The image of our LORD'S in the liturgi Death sought cal forms. what manner the Eucharist was to be regarded as a Sacrifice, or where the essentially sacrificial action in it was to be found. While the writers of this period recognized in the Mass an image of the Death of the Saviour, yet they often sought this image outside of the act of Consecration, and ordinarily placed it in the liturgical ceremonies instituted by the Church. S. Gregory the Great (ob. 604) led the way in this s. Gregory new departure by his teaching both in his Dialogues and in his Letters. In these he sets forth the efficacy of the Mass to obtain various graces, and especially the deliverance of souls from purgatory.* He shows that our LORD renews His Sacrifice for us in the Eucharist, and that this Sacrifice is an unceasing reproduction of the image of His Passion for the remission of our sins. At the moment of our LORD's daily immolation of Himself in the Eucharist, according to S. Gregory, heaven opens at the voice of the priest, to unite itself with the Church on earth.† S. Gregory also gave an impulse to the study of the Mass from a liturgical point of view, by introducing the Roman liturgy into Gaul. In the ninth century the liturgical writings of Amalarius, Florus, and others testify to the greater value set upon the liturgies, especially upon that of the Roman Church. teaches the in purgatory; and that by it earth are He gave an impulse to liturg ical study. S. Isidore of Seville (ob. 636) adds to the theological s. Isidore of stores of the Church a definition of the word sacri fice" which long held sway: "The term 'sacrifice,' he says, "is equivalent to a thing made holy,' since the sacrifice is mystically consecrated by prayer in memory of our LORD'S Passion for us." * S. Greg. Mag., Dialog., iv., c. xlvii., xlviii. † Ibid., c. xlviii. ‡“Sacrificium dictum, quasi sacrum factum, quia prece Seville contributes a de finition of S. Bede's view is similar. In cent. VI. was allowed on the same day at any altar by the Synods of Auxerre and Merida. The Venerable Bede (ob. 735) treated the subject on much the same lines. A development of the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist which was practical rather than doctrinal may be noticed about this time. In the sixth century a comone Mass only paratively small number of Masses were celebrated, the Synod of Auxerre (578) in its tenth canon forbidding the saying of two Masses on the same day at the same altar; while in the Council of Merida, in Spain (666), the nineteenth canon directs that all the intentions of the assistants and of the benefactors of the Church should be recommended together at the Mass. A little later than this the opinion seems to have gained ground that the offering of a Mass for one intention exclusively was more efficacious than the commemoration of many intentions in the same Mass. This naturally led to a multiplication of Masses in order to give people an opportunity of offering them with special intentions, and in the ninth century Walafrid Strabo Strabo notices tells us that some of the faithful were in the habit of going from one Mass to another in order to assist at as many Masses as they had intentions to present.† As a result of this, many priests were in the habit of saying two or three Masses a day in order to satisfy the mystica consecratur in memoriam pro nobis Dominicæ passionis" (S. Isidore Hispal., Etymol., 1. vi., c. xix.). Kidd, in his The Later Medieval Doctrine of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, p. 43, quoting from Vacant, p. 26, gives this reference as l. v., c. xix. In Vacant, p. 26, it is 1. iv., c. xix., but on p. 23 he quotes it correctly as 1. vi., as it is in the Paris edition of 1601, which we use. In this place other definitions of the word "sacrifice" are found, and, indeed, that part of the chapter which refers to the Eucharist deserves to be read. In cent. IX. an increase in the number of Masses. * Hefele, vol. iv., p. 411. † Strabo, De Rebus Eccles., pt. i., c. xxii. demands of the faithful, and also for their own intentions. In the beginning of the eleventh century this practice had become so much abused that it was forbidden, or at least regulated, by the decrees of several local Councils.† The Euchar cent. IX.: Paschasius, The ninth century witnessed unusual literary activity in regard to the Holy Eucharist, especially in the istic writers of writings of Amalarius and his opponent Florus, the Amalarius, Deacon of Lyons; Paschasius Radbertus and his ad- Florus, versary, Ratramnus, the monk of Corbey; Walafrid Strabo, Strabo and Rabanus Maurus. Amalarius was the first Rabanus. who treated the liturgy as mystically setting forth the Passion of our LORD, and so laid the foundation for the mystical writers of the twelfth century. new current sets in, mystical rather than About this time we observe the setting in of a new In cent. IX. a current of opinion, flowing side by side with the prevailing theory of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, which, as we have said, viewed it in its effects rather than in its theological, essential character. The new current was mystical rather than theological, and while at first in conflict with the theological conception of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, as evidenced by the controversy between Amalarius and Florus, the two were harmonized in the writings of Paschasius Radbertus. This new current of thought was the result of the resulting from impetus given to liturgical study. It endeavoured to * Strabo., De Rebus Eccles., pt. i., c. xxi. †The Council of Seligenstadt (1022) forbade priests saying more than three Masses a day; and later they were forbidden to say more than one Mass, unless in exceptional cases. Cf. Alexander II. (A.D. 1065), Decret., 3 p., De Consecratione, Cap. liii.; Innocent III. (1212), Decret., 1. iii., tit. xli., c. 3; Council of Westminster (1199), Canon 2; of Oxford (1222), Canon 6; of Treves (1227), Canons 3 and 9; of Rouen (1231), Canon 12; of Tarragona (1239), Canon 6. liturgical and attempting to find in the liturgy itself the image of the Passion. Amalarius its source. His exposition of the liturgy. find in the liturgical services the image of the Passion, and therefore the accomplishment of S. Paul's words, As often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye do shew the LORD'S Death till He come." The writers of this school considered these words as a precept enjoined especially upon the priest who celebrated, to make remembrance of our LORD's Passion in the Mass; and they thought that the Church, having instituted and arranged the ceremonies and prayers which precede and follow the Consecration, intended by them to aid the priest to fulfil this precept. They were therefore led to seek in the ceremonies of the Mass a picture intended to recall the Death, and even the Life of our LORD JESUS CHRIST. Amalarius (ob. 837), who was distinctly the leader in this new method of regarding the Eucharist, sketches the picture somewhat as follows: The Introit and the Kyrie, he says, remind us of the preparation by the Prophets of the Old Testament for the coming of the Messiah. The Gloria in Excelsis tells of the Birth of CHRIST; the Epistle, of the preaching of S. John the Baptist; the Gospel, of the preaching of our LORD Himself. The Offertory represents His triumphal entrance into Jerusalem; the Preface, the hymn which was sung after the Institution and before proceeding to Gethsemane. The Te igitur he takes of the Prayer in the Garden of Olives; the Consecration, of the Crucifixion; the Unde et memores, of the elevation of the Cross. According to his view, the Nobis quoque peccatoribus, pronounced with a loud voice in the midst. of the silence of the Canon, expresses the cry of the dying LORD. By the number seven, which corresponds to the sabbath, the petitions of the Paternoster tell of the rest of His Burial. The particle of the Host min gled with the Wine after the fraction symbolizes the Resurrection, which reunites His Soul to His Body; and the final benediction recalls that blessing which JESUS gave to His Apostles at His Ascension.* When, however, Amalarius dealt with the question His serious of the mode of our LORD's Presence at the same time theological in heaven and in the Eucharist, he fell into grievous error. errors. For he taught that our LORD'S glorious Body Stercorianism, divides and multiplies Itself in different Bodies as new Hosts are consecrated. He even speculated whether after the Communion our LORD'S Body re-ascended to heaven, or remained in our bodies until their burial, or whether It passed away in the processes of digestion.† These gross views were branded with the name of Stercorianism. He also fell into another error when trying to find the signification of the three fragments into which the priest after the Consecration divides the Host. For Amalarius says that the Body of JESUS CHRIST has a triple form: the Body born of the Blessed Virgin and raised from the dead being represented by the fragment placed in the chalice; the Body which is on earth, represented by the fragment which serves. for the Communion of the priest and people; and finally, the Body which lies in the sepulchre, represented by the third fragment, which is left upon the altar for the reservation for the sick. I In a later work Amalarius makes no reference to this triple Body of JESUS CHRIST, but teaches that the fraction of the Host recalls the appearance to the disciples at * Amal., De Eccles. Offic., 1. iii. Migne, P. L., tom. 105, col. 986-1242. † Amal., Epist. ad Gunther, col. 1336-1339. Amal., De Offic., 1. iii., c. xxxv., col. 1154. and the triple form of our LORD'S Body. |