The First Book of Edward, 1001; the Unction of Scripture, 1002, 3; medieval practice, 1003-7; Communion before Unction, 1007, 8; Unction before Communion, 1008-10; The first Reformed Book, 1016-8; reservation in both kinds, This necessary at first, 1026-9; but discouraged except in PART I. CHAPTER I. Of the Names of this Holy Sacrament. SECTION I.-The Title of the Office. * The Order for the Administration of the Lord's Supper, or Holy Communion. с THE ORDER, etc.]-This heading was prefixed at the Revision of 1552. The Liturgy of 1549 was entitled, "The Supper of the Lord, and the Holy Communion, commonly called the Mass." Mass is merely the English corruption of the Latin word Missa; and "by Missa," observes Florus1 Diaconus, A.D. 840, 1 Expos. Missæ, § 92, col. 72; Par. 1852. This is the derivation accepted by J. S. Durantus (De Rit. Eccl. L. ii. c. i. p. 145; Lugd. 1715), by Bona (Rerum Liturgicarum, L. i. c. i. n. vi.), by Gavanti and Merati (Thesaur. Sacr. Rit. P. i. Rub. Gen. Missæ), by Le Brun (Explication de la Messe, tome i. p. 2; Liége, 1771), by Grancolas (Les Anciennes Liturgies, p. 7; Par. 1697), and in short by all the chief liturgists. Some, how. ever, as Reuchlin, Baronius, Genebrard, De Sainctes, etc. (see Merati u.8.), have derived missa from the Hebrew missah, which they supposed to mean an oblation in Deut. xvi. 10. Its real meaning is enough. The English version there reads “a tribute (marg. sufficiency) of a freewill offering." For this S. Jerome had merely the words oblationem spontaneam, not rendering the word missah at all. Later writers, comparing his version with the Hebrew, imagined that he had rendered missah by oblationem, whereas the single word nidbath that follows, is the equivalent to his two words, oblationem spontaneam. This curious mistake ought not to have survived its exposure by Picherellus (born in 1500); but unfortunately his Dissertatio de Missa only existed in Ms. before the year 1629. See cap. i. Opp. p. 87. De l'Aubespine, in his "Ancienne Police sur Administration, etc., de l'Eucharistie" (L. ii. c. iii. p. 235, ad fin. Optati de Schism. Donat.; Par. 1679), advocates at great length a very singular opinion with regard to the word Mass. Because Messe, in Germany, etc., means a fair, i.e. an assemblage of the people for purposes of merchandise, etc., he conceived that the celebration was so called from its drawing people together in the same manner (compare the "Holy Fair" of Scotland). But the truth is that a fair was called Messe because it nothing else is meant than dismissal, i.e. release, which, the celebration being over, the Deacon then announces when the people are dismissed from the solemn observance. Whence the Canons speak also of the Mass of the Catechumens, when, after the reading of the Gospel, the sacred Mysteries begin to be celebrated, at which it is lawful for no one to be present unless regenerated in the font of baptism. For then, at the cry of the Deacon, the said Catechumens were sent away-that is, were dismissed and put out. The Mass (missa, dismissal) of the Catechumens, therefore, took place before the celebration of the Sacrament; the Mass [dismissal] of the Faithful takes place after the Consecration and Communion." The formula which has for many centuries been generally used by the Priest or his Deacon at the conclusion of the Roman Mass is Ite; Missa est;-Depart; it is the dismissal. It cannot be shown that the same words were at any time addressed to the Catechumens or other non-communicants, when it was time for them to leave the church; but it is certain that their dismissal was called their Missa or Mass, as by S. Augustine,2 A.D. 396, by Cassian, 424, the Council of Valentia, 524, and many others. originated in a religious festival; as in Italy any crowd is called sagra, which is literally a consecration, great numbers often assembling on such occasions. Every Church Festival was called a Mass from the high celebration that took place. Witness Christmas, Childermas, Martinmas, etc. Traders brought their goods for sale to gatherings instituted for a religious purpose. A conjecture still less plausible is that of Genebrard (De Liturgia Apost. c. vii. in Bona, L. i. c. i. n. iii.), that Missa comes from the Greek μúnois, initiation, a word cognate to mystery. 1 Missa is by some supposed to be a participle, and Ecclesia is supplied; but it is clearly a noun substantive, and equivalent to missio. Similarly, ascensa for ascensio, accessa for accessio, ulta for ultio, remissa for remissio, collecta for collectio, proba for probatio, confessa for confessio, etc. It often occurs in the sense of dismissal in the writings of Cassian, A.D. 424; e.g. of one coming to the chapel after the service has begun,-"Congregationis missam, stans præ foribus, præstolatur" (De Cœnob. Instit. L. iii. c. vii. p. 57; Atreb. 1628. See the note of Gazæus in L. ii. c. vii. p. 27). It was used of the formal dismissal of secular as well as religious assemblies: -"In ecclesiis, palatiisque, sive prætoriis, missa fieri pronunciatur, cum populus ab observatione dimittitur." Avit. Vienn. A.D. 490; Ep. i. Migne, Patrol. tom. lix. col. 189. Ecce post Sermonem fit missa catechumenis; manebunt fideles. Serm. xlix. c. viii. tom. vii. col. 275; Venet. 1762. 3 Cœnob. Instit. L. xi. c. xv. p. 252. Here the Deacon, whose duty it was to dismiss the Catechumens, is said missam Catechumenis celebrare—a singular phrase, the use of which, when a Priest gave the warning, would certainly favour the vulgar notion that by missa the service itself was meant. 4 Can. i. Labb. Conc. tom. iv. col. 1617. Evangelia ante . . . Missam catechumenorum . . . legantur. Comp. the citation by Burchard, col. 1620. And as their Missa was the signal for the commencement of that part of the Liturgy which only the faithful could attend, the ill-instructed easily fell into the mistake of applying the word, as a name, to that office itself. In Spain, from the same cause, the name of Missa was given to an exhortation (for such it was, though called a prayer) addressed to the faithful very soon after the departure of the Catechumens.1 In both cases the usage must have arisen from popular ignorance, although in both it soon obtained a footing in the writings of approved authors, and at length in the Ritual itself. 2 The earliest instance of the use of this name for the Holy Eucharist occurs in an epistle of S. Ambrose, A.D. 385:"I began to perform Mass." It is not found in the earliest Roman Sacramentary, known by the name of Leo; but is of constant occurrence in the revised edition of it ascribed to Gelasius. By the end of the sixth century it was in constant use as the ordinary designation of this Sacrament.3 From the foregoing account of the word Mass, it will be inferred that the Revisers of 1552 were justified in their disuse of it. It is not found in Holy Scripture, it was 1 See Miss. Mozarab. Leslie, pp. 8, 17, 21, etc. It is called by S. Isidore of Seville, "the prayer of admonition;" whence we may infer that the usage was later than the 6th century. De Eccl. Offic. L. i. c. 15 ; Hittorp. col. 188; Par. 1610. In Gaul, the same prefatory exhortation was also called missa; though I believe but one instance of it can now be pointed out, viz., in the Sacramentary found by Mabillon at Bobio. See his Muse. Ital. tom. i. p. 373. The series of variable collects, etc., proper to any festival, is also called the "mass " of that day in the ancient Sacramentaries. See the Gelasian, Gregorian, Gothic, etc., passim, in Muratori, Liturgia Romana Vetus; Venet. 1748. From this doubtless it was that the word came to denote a festival. Thus, Spatium usque ad Missam S. Martini dare decrevimus. Capitularia Regum Francorum (ed. Baluz. ; Paris. 1677), L. ii. c. xviii. tom. i. col. 741. Sim. Ad Missam S. Andreæ, Post Missam S. Johannis, L. iii. c. xxiii. col. 758. The name was also given to any office of Prayer. Thus the Council of Agde, a.d. 506, speaks of "the Morning and Evening Masses;" i.e. Matins and Evensong. Can. xxx. Labb. iv. col. 1388. It was also applied to the proper lessons read at the celebration, and thence to the proper lessons used at any office. Thus in the Regula ad Monachos of S. Cæsarius, c. 21: "Omni Dominica sex Missas facite. Prima Missa semper Resurrectio legatur. . . Perfectis Missis dicite matutinos." Codex Regul. Holsten. P. ii. p. 56. Sim. in the Rule of St. Aurelian : Facite sex Missas de Isaia Propheta, Ordo Reg. insert. ibid. p. 68. C. XX. etc. 2 Ep. xx. ad Sor. c. 4; tom. vi. p. 45; Venet. 1781. 3 We find it in the writings, e.g. of S. Cæsarius in Gaul, a.d. 502, Hom. viii. p. 58 (Baluz.); and of Cassiodorus in Italy, 514, in Ps. xxv. v. 7, tom. ii. p. 80; in Ps. xxxiii. at end, p. 106; Ven. 1729. Later in this century it is the common word, used passim by Gregory of Tours, 575, and his namesake at Rome, 595. unknown to the first ages of the Church, and it is unmeaning and inappropriate as a name of the Sacrament to which it had accidentally attached itself. b THE LORD'S SUPPER.]-The Church has learnt this name from S. Paul, who, as S. Augustine observes, "in saying, When ye come together into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper,' calls the reception itself of the Eucharist, the Lord's Supper.' "2 So also Theodoret,3 "He calls the Master's Sacrament [or mystery] the Lord's Supper." Accordingly we find S. Augustine using the name as if it were familiar and well understood:-"In the eastern parts most persons do not communicate at the Lord's Supper every day." And similarly S. Basil, who, in reply to the question, "Whether it is right for the Oblation to take place in a common house," infers from S. Paul's reproof of the Corinthians that we ought neither to eat and drink a common supper in church, nor to degrade the Lord's Supper [by celebrating it] in a house." It seems most probable that S. Paul was thinking of the Eucharist only, as these writers evidently suppose, when he spoke of the Lord's Supper; for after the rebuke partly cited above, he immediately proceeds to an account of the institution of the Sacrament:-" For I have received of the Lord," etc. The propriety of the name would, however, be unquestionable, even if it could be shown that he rather gave it to the combined celebration of the Love-feast and the Communion; for if his argument does not prove that the "Lord's Supper" was neither more nor less than the Eucharist, it certainly implies that the latter was the principal part of the whole solemnity to which he refers; in which case it would naturally and properly retain the name of the Lord's Supper when the less important part was separated from it or abolished. But even if we had no Scriptural warrant for it, the appellation would, nevertheless, have been most suitable, "taking us back as it does (the thought is S. Chrysostom's) to the evening in which Christ delivered the awful mysteries." "The Lord's Supper," observes another,8 "ought to be common to all. But it is 1 Cor. xi. 20. 6 2 Ep. liv. c. 7; tom. ii. col. 168. 3 Comment. in Ep. i. ad Cor. (xi. 20), p. 213; Oxf. 1852. * De Serm. Dom., L. ii. c. 7, tom. iv. col. 276. 5 Regulæ Brevius Tract., N. cccx. Opp. tom. ii. p. 525; Par. 1722. 6 1 Cor. xi. 23. 7 Hom. xxvii. in 1 Cor. (x. 20), § 2, tom. x. p. 285; Par. 1837. 8 Comment. in 1 Cor. xi. 20, Hieronymo ascr. Opp. ed. Ben., tom. v. col. 997. |