3. Incense and the sign of the cross.-The use of incense in connection with the sacrament was unknown in the church until the time of Gregory the Great, in the latter part of the sixth century. After this period it became prevalent in the churches. It was one of a multitude of perversions which resulted from the attempt to make the sacrificial rites of the Jewish dispensation a pattern and type of the ordinances of the Christian church.

6

The signing of the cross has a higher antiquity. It is spoken of by Basil, Chrysostom, and Augustin,' and is distinctly mentioned in the Apostolical Constitutions as a part of the sacramental service. This ceremony may have been the means of exciting the devotion and confirming the faith of the early Christians, but it became the occasion of such superstition that it is deservedly neglected in Protestant churches. The Roman missal directs the use of this sign no less than fifty-five times.

§ 13. OF THE AGAPE, OR FEASTS OF CHARITY.

THESE feasts were usually celebrated in connection with the Lord's supper; but not as a necessary part of it. From their connection with this ordinance, the following account of them is inserted in this place.

The history of the common meals or feasts in the church, called agapæ, (ayaлai, more frequently than in the singular, ȧуαлn,) is in many respects obscure. It appears that they were not independent rites, but always connected with some act or office of public worship. When they were celebrated in connection with the Lord's supper, they seem to have taken place before the administration of that sacrament, in conformity with the circumstances of the original institution, which took place "after supper." 1 Cor. xi. 25. This arrangement is supposed to have led to the disorders which St. Paul so sharply reproved in the Corinthian church; and the inconvenience of it becoming generally manifest, it was soon made the practice of the church to celebrate the Lord's supper first, and even to dispense with attendance at the feast which followed, although all Christians were required to contribute provisions for it, according to their ability.1

But, even under these altered circumstances, the love-feasts were frequently attended with intemperance, and other serious disorders, which form subjects of grave complaint in the writings of the fathers. This may perhaps be reckoned among the causes of the

change in the time of celebrating the Lord's supper, already mentioned, from the evening to the early part of the morning. And hence it was, that afterward the holding of agape within the churches was forbidden. And by this regulation the agape became entirely distinct from the eucharist, which continued to be publicly celebrated in the church.

1. Origin of the name and of the custom.-The Greek word agapæ, ȧɣáлŋ, which signifies love, or charity, is used in ecclesiastical antiquities to denote a certain feast, of which all members of the church, of whatever rank or condition, partook together; intended to denote and cherish those dispositions of brotherly love and affection which the gospel prescribes to the disciples of Jesus. In the New Testament, the word occurs only once in this sense of feast of charity, or love-feast, namely in the Epistle of St. Jude, verse 12, and there it is found in the plural number; but the observance itself is alluded to in the sacred records, under other names, as meat, tables. Acts ii. 46; vi. 2. The word was retained by ecclesiastical writers, but not to the exclusion of other significant appellations; e. g. оνμлóσia, banquets; xoivai τρáñeα, public tables; xoiai EoTiaσeis, public feasts; deiлva xová, public suppers. This use of the term dɣáл is not found in the writings of any profane authors before the Christian era; but it occurs in the works of Plutarch and Celsus, who doubtless borrowed it from the Christians.

It is certain that the feast of charity was celebrated in the earliest period of the Christian church. See Acts ii. 46; vi. 2; 1 Cor. xi. 16-34. Some writers suppose that this custom had its remote origin in the practice of the heathen; while others regard it as derived from the Jewish synagogue. But it is perhaps still more probable that it originated simply in the circumstances of our Lord's last supper with his disciples; or that, at all events, it is to be attributed entirely to the genius of a religion which is eminently a bond of brotherly union and concord among its sincere professors. After the example of the Jewish passover, and of the original institution, the Lord's supper was accordingly at first united with a social meal. Both constituted a whole, representing a communion of the faithful with their Lord, and their brotherly communion with one another; both together were called the supper of the Lord, (δεῖπνον τοῦ κυρίου, δεῖπνον κυριακόν,) the supper of love, (ἀγάπη.) There was a daily celebration of this Christian communion in the first church at Jerusalem; the phrase xλậv àρtov,

breaking of bread, in Acts ii. 46, is most probably to be understood of them both together. In like manner we find them both united in the first church at Corinth; and so it probably was with the innocent, simple meal of the Christians of which Pliny speaks, in his report to the emperor Trajan. On the contrary, in the description given by Justin Martyr, we find the celebration of the supper entirely separated from those feasts of brotherly love, if indeed they still continued to exist in those churches which he had in view. This separation was occasioned partly by irregularities similar to those which had arisen in the Corinthian church, when the spirit that prevailed in these feasts became unsuited to the holy rite which followed, and partly by local circumstances, which prevented generally the institution of such social meals. In truth, these meals were especially calculated to excite the jealousy of the heathen, and gave birth to the strangest and most malicious reports,—a circumstance which may have early led to their abolition or less frequent observance.

We now speak first of these feasts of brotherly love, as they were afterward, when, separated from the supper of the Lord, they went under the particular name of agapæ, (άɣáлα.) At these, all distinctions of earthly condition and rank were to disappear in Christ. All were to be one in the Lord; rich and poor, high and low, masters and servants, were to eat together at a common table. We have the description of such a feast of agape by Tertullian.* (Already cited, p. 274.)

2. Mode of celebration.-In the earliest accounts which have come down to us, we find that the bishop or presbyter presided at these feasts. It does not appear whether the food was dressed in the place appointed for the celebration of the feast, or was previously prepared by individual members of the church at their own homes; but perhaps either of these plans was adopted indifferently, according to circumstances. Before eating, the guests washed their hands; and a public prayer was offered up. A portion of Scripture was then read, and the president proposed some questions upon it, which were answered by the persons present. After this, any accounts which had been received respecting the affairs of other churches were recited; for, at that time, such accounts were regularly transmitted from one community to another, by means of which all Christians became acquainted with the history and condition of the whole body, and were thus enabled to sympathize with, and in many cases to assist each other. Letters from bishops and other

6

eminent members of the church, together with the Acts of the Martyrs, were also recited on this occasion; and hymns or psalms. were sung. At the close of the feast, money was also collected for the benefit of widows and orphans, the poor, prisoners, and persons who had suffered shipwreck. Before the meeting broke up, all the members of the church embraced each other, in token of mutual brotherly love; and the whole ceremony was concluded with a philanthropic prayer.7

As the number of Christians increased, various deviations from the original practice of celebration occurred, which called for the censure of the governors of the church. In consequence of these irregularities, it was appointed that the president should deliver to each guest his portion separately, and that the larger portions should be distributed among the presbyters, deacons, and other officers of the church.

9

While the church was exposed to persecution, these feasts were not only conducted with regularity and good order, but were made subservient to Christian edification, and to the promotion of brotherly love, and of that kind of concord and union which was specially demanded by the circumstances of the times. None but full members of the church were allowed to be present; catechumens, penitents, Jews, and heathens, being carefully excluded.10 A custom of admitting baptized children, which was introduced at an early period, was afterward abandoned as inconvenient."

3. Time and Place of Celebration.-Time of day.-These feasts, as well as all Christian assemblies, were held, at first, whenever and wherever opportunity would permit, consistently with safety. The passages of the New Testament which refer to the agapæ afford no intimation of the time of day in which they were celebrated, unless indeed we regard Acts xx. 7, as supplying some information on this point. From Tertullian it would appear that they were held in the night; for he calls them cœnæ and cœnulæ, in contradistinction to prandia; and this writer gives us to understand that lights were required in the place in which the feast was made. But it is probable that this nocturnal celebration was more a matter of necessity than of choice.

According to the account of Pliny in his letter to Trajan, it would seem that in his time (in Bithynia, at least) these feasts were held in the daytime.12

On the whole, it may be concluded that the nature of the case did not permit the uniform observance of any fixed hour or time of

day for the celebration of this feast, during the earliest period of the church, while it was exposed to persecution.

Day of the week.-These feasts were ordinarily held on the first day of the week, or Sunday; but the celebration does not appear to have been exclusively confined to that day.13

Place of meeting.-At first, the agape were celebrated in private houses, or in other retired places, in which the Christians met for the purpose of religious worship. After the erection of churches, these feasts were held within their walls; until, abuses having occurred which rendered the observance inconsistent with the sanctity of such places, this practice was forbidden. In the middle of the fourth century, the Council of Laodicea enacted "that agapæ should not be celebrated in churches;" a prohibition which was repeated by the Council of Carthage, in the year 391; and was afterward strictly enjoined during the sixth and seventh ceturies.14 By the efforts of Gregory of Neocæsarea, Chrysostom, and others, a custom was generally established of holding the agapæ only under trees, or some other shelter, in the neighbourhood of the churches; and from that time the clergy and other principal members of the church were recommended to withdraw from them altogether.

In the early church, it was usual to celebrate agapæ on the festivals of martyrs, agape natalitia, at their tombs; a practice to which reference is made in the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, concerning the martyrdom of Polycarp.15

These feasts were sometimes celebrated on a smaller scale, at marriages, agapæ connubiales, and funerals, agapæ funerales.

4. Abolition of the custom.-These agapæ lost by degrees their true original significancy, which it was impossible for them to retain except under the first simple relations of the communities. They became often a lifeless form, no longer animated by the original spirit of brotherly love, which removed all distinctions between men and united together all hearts as one. Many abuses crept into them, which furnished occasion for the maliciously disposed to present the whole solemnity in the most unfavourable light. As usually happens in such cases, some attributed undue importance to the dead form, as an opus operatum; others unjustly condemned the whole custom, without distinguishing the right use of it from its abuse; neither party being any longer capable of appreciating the simple, childlike spirit in which this festival had origi nated. Wealthy individuals of the church provided agapæ of this sort, and imagined they had done something peculiarly meritorious;