But the NT itself bears witness to the dangers which such a meal ran of degenerating into licence. St. Paul had to check this at Corinth, and perhaps also at Ephesus (Eph 5'*:). St. Peter mentions the presence of immoral men degrading the feast into a banquet (συνευωχούμενοι). The heathen were not slow to exaggerate this, and to accuse the Christians of wild licence and immorality. Hence in the course of the 2nd cent., throughout many parts of the Christian Church, the Agape was separated from the Eucharist, the former being Rented in the evening, tbe latter in the morn- ing. This was already the case in Bithynia at the time of Pliny’s letter to Trajan (Zp. 96), and the Agape was dropped there owing to Trajan’s edict against sodalitates. Justin Martyr (Apol. i. 67) describes the Eucharist without any refer- ence to the Agape; Tertullian (Apol. 39) describes the Agape without any reference to the Eucharist, and speaks of the Eucharist as celebrated before daylight (de Corona, c. 3). At Alexandria the connexion of the two, at any rate on some occasions, is found much later (cf. Socrates, HE y. 22), and the Agape took two forms there: either it retained the old idea of a common meal in the church,
and tended at Alexandria to become an elaborate banquet ; or it took the form of a dinner for the poor given by a richer brother at his own louse, and apparently it was then called δοχή rather than Agape (Bigg, Christian Platonists, pp. 102-105). By the time of Sc. Augustine it was little more than a dole for the poor (c. Faustum, xx, 20; et.
Canons of Hippolytus, Xxxi.-xXXx¥ Che changes
158 LOVINGKINDNESS
in the observance of the Agape may be compared
with those in the Roman ‘sportula.’ For the later history in which the meal was first banished from the churches and then entirely disused, the reader is referred to Smith’s Dictionary of Christian Antiquities. The institution has left its per- manent mark in two ways upon the Christian Church: first, in all acts of charity that take the form of entertainment of the poor; and, secondly, in certain points of ritual connected with the Eucharist, such as the offertory, the washing of hands, the kiss of peace, and in the Oriental Church the distribution among the poor of bread which had been blessed but not consecrated. The Methodist ‘ Love-feasts’ were a deliberate attempt on Wesley’s part to revive the apostolic practice. LireratTure.—Lightfoot, Ignatius, i. 52 note, 400ff., ii. 87, 227, 312, 313, iii. 457f.; S. Chrysostom on 1Co 11; Suicer, Thesaurus, 8.v.; Bingham, Christian Antiquities, xv. 7; Bp. John Wordsworth, Uke Holy Communion, pp. 44-46, 57-60; Uhlhorn, Christian Charity in the Ancient Church; Spitta, Zur Geschichte u. Litt. des Urchristenthums, i. (Gottingen, 1893); Zahn in Herzog’s RE3, 8.0. ‘Agapen’; Brightman, Liturgies, Eastern and Western. W. Lock.
LOVINGKINDNESS.—We owe this beautiful word to Coverdale. His use of it is somewhat capricious, and in that respect he has been imitated by all subsequent versions until we come to the American Revised Version. The Heb. word so translated (107 hesed) is used of God’s love to man, and less frequently of man’s love to man. It is disputed whether it also denotes man’s love to God. The passages relied on for the last meaning are Jer 2?, FTos 6%: 8, together with Is 57! men of piety, and 2 Ch 32% 35°, Neh 13" pious acts. The Oxf. Heb. Lex. favours the sense of piety to God in all these places. It is only when the word means God’s love to man that it was translated by Coverdale (followed by AV) ‘lovingkindness,’ and that was well, for, as Driver says, that term is too strong to be used generally of men. But unfortunately it is only some of the passages with that meaning that have been so translated, chiefly in the Psalter, the other renderings in AV being ‘mercy’ (Gn 191° 24°7 321°, Ex 1513 208 347, Nu 1418, Dt 5 7912 9S 7159951 1 K 8% 1 Ch 16% 41 1718. 2 Ch 538 gi. 42 78-6 9021, Kzr 911 723 99, Neh 1° 982 13°) Ps 57 64135 18° 217 938 957.10 377-16 3910 995. 18. 32 365 4426 598 573-10 5g10. 16. 17 617 6913 GG2 6018 778 557-10 QG5: 18-15 901]. 214. 24.28 0014. 9418 983 1005 1011 103% 11- 17 106): 7.45 107! 1084 10921. 26 115! 118}: 2. 3. 4. 29 1191. 64- 124 1307 136]- 3- 8. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10. 11. 12. 18, 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 31. 22. 38, 24. 25.28 1388 14319 1458 1470, Pr 168, Is 55%, Jer 3311, La 37%, Dn 94, Mic 738°); ‘goodness’ (Ex 348, Ps 33° 52! 1078: 15-21-81 1443). « kindness’ (Ps 31%, Jon 435); ‘merciful kindness’ (Ps 117? 119%), The RV has made but few changes. It has preferred ‘lovingkindness’ to ‘merey’ in 28S 2251, Ps 57 64 18 217 257- 10 3116 365 44°6 617 143”, to ‘goodness’ in Ps 33°, to ‘kindness’ in Ps 8151, to ‘merciful kindness’ in Ps 11978, and once it goes the other way, ὉΠ ΒΒ ΕΊΤΕ ‘lovingkindnesses’ in Ps 89 into ‘mercies.’ But the Amer. Revisers have chosen ‘lovingkindness’ for all the passages in which the meaning is God’s love to man, and for these only. See their note on this word under ‘Classes of Passages’ in the Appendix to the English RV.