THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
and the pagan calumnies still continued after this. It is more likely that both religious and practical reasons brought about the change. The earlier manner of celebrating the Eucharist endangered the unity of the local church, and did not accord with the growing importance of the priesthood. Where these meetings had often been held independently in private houses, the aphorism of Ignatius— " no lawful Eucharist without the bishop " (Smyrn. viii. 1) — now prevailed. At the morning service the clergy were assembled, the Scriptures were solemnly read; a natural center of unity for the local church was here, and the religious development was met by the change, as well as the practical difficulty of assembling widely scattered members for both services.
In studying the liturgical development, the earliest stage is wrapped in obscurity. Exclusive of the Gospel narratives of the institution (see Lord's Supper, Introduction and I.), the only sources are I Cor. xi. 20 sqq. and the ninth, tenth, and fourteenth chapters of the Didache. The traditional interpretation of the Pauline passage (still upheld by Harnack, Zahn, and others) regards the Eucharist as the conclusion of a meal
2. The taken in common, or agape. A more
Early modern view, held by Julicher, Spitta,
Liturgical Haupt, and Hoffmann, holds that the
Develop- reference of the passage is to one sinment. gle meal, designated as a whole by the name " Lord's Supper." This theoryis borne out by the fact that Ignatius uses the terms agape and eucharistia indiscriminately for one and the same sacred feast (Smyrn. viii. 2, vii. 1; Rom. vii. 3; perhaps also Philad. iv.; Eph. xiii. 1). But this still leaves the question open as to the manner in which this feast was conducted. Since Christ had left no precise ritual directions, the first Christians were free to arrange their Eucharist as seemed best to them. The most natural thing was to follow the traditions of the sacred meals of Judaism. Of these the most natural choice would have been the Passover supper, if it is assumed that the institution took place on this occasion; but even with this assumption neither I Cor. xi. nor the Didache shows any relation between the two, and none is forced upon us by such passages as I Cor. x. 6, v. 7. It seems more probable that a model was sought in the most common of these observances, the Sabbath meal as it was celebrated in every Jewish house at the beginning of the Sabbath on Friday night. We can get an idea of it from the Mishnah (especially Berakot vi.-viii.), which shows that it was marked by unity and characterized by the partaking of a blessed cup and blessed bread. At the beginning of the meal the cup, blessed with prayer by one of the family, preferably the father, was handed round — though this blessing might come later, and, indeed, the cup be dispensed with altogether. Then the bread was blessed which was broken and eaten during the meal; and a thanksgiving followed, to which the company responded with " Amen," and after the meal, in which no " stranger " might take part, there was another thanksgiving. The dependence of the eucharistic form on this observance
is supported by the Didache, where (ix., x.) is found the same sequence of customs: after the act of reconciliation, the so-called exomologesis (xiv.), the blessing of cup and bread by a short prayer (ix.), common participation (Gk. emplesthenai, x. 1), and a final thanksgiving (x.). The formulas of blessing are indeed purely Christian, but the double blessing of cup and bread, and the placing of the cup first, point clearly to a Jewish origin. Like the Sabbath meal, again, the whole ceremony is one; the contention of Zahn, Weizsacker, and Haupt that the prayers for the agape are found in chapter ix. and those for the Eucharist in x. can not be upheld. The partaking of the consecrated elements was not (as has been supposed from a misunderstanding of I Cor. xi.) the final but the initial act; it was the blessing of the bread and wine that made the meal " the Lord's Supper." Inquiring how the unity was dissolved, it appears that the reception of the consecrated elements at the beginning became more and more the principal thing, while, on the other hand, the subsequent meal became more and more an agape, or act of charity on the part of the rich believers toward their poorer brethren. This, deprived of its most significant accompaniment, for which the later eulogia (q.v.) offered an insufficient equivalent, gradually decayed and perished, while the Eucharist lived on with power in its new form, took precedence of the service of Scripture-reading and preaching, and finally, as the mass, became the supreme act of worship.
But meanwhile, when it was united with the other service, of Scripture-reading and prayer, it naturally took with it the essential forms which had up to that time constituted it. Some notable changes took place; the two prayers of blessing on the elements were fused into one, and the offering of the bread and wine, by members of the church, now took on the dignity of a liturgical function. What the order of the various parts was at this period we learn from Justin to have been as follows: (1) the kiss of peace; (2) the 3. The oblation (Gk. prosphora); (3) the eu-
Service in charistic prayer of the " president " Justin's (Gk. proestos), i.e., the bishop, with
Time and intercessions, and the response Later. "Amen"; (4) the communion; (5) the payment of the congregation's contribution {stips), and distribution to the poor. The last was dropped in later times, and a responsory (preface) added, which may, indeed, have been in use as early as Justin, though he does not mention it. But the same groundwork continues to show itself, e.g., in Tertullian and Cyprian. Thus, too, about 348, Cyril of Jerusalem describes substantially the same order; (1) the washing of the hands of the bishop and presbyters; (2) the kiss of peace; (3) preface with Trisagion and Epiklesis, or invocation of the Holy Spirit; (4) intercessions; (5) Lord's Prayer; (6) communion; (7) final prayer. As to the later detailed development, see Mass, II.
We must now consider more definitely the individual parts of this primitive service. After the kiss of peace (q.v.) came the oblation, which was