« PoprzedniaDalej »
was only intended to throw obloquy on the Spanish liturgy; for only a very short time before, A.D. 1064, three bishops, deputed by all the prelates of Spain, had attended the council of Mantua, and presented the Spanish or Mosarabic missal for the inspection of that council, and of Alexander the Third of Rome; by whom it was approved, and declared orthodox ". Roderic Ximenes, archbishop of Toledo, relates that the clergy and people of all Spain were in disturbance, at being compelled by the king Alphonso and the Roman legate to receive the Gallican office *; that is, the Roman, which had now been long used in Gaul, and was probably most familiarly known in Spain by the title of Gallican. However, the king at last succeeded in his design, (which had been chiefly instigated by the queen Constantia,) by threatening death and confiscation to all who opposed it; and then, according to Roderic, while all wept and lamented, it became a proverb, that "quo volunt reges vadunt leges." From this time the Mosarabic or Spanish liturgy became almost extinct, until, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, cardinal Ximenes endowed a college and chapel in
d Ibid. p. xliii.
e "Quia Ricardus legatus se gerebat in aliquibus minus caute-fuit ab Urbano summo pontifice revocatus; verum ante revocationem clerus et populus totius Hispanic turbatur, eo quod Gallicanum officium suscipere a legato et principe cogebantur." Roderic. Toletan. de Reb. Hist. lib. vi. c. 26.
f "Sed rex cum esset magnanimus, et suæ voluntatis
pertinax executor, nec miraculo territus, nec supplicatione suasus, voluit inclinari; sed mortis supplicia et direptionem minitans resistentibus, præcepit ut Gallicanum officium in omnibus regni sui finibus servaretur. Et tunc cunctis flentibus et dolentibus, inolevit proverbium : Quo volunt reges vadunt leges." Ibid.
Toledo, for the celebration of that ancient rite; and this is now perhaps the only place in Spain where the primitive liturgy of that country and of Gaul is in some degree preserved.
On examining the Mosarabic liturgy, it appears to have agreed almost exactly with the ancient Gallican rite". Much confusion has been caused by
not distinguishing between the Spanish liturgy and missal. The liturgy may be old, though many "missæ" may be modern; nay, all the prayers now existing in the missal may be modern, and yet the liturgy be most ancient. The number and order of the parts is that which gives us the characters of the liturgy; and on examining the remains of the ancient Spanish missal, we find that the liturgy accorded in these respects with the early Gallican. This uniformity is recognised in the Epistle of the emperor Charles the Bald to the clergy of Ravenna, in which he intimates that priests who came to him from Toledo in Spain had performed in his presence the ancient liturgy of the Gallican church, which had been abolished by his ancestor Charlemagne. This shews that in the ninth century the Spanish and the ancient Gallican liturgies were considered to have been the same. The Spanish liturgy was therefore different from the Roman in the ninth century. And it is plain also that this difference had existed since the sixth century; for Isidore, bishop of Seville, describes the liturgy so minutely,
8 Pinius ut supra, cap. viii. h Lesleus, in his preface to the Mosarabic missal, sect. v. traces the conformity of the Gallican and Mosarabic mis
sals; and section vi. refutes the arguments of those who deny that conformity.
i See this passage cited in sect. 9, note", p. 146.
as to leave no doubt that it was the same as that afterwards used in Spain, and very different from the Roman. And Vigilius of Rome, about A.D. 538, writing to Profuturus, bishop of Braga in Spain, on the subject of the liturgy, informed him, as if he had been ignorant on the subject, that at Rome they were always accustomed to consecrate the elements after the same tenor, or in the same words; and that on each feast day they made commemoration of the subject of that day, by subjoining certain collects, &c.: and, finally, that he might receive full information on the subject, he transcribed for Profuturus the Roman canon, and the collects &c. for Easter *. All this shews that the Roman liturgy was at that time not well known in Spain; and we may observe, with regard to the above passage, that it not only shews that the Roman liturgy was not used in Spain A.D. 538, but contains a sort of tacit allusion to the ancient Roman and Spanish modes of celebrating the liturgy. For when it is said by Vigilius, that they always consecrated in the same manner, and when he adds the canonical prayer to his letter, we see a distinct reference to the Roman custom of always using the same canon, and only admitting variety in the prefaces, collects, &c. While, on the other hand, we know that the Spanish and Gallican churches varied the canon, as well as the prefaces and collects, for almost every festival; which seems evidently to be alluded to.
If then it appears that in the sixth century the Spanish churches had their liturgy distinct from the
Isidor. Hispalens. de Eccl. Offie. lib. i. c. 11–15.
k Cited above in note i of section 6,
Roman, we are justified in thinking that they had used the same from a period of remote antiquity. There was no supreme power over them, which was likely to have introduced this liturgy at a recent period. The patriarchs of Rome had no right to introduce any liturgy into the Spanish church; and even supposing that they had, would they have introduced one entirely different from their own1? Nor have we any reason to think that the oriental liturgy was brought from Constantinople by the Goths, when they invaded Spain, as Pinius would contend". For there is no reason to suppose that the bishops of Spain would have relinquished their original liturgy, to adopt another which was introduced by the barbarian invaders of their country; nor is there, as far as I am aware, any proof that the Goths who invaded Spain had received Christianity and a liturgy in the east; and, finally, the liturgy of Spain does not seem to have been derived from the oriental formularies, but to have accorded with the Gallican. Neither have we any reason to think that the rites of the Gallican church were imposed on that of Spain; or that the latter adopted the rites of the former, at any period approaching towards the sixth century. We have no trace in history or tradition of such an approximation. And, in fact, Isidore of Seville, in the sixth century, attributed the origin of the Spanish liturgy to St. Peter"; which shews that he considered it of the
1 Lesleus, Præfat. Missal. Mosarab. sect. x. proves at length that the Roman was not the original liturgy of Spain.
m Pinius, ut supra, cap. ii.
"Ordo autem missæ vel orationum, quibus oblata Deo sacrificia consecrantur, primum
most remote antiquity, and had little idea of its having been derived from the Gallican.
It is however apparent that this liturgy must have been derived from the Gallican at a most remote period, simply from combining the fact of the substantial identity of both, with their circumstantial variation, and the ancient independence of the two churches. If we regard the geographical position of the two countries, we perceive that Gaul was more likely to receive the Christian faith at an early period than Spain; and, in fact, we have more ancient accounts of churches and bishops in the former than in the latter country. It is true that St. Paul is said by many ecclesiastical writers to have visited Spain; that an inscription (of questionable authenticity however) records the persecutions inflicted on Christians in that country in the time of Nero; that Irenæus, Tertullian, and Cyprian, speak of Christians in Spain: but it seems that religion was for some time only in an infant state there. The earliest mention of Spanish bishops occurs in the writings of Cyprian, nearly a hundred years after the time of Pothinus, bishop of Lyons. The first Spanish martyr of whom we have any authentic account, is Fructuosus of Tarragona, who suffered in the time of Decius, about A.D. 259. If we take probability for our guide, in the absence of certainty, we may say, that the chief missionaries came from Gaul to Spain, and with the ecclesiastical orders introduced the liturgy of their own
a Sancto Petro est institutus, cujus celebrationem uno eodemque modo universus peragit orbis." Isidor. Hisp. de
Eccl. Off. lib. i. c. 15.
• Cyprian. Epist. lxvii. edit. Fell. p. 170.
P Ruinart, Acta Martyrum, p. 219.