RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Mass
historic Christ is to celebrate in it his constant presence." The Church " substituted " the eucharistic Christ for the historic at his own command; " the former is now taken for the latter, because the latter is also the former." So " the eucharistic Savior " too "is to be regarded as the sacrifice for the sins of the world," and all the more because the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, rightly and exactly expressed, is only a part of an organic whole. It was only one form of his love. " And who will venture the assertion that the eucharistic humiliation of the Son of God is not also a part of the sum total of his merit which is imputed to us ? " To the liturgical form of the sacrifice Mohler attached no importance. " Faith in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the foundation of the entire conception of the mass; without that presence the Lord's Supper is a mere memorial of the selfimmolating Christ. With faith in the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, on the other hand, the past becomes the present." Christ is present then as " what he actually is and in the full comprehension of his services — in a word, as a real sacrifice." The theory of Frint and Mohler has been accepted, more or less completely, by many eminent Roman Catholic theologians — among others by Hirscher, Klee, Veith, Probst, Dollinger, and especially Professor Thalhofer of Munich. On the other hand, the Jesuits J. Perrone (d. 1876) and J. B. Franzelin follow respectively Vasquez and John of Lugo. Gihr now inclines to the latter, although earlier he preferred Vasquez. The Redemptorist J. Herrmann advocates Bellarmine's theory. M. J. Scheeben, professor in Cologne (d. 1888), revived the Augustinian view of the body of Christ. Schwane, Schell, and Schanz attempt restatements of the Mohler-Thalhofer theory. F. S. Renz, professor at Breslau, the most learned historian of the subject and the latest writer upon it, declares that " the presence of the res externa, which represents Christ's death, suffices for the mass, and there is no proper actio sacrificialis, because it is not an independent sacrifice, but a function pointing to an independent sacrifice." In the spirit of the Fathers he aims, on the one hand, to simplify the doctrine of the mass, on the other hand, to render it more profound, and in summing up results he ascribes to the thoughts of Augustine an abiding value and truth which he finds elsewhere only in the doctrinal decisions of the Council of Trent. (F. Kattenbubch.)
II. The Liturgy.— 1 . Development of the Roman Mass to Gregory I. : The oldest notices of Christian worship in Rome are found in the First Epistle of Clement. It shows that the service followed the Old- Testament model in having a certain fixed order
(xl., xli.), and that the Trisagion from
1. The Isa. vi. 3, with introductory formula
First Three from Dan. vii. 10, was used in the
Centuries. Eucharist in Rome at the end of the
first century (xxxiv.). It may be inferred that a prayer like that known later as the " preface prayer " preceded the act of communicating. The long prayer in chaps, lix.-lxi. is generally assumed to have been the common " church prayer" of Rome, and, in any case, gives a clear conception of the manner of prayer in the Roman
" Word-service " (the morning assembly to hear the Word in distinction from the Eucharist, which took place in the evening; see Eucharist, § 1). Both epistles of Clement give substantial hints of the preaching of the time (cf. E. von Dobschiitz, Die urchristlichen Gemeinden, Leipsic, 1902, p. 147); there is a certain fixation and tendency to formalism, the spirit of order having taken the place of the earlier enthusiasm. Prayers and addresses are ascribed to definite officials. At what point in the service the long prayer was inserted is not known; very possibly it followed the homily. Scripture-reading can not have been lacking. In general the Christian service was alike in the East and the West about 100, and that Rome did not differ from the East fifty years later may, perhaps, be shown by the fact that the Roman Bishop Anicetus allowed Polycarp of Smyrna, who was in Rome in 155, to celebrate the Eucharist. The Shepherd of Hermas witnesses to an evening service about 150 (Simil. IX., xi. 7), and seems to know of another in which charismatic revelations were tolerated (cf. Von Dobschiitz, ut sup., 23 sqq., 235). It says nothing of the Eucharist. The most important step in the development of the Christian service into the mass had certainly been taken by 150; the Word-service and the celebration of the Eucharist had been combined in Rome at any rate on Sundays (Justin, / Apol., lxv.-lxvii.; see Eucharist, § 1). According to Justin this combined service was opened with reading of the Gospels and the Prophets by the lector, lasting while the congregation was assembling. Then the proestOs made an address, and the church prayer mentioned above followed, including a petition for the authorities, for enemies, and for all men (7 Apol., xiv., xvii.; Trypho, cxxxiii., xcvi., xxxv.). The kiss of peace came next, and then bread, wine, and water were brought. The proestos offered a long, free prayer of praise and thanksgiving, which probably included the Trisagion and words of institution, the congregation responded " amen," and the deacon administered the sacrament. The next witness (the Canons of Hippolytus, provided they are genuine), two generations later, shows another step in the development of the mass in that the sermon has been omitted from the introductory Word-service in the combined service (xxxvii., xxvi.). The order of a eucharistic service in the time of Hippolytus may be reconstructed as follows: Scripture-reading by the lectors " till the whole congregation is assembled"; the long church prayer by the bishop (xxxvii., cf. xix.), probably beginning with a general confession (ii.); the kiss of peace (xviii.) and the offertory, the givers being probably named. After the offerings have been blessed the preface begins, introduced by responsory formulas between bishop and congregation. The succeeding prayer probably included the Trisagion and the words of institution, and the Epiklesis (q.v.) can not have been lacking. The presbyter or bishop administered the sacrament, the deacon only exceptionally. The congregation advanced to the " table of the body and blood of the Lord," and the formula of distribution was " this is the body, the blood, of Christ." The recipient answered " amen." The conclusion was doubtless a prayer of
Mass