The Ancient Church Orders (Maclean)

The Ancient Church Orders (Maclean)

continued

Chapter IV: Church Buildings and Worship

1. Church Buildings. The earliest account of Church buildings is given in Didasc, which mentions 'holy churches,' presbyters' seats 'in the part of the house which is turned to the East,' the bishop's throne in the midst of them, the laymen also sitting 'in another part turned to the East' behind the presbyters, the women behind them, so that when they stand to pray the rulers (praepositi) rise first and after them the laymen, and then the women. All pray towards the East (so || AC ii. 57, 57, EdCan 1, Tertullian Apol. 16). One deacon attends to the Eucharistic offerings, another guards the door outside; later in the service both serve together inside the church. The deacon arranges the congregation and keeps order, the aged and the young sitting in separate parts of the church (Funk DidCA i. 158 ff., Gibson p. 65 f.; H₁ is wanting here). The corresponding part of AC (ii. 57) adds several particulars. There are porticoes or chambers (τὰ παστοφόρια or παστοφορεῖα) 'towards the East' (cf. Test below); these may be sacristies, for in viii. 13 the deacons carry into them what remains of the Eucharistic elements after the communion of the people. The church, which is oblong, and turned to the East, is like a ship, with the bishop as helmsman*, the deacons in trim garments as sailors and head-rowers (τοίχαρχοι), the laymen ('the brethren') as passengers. The reader stands in the middle on a raised place (EthD 10 is similar). The idea of the ship is also found in the 'Clementine' Epistle to James (§ 14), but there the Church referred to is the Christian society, not the building. God is the ship-master, Christ the pilot, the bishop the man in the prow (πρωρεύς), the deacons the sailors, the catechists the midshipmen, the laity the passengers.

2 In Test and ArD we have a much fuller account. In Test i. 19 we read of the bishop's throne, raised three steps, on the East (?), with the presbyters right and left, the altar, which is on the raised steps, veiled (cf. CH xxix. 210, xxxvi. 188, both bracketed by Achelis), as is also the baptistery. There are two porches (στοαί) on right and left, apparently near the altar, for the men and the women. All the places are to be lighted, both for a type, and for reading. The lectern is outside the 'altar' (sanctuary). There is a courtyard with various buildings—a diaconicum or deacons' chamber, an oblong baptistery, a building for catechumens and for exorcists, a building for receiving the oblations, a place for the presbyters, a house of 'offering' and the treasury, houses for the bishop, presbyters, deacons, widows, deaconesses, and a guest house (see below, p. 65). There are three

3 * In Test i. 23 (last prayer) God is called 'the Helmsman of souls.' entrances (to the courtyard?) 'as a type of the Trinity.' The description of ArD 35 is very similar. The dimensions of the baptistery, called here 'photisterium' (φωτιστήριον) are slightly different (24 × 12 instead of 21 × 12 cubits), and the phrase about lights is expanded thus: 'Let them be lighted with many lights as a figure of heavenly things, especially in the reading of the pericopae of the sacred books.' This is a clear sign of the dependence of ArD on Test and not vice versa. The completeness of the description shows that neither of these works can be ante-Nicene. In the foregoing descriptions of the seats of the clergy there is some ambiguity. Is the meaning that there was an apse at the East end, with the bishop and presbyters seated in a semicircle round the East wall looking West, the holy table at the chord of the apse? The Church Orders are far from clear on this point. But in any case all prayed looking East. This is seen in the above accounts, and also in the description of the Liturgy in Test i. 23, where the bishop stands to celebrate it in the middle, the presbyters immediately behind him on either side, the deacons and widows behind them on the right and left respectively, the readers, subdeacons and deaconesses in turn behind them, and all within the veil. Thus, if the semicircular arrangement of seats is meant, the bishop and presbyters must have left their seats and have stood on the West of the holy table, facing East*.

4 * We read of some exceptions to the rule of churches facing East; e.g. at Antioch (Socrates, HE v. 22). In Didasc we read of the clergy and people rising for prayer; so in AC ii. 57; and so Cyprian de Orat. Dom. 31, Origen, in Num. hom. xx. 5, etc. Standing was the normal attitude (cf. Mk. xi. 25, Lk. xviii. 11, 13); kneeling or genuflexion was practised as a sign of special penitence, but was forbidden on Sundays and between Easter and Pentecost (Nicaea can. 20; cf. Test ii. 12, Tertullian de Cor. Mil. 3, Augustine Ep. lv. 32 (Ben.) ad Januarium, Cassian Inst. ii. 18). We find, however, kneeling in Hermas Vis. ii. 1 and in NT (Ac. vii. 60, ix. 40, xx. 36, xxi. 5, Eph. iii. 14). 5 2. The Eucharist. Four of the Church Orders give, more or less fully, the Eucharistic Liturgy; several others give some slight description of the same. From this material we may get some idea of the service. It would appear that the structure of the Liturgy was allowed to remain in a more or less fluid condition till the fourth century. The first part to be crystallised into a written form was probably from the Sursum Corda to the end of the Invocation or Epiclesis. In other portions, such as the deacon's Ectene or Litany, the pro-anaphoral prayers, the Intercession for the Church, the prayers at the dismissal of the catechumens, and the Communion of the people, this process followed a little later. That the Communion was not put into a fixed form quite so soon as the Eucharistic Thanksgiving is made probable by the following fact. The Liturgy in H₃, as far as it goes, is almost identical with that in EthCO, and is closely connected with that of Test (see below). But it stops short at the end of the Blessing of Oil etc., which immediately follows the Epiclesis. The part which in EthCO follows this is not only absent from H, but, so far as the wording of its prayers etc. is concerned, is quite independent of Test and AC. The conclusion is that all which follows the Blessing of the Oil in EthCO is a later addition (see also below, p. 53).

6 But the general scheme of the service is the same in all the authorities, and seems to be much more ancient than the set forms. We may conjecture from our materials that even before (perhaps long before) the fourth century the Eucharistic service consisted of (1) prayers and psalmody, (2) lections and instructions, (3) dismissal of catechumens and perhaps a 'fencing of the tables,' (4) requests for prayer and a litany-like series of petitions, (5) kiss of peace and offertory, (6) salutation and Sursum Corda, with Eucharistic Thanksgiving commemorating creation (?) and redemption and describing the Last Supper, and containing the Oblation and Invocation, (7) blessing of oil for healing (?), (8) communion of clergy and people, (9) thanksgiving and dismissal. This scheme is somewhat fuller than, but is consistent with, the well-known accounts in Justin Martyr (Apol. i. 65, 67) and Cyril of Jerusalem (CL xxiii.), and agrees with the detached references to the Liturgy in St Chrysostom's Antiochene writings, which have been collected by Brightman (LEW p. 470 ff.).

7 The details of the Liturgy in the four Church Orders will best be seen by the following Table. [Eth. Stat. 22; Hauler lxix.-lxxi.] Offertory. Salutation and Sursum Corda. Eucharistic thanksgiving (short) with commemoration of Redemption (one sentence refers to creation, no reference to Angels, no Sanctus), Words of our Lord, Oblation ('Remembering therefore') and Invocation (implicit, asking for the Holy Ghost).

TEST i.

8 [The order of 26-28, 35 is uncertain.] 26, 27 a. Prayers and psalmody (not daily). 27 b. Lections and instruction. 27 c. Catechumens dismissed (no form given) with laying on of hands. 35. Deacon's Ectene (independent); the bishop 'concluding the prayer' (no form given). 28. Mystagogia on festivals. 23 a. Kiss of peace, Offertory, Deacon's short admonition. 23 b. Salutation and Sursum Corda. 23 c. Sancta sanctis. 23 d. Euch. thanksg. from EthCO with long preamble and with interpolations, reference to Angels but no Sanctus; only half of our Lord's Words given; Oblation from EthCO closely (said by the people with the bishop), Invocation (implicit, addressed to Holy Trinity, not explicitly asking for the Holy Ghost). 23 e. Prayer for communicants and very short Intercession for Church.

AC viii.

9 35-39. Public morning prayer (daily). 5. Lections and instruction. 6-9. Long dismissals of catechumens, penitents, etc. 10-11. Deacon's Ectene (independent), the bishop concluding the prayer (form given). 11-12. Kiss of peace, Lavabo, Deacon's short admonition, Offertory. 12,. Salutation and Sursum Corda. 12⁻. Eucharistic thanksg. with very long commemoration of Creation, reference to Angels and Sanctus, commemoration of Redemption, Words of our Lord, Oblation and explicit Invocation, asking for the Holy Ghost. 12⁻. Intercession for Church (long). (ETHCO AND H3 — TEST i — AC viii) Blessing of oil [and cheese and olives, H], short form given. — — — —; [The rest not in H.]; Prayers for communicants. — — — 131-11. Benediction, deacon's shorter Ectene, bishop's prayer.; Sancta sanctis. — [see above] — 1312,13. Sancta sanctis, Gloria in excelsis (one sentence), Hosanna, Benedictus qui venit.; Benediction and Communion with hymn of praise. — 23 f. Benedictus qui venit. 23 g. Communion and rubrics as to who is not to receive. — 1314-17. Communion, with psalms.; Thanksgiving after Reception. — 23 h. Thanksgiving after Reception, prefaced by deacon's exhortation similar to AC but independent. — 14, 151-6. Thanksgiving after Reception, prefaced by deacon's exhortation 'Having partaken.; Benediction by presbyter, Prayer for congregation and benediction by bishop. — — — 157-9. Prayer for the congregation.; Dismissal by deacon. — — — 15. Dismissal by deacon.; [see above] — 24, 25. Benediction of oil and water (form given, independent). — 29. Benediction of water and oil (form given, independent).

10 Note 1. In the above Table, by an 'explicit Invocation' is meant one which prays that the elements may become or be made the body and blood of Christ to the end that the communicants may be blessed; by an 'implicit Invocation' one which omits the express reference to the change in the elements. Note 2. The order of communicating is suggestive. After bishops, presbyters and deacons, come in Test, widows, readers, subdeacons, those that have gifts, neophytes, babes, old men, virgins (male), other laymen, deaconesses, laywomen; in AC, subdeacons, readers, singers, ascetics, deaconesses, virgins (female), widows, children, all the lay people in order. Each communicant replies Amen, and in Test also says a prayer for himself. In ApCan 8, 9, all the faithful, clergy and laity, who attend, are expected to communicate except for good cause. Women communicate veiled; see ApCO-syr 27, AC ii. 57 (not || Didasc), EthD 10; cf. Test ii. 4.

11 Note 3. In EdCan 10 the 'OT' and Prophets and Gospel and Acts are the only lections allowed; the Epistles seem to be excluded. Standing for the Gospel is prescribed in EdCan 8, AC ii. 57, EthD 10 (cf. Sozomen HE vii. 19). Note 4. The Sursum Corda is mentioned in Cyprian de Orat. Dom. 31, and Cyril of Jerusalem, CL xxiii. 4 f. Note 5. The Lord's Prayer comes before Sancta Sanctis and Communion in Cyr. Jer. CL xxiii. 11—18, and St Augustine says that it was used 'daily in the Church before the altar of God' in his day (Serm. lviii. 12 Ben., aliter xlii.), and that 'almost the whole Church concludes the [Eucharistic] petition with the Lord's Prayer' (Ep. cxlix. 16, ad Paulinum). But it is not found in the Liturgies of our Church Orders; it is not in EthCO, though this is the part which seems to be the later addition, nor in Test nor in AC. Nor do we find it in Sar, though Brightman sees traces of it both there and in EthCO (JThSt i. 97); but this is far from obvious. The witness of St Chrysostom is doubtful but rather points to its use (LEW p. 480, note 28). The private use of the Lord's Prayer is prescribed in AC iii. 18 and (thrice daily) in D 8 and || AC vii. 24. St Cyprian (de Orat. Dom. 2 f.) urges its private use, but though he refers to the Eucharist more than once in the treatise (e.g. 4, 31), he does not expressly say that the Prayer was in public use as part of the Liturgy.

12 Note 6. There is a prayer in Sar 17 over oil or bread or water, and another (5 f.) for oils and waters that are being offered, with a benediction; in Test and AC there are prayers over oil and water, in EthCO over oil. All these seem to be for the healing of the sick. But this can hardly be the case with the blessing of cheese and olives in H₃ p. 108. 13 The descriptions in CH and EgCO are meagre, only giving the Salutation and Sursum Corda; but CH alludes to the benediction of oil and firstfruits, which is to end with the Gloria Patri in this form: 'Glory to thee, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost for ever, Amen' (see below, p. 125). There is also a description of a Liturgy (clearly founded on AC viii. in SEC 64 f.; a few of the deacon's proclamations are given (including that before the Thanksgiving after reception); the words of administration are given in full ('This is the body of Christ'; 'This is the blood of Christ, this is the cup of life'); and the Invocation described is an explicit one: 'Let the High Priest pray over the oblation, that the Holy Ghost may descend on it, making the bread the body of Christ, and the cup the blood of Christ.' EthS 53 has almost identically the same description of the Liturgy, but it mentions Church gates, and says of the Epiclesis: 'The High Priest shall pray over the same that the Holy Ghost may descend and dwell upon them, upon the bread that it may become the body of Christ, and upon the cup that it may become the blood of Christ; and then the bishop shall say the Coming of the Holy Spirit.' To the first formula of administration is prefixed: 'This is the bread which came down from the heavens' (Horner p. 200).

14 The description in SEC-arab adds incense* at the time of the ordination of a bishop, and in the Epiclesis agrees with EthS 53 (Horner p. 274 ff.). That in ArD 38 (Funk DidCA ii. 132, Brightman LEW 510) begins with a prayer of Thanksgiving, followed by instruction and psalmody; the presbyter (not the deacon) brings in the elements; there is a procession with incense; lections are read; a long prayer is made for the Church (i.e. the deacon's Ectene), and the Anaphora is said, the veil being let down, and the clergy (including subdeacons, a reader [or readers], 'widows who are deaconesses' and those with gifts) being inside the veil; the deacons wave fans (so AC viii. 12, and || SEC-sah-arab 65, EthS 53, and perhaps Test ii. 10). Apparently ArD and Test are the only manuals which allow women inside the veil. 15 The Epiclesis in Test is a remarkable one, as not expressly asking for the Holy Ghost. The words of our Lord 'Do this in remembrance of me' are omitted in the Recital of the Last Supper, and yet the Invocation begins with 'Remembering therefore.' This would prove (since the rationale of these words is to take up our Lord's command) that 'Do this' was in the source of Test. According to the most probable reading the Epiclesis runs as follows: 'Remembering therefore thy death and resurrection, we offer to thee bread and the cup, giving thanks to thee who alone art God for ever and our Saviour, since thou hast promised us to stand before thee and to * So in EthD 14, 16 incense is added to the || AC iii. 10, 20. serve thee in priesthood. Therefore we render thanks to thee, we thy servants O Lord [the people repeat this, with (?) the bishop]. We offer to thee this thanksgiving, Eternal Trinity, O Lord Jesus Christ, O Lord the Father ...O Lord the Holy Ghost; we have brought this drink and this food to thy holiness [so the derived 'Anaphora of our Lord']; cause that it may be to us not for condemnation...but for the medicine and support of our spirit.' We notice the confusion of Persons, so characteristic of this writer (see below, p. 119); the Father had been addressed in the immediately preceding paragraph. The writer seems deliberately to have omitted a prayer for the Holy Ghost which was in his source; and this is surprising in one who had such a clear conception of the personality of the Third Person (below, p. 119).

16 Reference may here be made to two later forms of the Test liturgy; the Arabic translation of it (made through the Coptic) which is referred to in Rahmani's notes but is not published; and the Ethiopic 'Anaphora of our Lord' derived from Test (for an English version see Cooper-Maclean p. 245 ff.). Test-arab alters the sentences of the deacon's admonition at the Offertory, and omits some of them, adds the Sanctus, and has an Epiclesis addressed to the Holy Ghost (so Rahmani p. 39); inserts long diptychs and, before the Communion, the Lord's prayer. The 'Anaphora of our Lord' begins with the Eucharistic thanksgiving, into which it interpolates diptychs as in the later Egyptian rite; in the Commemoration of the Last Supper, like AC but unlike Test, EthCO, H, occurs the phrase 'In that night in which they betrayed him'; as in Test our Lord's words over the cup are omitted; an explicit Epiclesis is added to and precedes the implicit one of Test; the latter remains with slight alterations, one correcting the order of the Three Persons; the Intercession for the Church follows as in Test, but unlike the modern Egyptian and Ethiopic rites. All that follows the Intercession in Test is omitted in the 'Anaphora of our Lord' as given by Ludolf, except that the post-Communion prayer is added.

17 The above is the Liturgy when a bishop is consecrated, the new bishop himself being the celebrant. But many of the Church Orders have also, as in Justin Martyr, a second but shorter description of the Eucharist, in connexion with the first communion of the newly baptized. Similarly, though this baptismal Eucharist is wanting in AC viii. (see above, p. 19), we have a description of the Liturgy in AC ii. 57, where it is interpolated into Didasc.—This second description supplies us with one or two details in the Communion of the people which are wanting in the first description, such as the words of administration; and speaks of the custom of giving milk and honey to the neophytes. This custom is mentioned by Tertullian (de Cor. 3, adv. Marc. i. 14), Clement of Alexandria (Paedag. i. 6), and at the third Council of Carthage (can. 24, some MSS); it seems to have been originally Egyptian and African only, for it is not found in Test or AC.

18 The Church Orders differ in the directions for administering Holy Communion. The older custom seems to have been for the deacons to administer in both kinds (cf. Justin Apol. i. 65), and so perhaps Test ii. 10. But the custom varied, the bishop sometimes administering in both kinds, as in CH xix. 146 f. (but in xxxi. 216 the bishop or presbyter may allow deacons to administer 'oblations'—whether that means the Eucharist or the eulogiae), ArD 38? (so LEW 511, but not Funk), cf. Tertull. de Cor. 3? ('nec de aliorum manu quam praesidentium sumimus'); in some cases (EgCO 46, EthCO 35, H₃ p. 112) the bishop administers the bread, the presbyters (or if there are not enough presbyters, the deacons) the cups (see above, p. 18); and so in AC viii. 13, SEC 66, EthS 53 (where there is no milk and honey), the bishop administers the bread, the deacon the cup.

19 Deacons are forbidden to communicate presbyters in Test ii. 10, Nicaea can. 18, and probably in EthCO 35 and CH xxx. 215. The two last are unintelligible without the hint given in Test :— Test. The deacon does not give the oblation to a presbyter. Let him open the disc or paten, and let the presbyter receive (i.e. communicate himself). EthCO. Whenever the deacon approaches the presbyter, he shall hold out his robe, and the presbyter himself shall take (the bread) and deliver to the people with his hand. [The last clause seems to have been added by EthCO to its source.] There is no parallel to this in EgCO. CH. If the presbyter is sick, let the deacon carry the mysteries to him, and let the presbyter alone accept them. In EdCan 27 it is prescribed that the 'bread of the oblation' is to be used in the Eucharist on the day on which it is baked. This is still the East Syrian (Nestorian) custom.

20 In several Church Orders reference is made to 'eulogiae,' or bread such as that used for the Eucharist, but not consecrated; it was given to the people much in the same way as the pain bénit is given in French churches at the present day. It seems to have been the same as the 'bread of exorcism' or 'bread of blessing' given to catechumens who were not allowed to be present at Eucharist or Agape. For this custom see CH xx. 171, xxxiii. 170, EgCO 47 f. ('this is a blessing [εὐλογία] and is not an Eucharist like the body of the Lord'), EthCO 36 f., H₃ p. 113, Test ii. 19. In AC viii. 31 and || SEC 73, EthS 61, that which remains over from the Eucharist but is not consecrated (so expressly SEC, EthS) is called eulogiae, and is to be distributed among the clergy, including the minor orders and deaconesses.—The name is also used for the consecrated bread sent from one church to another as a proof of intercommunion, or to absent sick persons (DCA i. 629).

21 The usual word in the Church Orders for celebrating the Eucharist is 'to offer' (προσφέρειν, offerre), or 'to offer the oblation*'. In AC ii. 25 we read of the bishops being priests, levites, to their people, ministering (λειτουργούντες) in the holy tabernacle, the holy catholic Church, and standing at the altar of the Lord our God and bringing to him the reasonable and bloodless sacrifices through Jesus the great High priest (|| EthD 5 similar, but with 'offer unto Jesus Christ'), where the phrase 'reasonable and bloodless sacrifices' is not in || Didasc. This method of expression is even more emphatically repeated in AC vi. 23, viii. 5 (ordination prayer for bishops), 46; it is found in Sar 1. We must however notice that in Test ii. 10 the phrase 'to offer the oblation' is used of deacons bringing in the elements to the bishop at the Offertory; and || CH xix. 142 (bracketed by Achelis) has: 'Deinde diaconus incipit sacrificare,' i.e. probably, προσφέρειν. [This corresponds to iii. 20: 'Diaconus

22 * Cf. Tertullian de Exhort. Cast. 7: 'Offers et tinguis,' i.e. 'thou celebratest the Eucharist and baptisest.' autem afferat oblationes.'] But this sense is unusual; H₃ p. 112 has: 'Let the oblation be offered by the deacons to the bishop,' and so EgCO 46, EthCO 35, with 'bring' for 'offer.' In the sense of celebrating the Eucharist deacons are said to be unable 'to offer' in AC viii. 28, and so at Arles (can. 15*) and Nicaea (can. 18). Indeed the verb 'to offer' used absolutely seems almost always to have this sense. 3. Relationship of the Liturgies. We may now consider how the Eucharistic Liturgies given in the Table on p. 40 f. are connected with one another. It seems clear that the Test compiler had before him, for the portion from the Offertory to the end of the Invocation, a liturgy almost if not quite identical with that of H₃. He has treated his materials very freely; having, for example, added a long preamble to the Eucharistic Thanksgiving (as he added a preamble to the bishop's ordination prayer, p. 77), and having inserted many phrases in it, all in his own style. His Epiclesis is addressed to the Holy Trinity, see above, p. 44 f. There is an interesting development in the brief Intercession for the Church after the Eucharistic Thanksgiving; the Intercession is wholly wanting in H₃ and EthCO. There can be no doubt that the Test liturgy is later than both these.

23 There are no signs of direct connexion between the Test and AC liturgies. But AC throughout shows by far the greater development. Except in the prayer said in Test by the communicant at * This canon says that many deacons actually did attempt to celebrate the Eucharist. In the fourth century deacons were pressing their claims. M. the time of reception (which seems to have been entirely the invention of the compiler of that work), every detail in Test is less developed than the corresponding one of AC. The question of the relation of the liturgies in EthCO (H₃) and AC is raised by Funk (DidCA ii. p. xxi, TUH 140 ff.). He assigns the priority to AC, which he believes to be the parent of EthCO and the grandparent of Test. He takes the shortness of the liturgy in EthCO as compared with AC to be due to omission. Let us therefore compare these liturgies.

24 In EthCO and H₃ we go straight from the ordination of a bishop to the Offertory. AC interposes a large mass of material with set forms, which doubtless represent in outline preexisting practice, but which seem to be emerging in AC from a fluid or oral to a more fixed condition. The Sursum Corda in EthCO is prefaced by the salutation 'The Lord be with you all,' almost exactly as CH, Test, H₃, and the later Egyptian and the Roman liturgies; while in AC it is prefaced by 2 Co. xiii. 14 as in St Chrysostom's Antiochene writings, and in the later Antiochene, East Syrian, and Byzantine liturgies, and in the Mozarabic (for details see Cooper-Maclean p. 169). The Eucharistic Thanksgiving in EthCO and H₃ is very short; it goes straight to the passage which speaks of the sending of the Son by the Father; AC prefixes a very long preamble in its own style, referring copiously to OT and to the angels, and gives the Sanctus. There is apparently no literary connexion, other than the use of a common Christian vocabulary and a common knowledge of the Gospels, between the two forms down to the end of the account of the Last Supper. Funk has placed extracts in parallel columns (TUH 144) which show how unlike they are. Note also that EthCO and H do not introduce 1 Co. xi. 26 as part of our Lord's words, whereas AC does so*.

25 In the Epiclesis, however, there is a certain relation. The forms are: ETHCO (Horner p. 140). Remembering therefore thy death and thy resurrection, we offer to thee this bread and this cup, giving thanks to thee because thou hast made us worthy to stand before thee and minister as priests to thee. We pray to thee Lord, and we beseech thee to send thy Holy Spirit upon this oblation of the Church, that in joining (them) together thou mayest grant to them, to all of them, to them who take of it, that it may be to them for holiness and for filling (them) with the Holy Spirit, and for strengthening of faith in truth, that thee they may glorify and praise through thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ, through whom to thee be glory and might in the holy Church AC viii. 12. Remembering therefore his passion and death and resurrection from the dead and return into heaven and his future second parousia when he cometh with glory and power to judge the quick and the dead and to give to each one according to his works, we offer to thee, King and God, according to his command this bread and this cup, giving thanks to thee through him because thou hast made us worthy to stand before thee and minister as priests to thee. And we beseech thee to look graciously on these gifts lying before thee, thou, O God, who needest naught, and to be well pleased with them to the honour of thy Christ, and to send down thy Holy Spirit the

26 * So (in different ways) do Test and many later liturgies. Cf. also the North-Italian de Sacramentis iv. 5, 6 (c. A.D. 400); and Maximus of Turin (c. A.D. 450): 'Sicut ipse [sc. Dominus] ait: Quotiescunque hoc feceritis, mortem meam annunciabitis donec veniam' (Migne Patr. Lat. lvii. 690). For the Ambrosian and Mozarabic forms see Duchesne Christian Worship p. 216 (Eng. tr.); and for others Cooper-Maclean p. 172. now and always and for ever and ever. Amen. [The H₂ Epiclesis is almost identical.] Note. There is apparently an Invocation of the Holy Spirit in Didase, but the form is not given (H₁ p. 80, cf. p. 85). witness of the sufferings of the Lord Jesus upon this sacrifice that he may constitute (or declare, ἀποφήσῃ) this bread the body of thy Christ and this cup the blood of thy Christ, that they who partake of it may be strengthened in godliness, may receive forgiveness of sins, may be delivered from the devil and his deceit, may be filled with the Holy Spirit, may become worthy of thy Christ, may receive eternal life, thou being reconciled to them, O Master Almighty.

27 Here AC shows by far the greater development. The compiler seems to have taken the EthCO form (or one very like it but lacking the doxology) and to have practically incorporated it entire in his form, adding characteristic phrases of his own. Of these phrases we may note: (1) 'O God who needest naught...well pleased with them,' cf. vi. 20,; (2) 'witness of the sufferings of the Lord Jesus,' cf. v. 1; (3) 'may receive (τῡχωσι) forgiveness of sins,' cf. ii. 18; (4) 'may become worthy of thy Christ, may receive eternal life'; these are found in the Compiler's writings elsewhere than in the Epiclesis; the second, a most striking phrase, being also found in another context in Pseudo-Ignatius Rom. 2, and the fourth (both clauses) in substance in Philad. 3 (cf. Smyrn. 6); see LEW p. xli f.; for Pseudo-Ignatius see below, p. 124. Side by side with this development of the Epiclesis we may put the greatly developed Intercession for the Church which immediately follows in AC. As we have seen, this feature is wholly wanting in EthCO.

28 There is however one point adduced by Funk (TUH p. 58) which quite possibly indicates priority in AC. The answer to the Sancta Sanctis (i.e. 'Holy things to holy persons') in AC is 'One holy, one Lord Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the Father thou art blessed for ever, Amen' (viii. 13), while in EthCO 22 it is 'One holy Father, one holy Son, one is the Holy Spirit.' Funk says that the former is the earlier phraseology. The question is much the same as in the case of the doxologies to the prayers (below, p. 124 ff.). But we need not consider it here, for we have already (p. 39) seen reason to believe that this portion of the Liturgy is a later addition to EthCO. The probable deduction from the evidence, in the opinion of the present writer, is that neither of the two compilers had the other's work before him, but that the AC compiler used a liturgy very like EthCO for the Epiclesis. Or a still more probable hypothesis may be hazarded. Considering that so many of the descriptions of the Liturgies have rather full details about the Invocation (e.g. SEC 65, EthS 53, Cyr. Jer. CL xxiii. 7, Chrys. de Sacerd. iii. 4, § 179 etc.) it is not impossible that this was one of the very first parts of the service that were written down. If the common rubrical scheme which underlies the Liturgies of the Church Orders was a document rather than an oral tradition, it is quite probable that it had a written Epiclesis, even though that Epiclesis was not regarded as being so authoritative that it could not be changed.

29 Whether the AC compiler had any source before him other than such a rubrical scheme it is difficult to say. For theories of Probst and others see Brightman LEW p. xliii ff. 4. The Liturgy in Sarapion. In this sacramentary we have several pro-anaphoral prayers: the 'first prayer of the Lord's day' (19); prayers after the sermon, for the people and the catechumens (20 f.); and a benediction of the catechumens (28). There is no mention of any dismissal of penitents (cf. Test) as in AC. The prayers of the faithful follow; a litany was probably said (not given), and the bishop would 'complete the prayer' (cf. Test) with several collects: for the people, for the sick, for fruitfulness, for the Church, for the bishop and clergy, for solitaries and virgins, for the married, for children, etc. (22—27, 29 f.). The list of clergy includes subdeacons, readers and interpreters. 30 Then would doubtless come the Kiss of peace, the Offertory, and Sursum Corda, which are not mentioned. But we have the Eucharistic Thanksgiving (1—4, εὐχὴ προσφόρου Σαραπίωνος ἐπισκόπου). This begins with 'It is meet and right to praise, hymn, and glorify thee, the uncreated Father of the only-begotten Jesus Christ.' It refers to the angelic hierarchy, and introduces the Sanctus; then mention is made of the 'bloodless oblation' to God (cf. p. 48 above), and the narrative of the Last Supper is given, the oblation being joined with it. The command 'Do this' is omitted, and so consequently are the words 'Remembering therefore.' The Invocation of the Logos follows, praying the Father that the Word may come upon (ἐπιδημησάτω*) the bread 'that it may become body of the Word,' and upon the cup 'that it may become blood of the Truth'; and that all who partake may receive a medicine of life etc. The Epiclesis ends: 'We have invoked thee, the Uncreated, through the Only-begotten in Holy Spirit' (ἐν ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι). An intercession for the living and departed (including a recitation or ὑποβολή of the names of the departed) and for those who have made offerings follows the Epiclesis. The last sentence (ascribed by Brightman to the people) is: 'As it was and is and shall be to generations of generations and to all the ages of the ages. Amen.' Then the fraction is mentioned, and in connexion with it a prayer for the communicants is given; and after the communion of the clergy we have a benediction (χειροθεσία) of the laity, and after the communion of the laity a thanksgiving prayer. A prayer or blessing of oil and water (5) follows, and a 'benediction (χειροθεσία) of the people after the blessing (εὐλογία) of water and oil' (6). Except for the headings of the prayers, there are no rubrics, and only the bishop's part is given. The wording of the prayers seems to be quite independent of the Church Orders.

31 5. Days for the Eucharist. Sunday, in the earlier period covered by our literature, seems to have been the only day for the liturgy, as in D 14, Didasc ii. 59 (H₁ p. 44), ApCO 19, and apparently in * ἐπιδημία is used in Sar for the Incarnation. 32 EthS 15 alters the phrase to: 'who is quick to go every day to the church.' EdCan 2 (which mentions the Sunday Eucharist expressly, whereas the assembly on Wednesdays and Fridays seems to have been only for prayer). Brightman (JThSt i. 92) thinks that this appropriation of the Eucharist to Sunday is implied by the title of Sar 19, 'The first prayer of the Lord's day.' So also in Justin Martyr (Apol. i. 67), and Pliny (Ep. 96; his 'fixed day' was doubtless Sunday); and even Athanasius (Apol. c. Arian. 11) speaks of a certain event happening on a day which 'was not the Lord's day' and 'did not require the use of' the sacred office—language which may perhaps exclude the celebration of the Eucharist on a week day, at any rate as a general rule (cf. Acts xx. 7). We have evidence, however, even at an early date, of a more extended use of the Eucharist. Tertullian expressly mentions a Eucharist on Wednesdays and Fridays, 'station days' (de Orat. 19). Cyprian alludes to a daily Eucharist in Africa (Ep. lvii. [liii.] 3: 'we, as priests who daily celebrate the sacrifices of God') and advocates daily reception (de Orat. Dom. 18). In CH xxxvii. 201 the bishop may celebrate the Eucharist when he pleases. One caution in reviewing the witness of Christian antiquity on this subject must be borne in mind. As reservation of the sacrament was commonly practised, especially in Egypt (cf. Tertull. de Orat. 19, ad Uxor. ii. 5, Ambrose Orat. de excessu fratris Satyri i. 43, Basil, Ep. xciii. ad Caesariam, etc.), the mention of reception on certain days does not necessarily mean that there were Eucharists on those days. Thus Basil (loc. cit.)

33 says that he communicated four times a week (or oftener if a Saint's day fell in the week), though some communicated daily; Test ii. 25 (though elsewhere, in i. 22, it forbids a daily Eucharist) advises the Christian believer to 'take care that before he eat he partake of the Eucharist, that he may be incapable of receiving injury.' The || EgCO 58, EthCO 44 only deal with days when there is an Eucharist. 34 In the fourth century and later Saturday and Sunday were special days for the Eucharist. In Test i. 22 the Liturgy is to be celebrated only on Saturday and [the text has 'or' but this seems to be a corruption] Sunday and on a fast day. So ArD 38 says 'Saturday and Sunday...and on festivals which fall in the week'; but if a festival fall on the two fast days, Wednesday and Friday, they are to pray and receive the holy mysteries, but not to break the fast till the ninth hour. Saturday and Sunday Eucharists are hinted at in AC ii. 59, which provides for daily public services, but says that these two days are to be specially observed; Saturday is a festival as the commemoration of the Creation, Sunday as that of the Resurrection (vii. 23). EthD 10 develops the former passage by calling Saturday 'the Jewish sabbath' and the Lord's day 'the Christian sabbath.' In these manuals the provision for a Saturday Eucharist betrays a post-Nicene date. Socrates (HE v. 22) says that in his time (c. A.D. 440) Saturday Eucharists were almost universal except at Alexandria and Rome where, 'on account of some ancient tradition' they had ceased. He adds that some other Egyptians celebrated the Eucharist on Saturdays, apparently after an Agape (see further DCG i. 254 f., ERE i. 172). Yet in A.D. 380 there was a Saturday Eucharist at Alexandria (Timoth. Alex. Resp. Can. in Migne, P. G. xxxiii. 1306). Cassian (Inst. iii. 2) speaks of it in Egypt;

35 and the Council of Laodicea in Phrygia, as far as Lent is concerned. This council (c. A.D. 380) forbids Christians to Judaize and abstain from work on Saturday (can. 29; AC viii. 33 says the exact opposite). In Lent, however, Saturday and Sunday are the only liturgical days, and no feasts of martyrs are to be observed in Lent except on these two days (can. 49, 51; so Trullan Council can. 52). Pseudo-Pionius in his fourth-century Life of Polycarp 23 (Lightfoot Ignatius iii. 455) speaks of the Eucharist 'on the Sabbath and on the Lord's day.' In the Acts of Pionius, which are probably genuine (A.D 250), the real Pionius tastes the holy bread and water on the day of his martyrdom, a Saturday, but this was probably an Agape (§ 3, Ruinart Acta Sincera, ed. 2, p. 140). St Augustine says that in his day some celebrated the Eucharist daily, some on Saturday and Sunday only, and some on Sunday only (Ep. liv. Ben. ad Januarium, 2). Pseudo-Hippolytus in Prov. ix. 1 speaks of a daily Eucharist; but the date and authorship of this work are uncertain (DCB iii. 103).

36 Maundy Thursday Eucharists are first found in the latter half of the fourth century; in Test ii. 11 and 'Silvia' (both apparently in the evening), and at the third Council of Carthage, A.D. 397 (can. 29). Augustine (Ep. liv. 9) speaks of the Eucharist on this day (see further DCG i. 260). No religious rites at marriages are mentioned in the Church Orders; Tertullian mentions the 'Oblation' and the 'Benediction' at a Christian marriage (ad Uxor. ii. 8). A Benediction seems to be implied in Ignatius Polyc. 5. 6. Daily prayers. Daily public service for all men was a comparatively late development; it did not immediately follow even when persecution ceased. In D, Didasc, ApCO (above, p. 55) Sunday is the only day mentioned for the Christian assembly. In EgCO 60, EthCO 46 we find a morning daily prayer assembly for the clergy who meet the bishop to talk over the day's work; perhaps a phrase about 'giving information to' (Eg) or 'instructing' (Eth) those who are in the church points to some of the laity being present; so more plainly EgCO-arab (Horner p. 262). The || CH xxi. 217 f. turns this into a public daily prayer meeting at cockcrow for 'presbyters and sub-deacons [see below, p. 82] and readers and all the people'; but xxvi. 231 has an older flavour, speaking of the duty of going to church 'on all days when there are prayers.' Test (i. 32) does not go quite so far as EgCO, for though it provides fixed daily prayers for the presbyters, no hour is stated for them, but each presbyter says them 'at his own time,' though he is evidently meant to get some of the faithful to respond. The same thing is true with regard to the prayers appointed for use by the 'widows who sit in front' (i. 42 f.; see below, p. 83 f.).

37 At midnight the clergy and 'those of the people who are more perfect' give praise by themselves (i. 32). A public service 'at the lamplighting' is spoken of in Test ii. 11, but this appears to refer only to Pascha. The daily service is greatly developed in AC. The laity are very expressly bidden to attend prayers with the clergy twice daily, at dawn and in the evening (the 'lamplighting'), and Ps. lxii. is appointed for the former, Ps. cxl. for the latter service (ii. 59, interpolated into || Didasc). In AC viii. 35—39 we have an order of service with fixed prayers; canticles are given in vii. 47—49 (but see p. 29 above). EdCan 19 implies public service at least once daily. St Basil seems to refer to a daily prayer meeting at the 'lamplighting' (de Spir. S. xxix. [73]). Socrates (HE v. 22) speaks of expositions of Scripture at the 'lamplighting' in some places. With the rise of religious communities daily service developed. In the treatise de Virginitate (c. A.D. 390?)* we find fixed psalms, Nunc Dimittis, Benedicite. 'Silvia' describes daily public services at Jerusalem during her visit, with psalms, hymns, litanies, and prayers, but no lections. Later, c. A.D. 420, Cassian gives an elaborate account of the monastic 'hours of prayer' (Inst. ii., iii.).

38 Although the Church Orders show a somewhat slow development in this respect, most of them prescribe private prayers at fixed hours. We find seven such hours of prayer in EgCO 62, EthCO 48, H₃ p. 119 * The Athanasian authorship is defended by Von der Goltz in Texte und Untersuchungen xiv. 2 a. He suggests the date 320—340. 39 (probably, but this is a fragment), Test ii. 24; on rising, at the third, sixth, and ninth hours, before going to bed, at midnight, and at cockcrow (Test by error has 'dawn' a second time instead of 'cockcrow'). In connexion with the midnight prayer we have a reference to the Benedicite in EthCO and H, and it is developed in Test, though there not specially associated with the midnight prayer. Probably this canticle was used at that hour. CH xxv. ff. 223—5, 233—245 has the same hours of prayer (and the reference to the Benedicite) but apparently adds an eighth. It has 'at sunset...then at the lamp lighting' for the fifth hour of prayer. Achelis looks on the last five words as an interpolation, as the lamp-lighting and sunset prayer would be the same; but Funk denies this. It may be suspected that the words are genuine, but that 'then' is a mistake which has arisen in the course of the various translations through which we know CH; probably the 'lamp-lighting' is an explanation of 'sunset,' and does not involve an additional hour of prayer. It is noteworthy that AC viii. 34 has six hours of prayer only; it omits the midnight hour and the reference to the Benedicite. Funk (TUH p. 55 f. marks this as a sign of priority in AC, as hours of prayer showed a tendency to increase. Cyprian (de Orat. Dom. 34 ff. mentions six hours (not five, as Funk):

40 morning, the third, sixth, and ninth hours, 'at the sunsetting and at the decline of day' (cf. CH), and 'even during the night.' The last is perhaps only expected of the more earnest. There does not here seem to be any sign of priority in AC, as compared with EgCO etc. Is the omission of the difficult midnight hour due to the less ascetic tone of AC? It would be a compensation for the addition of the two public daily prayer meetings which it makes binding on the laity. 41 These private prayers might take place either in the home (when they would usually take the form of family worship), or in the church. AC viii. 34 speaks of the possibility of Christians not being able to go to church 'because of the unbelievers.' So || SEC 75, which bids the Bishop 'make the synaxes' (sah) or 'celebrate the Eucharist' (arab) in his house in such a case; and so EthS 69, which however does not refer to the Eucharist (Horner, pp. 215, 286, 355). 7. The Agape and Funeral Commemorations. The Church Orders do not add much to our knowledge on this head. In D the Agape and Holy Communion were apparently united under one name 'Eucharist*.' The prayers given are probably 'graces' before and after the Agape, and the Eucharistic thanksgiving is not given, the prophets being allowed 'to give thanks as much as they desire'; that is, the Eucharistic worship was in the main extemporaneous. But this conclusion is much disputed; and for the various opinions reference may be made to the article 'Agape' in ERE i. 168 by the present writer, and to DCB iv. 807 (Salmon).

42 * The verb εὐχαριστεῖν was often used of grace before meals; it clearly underlies the 'gave thanks' of Clementine Recogn. i. 19; cf. Mk. viii. 6, Jn. vi. 11, Ac. xxvii. 35, Ro. xiv. 6, etc. In the later Church Orders the Agape and Eucharist are entirely distinct. The Agape in Didasc (and || AC ii. 28, EthD 6) is a feast given to old women (the poor and widows and orphans EthD); a portion is to be given to the bishop and the other clergy (see below, p. 86). In CH xxxiii. f. 169—179 and the parallel manuals (EgCO 48—52, EthCO 37—39, H₃ p. 113 f., Test ii. 13) we read of the Agape as an institution quite distinct from the Eucharist; in neither Agape nor Eucharist may the catechumens, still less the heathen, share*. The bishop presides and exhorts, and gluttony and drunkenness are strictly forbidden. In EgCO and H (not EthCO) the Agape is called 'the Lord's supper.' EthCO speaks of 'the Lord's table.' In these manuals there is mention made of the supper to widows as a separate thing.

43 Further, there is some connexion between the custom of the Agape and the commemoration of the faithful departed. The passage in AC (viii. 44) which corresponds to those just given refers only to these commemorative feasts; a prayer for the departed immediately precedes (§ 41). And CH xxxiii. 169 f. has this direction: 'If there is a memorial of the departed, before they sit (at meat) let them par- * So in D 9 only the baptized may partake of the 'Eucharist'; and in Clem. Recogn. i. 19, ii. 71, Peter expressly excludes all unbaptized persons, even Clement, from eating with him, because they are 'not free from an unclean spirit.' For the exclusion of catechumens and heathen from the Eucharist, see e.g. Athanasius Apol. c. Arian. 11. The exclusion is doubtless based on Ex. xii. 45. 44 take of the mysteries, though not on the first day of the week. After the oblation let the bread of exorcism (above, p. 18) be distributed to them before they sit down.' This precedes the regulations for the Sunday Agape. Offerings for the dead are mentioned in Tertullian de Cor. 3. And at funerals hymns and prayers were used (EthD 38 in Ludolf's table of contents, above, p. 33; AC vi. 30), but the only form given is in Sar 18 which is a prayer 'for one who is dead and is being carried forth' (ἐκκομιζομένου); it seems to have been said in the house. Commemorative Eucharists are referred to in AC vi. 30 and in || Didasc (Funk DidCA i. 376, H₁ p. 85). AC viii. 42 gives directions for observing the 'third day of the departed' with psalms and lections and prayers, also the ninth and fortieth [one MS 'thirtieth'] days and the anniversary; alms are to be given to the poor from the goods of the deceased as a memorial of him. So || SEC 76 but with 'seventh' for 'ninth' and with 'a month' for the 'fortieth day.' EthS 70 agrees with SEC but gives both 'a month' and 'the fortieth day' and adds a commemoration after six months. For martyrs' anniversaries see below, p. 129 f.

45 8. Clerical Vestments. These are referred to in CH xxxvii. 201—3. The presbyters and deacons are to wear 'white vestments more beautiful than all the people, very splendid' when the bishop celebrates the Eucharist. Even the readers are to wear festal garments. In Test i. 34 the deacon who is in charge of the guest-house is to be 'clothed in white garments, a stole only on his shoulder'; but this is not in church—the vestments are a badge of office. This is probably the first mention of a stole (the word used is ὡράριον, orarium, transliterated into Syriac); the other early reference to it is c. A.D. 380 at Laodicea (can. 22 f.) where the subdeacon (ὑπηρέτης) is forbidden to wear it and to leave his place at the door, and the readers and singers are also forbidden to wear it or to read and sing with it on. At Laodicea the reference is to the stole used in service by a large number of people. In Test it is, apparently, restricted to one of the deacons; and this is an indication that that Church Order is of an earlier date than the Council. On the stole see further in DCA ii. 1934 ff.

46 NOTE. It is interesting to compare the liturgies of the Church Orders with the Liturgical Homilies of Narsai lately published by Dom Connolly ('Texts and Studies' viii. 1). These belong to the latter half of the fifth century. One of the homilies describes the Eucharist, but it is not too much to say that it breathes an atmosphere widely removed from that of the Church Orders. The ceremonial and liturgical development is great. Much is made of the vestments of the clergy (including stoles), of lights, incense, fans, bowings and genuflexions (which are forbidden after the Epiclesis); the Creed is introduced into the service, and this is one of the very first instances of the introduction. We find in Narsai the same general scheme as in the present East Syrian liturgies, in which the Narrative of the Last Supper is followed by the Intercession (in Narsai a very long one, expressly said to be fashioned on 'Mar Nestorius,' i.e., probably, on the original of the East Syrian liturgy so named),

47 M. and the Intercession by the Invocation, which is of the explicit form and appears (though this may be doubtful) to be addressed to the Holy Ghost, instead of to the Father. On the other hand no sanctuary veil and no litany are mentioned. The description probably presupposes the existence, at least in an early form, of the three present East Syrian liturgies ('Addai and Mari,' 'Theodore,' 'Nestorius'). All this points to the conclusion that the Church Orders belong to a time considerably before Narsai.