RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Mystagogical Theology
robed for the act of renunciation, then by facing eastward and steadfastly gazing in this direction while confessing the faith, is led over from the sphere of the lightless to that of the light.
The next important mystagogue was Maximus Confessor (q.v.), whose interpretation of the Eucharist, found in MPG, xci. 657 sqq., supplies what Dionysius omitted, a mystagogical elucidation of the Church as congregation. In so far as the Church embraces all " sorts and conditions of men," it is fairly a " type and image " of God, a copy of his fulness and diversity, though in unity inherent. Maximus furthermore contemplates the Church as a structure; for if one surveys its typical compartments aright, the Church is at once a mysterious depiction of the universe, and an image of man and his constituent parts. In chap. viii. Maximus reaches his distinctive theme, the Eucharist. He reviews the entire course thereof; the priest's entrance into the Church represents Christ's appearing in the flesh, the entrance of the people indicates the separation of the faithful from the unbelieving, the closing of the doors points to the end of the world and the judgment, which only those worthily transformed into the world of divine reason can enter securely.
Next to be considered are the writings which deal particularly with a historical and symbolical construction of the Eucharist; that is, those the rational continuity of which has evolved the theory as to the so-called dramatic character of the liturgy. But here many literary questions re-
3. Works main to be settled before the develop- Antedating ment becomes thoroughly clear. It
Theodore was long believed that Sophronius of of Andida. Jerusalem was the founder of this theory. But the Russian scholar Krasnoseljcev has shown this to be an error. It is owing to him, again, and to F. E. Brightman, that an important man in the history of mystagogical theology has of late been to some extent newly recovered to knowledge, namely, Theodore of Andida. But in order to keep the literary sequence firmly in mind, one must pause at this point to consider a work entitled " Mystagogical Church Lore." This has been ascribed to many authors, and a really critical edition on the basis of the many manuscripts available is still lacking. Pitra communicated a fragment of a Latin translation prepared by Anastasius Bibliothecarius (q.v.); while from the letter to Emperor Charles the Bald, appended by Anastasius to this document, it appears that in Constantinople at that time, the Patriarch Germanus I. (d. 730) was deemed the author. It is entirely possible that this tradition is correct. The work itself underwent many reconstructions. Whether the shortest form, published by Miller after a Codex Bodlejanus et Magdalenensis (in his edition of the works of Cyril of Jerusalem, pp. 325- 332, Oxford, 1703), is the earliest, is undecided. The one in MPG, xcviii. 384-453, is certainly late and greatly enlarged. In the explanation of the liturgy which this work presents, the thought is dominant that the celebration of the Eucharist reveals the entire life of the Lord. The priest represents Christ himself; indeed his very vestments are
so fashioned that Christ is to be discerned therein. Originally the design appears to have been limited to the priestly symbolizing (in visible ritual acts) of Christ in his passion, death, and resurrection. But ultimately the conception so far expands that practically the whole history of Jesus Christ becomes illustrated in the acts and actors of the liturgy. Even the manner in which the priest holds his fingers, while blessing the people at the close, has its symbolism, and announces the event of Christ's coming again, and of the end of the world. It is Theodore of Andida who turns the construction so as to cover the whole history of Christ. Who Theodore was, is totally uncertain; Andida the place is supposed to be situated in Asia Minor.
Theodore may belong to the twelfth,
4. Theodore if not to the eleventh, century. He is
of Andida acquainted with the work just noted,
and Others, and holds it to be a work of Basil of
Csesarea. His own treatise is entitled " Summary Review of the Symbols and Mysteries Occurrent in the Divine Liturgy " (cf. A. Mai, Nova patrum bibliotheca, vi. 2, pp. 547-584, 8 vols., Rome, 1852-71; and MPG, cxl. 417-468). Theodore (some codices call him " Nicholas ") is a learned man. He remarks that " many priests were aware that the various acts in the liturgy aimed to set forth the Lord's passion, etc., not only according to its effects, but also to depict, as in a figure, the very manner thereof; save that there was no doubt but that those liturgical acts exhibited likewise the entire earthly career of Jesus." The holy table, whereon the sacrifice is prepared, can certainly be regarded as the "grave," but is also expected to recall the " manger." The bread is naturally a "type of the body of Christ, but also of Mary, in so far as she conceives the Word by power of the Holy Ghost," whereas the deacon also " salutes " the bread, even as the angel greeted Mary. Where the deacon withdraws from the " table of preparation " the Lord abides there in the stillness of retirement and seclusion; these being the thirty years of Christ's " obscurity." Then the priest comes actively forward: his first " ingress " into the Church represents the preaching Christ; his second entrance, with the bread and wine, exhibits Jesus on his way to death. The vestments have manifold significance (see Vestments and Insignia, Ecclesiastical). Theodore's entire treatise is full of subtle, often brilliant, phantasy. Its manner of interpretation dominated all the succeeding era; and its theory has come to be officially binding. A treatise to be correctly appraised only upon due acquaintance is the one associated with Sophronius of Jerusalem (d. 638), and formerly held to be genuine: " Account Comprising the Entire Ecclesiastical History" (MPG, lxxxvii., pp. iii., 3981 sqq.). Thi3 work is a combination of the primitive " Mystagogical Church Lore " and of Theodore's " Summary Review." The various mystagogical writings mentioned above are of moment in that they reveal the development of the liturgy in general. Yet they have not been adequately valued by liturgical scholars either as sources to determine the graduating distinctions or different successive phases in the history of liturgy, or as governing the relative
Mystag-ogical Theology Mysticism