Ἔλεον εἰρήνης, Sacrificium laudis: Mercy of Peace, Sacrifice of Praise

Treatise on the Mass (from the Stowe Missal), Part 01

2011-05-26T03:58:00.000-07:00

According to Wikipedia:

The Stowe Missal is a missal written in Latin and Gaelic which was transcribed at Lorrha Monastery in the ninth century. Also known as the Lorrha Missal, it is known as the 'Stowe' Missal due to its acquisition by one of the Dukes of Buckingham for the Stowe manuscripts collection. Stowe House was sold in 1849 to the Earl of Ashburnham. In 1883 the missal was purchased by the British Government and deposited in the Royal Irish Academy.

The form of the liturgy and the services of baptism and unction reflect a Celtic usage dating from before 650 AD. Whether this is the usage brought by St. Patrick in the early fifth century, or a later revision is not certain. Used during an era in which Christianity was neither universal nor fully understood, it asserts in detail the redemptive nature of Jesus Christ's birth, death and resurrection. The writer(s) assumes that those participating in the Eucharist must have every detail repeated clearly.

Here we are going to look upon a tract on the Mass (folios 65-67) written in Old Irish. I would first provide the original Gaelic and Latin text (as it appears in the Missal), a more 'tidied up' version (with proper spacings and punctuations), and an English translation.

A TREATISE ON THE MASS
from the Stowe Missal

INdaltoir fiugor dīgrīme īmab · in cailech isfig īnaecl fuirmed & rofothiged forīgrimī & fōmartri īnafathe & aliorū · huisq: p: ī calicem & iss canar occo· peto te pat depcor té filii· obsecro te sps scae·i·fig īphop toresset in aecla · Oblae iar– suƥ altare·i·īƭƭ iss canar occo·i·ihs xps Α & ω ḣ÷ ṕncipiu & finis · fig cuirp cr rosuidiged hi linannart brond maire · Fin iar– aṙhuisq2 hicaelecḥ·i·deacht cr aradonacht & arīpōp īaīsir thuisten iss canar ocsuidiu · Remit& pr īdulget fl2· misseret sps scs :·

Ind altoir, fiugor ind ingrimme immabred.
In cailech, is figor inna eclaise foruirmed ocus rofothaiged for ingrimmim ocus for martri inna fathe et aliorum.
Huisque (/ Huisce) prius in calicem, ocus issed canar occo: Peto te Pater; deprecor te, Filii (/ Filii); obsecro te, Spiritus Sanctae (/ Sancte); idon, figor in phopuil toresset in aeclesia (/ ecclesia).
Oblae iarum super altare, id est, intrat. Issed canar occo, idon, Iesus Christus, a et ω, hoc est, principium et finis. Figor cuirp Crist, rosuidiged hi linannart brond Maire.
Fin iarum ar huisce hi caelech, idon, deacht Crist ar a donacht (/ doenacht), ocus ar in popul, in aimsir thuisten. Issed canar oc suidiu: Remitet (/ Remittat) Pater, indulget (/ indulgeat) Filius, miseretur (/ misereatur) Spiritus Sanctus.

The altar, a figure of the persecution which is inflicted.
The chalice, it is a figure of the Church which was set and founded upon the persecution and upon the martyrdom of the prophets et aliorum (and of others).
Water, first, in calicem, (into the chalice) and what is chanted by them is: Peto te Pater; deprecor te Fili; obsecro te, Spiritus Sancte ("I pray to you, O Father; I ask intercession of you, O Son; I appeal to you, O Holy Spirit"), that is, a figure of the people that was poured in Ecclesia (into the Church).
The Host, then, super altare, id est, intrat (over the altar, that is, it enters). What is chanted by them is: Iesus Christus, Αlpha et Omega, hoc est, principium et finis ("Jesus Christ, Alpha and Omega, this is the beginning and the end"). A figure of the body of Christ which was placed in the linen-sheet of the womb of Mary.
Wine afterwards upon water in the chalice, that is, the divinity of Christ upon His humanity and upon the people, at the time of Incarnation. It is what is chanted thereat: Remittat Pater, indulgeat Filius, miseretur Spiritus Sanctus ("May the Father remit, may the Son pardon, may the Holy Spirit have mercy").

Acanar dind off fsen it ītroit & orthana & tormach corrigi liacht naps & ψalm ṅ dig isfigor recto aicnith īsin inroaithnuiged [aithgne] cr triahuili baullo & gnímo · Liacht aps im & salṁ digd & hoṡuidiu codinochtad is foraithmet· rechta litre īrofiugd cr [acht] nadfess cadacht cidrofiugd and · Indinochtad corricileth īna oblae & īcailich & acanar occo it sos & aillóir corrici oblata isforet rechta fáthe hitarc[h]et cr cofoll: acht nath naiccess corogenir :~

A canar dind offriund forsen, iter Introit ocus Orthana ocus Tormach, corrigi Liacht nApstal ocus ψalm (/ Salm) ṅdigrad, is figor recto aicnith insin, in roaithnuiged [aithgne] Crist tria huili baullo ocus gnimo.
Liacht nApstol, immorro, ocus Salm digrad ocus ho shuidiu co Dinochtad, is foraithmet rechta litre, in rofiugrad Crist, [acht] nadfess cadacht, cid rofiugrad and.
In dinochtad corrici leth inna oblae ocus in cailich ocus a canar occo, itir Soscel ocus Ailloir, corrici Oblata, is foraithmet rechta fathe, hi tarc(h)et Crist co follus, acht nathnaiccess co rogenir.

What is chanted of the Mass thereafter - both Introit and Prayers and Addition - up to the Lesson of Apostles (the Epistle) and the bigradual Psalm, it is a figure of the law of nature, wherein was renewed [the knowledge of] Christ through all His members and deeds.
The Lesson of Apostles, moreover, and the bigradual Psalm and from that to the Uncovering (of the chalice), it is a memorial of the law of the Letter wherein was figured Christ, who was not known as yet, though He was figured therein.
The elevation of the chalice, after the full uncovering thereof, quando canitur oblata (when the Oblata is chanted), that is a commemoration of Christ's birth and of His glory through signs and miracles.
The Uncovering, as far as half, of the oblation and of the chalice, and what is chanted by them - both Gospel and Benediction, as far as Oblata, it is a memorial of the law of the Prophets, wherein Christ was foretold clearly, but was not seen until He was born.

From Youtube: Beneventan Chant

2011-05-24T03:19:00.000-07:00

Beneventan chant is a liturgical plainchant repertory of the Catholic Church, used primarily in the orbit of the southern Italian ecclesiastical centers of Benevento and Montecassino, distinct from Gregorian chant and related to Ambrosian chant. It was officially supplanted by Gregorian chant in the 11th century, although a few chants of local interest remained in use.

Here is a sample of Beneventan Chant from Youtube: Otin to Stauron - O Quando in Cruce, sung by Ensemble Organum in Greek and Latin, from their album, Chants de la Cathédrale de Benevento: Semaine Sainte & Pâque.

What is interesting is that three bilingual (Greek and Latin) antiphons, of this is but one, were sung in Benevento and some other Italian centres as part of the Adoration of the Cross service in Holy Week. Some of these chants seem to have Eastern origins: this particular sample for instance, found in sources from places such as Benevento and Ravenna, is actually a version of a Byzantine troparion which can be followed back to the rite of Jerusalem in the 7th century. Its presence in Ravenna should mean that it was already used in the liturgy there before the fall of the Exarchate of Ravenna to the Lombards in 752.

Received Greek Text
(Sung during the Ninth Royal Hour of Holy Friday in the Byzantine liturgy)

Ὅτε σὲ Σταυρῶ προσήλωσαν παράνομοι, τὸν Κύριον τῆς δόξης, ἐβόας πρὸς αὐτούς.
Τὶ ὑμᾶς ἐλύπησα; ἢ ἐν τίνι παρώργισα;
πρὸ ἐμοῦ, τὶς ὑμᾶς ἐρρύσατο ἐκ θλίψεως;
καὶ νύν, τίμοι ἀνταποδίδοτε; πονηρὰ ἀντὶ ἀγαθῶν,
ἀντὶ στύλου πυρὸς Σταυρῶ μὲ προσηλώσατε,
ἀντὶ νεφέλης, τάφον μοὶ ὠρύξατε,
ἀντὶ τοῦ μάννα, χολὴν μοὶ προσηνέγκατε,
ἀντὶ τοῦ ὕδατος, ὄξος μὲ ἐποτίσατε.
Λοιπὸν καλῶ τὰ ἔθνη, κακείνά με δοξάσουσι,
σὺν Πατρὶ καὶ ἁγίω Πνεύματι.

Transliterated Greek text
(text based on MS. 1343 (Sessorianus 62), Rome, Biblioteca Nazionale, folio 80v)

[O]te to stauron proschiloson paranomi kyriontis dosis evoa pros autus
timas elipsas gem tini parorgersas pro emutis ymas elisato e gliesos
che non ti mi antappoditote pomiram anti agaton
anti stilu piros stauro me proschilosate
anti tu manna olimin pro sinegate
ante tu idatos oxos meos potisate
lipon chalo ta etni chachinna me doxa susi si
sin patri che agyon peunemati.

Latin

O quando in Cruce confixerant iniqui Dominum glorie, ait ad eos:
Quid vobis molestus sum, aut in quo iratus sum?
Ante [/ Absque] me, quis vos liberavit ex angustiis?
Et nunc quid michi redditis mala pro bonis?
Pro columna ignis in cruce me configitis:
Pro nube sepulchrum michi foditis:
Pro manna fel me potasti:
Propter aquas aceto michi in poculum porrigitis:
Ego vocabo gentes, ut ipse me glorificent,
una cum Patre et cum Sancto Spiritu, Amen.

English

When transgressors nailed to the Cross the Lord of Glory, He said to them:
"How have I troubled you? Or in what have I angered you?
Before [/ Besides] me, who has delivered you from distress?
And have you not given me back evil for good?
For the pillar of fire you nail me to a cross,
For the cloud you dig me a tomb,
For the manna you made me drink gall,
For the water you offer me vinegar to drink.
I shall call the nations, that they may glorify me,
together with the Father and with the Holy Spirit," Amen.

Another version:

The Pre-Conciliar Ambrosian Rite Mass now up!

2011-05-07T17:00:00.000-07:00

The Latin text of the pre-Conciliar Mass according to the Ambrosian Rite now has its own page.

From Youtube: Ambrosian Rite Mass at Rome's Santa Maria Sopra Minerva

2011-05-05T03:17:00.000-07:00

A little something I just wanted to introduce.

The video shows the chanting of the Gospel. Note the Ambrosian form of the thurible (no top cover), the manner of censing (clockwise), and the cappino worn by the priest around the neck (derived from the apparelled amice).

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 11: Ancient Writers on the Cross

2011-05-04T11:46:00.000-07:00

A Roman citizen of no obscure station, having ordered one of his slaves to be put to death, delivered him to his fellow-slaves to be led away, and in order that his punishment might be witnessed by all, directed them to drag him through the Forum and every other conspicuous part of the city as they whipped him, and that he should go ahead of the procession which the Romans were at that time conducting in honour of the god. The men ordered to lead the slave to his punishment, having stretched out both his arms and fastened them to a piece of wood which extended across his breast and shoulders as far as his wrists, followed him, tearing his naked body with whips.

-Dionysius of Halicarnassus (ca. 60 BC-after 7 BC), Roman Antiquities, VII, 69:1-2

I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet (patibulum).

-Seneca the Younger (ca. 1 BC-AD 65), To Marcia on Consolation, 20.3

Such are his verbal offences against man; his offences in deed remain. Men weep, and bewail their lot, and curse Cadmus with many curses for introducing Tau (Τ) into the family of letters; they say it was his body that tyrants took for a model, his shape that they imitated, when they set up the erections on which men are crucified. Σταυρός (stauros) the vile engine is called, and it derives its vile name from him. Now, with all these crimes upon him, does he not deserve death, nay, many deaths? For my part I know none bad enough but that supplied by his own shape--that shape which he gave to the gibbet named σταυρός after him by men.

-Pseudo-Lucian (ca. 125-after 180), Trial in the Court of Vowels

Learn fully then, children of love, concerning all things, for Abraham, who first circumcised, did so looking forward in the spirit to Jesus, and had received the doctrines of three letters. For it says, "And Abraham circumcised from his household eighteen men and three hundred." What then was the knowledge that was given to him? Notice that he first mentions the eighteen, and after a pause the three hundred. The eighteen is Ι (=10) and Η (=8) - you have Jesus (ΙΗϹΟΥϹ) - and because the cross was destined to have grace in the Τ (=300) he says "and three hundred." So he indicates Jesus in the two letters and the cross in the other.

=================================

Anchor and Fish, Catacombs of Domitilla, Rome. 3rd c.
Similarly, again, he describes the cross in another Prophet, who says, "And when shall all these things be accomplished? saith the Lord. When the tree shall fall and rise, and when blood shall flow from the tree." Here again you have a reference to the cross, and to him who should he crucified. And he says again to Moses, when Israel was warred upon by strangers, and in order to remind those who were warred upon that they were delivered unto death by reason of their sins - the Spirit speaks to the heart of Moses to make a representation of the cross, and of him who should suffer, because, he says, unless they put their trust in him, they shall suffer war for ever. Moses therefore placed one shield upon another in the midst of the fight, and standing there raised above them all kept stretching out his hands, and so Israel again began to be victorious: then, whenever he let them drop they began to perish. Why? That they may know that they cannot be saved if they do not hope on him. And again he says in another Prophet, "I stretched out my hands the whole day to a disobedient people and one that refuses my righteous way."

-Epistle of Barnabas (late 1st-early 2nd century), 9:7-8; 12:1-4

Since he is a criminal, he will be crucified in his height and in the extension of his hands.

-Artemidorus (2nd century), Oneirocritica 1:76

I extended my hands and hallowed my Lord,
For the expansion of my hands is His sign.
And my extension is the upright cross.
Hallelujah.

-Odes of Solomon (1st-3rd century), 27

That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb.

=================================

Crucifixion (Gaza), Paris, jasper. (Late 2nd-early 3rd c.)

"Listen, therefore," say I, "to what follows; for Moses first exhibited this seeming curse of Christ's by the signs which he made."
"Of what [signs] do you speak?" said he.
"When the people," replied I, "waged war with Amalek, and the son of Nave (Nun) by name Jesus (Joshua), led the fight, Moses himself prayed to God, stretching out both hands, and Hur with Aaron supported them during the whole day, so that they might not hang down when he got wearied. For if he gave up any part of this sign, which was an imitation of the cross, the people were beaten, as is recorded in the writings of Moses; but if he remained in this form, Amalek was proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed by the cross. For it was not because Moses so prayed that the people were stronger, but because, while one who bore the name of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront of the battle, he himself made the sign of the cross. For who of you knows not that the prayer of one who accompanies it with lamentation and tears, with the body prostrate, or with bended knees, propitiates God most of all? But in such a manner neither he nor any other one, while sitting on a stone, prayed. Nor even the stone symbolized Christ, as I have shown."

-St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 50; 90:4

Crucifixion, British Museum: carnelian. Mid 4th c.
The sea is not traversed except that trophy which is called a sail abide safe in the ship … And the human form differs from that of the irrational animals in nothing else than in its being erect and having the hands extended, and having on the face extending from the forehead what is called the nose, through which there is respiration for the living creature; and this shows no other form than that of the cross (σταυρός).

But in no instance, not even in any of those called sons of Jupiter, did they imitate the being crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet foretold, is the greatest symbol of His power and role; as is also proved by the things which fall under our observation. For consider all the things in the world, whether without this form they could be administered or have any community. For the sea is not traversed except that trophy which is called a sail abide safe in the ship; and the earth is not ploughed without it: diggers and mechanics do not their work, except with tools which have this shape. And the human form differs from that of the irrational animals in nothing else than in its being erect and having the hands extended, and having on the face extending from the forehead what is called the nose, through which there is respiration for the living creature; and this shows no other form than that of the cross. And so it was said by the prophet, "The breath before our face is the Lord Christ." And the power of this form is shown by your own symbols on what are called “vexilla” [banners] and trophies, with which all your state possessions are made, using these as the insignia of your power and government, even though you do so unwittingly.

-St. Justin Martyr, First Apology 55

But that this point is true, that that number which is called five, which agrees in no respect with their argument, and does not harmonize with their system, nor is suitable for a typical manifestation of the things in the Pleroma, [yet has a wide prevalence,] will be proved as follows from the Scriptures. Soter (Savior) is a name of five letters; Pater (Father), too, contains five letters; Agape (love), too, consists of five letters; and our Lord, after blessing the five loaves, fed with them five thousand men. Five virgins were called wise by the Lord; and, in like manner, five were styled foolish. Again, five men are said to have been with the Lord when He obtained testimony from the Father—namely, Peter, and James, and John, and Moses, and Elias. The Lord also, as the fifth person, entered into the apartment of the dead maiden, and raised her up again; for, says [the Scripture], He suffered no man to go in, save Peter and James, and the father and mother of the maiden. The rich man in hell declared that he had five brothers, to whom he desired that one rising from the dead should go. The pool from which the Lord commanded the paralytic man to go into his house, had five porches. The very form of the cross, too, has five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails.

-St. Irenaeus of Lugdunum (Lyons) (d. ca. 202), Adversus Haereses 2.24.4

The skins which were put upon his arms are the sins of both peoples, which Christ, when His hands were stretched forth on the cross, fastened to it along with Himself.

-Hippolytus of Rome (ca. 170-ca. 236), as quoted in St. Jerome's Epist. 36, Ad Damasum, 28

Crucifixion, Rome, Nott Collection: gem. 4th c.

Crosses, moreover, we neither worship nor wish for. You, indeed, who consecrate gods of wood, adore wooden crosses perhaps as parts of your gods. For your very standards, as well as your banners; and flags of your camp, what else are they but crosses gilded and adorned? Your victorious trophies not only imitate the appearance of a simple cross, but also that of a man affixed to it. We assuredly see the sign of a cross, naturally, in the ship when it is carried along with swelling sails, when it glides forward with expanded oars; and when the military yoke is lifted up, it is the sign of a cross; and when a man adores God with a pure mind, with hands outstretched. Thus the sign of the cross either is sustained by a natural reason, or your own religion is formed with respect to it.

-Marcus Minucius Felix (active ca. 150-270), Octavius 29

Ivory casket (ca. AD 420-430) from Rome (British Museum).
As to the actual images, I regard them as simply pieces of matter akin to the vessels and utensils in common use among us, or even undergoing in their consecration a hapless change from these useful articles at the hands of reckless art, which in the transforming process treats them with utter contempt, nay, in the very act commits sacrilege; so that it might be no slight solace to us in all our punishments, suffering as we do because of these same gods, that in their making they suffer as we do themselves. You put Christians on crosses (crucibus) and stakes (stipitibus): what image is not formed from the clay in the first instance, set on cross and stake? The body of your god is first consecrated on the gibbet...

-Tertullian (ca. 160-ca. 220), Apologia 12

Premising, therefore, and likewise subjoining the fact that Christ suffered, He foretold that His just ones should suffer equally with Him— both the apostles and all the faithful in succession; and He signed them with that very seal of which Ezekiel spoke: "The Lord said unto me, 'Go through the gate, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set the mark Tau upon the foreheads of the men.'" Now the Greek letter Tau and our own letter T is the very form of the cross, which He predicted would be the sign on our foreheads in the true Catholic Jerusalem, in which, according to the twenty-first Psalm, the brethren of Christ or children of God would ascribe glory to God the Father, in the person of Christ Himself addressing His Father; "I will declare Your name unto my brethren; in the midst of the congregation will I sing praise to You." For that which had to come to pass in our day in His name, and by His Spirit, He rightly foretold would be of Him.

-Tertullian, Against Marcion, 3.22

Under the armour of prayer let us guard the standard of our commander, let us in prayer await the angel's trump. All the angels likewise pray, and every creature, beasts of the field and wild beasts pray and bend the knee, and as they leave the stable or the cave, look up to heaven with no vain utterance, stirring their breath after their own manner. Even the birds as they rise in the morning, wing their way up to heaven, and make an outstretched cross with their wings in place of hands, and utter something that seems a prayer. What more, then, is there to say on the duty of prayer? Even the Lord Himself prayed, to whom be honour and power for ever and ever.

-Tertullian, On Prayer, 29

As then in astronomy we have Abraham as an instance, so also in arithmetic we have the same Abraham. "For, hearing that Lot was taken captive, and having numbered his own servants, born in his house, 318 (ΤΙΗ)," he defeats a very great number of the enemy. They say, then, that the character representing 300 (Τ) is, as to shape, the type of the Lord's sign, and that the Iota (Ι) and the Eta (Η) indicate the Saviour's name; that it was indicated, accordingly, that Abraham's domestics were in salvation, who having fled to the Sign and the Name became lords of the captives, and of the very many unbelieving nations that followed them.

-Clement of Alexandria (ca.150-ca. 215), Stromata Book 6, 11

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 10: Joseph Caiaphas

2011-05-04T02:29:00.000-07:00

Joseph Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest between AD 18-37, best known for his role during the trial of Jesus of Nazareth. Nothing is known about his early career, but we can assume that he was a member of a wealthy family, because he married a daughter of the high priest who is called Annas (or Ananus) son of Seth, high priest from AD 6-15 (John 18:13). Even when he was no longer in function, he was apparently extremely influential. According to Josephus, five of Ananus' sons became high priest (Antiquities 20.198); to this we may add Caiaphas, his son-in-law.

Both Annas and Caiaphas may have sympathized with the Sadducees, which found most of its members among the wealthy Jewish elite. Some scholars think it probable that Caiaphas was a member of the embassy that went to Rome in AD 17 to discuss fiscal matters (Tacitus, Annals, 2.42.5).

In AD 18, the Roman governor Valerius Gratus (AD 15-26) appointed Caiaphas as high priest. The two men must have had an excellent working relation, because Caiaphas remained in office exceptionally long. Gratus had dismissed at least four high priests - Annas (Ananus), Ishmael ben-Fabus, Eleazar ben-Ananus, and Simon ben-Camithus - before appointing Caiaphas. Aside from Annas, the aforementioned high priests ruled for only a single year before being taken out of office. It is tempting to link this appointment to the Jewish embassy that in AD 17 had appealed to Tiberius for a reduction in the tribute of Judaea: was Caiaphas rewarded for his tactful behavior in Rome? In any case, Gratus' successor Pontius Pilate never changed the high priest, which can mean that he had found in Caiaphas a man who could be trusted.

Jerusalem at the time of Jesus was goverened by the high priest and his council. This was a reversion to the system that had been followed in the Persian and Hellenistic periods before the Hasmonean revolt. The high priest, often in concert with the 'chief priests', sometimes with the 'elders' (influential, aristocratic laymen), was in charge of ordinary police and judicial procedures, and he - alone and in such combinations as just described - figures large in the Gospels, Acts and in Josephus.

Priesthood was hereditary among the Jews; the priests traced their lineage to Aaron, brother of Moses and first high priest. During the Persian and Hellenistic periods, the high priests, who were rulers of the nation, were (or were thought to be) members of the family of Zadok (1 Kings 1:28-45). The Hasmoneans were hereditary priests, but they were not Zadokites. When they arose to power as a result of the Maccabean revolt against the Seleucids, however, the natural consequence was that the leading member of the family was declared high priest.

When Simon ascended to the high priesthood (1 Maccabees 14:41-49), the previously ruling Zadokite family was deposed, though the system of government remained the same. About a hundred years later, however, the revolt of Aristobulus II (66-63 BC) and his son led to Herod's appointment as King of Judaea, and this changed the system. Herod, himself a non-Jew, could not claim descent from a priestly family and had to appoint high priests during his reign. When Rome deposed Archelaus in AD 6 and sent a prefect to govern Judaea, it also began to appoint the high priest. Thereafter it sometimes granted the right to a member of Herod's family, but sometimes this right was retained by the prefect (later procurator), or by the legate of Syria.

During a sixty-year period (AD 6-66), the high priests were always chosen from one of four families of aristocratic priests. The high priests as political appointees did not have quite the prestige and authority of the hereditary high priests of earlier periods, but nevertheless they had some prestige and a lot of authority. For the most part, they governed Jerusalem successfully.

In Jerusalem, then, even when Judaea was under 'direct' Roman control, Jewish leaders were in day-to-day control. The magistrates were Jews who ruled by Jewish law, the schools were Jewish and the religion was Jewish. The high priest and his council had a wide range of responsibilities: they were required to organize payment of tribute and to get the money and goods to the right person. Jerusalem was policed by the Temple guards, commanded by the high priest.

The high priest was a suitable ruler because the office was traditional and thus was held with great reverence, and the prefect considered him the ideal spokesman for and to the population of Jerusalem. Granted, there were cases when people did not like a high priest (the mob hunted down and killed a former high priest when revolt broke out in AD 66), but whether the high priest was good or not, respect for the office was deep and genuine. First Herod and then Rome took control of the priestly vestments and released them only during special occasions. With them on, the high priest wielded too much power. Cases concerning control of the vestments, and with it the appointment of the high priest, more than once went directly to the emperor for decision.

Who controlled the vestments and the office really mattered, because the man in the office was not only a mediator between Rome and her subjects, but also between God and man. He was the one who, on the Day of Atonement, would go into the Holy of Holies and make atonement for the sins of himself and all Israel.

The Romans considered the high priest to be the reasonable official for them. If people wanted to deal with Rome, they went to the high priest. If Rome wanted to communicate with the people, the prefect summoned the high priest. If anything went wrong, the high priest held full responsibility. But he was only the first among equals: responsibility to prevent trouble fell, to some degree, on all the leading citizens.

In short: Rome's rule over Judaea at our period was rather 'indirect': it governed through client (puppet) kings or resident governors, who in turn, utilized local aristocrats and magistrates down the food chain - be it the local village elder or the Temple high priest. The prefect's main duties are to maintain domestic peace and collect tribute: in Judaea - specifically in Jerusalem, both tasks are turned over to the priestly aristocrats, while the prefect would usually limit himself to monitoring for potential trouble and moving out only when things spiralled out of control, under normal circumstances.

If the high priest did not preserve order, the prefect would intervene militarily, and the situation might get out of hand. As long as the Temple guards, acting as the police, carried out arrests, and as long as the high priest was involved in judging cases (though he usually did not execute anyone), there was little possibility of a direct clash between the Jews and the Romans. To keep his job, he had to remain in control, but any decent high priest - and Caiaphas, it seems, was pretty decent - had to care about the common populace as well. He had other obligations than just the need to prevent clashes with Roman troops. As the man in the middle, he should also represent the views of the people to the prefect, and should stand up for Jewish customs and traditions.

But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they made plans to put him to death.
- John 11:49-52

Around AD 36, Pilate's career in Judaea came to an end. The governor of Syria, Lucius Vitellius, intervened in the Jewish affairs during the Passover festival of AD 37 and removed Caiaphas from office. The man who had ruled the longest of the nineteen high priests of the first century was succeeded by his brother-in-law Jonathan, a son of Ananus, who himself ruled for only a year before being replaced by his brother, Theophilus (AD 37-41).

The Ossuary of Caiaphas?

In November of 1990, a family tomb was discovered in Peace Forest in North Talpiot, Jerusalem. The crypt contained four loculi (burial niches), with twelve intact ossuaries (boxes containing human bones), as well as some coins. The coins, as well as the writing on the ossuaries, help date this tomb as being from around the 1st century AD.

On one of the ornate ossuaries (left), measuring 74 cm long, 29 wide, and 38 high, two inscriptions were found: on the side was written Yehosef bar-QYF', with Yehosef bar-QF' written on one end. This ossuary contained the bones of two babies, a young child, a teenage boy, an adult woman, and a man about 60 years of age. Another ossuary from the same tomb also bore the inscription QF'. After some study, the bones were buried again back on the Mount of Olives - because burial is so central to the Jewish faith, there has in fact been some recent controversy between archaeologists and ultra-Orthodox Jews over human remains uncovered in digs: it is now a rule that uncovered remains are to be promptly turned over to the Ministry of Religious Affairs (presently the Ministry of Religious Services) for reburial - while the ossuary is currently located in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.

Those who favor the Caiaphas interpretation (based on Josephus, who mentions his name as Joseph Caiaphas) propose that QYF'/QF' should be read as Qa[ya]fa', while those questioning it think that it should be vocalized as Qofa' or Qufa' instead.

Ἔλεον εἰρήνης, Sacrificium Laudis

2011-05-03T01:24:00.000-07:00

As you can see, I've slightly retitled my blog to Ἔλεον Εἰρήνης, Sacrificium Laudis. This is a slight reference to the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, where before the Anaphora proper begins there is the usual dialogue between the deacon (or priest) and the congregation common in all liturgies. One of the responses happen to be (in Greek) Ἔλεον εἰρήνης, θυσίαν αἰνέσεως. That is, "mercy of peace, sacrifice of praise."

The term 'sacrifice of praise' which is used in Psalm 49/50:14 and also in Hebrews 13:15 ("Through [Jesus] then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name"), has since from early on apparently been applied to the Eucharist. To quote the Catechism, paragraph 1359: "The Eucharist, the sacrament of our salvation accomplished by Christ on the cross, is also a sacrifice of praise in thanksgiving for the work of creation. In the Eucharistic sacrifice the whole of creation loved by God is presented to the Father through the death and the Resurrection of Christ. Through Christ the Church can offer the sacrifice of praise in thanksgiving for all that God has made good, beautiful, and just in creation and in humanity."

Aside from the Byzantine liturgy, we can see it referenced within the Roman Canon at the commemoration of the living - which is what I was also thinking of when trying to come up with a title for this blog:

Memento, Domine, famulorum, famularumque tuarum N. et N. et omnium circumstantium, quorum tibi fides cognita est, et nota devotio, pro quibus tibi offerimus: vel qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium laudis, pro se, suisque omnibus: pro redemptione animarum suarum, pro spe salutis et incolumitatis suae: tibique reddunt vota sua aeterno Deo, vivo et vero.

Remember, Lord, your servant men and women (Names) and all here present. You are aware of their faith and know their devotedness. We offer for them, or they offer, this sacrifice of praise for themselves and all who are theirs, for the redemption of their souls, for the hope of their health/salvation and safety; and they present their prayers to you, the eternal, living, and true God.

We go to Ἔλεον εἰρήνης. As we have noted, this phrase literally translates to "mercy of peace," which admittedly does not make much sense, to the point that some who use an English translation of the Divine Liturgy soften it into more comprehensible forms like "Offering of peace" or "mercy and peace". There have been various attempts to explain what the original wording could have been (there are have apparently quite a number of variants throughout history). For all intents and purposes, I chose to preserve the textus receptus version here. After all, εἰρήνης (pronounced as irinis in Byzantine Greek) is a good rhyme to laudis. ;)

Old Roman Chant

2011-05-03T00:25:00.000-07:00

Ever heard the claim: "Pope Gregory the Great came up with Gregorian chant"?

For centuries, it has become common wisdom that the venerable pope was the source of what we now know of as Gregorian chant, and the assumption that it was the chant tradition of the Roman Church - apparently the sole one - was a given. Many - scholars and laymen alike - repeat this attribution, often without question. However, certain discoveries in the 19th century (which were not given proper attention until the 20th century!) has shook the foundations of centuries of pious retelling.

Before 1890, no serious enquiry had been made into the direct origins of Roman Chant or its forerunners. It was in that year when a monk from the famous Benedictine abbey of Solesmes, Dom André Mocquereau (1849-1930), as part of his research into the manuscript tradition of Gregorian chant, published an account of three books he discovered in the Vatican Library: two Graduals (Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Archivio di San Pietro, MS lat. 5319 and MS F. 22) and an Antiphonary (MS B.79), all dating from somewhere between the 11th and the 13th century.

Now what intrigued Dom Mocquereau about these manuscripts was that although the material in these sources covered the same liturgical feasts as did the Gregorian books (showing that they were related to each other in that they were both Roman chants), it was melodically distinct from both it, as well as with Ambrosian chant. He wrote a letter to his abbot:

I must tell you of a discovery we made at the Vatican, and that continues to astonish us. Perhaps Dom Pothier will be able to explain what I am going to say? It is a 12th-century Gradual, certainly of the Roman liturgy, with the exception of some slight peculiarities, but in which the chant is not the one used in all manuscripts in all countries. This is a singular exception that intrigues me. For a time, I had thought that the Ambrosian chant had replaced the Gregorian chant; but this is not the case, because in this new chant the universal Gregorian chant is easy to recognize, but with constant variations that give it a very special character. This is surely an Italian manuscript, as proven by the notation. One note that I found, I no longer know where, advances the unsubstantiated notion that it belonged to St. John Lateran. We have yet to see the Archives at that Basilica; are surprises of this kind awaiting us there, perhaps? I have no idea. I would be most interested to know what the Reverend Father Dom Joseph Pothier thinks about all this. I have not yet studied this curious manuscript in detail, because I had hoped to manage to get it to Solesmes.

Dom Pothier wrote a reply dated the 8th of April:

... bring us as many details as possible. What do the variations in the chant or the text consist of? ... we must have a good analysis of it; it is on that analysis that we will base the research needed to understand the nature of the variations, their origins and their cause ... the more numerous and the more accurate the details, the narrower the scope of the guesswork will be. ... Traditions thrived in prior times; at St. Peter's they still use not only ancient hymns, but even a special Psalter that dates from far back.

Dom André Mocquereau (1849-1930)

Eventually publishing the results of his study of the manuscripts, Dom Mocquereau then concluded that this repertory, which he recognized as distinct from Ambrosian and Gregorian chant, seems to date from a "relatively recent period, when the rules of Gregorian composition were beginning to fall into disuse." (Ces mélodies semblent dater d'une époque relativement récente, dans laquelle les régles de composition grégorienne commençaient à tomber en désuétude; Paléographie Musicale, volume II, pp. 4-5, footnote 1) In short, it was a later corruption of Gregorian chant.

Contrary to this view, fellow Benedictine Dom Raphael Andoyer, who after analysing the same sources, expressed the opinion in 1911-12 that they actually represented an earlier stage of musical development than that of Gregorian - a stage he defined as 'pre-Gregorian' (ante-grégorien). For Dom Andoyer, these melodies are the ones which Pope Gregory the Great organized and revised (thus he views Gregory's 'authorship' of plainchant, rather than composing it outright, in the strict sense) into what would become known as Gregorian chant.

The introit Gaudeamus omnes for the
feast of St. Henry of Finland,
from the Graduale Aboense (14th-15th c.)

After this, the subject was abandoned and no new or authoritative conclusions were reached until 1950, when German musicologist Bruno Stäblein published several articles dedicated on the subject, declaring these manuscripts to be prime examples of a chant tradition he called Altrömisch, or Old Roman. From his time on the problem of Old Roman chant became the object of wide-ranging investigation, and even today it claims the close attention of many experts.

We must note here a couple of interesting and inescapable questions, for which an explanation was needed: among the hundreds of medieval manuscripts of Gregorian chant, there is not one which is known to have been used or written at Rome before the mid-13th century, and the very few sources of definite Roman origin which date from before that period contain similar material to that of Gregorian books, but are different from a melodic point of view - and these manuscripts happen to be the ones which Dom Mocquereau discovered (and dismissed as late corruptions)!

In Stäblein's view, both the 'Old Roman', which he takes to be the one edited by Gregory the Great, and the newer 'Gregorian' - a later revision which he dated from the reign of Pope Vitalian (657-672) - coexisted and were being used simultaneously in Rome. Basing his argument on the evidence of an Ordo Romanus which ascribes an active interest in the revision of chant to eight Popes - from Damasus (366-384) to Martin (649-653) - and to three abbots of the Roman monastery of St. Peter (Catolenus, Marianus and Virbonus), Stäblein held that the three abbots are to be credited for the reformation of Roman chant.

The transformation, according to him, would have taken place before 680, when John the archicantor of St. Peter's was sent by Pope Agatho (reign 678-681) to England, ostensibly to teach singing there. This dating, in Stäblein's opinion, is confirmed by what certain sources relate about the work of Vitalian, during whose pontificate the chant in the Papal liturgy was apparently performed by the group of cantors named Vitaliani after their founder. By the 11th to the 13th centuries, Stäblein continues, the situation was such that the Old Roman style of plainchant continued to be employed in the monasteries of the Lateran, while the Papal palace used the 'Gregorian'. The substance of his argument went largely unchanged as time went on, though Stäblein was compelled to make slight adjustments due to the criticism of other scholars (for example, about the mission of the cantors to England). In brief, he hypothesizes the idea of a transformation at Rome of Old Roman into Gregorian, and the coexistence of the two traditions (respectively, as the chant of the Papal liturgy and the chant of the other Roman churches) until the 13th century.

A similar position was taken up by Joseph Smits van Waesberghe, who believed however that the monastic institutions of Rome used Gregorian chant, while the secular clergy kept using the Old Roman style of plainchant. His idea was criticized, however, by other scholars due to his excessive dependence on the Liber Pontificalis (which has undergone intense modern scholarly scrutiny) and for making an over-strict and historically unfounded distinction between Roman monks and secular clergymen. His critics also raised an objection used against Stäblein's thesis: that there is no incontrovertible proof either that a reform of chant took place in 7th-century Rome or that the two repertories existed side-by-side there until the mid-13th century.

Allowing for more or less personal emphases, other scholars (such as Fr. Stephen J.P. Van Dijk O.F.M., and Ewald Stammers) accepted Stäblein's idea of the coexistence of the two repertories, and also took into account a fact confirmed by liturgical historians, according to whom Rome had witnessed over a long period the coexistence of the Papal liturgy (which was undergoing a continual, yet gradual, process of reform) and the liturgy of the presbytal tituli, i.e. the parish churches served by non-Curial clergy.

In 1954, Michel Huglo published an exhaustive directory (Le chant 'vieux-romain': liste des manuscrits et temoins indirects, Sacris Erudiri 6) of Old Roman sources both direct - that is, Graduals and Antiphonaries - and indirect, demonstrating thereby that this chant was the official repertory at Rome towards the mid-8th century, in about 1140, and in the 13th century. Old Roman was thus to be seen as a local repertory of specifically Roman origin (like the Ambrosian chant of Milan or Beneventan chant) which had nonetheless spread into central Italy and had even left traces in the monastic centers of the Carolingian Empire (Stäblein has shown that it was in use as far away as St. Gall in present-day Switzerland in the 9th century) before Gregorian chant had gained the upper hand. Although he came to no conclusion regarding the origins of Gregorian chant, Huglo was prepared to state that Old Roman was the only form of chant familiar to the entire Roman clergy of the period; and this was a clear enough indication that the origins of Gregorian should be looked for outside Rome.

Old Roman Chant: Tecum principium
(courtesy of New Liturgical Movement)

Musicologist Helmut Hucke took up the challenge, when developing an alternative line of argument to that of Stäblein. In Hucke's view, the point of departure of Gregorian is Old Roman, which underwent a transformation in Frankish territory during the Carolingian era.

As everyone who has studied the history of the Roman Rite pretty much knows, the Roman liturgy starting from the Middle Ages is actually a hybrid between the Gallican family of rites and the original liturgy in use at Rome. It all started in 754, when the first King of the Franks, Pepin the Short decreed the adoption of the Papal liturgy in his kingdom. It was the time when the Roman liturgy, which until then, apart from the Anglo-Saxon mission Church, had possessed and laid claim to recognition only for Rome and its environs, advanced in a short time to becoming the liturgy of a great empire.

Of course, as soon as the Roman way of worship was introduced in Frankish territory, its started to absorb local elements. It is often related that Charlemagne, Pepin's son, once asked Pope Hadrian I to provide an authentic Roman sacramentary for use throughout the empire, which the latter sent to the court at Aachen around in the year 785-786. The intention was to preserve it as the authentic "standard" of the text attributed to Pope St. Gregory the Great and to disseminate it throughout all of Charlemagne's domain through copies, thereby unifying the whole empire under one liturgy - that of Rome. However, the sacramentary the Pope sent soon proved to be ill-suited to the Emperor's plan: it only contained the liturgy for certain feasts, which would make it ill-adapted to the daily liturgical needs of a parish! When complaints reached the ear of the Pope, his excuse was saying that he merely picked from the Lateran library what seemed to him to be the best sacramentary he had! Recognizing the obvious unsuitability of the book, the court liturgists decided to correct the text (especially its rather mediocre Latin) and then to augment it with a supplement - derived from the local traditions - so that it could serve for the daily liturgy. The result of this work is the Hadrianum, aka the Hadrian Sacramentary.

(above: Introit: Resurrrexi, sung by Ensemble Organum, from their album Chants de L'Eglise de Rome: Période Byzantine)

Eventually, this hybrid Roman-Frankish liturgy started creeping its way into the Eternal City itself, eventually supplanting its own parent altogether. Church life in Rome was stagnant during the saeculum obscurum of the first half of the 10th century; there was a liturgical vacuum, which the Gallo-Roman liturgy refilled. This took place both through the direct intervention of the Holy Roman Empire and by the settlement of the Cluniacs in monasteries of Rome or its neighborhood.

Hucke's idea was that Old Roman chant would have shared the same fate as that of the Roman liturgy, to which it is tagged: it would have encountered the Gallic repertories and would have been transformed into what would be known into later ages as 'Gregorian' not only by an inevitable process of 'contamination' but above all by being deliberately adapted for aesthetic reasons. Whatever the value of the latter motive, it should not be forgotten that musical notation did not exist yet, and the repertory would have been handed on by memory.

Hucke's idea received support from writers such as Willi Apel and Robert J. Snow, while Walther Lipphardt, although claiming that Gregorian chant was the Frankish version of a Roman original, maintained that the melodic material exported from Rome was accepted in Frankish domains without any modification; thus Gregorian would be nothing more than the Roman chant of the 9th century. Apart from this detail, these are the broad lines of the second hypothesis: the birth of Gregorian in what is now France as a result of the impact of Roman chant on the local Gallican traditions.

Part of the reason why Gregorian chant succeeded in gaining the upper hand, it seems, was facilitated by two factors: the invention of a process of writing the melody, which represents a turn in musical history, and its being attributed to one of the most famous characters in Christendom - Pope St. Gregory the Great.

There are now various alternative theories as to how Gregorian chant got its name, aside from the standard interpretation that it was named after Gregory the Great, and not without their own critics. One proposes that the name actually refers to a different Gregory (one popular candidate here is the 8th-century pope Gregory II) - a theory that already existed even before Old Roman chant was actually discovered - while another says that the name was actually the result of (Carolingian?) propaganda by appealing to higher authority to give vindication for the abandonment of local chant traditions in favor of the (Frankish-) Roman style of chanting.

After all, who could go wrong with Gregory's music? ;)

Holy Week in the City of Rome: Palm Sunday

2011-05-03T00:07:00.000-07:00

Dominica in Palmis (De Passione Domini)

Three of the earliest Roman liturgical books, the Gelasian Sacramentary (7th c.), and both the Paduan (7th c.) and the Hadrian (8th c.) editions of the Gregorian Sacramentary already call the Sunday before Easter Dominica in Palmis ("Sunday for Palms") or Die dominico ad Palmas. Even so, none of these documents explicitly mention any observances of palm rites, which were by the time already being performed in various parts of Christendom. The references to palms is absent in the propers, and in all the Roman Epistolari and Evangeliari of the period - in fact, the original title for the day probably did not mention palms at all, since the rite did not probably reach Rome until about the tenth century. In Rome, Palm Sunday was simply Passion Sunday, due to the fact that the Passion account from Matthew's Gospel (chapters 26-27) was read on this day. After the Gospel is read, the pope then usually gave a sermon on the first half of the account, postponing his explanation of the remainder to the following Wednesday.
Such a ceremony had already existed in Jerusalem as early as the 4th century, as testified to by the pilgrim Egeria:

Accordingly at the seventh hour all the people go up to the Mount of Olives, that is, to Eleona, and the bishop with them, to the church, where hymns and antiphons suitable to the day and to the place are said, and lessons in like manner. And when the ninth hour approaches they go up with hymns to the Imbomon, that is, to the place whence the Lord ascended into heaven, and there they sit down, for all the people are always bidden to sit when the bishop is present; the deacons alone always stand. Hymns and antiphons suitable to the day and to the place are said, interspersed with lections and prayers. And as the eleventh hour approaches, the passage from the Gospel is read, where the children, carrying branches and palms, met the Lord, saying; Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord (Matthew 21:9), and the bishop immediately rises, and all the people with him, and they all go on foot from the top of the Mount of Olives, all the people going before him with hymns and antiphons, answering one to another: Blessed is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord. And all the children in the neighbourhood, even those who are too young to walk, are carried by their parents on their shoulders, all of them bearing branches, some of palms and some of olives, and thus the bishop is escorted in the same manner as the Lord was of old. For all, even those of rank, both matrons and men, accompany the bishop all the way on foot in this manner, making these responses, from the top of the mount to the city, and thence through the whole city to the Anastasis, going very slowly lest the poeple should be wearied; and thus they arrive at the Anastasis at a late hour. And on arriving, although it is late, lucernare takes place, with prayer at the Cross; after which the people are dismissed.

In the West, it appears for the first time in the Liber Ordinum, a liturgical book of the Mozarabic Rite containing practices of the fifth to seventh centuries; both the blessing of palms at the altar and a subsequent procession with palms are mentioned. In the North Italian-Celtic Bobbio Missal (7th-8th century) a prayer for "the Blessing of Palms and Olives on the altar" is provided, but it says nothing about a procession afterwards; it does, however, indicate that the laity took palms home with them "piously with devotion." In the next century, the liturgist Amalarius of Metz apparently described the custom in his native Gaul: "In memory of this [our Lord's entry into Jerusalem] we are accustomed throughout our churches to carry branches and to cry Hosanna." It was during this same period that Theodulf, Bishop of Orléans (ca. 750/60-821) composed the hymn Gloria, Laus et Honor. A procession is described in the tenth-century Regularis Concordia, a document produced in Winchester detailing the practices of English Benedictine monasteries:

...the gospel Turba multa [John 12:12-19] shall be read by the deacon as far as the words "Behold, the whole world is gone after him": the blessing of the palms shall follow. After the blessing the palms shall be sprinkled with holy water and incensed. While the children begin the antiphons Pueri Hebraeorum the palms shall be distributed. Then the greater antiphons shall be intoned and the procession shall go forth. As soon as the mother church is reached the procession shall wait while the children, who shall have gone on before, sing Gloria laus with its verses, to which all shall answer Gloria laus, as the custom is. When this is finished the cantor shall intone the respond Ingrediente Domino and the doors shall be opened.

It is more likely that the arrival in Rome of the Romano-Germanic Pontifical compiled in in St. Alban's Abbey, Mainz, under the reign of William, Archbishop of Mainz, in the mid-tenth century, would have led to the introduction of the Procession of Palms into the Roman liturgy, for just such a ceremony is described at great length in this work (Ordo de die Palmarum). The pontifical itself had a decisive influence over the Roman liturgical books of the twelfth-thirteenth centuries - such ceremonies already appear in the Roman Ordines 11 and 12.

The propers of the day from the Gelasian Sacramentary:

DOMINICA IN PALMIS
De Passione Domini.

(Omnipotens sempiterne) Deus, qui humano generi ad imitandum humilitatis exemplum, Salvatorem nostrum et carnem sumere et crucem subire fecisti, concede (nobis) propitius ut et patientiae eius habere documentum et resurrectionis eius consortia mereamur, Christi Domini nostri. Qui tecum vivit et regnat Deus in unitate Spiritus sancti, per.

Deus, quem diligere et amare iustitia est, ineffabilis gratiae tuae in nobis dona multiplica: et [ut] qui fecisti nos morte Filii tui sperare quod credimus, fac nos, eodem resurgente, pervenire quo tendimus. Per.

Secreta.
Ipsa maiestati tuae, Domine, fidelis populus commendet oblatio, qui per Filium tuum reconciliavit inimicos, Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum. Qui tecum uiuit et regnat Deus in unitate Spiritus sancti, per omnia saecula saeculorum.

Postcommunio.
Sacro munere satiati, supplices te, Domine, deprecamur, ut qui debite servitutis celebramus officio, salvationis tuae suscipiamus augmentum. Per.

Ad Populum.
Purifica, quaesumus, Domine, familiam tuam, et ab omnibus contagiis pravitatis emunda, ut redempta vasa sui Domini passione, non spiritus immundus rursus inficiat, sed salvatio sempiterna possideat. Per.

From the Hadrian Sacramentary:

DIE DOMINICO IN PALMAS
Ad Sanctum Iohannem in Lateranis.

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui humano generi ad imitandum humilitatis exemplum, Salvatorem nostrum carnem sumere et crucem subire fecisti, concede propitius ut et patientiae ipsius habere documenta et resurrectionis consortia mereamur, Per.

Super oblata.Concede, quaesumus, Domine, ut oculis tuae maiestatis munus oblatum, et gratiam nobis devotionis obtineat, et effectum beatae perennitatis acquirat. Per.

Ad completa.
Per huius, Domine, operationem mysterii: et vitia nostra purgentur, et iusta desideria compleantur. Per.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 9: Pontius Pilate, Third Part and Appendix

2011-05-02T23:54:00.000-07:00

The Jesus incident certainly was not the last event in Pilate's career.

But the nation of the Samaritans did not escape without tumults. The man who excited them to it was one who thought lying a thing of little consequence, and who contrived every thing so that the multitude might be pleased; so he bid them to get together upon Mount Gerizim, which is by them looked upon as the most holy of all mountains, and assured them, that when they were come thither, he would show them those sacred vessels which were laid under that place, because Moses put them there.

So they came thither armed, and thought the discourse of the man probable; and as they abode at a certain village, which was called Tirathana, they got the rest together to them, and desired to go up the mountain in a great multitude together; but Pilate prevented their going up, by seizing upon file roads with a great band of horsemen and foot-men, who fell upon those that were gotten together in the village; and when it came to an action, some of them they slew, and others of them they put to flight, and took a great many alive, the principal of which, and also the most potent of those that fled away, Pilate ordered to be slain.

But when this tumult was appeased, the Samaritan senate sent an embassy to Vitellius, a man that had been consul, and who was now president of Syria, and accused Pilate of the murder of those that were killed; for that they did not go to Tirathaba in order to revolt from the Romans, but to escape the violence of Pilate. So Vitellius sent Marcellus, a friend of his, to take care of the affairs of Judea, and ordered Pilate to go to Rome, to answer before the emperor to the accusations of the Jews.

So Pilate, when he had tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome, and this in obedience to the orders of Vitellius, which he durst not contradict; but before he could get to Rome Tiberius was dead.

- Josephus, Antiquities 18.85-89

This anonymous Samaritan may be called a Messiah in one sense (not on the original, as that is a Jewish concept), because he apparently announced the restoration of the cult in the Samarian temple, which was on Mount Gerizim - as implied by his claiming to be able to show Moses' sacred vessels. The Samaritan equivalent of the Jewish 'Messiah' is the Taheb ('Restorer'), which they interpret to be the prophet like unto Moses mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:15-18.

With this, Pontius Pilate disappears from the records of history once more. We will never know what happened to him after his dismissal. Pilate had remained in office for more than ten years (AD 26-36).

Appendix: the Physical Evidence of Pilate

Aside from the literary testimonies, we have at least a couple of physical evidences for the existence of Pontius Pilate: coins dating from the period of his governorship and a single stone discovered in 1961.

The Pilate Stone (right) is a block of limestone with a carved inscription attributed to Pilate, found in 1961 by a team of Italian archeologists led by Dr. Antonio Frova in an ancient theater, built by decree of Herod the Great c. 30 BC, located in Caesarea Maritima (present-day Qesarya), the capital of Roman Judaea. On the partially damaged block is a dedication to Tiberius Caesar. As of now, this is the only known occurrence of the name Pontius Pilate in any ancient inscription. The stone is now located at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, with a replica left on the site at Caesarea.

Since the text is so damaged - one can only make out the words Tiberieum, [Po]ntius Pilatus and [Praef]ectus Iuda[ea]e on it now - there are a number of proposals as to how the original text may have originally read. Here are some of them:

1.) [dis augusti]S TIBERIEVM [po]NTIVS PILATVS [praef]ECTVS IVDA[ea]E [fecit d]E[dicavit] "To the honorable gods (or To the Divine Augusti [i.e. Augustus and Livia]) the Tiberieum Pontius Pilatus, prefect of Iudaea, has made (and) dedicated."

2.) [caesarien(ibu)]S TIBERIEVM [po]NTIVS PILATVS [praef]ECTVS IVDA[ea]E [d]E[dit] "The Caesareans' (i.e. people of Caesarea Maritima) Tiberieum, Pontius Pilatus, prefect of Iudaea, dedicates."

3.) [kal(endis) iulii]S TIBERIEVM [m (arcus) ? pon]NTIVS PILATVS [praef]ECTVS IVDA[ea]E [d]E[dicavit] " "The Tiberieum of the kalends of July Marcus (?) Pontius Pilatus, prefect of Iudaea, has dedicated."

4.) [opu]S TIBERIEVM... "The Tiberieum building..."

5.) [iudaei]S TIBERIEVM... "The Judeans' (Jews') Tiberieum..."

6.) [nemu]S TIBERIEVM... "The Tiberieum of the (sacred) grove..."

7.) [munu]S TIBERIEVM... "The municipal Tiberieum..."

8.) [nauti]S TIBERIEVM [pon]NTIVS PILATVS [praef]ECTVS IVDA[ea]E [r]E[fecit] "The seamen's Tiberieum Pontius Pilatus, Prefect of Iudaea, restores."

This inscription caused some sensation among experts, because it proves that Pilate's title was praefectus, and not procurator, as the Roman historian Tacitus states in his Annals.

The title used by the governors of the region varied depending on the period. When Samaria, Judaea proper and Idumea were first amalgamated into Judaea Province, from AD 6 to the outbreak of the First Jewish Revolt in AD 66, officials of the equestrian order governed. They held the Roman title of praefectus until Herod Agrippa I was named 'King of the Judaeans' by the emperor Claudius. After Herod Agrippa's death in AD 44, when Judaea reverted to direct Roman rule, the governor began to held the title procurator. When applied to governors, the title procurator, otherwise used for financial officers, connotes no difference in rank or function from the title known as prefect. Contemporary archaeological finds and documents such as the Pilate Stone attest to the governor's more accurate official title only for the years 6 through 44: prefect.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 9: Pontius Pilate, Second Part

2011-05-02T23:47:00.000-07:00

Later, on another occasion:

After this he raised another disturbance, by expending that sacred treasure which is called korbonas upon aqueducts, whereby he brought water from the distance of four hundred furlongs. At this the multitude had indignation; and when Pilate was come to Jerusalem, they came about his tribunal, and made a clamor at it.

Now when he was apprized aforehand of this disturbance, he mixed his own soldiers in their armor with the multitude, and ordered them to conceal themselves under the habits of private men, and not indeed to use their swords, but with their staves to beat those that made the clamor. He then gave the signal from his tribunal [to do as he had bidden them].

Now the Jews were so sadly beaten, that many of them perished by the stripes they received, and many of them perished as trodden to death by themselves; by which means the multitude was astonished at the calamity of those that were slain, and held their peace.

- Josephus, Wars of the Jews 2.175-177

But Pilate undertook to bring a current of water to Jerusalem, and did it with the sacred money, and derived the origin of the stream from the distance of two hundred furlongs. However, the Jews were not pleased with what had been done about this water; and many ten thousands of the people got together, and made a clamor against him, and insisted that he should leave off that design. Some of them also used reproaches, and abused the man, as crowds of such people usually do.

So he habited a great number of his soldiers in their habit, who carried daggers under their garments, and sent them to a place where they might surround them. So he bid the Jews himself go away; but they boldly casting reproaches upon him, he gave the soldiers that signal which had been beforehand agreed on; who laid upon them much greater blows than Pilate had commanded them, and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not; nor did they spare them in the least: and since the people were unarmed, and were caught by men prepared for what they were about, there were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded. And thus an end was put to this sedition.

- Josephus, Antiquities 18.60-62

Korbanas: among the Jews the holy treasury. Pilate spent the holy treasury on an aqueduct and stirred up a riot. It brought in water from a distance of seventy-two kilometers. Bringing in his army, he killed many.

- The Souda, 'Korbanas'

The construction of the aquaduct - its length was twenty kilometers - had been ordered by Herod the Great. Pilate could not finish the building; it was inaugurated by Herod Agrippa, who reigned in Jerusalem from AD 41 to AD 44.

The treasury Josephus describes as korbonas is known from Jewish sources as qorban (cf. Matthew 27:6 "It is not lawful to put them to the korbanas"), and Jewish law permitted the use of money from this treasury for social welfare and public works (Mishna, Šeqalim 4.2). Granted, the Mishna dates from a later period, but it could be possible that a similar law was in force in the 1st century. Of course the Temple authorities, whose duty it was to administer the money, had to cooperate, but their consent - whether voluntary or coerced we do not know - is implied in the story. Had they refused, Josephus would have told us that Pilate stole the money and expressed horror that a pagan had violated the Temple.

It is unclear what Pilate did wrong, especially since the construction of an aqueduct was surely an undertaking that would have improved the inhabitants' standard of living enormously (and which it did, as Jerusalem's water supply was limited). It could be that he took the initiative, instead of allowing Caiaphas to take the credits. Or he could have completely drained the funds, which were primarily used for sacrificial purposes. Supposing that a law similar to that found in the Mishna did exist at that time, Pilate would have received surplus money from the treasury for use in the aqueduct's construction. Problem would have only arose when Pilate began to wantonly spend the money and demand more than the surplus for his venture from the priests. Building projects are after all notorious requiring more money than initially expected.

The demonstration seems to have taken place at a feast, because Pilate was staying in Jerusalem (the governor usually stayed here during feastdays to monitor the crowds and to check for potential unrest). It may have been during this festival that the soldiers "mingled the blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices" (Luke 13:1). The fact that Pilate's soldiers could be hidden among the populace may suggest that they were not Italians, but belonged to a locally-recruited unit (say, the Samaritan Ala I Sebastenorum or Cohors I Sebastenorum).

Not too later would come the most well-known incident in the life of Pilate, so familiar that I would step aside and let the authors do the talking.

And immediately in early-morning the chief priests, having made counsel, with the elders and scribes and the whole Council, having bound Jesus, carried Him off and handed Him over to Pilate. And Pilate questioned Him: “Are you the King of the Judaeans?” Now He, answering, says to him, “You say it.” And the chief priests were accusing Him much. Now Pilate again questioned Him, [saying,] “Do you not answer? See how many things they are accusing you of.” But Jesus no more answered anything, so that Pilate wondered.

Now at every feast he was releasing for them one prisoner whom they were asking. Now there was the one called ‘Barabbas’, bound with fellow-insurrectionists who had in the insurrection committed murder; and the crowd, having went up, began asking him to do as he was always doing for them. And Pilate answered them, saying, “Do you want that I should release for you ‘the King of the Judaeans’?” (For he knew that because of envy the chief priests had handed Him over.)

But the chief priests stirred up the crowd that he should rather release Barabbas for them; and Pilate answering, again said to them, “What, then [do you want] me to do with [the one you call] ‘the King of the Judaeans’?” Now again they cried out, “Crucify Him!” Now Pilate said to them, “Why? What evil did He?” But they more exceedingly cried out, “Crucify Him!” Now Pilate, wanting to satisfy the crowd, released to them Barabbas, and handing over Jesus – having Him flagellated – that He might be crucified.

- Mark 15:1-15

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, (if it be lawful to call him a man;) for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews (and many of the Greeks. ?) (He was [the] Christ. = 'He was believed to be the Christ.' ?) And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; (for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.) And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

- Josephus, Antiquities 18.63-64

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite punishments on a class hated for their disgraceful acts, called Chrestians (sic) by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.

- Tacitus, Annals 15.44

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 9: Pontius Pilate, First Part

2011-05-02T23:40:00.000-07:00

A belated Happy Easter to one and all! Christ is Risen!
Sorry again for the (usual) silence here in this blog. To make some amends: we'll have a bit of look on the man whose name is known to most Christians all over the world in a daily basis solely because he has some involvement in the death of Jesus Christ.

Pontius Pilate (Pontius Pilatus; Greek Πόντιος Πιλᾶτος, Pontios Pilatos) was the fifth prefect of the Roman province of Judaea, from AD 26-36. He is probably famous as the man who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. We do not know much about him, save for the scraps that men of former ages have left down for us. Pilate's name has become famous only because of his association with Jesus Christ: "He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate." Indeed, we can say that if he did not have any involvement with Jesus' death at all, he would only be yet another of those minor footnotes in the history of the Roman Empire.

Most of the governors (praeses (provinciae), rector provinciae) who ruled the forty-something provinces of the Roman Empire are actually virtually unknown to historians, who consider themselves lucky when they happen to know who was responsible for a province at a certain moment. There are, however, some exceptions to this.

Now the governor of any given Roman province had four tasks.

1.) He was responsible for taxation and financial management. Depending on the basis of his appointment, he was either the Emperor's personal agent, or the Roman Senate’s financial agent, and had to supervise the local authorities, the private toll collectors, and levy taxes. A governor could mint coins and negotiate with wealthy institutions such as temples and private money-lenders that could advance money.

2.) He was the province's chief accountant: meaning, he inspected the books of major cities and various operations as well as supervising large-scale building projects throughout the province.

3.) The governor was the province's supreme judge. The governor had the sole right to impose capital punishment, and capital cases were normally tried before him. To appeal a governor's decision necessitated travelling to Rome and presenting one's case before either the Praetor urbanus, or even the Emperor himself, an expensive, and thus rare, process. The governor was also supposed to travel across his province - in the case of the governor of Judaea, this necessitated travel through the districts of Samaria, Judaea and Perea - to administer justice in the major towns where his attention was required.

4.) He commanded the military forces within the province. In the more important provinces, this could consist of legions, but elsewhere, there were only auxiliaries, as was the case in Judaea. As a part of his standing orders the governor had the authority to use his legions to stamp out organized criminal gangs or rebels in the area without need for the Emperor's or Senate's approval. Two cohorts had their barracks in Jerusalem (at the old palace and at the Antonia fortress); a third cohort guarded the capital, Caesarea Maritima; and two cohorts of infantry and one cavalry regiment were on duty throughout the province. Taken together, the prefect of Judaea commanded 6×500 men: a force to be reckoned with, but not enough when things went seriously wrong. In that case, his superior, the legate of Syria, would have to send a legion to his aid.

The Fortress Antonia (reconstruction by Leen Ritmeyer)

Pilate's tenure of office - at least at first - was not typical, however, because the Syrian governor Lucius Aelius Lamia was absent. Lucius Aelius Lamia the younger, the scion of an illustrious family of cavalry officers that Augustus elevated to senatorial status and himself (or his father) reportedly a personal friend of the poet Horace and Cicero Minor, has had a prestigious career: he was consul of Rome in AD 3 and afterwards served as governor of Germania, Pannonia and Africa. He was assigned the post of legate of Syria in AD 22, but the title was purely nominal: for reasons entirely unclear, Tiberius requested the popular senator to stay in Rome. There, he was elevated to the status of prefect of Rome in AD 32. The aging military bureaucrat died after only a year in office and was honored with a state funeral.

The absence of an imperial legate for a decade gave Pilate much greater autonomy than was usual for a military prefect, as he could not rely on the Syrian governor and his troops to give him aid. In case of an emergency, he and his auxiliaries were alone.

Judaea was so unimportant a province, that no senator would have deigned to become its governor. Consequently, its governors belonged to the second class of the Roman elite, the equestrian order (ordo equester). These men were not entitled to become legates or proconsuls, but had to content themselves with the title of prefect (after AD 41, procurator).

Pilate, along with his wife, arrived at Caesarea in AD 26. Trouble started almost immediately at the beginning of his term as a prelude to his quite-stormy career: soldiers had brought army standards or inscribed shields, and almost the entire population of Jerusalem marched to Caesarea, imploring the new governor to remove the effigies, which were in violation of the Law.

Moreover, I have it in my power to relate one act of ambition on his part, though I suffered an infinite number of evils when he was alive; but nevertheless the truth is considered dear, and much to be honoured by you. Pilate was one of the emperor's lieutenants, having been appointed governor of Judaea. He, not more with the object of doing honour to Tiberius than with that of vexing the multitude, dedicated some gilt shields in the palace of Herod, in the holy city; which had no form nor any other forbidden thing represented on them except some necessary inscription, which mentioned these two facts, the name of the person who had placed them there, and the person in whose honour they were so placed there.

But when the multitude heard what had been done, and when the circumstance became notorious, then the people, putting forward the four sons of the king, who were in no respect inferior to the kings themselves, in fortune or in rank, and his other descendants, and those magistrates who were among them at the time, entreated him to alter and to rectify the innovation which he had committed in respect of the shields; and not to make any alteration in their national customs, which had hitherto been preserved without any interruption, without being in the least degree changed by any king of emperor.

But when he steadfastly refused this petition (for he was a man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very obstinate), they cried out: "Do not cause a sedition; do not make war upon us; do not destroy the peace which exists. The honour of the emperor is not identical with dishonour to the ancient laws; let it not be to you a pretence for heaping insult on our nation. Tiberius is not desirous that any of our laws or customs shall be destroyed. And if you yourself say that he is, show us either some command from him, or some letter, or something of the kind, that we, who have been sent to you as ambassadors, may cease to trouble you, and may address our supplications to your master.'"

But this last sentence exasperated him in the greatest possible degree, as he feared least they might in reality go on an embassy to the emperor, and might impeach him with respect to other particulars of his government, in respect of his corruption, and his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, and gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity.

Therefore, being exceedingly angry, and being at all times a man of most ferocious passions, he was in great perplexity, neither venturing to take down what he had once set up, nor wishing to do any thing which could be acceptable to his subjects, and at the same time being sufficiently acquainted with the firmness of Tiberius on these points. And those who were in power in our nation, seeing this, and perceiving that he was inclined to change his mind as to what he had done, but that he was not willing to be thought to do so, wrote a most supplicatory letter to Tiberius.

And he, when he had read it, what did he say of Pilate, and what threats did he utter against him! But it is beside our purpose at present to relate to you how very angry he was, although he was not very liable to sudden anger; since the facts speak for themselves; for immediately, without putting any thing off till the next day, he wrote a letter, reproaching and reviling him in the most bitter manner for his act of unprecedented audacity and wickedness, and commanding him immediately to take down the shields and to convey them away from the metropolis of Judaea to Caesarea, on the sea which had been named Caesarea Augusta, after his grandfather, in order that they might be set up in the temple of Augustus. And accordingly, they were set up in that edifice. And in this way he provided for two matters: both for the honour due to the emperor, and for the preservation of the ancient customs of the city.

- Philo, On the Embassy to Gaius (38) 299-305

Now Pilate, who was sent as procurator into Judea by Tiberius, sent by night those images of Caesar that are called ensigns into Jerusalem. This excited a very among great tumult among the Jews when it was day; for those that were near them were astonished at the sight of them, as indications that their laws were trodden under foot; for those laws do not permit any sort of image to be brought into the city. Nay, besides the indignation which the citizens had themselves at this procedure, a vast number of people came running out of the country.

These came zealously to Pilate to Cesarea, and besought him to carry those ensigns out of Jerusalem, and to preserve them their ancient laws inviolable; but upon Pilate's denial of their request, they fell down prostrate upon the ground, and continued immovable in that posture for five days and as many nights.

On the next day Pilate sat upon his tribunal, in the open market-place, and called to him the multitude, as desirous to give them an answer; and then gave a signal to the soldiers, that they should all by agreement at once encompass the Jews with their weapons; so the band of soldiers stood round about the Jews in three ranks. The Jews were under the utmost consternation at that unexpected sight. Pilate also said to them that they should be cut in pieces, unless they would admit of Caesar's images, and gave intimation to the soldiers to draw their naked swords.

Hereupon the Jews, as it were at one signal, fell down in vast numbers together, and exposed their necks bare, and cried out that they were sooner ready to be slain, than that their law should be transgressed. Hereupon Pilate was greatly surprised at their prodigious superstition, and gave order that the ensigns should be presently carried out of Jerusalem.

- Josephus, Wars of the Jews 2.169-174

BUT now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem, to take their winter quarters there, in order to abolish the Jewish laws. So he introduced Caesar's effigies, which were upon the ensigns, and brought them into the city; whereas our law forbids us the very making of images; on which account the former procurators were wont to make their entry into the city with such ensigns as had not those ornaments.

Pilate was the first who brought those images to Jerusalem, and set them up there; which was done without the knowledge of the people, because it was done in the night time; but as soon as they knew it, they came in multitudes to Cesarea, and interceded with Pilate many days that he would remove the images; and when he would not grant their requests, because it would tend to the injury of Caesar, while yet they persevered in their request, on the sixth day he ordered his soldiers to have their weapons privately, while he came and sat upon his judgment-seat, which seat was so prepared in the open place of the city, that it concealed the army that lay ready to oppress them; and when the Jews petitioned him again, he gave a signal to the soldiers to encompass them routed, and threatened that their punishment should be no less than immediate death, unless they would leave off disturbing him, and go their ways home.

But they threw themselves upon the ground, and laid their necks bare, and said they would take their death very willingly, rather than the wisdom of their laws should be transgressed; upon which Pilate was deeply affected with their firm resolution to keep their laws inviolable, and presently commanded the images to be carried back from Jerusalem to Cesarea.

- Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 18.55-59 (18.3.1)

There are two striking differences between these three stories. To start with, Philo knows about a petition by four sons of Herod and tells us nothing about the sit down action that Josephus describes with much gusto. The other difference is that Josephus thinks that army standards were involved, whereas Philo mentions gilded shields with an inscription. But whatever their differences, Philo and Josephus have one thing in common: they do not tell the story from Pilate's point of view, but tell it from a Jewish perspective, which is extremely hostile to the governor. Some debate still goes on as to whether Pilate deliberately did this to provoke the Jews or whether these were accidental faux pas on his part.

After the incident, Pilate may have written a letter to the emperor, to which was attached the request by the four Jewish leaders. It was common practice that a governor reported incidents and asked guidance from the monarch; the letters written by the 2nd-century governor of Bithynia-Pontus, Pliny the Younger, to Trajan are known to us and show us that the emperor was consulted frequently, and for matters of far less importance than the incident with the gilded shields (or the iconic standards). Philo must have known about this letter to Tiberius, but he can never have read it. He - and also we - certainly did not know the answer, which must have been friendly: Pilate was to be governor for another ten years.

We need your prayers

2011-03-13T16:00:00.000-07:00

As you probably have heard, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake has hit Japan. Thankfully no one in my family got injured, though we really need all your prayers now and in the days to come.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 8: The Birth of the Messiah, Part 2: Giving Birth

2010-12-23T16:50:00.000-08:00

In my humble opinion, one of the miracles of Jesus' birth that many people often overlook nowadays is a rather 'mundane' one: the fact that both Jesus and Mary survived.

Childbirth was a risky business in the ancient world. Mortality is considered to have been quite high in antiquity, due to a few factors: a lack of sanitation and hygienic awareness, no understanding of micro-organisms, and a dearth of effective drugs all contributed to it. In the context of childbirth, however, maternal and infant mortality were seriously raised by modern standards. This inflation resulted from the toll childbirth took on women, and the increased risk of infection following labor.

Producing children was a woman's greatest job, but the act itself was fraught with danger; death in childbirth was one of, if not the, common causes of death among women in antiquity. One estimate puts a 25% chance that the woman would die while delivering her child, and most maternal deaths were likely caused by infection. Even if the woman survived, there still remains the possibility that her baby might not. Infant mortality rate was quite high, like the rate of deaths in childbirth.

For the record, let's check as to how the Jews viewed death in childbirth: the rabbis answer that the cause of death was the transgression of any of the three commandments that women and only women are obligated to carry out: the laws of niddah, challah (the dough-offering), and the lighting of the Shabbat candle. These commandments were given in punishment for Eve's sin in the garden, and non-fulfillment was a matter of life and death, and carried a heavy penalty with it. By contrast, giving birth without birth pangs was seen as a sign of God's favor and the righteousness of the woman: Josephus records a tradition about how Moses' mother Jochebed gave birth to him without effort, which her parents took to be a good sign (Antiquities 2.218).

So, we now approach the question: how did women give birth in those days? Many Nativity scenes picture Mary and Joseph being by themselves alone, but the actual picture may be quite different.

For the Middle Eastern peasant, it is a bad thing to be alone. He does his thinking in a crowd, as his culture is a group-centered one, as opposed to the individualistic thinking of the 21st century West. Thus, in the case of a birth, the men will sit apart with the neighbors, but the room will be full of women assisting the midwife, as childbirth was then the domain of women, and men did not take part in it.

In the 2nd century AD, the physician Soranus of Ephesus wrote a text on gynecology introducing the occupation of the midwife, giving us a picture as to how wealthy women in the Greco-Roman world. Soranus described her role in great detail. For example, the midwife was to have certain tools to ensure a safe delivery including: clean olive oil, sea sponges, pieces of wool bandages to cradle the infant, a pillow, strong smelling herbs in case of fainting, and a birthing stool for the delivery (in those days, women did not give birth lying down, but sitting!)

The midwife would ready her supplies as labor began. During the labor process, the mother would lay on her back on a hard, low bed with support under her hips. Her thighs were parted with her feet drawn up. Gentle massage was implemented to ease labor pains as cloths soaked in warm olive oil were laid over her stomach and genital area, to soften the skin. Against the woman's sides were placed hot compresses in the form of warm oil-filled bladders. During the actual birth, the mother would be moved to the birthing stool where she was seated with a midwife in front of her and female aids standing at her sides. In a normal headfirst delivery, the cervical opening was stretched slightly, and the rest of the body was pulled out. Soranus instructed the midwife to wrap her hands in pieces of cloth or thin papyrus so that the slippery newborn did not slide out of her grasp.

Superstitions and religion also played a major role in antiquity including childbirth, and thus, mixed with the actual process itself were invocations to the goddess Artemis who had the ability to bring new life into the world and take it away: if a woman died while during childbirth, her clothes were taken to the temple of Artemis due to the fact her death was attributed to her, but if the birth was successful, the mother would make a thank-offering of some of her clothes to the goddess as well. There were also the preparation and consumption and fumigation of herbs and other strange concoctions - say, a drink mixed with powdered cow's dung or fumigation using hyena fat (!)

Let's now look at how Mary would probably have given birth to Jesus. While there were also some rather superstitious customs which we know were present among some Jewish communities in later ages (say, whispering passages from Scripture into the ears of the woman or the use of talismans such as magic bowls or silver sheets inscribed with the names of angels to ward off child-preying demons, etc.) and which were something that proper authorities often discouraged, such is not our concern for the moment. Our concern is the process of delivery itself.

Because this was a modest affair, the process was not as sophisticated as Soranus' description. The midwife's assistants would have walked Mary first (probably around the room), perhaps to speed delivery. Then comes the delivery: lower-class women would probably not even have had the luxury of a birthing stool, and Mary would have just rested somewhere, say on the lap of the assistants. The midwife then placed a cloth just below, so the Baby's would not come into contact with the dirt floor of the house.

Eventually, the Infant then comes out of the womb, and makes His first cry - the first thing that all babies make when they enter into this world. The umbilical cord is cut with either a knife or a heated hard crust of bread (a more sanitary alternative!). After the cord was cut and tied off, the midwife thoroughly examines the Baby. Then the Baby is, in true Hebrew fashion, then washed and rubbed with salt (cf. Ezekiel 16:4). After that, the Baby is then swaddled snuggly with bands of cloth, which is believed to help infants develop proper posture. It was around this moment that the husband (in this case, Joseph) would be able to enter inside and catch his first glimpse of the newborn Infant.

Luke tells us that Mary swaddled the newborn infant by herself, and indeed some take this as evidence that the Holy family were alone; however, there are accounts on how Palestinian women are not incapacitated by childbirth and could even give birth in a field and go back to the village, baby in tow, with no unusual effort required. In this scenario, it would then perhaps be natural that Mary would have swaddled the babe, since she could physically do so with little to no assistance; so when Luke tells us that Mary "wrapped the babe in swaddling clothes" that does not necessarily mean that they were alone. The process was almost complete: all that was left is to lay the Infant to rest somewhere. A trough which the family's animals grazed on, would probably do.

But even with the deed done, all was not over yet. According to the Law, the blood of childbirth made a woman impure, and Mary still had to undergo purification to ritually cleanse herself.

Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘If a woman has conceived, and borne a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days; as in the days of her customary impurity she shall be unclean. And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. She shall then continue in the blood of her purification thirty-three days. She shall not touch any hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary until the days of her purification are fulfilled.

‘But if she bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her customary impurity, and she shall continue in the blood of her purification sixty-six days.

‘When the days of her purification are fulfilled, whether for a son or a daughter, she shall bring to the priest a lamb of the first year as a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or a turtledove as a sin offering, to the door of the tabernacle of meeting. Then he shall offer it before the LORD, and make atonement for her. And she shall be clean from the flow of her blood. This is the law for her who has borne a male or a female.

‘And if she is not able to bring a lamb, then she may bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons—one as a burnt offering and the other as a sin offering. So the priest shall make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”

But that's a topic for another time. ;)

Once again, let's note two small things here: one would be that while countless Christmas pageants and artistic recreations of the birth of Jesus show Mary in labor at the very same day/night they arrive in Bethlehem (Catherine Hardwicke's 2006 film The Nativity Story is a good recent example of this), there is no indication from the Scriptural text alone that Mary went into labor at the very same day. All that Luke says of it is that it happened "while they were there", which could also suggest some time passing before Mary actually delivered her Child.

The final thing I'd like to relate is the story of the midwife Salome, found in the Protoevangelium of James and some other apocryphal gospels, still commemorated in every Eastern icon of the Nativity (cf. some of the pictures above), though she has long vanished from most Western depictions. I could do no better but merely quote it:

And I [Joseph] saw a woman coming down from the hill-country, and she said to me: "O man, where are you going?" And I said: "I am seeking a Hebrew midwife." And she answered and said to me: "Are you of Israel?" And I said to her: "Yes." And she said: "And who is it that is bringing forth in the cave?" And I said: "A woman betrothed to me." And she said to me: "Is she not your wife?" And I said to her: "It is Mary that was reared in the temple of the Lord, and I obtained her by lot as my wife. And yet she is not my wife, but has conceived of the Holy Spirit."

And the widwife said to him: "Is this true?" And Joseph said to her: "Come and see." And the midwife went away with him. And they stood in the place of the cave, and behold a luminous cloud overshadowed the cave. And the midwife said: "My soul has been magnified this day, because my eyes have seen strange things— because salvation has been brought forth to Israel." And immediately the cloud disappeared out of the cave, and a great light shone in the cave, so that the eyes could not bear it. And in a little that light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and went and took the breast from His mother Mary. And the midwife cried out, and said: "This is a great day to me, because I have seen this strange sight." And the midwife went forth out of the cave, and Salome met her. And she said to her: "Salome, Salome, I have a strange sight to relate to you: a virgin has brought forth— a thing which her nature admits not of." Then said Salome: "As the Lord my God lives, unless I thrust in my finger, and search the parts, I will not believe that a virgin has brought forth."

And the midwife went in, and said to Mary: "Show yourself; for no small controversy has arisen about you." And Salome put in her finger, and cried out, and said: "Woe is me for my iniquity and my unbelief, because I have tempted the living God; and, behold, my hand is dropping off as if burned with fire." And she bent her knees before the Lord, saying: "O God of my fathers, remember that I am the seed of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; do not make a show of me to the sons of Israel, but restore me to the poor; for You know, O Lord, that in Your name I have performed my services, and that I have received my reward at Your hand." And, behold, an angel of the Lord stood by her, saying to her: "Salome, Salome, the Lord has heard you. Put your hand to the infant, and carry it, and you will have safety and joy." And Salome went and carried it, saying: "I will worship Him, because a great King has been born to Israel." And, behold, Salome was immediately cured, and she went forth out of the cave justified. And behold a voice saying: "Salome, Salome, tell not the strange things you have seen, until the child has come into Jerusalem."

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 8: The Birth of the Messiah, Part 1: Katalyma, Pandocheia, House and Cave

2010-12-23T16:11:00.000-08:00

(Admittedly, part of this would be a rehash of something I wrote a while ago)

And it came to pass, that in those days there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that the whole world should be enrolled. This enrolling was first made by Cyrinus, the governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem: because he was of the house and family of David, to be enrolled with Mary his espoused wife, who was with child.

And it came to pass, that when they were there, her days were accomplished, that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him up in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

-Luke 2:1-7 (Douay-Rheims Challoner)

I'm sure many of our readers know of the manifold inspirational stories, poems, songs and sermons that have been made through the ages on the innkeeper who either gave Mary and Joseph room or shooed them away. This rude man has been pretty much a mainstay of our Christmas pageants and Nativity scene and is usually made as a prime example of the cruel world that would not accept its Creator. However, did Luke really refer to an 'inn' (in the sense we often understand the word) in Luke 2:7?

First, we need to know what word it was that Luke used in his story which is rendered as "inn" in our Bibles. Luke had used the word κατάλυμά (katalyma). In extra-biblical literature, katalyma has a wider connotation than "inn;" it can also mean "house," "guest room" or "lodging-place". It is a noun form of the verb καταλυο (katalyo), a compound verb (kata "among" + lyo "break up" or "(un-)loose") which translates literally as "to disintegrate" or "to unyoke," i.e. "to loosen down." As a place of rest and lodging, a katalyma was a place to drop your baggage, to untie the straps and packs of the beasts of burden and simply sit down and relax. Such is the way that the word is used in the Septuagint: a place of hospitality for people on a journey.

Another place where Luke uses the noun katalyma is in 22:11, where it refers to the upper-room where Jesus and company held the Last Supper, which is clearly not a commercial "inn" but some available space in what is apparently, a private house (either a guest-room inside the home or even the flat rooftop of the home). Mark 14:14 also uses katalyma to describe the upper room itself. There are two other places where some form of it appears as well: in 9:12, where the disciples ask Jesus to "Send away the multitude, that going into the towns and villages round about, they may lodge" (katalysosin), and in 19:7, where the crowd complains of Jesus: "He has gone in to be the guest (katalysai) of a man who is a sinner." While katalyma can mean 'inn', we can see from these examples that the word does not have so narrow a meaning, and Luke does not necessarily employ it as such.

When Luke does speak of a commercial inn where someone pays for lodgings, as he does in Luke 10:34 (in the parable of the Good Samaritan), he uses a different word, πανδοχεῖον (pandocheion), which literally means "that which receives all". This word, pandocheion, is the root of Aramaic pundheqa' and the Arabic funduq. All these are used of public inns, and they all correspond to the khan or caravanserai, roadside edifices where travelers could rest and recover from the day's journey. These are to be found on the great trade routes all over the East.

Inns were not in great repute in those days. Innkeepers were seen as invariably untruthful, dishonest and oppressive, and such commercial lodgings were said to be dens of sin and vice, even disease and death (as inns were often the last resort of travelers who fell ill or were injured on the road). Pandocheia and other hostelries, usually lower-class ones - such as the Roman stabulum, also used to mean 'brothel' - were linked with prostitution, theft, drunkenness and even murder. The Roman laws in many places recognize this. In two places at the Mishnah, the word of an innkeeper was doubted, and they were placed in the lowest scale of degradation. Even the word for female innkeepers in Aramaic (pundaqit) eventually became synonymous with "harlot". Josephus (Antiquities III.276, 451) adds female innkeepers to the list laid out in Leviticus 21:7 of women whom priests may not marry.

In a positive sense, such roadside spaces could be places of unusual encounters, interaction and personal change, conversion and reform. One Midrash speaks of two merchants who despised each other, until one had difficulties with his pack animals, at which the other merchant assisted him. Both went to a pundaq, where they ate and were reconciled to each other. Another story from the Babylonian Talmud speaks of another chance meeting between two merchants, one from the south and one from the north, who wished to eat at the same table while one ate meat and the other consumed cheese (cf. the forbidden combination of meat and dairy products). The forbidden conjunction became permissible in this special context, as long as the two food items came from separate containers. The Greek orator Dio Chrysostom even speaks of how the happenstance of travelers in a pandocheion might lead to friendship between them.

Another reason of the negative image of inns is because of the Semitic spirit of hospitality, which required people to keep open house for travelers (relatives or no), to make themselves as comfortable as possible at the host's expense. Entertaining a guest in one's home is considered a pious and meritorious act (cf. Hebrews 13:2 "Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares"). Since Joseph and Mary came to Bethlehem in the province of Iudaea as that was his ancestral home, we could assume that Joseph, at least, may have had a number of distant relations living in the town who could serve as potential hosts. Kinship ties throughout the village would have been the rule, not the exception. So no, we need not necessarily think anymore of the Holy Couple frantically looking for any good hostelries or rude innkeepers who shut the door at Joseph's face. Bethlehem was, after all, not a large town and there was simply no other place to stay.

We should note however that there were probably pandocheia or inns in Palestine at this period, but no structure discovered as of now were positively identified as one. Most likely, 'inns' in those days were just extra spaces in private houses that were rented to travelers for a price, which was not exactly the most comfortable place in the world: the accomodations would have been quite bad.

Now, to go back. Mary and Joseph has now arrived in Bethlehem and is now inside the house of someone who would kindly let them stay in. The problem is, there's no room for the delivery of the child! The house they were staying in were occupied by the host's family, and there were probably a group or two of fellow pilgrims who stayed as well. And since houses of the period tended to be small (and dingy, due to lack of windows) affairs, there's now the problem of lack of space for the pregnant teenage girl. The question now is: so then, Mary and Joseph went to the barn outside, right?

Not necessarily! The whole 'barn' is just assumed because of the manger. The word translated as 'manger' in fact is phatnē, which comes from pateomai 'to eat'. The Greek is more ambiguous in meaning here: while it could refer to the feeding trough itself (which in those days were usually made of stone), it could also refer to the place were animals are kept and fed itself.

Which still doesn't answer the question: where was the barn? Well, the answer was, there probably was no barn. In the ancient world, as well as in primitive modern cultures, animals are regularly kept in or near their owners' homes at night, and feeding troughs would thus have been located there. By being inside, the animals were protected from the elements and theft. In addition, their presence provided body heat for cool nights, access to milk for the daily meal and dung as a critical fuel source. In one possible scenario, the animals as well as the family stayed under one enclosed space that was divided so that the animals would usually be on the lower level, while the family would sleep on an upper level (cf. the rather crude model on the right of a small house divided as such, by yours truly courtesy of Google Sketchup). Another possibility was that the house would have been built in front of, next to or over a natural or man-made cave, which would serve as the holding place for animals. People in those days were known to use caves as an extension of the house (using it as stables and/or storage rooms) or perhaps - especially in the cases of the most destitute - even dwell on one. Even today, shepherds in the Middle East employ caves as shelters for their flocks. This is the scenario that the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem presents. Consequently, because Mary and Joseph did not find any space in the living quarters of the family home for childbirth, the Infant was delivered where the animals are.

Now here, we devote a little section to the location of Jesus' birth according to early Christian tradition and iconography. It is a very ancient belief that Jesus was born in a cave: we see it mentioned as early as the 2nd century by St. Justin Martyr (AD 103-165), and even he appears to be working with an old received narrative. Another source which mentions it is the nearly-contemporary Protoevangelium of James (ca. AD 140-70). Justin saw the cave as a fulfillment of Isaiah 33:16, which in the Greek Septuagint read: οὗτος οἰκήσει ἐν ὑψηλῷ σπηλαίῳ πέτρας ἰσχυρᾶς, "he shall dwell in a lofty cave of a strong rock." Thus, the cave tradition was, and continues to be, very strong in the East, as iconography testifies to.

How did this tradition disappear in the West, we might ask. One interpretation thinks that this might be due to how the Latin Vulgate rendered Isaiah 33:16 (which followed the Hebrew more closely), which reads: munimenta saxorum sublimitas eius, "the fortifications of rocks shall be his highness;" hence, there was no prophecy to fulfill. The idea continues that because of Luke's mention of the 'manger' people seem to have just begun to assume that Jesus was born in a barn (because in Western cultures, that's where mangers are!) Some medieval artists, still bound by early artistic conventions, made a compromise and showed both a cave and a stable to accomodate both versions, but the cave was eventually done away with altogether in later medieval and Renaissance art as new depictions were born in its place such as depicting the 'stable' as a ruined structure (which represented the end of an old era and the beginning of a new one) or as the wooden barn we are all familiar with.

Now finally, for those who are interested: Stephen C. Carlson of Hypotyposeis has put out a very good and comprehensive article on katalyma (warning: PDF!): The Accommodations of Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem: Κατάλυμα in Luke 2.7.

December 12 - Our Lady of Guadalupe

2010-12-12T15:20:00.000-08:00

And on Tuesday, while it was still night, Juan Diego left his house to come to Tlatilolco to get the priest. And when he finally reached the little hill which ended the mountain range (tepetzintli Tepeyacac), at its foot, where the road comes out, on the side that the sun sets on, where he always passed before, he said: "If I go ahead on the road, I don’t want this Lady to see me, because for sure, just like before, she’ll stop me so I can take the sign to the church governor for her, as she ordered me to; because first our tribulation must leave us; first I must quickly call the [Franciscan] priest (teopixqui motolinia); my uncle is anxiously waiting for him."

He immediately turned toward the hill, climbed up across it where there is a pass, and emerged on the eastern side, so that he could go quickly to Mexico so that the Queen of Heaven would not detain him. He thinks that where he made the turn, the one who is looking everywhere perfectly won’t be able to see him.

He saw how she was coming down from up on the hill, and that from there she had been looking at him, from where she saw him before. She came to meet him beside the hill, she came to block his way; she said to him: "Where are you going, my youngest-and-dearest son? Where are you headed for?"

And he, perhaps he grieved a little, or perhaps he became ashamed? Or perhaps he became afraid of the situation, be became fearful? He prostrated himself before her, he greeted her, he said to her: "My little Maiden, my smallest Daughter, my Virgin, I hope you are happy; how are you this morning? Does your beloved little body feel well, my Lady, my Girl?
"Although it grieves me, I will cause your face and your heart anguish: I must tell you, my little Girl, that one of your servants, my uncle, is very ill. A terrible sickness has taken hold of him; he will surely die from it soon. And now I shall go quickly to your little house in Mexico, to call one of our priests, the beloved ones of Our Lord, so that he will go to hear his confession and prepare him, because we really were born for that we who came to wait for the painful effort of our death.
"But, if I am going to carry it out, I will return here after that to go carry your breath, your word, Lady, my little Young one. I beg you to forgive me, be patient with me a little longer, because I am not deceiving you with this, my youngest Daughter, my little Girl. Tomorrow without fail I will come as fast as possible."

As soon as she heard the explanations of Juan Diego, the Merciful Perfect Virgin answered him: "Listen, put it into your heart, my youngest-and-dearest son, that the thing that frightened you, the thing that afflicted you is nothing. Do not let it disturb you. Do not fear this sickness nor any other sickness, nor any sharp and hurtful thing.
"Am I not here, I, who am your Mother? Are you not under my shadow and protection? Am I not the source of your joy? Are you not int he hollow of my mantle, in the crossing of my arms? Do you need something more? Let nothing else worry you, disturb you. Do not let your uncle's illness pressure you with grief, because he will not die of it now. You may be certain that he is already well." And at that very moment his uncle became well, as they later found out.

- Nican Mopohua

Dignum Et Justum Est

2010-10-24T23:01:00.000-07:00

The Inlatio for the feast of St. James the Great followed by the Sanctus, sung by Ensemble Organum from from Chant Mozarabe: Cathédrale de Tolède (XVe siècle). (Video by yours truly)

The Mozarabic Inlatio, or Illatio, corresponds to the Roman Preface; as Dom Fernand Cabrol says of them (in his The Mass of the Western Rites): "hardly a Mass but has its own; some of them comprise many columns of text, and if they were sung, these must have lasted at least half an hour. We will attempt presently to discover their authors. But we may say at once that they form a dogmatic collection which is priceless for the study of theological history in Spain during the Middle Ages, and a collection which, it must be confessed, has as yet been but little studied. It contains pages which do honor to the learning, the depth, and the culture of Spanish theologians from the fifth-ninth centuries." Here is an excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on the Mozarabic Rite:

"The Illatio or Inlatio. This is called Praefatio in the Roman and Contestatio or Immolatio in the Gallican. With the Post-Sanctus it forms St. Isidore's fifth prayer. There are proper Illationes to every Mass. The form is similar to the Roman Preface, but generally longer and more diffuse, as in the Gallican. It is preceded by a longer dialogue than the usual one [...] The Illatio ends in all manner of ways, but always leading by way of the angels to the Sanctus."

This particular Inlatio (from the Omnium Offerentium) curiously has a reference to a medieval tradition, recorded in the Golden Legend, that St. James cured a paralytic on his way to execution, which caused one of the executioners, a scribe named Josiah, to convert at the spot and be martyred along with him: 'per Jesum Christum Filium tuum, Dominum nostrum: in cujus nomine electus Jacobus, cum ad passionem traheretur, paraliticum ad se clamentem curavit, atque hoc miraculo cor illudentis sibi ita compulsit, ut cum sacramentis instinctum fidei faceret ad gloriam pervenire martyrii' ("through Jesus Christ your Son, our Lord, in whose name the elect James, when he was being dragged to his passion, cured a paralytic who called out to him, and by this miracle so softened the heart of him who mocked him, as to cause him now imbued with the sacraments of faith to arrive at the glory of martyrdom.")

A Random Nit to Pick: Novus 'Ordo Missae' or 'Novus Ordo' Missae?

2010-10-24T03:50:00.000-07:00

Just a short one for today, folks.
As many readers may know, the Mass of Pope Paul VI (aka the Ordinary Form/Forma Ordinaria, et al.) is known in some circles as the 'Novus Ordo Mass'. A stroll through the awl-mightee internetz reveals that this bilingual term is actually quite well-known and used. Some folks even use the term in a pejorative manner, even drawing connections between it and Novus Ordo Seclorum of the US' Great Seal, and from there, the Freemasons or the Illuminati or Jewish bankers or whatnot (take your pick) or even Hitler and his Neuordnung - as good conspiracy theories often tend to do.

There is, however, something wrong about the usage of this term that I find hard NOT to nitpick. Many of the people who use the phrase parse it incorrectly. The original Latin term from which 'Novus Ordo Mass' comes from is novus Ordo Missae. Pope Paul VI himself used the phrase once in a speech for the Consistory for the creation of twenty new Cardinals in May of 1976:

Peculiari autem modo id eo gravius censendum est, quod illuc divisio inducitur, ubi congregavit nos in unum Christi amor, scilicet in Liturgiam atque in Eucharisticum Sacrificium, cum denegetur obsequium normis de re liturgica statutis. At vero, nomine ipsius Traditionis Nos ab omnibus filiis Nostris atque ab omnibus catholicis communitatibus postulamus, ut cum dignitate pietatisque fervore renovatae Liturgiae ritus celebrentur. Usus novi Ordinis Missae minime quidem sacerdotum vel christifidelium arbitrio permittitur. Instructione autem edita die quarto decimo mensis Iunii anno millesimo nongentesimo septuagesimo primo provisum est, ut Missae celebratio antiquo ritu sineretur, facultate data ab Ordinario, tantummodo sacerdotibus aetate provectis vel infirmis, qui Divinum Sacrificium sine populo offerrent. Novus Ordo promulgatus est, ut in locum veteris substitueretur post maturam deliberationem, atque ad exsequendas normas quae a Concilio Vaticano II impertitae sunt. Haud dissimili ratione, Decessor Noster S. Pius V post Concilium Tridentinum Missale auctoritate sua recognitum adhiberi iusserat.

That being said, because of Pope Paul's use of wording here in the Latin, many thus have the misconception that 'Novus Ordo' is somehow the actual title of the OF Mass, sometimes even ascribing spookily vague and threatening qualities to it. Newsflash; It isn't. Folks often parse novus Ordo Missae as Novus Ordo / Missae (which gives us 'Novus Ordo Mass', but the correct way to do it is novus / Ordo Missae, the "new Order of Mass". As everyone may know, the form of the Ordinary (i.e. the regular, unvarying parts) of the Mass, be it the 1570 or the 1970 Missal, has no official title: it is simply called the Ordo Missae, "Order of Mass". Names like 'Tridentine' or 'Pian' or 'Extra/Ordinary Form' or 'Pauline' or 'Latin Mass' are simply unofficial titles. In context Novus Ordo is thus not meant to be a title in the sense of the 'Mass of the New Order': it's just a (rather bland if you ask me) designator - the 'new Ordo Missae'.
Hence, I'm not too fond of calling the 'Ordinary Form' Novus Ordo Mass: it's a misuse of the Latin and gives off the wrong connotations in the wrong hands, in my humble opinion (seriously, 'New Order' (of the Ages?) Mass??). I'd rather people have it called in full English as "the new Mass Order" or suchlike. Or why not use Latin - novus Ordo Missae? ;)

"Our Lord God the Pope"...not: A Tiny Acknowledgement

2010-10-02T16:42:00.000-07:00

Just a tiny announcement:
A Youtube user under the name of BeingBob has just referenced my two articles! (Yes, the video's less than a year old now, but you gotta give credit...)

Thanks once again, BeingBob!

The Mass in Gaul, Part 3 (from The Mass of the Western Rites)

2010-08-21T23:39:00.000-07:00

Christ in Majesty (c. AD 1100),
Chapelle des Moines, Berzé-la-Ville

The "Commixtion," or "Immixtion," has, like the "Fraction," a dogmatic bearing. The celebrant soaks one or several of the consecrated particles in the chalice, allowing one of them to fall into it. Under this form, with
the words accompanying it in many liturgies, the sole meaning of this rite is to show to the faithful, before Communion, that it is the very Body and Blood of Christ which they are about to receive; and that their separation under the different species of bread and wine is only apparent. Although at this epoch Communion under both kinds was almost universal, the doctrine that Christ was present, whole and entire, under both species, was none the less of equally universal acceptance. The rites of "Commixtion" or "Immixtion," which are attached to this part of the Mass, seem, in our opinion, to favor this interpretation (see "Immixtion" in DACL).

The recitation of the "Pater" follows the "Fraction" and "Commixtion." Its recital during Mass in this place, or at some place very near to these two rites, is an almost universal practice. Some exceptions might indeed be mentioned. The "Apostolic Constitutions" do not speak of the "Pater;" neither does St. Hippolytus, nor Serapion, nor the "anaphora" of Balizeh. But these are exceptions. The "Pater" has its place, and that a place of honor in the Roman Mass, where it is surrounded with special rites. With the Gallicans, as in most other liturgies, it is, as it were, framed between a prelude or protocol and a conclusion or embolism.

Stained glass window (1140-44),
Abbey Church, Saint-Denis

Both of these are variable in the Gallican rite, like the "Contestatio," the "Post Sanctus," or the "Ad pacem." These various rites aim at emphasizing the importance of this prayer, taught to His disciples by Christ Himself, the Prayer of prayers. From the beginning its importance has been recognized and attested by the liturgy. The end of the "Pater" was enriched with a doxology, as we see in the Didache and in some of the most ancient MSS. of the New Testament; and we cannot be surprised at that assertion of St. Gregory who, astonished at finding the "Pater" relegated to a place after the close of the Canon, declared that originally this was the prayer by means of which the Apostles consecrated (see pp. 79-81). It has also an honorable place in Baptism and in the other Sacraments.

In the Gallican Mass it is recited by the entire congregation, as was also the custom amongst the Greeks; while in Africa and at Rome the celebrant alone recited the "Pater" aloud, the people responding "Amen," or "Sed libera nos a malo." In Spain we have seen there was a special place for the recitation of this prayer.

Before the Communion the Bishop, or even the Priest, blessed the faithful. This blessing also is important; it is not confined to the Gallican liturgy, but took place in Africa also, in the time of St. Augustine. It existed, too, in the Eastern liturgies, and even Rome may have known it at one time, though it has been transformed and placed elsewhere.¹⁰²

¹⁰² Cf. Dom Wilmart, op. cit., col. 1088; Dom Morin, "Revue Benedictine," 1912, Vol. XXIX, p. 179 seq.

The meaning of this blessing, a kind of absolution or final purification before Communion, is determined by the accompanying formulas. The Deacon said: "Humiliate vos benedictioni;" or with the Greeks: "Let us bow down our heads before the Lord." The pseudo-Germain mentions the following: "Pax, fides et caritas, et communicatio corporis et sanguinis D.N.J.C. sit semper vobiscum." He says, too, that the blessing given by the Priest must be shorter and less solemn than that given by the Bishop. This is a discreet allusion to the discussions which doubtless took place about this time, since the canons of some of the　Councils of the fifth and sixth centuries bear traces of the controversy. The question was whether the right of blessing the people should be reserved to the Bishop alone, or whether (as here) it was sufficient to mark the difference between his blessing and that of a Priest (cf. especially the 44th canon of the Council of Agde, held 506). The formula varied according to the day. In the MS. collections many episcopal benedictions exist, some of which have been published, and these must not be neglected, since they form part also of liturgical theology (see our article, "Benedictions episcopales", in DACL).

A certain hierarchical order-indeed, a very rigorous one-was enforced for the Communion. Priests and Deacons communicated at the altar; other clerics before it; the laity outside the choir. This at least was the Spanish custom. In Gaul the faithful entered the choir and communicated at the altar. Men received the Host upon the bare hand; while women received It in a linen cloth called the "Dominical" (Duchesne, op. cit., p. 257).

Mosaic of the Ark of the Covenant, Germigny-des-Prés, c. 806.

During the Communion a chant was sung: "antiphona ad accedentes." This, according to the most ancient tradition, was Psalm XXXIII, "Benedicam Dominum in omni tempore," or at least some of its verses which apply so well to the Eucharist: "Accedite ad eum et illuminamini, iste pauper clamavit et Dominus exaudivit eum;" and, above all: "Gustate et videte quoniam suavis est Dominus." Dom Cagin ("Paleographie musicale," Vol. V, PP. 22-25) has collected the principal evidence as to this tradition. It is interesting to know that Gaul had preserved it. The pseudo-Germain, amongst others, recalls it, but chiefly to prove that this chant (which he calls the "Trecanum") is an act of Faith in the Trinity. And indeed, three verses which were repeated in a certain manner, and doubtless ended with the Trinitarian doxology, did teach those who communicated that "the Father is in the Son, the Son in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost in the Son, and again the Son in the Father". P. Thibaut gives an explanation of this obscure text. "Trecanum" is an erroneous transcription of "Tricanon" (in Greek, "trikanon", three rules, or three bars). Now the Psalm "Gustate et videte" is numbered in Roman figures XXXIII, which was taken as a graphic symbol of the Trinity, three X's and three I's which must be written thus:

X X X I I I
1 2 3 321

This would explain the pseudo-Germain's text on "Circumincession" in the Trinity. It is very subtle, but subtlety never frightened the symbolists of that period. However, what is incontestable is that these three verses with a special doxology are indeed a chant in honor of the Trinity; and on this point the Mozarabic rite agrees with that of Gaul. Other chants for Communion accompanied this, or took its place, such as the beautiful hymn, "Sancti venite," of the Celtic liturgies. In the Eastern and Mozarabic rites the Symbol of Nicea-Constantinople was recited at this moment. What must always be noticed is the intense care taken to cause an act of Faith to precede the participation in the Body and Blood of Christ; because the Eucharist is, above all, the mystery of union with Our Lord, and through Him between the faithful, in Faith and Charity.

After the Communion was said a prayer, the text of which varied. The Post-Communions preserved in the Gallican books are well worth study, for they express the faith of these liturgies in the Real Presence, and in the effects of the Sacrament upon the soul.

After these prayers the faithful were dismissed, as in other liturgies. The formula in the Roman rite is "Ite, Missa est," in the Missal of Stowe it is "Missa acta est, in pace." The Ambrosian rite has "Procedamus in pace, in nomine Domini;" while the Mozarabites have an even more solemn formula. The Eastern liturgies have yet others, and it was not until much later that, in certain rites, the reading of the Gospel of St. John and other prayers were added after this dismissal, a custom which causes the latter ceremony to lose all its meaning.

Sens Cathedral

The part played by the Gallican liturgy did not end with its disappearance. In the history of the liturgy from the ninth-fifteenth centuries Gaul's place was a very important one-it might be said, almost the most important

of all. It was in Gaul that the Gelasian and Gregorian Sacramentaries, as well as the greater number of the "Ordines Romani," have been retouched, modified, and finally moulded into that form which may be studied in the Missals of the ninth-thirteenth centuries, which are in reality Gallicano-Roman. An influence almost equally considerable was exercised in that country upon the Pontifical, the Ritual, Breviary, and other liturgical books. This history of the liturgy is not yet written, but it can be said that each day some fresh work on the subject confirms this general impression. We must also take into consideration the numerous initiatives

undertaken in that country which were in the end adopted in other lands, even by Rome herself, such as the institution of new Feasts, and of more solemn rites.

None the less, it is infinitely to be regretted that, as regards this liturgy which in the splendor of its forms could rival the Mozarabic, the Ambrosian, or even the liturgy of Rome, we are reduced to a few fragments, doubtless of great interest, but which are mere "membra disjecta," as the poet calls it. What a pity that one of our old Basilicas, that of Rheims, for instance, or Sens, did not play the same "role" as Toledo or Milan, and thus keep till our own day that collection of rites and customs of which to-day only a few relics are left! ¹⁰³

¹⁰³ We shall have a word to say as to the neo-Gallican liturgies of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries on p. 203. But they have in reality little to do with the Mass.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 7: The Nails of the Crucifixion

2010-08-21T19:55:00.000-07:00

Most of us western Christians grew up looking at images of the crucifixion that show Jesus being pierced with one nail over both feet, as in the picture at right. Sometimes we see images which have both feet nailed separately (making a total of four nails), but the three nails version is, for most of the time, definitive. There are people who would even say that this portrayal is "traditional", sometimes almost giving the impression that the four-nails version were somehow a novel variation. We must note, however, that depicting only three nails is purely a medieval (this iconographic convention only started around the end of the 1st millenium), Western thing; Eastern icons, with a few Western-influenced exceptions, uniformly portray four nails being used to pin Jesus down to His cross. And here they are following a more ancient iconographic tradition which could have some basis in historical reality.

The oldest depiction of a crucifixion we have, the Alexamenos Graffito (dating from the late 1st-3rd century AD), clearly shows the crucified figure's feet as being separate. Other early images, such as a late 2nd-3rd century carved jasper either from Syria or Gaza (part of the Pereire Collection), a graffito found in Puzzuoli, another gem, and a relief from Santa Sabina in Rome (ca. 430-435 AD), follow suit in not showing the feet as being placed above the other. This convention has passed on to later Christian iconography, and for a time people, both in the East and the West, portrayed Jesus Christ being crucified with His feet separate.

'Alexamenos, worship God'

It was around the early part of the 13th century that most of Western art (with a few exceptions) began to represent the feet of Jesus as placed one over the other and pierced with a single nail. This convention had already existed for a century or two, but it was around that time when the three-nails version took hold in Western art. Not all greeted this 'novelty' with open arms; in fact, this depiction showing three nails had actually caused some controversy when it was first introduced. For example, in the latter part of the 13th century, Lucas the bishop of Tuy in Iberia wrote in horror about the Cathars who carve "ill-shapen" images of the crucified Jesus "with one foot laid over the other, so that both are pierced by a single nail, thus striving to annul or render doubtful men's faith in the Holy Cross and the traditions of the sainted Fathers." The Cathars, based on Lucas' report, apparently manufactured a cross composed only of the vertical post, the inscription, and the footrest without the horizontal beam - while showing Jesus pierced with three nails, one of which went on both feet. To all this, Lucas retorted that a proper cross must take the shape of overlapping arms and represent the four regions of the earth. Not only this, there were also complaints about the rather 'new' convention of showing Jesus as showing indications of suffering and death, in contrast to the serene and triumphant Christ many people back then were used to. For example, Byzantine art started to show a Jesus with bowed head and eyes closed in the 9th-11th century AD: Cardinal Humbert, infamous for placing the bull of excommunication in the Hagia Sophia, cried heresy upon seeing a cross with an 'image of a dying man' (hominis morituri imago) in Constantinople in 1054.

It is still unclear why the three-nails version became predominant. It has been suggested that it was because of the symbolic/religious connotations of the number three that it became a popular choice for medieval artists in Europe. By contrast, Eastern iconography was unaffected by all of this and continued to show four nails in most cases, even to this day (there are a few icons which show three nails, but these were probably done under Western influence). The four-nails version also lasted a bit longer in medieval Italian art because of the strong Byzantine influence in it (Byzantine artisans were used in important projects throughout Italy, and Byzantine styles of painting can be found up through the 14th century), and also in Spanish art well into the Renaissance.

Now, let's check archeology. The only artifact we have of an ancient Roman crucifixion, found in 1968 in Giv'at ha-Mivtar, is that of the right heel bone of a man called Yehohanan (aka Jehohanan), who was executed in his twenties, pierced by an iron nail 11.5 centimeters in length. The nail penetrated the lateral surface of the heel bone emerging on the medial surface in which the distal end of the nail had become bent. The bending of the distal end of the nail upon itself suggests that after the nail penetrated the tree or the upright it may have struck a knot in the wood which made it difficult to remove from the heel when the victim was taken from the cross. Remains of olive wood found between the head of the nail and the heel bone suggest that prior to penetrating the heel bone the nail was driven through a wooden plaque (serving as a washer) so as to increase the head of the nail thus making it difficult for the victim to free his legs from the vertical post.

Anthropologist Professor Nicu Haas of the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem examined the bones in 1970 and originally came into the conclusion that both heels were affixed by one nail to the front of the cross, as in the reconstructions at right. (As an aside, I personally know of a few films such as The Last Temptation of Christ, Jesus of Montreal and The Miracle Maker which follow Prof. Haas' initial reconstruction here, showing Jesus' feet, or rather, ankles, nailed very much in the same position as the reconstruction at the right of the picture below). This osteological analysis, however, was done rather rapidly due to the demands of the religious community for reburial of the bones. Hence, many of the conclusions upon which Haas' attempted reconstruction were made were later found to be flawed.

In 1985, Joe Zias, then-curator of Archaeology/Anthropology for the Israel Antiquities Authority and Eliezer Sekeles reexamined the bones and found that the nail which Haas reported to be 17-18 centimeters long was but 11.5 centimeters, thus making it anatomically impossible to pierce two heels with one nail. The two heels would have not been nailed together, but nailed separately to either side of the upright post of the cross, so that he straddled it (the Visual Bible's The Gospel of John follows this reconstruction).

Also later challenged was Haas' assertion that a nail had pierced the distal ends of the radius and ulna of the forearm. The scratches in the wrist area were determined to be non-traumatic and, therefore, not evidence of crucifixion). Haas had also claimed that there was evidence that the legs of the victim had been broken, but this was apparently based on what is described as "inconclusive evidence". Hence, Jehohanan's arms were probably just tied, rather than nailed, to the cross.

The way Jehohanan's heels were affixed to the cross may thus, in my humble personal opinion, lead credence to the ancient idea that Jesus' feet were separate instead of being pinned one feet over the other. Of course, at the end, we may never know which was correct, but it's fun to speculate, ain't it?

The Mass in Gaul, Part 2 (from The Mass of the Western Rites)

2010-08-19T16:25:00.000-07:00

THE MASS OF THE FAITHFUL

The paten from Gourdon.

The "Prayer of the Faithful" is a prayer recited after the departure of the catechumens by the faithful alone; thus it forms part of the Mass of the Faithful. Sometimes it is called the Prayer of the Church, or the Common Prayer. In the West, especially at Rome, it was recited in the following way: the Pontiff invited the faithful to prayer; the Deacon gave the order to bend the knee; the Bishop pronounced the prayer, and the people responded "Amen." Ed. Bishop remarks acutely, in this connection, that this prayer bears the seal of the Roman Church, in which ecclesiastical authority always maintains its rights, the part of the faithful being reduced to a minimum; while in the East the initiative of Christian people is allowed a much wider scope. To such a degree is this the case that at Rome this prayer might more correctly be called the Prayer "for" the Faithful. We have a very well-preserved type of the prayer in the "Orationes solemnes" of Good Friday. But all other trace of it has disappeared from the Roman liturgy. Under an analogous form it existed in the Gallican liturgies in the sixth century, as is proved by a text of the Council of Lyon under Sigismond (516-523), which alludes to the "Oratio plebis quae post evangelium legitur" (Concilia aevi merovingici," p. 34).
But since then it has disappeared, as it has at Rome, and we find in the Gallican liturgy only diaconal litanies, imitated from those in the Byzantine liturgy.

The offering of bread and wine in Gaul, as elsewhere was made by the faithful. What must be remarked here and what to some extent is peculiar to the Gallican Mass are the honors paid to the oblations, i.e. the elements which are to be consecrated. Analogous customs exist in the Eastern liturgies, and there is a temptation to see in this the results of Byzantine influence (Duchesne, op. cit., p. 216; Dom Wilmart, art. cit.,
col. 1080). It is surprising to find the pseudo-Germain describe these elements, in a prolepsis, by the following words: "Procedente ad altarium corpore Christi, praeclara Christi magnalia dulci melodia psallit Ecclesia" (P.L., Vol. LXXII col. 93). Gregory of Tours expresses himself in somewhat similar terms when he says that the "Mysterium dominici corporis" was contained in vessels shaped like towers; wooden towers, sometimes covered with gold.⁸⁶ The wine to be consecrated was brought in a chalice: "sanguis
Christi ... offertur in calice." Water was added to the wine, as in all other rites. The bread was placed on a paten. Reference is made to the veils which covered the oblations: the first, "Palle," of linen or wool; the second which was placed beneath the oblations, of pure linen "Corporalis palle;" finally, a precious tissue of silk and gold, ornamented with jewels, which covered them. Although analogous rites are certainly encountered elsewhere, some of those just described seem peculiar to the Gallican churches. In any case, they testify to the care and respect paid to he elements even before the Consecration. (For details, and comparison with other rites cf. Dom Wilmart, op. cit., col. 1081 seq.)

"Glor. Mart," 86; "Hist. France," X, xxxi. 13; P.L., Vol. LXXI, cols. 569, 781.

The "Sonum quando procedit oblatio" was a special canticle, very closely allied to the "Cheroubicon" of the Greeks. When the oblations were placed upon the altar the choir chanted the Christmas "Laudes" of the Mozarabites: "Alleluia, Redemptionem misit Dominus populo suo; mandavit im aeternum testamentum suum; sanctum et terribile nomen ejus, Alleluia." These chants, "Sonum" and "Laudes," practically correspond with the Offertory psalm used at Rome and Milan.

The reading of the Diptychs occurs here, as it does in most liturgies; but we have no special information as to this rite in the Gallican churches. The names of the living for whom the Sacrifice was to be offered, and names of other personages, were read at this moment. From the theological point of view this rite is important, because the inscription on the Diptychs is a sign that the faithful were in communion with those whose names were read out. The names of heretics were struck off the list, a practice which often gave rise to bitter controversies. Lastly, the Pope's name was usually in the place of honor (cf. art. "Diptyques," in DACL). We give as a type the following formula, taken from Duchesne ("Origines du culte," p. 221): "Offerunt Deo Domino oblationem sacerdotes nostri" (here the Spanish Bishops are signified), "papa Romensis et reliqui pro se et pro omni clero ac plebibus Ecclesiae sibimet consignatis vel pro universa fraternitate. ... Item pro spiritibus pausantium, Hilarii, Athanasii," etc. In the Gallican and Mozarabic rites this reading is followed by a prayer: "Collectio post nomina." The numerous formulas preserved in the Gallican books should be studied at first-hand, for allusion is made to the effects of the Sacrifice of the Mass (see art. "Mozarabe, Messe," in "Dict. de Theol. Catholique"). The whole of this rite of the Diptychs is, moreover, deeply interesting, for it is a proof of faith in the intercession of the Church, in the efficaciousness of that Sacrifice, and in the union of all the faithful in the Church on earth and with the Saints in Heaven.

St. Gregory of Tours (c. 538 - 594)

The Kiss of Peace which followed is also accompanied by a prayer, "Collectio ad pacem." In the Gallican and Mozarabic books this, like the preceding prayer, varies with every Feast. They are a rich collection of
texts, often expressive; it will be sufficient here to quote one example of the "Collectio ad pacem," that of the Assumption of Our Lady, celebrated by the Gallicans in January. It is taken from the "Missale Gothicum" (P.L., Vol. LXXII, col. 245):

"Deus universalis machinae propagator, qui in sanctis spiritaliter, in matre vero virgine etiam corporaliter habitasti; que ditata tuae plenitudenis ubertate, mansuetudine florens, caritate vigens, pace gaudens, pietate praecellens ab angelo gracia plena, ab Elisabeth benedicta, a gentibus merito praedicatur beata; cujus nobis fides mysterium, partus gaudium, vita portentum, discessus attulit hoc festivum; precamur supplices, ut pacem quae in adsumptione Matris tunc praebuisti discipulis, solenni nuper (doubtless sollempniter) largiaris in cunctis, salvator mundi, qui cum Patre.... mundi, qui cum Patre...."

We know that as regards the Diptychs and the Kiss of Peace the Roman liturgy differs in many important respects from the Gallican and Mozarabic rites, which latter on these points approach more closely to those of Constantinople. But we see, from what has gone before, that many ceremonies were borrowed comparatively late (cf. our article "Baiser de Paix "in DACL).

In the Gallican books the "Collectio ad pacem" is followed by an even more important prayer, usually called in these books the "Contestatio," or "Immolatio;" it corresponds to the Roman "Preface," and begins with "Sursum corda:" "Habemus ad Dominum." The prelude, too, is the same: "Vere dignum et justum est." But these Gallican "Contestationes," like the Mozarabic "Immolationes," are characteristically different from the Roman Prefaces. They are, if we may use such a comparison, like locally grown fruit. The Gallo-Roman genius of the sixth and seventh centuries here gave itself free rein. The Latin of that period was no longer the classical language of Augustan Rome; it is very often prolix; we find in it antitheses, ornaments, and even verbal conceits which we should desire to see banished from ecclesiastical compositions. The Roman manner, especially at the time of Gelasius and Gregory, has incontestably more discretion, more dignity; moreover, it expresses a more carefully guarded orthodoxy. But from the point of view which alone interests us here this rich collection of "Contestationes" preserved in the Gallican books is a treasure as yet little explored by theologians. Here may be studied the doctrines of this Church on the Eucharist, Grace, the Incarnation, and Redemption, better perhaps than in any other collection. We can but mention here this source of the history and theology of the Gallican Church, for a detailed explanation would require a long thesis.

As in other liturgies the "Contestatio" ends with the "Sanctus." But the Gallican and Mozarabic liturgies have another prayer, the "Collectio post Sanctus," which is a transition from the "Sanctus" to the recital of the
Institution. It generally begins with these words: "Vere Sanctus." Thus in one of the Masses of Mone: "Vere Sanctus, vere benedictus dominus noster Jesus Christus filius tuus qui pridie" (P.L., Vol. CXXXVIII, col. 866). But usually more ample developments are found, where dogmatic questions are touched upon, as in the following from the same collection (loc. cit., col. 873):

"Hic inquam Christus Dominus noster et Deus noster, qui sponte mortalibus factus adsimilis per omne hunc aevi diem immaculatum sibi corpus ostendit, veterisque delicti idoneus expiator sinceram inviolatamque peccatis exhibuit animam, quam sordentem rursus sanguis elueret, abrogataque in ultimum lege moriendi, in caelo corpus perditum atque ad patris dexteram relevaret, per Dominum nostrum qui pridie..."

12th century Romanesque fresco from the Church of
the Assumption in Gourdon, France.

In the MS. this passage is altered, but we can guess the meaning (see Denzinger's note, col. 873). The "Post Sanctus" also answers to a prayer of the same kind in the Eastern liturgies. That of Rome has no prayer which corresponds to the "Vere Sanctus."

The recital of the Institution, introduced in the Gallican liturgies by "Vere Sanctus," follows the text of St. Matthew and St. Mark with the words: "qui pridie quam pateretur." Here is an instance of complete accord between the rites of Rome and Gaul; but on this point we can but refer to the remarks of other liturgiologists, especially to those of Dom Cagin, who has drawn his conclusions from this fact extremely well. The Eastern liturgies follow another tradition, and say with St. Paul: "In qua nocte tradebatur." Spain, it is true, also says: "In qua nocte", but this is generally attributed to Byzantine influence in a later age. This is all the more likely because the Spanish books called the prayer which follows, "Post pridie". ⁸⁷

Cf. on this point Dom Cagin, "Paleographie musicale," Vol. V., p. 55 seq.; Duchesne, loc. cit., p. 230, note 1; Dom Wilmart, art. cit., col. 1085. There has been discussion as to whether these liturgies did not in primitive days contain the incisive words: "pro nostra et omnium salute." Cf. "Revue Benedictine," 1910, Vol. XXVII, p. 513 seq.

The words "Mysterium fidei" also seem to have been adopted in Gaul, as in the Roman formula, and probably under Roman influence.

In Gaul the words of Consecration were accompanied by the sign of the Cross traced on the oblation; a gesture recognized as possessing the special virtue of accomplishing the Mystery, and which is ratified by Heaven. The pseudo-Germain, speaking of the transformation operated by the Consecration of the bread and wine, alludes to the Angel of God who blesses the Host: "Angeles Dei ad secreta super altare tamquam super monumentum descendit et ipsam hostiam benedicit instar illius angeli qu Christi resurectionem evangelizavit." In this connection the story related by Gregory of Tours may well be recalled, he tells us that St. Martin appeared in the Basilica dedicated to him in that town, and blessed, "dextera extensa," the Sacrifice offered on the altar, "juxta morem catholicam signo crucis superposito" ("Vita Patrum," XVI, 2- P.L. Vol. LXXI, col. 1075; cf. Dom Wilmart, col. 1086).

The following prayer is of the first importance for the theology of the Mass. It bears the name Post Secreta, and elsewhere "Post Mysteria," "Post Eucharistiam." This title, this formula, the miracle of St. Martin just
mentioned the fact that Gregory of Tours calls the words of Consecration "Verba sacra" ("Glor. Mart.," 87; P.L., Vol. LXXI col. 782), and other texts we could mention, sufficiently prove that the words of the Institution were considered as operating the mystery of the Eucharist. But it must be added that this prayer is frequently conceived in terms which would incline a reader to the contrary belief, i.e. that Transubstantiation
is wrought by the "Epiclesis," such as that of one of the Masses of Mone (P.L. Vol. CXXXVIII, col. 871, and Vol. LXXII, col. 257). In any case, the collection of these prayers, "Post Secreta" in the Gallican liturgies, is one which should be most carefully studied, in order to realize the faith of these churches in the Eucharistic Mystery.

It has been thought, since the word is "Post Secreta" that the formula of Consecration was said in a low voice while the "Contestatio" and "Post Sanctus" were said aloud. We shall not take up here that question so hotly debated in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, by theologians and liturgiologists, as to the Secret of the Mysteries, which we treat elsewhere (Chap. XII).

The rites of the "Fraction" and the "Commixtion" are attached to the prayer "Post Secreta." In the primitive Mass the "Fraction" was a rite of the first importance. The name of "Fractio panis" given to the Eucharist at the beginning, the place of the word "Fregit" in the story of the Institution, the insistence of all the most ancient liturgies in this formula upon the words "(corpus meum) quod pro vobis confringetur," and many other indications which could be given are sufficient to prove this fact. There are numerous variants of the rite in the various liturgies. In the Celtic rite, as we shall see, the Irish divided the Host in seven different ways,
according to the Feast. In Gaul they divided it into nine particles, in the form of a Cross. Sometimes the particles were arranged on the paten to design a human form. The Council of Tours in 567 forbade this practice as superstitious, and ordained that the particles were to be disposed in the form of a Cross. The meaning of this act is given in the chant of the "Fraction," called "Confractorium," or "Ad Confractionem." We have mentioned some of these in our article "Fractio Panis" (DACL). Here is one of them:

"Credimus Domine, credimus in hac confractione corporis et effusione tui sanguinis nos esse redemptos: confidimus etiam quod spe hic mysterium jam tenemus, in aeternum perfrui mereamur. Per. ..."

The Mass in Gaul, Part 1 (from The Mass of the Western Rites)

2010-08-18T00:11:00.000-07:00

THE MASS IN GAUL

The Mass of the Catechumens. -The Mass of the Faithful.

In the volume on "Books of the Latin Liturgy" (Sands & Co., London), pp. 96-103, we have mentioned the different documents by the aid of which the Gallican Mass may be reconstituted and the origins of this liturgy established. On this subject we have also stated that for the description of the Gallican Mass no reliance can be placed on the pretended letters of St. Germain of Paris, though this has been done too often. These letters are not a document of the middle of the sixth century, but an anonymous treatise written a century later (ibid., p. 99). We must therefore, like Mabillon and, more recently, Dom Wilmart (DACL, "Germain, Lettres de St."), keep solely to the other documents which we possess on this subject, and to the texts of contemporary authors, the most valuable of which is that of Gregory of Tours. A very complete bibliography of all these documents will be found in the article ("Gallicanes Liturgies)" of Dom Leclercq, DACL.

THE MASS OF THE CATECHUMENS

The Gallican Pre-Mass, or Mass of the catechumens, was already very fully developed; it possessed chanted anthems, psalms, canticles, readings, and litanies. It began with an anthem and a psalm, while the Priest went from the sacristy to the altar. This chant, executed by clerics, existed also in the Mozarabic Mass, and 138 answers to the Roman "Introit" and the "Ingressa" of the Milanese rite. Gregory of Tours, whatever may be said to the contrary, makes no allusion to this introductory anthem.

The Deacon enjoined silence, probably in these words: "Silentium facite." The Bishop saluted the congregation with the formula: "Dominus sit semper vobiscum." At Rome and Milan the salutation is: "Dominus vobiscum." But the former greeting is found in the Mozarabic rite.

The letters of the pseudo-Germain announce the solemn singing of the "Aios" in Latin and in Greek at this point. What was this chant? It is not the "Sanctus," as has been wrongly believed, and which, also wrongly, has sometimes been called the "Trisagion." The latter title must be reserved for a chant of Byzantine origin, the history of which is well known. It was introduced there under Theodosius II (408-450), but is perhaps more ancient, and runs thus: "Hagios ho Theos, Hagios Ischuros, Hagios Athanatos Eleeson Hemas" Pierre le Foulon (+477) added these words to it: "Ho Staurotheis di Hemas," and there was much quarreling over this formula, which for its author had a monophysite meaning, and which was adopted by the Syrian Jacobites. On Good Friday, in the Roman liturgy, we have the "Trisagion" under its primitive double form in Greek and Latin, naturally without Foulon's addition. There is yet another form in the Mozarabic liturgy, which does not concern us here (cf. Dom Ferotin, "Liber Ordinum," cols. 737, 760, and 809).

The Kyrie Eleison was then sung, once only, by three children. We have spoken elsewhere as to the researches recently made regarding the "Kyrie Eleison," and upon its use; we shall therefore merely refer to the article under that heading in DACL.

The singing of the Prophecy which came next means the singing of the "Benedictus." This point is now finally settled, and the "Collectio post Prophetiam" in the Gallican books is the prayer which followed. On the bearing of this canticle on the Mass we may also refer to our article, "Cantiques (evangeliques)," in DACL. P. Thibaut has recently called attention to this chant, and its title of "Prophetia." In his opinion it is exclusively Gallican, and is an allusion to the conversion of Clovis, who became the protector of the Gallo-Roman churches. The "Cornu salutis" may indeed have given rise to the legend of the "Sainte Ampoule" (op. cit., p. 29).

Next comes the first Lesson. According to the pseudo-Germain this is taken from the Prophets or the historical books, and from the Apocalypse during Paschal time; while on the Feasts of Saints their Acts were read, "Gesta sanctorum confessorum ac martyrum in solemnpnitatibus eorum." The usage of the prophetic Lesson has almost entirely disappeared from the Roman Mass since the fifth century; it was maintained longer at Milan, and on this point the Gallican books confirm the testimony of the pseudo-Germain. The Mozarabic rite has also preserved the ancient use of this Lesson. The importance of the reading of the Lives of the Saints at Mass will be noticed; this point is confirmed by Gregory of Tours and by the Gallican books. In Spain and at Milan the custom was the same.

St. Caesarius of Arles (468/470 - 572)

The second reading at Mass was taken from the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles. After these two Lessons the Canticle of the Three Children in the furnace was sung, "Benedictus es," also called "Benedictio." This fact is confirmed by the same witnesses. The importance attached to this rite is shown by the fact that the Council of Toledo of 633, which was presided over by St. Isidore, laid down that "in all churches of Spain and Gaul, in the solemnity of all Masses, the aforesaid hymn shall be chanted from the Lector's pulpit." Only, in the Mozarabic liturgy the canticle was inserted between the first and second readings. The singing of the Benedictus es in the Roman Church on Ember Saturday is an old tradition which recalls this custom. In the Missal of Bobbio a collect "post Benedictionem" is mentioned, but this would seem to be a derogation from the usage attested by many witnesses of a sung Responsory here, which chant must be identified with the "Psallendum," the "Versus" or "Clamor," or "Psalmellus." At Rome, after the Lessons, there was the Responsory and "Alleluia," sometimes replaced by the "Tractus." The Council of Toledo just mentioned forbade the custom which had been introduced into several Spanish churches of singing "Laudes" between the Epistle and Gospel. We may take it, with St. Isidore, that this word signifies "Alleluia" (Dom Wilmart, op. cit., col. 1072). This chant, which is another Gallican feature, is also a memorial of the Baptism of Clovis, according to P. Thibaut; it should be followed by a "Collectio post Benedictionem," as mentioned in the Missal of Bobbio (op. cit., p. 39).

The pseudo-Germain notes here the repetition of the chant of the "Agios," or "Trisagion," an innovation of which no other example is found at this place in the Mass in any liturgy. It was evidently intended to give greater solemnity to the reading of the Gospel, which was about to follow. The author of this document emphasizes this intention in the following remarkable terms: "Expeditur processio sancti evangelii velut potentia Christi triumphantis de morte, cum praedictis armoniis et cum septem candelabris luminis ... ascendens in tribunal analogii ... clamantibus clericis: Gloria tibi, Domine." The "tribunal analogii" means an ambone or tribune, raised and decorated, from which the Bishop would preach, and upon which he would appear as a judge upon his tribunal. The acclamation "Gloria tibi, Domine," or "Gloria Deo omnipotenti," of which Gregory of Tours speaks, answers the Deacon's announcement: "Lectio sancti evangelii."

The Gospel was usually followed by a chant. The pseudo-Germain says that the "Trisagion" sung before the Gospel is again taken up and repeated at this point. At Milan the Gospel was followed by Dominus vobiscum and a triple "Kyrie" with anthem. At Rome the Pope saluted the Deacon with "Pax tibi," and then said the "Dominus vobiscum" and "Oremus." The homily generally followed the Gospel.

Here occur the litanic prayers which may be attached to the Pre-Mass, at least in the Gallican use, since the catechumens were not dismissed until these were said. The pseudo-Germain thus describes these prayers: "precem (psallant levitae) pro populis, audita (apostoli) praedicatione, levitae pro populo deprecantur et sacerdotes prostrati ante dominum pro peccatis populi intercedunt."

Gold chalice, with garnet and turquoise,
from the Treasure of Gourdon (5th-6th century)

There can be no doubt but that we recognize here the diaconal litany referred to in the preceding pages, and which must not be confused with the "Prayer of the Faithful," as Duchesne and others after him have confused it.⁹⁷ Each of these prayers presents analogies, and belongs, we believe, to the class of litanic prayers; yet they are distinguished by certain characteristics which must be mentioned here as this question has its importance.

⁹⁷ Dom Wilmart after Edmund Bishop, has insisted on this point. Cf. Ed. Bishop, "Observations on the Liturgy of Narsai," pp. 117--121; "Journal of Theological Studies," 1910 11, Vol. XII, pp. 406-413 ・and "Liturgica Historica," pp. 122, 124; Connolly, "Journal of Theological Studies," 1919-20, Vol. XXI, pp. 219-232; Dom Wilmart, art. cit., col. 1075. Duchesne, in his fifth edition of "Origines du culte chretien," p. 211, note 2, discusses the attribution to Gelasius of the "Dicamus omnes."

These litanies, or "Diakonika," are recited by the Deacon, and form part of the Pre-Mass. To each invocation made by the Deacon the people respond: Kyrie Eleison, and at the end the celebrant concludes with a prayer.

This type of prayer, doubtless created at Antioch, was adopted at Constantinople, and thence transported to Rome and Gaul in the fifth century. The "Supplicatio litaniae" of which it is question in the Rule of St. Benedict the "Preces deprecatoriae," the "Letaniae," the "Kyrie" of the Roman Mass are all derived from this.

We have spoken elsewhere of this diaconal prayer, of its origin and destinies; many examples of it exist in the Gallican books, such as the "Divinae pacis," and "Dicamus omnes." Both these are given by Mgr. Duchesne in his chapter on the Gallican Mass (fifth edition, pp. 210, 211), to which we may refer our readers. Further, they present the most striking analogies with those we have quoted from the "Apostolic Constitutions," with the "Deprecatio Sancti Martini" of the "Missal of Stowe," and the "Deprecatio pro universali Ecclesia," which good judges continue to attribute to Pope Gelasius (492-496) in spite of the opinion of Duchesne. ⁹⁸

⁹⁸ Cf. Duchesne, op. cit., p. 221, note 2; and Dom Wilmart art. cit., 1076; cf. also article "Litanies," in DACL.

The Mass of the catechumens is certainly finished with these diaconal prayers, and the catechumens are dismissed by the Deacon. The formula is not given here but an equivalent will be found in the Milanese ritual. "Si quis catechumenus procedat, si quis judceus procedat, si quis paganus procedat, si quis haereticus procedat, cujus cura non est procedat." ⁹⁹ St. Gregory mentions another formula: "Si quis non communicet det locum;" and the Pontifical even yet contains this curious formula at the Ordination of Exorcists: "Exorcistam oportet ... dicere populo ut qui non communicat det locum." The pseudo-Germain recalls in this connection the energetic words of the Gospel: "nolite dare sanctum canibus neque mittatis margaritas ante porcos."

⁹⁹ Under this formula cf. Ambrosian Mass, p. 93.

All these precautions prove the importance of the action which is about to take place, and fresh warnings from the Deacon awaken the attention and respect of the people. Formerly the formula was "Silentium faciet," or "Pacem habete," as in the Milanese rite. The pseudo-Germain, who often comments on or interprets the rite, says that they made the sign of the Cross on eyes, ears, and mouth, "ut hoc solum cor intendat ut in se Christum suscipiat."

From the Gallican Rites...

2010-08-17T23:36:00.000-07:00

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia:
The Reichenau Fragments (Carlsruhe, 253) are described (no. 8) in Delisle's "Memoire sur d'anciens Sacramentaires." -- These were discovered by Mone in 1850 in a palimpsest manuscript from the Abbey of Reichenau, in the library of Carlsruhe. The manuscript, which is late seventh century, had belonged to John II, Bishop of Constance (760-81). It contains eleven Masses of purely Gallican type, one of which is in honour of St. Germanus of Auxerre, but the others do not specify any festival. One Mass, except the post Post-Pridie which is in prose, is entirely in hexameter verse. Mone published them with a facsimile in his "Lateinische und Griechische Menssen aus dem zweiten bis sechsten Jahrhundert" (Frankfort 1850). They were reprinted in Migne's "Patrologia Latina" (Vol. CXXXVIII), and by Neale and Forbes in "The Ancient Liturgy of the Gallican Church" (Burntisland, 1855–67).

MISSA II
(collectio.) Deum fidelium saluatorem, conseruatoremque credentium. deum aeterne. inmortalitatis auctorem. fratres dilectissimi. unianimiter dominum depraecemur. ut nobis pietatis suae dono spiritali misericordiam indeficienter inperciat p. d.

(collectio ante nomina.) Deus qui pro magnitudinem tuam per uniuersa deffunderis et ubi tamen totus adsistis. discriteus omnium uoluntatis qualitatebus locis temporibus adque personis. uotorum omnium capax. propiciatus exaudi. dum ad cunctus adspices foues omnebus misereris. p. d.

(post nomina.) Recitata nomina dominus benedieat et accepta sit domino uti huius oblatio. nostrisque praecebus intercessio suffragetur. spiritibus quoque karorum nostrorum laetis sedibus conquiiscant. et primi resurrectionis gaudia consequantur. p. d. nm.

(ad pacem.) Exaudi nos deus salutares noster. et in consortio nos diuinorum sacrificiorum dignanter admitte. hac pacem tuam benignus largire. p. d.

(contestatio.) Dignum et iustum est equum et iustum est ut te sancte pater omnipotens aeterne deus. omnibus locis. omnibusque temporibus. per omnia momenta ueneremur. tibi supplices simus. tibi deferamus praecis, te totis stodiis et effectibus adoremus. deus qui ultra omnibus uirtutis. ultra omnis es potestatis. deux uniuersorum arbiter. judex secretorum. quem caeli et terra. quem angeli et archangeli. quem throni et dominationis. quem cherubin. et serafin. incessabili uoce proclamant dicentes. SS. SCS. SS.

(contestatio.) Dignum et iustum est. nos tibi gratias agere domine deus per Xpm Jhm filium tuum. qui cum deus esset aeternus. homo fieri pro nostra salute dignatus est. unice singulare. et multiplex saluatoris nostri mysterium. nam unus idemque et deus summus et homo perfectus, et pontifex maximus. et sacrificii sacratissimum. secundum diuinam potentiam creauit omnia. secundum humanam conditionem liberabit hominem. secundum uim sacrificii expiauit conmaculatus. secundum jus sacerdocii reconciliauit offensus. O unice redemptionis. mysterium singulare. in quo uetusta ilia uulnera. noua domino medicina sanauit. et primi hominis praeiudicia. salutares nostri praeuiligia resciderunt. ille concupiscientiae exagitatus stimolis. hic oboedientiae, confixus est clauis. ille ad arborem manus incontinenter extendit. iste ad crucem pacienter abtauit. ille uoluptate inlecitus gustus explebit. iste cruciatu indebite dolores afflictus est. ideo merito poena innocentiae facta est absolutio debetores jure. etenim obnoxii demittuntur debita quae pro eis ille qui nihil
habebat absoluit. quod singulare mystirium. non solum homines in terris. uerum etiam. angeli uenerantur in caelis. cui me[rito].

(post sanctus.) Uere sanctus. uere benedictus dominus noster Jhs Xps filius tuus. Qui pridie.

(post mysterium.) Domini ac dei nostri sempeterni gloriam depraecemur. orantis uti hoc sacrificium tua benedictione. benedicas et sancti spiritus tui rore perfundas. ut accipientibus uniuersis. legitima sit eucharestia per Jhm Xpm filium tuum deum ac dominum conseruatoremque nostrum, cui est aput te domine cum spiritum sanctum regnum sempiternum perpettia diuinitas in secula seculorum amen.

August 15 - The Assumption

2010-08-15T21:47:00.000-07:00

FURTHERMORE Ozias the prince of the people of Israel, said to her, "Blessed are you, O daughter, by the Lord God the most high above all women upon the earth. Blessed be the Lord who made heaven and earth, who has guided you for a wound to the head of the prince of our enemies. For on this day He has so magnified your name that your praise shall not retire from the mouth of men, who shall be mindful of the power of the Lord for eternity, for that you have not spared your life for the sake of the distress and tribulation of your people, but have prevented our ruin before the sight of our God."

(Vulgate, Judith 13:22-25)

And said Ozias to her, "Blessed are you, O daughter, to God the Most High above all the women upon the earth; and blessed is the Lord God, who created the heavens and the earth, who has guided you for a wound to the head of the leader of our enemies. For this your confidence shall not depart from the heart of men, who remember the strength of God to the age; and God turn these things to you for an exaltation to the age, to visit you in blessings, since you did not spare your life for the affliction of our nation, but went against our ruin, walking a straight way before our God."

(Septuagint, Judith 13:18-20)

AND opened was the sanctuary of God which is in the heaven, and there was seen the chest of His covenant in His sanctuary; and there came lightnings and voices and thunders and an earthquake and great hail, and there was seen a great sign in the heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a wreath of twelve stars; and being with child, she cries out in labor, and being tortured to deliver.

And there was seen another sign in the heaven, and behold: a great fiery-red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his head seven diadem crowns, and his tail sweeps the third of the stars of the heaven and cast them to the earth; and the dragon was standing before the woman who is about to give birth, that when she may give birth, her child he may devour.

And she birthed a son - a male, who is about to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and snatched up was her child to God and to His throne, and the woman fled to the wilderness, where she has a place prepared from God, that there they may nourish her a thousand, two hundred, sixty days.

And there was war in the heaven. Michael and his angels waged war against the dragon, and the dragon waged war and his angels; and they were not strong enough, nor was their place found any more in the heaven. And thrown out was the great dragon, the ancient serpent that is called 'Slanderer' (diabolos) and 'Satan', who is leading the whole world astray – he was thrown out to the earth, and his angels were thrown out with him. And I heard a great voice saying in the heaven:

"Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ, for thrown out was the accuser of our brethren, who is accusing them before our God day and night; and they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life unto death.

"For this be glad, O heavens, and those in them who tabernacle! Woe to the earth and the sea, for the Slanderer has descended to you, having great wrath, having known that he has little time."

And when the dragon saw that he was thrown out to the earth, he pursecuted the woman who birthed the male, and there were given to the woman two wings of the great eagle, that she may fly to the wilderness, to her place where she is nourished a time and times and half a time, from the face of the serpent; and the serpent cast after the woman, out of his mouth, water like a river, that he may cause her to be swept away by the river. And the earth aided the woman, and the earth opened her mouth and drank up the river that the dragon cast forth from his mouth. And the dragon was angry at the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her seed: those keeping the commandments of God and having the testimony of Jesus.

(Revelation 11:19; 12:1-17)

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 6: The Horns of the Altar

2010-08-12T20:49:00.000-07:00

In 1 Kings 1:50-52 and 2:28-34, we read that (NKJV):

Now Adonijah was afraid of Solomon; so he arose, and went and took hold of the horns of the altar. And it was told Solomon, saying, "Indeed Adonijah is afraid of King Solomon; for look, he has taken hold of the horns of the altar, saying, ‘Let King Solomon swear to me today that he will not put his servant to death with the sword.’" Then Solomon said, "If he proves himself a worthy man, not one hair of him shall fall to the earth; but if wickedness is found in him, he shall die." So King Solomon sent them to bring him down from the altar. And he came and fell down before King Solomon; and Solomon said to him, "Go to your house."

Then news came to Joab, for Joab had defected to Adonijah, though he had not defected to Absalom. So Joab fled to the tabernacle of the LORD, and took hold of the horns of the altar. And King Solomon was told, "Joab has fled to the tabernacle of the LORD; there he is , by the altar." Then Solomon sent Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, saying, "Go, strike him down."
Some horned altars from Iron Age II (10th-6th centuries BC) Ekron.
So Benaiah went to the tabernacle of the LORD, and said to him, "Thus says the king, ‘Come out!’" And he said, "No, but I will die here." And Benaiah brought back word to the king, saying, "Thus said Joab, and thus he answered me." Then the king said to him, "Do as he has said, and strike him down and bury him, that you may take away from me and from the house of my father the innocent blood which Joab shed. So the LORD will return his blood on his head, because he struck down two men more righteous and better than he, and killed them with the sword––Abner the son of Ner, the commander of the army of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, the commander of the army of Judah––though my father David did not know it. Their blood shall therefore return upon the head of Joab and upon the head of his descendants forever. But upon David and his descendants, upon his house and his throne, there shall be peace forever from the LORD." So Benaiah the son of Jehoiada went up and struck and killed him; and he was buried in his own house in the wilderness.

An altar from the temple complex at Tel Dan.

Ever wondered what these horns are? The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia defines the horns of the altar as:

Projections at each of the four corners of the altar of burnt offering (Ex. 27:2; 38:2; Ezk. 43:15) and of the altar of incense (Ex. 30:2f.; 37:25f.). In both cases they were to be of one piece with the altar. Blood was smeared on the horns of the altar of burnt offering for the consecration of Aaron and his sons (Ex. 29:12), in the sin offering for a ruler (Heb. nasi'), and on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:18). The horns of the altar of incense were smeared with blood in the case of sin offerings for the high priest and the congregation of Israel (Lev. 4:17,18). Fugitives seeking asylum would cling to the horns, thus putting themselves under the divine protection (cf. 1 K. 1:50-53; 2:28; an addition to the LXX [2:29] reads, "I fled to the Lord"), though not in the case of wilful murder (1 K. 2:31-34; cf. Ex. 21:14); the horns appear to epitomize the holiness of the altar. The cutting off of the horns in Am. 3:14 signifies the removal of Israel's last refuge from God's judgment.

As was noted, in Exodus 27:1-2 and 30:1-3, God commands Moses (NKJV):

You shall make an altar of acacia wood, five cubits long and five cubits wide—the altar shall be square—and its height shall be three cubits. You shall make its horns on its four corners; its horns shall be of one piece with it. And you shall overlay it with bronze...

You shall make an altar to burn incense on; you shall make it of acacia wood. A cubit shall be its length and a cubit its width—it shall be square—and two cubits shall be its height. Its horns shall be of one piece with it. And you shall overlay its top, its sides all around, and its horns with pure gold; and you shall make for it a molding of gold all around...

An altar at Beersheba, probably connected to a temple or cult center
in the city. When Tel Be'er-Sheva was first excavated,
archeologists discovered sandstone blocks in the walls of storehouses
- most of the blocks used in the ancient city was made of
limestone. They eventually took these blocks and
reconstructed the altar, as shown here. It is thought that the altar was
dismantled during the reforms of King Hezekiah in circa 8th century BC.

In Ancient Near Eastern culture, altars were thought of to be the god's 'table' or even as a representation or even a symbol of the deity himself (cf. Psalms 26:6-7; 43:4; 118:27). Now, it was actually unclear what the horns' - to which an extreme degree of holiness were attached - exact origins are and the exact symbolism and purposethey had in Ancient Near Eastern societies. We can infer that some altars had their horns used to latch the sacrificial animals on, but it seems to not be a universal practice. Some have interpreted these horns as being descendants of matztzevot ("standing stones") which were originally placed in the altar but was gradually moved farther into the corners as time passed. Others interpret them more mundanely as serving a more practical purpose: as censer-holders.

Later, these horns were interpreted as symbols of the concepts of strength and protection that are present in the word "horns" (qeren); hence the reason why Adonijah and Uriah clutched the projections of the holy altar: they are seeking the protection of the Lord for themselves - and the Semitic idea that one 'contracts' holiness and impurity by touching either a holy or impure person or item. Also note that many deities throughout the ancient Near East were either portrayed with horns or are associated with horned animals, such as bulls, perhaps as a symbol of virility and strength. Jeremiah meanwhile denied the horns expiatory power as they too are infected with the sin that is engraved on the heard (Jer. 17:1). And as mentioned in the ISBE quote above, cutting off the horns (Amos 3:14) apparently made an altar useless and unfit, signifying "the removal of Israel's last refuge from God's judgment".

Exhibition in Dresden reunites Dürer painting with altarpiece following a 21-year restoration

2010-08-12T20:24:00.000-07:00

A tip of my (symbolic) hat to the folks at The New Liturgical Movement for this headline: Durer Altarpiece Unveiled 21 Years After Acid Attack.

LONDON. A panel from Dürer’s first major altarpiece has been restored after a 21-year treatment following a devastating acid attack in Munich. The Virgin of Sorrows has been unveiled in Dresden, where it was reunited with the rest of the altarpiece of the Seven Sorrows for the first time in nearly five centuries.

Dürer painted the Seven Sorrows and the Seven Joys of the Virgin in 1496, at the age of 25. It may have been commissioned by Frederick the Wise for his palace church at Wittenberg. The altarpiece was probably dismembered during the Reformation, and the seven panels of the Sorrows (of the life of Christ) passed to the artist Lucas Cranach the Younger, whose father had been a court painter. In 1588 Cranach’s estate sold them to the Saxon art collection in Dresden, and they later went to the city’s Gemäldegalerie [...]

The Roman Mass of the Late 15th Century now (partly) up!

2010-08-12T20:06:00.000-07:00

It may not be much of a news, I know, but I've finished typing half of the ordo of the 15th century Roman Mass, derived from Henry Bradshaw & Son's Missale Romanum Mediolani, 1474. It's only half-complete, so stay tuned for updates.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 5: The High Places and the Standing-Stones

2010-08-11T17:44:00.000-07:00

10 monumental megaliths possibly comprising a Canaanite
"high place" found in Gezer

In the Bible, we often encounter Canaanite sanctuaries (and Israelite establishments which were imitations of these) known under the name "high places", the normal translation of the Hebrew word bamot (sing. bamah). We do not know the verbal root from which the word is derived, and the noun itself may be pre-Semitic. The cognates of bamah in both Akkadian and Ugaritic mean the 'back' or 'trunk' of an animal, though it can also denote any elevated ground, such as a crest of a hill or height. In the Bible too, apart from the cultic references and some obscure texts, bamah can mean the 'back' of one's enemies (Deuteronomy 33:29), 'heights' (Deuteronomy 32:13; Psalm 18:34; Isaiah 58:14; Micah 1:3; Amos 4:13; Habbakkuk 3:19), the 'back' of clouds (Isaiah 14:14), or the 'waves' of the sea (Job 9:8). The idea which the word expresses therefore is something which stands out in relief from its background, but the idea of a mountain or hill is not contained in the word itself (note how in 2 Kings 16:4; 2 Chronicles 28:4 the "high places" are distinguished from the "hills").

It is quite true however that some, perhaps many, of these "high place" stood in the elevated areas: men "went up" to the neighboring bamah from Samuel's home-town and "came down" from it (1 Samuel 9:13, 14, 19, 25). In Ezekiel 20:28-29, the word is interpreted, by a play on words, as the name of the lofty hill where men went to offer sacrifice. Solomon built a bamah for Chemosh and Molech (received text) or Milcom (reconstruction based on verses 5 and 33) "on the mountain east of Jerusalem" according to 1 Kings 11:7. The fact that high hills seemed to be places destined for worship is a sufficient explanation of these texts, but not all bamoth were on the hills. There were some in the towns (1 Kings 13:32; 2 Kings 17:29; 23:5) and even at the gate of Jerusalem (2 Kings 23:8). The bamah of Tophet stood in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (Jeremiah 7:31; 32:35). In Ezekiel 6:1-3, we read that:

And there was a word of YHWH toward me, saying:
"Son of man, set your face toward mountains of Israel and prophesy toward them, and say: 'Mountains of Israel, hear a word of the Lord YHWH!
Thus says the Lord YHWH to the mountains and to the hills,
to the ravines and to the valleys:
Behold I, I am bringing upon you a sword,
And I will destroy your high-places.'"

An oval platform found at Megiddo (Stratum XII) made of
unhewn stone, probably dating from 2500 BC,
approximately 8-10 meters wide and 1.25 meters high. The
platform apparently remained in use for several centuries after
its construction for sacrificial purposes - with temples later
being built beside it, as testified by the presence of
animal bones and remains of jars.

One meaning which may suit all of these references is a 'mound' or 'knoll' for cultic purposes. They may have used, sometimes, a prominent rock, but it would seem that this mound was usually artificial: this would make sense of bamoth being "built" (1 Kings 11:7; 14:23; 2 Kings 7:9; 21:3; Jeremiah 19:5), "torn down" and "destroyed" (2 Kings 23:8; Ezekiel 6:3).

Since a 'high place' was a place of worship, each one had to have its altar. The knoll itself could serve as an altar, but an altar could also be built on it, and some biblical texts do mention one as part of the high place (2 Kings 21:3; 2 Chronicles 14:2, 4 [3, 5]; Ezekiel 6:6). The altar was either built of stones separate from the bamah (2 Kings 23:15 LXX; 2 Chronicles 34:3f.) or was made as a portion of the bamah itself. This may explain the Greek word bōmos 'platform' or 'altar', which seems to be cognate with bamah.

Aside from the altar, the most important furnishings for a bamah were the 'asherah and the matztzevah (1 Kings 14:23; 2 Kings 18:4; 23:13f.; 2 Chronicles 14:2 [3]). To these must be added texts which, though not expressing any connection with a bamah, certainly have the same type of worship in mind (Exodus 34:13; Deuteronomy 7:5; 12:3; 16:21-22; Micah 5:12-13). On the other hand, such furnishings were not unique to bamoth: Ahab installed an 'asherah (1 Kings 16:33) and a matztzevah (2 Kings 3:2) in the temple of Baal in Samaria.

Matztzevah, also rendered as maṣṣebah or matstsebah (plural: matztzevot, from the Hebrew word natzab meaning 'to stand', 'to erect' or 'to set up') is the usual term for an erect standing stone. It was a sort of commemorative stele usually erected as a sign of an alliance or undertaking. These stones functioned as a sort of testimony or witness, a symbol of divine presence and a memento of divine revelation. But not only this, matztzevah can also be erected in honor of a deceased person's memory (headstones are actually also called matztzevah in Hebrew today).

In the Bible, we often hear of matztzevot being set up in commemoration of some event or in memory of someone. On at least four occasions, Jacob sets up a matztzevah in connection with certain events of his life: the most well-known is, of course, after he receives the vision of the stairway reaching to heaven in Luz/Bethel (Genesis 28:18). In Genesis 31 (v. 45-54), Jacob erects another stone, as well as a mound, as a witness of his decision to leave Laban. After his return to Bethel, God appears again to Jacob, and once more, Jacob erects yet another matztzevah in memory of this (Genesis 35:14-15). Not too long after this event, Rachel dies and Jacob sets up one last stone in his wife's grave (35:20). Also, God's covenant with Israel through Moses was represented by twelve matztzevot erected at the foot of Mount Sinai, one stone for each tribe (Exodus 24:4). Finally, the book of Joshua also records a number of times that such monuments were erected pointing to the power of God: in Joshua 4:20-24 for example, Joshua sets up twelve stones taken from the Jordan in memory of Israel's miraculous crossing of the river. Near the end of his life, after Joshua challenged the Israelites to serve God, he takes a large stone and sets it "under the oak that was in the sanctuary of YHWH" as a witness against them should they deny the Lord (24:25-27).

It was not a huge step from the idea of the standing-stone as a sign of the presence of the divine or the manifestation of a god to accepting the stone itself as a representation of the deity, and there was not need for it to be hewn in the shape of a statue: even in its crude, natural shape, the matztzevah is a symbol of the god.

We might note that the matztzevah is not, by itself, evil: as shown above, a few of the 'good' characters of the Bible in olden days erected one or more of these at some point in their lives. What was condemned in the Bible were the altars and standing-stones of Canaanite gods, which were abominations to the Lord. His covenant with Moses demanded that the Israelites tear these monuments to other deities down (Exodus 23:24; Deuteronomy 7:5). Still, in latter days, the connection between matztzevot and worship of false gods seems to have strengthened to the point that making one was eventually frowned upon altogether.

A matztzevah was the symbol of a male deity (cf. 2 Kings 3:2 and 10:26-27). Female deities, meanwhile, were represented with the 'asherah, a name applied to both the goddess bearing this name and the cultic symbol. The Ras Shamra texts mention Asherah (as Athirat) as a consort of the god El, and the Old Testament links her with Baal (Judges 3:7; 2 Kings 23:4). Interestingly, inscriptions linking YHWH and 'asherah have also been discovered, although whether the goddess or a cultic object is meant here is admittedly unclear: an 8th century BC ostracon inscribed with the phrase Berakhti etkhem l’YHWH Shomron (or shomrenu) ul'asherato ('I have blessed you by YHWH of Samaria (or 'our guardian') and His 'asherah'). Another inscription, from Khirbet el-Qom near Hebron, reads in part: 'Blessed be Uriyahu by YHWH; for from his enemies by His 'asherah He has saved him.'

All we know about these 'asherah (the cultic objects) is that these were usually carved out of wood (Exodus 34:13; Judges 6:25-26, and thus could be burned (Deuteronomy 12:3; 2 Kings 23:6, 15); alternatively, they could be live trees (Deuteronomy 16:21; 2 Kings 23:14; Micah 5:13). It is more commonly thought however that these were man-made wooden objects (1 Kings 14:15; 16:33; 2 Kings 17:16; 21:3; Isaiah 17:8) that could be erected like the matztzevot (2 Kings 17:10) and standing upright (2 Kings 13:6; Isaiah 27:9), which may imply that it was a kind of post or stake. There are some who have suggested something midway between these two possibilities, saying that it could be a pruned living tree. It is impossible to be more precise about it however, and there is some doubt whether this object was actually carved with a likeness of the goddess.

Along with smaller cultic vessels like basins and lavers for ablution, ephod and teraphim, another furnishing of bamot was the ḥammanim (Leviticus 26:30; 2 Chronicles 14:4 [5]; 34:4, 7; Ezekiel 6:4-6; cf. also Hosea 4:13). The word, usually thought to derive from ḥamam 'to be hot', is never found outside bamot expect when it is with an 'asherah (Isaiah 17:8), or with an altar and an 'asherah (Isaiah 27:9).

We do not know the exact form that these items took. For a long time, ḥammanim were thought to be 'pillars of the sun', following Rashi. Ancient translations (for example, the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Aramaic Targums and the Syriac P'shitta) rendered ḥamman differently from each other - sometimes they even translate the same word differently in different contexts. This shows that the meaning of the word has already become obscure at such an age.

Unfortunately, neither archeology nor epigraphy provide a final answer to this mystery: the word appears in Nabatean and Palmyran inscriptions but they do not provide a clear indication of what it refers to. There is one theory which states that it might be incense utensils of some kind (which is thought by some to have a stela-like form), which rested on the ground or even upon an altar; cf. 2 Chronicles 34:4, which speaks of ḥammanim "that were high above" the altars of Baal. Opinions differ as to the precise identification of the utensil: they are variously thought to be similar to either the incense stands or mini-altars themselves, or the vessels which were placed over these altars or stands. Another idea suggests that a ḥamman, instead of being a sort of utensil or altar, may actually be some sort of edifice, say a canopy which was built over the main altar; the term would then refer to a sort of outdoor chapel or model shrine which probably housed the matztzevot and the 'asherim.

Taking Advantage of the Pages...

2010-07-29T17:09:00.000-07:00

As per the title, I decided to take advantage of the page function and assign separate pages for the liturgies I've once tackled on this blog (yeah, I know I can only add up to 10, but I've not crossed the limit...yet ;))
Here's the page for the St. Amand Ordo (typed straight from E.G. Atchley's Ordo Romanus Primus, this time without major alterations of any kind - just the pure text). Hope you enjoy. :)

June 29: The Feasts of Saints Peter and Paul

2010-06-29T04:15:00.000-07:00

DIGNUM et justum est: omnipotens Pater nos tibi ingentes agere gratias: pro multiplici Apostolorum Petri et Pauli gloria: quam eis per diversas munerum distributiones larga satis pietate donasti. Quos et unigeniti tui discipulos: et fecisti esse magistros. Qui ob Evangelii predicationem cum celorum preficiantur in regnis: carcerum clauduntur angustiis. Potestatem accipiunt solvendi: et ferri vinculis alligantur. Sanitatem donant: et egritudines portant. Demonibus imperant: et ab hominibus flagellantur. Mortes fugant: et fugiunt persequentes. Super mare ambulant: et labore desudant. Montes verbo transferrant: et propriis victum manibus querunt. Judicaturi Angelos: in questionem mittuntur. Cum Deo vivunt: in mundo periclitantur. Postremo Christus eis serviens pedes lavat: el facies eorum blasfemantium manus alapis collapbizat. Nihil sustinentibus pene defuit ad tolerantiam: nihil superantibus victorie non adfuit ad coronam. Si recurramus: quot ad testificandam fidei veritatem erumnarum pertulerint in tormentis frequenter suis: superfuere Martyribus. Si in mirabilibus: hoc per Christum fecere: quod Christus. Si in passionibus: hoc sustinuerunt illi necessitate mortali: quod ille voluntate moriendi. Isti ejus viribus: ille suis. Probantes doctrine auctoritatem similitudine: non equalitate doctoris. Implevit Petrus suo tempore: quod promiserat ante tempus. Posuit animam suam pro illo: quem se non crediderat negaturum. Quia ad ardue sponsionis celeritatem nimia charitate preventus non intellexit servum pro Domino dare non posse: quod pro servo ante Dominus non dedisset. Similiter non renuit crucifigi: sed equaliter non presumpsit appendi. Obiit ille rectus: iste subjectus. Ille ut majestatem ascendentis sublimitate proferret: iste ut fragilitatem descendentis humilitate monstraret.
Nec Paulus affectu minor meminit: quemsibi arrogaverat dicens: Mihi vivere Christus est: et mori lucrum. Gaudet insanientis ictibus percussoris: domitas jugo Christo offerre cervices: et pro corporis sui capite: dare corporis sui caput. Diviserunt sibi passionis Dominice vestimentum duo milites Dei: unus in patibulo: alter in gladio. Petrus in transfixione: Paulus in sanguine. His igitur dispari mortis genere: non dispari moriendi amore perfunctis. Exultet in eorum doctrinis Ecclesia Catholica: in exis religiositas universa: in memoriis Urbs Romana: in patrociniis omnis anima christiana. Неc autem omnia tu Domine operaris: qui a Prophetis demonstraris: ab Angelis adoraris: et in omni seculo Apostolorum lumine declararis. Cui merito omnes Angeli et Archangeli non cessant clamare quotidie ita dicentes:
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus
Dominus Deus Sabaoth:
Pleni sunt celi et terra gloria majestatis tue:
Osanna filio David.
Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini:
Osanna in excelsis.
Agyos, Agyos, Agyos, Kyrie o Theos.

- The Inlatio of the Feast, from the Missale Mixtum (Mozarabic Rite)

Oratio Jeremiae Prophetae

2010-06-21T05:15:00.000-07:00

A piece of Mozarabic Chant: the Prayer of Jeremiah the Prophet (Lamentations 5:1-11).

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 4: The Upper-Room

2010-06-19T20:48:00.000-07:00

And He said to them, "Behold, when you have entered into the city, there shall meet you a man, carrying a jar of water. Follow him to the house that he enters, and you shall say to the householder of the house, 'The Teacher says to you, "Where is the guest-room where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?"' And he shall show you a large upper-room, furnished; there make ready."

-Luke 22:10-12

The Last Supper, one of the most important events in the life of Christ wherein He instituted the Eucharist, was held in an anagaion (anything that is above ground; traditionally rendered and understood as "upper-'room'"). Now we wonder: what could this upper-room be? First, let's check how houses looked like in the 1st century.

First and foremost, we must remember that one traditional candidate for the site, known as the Cenacle, as it stands today, only reached its present form around the medieval period (there is still some debate as to exactly when), after experiencing numerous cycles of destruction and reconstruction. So, it's rather unlikely that Jesus and His disciples held their last meal in a wide, spacious Gothic room such as this - supposing that this is the actual site. The area would have looked totally different in the 1st century AD.

Many 1st-century houses in Roman Judea were small, box-like buildings, usually built from hand-made and sun-dried day bricks or stone. Interior walls (or also the exterior if one could afford it) were covered with a mixture of soil, chalk and straw or lime plaster. Wide benches of mud brick or stone for sitting and sleeping, and shelves for storage, were built into the structure itself.

Stairs or a wooden ladder led up onto the flat roof, which was usually composed of timber covered with reeds, followed by a layer of mud and a dry mixture of chalk, earth and ash, which provided insulation. This layer was applied while the mud plaster was still damp. Finally a mixture of mud rich in lime was added, to keep out water. A stone roller was then used to compact each layer. It was because of this mud that weeds sometimes grew on rooftops. In some areas where timber was scarce, another possible alternative was stone beams covered with plaster. The roof was usually bordered with a wall around two feet high as a safety measure. The interior tended to be a cramped, cold and dark space (due to the small and high windows, which prevented intruders and the cold from entering), so the courtyard and/or the roof tended to be more important parts of the house where work was done, since they were used for tasks that needed good light - such as spinning and weaving, and food preparation. The roof might also be used for sleeping at hot days, or for drying food or textiles, or even as a dining area. At times temporary tent or booth-like structures were even set up on the rooftop as a protection against the hot sun and the elements. Hence, some historians think that it may be possible that the 'upper-room' where Jesus and His disciples ate the Seder was actually the rooftop of the house they were in, with a sort of booth, stall or awning (most likely made out of thatch or tree branches, probably kind of like the sukkah erected during the week-long Jewish festival of Sukkot, aka Feast of Booths) erected on it, and furnished with tables and couches (chairs were mostly non-existent; people either reclined on couches or sat on the floor) for the meal. In a busy season such as Passover, when many people crowded the streets of Jerusalem, this was the only available space for anyone who is seeking room.

Another possibility is that the house was a two-storey house (see left). In such a dwelling, a lower room or cellar was used as a storeroom and stables for animals. The main living area, partitioned into several sections, was located on the upper level, accessed by a flight of stairs. It had a work and kitchen area, where the children often slept, and a separate bedroom for the parents. In a more wealthier home, a third room would be added for guests and for entertaining (='upper-room'?).

Passover was a season when thousands of pilgrims from all over the known world flocked into the Holy City, swelling its overall population probably tenfold. At this time of year, there were a lot of people on the streets, many of them trying to find houses that would and could let them stay in for the feastdays or, in the event where such is not possible, building temporary structures in virtually any place they could (the word used for 'guest-room' here, katalyma, is the same word that was used by Luke to describe the place where Joseph and Mary found no room for the birth of Jesus - which is traditionally misrendered as "inn"). What is interesting is that the words, 'the Teacher' and 'my guest-room', suggest that Jesus was well-known to that householder.

From Youtube: Coptic Liturgy

2010-06-19T19:40:00.000-07:00

From Youtube: a Coptic Orthodox liturgy celebrated in English by Fr. Mauritius Anba Bishoy at the El-Samaeyeen Cathedral, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. The thick accents (as well as the microphones!) might be a distraction to some, but these give a fairly good impression of the divine liturgy of the Coptic Church.

Trivia: the beginning of part 1 (below) shows the priest choosing the Lamb that would be used in the Liturgy among the loaves of bread offered and inspecting the wine as the choir repeatedly sings Kyrie Eleison (it is actually sung 41 times: the reason usually given for this is because Christ was scourged with 39 lashes, and then crowned with thorns and pierced with a spear - yielding 41).

Here are the other videos: Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, and Part 11.

Crédimus in unum Deum...

2010-06-19T10:31:00.001-07:00

Fidem, quam corde crédimus, ore autem dicámus:Crédimus in unum Deum Patrem omnipoténtem, factórem caeli et terrae, visibílium ómnium et invisibílium Conditórem.

Et in unum Dóminum nostrum Jesum Christum, Fílium Dei Unigénitum, et ex Patre natum ante ómnia sæcula; Deum ex Deo, Lumen ex Lúmine. Deum verum ex Deo vero; natum non factum, Omoúsion Patri, hoc est, ejúsdem cum Patre substántiae; per quem ómnia facta sunt, quae in caelo, et quae in terra.
Qui propter nos hómines, et propter nostram salútem, descendit de caelis, et incarnátus est de Spíritu Sancto ex María Vírgine, et homo factus est. Passus sub Póntio Piláto, sepúltus, tértia die resurréxit, ascéndit ad caelos, sedet ad déxteram Dei Patris omnipoténtis. Inde ventúrus est judicáre vivos et mórtuos, cujus regni non erit finis.

Et in Spíritum Sanctum, Dóminum vivificatórem, et ex Patre et Fílio procedéntem. Cum Patre et Fílio adorándum et conglorificándum; qui locútus est per prophétas.
Et unam, sanctam, Cathólicam et Apostólicam Ecclésiam.
Confitémur unum baptísma in remissiónem peccatórum.
Expectámus resurrectiónem mortuórum, et vitam ventúri saeculi.
Amen.

Thus is the Creed in the Mozarabic Rite of Spain. One interesting thing that you'll notice first here is that the Mozarabic Creed was, and is recited in the first-person plural (Crédimus...confitémur...expectamus, 'We believe...we confess...we await') as was the case with the Coptic, Ethiopian, Chaldean, and Armenian liturgies. This is in contrast to other Eastern and Western rites where the pronoun is changed to the singular (Credo...confiteor...expecto). In this respect this version preserves the form adopted by the First Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople, which was in the plural.

Now this, of course predated ICEL's changing of the Roman version from the singular to the plural during translation of the text. ;)

Another variation you can see is the wording:

1.) ...visibílium ómnium et invisibílium Conditórem.
2.) Deum ex Deo, Lumen ex Lúmine, Deum verum ex Deo vero. 'God from God, light from light, true God from true God'; compare Roman Deum de Deo, etc. Notice that it also sports the 'God from God' clause that was not originally present in the Greek text.
3.) Natum, non factum (as opposed to the Roman genitum)
4.) Omoúsion Patri, hoc est, ejúsdem cum Patre substántiae. This version preserves the Greek ὁμοούσιον instead of translating it with terms such as consubstantialem, and provides with it an explanatory clause: 'Omousion to the Father, that is, of the same substance with the Father')
5.) Per quem ómnia facta sunt, quae in caelo, et quae in terra.
6.) Passus sub Póntio Piláto...Inde ventúrus est judicáre vivos et mórtuos. The wording of the text in this portion closely resembles the Latin version of the Apostles' Creed: 'He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was buried, rose again on the third day, ascended into heaven; sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.'
7.) Dóminum vivificatórem (cf. Roman Dóminum et vivificántem)
8.) Et ex Patre et Fílio procedéntem: cum Patre et Fílio adorándum et conglorificándum... (cf. Roman Qui ex Patre Filióque procédit: qui cum Patre et Fílio simul adorátur et conglorificátur). Note the et Filio in place of the infamous Roman Filioque.

Yet another difference is the place it is recited at Mass: the Creed is recited well after the Post-Sanctus and the Post-Pridie (roughly corresponding to our Canon), just before the Our Father. At this time the Priest takes the consecrated Host on the paten, holds it over the uncovered chalice and and says, or sings (after a Dominus sit semper vobiscum): "The Faith we believe with the heart, let us then say with the mouth." (Fidem, quam corde credimus...) He then elevates the Host to show it to the people as the Creed is sung (hear it sung here and here).

According to Dom Fernand Cabrol (from The Mass of the Western Rites):

The Spanish were the first in the West to introduce the symbol of Nicea-Constantinople into the Mass. In the East the custom already existed, and in 568 Justinus the Younger made it a law. In 597 the Third Council of Toledo issued an edict: "Ut prius quam Dominica dicatur oratio, voce clara a populo" (symbolum Constantinopolitanum) "decantetur, quo fides vera," etc. This is a fresh example of the eagerness shown by the Spanish Bishops to follow the customs of Constantinople. From Spain the usage spread into Gaul; but Rome held out long, and only yielded in the eleventh century. The true place of this symbol is in the rite of Baptism and it is not an essential element of the Mass. The Gallican churches sang it after the Gospel, at the end of the Mass of the catechumens, and this too is the place given to it by Rome. Like the Greeks and Orientals, the Spanish, by putting it at the end of the Canon, before the "Pater," rather disturbed the general equilibrium of this part of the Mass; and, moreover, diminished accordingly the importance of the "Pater."

Let's turn to the et Filio clause (as I would dub it now). As many of you may know, the origin of the Filioque clause in the West is usually traced in the anti-Arian situation of seventh-century Iberia: the clause was placed there in an effort to combat Arianism which was widespread back then in Visigothic Spain by making the Son like the Father in all things.

It would seem that the original form that this controversial clause took (at least in the Spanish version), however, was et Filio. The text of the Creed as it is recited today can already be found in pretty much the same form, with minor variants in the text, in the minutes of the Third Council of Toledo of 589 (to which some trace the origins of this clause), down to the omousion Patri, though an et Filio within the text is obviously still absent.

ITEM SANCTA FIDES QUAM EXPOSUERUNT CL PATRES IN CONCILIO CONSTANTINOPOLITANO.

Credimus in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium Conditorem.
Et in unum Dominum Iesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula. Deum ex Deo, lumen ex lumine, Deum verum, ex Deo vero. Natum non factum, homousion Patri, hoc est, eiusdem cum Patre substantiae. Per quem omnia facta sunt, quae in caelis et quae in terris sunt. Qui propter nostram salutem descendit, et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto, et Maria virgine. Homo factus, passus est sub Pontio Pilato, sepultus, tertia die resurrexit. Ascendit in caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Iterum venturus in gloria iudicare vivos et mortuos: cuius regni non erit finis.
Et Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et Vivificantem. Ex Patre procedentem, cum Patre et Filio adorandum et glorificandum: qui locutus est per prophetas. Unam, catholicam, atque apostolicam ecclesiam. Confitemur unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum, vitam futuri saeculi. Amen.

The genesis of the clause can be seen in the third anathema of that same council: "Quicumque Spiritum Sanctum non credit aut non crediderit a Patre et Filio procedere, eumque non dixerit coaeternum esse Patri et Filio et coessentialem, anathema sit." (Whoever does not believe in the Holy Spirit or does not believe that He proceeds from the Father and the Son, and does not declare that He is coeternal and coessential with the Father and the Son, let him be anathema.) But this is also hardly new: a century before the third Synod, a different confession of faith found in the First Council of Toledo in 400 already has the following clauses: Spiritum quoque esse Paraclitum, qui nec Pater sit ipse, nec Filius, sed a Patre Filioque procedens. Est ergo ingenitus Pater, genitus Filius, non genitus Paraclitus, sed a Patre Filioque procedens. Eventually, the next time the Nicene Creed was quoted (during the Eighth Council of Toledo in 653), it now carries the et Filio within the text itself:

Credimus in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem cęli et terrę, visibilium omnium et invisibilium Conditorem.
Et in unum Dominum Iesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, ex Patre natum ante omnia secula. Deum ex Deo, lumen ex lumine, Deum verum ex Deo vero. Natum non factum, homousion Patri, hoc est, eiusdem cum Patre substantiae. Per ipsum omnia facta sunt, quae in cęlo et quae in terra. Qui propter nos et propter nostram salutem descendit, et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto, et Maria virgine. Homo factus et passus sub Pontio Pilato, ac sepultus, et tertia die resurrexit. Ascendit in cęlos, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Inde venturus in gloria, iudicare vivos et mortuos, cuius regni non erit finis.
Credimus et in Spiritum Sanctum et Vivificatorem, ex Patre et Filio procedentem, cum Patre et Filio adorandum et glorificandum, qui locutus est per prophetas.
Et unam, catholicam, atque apostolicam ecclesiam. Confitemur unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum, expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum, et vitam futuri sęculi. Amen.

The Eleventh Council of Toledo (675) contained a lengthy confession of faith at its preamble. It says the following concerning the Holy Spirit:

Spiritum quoque Sanctum qui est tertia in Trinitate persona, unum atque aequalem cum Deo, Patre et Filio credimus esse deum, unius substantiae, unius quoque esse nature, non tamen genitum, vel creatum, sed ab utrisque procedentem amborum esse Spiritum. Hic etiam Spiritus Sanctus nec ingenitus nec genitus creditur, ne aut si ingenitum dixerimus duos Patres dicamus, aut si genitum duos Filios predicare monstremur. Qui tamen nec Patris tantum, nec Filii tantum, sed simul Patris et Filii, Spiritus dicitur, nec enim de Patre procedit in Filium, vel de Filio procedit ad sanctificandam creaturam, sed simul ab utrisque processisse monstratur, quia caritas sive sanctitas amborum esse agnoscitur. Hic igitur Spiritus Sanctus missus ab utrisque sicut Filius creditur, sed minor Patre et Filio non habetur, sicut filius propter adsumptam carnem minorem se Patre et Spiritu Sancto esse testatur.

We also believe that the Holy Spirit, the third person in the Trinity, is God, one and equal with God the Father and the Son, of one substance and of one nature, not, however, begotten nor created but proceeding from both, and that He is the Spirit of both. Of this Holy Spirit, we also believe that He is neither unbegotten nor begotten, for if we called Him unbegotten we would assert two Fathers, or if begotten, we would appear to preach two Sons. Yet He is called the Spirit not of the Father alone, nor of the Son alone, but of both Father and Son. For He does not proceed from the Father to the Son, nor from the Son to sanctify creatures, but He is shown to have proceeded from both at once, because He is known as the love or the sanctity of both. Hence we believe that the Holy Spirit is sent by both, as the Son is sent by the Father. But He is not less than the Father and the Son, in the way in which the Son, on account of the body which He has assumed, testifies that He is less than the Father and the Holy Spirit.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 3: 'Mount' Calvary

2010-06-19T09:28:00.000-07:00

We read the following from John's Gospel:

And they took Jesus and led Him away, and carrying the cross by Himself, He went out to the place called Place of a Skull (which is called in Hebrew 'Golgotha'), where they crucified Him, and with Him two others: on this side and on that side, but in the middle Jesus.

- John 19:16b-18

Nowadays, it is common to assume that the Golgotha of the Gospels was a sort of hill located a good distance from the hustle-and-bustle of Jerusalem (hence the common appellation: ‘Mount Calvary’). Many artists and filmmakers have followed suit: sometimes to the extent of showing it as a very high and steep ridge, as Mel Gibson does in his famous film The Passion of the Christ. There are even hymns entitled There is a Green Hill Far Away or On Golgotha's Hill Christ the Son.

Close reading of the Gospel accounts themselves however do not say anything about the location, whether it was a hill – or for that matter, that the ‘Skull Place’ was an elevated area at all; they all just say something to the effect that it was a “place (Greek topos) called ‘Skull’.” This may be one of the cases where popular conception can color our reading of the Scriptures.

First of all, tThere is no explicit mention of Golgotha as a raised place until the 4th century, when it is spoken of as a monticulus (‘little hill’) by the anonymous pilgrim of Burdigala (Bordeaux). The expression does not occur again until once in the 6th century, after which we do not come across it until Bernard the Pilgrim visited Palestine in the 9th century and spoke of a Mons Calvariae. From thence the expression was adopted by Western writers and became popular. The early Greek Christian writers, with the exception of Sts. Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 329 – 389/390) and Cyril of Jerusalem (ca. 313 – 386), also never speak of it as being connected with a hill or a height, and it must be remembered that both lived a bit after the traditional area, where the Church of the Holy Sepulchre now stands, was officially discovered by Constantine.

Early Christians seem to have tended also to think that Golgotha was the name of the whole area which contains the spot where Jesus was crucified rather than that specific outcrop of rock, which is more properly known as the Rock of Calvary. Even when it was determined as the actual location of the Crucifixion, it still did not become ‘the’ Golgotha until about the 6th century AD. Before that, it was merely known as “the rock of the Cross”; (Egeria, Itin. 24.7; 25.9, 11; 27.3, 6; 30.1, 2; 31.4; 35.2; 36.4.5; 37.1.4, 5, 8; 39.2; St. Jerome, Ep. 58.3). The basilica itself was understood to be “on Golgotha,” which was understood to be a more wider area.

Christian iconography itself may have also played a part in making this idea widespread. Some trace it to the iconographic depiction of Jesus' cross as standing on a little mound (in later artworks, a skull – usually identified as Adam’s – may be seen beneath it): see the icon on the left for such an example. Artists then have almost invariably depicted the crucifixion as occurring on a high hill or on an elevated ground, probably to carry out the idea that it could be seen from afar as well (cf. Matthew 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41; Luke 23:49). Thus the idea of a 'Mount Calvary' solidified in our minds.

The identification of Golgotha as a hill may also probably come from the fact that the traditional area (on the right of the present entrance of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre) was an isolated knoll presently about 5-6 meters high, located on the tilled saddle of part of the slope of a hill, possibly known once as Mount Gareb, but this would not have looked in any way like a hill: rather, it would have looked like an elongated crater. The entire area had once been a quarry for building stones during the Iron Age (ca. 10th-7th centuries BC), and was characterized by irregular rock cuttings, scarps and caves. The slope had been substantially cut away by the quarrying, and good-quality stone eventually ran out, leading to its abandonment. Archeologists believe that the area was then filled with arable soil, presumably to turn the ugly quarry remains into a beautiful garden fit for growing crops. The city-gate near it known as the 'Gennath' (Garden) Gate may have gained its name from the fact that this region was quite intensely farmed, despite the irregular features of the topography, with caves and rocky scarps and protrusions, interposed with areas of cultivation. Tombs and cultivated areas could lie side by side, since according to Jewish law the uncleanness of tombs need not affect cultivations (m.Ohol. 17.4, cf. m. Baba Bathra 2.9), and gardens and tombs were often located close by. Indeed some 1st century AD tombs were found only 49 feet away from the edicule (Latin aedicula "little house") containing the supposed tomb of Christ.

This hump may have been especially cut back in either the 2nd century, for the pagan temple that was built on the site, or the 4th century, for the Martyrium complex of the Constantinian basilica, or simply a remnant of the area’s days as a quarry - scholars are still in disagreement. But whenever it reached its present form as a kind of rock finger, a number of scholars think that would have been quite difficult, if not impossible, for three people to have been crucified on the summit of this 9 to 13-meter outcrop (measuring 3.5 x 1.7 meters) due to lack of adequate space for three crosses, not to mention that its slopes are too steep to allow easy access. Thus, while this rock may have been a monument or signpost marking the general location of Golgotha, it was not the actual spot where the crosses would have stood.

The Roman rhetorician Quintilian (ca. AD 35-100) once stated that:

Whenever we crucify the guilty, the most crowded roads are chosen, where most people can see and be moved by this fear. For penalties relate not so much to retribution as to their exemplary effect.

This was of course demonstrated to great effect in the aftermath of the Third Servile War (73-71 BC), when 6,000 surviving slaves who joined Spartacus' rebellion were crucified along the roadside of the Appian Way from Rome to Capua (approx. 200 kilometers). Since one of the purposes of crucifixion was to publicly humiliate the victim, making him a living billboard to deter any possible crime and rebellion, crucifying someone in public places where a lot of people can see him is natural. The Gospels themselves write that it was "those passing by" who taunted Jesus (Matthew 27:39), and that people saw the placard above His head "because the place was near to the city where Jesus was crucified." (John 19:20) These statements would have made not much sense if the Lord was crucified far away on a high hill a good distance off the roads and the city!

Hence, one writer (Joan Taylor), while accepting the authenticity of the traditional location of the tomb, propose that Jesus, and the two criminals, were probably crucified somewhere closer to the roadside and to the Gennath Gate than the traditional spot, which could have been the backdrop of the event, rather than its location. She proposes that this spot was eventually buried and obscured when a street was built on the site. Thus, it would seem that the reason why Constantine built his basilica in a more northward location is because it was more convenient - underneath the pagan temple, according to local Christian tradition, also lies the possible site of Jesus' tomb; also, it was a prime building spot and would have saved the trouble of having to demolish the road. Joan writes: "After all, with the miraculous discovery of the True Cross in the region of the temple temenos, there was convincing proof that everyone should look northwards to the site of the crucifixion anyway. For his localization, an attesting miracle was clearly necessary and thereafter those that pointed southwards could no longer be given credence."

The Triduum as it was in the Church of Rome: Holy Thursday from the Gelasian Sacramentary, Part 2

2010-06-19T08:02:00.000-07:00

(Part 1 here)

RECONCILIATIO POENITENTIS AD MORTEM.

Deus misericors, Deus clemens, qui secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum peccata poenitentium deles, et praeteritorum criminum culpas venia remissionis evacuas, respice super hunc famulum tuum et remissionem sibi omnium peccatorum tota cordis confessione poscentem deprecatus exaudi. Renova in eo, piissime Pater, quicquid terrena fragilitate corruptum est vel quicquid diabolica fraude violatum est: in unitatem corporis ecclesiae tuae membrum, perfecta remissione restitue: miserere, Domine gemituum, miserere lacrimarum, et non habentem fiduciam, nisi in tua misericordia, ad sacramentum reconciliationis admitte: Per.
Maiestatem tuam, Domine, supplices deprecamur, ut huic famulo tuo, longo squalore poenitentiae macerato, miserationis tuae veniam largire digneris, ut nuptiale veste recepta, ad regalem mensam unde eiectus fuerat mereatur intrare. Per.

Maiestatem tuam quaesumus, Domine, sanctae Pater omnipotens, aeterne Deus, qui non mortem sed peccatorum vitam semper inquiris, respice flentem famulum tuum, attende prostratum, eiusque planctum in gaudium tua miseratione concede. Scinde delictorum saccum, et indue eum laetitiam salutarem, ut post longa peregrinationis fame[m] de sanctis altaribus tuis satietur: ingressus cubiculum Regis, in ipsius aula benedicat nomen gloriae tuae semper. Per Dominum.

Deus misericors, Deus clemens, qui indulgentiam tuam nulla temporum lege concludis, sed pulsantis misericordiae tuae ianuam aperis, poenitentes etiam sub ipso vitae huius terminum non relinquis. Respice propitius super hunc famulum tuum, remissionem sibi omnium peccatorum tota cordis confessione poscentem. Renova in eo, piissime Pater, quod actione, quod verbo, quod ipsa denique cogitatione diabolica fraude vitiatum est, et unitati corporis ecclesiae membrum tuae redemptionis annecte. Miserere gemituum, miserere lacrimarum, et non habentem fiduciam, nisi in misericordia tua, ad sacramentum reconciliationis admitte, quia nullus animae in hoc corpore constitutae difficilis apud te, aut tarda curatio est. Fidelis enim es in verbis tuis, qui conversum peccatorem non longa temporum spatia differendum, sed mox ut in te gemuisset dixisti esse [audiendum?]. Per.

Oratio post reconciliationem, vel posteaquam communicaverit.

Deus qui confitentium tibi corda purificas, et accusantes se conscientias ab omni vinculo iniquitatis absolvis, da indulgentiam reis et medicinam tribue vulneratis, ut percepta remissionem omnium peccatorum in sacramentis tuis sincera deinceps devotione permaneat, et nullum redemptionis aeternae susteneat detrimentum. Per.

[Post haec offert plebs, et confitiuntur sacramenta.]

Secreta.
Virtutum caelestium Deus, de cuius gratiae rore discendit ut ad mysteria tua purgatis sensibus accedamus: praesta, quaesumus, ut in eorum traditione solemniter honorum tibi placitum deferimus obsequium. Per.

Infra actionem.
Communicantes, et diem sacratissimum celebrantes quo traditus est Dominus noster Iesus Christus. Sed et memoriam...

Item infra.
Hanc igitur oblationem, Domine, cunctae familiae tuae, quam tibi offerunt ob die ieiunii cenae Dominicae, in qua Dominus noster Iesus Christus tradidit discipulis suis corporis et sanguinis sui mysteria caelebranda, quaesumus, Domine, placatus intende, ut per multa curricula annorum salva et incolumis munera sua tibi Domine mereatur offerre: diesque nostros in tua pace d[isponas].

Item infra canone[m], ubi dicimus Qui pridie quam pateretur, in huius diei processione dicimus Qui ac die antequam traderetur, accepit panem in suis sanctis manibus, elevatis...

Postcommun.
Concede, quaesumus, Domine, ut percepti novi sacramenti mysterium et corpore sentiamus et mente. Per.

[Ad populum.]
Gregem tuum, Pastor bone, placatus intende, et oves, quas pretioso sanguine Filii tui redemisti, diabolica non sinas incursione lacerari. Per Dominum.

The Triduum as it was in the Church of Rome: Holy Thursday from the Gelasian Sacramentary, Part 1

2010-04-06T19:41:00.000-07:00

At Rome during the 4th to 6th century, Holy Thursday was a day for the reconciliation of the penitents. In the 7th century, there were two Masses in churches celebrated by priests: one in the morning to close out Lent, and the other in the evening to commemorate the institution of the Eucharist. But during noon, a Mass was celebrated by the Pope (=Bishop of Rome) and consecrated the chrism and blessing the oils. The ministers were also instructed to reserve a portion of the "sacrifice" consecrated in this Mass for the next day: reservant de ipso sacrificio in crastinum unde communicent, as the Gelasian notes in its rubrics.

The Sacramentary contains the propers for three Masses: one for the closing of Lent, another for the chrism, and yet another for the Last Supper.

THE RECONCILIATION OF PENITENTS

The Gelasian contains two distinct rituals for reconciling penitents. In the first, which belongs to the Papal liturgy, the deacon addresses a lengthy petition to the bishop: Adest, o venerabilis Pontifex, tempus acceptum ("It is here, O venerable Pontiff, the acceptable time..."), in which he urgently requests him to admit penitent sinners to reconciliation during these days when the Church is about to beget new children through baptism. Is not reconciliation a new baptism? "Water washes, but tears wash as well." The bishop or priest then warns the penitents against relapses and then says a series of prayers for pardon.

The beginning of the penitential season was Ash Wednesday. In those days, the bishop would sprinkle the penitents with water and ashes and clothe them in the cilicium (hairshirt) that would be the mark of their status in their years of separation and expiation. Penitents were then to be confined in an area (probably in a monastery or some such place) while they performed their penance until Holy Thursday either at the end of that Lent or a few years later, when the bishop would formally reconcile them. But even after this was held this does not mean that the penitents' period of fasting had ended or that they were no longer excluded from the sacraments or the kiss of peace. The sinner had to continue until the fifth or seventh year, each year returning for this partial reconciliation.

ORATIONES IN QUINTA FERIA

Eodem die non psallitur nec salutat, id est non dicit Dominus vobiscum: et Reconciliatio Poenitentis.

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, da, quaesumus, universis famulis tuis plenius atque perfectius omnia festi paschalis introire mysteria; ut incunctanter pia corda cognoscant quantum debeant de confirmata in Christo renascentium glorificatione gaudere. Per.

Concede credentibus, misericors Deus, salvum nobis de Christi passione remedium, et humanae fragilitatis praeteritae culpae laqueos aeterno suffragio plebs absolvat. Per Dominum nostrum.

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui vitam humani generis, pro nobis Filio tuo moriente, salvasti, praesta, quaesumus, ut in hac populi tui devotione fructus proveniat gaudiorum. Per Dominum.

ORDO AGENTIBUS PUBLICAM POENITENTIAM

Egreditur poenitens de loco ubi paenitentiam gessit, et in gremio praesentatur aeclesiae prostrato omni corpore in terra. Et postolat in his verbis diaconus:

Adest, o venerabilis Pontifex, tempus acceptum, dies propitiationis divinae et salutis humanae, qua mors interitum et vita accepit aeterna principium, quando in vinia Domini Sabaoth sic novorum plantatio facienda est, ut purgetur et curatio vetustatis. Quamvis enim a divitiis bonitatis et pietatis Dei nihil temporis vacet, nunc tamen et largior est per indulgentiam remissio peccatorum et copiosior per gratiam assumptio renascentum. Augemur regenerandis, crescimus reversis. Lavant aquae, lavant lacrimae. Inde gaudium de assumptione vocatorum, hinc laetitiae de absolutione poenitentium.
Inde est quod supplex tuus, postea quam in varias formas criminum, neglectu mandatorum caelestium, et morum probabilium transgressione, cecidit, humiliatus atque prostratus prophetica ad Deum voce clamat, dicens, Peccavi, impie egi, iniquitatem feci, miserere mei, Domine, evangelicam vocem non frustratoria aure capiens, Beati qui lugent, quoniam ipsi consolabuntur. Manducavit, sicut scriptum est, panem doloris, lacrimis stratum rigauit, cor suum luctu, corpus afflixit ieiuniis, ut animae suae reciperet quam perdiderat sanitatem. Unicum itaque est poenitentiae suffragium, quod et singulis prodest, et omnibus in commune succurrit.
Hic ergo, dum ad poenitudinis actionem tantis excitatur exemplis, sub conspectu ingemiscentis eclesiae, venerabilis Pontifex, protestatur et dicit, Iniquitates meas ego agnosco et delictum meum contra me est semper. Averte faciem tuam a peccatis meis, Domine, et omnes iniquitates meas dele. Redde mihi laetitiam salutaris tui et spiritu principale confirma me.
Quo ita supplicanti et misericordiam dei afflicto corde poscentie, redintegra in eo, apostolicae Pontifex, quicquid diabolo scindente corruptum est, et orationum tuarum patrocinantibus meritis, per divinae reconciliationis gratiam fac hominem proximum Deo, ut qui antea in suis perversitatibus displicebat, nunc iam placere se Domino in regione vivorum, devicto mortis suae auctore gratuletur. Per Dominum.

Post hoc admonetur ab episcopo sive alio sacerdote, ut quod poenitendo diluit, iterando non revocet. Inde vero has dicit orationes sacerdos super eum:

Adesto Domine supplicationibus nostris, et me qui etiam misericordiam tuam primus indigeo clementer exaudi, ut quem non electio meriti sed dono gratiae tuae constituisti operis huius ministrum; da fiduciam tui muneris exequendi, et ipse in nostro ministerio quod tuae pietatis est operare. Per.

Praesta, quaesumus Domine huic famulo tuo dignum poenitentiae fructum, ut ecclesiae tuae sanctae, a cuius integritate deviarat peccando, admissorum veniam consequendo, reddatur innoxius. Per Dominum.

Deus humani generis benignissime conditor et misericordissime formator, qui hominem invidia diaboli ab aeternitate deiectum unici tui Filii sanguine redemisti, vivifica itaque quem tibi nullatenus mori desideras, et qui non derelinquis devium, adsume corruptum . Moveat pietatem tuam, quaesumus, Domine, huius famuli tui lacrimosa suspiria. Tu eius medere vulneribus. Tu iacenti manum porrige salutarem, ne eclesia tua aliqua sui corporis portione vastetur, nec grex tuus detrimentum sustineat, ne de familiae tuae damno inimicus exultet, ne renatum lavacro salutari mors secunda possedeat. Tibi ergo, Domine, supplices preces, tibi fletum cordis effundimus. Tu parce confitenti ut imminentibus poene sententiae quae futuri iudicii te miserante, non incidat. Nesciat quod terre in tenebris, quod stridet in flammis, atque ab erroris via ad iter reversus iustitiae nequaquam ultra novis vulneribus saucietur, sed integrum sit ei atque perpetuum et quod gratia tua contulit et quod misericordia reformavit. Per.

Item ad reconciliandum poenitentem.

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, confitenti tibi huic famulo tuo pro tua pietate peccata relaxa, ut non plus ei noceat conscientiae reatus ad poenam quam indulgentia tuae pietatis ad veniam. per Dominum.

Omnipotens et misericors Deus, qui peccatorum indulgentiam ad confessione celeri posuisti, succurre lapsis, miserere confessis, ut quos delictorum catena constringit, magnitudo tuae pietatis absolvat. Per.

Deus qui confitentium tibi corda purificas et accusantes suas conscientias ab omni vinculo iniquitatis absolvis, da indulgentiam reis, et medicina tribue vulneratis, ut per accepta remissione omnium peccatorum senceram deinceps devtione permaneant, et nullum redemptionis aeternae susteneant detrimentum. Per.

Domine sancte, Pater omnipotens, aeterne Deus, respice super hunc famulum tuum qui ab infesta saeculi tempestate demersus, flebili lamentatione suos accusat excessus, ut fletus ac gemitus eius piae suscipias, eumque de tenebris ad lumen revoces, et medellam confitenti, salutem poenitenti, et vulnerato auxilium sanitatis indulgeas. Nec ultra inimicus in eius habeat animam potestatem, cuiusque confessionem libenter admittens, eclesiae tuae purificatum restitue, ac tuo altario repraesenta, ut ad sacramentum reconciliationis admissum una nobiscum sancto nomini tuo gratias agere mereatur. Per.

And Now...

2010-01-12T07:07:00.000-08:00

Two random articles from E.G. Atchley's Ordo Romanus Primus that might be of some interest:

ii. Lights.

The basilicas and churches were illuminated when need was with lamps and candles, of which we have very frequent mention in the Liber Pontificalis and elsewhere. The numerous gifts, for example, recorded in the Life of St. Silvester, which although probably of later date than the time of Constantine yet belong to an early period, include large lamps in which scented oils burned, heavy silver candelabra for the nave of the Lateran Basilica, and seven bronze candlesticks before the altar in the same; and in the time of Innocent I there was said to be twenty brazen candelabra in the nave of the church of SS. Gervase and Protase, each weighing forty pounds. Later on, Pope Leo III ordained that on Sundays and festivals lights should be set on either side of the lectern during the reading of the lessons.
Prudentius makes the Prefect of the City inquire of St. Laurence for the silver scyphi in which the sacred blood was held, and for the golden candlesticks in which the tapers were set at their nocturnal meetings. Paulinus of Nola (θ 431) describes the lights in his basilica of St. Felix at the festival in the following lines:

'Now the golden doors are adorned with curtains all snow-white,
Thickly crowned with lamps the altars are brilliantly shining:
Lights are burning, and give forth the scent of the waxen papyrus,
Night and day they shine: thus night with the splendour of daylight
Blazes, and day itself, made bright with heavenly beauty,
Shines yet brighter, its light by lamps innumerable doubled.'
So, in another poem on the same subject, he mentions tapers fixed to the pillars of the church, giving forth scented odours, and lamps hanging by brazen chains in the spaces between them. These he compares to a tree full of branches, bearing little glass vessels at the end like fruit in which the lights burn: the whole candelabrum, when lit, rivalling the crowd of stars with its numerous flames.
We have got beyond mere lighting for necessity here, for the lamps were lit by day as well as by night at the festival of St. Felix: the lights are become signs of rejoicing, a common practice amongst most nations of antiquity. The well-known lines of Juvenal will suffice to recall the custom of pagan Rome:

'All things are gay: my doorway now is decked with tall branches,
And is keeping the feast with lanterns lit in the morning.'
St. Paulinus also mentions lamps (lychni) hanging by brazen chains in the basilica of St. Felix. And in the Life of Pope Hilarus we read of four golden lamps burning before the Confession in the Oratory of the Holy Cross, and ten silver candelabra hanging before the altar of the Lateran Basilica. Belisarius is recorded, in the Life of Pope Vigilius, to have offered of the spoils of the Vandals two large silver-gilt candlesticks, which stood (at the time when the biographer wrote) before the body of blessed Peter in the Vatican Basilica. There was also a branched candelabrum hanging by golden chains in the covered space (pergula) before the same Confession, given in the time of Leo III; this pope also ordained that two lamps should burn every night before the altar in the same Basilica. Pope Paschal caused them to burn by day as well as by night.

iii. Incense.

From lights to incense is but a step. The list of gifts recorded in the Liber Pontificalis under St. Silvester mentions Donum aromaticum ante altaria, after the censers. As the latter weighed thirty pounds, the passage may mean that the aromatics were burned in censers hung before the altar of the Lateran Basilica. Boniface I (418-422) is said to have ordained that no woman or man, save only a minister, should burn incense (incensum poneret). We do not meet with censers in the Liber Pontificalis before the time of Sixtus III (432-440), except in the Life of Silvester; and these latter, as was mentioned before, seem to belong rather to the time of Hilarus.
In the church of SS. Marcellinus and Peter aromatics were burned before the relics of the patron saints who were buried therein, according to the compiler of the Life of St. Silvester. Later on, Pope Sergius (687-701) hung a golden censer, with columns and a cover, before the images of St. Peter in the Vatican Basilica, 'in which incense and the odour of sweetness were put while mass was being celebrated, on festivals.' We find a similar practice at Cremona in 666, and in England under Theodore (668-690). Leo III (795-816) set up a golden censer before the vestibule of the altar in the same basilica, which weighed seventeen pounds. In the Life of Leo IV (847-855) we are told of a censer with a hanging cup (canthara) at the basilica of the Four Crowned Martyrs.
We have already dealt with the ceremonial use of incense in the pope's procession to the altar, and the deacon's procession to the ambo to read the gospel. Ordo I also mentions that the sexton and the assistant presbyter of the
stational church welcomed the pope with incense on his arrival there.
Incense was only used in the Roman rite at these two liturgical moments, save the occasional use in some basilicas of a hanging censer, burning all through the service, before some altar or image. When Amalar of Metz went to Rome for the furtherance of his liturgical studies, he found that the Ordo Romanus, by which he had set such store, had misled him in several particulars, which he recorded in the second preface to his book on the Ecclesiastical Offices. There he tells us that the Romans did not offer incense at the altar after the gospel; and there is no reference to any such practice in Ordo I, although the Gallicanized Ordo II directs it to be done.

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 2: the Kapporet (aka Mercyseat)

2010-01-09T20:54:00.000-08:00

Out of all the items described within the Bible, one of the most popular is the Ark of the Covenant. Indiana Jones famously summed it all up; it is "the chest the Hebrews used to carry the Ten Commandments around in." In the Bible, God gives Moses specific instructions on how to construct this box:

And they shall make a chest of shittim (acacia) wood: two cubits and a half its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth, and a cubit and a half its height; and you shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and out shall you overlay it, and shall make on it a zer (traditionally 'crown'; most modern translations 'molding') of gold all around. And you shall cast four rings of gold for it and put them on its four feet, even two rings on one side of it and two rings on the second side. And you shall make poles of shittim wood and overlay them with gold, and you shall put these poles into the rings on the sides of the chest, to carry the ark with them. In the rings of the chest shall be the poles; they shall not be removed from it. And you shall put in the chest the testimony which I will give you.

The text then goes on to describe an item usually thought of as the Ark's lid, called in Hebrew kapporet, traditionally called the mercy-seat (Exodus 25:17-20):

And you shall make a kapporet of pure gold: two cubits and a half its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth; and you shall make two kheruvim of gold, of beaten work you shall make them at the two ends of the kapporet; and make one kheruv at the end on this side, and one kheruv at the end on that; from the kapporet you shall make the keruvim on its two ends. And the kheruvim shall stretch out their wings upward, overshadowing (sokhekhim; other possible renderings are 'covering', 'screening', 'hedging') the kapporet with their wings, and their faces a man to his brother - towards the kapporet the faces of the kheruvim shall be.

Before we go further, let's look at the Hebrew word kapporet first. Traditionally, English translators have loosely rendered it as "mercy-seat", a tradition which begun with Miles Coverdale's 1535 English translation of the Bible and before that, Martin Luther's German translation. Coverdale was in fact not proficient in Hebrew or Greek; instead, he used 'five soundry interpreters' in Latin, English and German as his source texts - including Luther’s Bible and the Swiss-German version (Zürich Bible) of Huldrych Zwingli and Leo Jud. Luther has rendered the word kapporet as gnadenstuhl/gnadenstuel ("seat of grace") in his translation, which Coverdale turned into Mercyseate in English. The rest, then, is history.

Admittedly, what kapporet precisely means and its etymology is a matter of debate. Despite traditional English usage, there is really nothing in the Hebrew to suggest 'mercy' or even 'seat' here. Various attempts are made to link it with the Egyptian kp n rdwj ("sole of the feet"), the Hebrew kaphar (literally "to cover", figuratively "to wipe out" or "to atone;" note cognate Arabic term kaffarat, used in modern legal contexts to refer to any mechanism of rectifying illegality), or even the Akkadian kapāru ("to purify cultically"). The Greek Septuagint seems to have followed the 'atonement' interpretation with its rendering of the term as ilasterion, "propitiatory" or "[place of] atonement". St. Jerome meanwhile renders kapporet both as propitiatorium and oraculum in the Latin Vulgate.

Let's now review the purpose of the Ark. It is, of course, obvious at first glance that the chest serves as a receptacle for the tablets of the law, as well as some other items. However, the Ark also has one other use, something that is quite obscured by its traditional depiction in art: it serves as both a throne and a footstool for God. It is a seat of sorts for the shekinah (Exodus 25:21-22):

And you shall put the kapporet on the chest above, and in the chest you shall put the testimony that I shall give you. And I will meet with you there, and I will speak with you from above the kapporet, from between the two kheruvim that are on the chest of the testimony, all that I will command you for the sons of Israel.

The Old Testament has quite a number of references to the Lord riding/sitting enthroned upon cherubs:

So the people sent to Shiloh, and brought from there the chest of the covenant of YHWH Tzevaot, sitter of the kheruvim; and the two sons of Eli were there with the chest of the covenant of Elohim, Hophni and Phinehas. (1 Sam. 4:4)

And He rode a kheruv and flew, and glided on the wings of the wind. (Ps. 18:10; cf. 2 Sam. 22:11)

O YHWH Tzevaot, God of Israel, sitter of the kheruvim, you are the God, you alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; you have made the heavens and the earth. (Is. 37:16)

This now brings us to the cherubim and how they looked like, or more correctly, how they were depicted by men - at least in this period of time. Whereas the older parts of the Old Testament took it for granted that the cherubim's form is familiar to the audience (one notable exception to this is Ezekiel, who provides a detailed description of the 'living creatures' which he later dubs as cherubim), around Josephus' time - at the late 1st century AD - people no longer knew what they look like. We commonly think of cherubs today as cute, winged putto but this is only an artistic convention that arose during the Renaissance. The only thing we can glean about cherubim from Biblical records was: that they have faces - the number of which itself is unclear - and wings.

Traditional Christian art has almost quite uniformly depicted the cherubs on the kapporet either as something that looks like stereotypical depictions of angels or as looking like Ezekiel's living creatures - if they depict them at all, a form which has stuck into the popular mind as the well-known diorama in Indiana Jones shows. But many scholars today, following the idea of well-known archeologist Prof. William Albright (1891-1971), opine that to discern how the cherubim of the Ark looked like, we must first need to investigate the art and culture of the neighbors of the Israelites. Albright wrote an article once about the cherubim, and here is an excerpt:

Since the veil of the Tabernacle was decorated with embroidered cherubim, and the walls and the religious objects of Solomon’s temple lavishly adorned with them, we ought to be able to identify them in contemporary Syro-Palestinian art. The account of the Ark of the Covenant shows that only a creature with wings can be considered. If, therefore, we study all known representations of animals and hybrid creatures, partly animal, we find one which is much more common than any other winged creature, so much so that its identification with the cherub is certain: that is the winged sphinx or winged lion with human head. In Egypt the wingless sphinx and the griffin appear; in Babylonia and Assyria the winged bull with a human head prevails; but in Syria and Palestine it is the winged sphinx which is dominant in art and religious symbolism.

The God of Israel was often designated as "He who sitteth (on) the cherubim" (I Sam. 4:4, etc.). The conception underlying this designation is well illustrated by representations of a king seated on a throne supported on each side by cherubim, which have been found at Byblus, Hamath, and Megiddo, all dating between 1200 and 800 B.C. One shows King Hiram of Byblus (period of the Judges) seated upon his cherub throne [see picture on left]. Pottery incense altars found at Taanach and Megiddo are archaeological parallels to the wheeled lavers ("bases") of Solomon’s temple, which were decorated with lions and cherubs, according to I Kings 7:36.

Note that these human-animal hybrids are considered as protectors and representative/intercessors in ancient Semitic cultures. They were the guardians of sacred precincts, persons and objects from intruders and the bringers of the petitions of man to the gods (some connect the word kheruv with the Akkadian word karubu or kuribu, 'an intercessor').

In the Bible, the cherubim are also sometimes associated with guarding or protecting. For example, Genesis 3:24 relates that God "placed the kheruvim at the east of the garden of Eden, and the flaming sword (kherev) turning every way to keep the way to the tree of life." And here, in the Ark of the Covenant, the golden cherubs, the "cherubim of the Glory" (Hebrews 9:5), are overshadowing or screening (sokhekh) the lid with their wings in the act of guarding something - and/or Someone.

Such creatures also functioned as the throne or the vehicle for deities and kings in Ancient Near Eastern iconography. For example, in the image to the right (one of the so-called Megiddo Ivories, dating ca. 13th-12th century BC), the king or prince on the left sits upon a throne flanked by a winged sphinx, which is looking forward.
The king of the ancient Amorite city of Alalakh, Idrimi (16th-15th century BC) was apparently also depicted with such a chair.
Also, from the Beth Shan temple (Stratum VII) dating from the Late Bronze Age is a miniature basalt throne depicting winged creatures engraved on its sides. Something similar can be found in the Phoenician temple to Eshmun near Sidon in modern-day Lebanon, which has a (life-size) throne to the goddess Astarte within its precincts (similar model thrones found here and here).
Finally, there are also quite a number of Phoenician-manufactured gems (dating 6th-4th centuries BC) depicting such creatures, either alone or functioning as throne chairs. The Bible also mentions one such example of a seat: according to 1 Kings 10:20, King Solomon's throne had "armrests [literally hands] on this side and on that of the place of the seat, and two lions standing beside the armrests."

We now go over to Egyptian art. As the Israelites were under Egyptian bondage for three to four centuries, we should expect that there would have been some influences. Firstly, we can observe that a number of Egyptian chairs usually have depictions of lion feet as the legs; say, in Tutankhamun's throne (also note the winged serpents on the sidearms of King Tut's throne as well as the Egyptian griffins on the other examples).
Secondly, there is one more thing that is functionally and visually quite similar to the Ark: box-shaped portable thrones, designed to serve as the Pharaoh's or a god's processional chair, as on the picture at left (more examples here, here, here and here). Note some or all of the following flanking this box-chair: (1) a winged figure that enfolds the occupier within its wings, (2) a human-headed griffin with wings tucked-in and flat against their backs, as is common in Egyptian art - with a few exceptions, and (3) a lion.

In many ways, God's (empty) earthly throne is like all of the above, and yet unlike. One of the noticeable differences is that the cherubim are to be looking at each other, towards the kapporet. By itself of course, this is also not without parallel (sphinxes with their heads turned to the side are attested), but its usage in a throne seems to be quite unique. Instead of having their faces forward, the ones on the kapporet seem to be turned towards Him who is seated.

January 1 - The Circumcision of Christ and Mary, Mother of God (the Octave of Christmas)

2010-01-01T16:40:00.000-08:00

The propers of the feast (without the readings), from the Vatican Gelasian Sacramentary, aka Old Gelasian (Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica, Reg. lat. 316/Paris, B.N., 7193, 41-56):

ITEM IN OCTABAS DOMINI. KALENDAS IANUARIAS
(Liber I.VIIII)

Deus qui bonis nati saluatoris diem celebrare concedis octauum, fac, quaesumus, nos esse perpetua diuinitate munere, cuius sumus carnali conmercio reparati: per.

Omnipotens sempiterne deus, qui unigenito tuo nouam creaturam nos tibi esse fecisti, custodi opera misericordiae tuae et ab omnibus nos maculis uetustatis emunda, ut per auxilium gratiae tuae in illius inueniamur forma, in quo tecum est nostra substantia: per.

(secreta) Praesta, quaesumus, domine, ut per hanc munera, qui domini Iesu Christi arcanae natiuitatis mysterio gerimus, purificate mentes intellegentiam consequamur: per dominum.

Uere dignum: per Christum dominum nostrum. Cuius hodie octauas nati celebrantes tua, domine, mirabilia ueneramur, quia qui peperit, et mater et uirgo est; qui natus est, et infans et deus est. Merito caeli locuti Sunt, angeli gratulati, pastores laetati, magi mutati, regis turbati, paruoli gloriosa passione coronati. Lacta, mater, cybum nostrum, lacta panem de caelo uenientem, in praesepio positum uelut piorum cybaria iumentorum. Illic namque agnouit bos possessorem suum et asinus praesepium domini sui, circumcisio scilicet et praeputium. Quod etiam saluator et dominus noster a Symione susceptus in templo plenissimae dignatus est adimplere. Et ideo cum angelis et archangelis.

(post communionem) Praesta, quaesumus, domine, ut guod saluatoris nostri iterata solempnitate percipimus, perpetuae nobis redemptionis conferat medicinam: per.

(ad populum) Omnipotens sempiterne deus, qui tuae mensae participes a diabolico iubes abstinere conuiuio, da, quaesumus, plebi tuae, ut gustum mortiferae profanitatis abiecto puris mentibus ad aepulas aeternae salutis accedat: per.

From the Angoulême Sacramentary (B.N. Lat. 816):

XII. KALENDAS IANVARII. OCTABAS DOMINI AD SANCTAM MARIAM
(Liber I. VIIII)

Deus qui bonis nati saluatoris diem celebrare concedis octauum, fac, quaesumus, nos esse perpetua diuinitate munere, cuius sumus carnali conmercio reparati: per.

Omnipotens sempiterne deus, qui unigenito tuo nouam creaturam nos tibi esse fecisti, custodi opera misericordiae tuae et ab omnibus nos maculis uetustatis emunda, ut per auxilium gratiae tuae in illius inueniamur forma, in quo tecum est nostra substantia: per.

(secreta) Praesta, quaesumus, domine, ut per hanc munera, qui domini Iesu Christi arcanae natiuitatis mysterio gerimus, purificate mentes intellegentiam consequamur: per dominum.

Uere dignum: per Christum dominum nostrum. Cuius hodie octauas nati celebrantes tua, domine, mirabilia ueneramur, quia qui peperit, et mater et uirgo est; qui natus est, et infans et deus est. Merito caeli locuti Sunt, angeli gratulati, pastores laetati, magi mutati, regis turbati, paruoli gloriosa passione coronati. Lacta, mater, cybum nostrum, lacta panem de caelo uenientem, in praesepio positum uelut piorum cybaria iumentorum. Illic namque agnouit bos possessorem suum et asinus praesepium domini sui, circumcisio scilicet et praeputium. Quod etiam saluator et dominus noster a Symione susceptus in templo plenissimae dignatus est adimplere. Et ideo cum angelis et archangelis.

(post communionem) Praesta, quaesumus, domine, ut guod saluatoris nostri iterata solempnitate percipimus, perpetuae nobis redemptionis conferat medicinam: per.

(ad populum) Omnipotens sempiterne deus, qui tuae mensae participes a diabolico iubes abstinere conuiuio, da, quaesumus, plebi tuae, ut gustum mortiferae profanitatis abiecto puris mentibus ad aepulas aeternae salutis accedat: per.

From the Cambrai Hadrianum (Bibl. Municipale MS 164):

MENSE IANUARIO IN OCTABAS DOMINI AD SANCTAM MARIAM AD MARTYRES

Deus, qui salutis aeternae beatae mariae virginitate fecunda humano generi praemia praestitisti, tribue quaesumus, ut ipsam pro nobis intercedere sentiamus, per quam meruimus auctorem vitae suscipere. Per dominum.

Super oblata. Muneribus nostris quaesumus, domine, precibusque susceptis, et caelestibus nos munda mysteriis et clementer exaudi. Per dominum.

Ad completa. Haec nos communio domine purget a crimine, et caelestibus remediis faciat esse consortes. Per.

From the 1962 Missale Romanum:

IN OCTAVA NATIVITATIS DOMINI
I classis
Statio ad S. Mariam trans Tiberim

Oratio: Deus, qui salutis aeternae, beatae Mariae virginitate fecunda, humano generi praemia praestitisti: tribue, quaesumus; ut ipsam pro nobis intercedere sentiamus, per quam meruimus auctorem vitae suscipere, Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, Filium tuum: Qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitate.

Secreta: Muneribus nostris, qusesumus, Domine, precibusque susceptis: et caelestibus nos munda mysteriis, et clementer exaudi. Per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum.

(Praefatio et Communicantes de Nativitate)

Postcommunio: Haec nos communio, Domine, purget a crimine: et, intercedente beata Virgine Dei Genetrice Maria, caelestis remedii faciat esse consortes. Per eundem Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, Filium tuum: Qui tecum vivitet regnat in unitate.

From the 2002 Missale Romanum:

SOLLEMNITAS SANCTAE DEI GENITRICIS MARIAE IN OCTAVA NATIVITATIS DOMINI
Deus, qui salutis aeternae, beatae Mariae virginitate fecunda, humano generi praemia praestitisti, tribue, quaesumus, ut ipsam pro nobis intercedere sentiamus, per quam meruimus Filium tuum auctorem vitae suscipere...

Super Oblata: Deus, qui bona cuncta inchoas benignus et perficis, da nobis, de sollemnitate sanctae Dei Genetricis laetantibus, sicut de initiis tuae gratiae gloriamur, ita de perfectione gaudere.

Postcommunio: Sumpsimus, Domine, laeti sacramenta caelestia: praesta, quaesumus, ut ad vitam nobis proficient sempiternam, qui beatam semper Virginem Mariam Filii tui Genetricem et Ecclesiae Matrem profiteri gloriamur...

December 25 - The Nativity of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ

2009-12-24T22:02:00.000-08:00

From lands that see the sun arise,
to earth's remotest boundaries,
the Virgin-born today we sing,
the Son of Mary, Christ the King.

Blest Author of this earthly frame,
to take a servant's form He came,
that liberating flesh by flesh,
whom He had made might live afresh.

In that chaste parent's holy womb,
celestial grace hath found its home:
and she, as earthly bride unknown,
yet call that Offspring blest her own.

A Merry Christ's-Mass to all readers!

The O Antiphons: O Emmanuel (Day 7)

2009-12-23T14:54:00.000-08:00

Day 7: O Emmanuel

O Emmanuel, Rex et legifer noster,
Exspectatio gentium, et Salvator earum:
Veni ad salvandum nos, Domine Deus noster.

O Emmanuel, our King and Lawgiver,
The hope of the nations and their Savior:
Come and save us, O Lord our God!

Quotes for the day:

And YHWH added to speak to Achaz, saying, "Ask for yourself a sign from YHWH your God. Make it deep as Sheol, or make it high upwards."
And Achaz said, "I will not ask, and I will not test YHWH!"
And he said:
"Hear now, O house of David!
Is it a small thing for you to weary men,
That you weary my God also?
Therefore Adonai Himself will give you a sign.
Behold, the virgin is conceiving and is bearing a son
And will call his name Immanu-El.
Curds and honey he will eat,
For his knowing to reject evil and to choose good;
For before the boy knows to reject evil and to choose good,
Forsaken will be the land which you fear because of her two kings."

Isaiah 7:10-16

And of [Jesus] Christ, the birth was thus:
His mother Mary having been betrothed to Joseph, before their coming together she was found to have conceived from the Holy Spirit, and Joseph her husband being righteous, and not wanting to disgrace her, intented to divorce her privately.
Now on his thinking of these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which in her was begotten is of the Holy Spirit; and she will bear a son, and you will call His name 'Jesus', for He will save His people from their sins."
And all this came to be that it might be fulfilled that was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: "Behold, the virgin will conceive and bear a son, and they will call His name Emmanouel,' which translated is, 'With us is God.'"
And Joseph, having risen from the sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took his wife, and was not knowing her until she bore her son - the first-born, and he called His name 'Jesus'.

-Matthew 1:18-25

ERO CRAS
"Tomorrow, I will come."

The O Antiphons: O Rex Gentium (Day 6)

2009-12-22T06:13:00.001-08:00

Day 6: O Rex Gentium (O King of the nations)

O Rex Gentium, et desideratus earum,
Lapisque angularis, qui facis utraque unum:
Veni, et salva hominem,
quem de limo formasti.

O King of the nations, and their desire,
The corner-stone, who makes both one:
Come and save man,
which you formed from clay.

Quotes for the day:

And YHWH Elohim formed man - dust from the ground, and breathed into his nose the breath of life; and the man became a living soul.

-Genesis 2:7

A stone which the builders rejected has become a head of the corner;
From YHWH has this been, it is wonderful in our eyes!

-Psalm 118:22-23

And it will happen in the end of the days,
That the mount of YHWH's house will be established as the chief of the mountains,
And it will be lifted up above the hills,
And all the nations will flow into it.
And many peoples will come and say,
"Come, and let us go up to the mountain of YHWH,
To the house of the God of Ya'akov;
And He will teach us of His ways,
And we will walk in His paths."
For from Zion a law will go out,
And a word of YHWH from Yerushalaim.
And He will judge between the nations,
And will render decision for many peoples;
And they will beat their swords to plowshares,
And their spears into pruning-hooks,
Nation will not lift up sword against nation,
Nor will they learn any more - war.
O house of Ya'akov, come and let us walk in the light of YHWH!

-Isaiah 2:2-5

Therefore, hear a word of YHWH, men of scorning,
Ruling this people in Yerushalaim. For you have said,
"We have cut a covenant with death,
And with Sheol we have made a pact,
An overflowing scourge, when it passes by, will not come to us,
For we have made a lie our refuge,
And in deception we have hidden ourselves."

Therefore, thus said Lord YHWH,
"Behold, I am laying a foundation in Zion a stone:
a tested stone, a precious corner-stone, a settled foundation;
He who is believing will not make haste.
And I will make judgment the measuring-line,
And righteousness the plummet;
And hail will sweep away the refuge - the lie,
And the hiding-place will waters overflow.
And your covenant with death will be annulled,
And your pact with Sheol will not stand.
An overflowing scourge, when it passes by, you will be to it for a trampling-place.
From the fullness of its passing over it will seize you,
For morning by morning it will pass over - by day and by night,
And it will be only a trembling to understand the report."

-Isaiah 28:14-19

Therefore remember that you, once Nations in the flesh - who are called "Uncircumcision" by those called "Circumcision" made in the flesh by hands - that you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world; and now in Christ Jesus you who once were afar off became near by the blood of the Christ.
For He is our peace, who has made the both one, and has broken down the middle wall of the enclosure, having inactivated the hostility in His flesh - the law of the commandments in ordinances, that the two He might create in Himself into one new man, making peace, and might reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, by killing the hostility in Himself. And having come, He did proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; because through Him we have the access - we both - in one Spirit to the Father.
Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and aliens, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and are of the household of God, having been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being corner-stone, in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy sanctuary in the Lord, in whom also you are being built together for a dwelling-place of God in the Spirit.

-Ephesians 2:11-22

The O Antiphons: O Oriens (Day 5)

2009-12-21T00:05:00.000-08:00

Day 5: O Oriens (O Rising Sun)

O Oriens,
Splendor lucis aeternae, et sol iustitiae:
Veni, et illumina sedentes in tenebris et umbra mortis.

O Rising Sun,
Splendor of light eternal, and sun of righteousness:
Come and shine on those seated in darkness and the shadow of death!

Quotes for the day:

Indeed there is no gloom for her, to whom there was anxiety for her;
Just as in earlier times He humiliated the land of Zvulun and the land of Naftali,
In the latter times He has honored the Way of the Sea, Beyond the Yarden, Galil of the nations.
The people walking in darkness have seen a great light,
Dwellers in a land of death-shadow - upon them light has shined.

-Isaiah 9:1-2

Arise! Shine! For your light comes, and the glory of YHWH has risen upon you!
For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the people;
And YHWH will arise over you, and His glory upon you will be seen.
And nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawning.

-Isaiah 60:1-2

"For behold, the day will come, burning like a furnace,
And all the arrogant and all who do wickedly will be chaff.
And the day that comes will burn them up," said YHWH Tzevaot, "That it will not leave them root or branch."
"And to you who revere my name the sun of righteousness will rise, with healing in its wings,
And you will go out and skip about like calves from a stall,
And you will trample the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day which I am fashioning," said YHWH Tzevaot.
"Remember the law of Mosheh my servant which I commanded him in Chorev for all Israel - statutes and ordinances.
Behold, I am sending to you Eliyah the prophet before the coming of the day of YHWH - the great and the terrible;
And he will turn the heart of fathers to sons, and the heart of sons to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the land with a ban!"

-Malachi 4:1-6

Now when [Jesus] heard that John had been handed over, He went into Galilaia; and leaving Nazara, He came and settled in Kapharnaoum by-the-sea, in the districts of Zaboulon and Nephtalim, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying:
"Land of Zaboulon, land of Nephtalim, the Way of the Sea, beyond the Iordan, Galilaia of the nations!
The people sitting in darkness have seen a great light, and on those sitting in the region and shadow of death light has dawned."

-Matthew 4:12-16

The O Antiphons: O Clavis David (Day 4)

2009-12-20T07:04:00.000-08:00

Day 4: O Clavis David (O Key of David)

O Clavis David, et sceptrum domus Israel,
Qui aperis, et nemo claudit,
Claudis, et nemo aperit:
Veni, et educ vinctum de domo carceris,
Sedentem in tenebris et umbra mortis.

O Key of David, and sceptre of the house of Israel,
Who opens, and no one shuts,
who shuts, and no one opens:
Come, and lead the bound from the prison house,
seated in darkness and the shadow of death!

Quotes for the day:

For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us,
And the dominion is on his shoulder;
And he called his name Pele Yo'etz (Wonderful Counsellor), El-Gibbor (Mighty God), Avi-ad (Father-forever), Sar shalom (Prince of Peace).
To the increase of his dominion and of peace there will be no end,
Over the throne of David and over his kingdom,
To establish it and to sustain it with justice and with righteousness
Now and to the age.
The zeal of YHWH Tzevaot (YHWH of hosts) will do this.

-Isaiah 9:6-7

And it will happen on that day that I will call my servant, to Elyaqim ben-Chilqiah;
And I will clothe him with your robe,
And with your belt I will strengthen him,
And your dominion I will give to his hand.
And he will be a father to the inhabitant of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
And I will set the key of the house of David on his shoulder;
And he will open, and no one will shut,
And will shut, and no one will open.
And I will fasten him - a peg in a secure place,
And he will become a throne of glory for the house of his father.
And they will hang on him all the glory of the house of his father, the offspring and the issue;
All the small vessels, from vessels of bowls to all vessels of jars.
"In that day" - a declaration of YHWH Tzevaot - "The peg that is fastened in a secure place will give way and will be cut off and fall, and the load on it will be cut off, for YHWH has spoken!"

-Isaiah 22:20-25

Thus says the God YHWH who created the heavens and stretched them out,
Who spread out the earth and its offspring,
Who gives breath to the people on it,
And spirit to those walking in it:
"I, YHWH, have called you in righteousness,
and have held your hand and protected you;
And I have given you for a covenant of people, a light to nations.
To open the eyes of the blind,
To bring out from the dungeon the bound one,
From the house of imprisonment those who dwell in darkness.
I am YHWH - that is my name!
And my glory to another I will not give,
Nor my praise to graven images.
The former things, behold, have come, and new things I declare;
Before they sprout up I cause you to hear."

-Isaiah 42:5-9

And to the angel of the church in Philadelpheia write:
These things says the Holy, the True, who has the key of David,
Who opens and no one shuts, who shuts and no one opens...

-Revelation 3:7

The O Antiphons: O Radix Jesse (Day 3)

2009-12-19T00:27:00.000-08:00

Day 3: O Radix Iesse (O Root of Jesse)

O Radix Iesse, qui stas in signum populorum,
Super quem continebunt reges os suum,
Quem gentes deprecabuntur:
Veni ad liberandum nos, iam noli tardare.

O Root of Jesse, who stand as a sign to the people;
At whom kings shall shut their mouths,
To whom the nations shall entreat:
Come to deliver us, and delay no longer.

Quotes for the day:

And there will come a shoot out from the stem of Yishai,
And a branch from his roots will sprout.

-Isaiah 11:1

And there will be, on that day, a root of Yishai
That will stand for a signal-flag of peoples;
To him nations will resort,
And his rest will be - glory.

-Isaiah 11:10

Behold, my servant will act wisely!
He will be elevated and lifted up, and will be very high.
(Just as many were astonished at you),
So disfigured from a man his appearance, and his form from sons of men,
So will he sprinkle many nations;
Because of him kings will shut their mouth,
For what had not been told them they will see,
And what they had not heard they will understand.

-Isaiah 52:13-15

Therefore receive one another, just as Christ also received us, to the glory of God.
For I say that Christ has become a servant to the circumcision on behalf of the truth of God to confirm the promises to the fathers, and that the nations glorify God for His mercy, as it is written, "For this reason I will confess you among the nations, and sing praises to your name."
And again he says, "Rejoice, O nations, with His people!"
And again, "Praise the Lord, all you nations, and let all the peoples praise Him."
And again Esaias says, "There will be a root of Iessai, and He who rises to rule the nations; in Him the nations will hope."
Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in the believing, that you may abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.

-Romans 15:7-13

The Minor, Trivial Biblical Stuff, Part 1: Of Tallitot in Jesus' Time

2009-12-18T03:32:00.000-08:00

Just as I have mentioned in this thread over at Catholic Answers Forums, by "minor stuff" I mean the small, 'trivial' things related to the Bible that never make it in serious high discussion - things such as the Israelites' houses or clothing habits or other such mundane things. The nitpicker that I am, I shall also critique some popular depictions of Biblical life.

You've probably noticed it by now, but this series will be taken from my posts in the CAF thread. Still, I plan to revise some things and to write some blog-original parts along the way - which I shall later post in the thread. ;)

Without further ado:

Anyone who has watched his fair share of recent Jesus movies or looked at some recent Biblical art would note that there has been a surge as of late to emphasize the Jewishness of Jesus and His contemporaries - countering the blond, white Jesus that characterized a number of Biblical art of centuries ago (IMO this is a good thing). One of the ways in which this is emphasized is by showing one of the more recognizable symbols of Judaism - the prayer shawl, aka tallit (Hebrew) or tallis (Yiddish). This of course led to the Pharisees, often painted as holier-than-thou, play-acting legalists scrupulous about the Law, being shown to tout their own tallitot, as in the picture at right.

This might come as news for many people, but from a historical point of view, it is actually more likely that the tallit as we know it today developed AFTER Jesus' time; i.e. showing modern-day-ish tallitot in a 1st-century context is an anachronism.

First of all, we must first see why the tallit exists in the first place. In Numbers 15:38-39 and Deuteronomy 22:12, the Israelites are commanded to add tassels to the "four corners of [their] garments" as a remembrance of God's commands; the tallit is a way to keep this in an age when most articles of clothing do not have four corners. Ever notice the tassels at the edges of a tallit? They are the tzitzot (sing. tzitzit).

Next, we shall examine the items of clothing at the time of Jesus. Based from what we know, clothing of the period basically consisted of a tunic (Hebrew haluq, Greek chiton) and a large cloak (Hebrew tallit or me'il, Greek himation) draped over and around it, both either made of linen or wool.

Despite the popularity of depicting 1st-century Jews as being dressed very much like Arabs, evidence points out that there was actually not much difference from what other peoples in the Empire were wearing at the time. Surviving fragments of tunics we have, for example, had clavi, a pair of narrow vertical stripes that ran down the length of the tunic. These stripes were actually one of the instantly recognizable characteristics of Roman-period tunics. Many depictions of Romans usually depict clavi running down their tunics (higher-class Romans sometimes dyed them in certain colors to indicate their status, such as purple). The clavi proved to be popular enough that it stayed in fashion for some time. If you've ever seen a deacon's dalmatic and noticed stripes, know that that is a descendant of the clavi.

(As an aside, open-air museum Nazareth Museum apparently did their research well here; many of their tunics have the clavi! Very good for them.)

To get back on the subject, one shape that cloaks took were rectangular - four corners; just the perfect item to place the tzitzot in! It is even said that these were one of the ways to recognize a Jew in public at the time - a Jewish cloak would have fringes on each of its corners.

It is opined however that not all Jews at the time wore tzitzot on their mantles, as non-Jewish writers do not mention them and no fringes were attached to the cloaks found in the Cave of Letters (though it is believed that tzitzot were removed from these before burial). It could be that only the sages/rabbis and the observant, and perhaps even a number of other common folk actually wore them - the obligation was not considered to be universal. Others, such as urban Jews who have 'blended into' Greco-Roman culture, would have completely forgone this (one tradition exempts the Roman toga and other such gentile clothing from the commandment). Indeed, one of the most noticeable things in the frescoes which adorn the 3rd-century Dura-Europos synagogue in Syria is that while some of the clothing are pretty much identical to just about most people wore at the time (clavi'd tunic+mantle) almost no one is clearly depicted as having tzitzot on his cloak. See for example the depiction of the worship of the golden calf at left.

Of course, one main difference between the tallit-cloak of old and the tallit-shawl of today is that the tallit today is just something worn only on special occasions, like prayer (though Orthodox Jews do have the tallit katan designed to be worn under one's clothes). Cloaks in ancient times, however, were part of normal dress; it was the overgarment, protecting you from the weather. It is taken off at house or at work, but at other times you wear it lest you be considered 'naked'; it could even double as a blanket at night (hence the Mosaic law requiring the return of a cloak taken as a pledge before sunset; Exodus 22:26).

So how did we come by the shawl-ish tallit?
The tallit as it is now serves a purpose: so that the commandment of tzitzot would never vanish from Jewish life in the absence of four-cornered garments.

In the Talmudic period (ca. 200-500 AD), in both Palestine and Babylonia, it was apparently the custom to wear a cloak with tzitzot during prayer (note that we must however distinguish between 'mantling' and 'covering the head'). This is especially exceptional for Babylonia because clothing customs there at the time did not have mantles; the basic items of clothing in the Sassanid Era consisted of tunics and trousers. This in part may have contributed to the view of the tallit as a special, ceremonial garment.

As centuries passed and fashions changed, blanket-like cloaks completely fell out of fashion and public wearing of the tassels disappeared. There were even concerns that the commandment might be forgotten and be lost to oblivion and thus it was advised that Jews should purposely wear a cloak-like garment to necessitate the attachment of the tzitzot. The size of the tallit increasingly shrunk as the years went by, giving us the 'prayer shawl' we all recognize today.

To sum: it is correct to say that 1st-century Jews wore tallit, however it is incorrect and anachronistic to say that they wore 'prayer shawls'.

Ever wondered what the stripes on the modern tallit signifies?

The commandment requires "a thread of blue" (ptil tekhelet), said by the rabbis to be made out of an animal called hilazon, be included in the tassels. As time passed, the use of the blue thread gradually dwindled. One source attributes it as due to the Romans seizing control of the dyeing process (the tekhelet dye itself was rare, which made it very expensive). The story goes that Romans made it hard for the Jews to obtain tekhelet with edicts limiting its use to the upper-class and its production to imperial dye-houses, driving the Jewish dyers underground. As a result of this many substitutes - such as the cheaper indigo dye - sprung up. The Bar-Kochba period dyed yarn found at the Judean desert were probably such a counterfeit. Eventually however, the source of the dye was lost and as a result Jews since then have worn only plain white tassels on their tzitzit. The stripes on prayer shawls, often black, but also blue or purple, are therefore believed to symbolize the lost tekhelet.

Are there any mentions of the tzitzot in the Gospels?

Jesus directly mentioned the tassels in Matthew 23:5: "[the Pharisees] make their phylacteries wide and their edges/fringes (Greek kraspeda) long", a reference to the fact that at that time, the length of the tzitzot were not fixed and thus could be of various lengths depending on the person - those who were 'strict' in observance of the law favored larger ones hanging on their cloaks.
Another possible mention of tzitzot is when the woman with the issue of blood touched "the edge/fringe", the kraspedon, of Jesus' cloak (Matthew 9:20).