RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Mass
(2) The so-called Sacramentarium Gelasianum, preserved in several manuscripts, of which the oldest, in the Vatican, belongs to the first half of the eighth century or perhaps to the seventh (cf. A. Ebner, Missale Romanum, Freiburg, 1896, pp. 238, 374 sqq.). It contains Gregorian and post- Gregorian elements, hence can not, in its present form, derive from Pope Gelasius I. (d. 496). It was written in Gaul, but, apart from later and Frankish insertions, presents the prayers of the Roman mass of the sixth century. (3) The so-called Sacramentarium Gregorianum, extant in many widely variant manuscripts (cf. Ebner, ut sup., 380 sqq.), none of which is older than the ninth century; nevertheless the book contains much material which goes back to Gregory I. (4) Various ordines (i.e., complete and exact directions for the conduct of a religious service), of which the most important are: (a) the Ordo I. published by Mabillon in his Museum Italicum (Paris, 1689; reprinted MPL, lxxviii.). Grisar {ZKT, ix. 1885, pp. 389 sqq.) and Probst (Sakramentarien und Ordines, pp. 386-387, Munster, 1892) assign it to Gregory I.; Duchesne (ut sup., 139-140) denies its pure Roman character and dates it in the ninth century. (b) The first of the ordines published by Duchesne (ut sup., 439 sqq.), of the ninth century, from the abbey of St. Amand, and partly Roman. (5) A collection of seventeen collects published by Mercati in the seventh part of his Studi e Testi (Antiche reliquie liturgiche Ambrosiane e Romane, pp. 35-44, Rome, 1902). It is from Bobbio (now in Milan), the manuscript belongs to the sixth or seventh century, and the prayers were inserted one hundred years later. Thirteen of them are also found in other sacramentaries, four were previously unknown.
2. Liturgies Outside of Borne: Besides the Roman liturgy, those of Africa, South Italy, Milan, Gaul, Spain, and the Celtic-Anglo-Saxon are to be considered. Space forbids here to describe each in detail (cf. the Hauck-Herzog RE, xii. 708-712); but a comparison of them with one 1. General another and with the liturgy of Rome Character establishes the following facts: (1) Beand Rela- fore Rome began in the third or fourth tions. century to make important changes in the liturgy, all western Churches had substantially one and the same structure of divine service, and, furthermore, it was the same as the East had. (2) So far as is known, the African Church was the only one to keep pace with the Roman development, so that there came to be two types : the Roman- African and that of the other Churches. (3) The latter type in all its changes kept much closer to the original scheme than did Rome. On comparing the two western types with the eastern liturgy, it appears that Rome in the fourth century adopted the Syrian scheme, while the remainder of the West followed the Byzantine development. The point at which this becomes evident is the position of the diptychs. Originally, and in the Byzantine liturgy as late as the seventh century, these had their place in connection with the oblation and before the preface, but the Syrian-Palestinian liturgy put them after the epiklesis as early as the fourth century (Brightman, ut sup., pp. 528, 535-536, 466, 474) . Rome and Africa adopted the latter position, while elsewhere in the West the old and Byzantine custom was retained. These facts give, in broad outline, the development of the Western mass-liturgy until about the seventh century. Up to that time a strong influence from the East is evident, which even Rome was not able wholly to withstand. After that, however, this influence ceases and Rome begins to impose its liturgy upon the West. The development here set forth is not in accord with views which
have been held up to the present. Some, as Neale, distinguish between a Roman and a Gallic-Spanish type, and regard the liturgy of Milan as a mixed form of these two. Ceriani and Magistretti think that the Roman and Milanese forms belong together. Duchesne accepts the division given in the preceding paragraph, but holds that the eastern liturgy first found entrance in the fourth century through the influence of Bishop Auxentius of Milan (355-374), a Cappadocian, and that from Milan, especially under the authority of Ambrose, it spread over Gaul, Spain, and Britain. English liturgists have asserted that the Gallican liturgy was that of Ephesus, brought to Gaul by the founders of the church of Lyons, whence it spread over the entire transalpine West. All these hypotheses are reconciled if it be admitted that originally everywhere in the West and in the East there was one and the same liturgy, which suffered change more rapidly and radically in Rome than elsewhere.
For Africa the important witnesses are Tertullian (Apol., xxii., xxx., xxxi., xxxii., xxxix.; De corona, hi.; De exhortatione castitatis, xi.; De fuga in persecutione, ii.; De jejunio, xv.; De monogamia, x., xii.; De prmscriptione hcsreticorum,
xxxvi., xii.; Ad Scapulam, iv.; De oratione,
2. The hi., xi., xviii., xxix.; Ad uxorem, ii. 9),
Sources. Cyprian (Epist., xii. 2, xxxiv. 1; Ad De-
metrium, xx.; De oratione domini, viii., xxxi.), and — 150 years later — Augustine (Confessiones, ix. 13; Sermones, clix., clxxii., ccxxvii.; cf. G. Rietschel, Liturgik, i. 299-300, Berlin, 1900). The early mass of Milan may be reconstructed from notices in Ambrose (for the passages collected, cf. J. Pamelius, Liturgica Latinorum, i. 266 sqq., Cologne, 1571), supplemented by the works mentioned below in the bibliography. The value of the De sacramentis, ascribed to Ambrose, is impaired by grave doubts as to its genuineness. Probst (Liturgie, pp. 232 sqq., Munster, 1893) and Morin {Revue benedictine, xi. 344 sqq., 1894) think it is a secondary writing based on Ambrose, Rietschel (ut sup., p. 305, note 5) that it is Roman, Ceriani (Notitia, pp. 62-63, 65, Milan, 1897) and Magistretti {Liturgia, p. 85, Milan, 1899) that it is Gallican, Duchesne (Origines, p. 169, Paris, 1898) that it was composed in a North Italian city, perhaps Ravenna, about 400. For Gaul, besides scanty notices in Irenceus (Hcer., iv. 2, 18) and a little fuller information in Hilary of Poitiers (d. 367; Ad Constantium, i. 2; Fragmenta, viii.; Contra Constantium, xxvii.; De trinitate, iii. 7) and Sulpicius Severus (d. 410 or 420; Vita S. Martini, ix.; Chron., ii. 39), the chief sources are: (1) Eleven masses published by Mone (see bibliography); the manuscript is probably of the seventh century, but the masses are older; Roman influence is not evident. (2) Two letters doubtfully ascribed to Germanus of Paris (d. 576; in MPL, lxxii. 89 sqq.); the first, which is purely Gallican and belongs to the sixth century, permits reconstruction of the mass in its essential features (cf. the Hauck-Herzog RE, xii. 709-710). (3) The so-called Missale Gothicum, probably from Autun; the manuscript is of the late seventh or early eighth century; apart from inserted Roman prayers, the structure of the mass is Gallican and the book gives the liturgy of the sixth or seventh century. (4) The so-called Missale Gallicanum vetus, of the seventh or early eighth century, belonging perhaps to the diocese of Besancon; it is probably a composite of two different mass-books (cf. Delisle in Memoires de I'Institute de France, 1886, i. 73 sqq.; F. Kattenbusch, Apostolisches Symbol, ii. 774, 776, note 28, Leipsic, 1900); Roman influences are very strong. (5) The socalled Sacramentarium Gallicanum (Missale Vesontiense or Bobbiense), of the seventh century; it has been assigned to Bobbio and Luxeuil, probably belongs to Gaul, and Roman influence is strong. (6) The Lectionary of Luxeuil (MPL, lxxii. 171 sqq.), purely Gallican, and containing the lessons for the entire year; it is doubtful if it was used i» Luxeuil. (7) The so-called Missale Francorum, of the early eighth century or end of the seventh; Roman influence is so strong that Duchesne (ut sup., 128) and Ebner (Missale Romanum, p. 364, Freiburg, 1896) class it among Roman mass-books, but it originated and was used in the Frankish realm. (8)
Mass