For the 3rd and 4th cents., the Church Orders, some of which liave only lately come to light, and the early liidnscalia (i.e. the work as it was before it was incorporated in the Apostolic Constitutions, and as we have it, for example, in the Verrnia Latin Fragments, edited by Dr. Hauler) throw some light on the question of the Lord's Day. The Christians are bidden ' on the Lord's Day (die dominica), putting aside everything,' to assemble at church (Hauler, p. 44). "The fragment breaks off in the middle of a sentence explaining the object of Sunday churchgoin"; ('audire salutare uerbuni et nutriri ab . . . ') ; but we can fill the gap from other forms of the Didascalia, such as the Syriac edited by Mrs. Gibson, from which we see tfi»t the Eucharist is being spoken of (' be nourished with the divine food whicli endureth for
CALENDAR, THE CHRISTIAN
CALENDAR, THE CHRISTIAN 253
ever,' Gibson, ch. xiii.). This appears to come from the original Didascalla, and it is emphatic- ally said that the Lord's Day is the great time for the Christian asseniljly, for prayer, Eucharist, and instruction ; and tliis emphasis is all tlie greater as it was not yet customary to have public daily prayers for all men. But about A.D. 375 the writer of the Apuxliilir Constitutions, in adapting the Di(liisr,ii;,i. ;ili,is this direction for Sunday
worshiji 1(1 :i <■ Kind to assemble twice daily,
morning; niid i^iiiin- (ii. 59). In the Testament of our Lord (c X*\r]. the way is being felt towards public daily service liy providing daily forms for the clergy and tlie presbyteresses, with whom the devout nii^ht be Invited to join [see, further, on daily service, Wordsworth's Ministry of Grace, ch. vi. ; and Cooper and Maclean's Testament of our Lord, p. 189]. We may then .say that until the latter part of the 4th cent. Sunday was the only regular and universal day for Christian assemblies. There is a possible local and temporary exception in the Hippolytean Canons (§ 217, ed. Achelis), which command daily service ; but some have concluded that this is an interpolation, as it is thought to be in contradiction to § 226. These Canons allow a bishop to celebrate the Eucharist when he pleases. And again, a daily celebration of the Eucharist is perhaps foimd in Cyprian {de Orat. Dom. 18). But no further trace of this is found till the latter part of the 4th centuiy. The result arrived at does not mean, however, that the Chris- tians were not bidden to pray daily ; from a very early period, certainly from about A.D. 200 on- wards, regular daily hours of prayer were pre- scribed {e.g. Can. Hippol. % 223 ft".). But private prayers are here meant, even though sometimes they were said in church. For other synaxcs in the week, see below (§§ 2, 3).
The Lord's Day was the usiial day for the ordina- tion or consecration of a bishop ; so the older Didascalia in Mrs. Gibson's form, § iii. [but this is an interpolation from one of tlie following books], the Egyptian Church. Order (cd. Tattiiiii, i? 31), the Apostolic Consfit i(t'('iri\ (viii. 41, ;niil (lii^ Trstu mrnt Of our Lord (i. lill: .-Um. in th,' A7 /-,../-/> Church 0»-a!er-(§ 21), acconliH- l„ Adidis, Ih.Mv^h Ludolf (ad swam Hist. .-Kthwp. CuuiuicuL p. 323) has 'in die sabbati.' The Canons of Hippolytus perhaps mention Saturday, though Achelis gives 'in ea . . . hebdomade ' ; but the Arabic for ' Saturday ' and 'week' are pronounced alike (see Rahmani, Test. D. N. Jesii Christi, p. xxxvi).
The rest on the Lord's cbiy appears (especially until the time of Constantinc) to have been mainly to allow of church-going. But in the edict of Constantine in 321, the magistrates and people in cities are bidden to rest, and all worksliops are directed to be closed ' on the venerable day of the sun ' ; while no such obligation is laid on those engaged in agricultural pursuits. Whatever the motive of the emperor in making this decree may have been (and this is disputed), it doubtless did much to bring about a weekly holiday on the liord's Day.
2. Wednesday and Friday fasts.— Almost from the beginning we can trace an observance of these two days for the purpose of fasting. In this way the early Christians interpreted our Lord's words in Mt 9'^ that they sliould fast when the bride- groom should be taken av ay from them ; though, as we shall see, some found a more particular fulfilment of these words in the fast before Easter. The reason why Wednesday and Friday were chosen is not entirely obvious. The stricter Jews liad made a practice of fasting ' twice in the week ' (Lk 181=), and, as we learn from tlie Didache (§ 8), tlie Christians took over the practice, but changed the days. Probably ever since the Return from
the Captivity, Monday and Thursday had been the Jewish fasts, though we read of Judith fasting daily save on Sabbaths and New Moons and the eves of both and 'the feasts and solemn days of the house of Israel' (Jth 8"). Monday and Thursday were chosen, or were afterwards ac- counted for, because there was a tradition that Moses went up into the Mount on the latter day and came down on the former. But these were not matters of law, for the Mosaic Code prescribes only the Day of Atonement as a fast ; and thougli occasional fasts were ordered in times of trouble, these were never permanent nor of universal obli- gation. Thus the Pharisee's boast in Lk 18'- was that he did more than he was obliged by law to do (see, further, in Plummer's St. Luke, in loc.). In the sub- Apostolic age the Christians went a step further and seem to have tried to make tlie Wednesday and Friday fasts universal. The Didache (§ 8) says : ' Let not your fastings be with the hypocrites [the Jews], for they fast on the second and the iifth day of the week ; but do ye keep your fast on the fourth day and on the preparation ' (there is a change of construction : vrjUTevovui . . . Seirripq. aa^^druv . . . v/xei! Si vTia-TeuiraTe TerpdSa Kal irapaaKevriy. For the latter, v-ria-Tdjio witli direct accusative, see the parallel Apost. Const, vii. 23 and v. 15 ; and Oxyrhynchits Loffifi, 2 : ^av firi vipTe6<Tryre rhv Kbaixov, and Testa- ment of our Lord, ii. 6 and 12 [apparently]). A reason was found for the choice of Wednesday and Friday in the fact that on the former day the Jews made a conspiracy against our Lord, and that He was crucified on the latter. But tliis first appears in Peter of Alexandria (t 311), who gives this ex- planation in liis ('iiuniii.-iil J':/ux//c [canon xv.). It reappears el-i'\\lM'i !■, .,,/. in J/m^f. Const, v. 15. Another expl.-iii;il inii isi;i\,n l.y ( Irinent of Alex- andria {Strum, vii. I'_'). 11. • s;i'\ s that the fourth and sixth days are niiin''! Iiom lliiiiies and Aphro- dite respectively. Tlie 1 1 in- ( In i-l i,iii or 'Gnostic' fasts in his liife in re-^ini I til (■.)\ ctousness and voluptuousness, from whicli all the vices grow. Considering, then, that the symbolical explana- tions diil'er, and that they are not found until a somewhat later date than the first mention of tliese days, it is reasonable to suppose that they are afterthoughts. Yet it is probable that, when the Jewish fast days had to be changed, Friday was not accidentally fixed upon, but that our Lord's death on that day would make it appro- priate as a fast ; and when once Friday was chosen, Wednesday would follow from mere considerations of convenience.