Intervals. See Interstitia.
Interventores. See Intercessores.
Inthronization is the ceremony of installing a bishoji on the episcopal seat immediately after his con- secration. It is said that in the early times of the Church it was customary for the bishop, after taking possession of his seat, to address the congregation, and this address was called the Inthronization sermon. To the provincials under his control he addressed instead letters containing his confession of faith, intended to establish communications with them : these were called Inthronization letters (Bingham, Oriij. Eccles. 1. ii, c. xi, § 10). Inthronization money is the sum of money paid by some prelates for the purpose of securing their ordi- nation.— Bergier, Diet, de Theol. iii. 438.
Intinction is a name for one of the three modes in
which the sacrament is administered to the laity of the Eastern Church (comp. Neale, fntrod. East. Church, p. 525), viz., by breaking the consecrated bread into the consecrated wine, and giving to each communicant the two elements together in a spoon, to prevent the possi- bility of a loss of cither element. Some Greek litur- gical writers assert that the practice of intinction was introduced by Chrysostom himself (which Neale ajv proves), but the traditional evidence adduced does not well support this assertion ; and the fact, which seems to be ]iretty well established, that the two elements were of (lid administered by two persons, and not by one onlj', as is done at present, makes it doubtful whether their ad- mixture for communion was ever the ordinary practice. Bona {Rerum /-iVt/ry. II, xviii, 3), however, says that it was forbidden by Julius I (A.D. 337-352), whose decree, as given by Gratian (Distinct, ii, c. 7), speaks of it as a practice not warranted by the Gospel, in which Christ is represented as giving first his body and then his blood to the apostles; and, if this decree is authentic, it goes to prove that the practice was known during Chrysos- tom's time. The third Council of Braga (A.D. 675) de- creed against it in their first canon in the identical words used by Julius I : " Illud, quod pro complemento com- munionis intinctam tradunt eucharistiam popidis, nee hoc probatum ex evangelio testimonium recipit, ubi apostolis corpus suum et sanguincm commendavit ; se- orsum enim panis et seorsum calicis commendatio me- moratur. Nam intinctum panem aliis Christum non proebuisse legimus exccpto illo tantum discijDulo, quem proditorcm ostenderet." Micrologus (c. xix) asserts that the practice contradicted the primitive canon of the Ro- man liturgy, but this certainly cannot go to prove the time of its introduction into the Eastern Church. In the 11th century it was forbidden by pope Urban II (A.D. 1088-1099), except in cases of necessity; and his successor, Pascal II, forbade it altogether, and ordered in cases where difficulty of swallowing the solid element occurred, to administer the fluid element alone. Bona, however, quotes from Ivo of Chartres about this time a canon of a Council of Tours, in which priests are order- ed to keep the reserved oblation " uitincta in sanguine Christi, ut veraciter Presb3'ter possit dicere infirmo. Cor- pus, et Sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi proficiat tibi in remissionem peccatorum et vitam aeteniam." The Convocation of Canterbury (A.D. 1175) expressed itself opposed to the practice of intinction in the following plain language : " Inhibemus ne quis quasi pro comple- mento communionis uithictam alicui Eucharistiam tra- dat.'' But from the word complementuni the practice for- bidden seems to have been as much the consumption of the superabundant elements by the laity (directed in one of the modern rubrics of the Church of England) as that of intinction. There can be no doubt, however, that the Western Church always stood committed against the practice, though some think that traces of it can be found, e. g. in the ancient Irish Visitation Office, written about the 8th centiu-y, and which was published by Sir M'illiam Bentham (comp. Hart, Eccles. Records, Introd. xiv ). — Blunt, Theol. Diet, i, 355. See Concomitant.
Intolerance is a word chiefly used in reference to those persons, churches, or societies who do not allow men to think for themselves, but impose on them arti- cles, creeds, ceremonies, etc., of their own devising. See Toleration.
Nothing is more abhorrent from the genius of the Christian religion than an intolerant spirit or an intol- erant church. " It has inspired its votaries with a sav- age ferocity; has plunged the fatal dagger into inno- cent blood; depopulated towns and kingdoms; over- thrown states and empires, and brought down the right- eous vengeance of heaven upon a guilty world. 'J'lie pretence of superior knowledge, sanctity, end authority for its support is the disgrace of reason, the gric f of wi- dom, and the paroxysm of folly. To fetter the con- science is injustice; to insnare it is an act of sacrilege; but to torture it by an attempt to force its feelings is
INTOKCETTA
630
INTRODUCTION"
liorrihle intolerance-, it is tlie most abandoned violation of Jill the maxims of religion anil morality. Jesus Christ formed a kingdom purely sitiritnal : the apostles exer- cised only a spiritual authority inider the direction of Jesus Christ; particular churches were united only by faith and love ; in all civil attiairs they submitted to civil magistracy; and in religious concerns they were govern- ed by the reasoning, ailvice, and exhortations of their own officers : their censures were only honest reproofs ; and their excommunications were only declarations that such offenders, being incorrigible, were no longer ac- counted members of their communities."