet_, 247. Although not

a sermon, it was evidently an address delivered to certain individuals.

_Cf._ c. 6 and 9 (ἀγαπητέ and ἄνθρωπε).

[373] _Constit Apost._, 8, 33; _cf._ 5, 13.

[374] SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii. 15, 204, 220.

[375] See GREGOR. NAZ., _Orat._, 39, c. 2.

[376] _Synodus II. S. Patricii._, can. 20.

[377] St Matthew ii. 10 _seq._

[378] St Matthew ii. 1-12.

[379] _Poema_, 27; _Natal_, 9, v. 47 _et seqq._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi.

649.

[380] SEDATUS, _Hom. de Epiph._ MIGNE, lxxii. 773. MAXIMUS TAUR., _Hom.

7 in Epiph._ MIGNE, lvii. 271. “Fuerunt enim hodie ... quid potissimum

præsenti hoc factum sit die, noverit ipse, qui fecit.”

[381] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo supposit._, 136, c. 1, and the hymn “Illuminans

Altissimus,” in KAYSER, _Hymnen_, 2nd ed., 370. See also the article

“Feste” by FUNK and KRIEG in KRAUS’S _Realenzyklopädie_.

[382] This also appears from the fact that some, as PHILASTRIUS (_De

Hær._, c. 140) informs us, omitted Epiphany and kept Christmas alone.

[383] _Comm. in Ezech._, i. 1.

[384] CHRYSOST., _Hom. ad Pop. Ant. de Bapt. Chr._, c. 2. _Migne_, _Patr.

Gr._, xlix. 363 _et seq._ It appears from this sermon that the Antiochene

Christians were in the habit of taking some of the baptismal water home

with them, and keeping it for a year without its becoming corrupt.

[385] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 202_, c. 2.

[386] _Cæsaraug._, A.D. 380, can. 3. AMMIANUS MARC., _op. cit._ Passio S.

Philippi Heracleensis in Ruinart, _Acta_, 440, c. 2.

[387] EPIPHANIUS (_Hær._, 51, c. 16 and 24), Ephrem, Cassian, etc. See

above, pp. 128 _seqq._

[388] Testam. D. N. Jesu Chr., ed. Rahmani (Mainz, 1899), i. 28; iv. 67,

101. The discussion of the date of this document cannot be entered into

here from want of space.

[389] Cod. Theodos., 2, 8, 20, 25; 5, 2; Cod. Justin., 3, 12, 6.

[390] See Appendix No. viii.

[391] _Peregr. Silviæ_, 60, ed. Geyer, c. 26: “Quadragesimæ de Epiphania

valde cum summo honore _hic_ celebrantur, etc.”

[392] THEOPHANES, _Chronogr._, ed. Bonn, 345 ad ann. 534.

[393] NICEPHORUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 17, 28: καὶ τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ὑπαπάντην

ἄρτι πρώτως ἁπανταχοῦ τῆς γῆς ἑορτάζεσθαι τάττει. See MURALT, _Chronogr.

Byz._, St Petersburg, 1855, i. 134.

[394] _Sacr. Gelasianum_, 2, 8, among the Natalitia Sanctorum. MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1158. There is no mention of a procession in the

Gregorian sacramentary either.

[395] MORCELLI, i. 86, 288.

[396] The statement was made by BARONIUS (ad ann. 534), repeated by PAGI,

and, in recent times, by WISSOWA (_Röm. Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 446) and

by USENER (332), but rejected by GRISAR (_Gesch. Roms._, i. 455).

[397] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii.

[398] See Appendix No. ix.

[399] CABROL (_Etude sur la Peregr. Silv._, 167 _et seqq._) gives a

survey of the lections then in use.

[400] Printed by BIANCHINI, _Opera Anast._, i. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,

cxxvii. 994. DUCHESNE, _Lib. Pont._, I. cxlvi.

[401] BINTERIM’S statement (_Denkw._, v. 2, 133-152) is out of date. The

article “Fastenzeiten” by HEUSER in the _Kirchenlexikon_, iv., 2nd ed.,

must be supplemented by the investigations of Dom G. MORIN in the _Révue

Bénédictine_, 1897, 336-347—“L’Origine des Quatre-Temps.”

[402] LEO M., _Sermo_, 19 (18), c. 2.: “Per totius anni circulum

distributa sunt (jejunia), ut lex abstinentiæ omnibus sit adscripta

temporibus. Siquidem jejunium vernum in quadragesima, æstivum in

pentecoste, autumnale in mense septimo, hiemale in hoc qui est decimus

celebretur.”

[403] LEO M., _Sermo_, 16 (15), c. 1, 2; _Sermo_, 12 (11), c. 3.

[404] MORIN (_op. cit._ 345) quotes passages from the Leonine and

Gelasian sacramentaries. See MIGNE, lv. 153 _et seqq._

[405] Concerning the “feriæ conceptivæ” and “sementivæ” of the Romans,

see MARQUARDT-MOMMSEN, _Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 198 _seqq._

[406] _Liber Pont._, _Callistus_: “Hic constituit jejunium die sabbati

ter in anno fieri, frumenti, vini et olei secundum prophetiam.” Ed.

DUCHESNE, i. 141.

[407] LEO I., _Sermo_, 19, c. 2; _Sacram. Leon._, 101, No. xxvii. MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, liv. 186; lv. 105.

[408] _Epist. ad Episc. Luc._, c. 11. MIGNE, lix. 47.

[409] LEO I., _Epist. ad Dioscorum Al._, c. i. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, liv.

626.

[410] MIGNE, cli. 978; c. 24-27.

[411] MORIN, _Révue Bénédictine_, 1897, 338 _seqq._

[412] _Sermo 2 de Jejun. X. mensis_: “Decimi mensis celebrandum esse

jejunium, quo pro consummata perceptione omnium frugum dignissime

largitori earum Deo continentiæ libamen offertur.”

[413] In MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, i. 511, 603; ii. 33, 94, 123, 136.

[414] H. MENARD, _Notæ et Observ. in Sacr. Greg._, in MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, lxxviii. 393.

[415] _Sacr. Gelas._ MIGNE, lxxiv. 1069, 1133, 1178 _seqq._

[416] _Sacr. Gregor._ MIGNE, lxxviii. 59-61, 113-115, 140-142.

[417] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvii. 124: “Ut jejunium quattuor temporum et

ipsi sacerdotes observent et plebi denuntient observandum.” This shows

that until then it had not been customary in the Frankish empire.

[418] See BINTERIM, _Gesch. d. d. Prov.- u. Diöz.-Konzilien_, ii. 273

_seqq._; iii. 517 _seqq._

[419] The disagreement arose from the fact that the ancient missals

(Sacramentorum libri), only mentioned the month without specifying the

week when the Ember fasts were to be observed. See BERNO of Reichenau

(MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlii. 1097), whose small treatise, composed

between 1020 and 1031, deals with the question.

[420] _Micrologus_, c. 24.

[421] SERVIUS, Comm. on Virgil., _Bucol. Eccl._, 3, 77.

[422] See examples in USENER, 305 A. 22, 306-345.

[423] OBID., _Fasti_, 4, 905 _seqq._, and _Fasti Prænest._, _Corp.

Inser. Lat._ i. 392. For the “Robigaliæ” see MARQUARDT-MOMMSEN,

_Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 574.

[424] VIGILII, _Epist. ad Simpl._ i.; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xiii. 550.

[425] AVITUS, _Hom. de Rogat._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lix. 289. GREGOR.

TUR., _Hist. Franc_, 2, 34.

[426] This fact is mentioned by both the biographers of Gregory, JOAN.

DIAC. i. 41-43, and PAUL. DIAC. c. 10, as well as by AMALARIUS 4, 24, and

BELETH c. 122, etc., but all draw their information from GREGOR. TUR.,

_Hist. France_, 10, 1. See BAILLET ix, 2, 87-103, who also makes use of

the designations “Litaniæ Gallicanæ” and “Litaniæ Romanæ.”

[427] These words come from a letter without an address in the appendix

to the Register of Gregory the Great. MIGNE, lxxvii. 1329.

[428] _Lib. Pont._ ed., BIANCHINI, ii. 386.

[429] In Spain the litanies were on 10th Sept., 7th Nov., and 15th Dec.,

according to the lectionary of Silos.

[430] The Martyrium was erected on Golgotha, close to the site of

the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The Anastasis, built by

Constantine, was the larger of the two, and served as the usual place of

assembly for the faithful in the fourth century. (_Peregr. Silviæ_, ed.

Geyer, c. 27, 30, 39, 43).

[431] J. P. KIRCH, _Die Christl. Kultusgeände in Altertum_, 34-40.

[432] St Gregory the Great ordered that the Anglo-Saxons should keep the

dedication of churches and the _natalitia martyrum_ in the same way as

they had previously observed the festivals while they were yet heathen,

that is to say by erecting huts of branches and by feasting. (Epist. ii.

76, of the year 601).

[433] For the East, see JOHANNES EUB., _Orat. in Concep. B.M.V._, c.

23. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvi. 1499. For the West, see the Sermons of St

Augustine on the “Dedicatio,” _Sermo 336-338_.

[434] Our informants are EUSEB., _Vita Constant_, 4, 6; SOZOMEN, _Hist.

Eccl._, 2, 26; 3, 5; SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 6.

[435] EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 10, 3; AMBROSE, _Ad Marcellinam Epist._, 22,

1 (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 1019). PAULINUS of Nola, _Nat. S. Fel._, 9;

_Poema_, 27, 402 _seqq._ (MIGNE, lxi. 657); _Peregr. Silviæ_, as above.

[436] _Missale Francorum_ in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 328.

[437] DIONYS, _De Hier. Eccl._, 4, 12. See RAHMANI, _Testam. D.N.I.

Chr._, 156.

[438] DURANDUS (_Rationale Div. Off._ 1, 23; 7, 262) expressly follows

the model of the Old Testament.

[439] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._ i. 308, 609, 613.

[440] _Op. cit._ ii. 467-489 and 186.

[441] GREGOR., ix. c. 5, x. _de feriis_ 2, 9. See Burchard of Worms,

_Decr._ 2, 77; Ivo of Chartres, _Decr._, in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clxi.

203.

[442] _Liber Ordin._ of Essen, 62 _et seqq._

[443] BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 1, 303 _et seqq._; _Conc._, v. 91) places

this synod in 1308. HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, iv. 106; vi. 498.

[444] Amongst others, Naogeorgius (Kirchmair aus Straubing) poured

contempt on the observance of these feasts and the abuses to which they

gave rise. HOSPINIANUS, 175.

[445] DUMONT, _Sammlung Kirchl. Erlasse für d. Erzd. Köhn_, 2nd ed., 165,

167.

[446] Remigius, a monk of St Germain, a diligent exegete who lived at the

end of the ninth century, attempted to give an allegorical interpretation

to the rites observed at the consecration of a church. The custom of

writing the letters of the alphabet in Greek and Latin on the floor of

the church seems to have presented difficulties to him. He commences his

explanation of this rite by the words: “Quæ res puerilis ludus videretur,

nisi ab apostolius viris instituta crederetur.” He interprets it as

meaning that the Church instructs the unlearned in the elements of faith.

His tractate in seven chapters is in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxi. 846-866.

G. Mercati, however (_Studi et Testi_, Roma, 1902, 9) attributes it to

Ivo of Chartres.

[447] Literature: Lebrun, _De Martyrum Natalitiis Diss._ MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, lxi. 519, _seq._ Sollerius, Præf. to the _Mart. Usuardi_. MIGNE,

cxxiii. 459, _seqq._ Ruinart, Præf. to the _Acta mart. sincera et

genuina_. Le Blant, _Les Actes des Martyrs_, in _Mémoires de l’Institut_,

1888, 57-336.

[448] _Passio S. Pionii et Soc._, c. 2 in Ruinart, 188.

[449] DIGG., 48, tit. 24, No. 3: “Corpora animadversorum quibuslibet

petentibus ad sepulturam danda sunt.”

[450] _Lib. Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 52, 128.

[451] _Op. cit._ 65, 148, EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 6, 45, § 11, also refers

to the seven deacons and seven subdeacons of Rome in the third century.

[452] _Lib. Pont._, I. xcv. 147.

[453] _Epist._, 12, 2.

[454] _Bullettino d. Comm. Arch. Communale di Roma_, 1894, 240 _seqq._

[455] RUINART, _Acta Sincera_, 630, with his Admonitio.

[456] GREGOR. NYSS., _Vita Greg. Thaum_. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xlvi. 954.

[457] SOZOM., _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 3.

[458] MAXIMUS TAUR., _Hom._ 81. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lvii. 427.

[459] _Lib. Pont._, _Symmachus_, c. 9.

[460] [See _The Legends of the Saints_, Delehaye, translated by Mrs V. M.

Crawford (London, 1907), especially chap. iv. Trans.]

[461] BÄUMER, _Gesch. des Breviers_, 456; see also 429, 447.

[462] _Regula ad Monachos_, ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxviii. 396. See

also N. PAULUS, _Martyrologium und Brevier als historische Quellen_;

Katholik, 1900, i. 355 _seqq._

[463] _De Gloria Martyrum_, c. 48.

[464] _Cf._ _Hist. Eccl._, 8, 13.

[465] MURATORI, in a valuable work, _De Martyrum Natalibus_, shows in

opposition to Pagi that “natales martyrum” indicates the actual day of

their death. The work is printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi. 819-26;

_Dissert._ 19.

[466] _De Anima_, 51.

[467] AUGUSTIN., _Epist._ 288. GREGOR. TUR., _De Gloria Conf._, 104.

[468] See the fourth canon of the Council of Valentia in A.D. 524.

[469] Edited by Baluzius, _Capitul. Reg. Franc._, Appendix. Also in

MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcix. 633. Other formulæ of the Carolingian period

are given in MIGNE, cxxxviii. 885-902.

[470] This branch of hagiography has been carefully dealt with by

Baillet. The entire first volume of his great work, _Les Vies des

Saints_, is devoted to Old Testament Saints, more than a hundred in

number, and to the history of their cultus.

[471] E. A. Kneller, in order to explain the choice of the 24th for

the 25th June, draws attention to the way in which the ancient Roman

Calendars were written, _i.e._ viii. Kal. Jan. = 25th December; viii.

Kal. Jul. = 24th July (_Innsbr. Zeitschr. für kath. Theol._, 1901, 527).

[472] _Agath. Can._ 31, 63.

[473] IVO CARN., _Decretum_, 4, 14. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clxi. 266.

[474] According to St Augustine (_sermo 292_, c. i.) it was “traditione

majorum receptum.”

[475] MORCELLI, _Menol. Const._, ii. 13 _seq._ No less than fifteen

churches and chapels were dedicated to St John the Baptist in

Constantinople.

[476] JOSEPHUS, _Antt._, 18, 5, 2.

[477] TILLEMONT, _Mém._, i. 44; vii. 163.

[478] SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii. 220-47.

[479] Dionysius Exiguus translated this account into Latin (MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, lxvii. 418). See also TILLEMONT, _Mém._, i. 44; vii. 163.

MORCELLI, _Menol. Const._, i. 167; ii. 65, 222. BAILLET, iv. 825 _seqq._;

vi. 291 _seqq._ DU CANGE, _Traité du Chef de S. J. B._ (Paris, 1665),

wrote against the trustworthiness of Marcellus. The chronology of the

Paschal Chronicle was corrected by Du Cange and Pagi. See RAUSCHEN,

_Jahrbücher d. Theol._, 356 A.

[480] NILLES, i., 2nd ed., 111.

[481] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 120, 394.

[482] Pseudo-Alcuin, _De off. Eccl._, c. 30.

[483] _Ordo Rom. XI._, c. 66. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 1050. There

is not sufficient evidence to support Binterim’s view (_Denkw._, v. 379)

that the procession to the Baptistry proves that solemn baptism was

administered at Rome on the 24th June.

[484] _Sermo 287-93._ In _Sermo 292_, c. 1, appears the passage quoted on

page.... “Hoc majorum traditione suscepimus, etc.”

[485] A town of Gamala was situated on the eastern shore of the Lake

Genesareth, on a mountain. Josephus, _Bello Jud._, 4, 1, 1-7; _Antt._,

18, 1, 1, etc. Nothing is known of the village of Gamala near Jerusalem.

[486] For the fullest account of the particulars, see HYDATIUS, _Chron._

(RONCALLI, ii. 99), “Honorio X. et Theodosio VI. Conss.” With this date

agrees MARCELLINUS (_op. cit._, ii. 279), but not the _Chron. Breve._

(_op. cit._, ii. 259) or THEOPHANES, _Chrongr._, ed. Bonn, i. 133.

[487] GENNADIUS, _De Script. Eccl._, 46, 47. The writings relating to the

“Inventio S. Stephani” are in Latin. The translation is printed in MIGNE,

xli., _Opera S. Augustini VII._, 805-54.

[488] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 316, 320-24; _Civ. Dei_, 22, c. 8.

[489] THEOPHANES, _Chrongr._, ad ann. 420.

[490] MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 48.

[491] As, for example, to Antoninus. See GEYER, _Itinera Hierosol._, 176.

[492] CODINUS, ii.

[493] The Syrian list of Abul Barakat gives for the date of St Stephen’s

death the 12th Sept. A.D. 37, and for the date of the first discovery

of his relics the 27th Dec. A.D. 40. Chr. IV. Caji. BAUMSTARK, _Oriens

Christ._, i. 266.

[494] GRISAR, _Gesch. Roms und der Päpste_, i. 194 _seqq._

[495] See the Calendars in SELDENIUS, _op. cit._; also the Synaxaria in

MAI, _Bibl. Vet. Patr._, iv.

[496] USENER, _Der hl. Theodosius_, Leipsig, 1890, 38, 144.

[497] JULIAN of Toledo in the _Vita S. Ildephonsi Tol._, c. 6. MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, xcvi. 46.

[498] It is printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxi. 798, from _Pamelius

Liturgica Lat._, Col. Agr. 1571, tit. ii. 70. [See also an article in

the _Dublin Review_, vol. cxv., on “The Earliest Roman Mass-book,” by Mr

Edmund Bishop.—TR.]

[499] _Liber Pont._, SERGIUS, No. 86.

[500] In the calendar of Sonnatius of Reims (quoted on p. 21), dating

from ten or twenty years after Gregory the Great, these three feasts are

already mentioned.

[501] There are, however, among the sermons of Peter Chrysologus, three

(140, 142, and 143) entitled “de annuntiatione,” but of these No. 140

contains no allusion to a festival of our Blessed Lady, and the two

others belong to Christmas.

[502] ST THOMASSIN, 409. See MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxv. 406. Fulbert,

however, speaks of the feast as of recent institution. _Sermo_, 4. MIGNE,

cxli. 320 _seqq._

[503] MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvii. 806 _seqq._

[504] So in the passage from the _Liber Pontificalis_ quoted above and

in the _Kalend. Fronteau_. Bede calls it the “Annuntiatio Dominica.” The

Greek name for the feast is Εὐαγγελισμός τῆς ἁγίας θεοτόκου.

[505] _Chron. Pasch. Olymp._, 351, ed. Bonn, i. 713.

[506] PETRUS CHRYS., _Sermo_, 140, 142, ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lii.

Among the spurious sermons of Leo the Great is one which is believed to

be a translation of a discourse of Proclus, _Sermo 15_. See the note of

Ballerini in MIGNE, _Patr Lat._, liv. 508. PROCLUS, _Orat. I._ MIGNE,

_Patr. Gr._, lxv. 679.

[507] RADULFUS GLABER, _Hist._, 3, 3.

[508] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 170, 734.

[509] HOLWECK, 292. When the 25th March falls on one of the three last

days in Holy Week or Easter Week, it must be translated. BINTERIM

(_Denkw._, v. 356) gives several historical references concerning this.

[510] PROCLUS, _Oratio III._, c. 2. When we find in collections of

sermons (_e.g._ COMBEFIS, _Bibl. Conc._), some by the Fathers, such as

Origen, St Ambrose, St Athanasius, etc., ascribed to the feasts of our

Lady, we must not jump to the conclusion that these feasts were observed

at the period when the authors of these sermons lived. These reputed

sermons are only homilies on texts which suit the feast in question, and

on this account have been inserted into the collection.

[511] EPIPH., _Hær._, 79, c. 11: “I say not she did not die, yet I am not

certain that she did die.”

[512] VETTER, _Tüb. Theol. Quartalschr._, 1887, 133 _seqq._ The letter is

also given in the treatise by NIRSCHL, _Das Grab der heiligen Jungfrau

Maria_, Mainz, 1896, 80 _seqq._

[513] _Transitus Mariæ_ in TISCHENDORF, _Apocal. Apocr._, Lips., 1866,

114.

[514] We have three sermons of John on the Assumption (MIGNE, _Patr.

Gr._, xcvi.), one of Modestus, patriarch of Jerusalem (MIGNE, _Patr.

Gr._, lxxxvi. pars 2), three of Andrew of Crete, who, before becoming

bishop, was a monk in Palestine (MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvii., oratio

12-14), and three of Germanus (MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcviii. 339-72).

[515] _De Gloria Mart._, i. 4.

[516] NICEPHORUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 17, 28.

[517] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 225. See also MABILLON’S note in the

same col., 475.

[518] In the _Martyr. Luccense_ of FIORENTINI, on the 22nd January:

“Depositio B. Mariæ Matris D. N. J. C.”

[519] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxx. 446. In HARDUIN (iii. 2946) it is so

named.

[520] H. JÜRGENS, _Die kirchl. Uberlieferung von der leibl. Aufnahme

Mariens in den Himmel_: Innsbr. _Zeitschr. für kath. Theol._, 1880,

595-650.

[521] WÜSTENFELD, _Synaxarium_ of Bishop Michael of Atriba and Malidsch,

251. MAI, _Script. Vet. Nova Collectio_, iv. 1. 5. SELDENIUS, _De

Synedriis_, iii. c. 15, 320 _seqq._

[522] A form for the blessing of the fruits of the field appears in the

Ritual of Augsburg, 1487. See RAICH, _Katkolik_, 1901, ii. 144. FRANZ,

_Das Ritual von St Florian aus dem 12. Jahrhundert_; Freiburg, 1904.

[523] BAILLET (viii. 434-441) and BENEDICT XIV. (_De festis_, c. 184-210)

collected materials for this purpose.

[524] The Emperor Leo VI., the Philosopher (896-903), spread the

observance of the feast. Passaglia relied (iii. 1750) on a speech of his

preserved in the Sforza library in Rome. It does not appear among the

speeches of this Emperor printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, cvii.

[525] Εἰ καὶ μὴ παρὰ τοῖς πᾶσι γνωρίζεται, c. 23. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._,

xcvi. 1499. Observe the article with πᾶσιν. Οἱ παντες means all

collectively, _i.e._ the whole community or church.

[526] For the so-called Typicum S. Sabæ, see Appendix xi.

[527] It is the first among his sermons. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, c. 1353.

[528] The change from the 9th Dec., the date of the festival among the

Greeks, to the 8th, is probably to be explained by the fact that in the

Roman Calendar vi., Idus Dec. corresponds to the vi. Idus Sept., the date

of our Lady’s Nativity, while the 9th Dec. is written v. Idus Dec.

[529] [The feast was, however, observed in England before the Norman

Conquest. The evidence for this is given by Mr Edmund Bishop in his

tract, _On the Origins of the Feast of the Conception of the Bl. V.

M._, London, Burns & Oates, 1904. From this the following is taken: (1)

Calendar contained in Cotton MS. Titus D., xxvii., has the entry in the

original hand at 8th Dec: “Conceptio sancte Dei genitricis Mariæ.” This

MS. was written in the New Minster, Winchester, under Abbot Aelfwin

(1034-57). (2) Calendar of the Old Minster, Winchester (Cotton MS.,

Vitellius E., xviii.), has the same entry. The MS. is attributed by Hicks

to or about 1030. (3) Add. MS., 28, 188, a pontifical and benedictional

of the eleventh century probably written for Bp. Leofric (1046-72),

and “distinctly pre-Norman.” In this, fol. 161, is a “Benedictio in

Conceptione Sancte Mariæ.” (4) Harl. MS. 2892, also a pontifical and

benedictional written for Canterbury in the first half of the eleventh

century (to judge from the handwriting); a similar benediction occurs,

ff. 189-90. (5) To these, in a letter to the translator, Mr Bishop adds:

I. In the Leofric Missal, among the Masses added to the book by Bp.

Leofric, is a Mass for the feast of the Conception (p. 268); II. In a

Worcester Calendar of about 1064, and written therefore under St Wulstan

and before the conquest, the feast of the Conception is entered at 8th

Dec. Trans.]

[530] See Appendix x.

[531] Two accounts of Elsinus are found among the spurious writings of St

Anselm (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clix. 319-326). Three others have recently

been published by Thurston & Slater, _Eadmeri Mon. Cant. Tractatus

de Conceptione S. Mariæ_, 88-98. Another by Lechler, _Mittelalterl.

Kirchenfeste_, 92 _et seq._

[532] _E.g._ in the Roman Breviary of 1473 (Univ. Bibl., Freiburg i.

Br.), in the Breviary of Sitten of 1493, National Mus., Zurich, and in

that of Constance of 1509.

[533] Gerberon in the introduction to Anselm’s works. MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, clviii. 43 _et seq._

[534] Osbert’s letters were first published along with those of Herbert

de Losinga by Robt. Anstruther (Brussels, 1846), unfortunately very

imperfectly. Lately they are given by Thurston and Slater, _op. cit._, 53

_et seq._

[535] _Osbert de Clara_ in Thurston and Slater, App. B. 60 _et seq._

[536] [Mr Bishop, _op. cit._, 30, 31, says the Normans probably treated

the celebration of this feast by the English with contempt, as “a

product of insular simplicity and ignorance.” Its public celebration was

discontinued most probably at Winchester and Canterbury, but “it did not

die out of the hearts of individuals.”—Trans.]

[537] Osbert, Epist. i. _op. cit._ 55. “Et in hoc regno et in

transmarinis partibus a nonnullis episcopis et abbatibus in ecclesiis

Dei instituta est illius diei recordatio.” That the feast was introduced

“in hoc regno,” _i.e._ England, by abbots but not by bishops, is clear

from Osbert’s second letter, and from other evidence; and, therefore, his

remark is true only of Normandy. Of the one English bishop whom he names

as in favour of the feast, he can only say he was “de his sufficienter

instructus” (_op. cit._ 58). Osbert has no knowledge of his having

introduced the feast. By “transmarinæ partes,” British chroniclers of

that period always mean Normandy and Brittany.

[538] Matthæus Paris. ad ann., 1228, _Chron. maj._ 3, 161.

[539] Wilhelm. Malmsbur., _Gesta Reg. Angl._ 4, 338. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._,

clxxix., 1290. Eadmer., _Hist. Nov._, _Præf._ et passim. MIGNE, clix. 347.

[540] This appears from a decree of Bishop Walter of Rouen in 1207,

printed in the collection of Bigot in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccvii. 1179.

Walter had withheld certain endowments which his predecessor Rotricus

appointed for the metropolitan chapter on certain festivals. These he

now restored. Vacandard (_Les origines de la Fête d. C. Imm._: Révue des

Questions Hist., 1897, 166) was unacquainted with this decree, else he

would have arrived at a different conclusion. Moreover he himself brings

forward proof that the feast was celebrated during the twelfth century in

Jumièges and St Owen, but not until the thirteenth century at Fécamp.

[541] _Syn. Rotom._ of 1189, can. 1. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccvii. 1180.

[542] HENRICUS A GANDAVO, _Quæst. quodlib._, 15 qu. 13 fol., 584 B.:

“Normanni, in quorum territorio dicitur hujusmodi revelatio facta fuisse,

præ ceteris populis illam conceptionem praccipue celebrant.” Again, fol.

385 A., it is twice called “festum quod a Normannis celebratur.” It would

appear from this that the Normans before 1260 were still the only people

who kept the feast.

[543] This legend must have enjoyed a wide circulation, since the

Greek Breviary finds it necessary to attack it. See the edition of

Constantinople, 1843, 77.

[544] PASSAGLIA (_De Imm. Conc._, iii. 1755 _seqq._) is not at all

shaken in his opinion by the fact that Mabillion, as he himself admits,

has shown the falsified life was not written by ILDEFONSUS, _Acta Ord.

S. Bened._, ii. 521. The title “conceptio S.V.M. Genitricis Domini”

refers to Christmas. It is an altogether absurd idea that the Jews in

the seventh century joined in the celebration of the 8th December.

Unfortunately SCHWANE (_Dogmengesch._, iii. 414) has copied Passaglia’s

mistake.

[545] LESLÆUS, _Miss. Mixtum_. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 933 A.

[546] PASSAGLIA (_op. cit._, iii. 1760) relies on a deed of gift of

1047, in which occurs the expression “Conceptio Immac.,” at that period

unknown—a clear proof of falsification. The document comes from Antonio

Dragoni, an industrious fabricator. See SICKEL, _Acta Regum, etc._, i. 23.

[547] SICARDUS, _Mitrale_, c. 43. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccxviii.

[548] PETRUS CELL., _ad Nicolaum Mon. Epist._, 2, 171. MIGNE, _Patr.

Lat._, ccii. 614.

[549] See BELETH, _Rationale Div. Off._, c. 146. SICARDUS, _Mitrale_, c.

43. DURANDUS, _Mim. Rationale_, also does not know of the feast.

[550] BERNARD., _Epist._, 171. Vacandard would like to place this letter

before 1128, but this is out of the question.

[551] BERNARD., _Epist._, 184.

[552] MANSI, _Conc._, xxiii. 764. CHEVALIER, _Bibl. Lit._, 7.

[553] WADDING, _Annales Minorum_.

[554] THOMAS, _S. Theol._, 3 q. 27, art. 2.

[555] SCHWANE, _Dogmengesch._, iii. 418.

[556] BINTERIM, _Konzil._, vi. 536, A. I.

[557] SCHATEN, _Annal. Pad._, ad ann. 1343.

[558] PASSAGLIA, _De Imm. Conc._, iii. 1767. BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 1,

302 _seq._

[559] BINTERIM and MOOREN, _Die Erzdiözese Köln I._, Düsseldorf, 1892,

538. WÜRDTWEIN, _Diplomat Magunt._, i., Mainz, 1788, 131, No. 69.

_Urkunde des Klosters Jechaburg in Thüringen_, see FALK, _Katholik_,

1903, 1.

[560] The 2nd Canon of this synod of Canterbury runs:—“Venerabilis

Anselmi, prædecessoris nostri, qui post alia quædam B.M.V. antiquiora

sollemnia Conceptionis festum superaddere dignum duxit, vestigiis

inhærentes, statuimus, etc.” On the one hand the synod does not say that

Anselm had actually introduced the feast, and, on the other, the words

are too plain to allow of us thinking, with some recent writers, that

the synod confused the uncle and the nephew. One cannot charge it with

ignorance of this kind. See HARDOUIN, _Conc._, vii. 1538; LABBE-COSSART,

_Conc._, ix. 2478.

[561] HARDOUIN, _Conc._, viii. 1266. SCHWANE, _Dogmengesch._, iii. 427.

[562] NAT. ALEXANDER., _Hist. Eccl._, 8, 546, ed. Paris, 1627.

LABBE-COSSART, _Conc._, viii. 1403.

[563] The feast was kept with special devotion by the Carmelite nuns in

their church in Rome. Under Innocent VIII. the order of the Conceptio

B.M.V. for women was also instituted in Rome. PASSAGLIA, _De Imm. Conc._,

iii. 1776.

[564] PASSAGLIA, _op. cit._, 1777, and, after him, TAPPEHORN,

_Predigtentwürfe_, ii. 9, give the date incorrectly as 1476.

[565] FERRARIS, _Prompta Bibl._, 3, 379.

[566] PASSAGLIA, _op. cit._, iii. 1788; Constitution of 10th November

1644: “In his quæ per.”

[567] From 1477-1854 is scarcely four hundred years.

[568] BENEDICT XIV., _De Festis._, 2, 152.

[569] EUSEBIUS, _De Nom. Hebr._ MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xxiii. 789.

[570] See the excellent article by J. B. Kraus in the first ed. of the

_Kirchenlexikons_, with the additions of SCHROD in the 2nd ed. For

special treatises, see BENEDICT XIV., _Commentarius de Festis B.M.V._,

and for a more modern work, HOLWECK, _Fasti Mariani_, Freiburg, 1892.

[571] _Protoevangelium_, 7. _Evang. de Nativitate Mariæ_, 6. See

TAPPEHORN, _Ausserbibl. Nachrichten oder die Apokryphen_, 25.

[572] MORCELLI, i. 287. The title runs, τὰ εἰς τὸν ναὸν εἰσοδὶα τῆς

Θεομητέρος. J. B. KRAUS (_Kirchenlex._, vi., 1st ed., 884) states it

was observed in Constantinople in 730, on the authority of Simeon

Metaphrastes, without giving the passages. ALT (p. 52) and others have

copied from him, also without citing the passages. The statement is very

improbable, for in 725 the Iconoclastic controversy had broken out,

rendering its introduction unlikely. It might be considered probable if

the homily of TARASIUS, _De Præsentatione B.M.V._, were genuine. MORCELLI

(ii. 250) considers it spurious. The feast is also not included in the

Menologium of Constantinople.

[573] “Depositio,” κατάθεσις, etc., is the actual name of the feast in

the Calendars, and in the older menologies it is called “ἡ σορὸς τῶν

βλαχένων Σορός.” Arca or loculus is the wooden coffin in which Mary is

said to have been originally placed in Jerusalem, and which was brought

to Constantinople under Marcian. MORCELLI, ii. 151. MURALT, _Chronogr.

Byz._, i. 83.

[574] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 407.

[575] _Constit. synodica Odonis Episc. Par._ MANSI, _Conc._, xxii. 681,

No. 10.

[576] MANSI, _op. cit._, 1108, i. 4. BINTERIM, _Konzilien_, iv. 480;

_Denkw._, vii. 1, 98-129. TH. ESSER, _Gesch. des Engl. Grusses_; Histor.

Jahrbuch, 1884, 92. [For the use of the Angelic Salutation in England,

see FR. BRIDGETT, C. SS. R., “_Our Lady’s Dowry_,” chap. iv. Trans.]

[577] [For questions connected with the history of the rosary, see a

series of articles in vols. 96 and 97 of _The Month_, by FR. HERBERT

THURSTON, S.J.; also, _Unserer Lieben Frauen Rosenkrantz_, by FR. TH.

ESSER, O.P., Paderborn, 1889. Trans.]

[578] HOLZAPFEL, _S. Dominicus und der Rosenkranz_, Munich, 1903.

[579] The originators of this form of prayer were Dominic of Prussia and

Adolf of Essen, two monks of the Charterhouse in Treves in the fifteenth

century. TH. ESSER, _Beitrag zur Gesch. des Rosenkranzes, Katholik_,

1897, ii. 409 _seqq._, and 1904, ii. 98 _seqq._

[580] There is historical proof for the existence of confraternities of

the Holy Rosary in the second half of the fifteenth century. That founded

in Cologne in 1474 by Prior Jacob Sprenger, O.P., was celebrated. TH.

ESSER, _U.L. Fr. Rosenkranz_, Paderborn, 1889, 289. It was confirmed by

Sixtus IV. in 1478. _Kirchenlexikon_, x., 2nd ed. 1281.

[581] _Kirchenlexikon_, viii. 2nd ed. 818; Brev. Rom. Dom i., Oct. lectio

7-9. On the 5th August takes place the local feast of Our Lady of the

Snows, “Maria ad Nives,” in the basilica of Sta. Maria Maggiore in Rome.

As the office has been incorporated in the Breviary, a short account of

it may be justified in this place. Pope Liberius erected a basilica on

the Esquiline, on the site of Livia’s market, which was called after him

“Liberiana.” In the next century, Sixtus III. restored the church and

changed its title, dedicating it to the Mother of God (_Lib. Pont._,

Liberius, No. 52, Xystus III., No. 63). From henceforth it was known as

“Basilica S. Mariæ,” at the present day, Sta. Maria Maggiore. The miracle

of the snow is not mentioned in any of the original documents, but

only in mediæval writings. The 5th August may have been the day of the

dedication of the basilica. See GRISAR, _Gesch. Roms._, i. 153 A. 1. The

legend of the translation of the Holy House of Loreto (10th Dec.) will

not stand historical investigation. According to trustworthy accounts,

pilgrims to Nazareth already in the eighth century found the holy house

there no longer, but only a church on the site where it had stood.

ADAMNAN, _De Locis Sanctis_, 2, 26; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxviii. 304.

ANTONINUS PLAC., _Itinerarium_, c. 5, in GEYSER, _Itinerarium Hieros._,

161, 197; NICEPHORUS CALL., (_Hist. Eccl._, 8, 30), names Helena as

the foundress of the church built on the spot where the house of the

Anunnciation had stood. See L. DE FEIS, _La Santa Casa di Loreto ed il

Santuario di Nazareth_, Florence, 1904.

[For Our Lady’s feasts as observed in England, see Fr. Bridgett, _op.

cit._, chap. vi. For what may be urged in favour of the Holy House of

Loreto, see an article by the Rev. G. E. Phillips, S.J., in the _Ushaw

Magazine_, March 1908. Trans.]

[582] PFÜLF, _Die Verehrung des hl. Joseph in der Geschichte_, in Stimmen

aus Maria-Laach, xxxviii (1890), 117, _et seqq._ _Révue Bénédictine_,

xiv. 1897, 106 _seqq._, 145 _seqq._, 203 _seqq._ _Le Développement Hist.

du Culte de St Joseph._

[583] _De Syn._, iii. c. 15, 220 _et seqq._

[584] _Script. Vet. Nova Coll._, iv. 15, _et seqq._

[585] “In Antioch. natalis Josephi,” _Codex Epternac._

[586] Printed in the _Analecta Bolland._, i. 19.

[587] _Révue Bénédictine_, xiv. (1897) iii. _seqq._ and 145 _seqq._

[588] _Ib._, 145 _seqq._

[589] PANVINIUS _Vita Sixti IV._, in the continuation to Platina.

[590] GROTEFEND, _Handbuch der Chronol._, ii. _passim_.

[591] PROCOPIUS, _De Ædif._, i. 3.

[592] _De Hær._, 79.

[593] PANVINIUS, _op. cit._

[594] See the article “Anna” by Schegg, and “Joachim” by Jocham in the

_Kirchenlexikon_, 2nd ed., i. and vi. Trithemius wrote a tract on the

worship of St Anne in 1484.

[595] BAILLET, v. 363.

[596] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxix. 1023; _Sermo de S. Matth._, Acta SS.

Boll., 3 Febr. 487.

[597] _Opera S. Leonis I._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lv. 57; lxxiv. 1168

under No. 33.

[598] BELETH, _Rationale Div. Off._ c. 124; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccii.

131.

[599] SOCR., _Hist. Eccl._, i. 16: μνήμη τῶν ἀποστόλων.

[600] EUSEB., _Vita Const._, 4, 71.

[601] Theophanes, Nicephorus, etc. MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 197.

[602] Edited in Greek by Usener in the Bonn _Lektionskatalog_ for 1877.

[603] DUCHESNE, _Origines_, 255.

[604] GREGOR, Nyss. _Opera_; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xlvi. 725, 787.

[605] AMBROS., _De Virg._ c. 19, No. 124: “Dies factus est Petrus, dies

Paulus ideoque hodie natali eorum Spiritus Sanctus increpuit dicens,

etc.” MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 299.

[606] _Hom._, 68-73 and _Sermo_, 66-69; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lvii.

[607] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 295, c. 8; 296, c. 1.

[608] See my article “Petrus und Paulus” in the _Katholik_, 1887, i.

11-39.

[609] CHRYSOSTOM, _Opera_, ed. Montfaucon, ii. 1.

[610] PRUDENTIUS, _Perist._, 12, 2: “Romam per omnem cursitant orantque;”

v. 52: “Aspice per bifidas plebs Romula funditur plateas,” and especially

v. 63: “Transtiberina prius solvit sacra pervigil sacerdos, Mox huc

recurrit duplicatque vota.”

[611] _Sermo_, 84, al. 81 of Leo the Great is entitled: In Octavis SS.

apostolorum. See AMALARIUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 3, 36.

[612] _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 16, ed. Vales, 518. THEOPHANES, ad an. 492.

[613] Among the Calendars published by Seldenius (_De Synedriis III._, c.

15) one contains it, another on 27th June has “Planctus Pauli” (see p.

212), and the third (p. 241) has another martyr called Basamon. Binterim

is mistaken in thinking the feast is absent from no ancient Calendar

(_Denkw._, v. 383).

[614] Eudocia lived as a widow at Jerusalem, 450-455, and died there. She

had previously visited Jerusalem in 438. MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 47, 68.

[615] A priest of this church, called Philip, was papal legate at the

Council of Ephesus.

[616] DE ROSSI, _Inscr. Chr._, ii. 1, 110, 134, 164. GRISAR, _Gesch.

Roms._, i. 172, pt. I. Other witnesses for the existence of St Peter’s

chain at Rome are ARATOR, _Acta Apost._, i. 1067; JUSTINIAN, _Epist._, in

Labbe-Cossart, iv. 1416; GREGOR M., _Epist._, i. 30, ix. 122, xi. 53, etc.

[617] SIGEBERT of Gemblours mentions the event _ad ann._ 969. MIGNE,

_Patr. Lat._, clx. 191.

[618] It is not in the Kalendarium Gothicum, the Neapolitan Calendar, nor

in that of Charlemagne belonging to 781 (ed. Piper), nor in the Greek

menologies of Basil and Constantinople.

[619] _Römische Quartalschrift_, 1901, 244 _seqq._ Ranke is much mistaken

in thinking that Bede celebrated the conversion of St Paul “in the

ancient manner” on 30th June. See BEDA, _Martyrol._, ed. Migne, _Patr.

Lat._, xciv. 962.

[620] HIERON. _De Vir. Ill._, c. 7, _Chron. Pasch._ The FASTI IDAT. and

THEOD. LECTOR (_Hist. Eccl._, 2, 61) agree in giving the 3rd March as the

date.

[621] Edited by Usener from a Parisian MS. of the ninth to twelfth

century, in _Anal. Boll._, xiii. 373-78. See the author’s art., “Zur

Gesch. des Aposels Andreas,” in the _Katholik_, 1906, vol. iii.

[622] Printed by Mombritius & Surius in Latin only. C. Chr. Woog (Lips.,

1749) published the Greek text. MORCELLI, _Menol. Const._, i. 245, and

TISCHENDORF, _Acta Apost. Apocr._, Lips., 1861, 105 _seqq._ The πράξεις

τοῦ Ἀνδρέου καὶ Ματθεία (_op. cit._, 432 _seqq._) are full of childish

legends.

[623] _Passio S. Artemii auctore Johanne mon._, c. 16. MIGNE, _Patr.

Gr._, xcvi., 1266. PAULINUS NOL., _Poema_, 19, 33. See also the

_Enconium S. Lucæ_, printed for the first time in the August number of

the _Jahrbuch für protest. Theologie_ for 1890, by Ph. MEYER, and ABU’L

BARAKAT, _Oriens Chr._, Rome, 1902, 337, No. 6. _Tüb. Quartalsch._, 1905,

596 _et seqq._

[624] See the Calendar in SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis Hebr._, and that given

by Mai.

[625] VENANTIUS FORT., _Carmina_, 8, 6. See _Kirchenlexikon_, iii., 2nd

ed., 774, art. “Compostela,” by Hefele.

[626] NOTKER BALBULUS, ad VIII. Kal. Aug., says: “Iussu Herodis regis

decollatus est Hierosolymis.... Hujus ossa ad Hispanias translata.”

MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxi. 1125.

[627] Pope Innocent I. flatly denies that any apostle had founded the

Church of Spain. _Epist. ad Decentium_, 25, c. 2: “Aut legant, si in his

provinciis alius apostolorum invenitur, etc.” MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xx.

552.

[628] Edited by Duchesne in _Acta SS. Nov._, vol. ii., pars. 1, 96.

[629] [And also on the 25th May.—Trans.]

[630] HIERON., _De Vir. Ill._, c. 2.

[631] For the proof of this, see the Author’s art. in the _Katholik_,

1887, i. 23.

[632] MORCELLI, i. 168. He can only produce as evidence the Calendars of

Reichenau and Rheinau, but they are sufficient for his purpose.

[633] The _Hieronymianum_ at least says so on the 27th December:

“Adsumptio S. Johannis Evangelistæ apud Ephesum et _ordinatio_

episcopatus S. Jacobi fratris Domini qui ab apostolis primus ex Judaeis

Hierosolymis episcopus est ordinatus.”

[634] THEODOSIUS (530 _circ._), _De Situ Terræ Sanctæ_, ed. Vindob.,

1898, 142, 174. VENANTIUS FORT., _Carmina_, 8, 6.

[635] So the Chronographer of 354. The _Hieronymianum_ in its oldest

recension (Weissenburg) has the entry: “In Africa natalis S. Philippi

Apostoli, Jacobi, Quintiani, etc.” The recensions of Echternach and Metz

have: “Natalis SS. Apostolorum Philippi et Jacobi,” and the incorrect

addition in Africa is transferred to another place.

[636] _Liber Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 303, 306, note 2.

[637] MORCELLI, ii. 97, gives more particulars. The name Manna implies

that the substance was white—probably the salt which gathers upon walls.

[638] _Op. cit._, i. 167 _et seq._

[639] BAUMSTARK, _Röm. Quartalschrift._, 1899, 314.

[640] There is no explanation of the entry on the 24th June, “VIII. Kal.

Jul. Natalis dormitionis S. Joannis Apost. et Evang. in Epheso.” The view

of those who ascribed the death of a martyr to St John on the grounds of

St Mark x. 39 has never found much support. See SCHANZ, _Kommentar zu

Joh._, 332.

[641] _De Præser._, c. 36.

[642] ABDIAS, _De Historia Certaminis Apostolorum Libri X._, GUTSCHMID

(_Kleine Schriften_, ii. 364-372), considers the author of the _Acta

Simonis_ _et Judæ_ contained in this history is familiar with Persian

customs and lived in the ante-Nicene period. Gutschmid adds that both

apostles preached in Armenia, A.D. 39-47, which was then subject to

Persia, and fancies he can discover allusions to the civil war waged by

the two Persian kings, Vardanes and Gotarzes. In the history Vardanes was

favourable to Greek customs and had been visited by Apollonius of Tyana.

[643] Suana is mentioned by Claud. Ptolem., 5, 13, § 119, as situated in

Greater Armenia. The Suani were a Caucasian tribe. See MURALT, _Chron.

Byz._, i. 85, 150, 211, 218, 250.

[644] _Chron. Pasch._, ed. Bonn, 471; see also 432, and _Cal. Calcasendi_

in Seldenius.

[645] Card. RAMPOLLA, _De Authentico Rom. Pontificis Magisterio_, in

_La Papauté et les Peuples_, ii., Paris, 1900, 8-48. ANDRIES, _Cathedra

Romana, etc._, Mainz, 1872. KELLNER, _Verfassung Lehramt u. Unfehlbarkeit

d. Kirche_, Kempten, 1873.