The Mass In The Infant Church By Rev Garrett Pierse Part 5.

CHAPTER III. Pt.3

Character of Sacrifices

" For the sacrifice of the Church is the word breathing as incense from holy souls, the sacrifice and the whole mind being, at the same time unveiled to God. Now the very ancient altar in Delos they celebrated as holy; which alone, being undefiled by slaughter and death, they say Pythagoras approached. And will they not believe us when we say that the righteous soul is alone the truly sacred altan and that incense arising from it is holy prayer ? But I believe sacrifices were invented by men to be a pretext for eating flesh." 1

"We do not therefore, and with reason, sacrifice to Him, who is not overcome by pleasure, since the fumes of smoke stop far beneath and do not reach even the thickest clouds." 2

" And those destitute of prudence, that is, those involved in heresies ' I enjoin,' remarks Wisdom, 'touch sweetly stolen bread and the sweet waters of theft,' the Scriptures manifestly applying the terms bread and water to nothing else but to those heresies which employ bread and water in the oblation, not according to the rule of the Church." 3

"For Salem is, when interpreted, peace ; of which our Saviour is enrolled King, as Moses speaks of Melchisedech, King of Salem, priest of the most high God, who gave bread and wine, consecrated food, for a type of the Eucharist." 4

In the first of those passages, we find an emphasis placed on spiritual sacrifices, a feature which was prominent too in the testimonies of Justin and Irenaeus. Seeing that Clement through his system of exegesis looks for the spiritual sense as the highest, it is natural that he should regard prayer and righteousness even as the " best and holiest sacrifice." 5 He is arguing in this context against the gross doctrine according to which the Deity was supposed to stand in need of sacrifice. Consequently, he emphasizes its more refined spiritual character. But from the fact that he declares prayer and righteousness to be the best sacrifice, is it fair to suppose that sensible sacrifices are entirely excluded? The conclusion is not warranted. The material creation, in Clement's idea, is a type of the spiritual, and is inferior thereto. Are material things, therefore, of no account ? The very fact that they body forth the spiritual shows their undoubted utility. From the fact that Clement declares the spiritual sacrifice of prayer to be better than the material sacrifices of Paganism and Judaism, or—as he may reasonably be interpreted—to be the best absolutely, better than a visible sacrifice of the Eucharist without devotion, it cannot be concluded that he could not admit at the same time the latter sacrifice in its proper place of subordination. From the point of view of personal sanctification—and Clement speaks in the context of the " holiest" sacrifice—prayer and a righteous mind seemed to this Father, perhaps, to be superior even to an external sacrifice of the Eucharist, which might be offered by a sinner, and which exists for the sake of subjective righteousness.

In another passage just quoted, Clement makes the statement that the Christians do not sacrifice. The words, already discussed, of Athenagoras—" as to our not sacrificing"—are strikingly similar to those of Clement. But from the context it seems that Clement had either Jew is/i or pagan sacrifices before his mind. For he speaks of the inutility of sacrifices, since the fumes of smoke, arising from the burnt-sacrifices, fail to reach even the clouds. His words, therefore, safely warrant only the conclusion that the Christians did not sacrifice in such wise. But may it be that the verb or concept " sacrificing" was excluded by Clement from the Eucharist ? No ; for this would flagrantly contradict what he teaches elsewhere. We have, in the remaining passages cited, positive indications of his admission of a sacrifice in a material sense. He admits sacrifices in a strict as well as in a loose sense. He speaks of heretics using bread and water in the oblation, and, showing his reverence for the ruling of the Church, speculative as was his mind, he protests that this was against her canon. Evidently he teaches an oblation of bread and wine, which was of such importance as to be a matter for the canons of the Church. Coming from a teacher who, owing to his professed love of the Discipline of the Secret, gives only obscure suggestions of dogmatic matters, this is a strong indication, generating moral certainty, that he believed in a visible and strict sacrifice in the Eucharist. Surely, an oblation of bread and wine does not mean a purely spiritual sacrifice; it is a rite sufficiently external. Nor can it be said that this oblation may consist merely of the offerings of the faithful, and may not be an offering to God. Why, unless it be a religious offering to God, is it of such paramount importance as to be a matter for the ruling of the Church, a matter in which heretics are seen to openly break with the Church ? The "bread and wine" must be regarded as objective, sacrificial gifts.

The very fact that the Eucharist is called an "oblation" shows that it is not merely the eating of a victim, offered and sacrificed on the Cross, but that there is a continued offering of the Christian sacrifice.

That the Eucharist, to Clement's mind, was a sacrifice with a visible and external rite is implied by the passage where he introduces Melchisedech. Melchisedech, high priest, King of Salem, is set down as a type of Christ, King of Peace or Salem ; and the giving of bread and wine on the part of the former is a type of the Eucharist introduced by the Lord. Does not this imply that the Eucharist was to Clement's mind a sacrificial offering just as was that of Melchisedech, especially since it is known from another passage that Clement regarded the Eucharistic bread and wine as an oblation ? Always it must be borne in mind that, owing to his observance of the Discipline of the Secret, Clement may be suspected to mean more than appears on the surface. Another question is what is the object offered, what is meant by the " bread and wine" which enter into the constitution of the offering ?

The Object Sacrificed.

" And," Clement writes, " the mixture of both— of the drink and of the Word— is called Eucharist, renowned and  glorious grace." Again, " For rest assured He Himself also partook of wine for He, too, was man. And He blessed the wine, saying: ' Take, drink, this is My blood,' the blood of the Word. He figuratively calls the Word, ' poured out for many unto the remission of sins '— the holy stream of gladness. . . . And that it was wine which was the thing blessed. He showed again, when He said to his disciples: ' I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, till I drink it with you in the kingdom of my Father." 6 Again, " Meat is the mystic contemplation; for this is the flesh and blood of the Word, that is, the comprehension of the Divine power and essence. ' Taste and see that the Lord is Christ,' it is said. For so He imparts Himself to those who partake of such food in a more spiritual manner." 7

That the oblation of bread and wine, to Clement's mind, included an offering of the Word really present can be reasonably concluded from the passage first quoted. The Eucharist, the very oblation about which we have already learned from the same Father, is a mixture of the Word and the drink. Here Clement cannot be allegorising; it would be absurd to speak, for example, of a mixture of mere doctrine and drink. There must be question, rather, of the presence of the body and blood and Divinity of the Logos.

While the term " mixture " gives unmistakable evidence of Clement's accuracy regarding the Real Presence, it suggests at the same time his inaccuracy regarding the doctrine of Transubstantiation. The mixture of the drink and the Word naturally invites us to think that Clement contemplates in the Eucharist a combination of the Son of God and the elements of wine and water. It may be said that drink, in the passage, meant to Clement's mind the water alone, which had been mixed with the wine, and which he may have supposed to remain after the wine itself was converted into the blood of Christ. But even this over-subtle interpretation will not absolve Clement from some crudity in conceiving the Eucharistic doctrine; even in this explanation there would be conceived by Clement a mixture of the Word and water.

It is not a matter for surprise that Clement, speculative inquirer as he was, and living at a time when controversies about more primary doctrines postponed definite developments concerning certain aspects of the Eucharist, should have exhibited some inaccuracy concerning the mode in which Christ becomes really present in the Sacrament.

It is noteworthy, too, that in some of the last passages cited he takes also in an allegorical sense the body and blood of Christ. Interpreting the text about the institution of the Sacrament, he states that the Word is typically called the holy stream of gladness. This means most probably that the Word is, metaphorically speaking, wine. Moreover, in the last passage quoted he interprets the flesh and blood of Christ as the food of mystical contemplation. Here he probably has before his mind an allegorical interpretation of the sixth chapter of St. John's Gospel, for, in another context, 8 he expressly gives a metaphorical sense to the eating of the flesh and blood of the Lord. But that he does not understand the eating of the body and blood of Christ in an exclusively spiritual sense is concluded not merely from the hint that mystical contemplation is the tasting of the Lord in a "more spiritual" manner, but from the evident fact that he has spoken of the Eucharist as a mixing of the Word and drink, which must be taken in a literal sense.

The object offered is not said in express words to be the body and blood of Christ. But this is implied in his writings, not merely in such a manner as that it may be concluded by his successors, but in such a fashion as to make it probable that his statements were understood in his own mind to mean an offering of the Logos, if not alone, at least amongst other things, namely, the bread and wine ; for he speaks of the Eucharist as an oblation, and understands the Eucharist to be a mixing of the Logos and drink.

Clement does not give expression to any thoughts concerning the objective propitiatory value of sacrifices. " And neither by sacrifices nor offerings, nor on the other hand by glory and honour, is the Deity won over, but He appears only to excellent and good men who will never betray justice for fear nor for great gifts." 9 ' Consistently with Clement's spiritual message, with his emphasis on the spiritual sense as the most important, he speaks here of a subjective propitiation The most important matter is a righteous disposition, a stainless conscience, a good life. He even discards the mere paying of honour and glory to God, which, in the case of a sinner, is a kind of flattery that does not win over God. Thus Clement's religion is not a religion of the heart alone but of the heart and hand—he requires a good life. And just as the fact of Clement's saying that God is not won over by glory and honour does not exclude all value from these actions, so too the fact that he says God is not won over by sacrifices does not necessarily exclude all value from the objective sacrifice itself. What is stated is that sacrifices do not of themselves put a person in the state of grace.

1 Str. vii. c. 6.

2 Ibid. vii. 3.

3 Ibid. i. 19.

4 Str. iv. 25.

5 Ibid. vii. c 6.

6 Paed. ii. 2.

7 Str. v. c. 10.

8 Paed., i. 6.

9 Str , vii., 3.

How Christ Said The First Mass, Or The Lord's Supper. Part 25.

Abraham meets Melchisedech (San Marco)

Christ chose the Cenacle in which to celebrate the Passover, because there lived, died, and were buried Melchisedech, David, Solomon and all the kings of David's family till the Babylonian Captivity.
Melchisedech comes into history under this name in the account of the four Mesopotamian kings, who went into Palestine, captured Lot, Abraham's nephew, and started for home. Abraham roused his servants, fell on them at night, rescued Lot, took their spoils, and returning passed by Salem, as Jerusalem then was named.
"But Melchisedech, the king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was a priest of the most high God, blessed him and said: 'Blessed be the most high God by whose protection thy enemies are in thy hand.' And he gave him tithes of all." 1
Here for the first time in Holy Writ we find a priest "of the most high God" offering the "bread and wine" of the Passover and Mass. Eight centuries of silence pass, and 1,100 years before Christ David wrote of Christ's priesthood: "Thou are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech." 2 Then this great pontiff-king appears no more, in Holy Writ, till St. Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews mentions him eight times as a type of Christ. 3
In patriarchal days, the chief of the tribe, or the king, united in his person the two offices of priest and ruler. Abraham was a priest, and sacrificed suffering animals, for of his race the priests of Aaron's family were born—the Hebrew priests who demanded the death of Christ—as they had in tabernacle and Temple immolated the victims which foretold the crucifixion.

WHO WAS MELCHISEDECH?

But here for the first time in history, comes forth another order of priests, this mysterious Melchisedech offering bread and wine of the Last Supper and Mass. To him Abraham offered tithes—the tenth part of the fruits of his victory. Therefore Melchisedech's priesthood was higher than that of Abraham; it was to be eternal; it pointed to Christ's priesthood of the Last Supper and of the Catholic Church. The whole prophetic scene in that vale beside the sacred city was emblematic of the future.
First dimly the bread and wine appear in patriarchal sacrifices, but brighter in the Temple ceremonial, and still clearer in the Passover. Beautifully S. Augustine explains prophetic Noe naked in his tent after taking the wine, an image of Christ crucified nearly naked. Ham, his son, reviling him, foretold the Jewish people mocking the dying Lord. 4 To the wine his son Melchisedech added bread, and from that time the bread and wine were always offered with the bloody sacrifices of the Hebrew Temple.
Who was Melchisedech? Early heretics hold he was the Holy Spirit himself, who in human form appeared as the "Just King." But this is wrong. Origen, Didymus and others of that age say he was an angel, but this we cannot hold. 5
It is certain he was a man. He was the king of Salem, as Jerusalem was then named, who offered bread and wine in sacrifice. 6 Others think him one of the Canaanite kings, who lived a holy life amid the awful corruptions of that age. 7
Coming into history to bless Abraham, to receive the tenth part of all he had, nothing given of whence he came, his history, his parents, his origin and end, of him St. Paul says: "Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life, but likened unto the Son of God, continueth a priest forever." 8

OPINIONS OF LEARNED WRITERS.

Not according to Aaron's priesthood killing countless animals foretelling the Redeemer's awful death, but according to this great high priest's order, Jesus Christ offered bread and wine at the Last Supper.
Melchisedech, "King of Peace," in that Palestine where kings were then called Abimelech, as in Egypt they were named Pharaoh, and later the Ptolomies, in his innocence and justice he was a striking figure of Christ, spiritual King and High Priest of mankind. Ignatius of Antioch 9 and other fathers say he was a virgin, without father or mother, foretelling the Redeemer without mother in heaven, father on earth or posterity. 10
Many learned works on this subject give various solutions. But Oriental traditions, Jewish and Samaritan writers clear up the difficulty. The Targums of Pseudo-Jonathan and Jerusalem, 11 Jewish Cabalistic works, 12 Rabbinical writers, 13 Samaritans 14 of ancient time, with Luther, Melanchthon, Lightfoot, Selden, etc., say Melchisedech was the patriarch Sem, sole survivor of the flood, eldest son and heir of Noe, king and high priest of the world.15
Noe established the right of primogeniture, that the eldest son should succeed the father in his property, kingship and priesthood, a custom coming down to our day. In monarchies, the eldest son sits on his father's throne, or becomes owner of the family estates. Of this Virgil sang "King Anius was indeed the king of men and the priest of Phebe." 16 Sem was therefore heir of Noe.
What is the meaning of the word Melchisedech? The Hebrew word for king is melek, and for justice tsaddiq, the latter coming from the Babylonian sadyk, "the just one," Therefore the name of this Pontiff-Founder of Jerusalem is "My King is Just." In our day, at Tel-el-Amarna in Egypt, terra-cotta tablets were discovered inscribed in the Babylonian tongue, the diplomatic language of the nations a hundred years before Moses led the Hebrews from the Nile land. When Melchisedech died
Adoni-Zedek, his successor as king of Jerusalem, sent these tablets to the Egyptian king, telling of the great king Melchisedech his predecessor, who had founded the city, stating he had five sons. A wealth of Jewish and Arabian lore is found relating to this personage.

WAS HE SEM, SON OF NOE?

Smith in his Dictionary says under the name Shem:
"Assuming that the years ascribed to the patriarchs in the present copies of the Hebrew Bible are correct, it appears that Methuselah, who in his first 243 years was contemporary with Adam, had still nearly 100 years of his long life to run after Shem was born. And when Shem died, Abraham was 148 years old, and Isaac had been nine years married. There are therefore but two links— Methuselah and Shem—between Adam and Isaac. So that the early records of the Creation, and the Fall of man, which came down to Isaac, would challenge, apart from their inspiration, the same confidence, which is readily yielded to a tale that reaches the reader through two well-known persons, between himself and the original chief actor in the events related. There is no chronological improbability in that ancient Jewish tradition, which brings Sem and Abraham into personal conference."
Sem or Shem, "Name," "Renown," or "Yellow," father of the yellow Asiatics, was born before the flood, when Noe was 500 years old. 17 "He (Sem) begot Arphaxad two years after the flood, and Sem lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years." 18 When the latter was in his thirty-fifth year, he begat Sale. And when Sale was thirty years old his son Heber was born. 19 Heber became the father of Pheleg in his thirty-fourth year. The latter had a son in his thirtieth year named Reu, who in his thirty-second year had a son born to him called Sarug. This Sarug in his thirtieth year begat Nachor, and the latter in his twenty-ninth year had a son Thare, who in his seventieth year became Abraham's father. 20
According to this statement, Abraham was born 352 years after the flood, when Sem was 450 years old. "Sem lived after he begot Arphaxad five hundred years." 21 Born 92 years before the flood, Sem lived till Abraham attained his forty-sixth year. Josephus has the following "Abraham, who accordingly was the tenth from Noe, was born in the two hundred and ninety-second year after the flood." 22 Following this Sem died when Abraham was ninety-two, and eighty years before Isaac's birth.

THE REVOLT OF NEMROD.

Sem therefore died when Abraham was either forty-six, ninety-two or one hundred and forty-eight years of age, and he could have been that great pontiff of mankind, high priest of the nations, whom the Canaanites called Melchisedech. Oriental and Hebrew traditions have the following, we think the best, solution of the difficulty. But we do not say that the following statements are all true. Let the reader judge for himself.
Dying Adam said to his son Seth: "Now I die for my sin, but bury me not till God shows you the place where I will sleep till the 'Seed of the woman,' who will crush the serpent's head will come." 23 They embalmed the body, patriarchs passed it down, Noe had the skull in the ark, and before he died, 350 years after the flood, he gave it to Sem his eldest son telling him the tradition.
There was born of Ham's family, his grandson Nemrod, "Valiant," or "The Rebel," who comes down among the Heathen nations as Baal, Bel, the god Jupiter, Hercules, Thor, etc. "He was the grandson of Ham, a bold man of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as it were through his means they were happy, but to believe it was their own courage, which procured them that happiness. He also changed the government into a tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, and to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again. For that he would build a tower too high for the waters to reach, and he would be revenged on God for destroying their forefathers." 24
This Nemrod turned mankind from Adam's religion; taught that the sky was a crystal ceiling; that their forefathers, the patriarchs, went to heaven and became the planets; that the natural forces were gods, and thus he founded paganism. Guided by him, the seventy-two families, born of Noe's grandsons, built the Tower they called Bab II, "Gate of God," in the Babylonian tongue, which the Hebrews later changed to Babel, "Confusion," whence they called the nearby city Babylon, "City of the Gate of God." 25

ADAMS SKULL BURIED ON CALVARY.

Infidelity, the worship of their father-patriarchs, the degradation of woman, immorality, irreligion were spreading through the people tyrannized over by this wicked Nemrod. But before the Tower of Babel was finished, God changed their language so each family spoke a different tongue and they could not understand the other families so they had to separate. Japheth's children migrated to the southern shores of the Caspian Sea; Sem's sons remained in his father's house, Asia, because he was the eldest; Ham's dark tribes went to Africa, except the tribes which had rebelled against Sem over the division of the continents. They remained in the rich plains between the Tigris and Euphrates, where they founded the Babylonian empire, of which Nemrod was the first king. From these seventy-two families or tribes came the great nations of antiquity.
Sem, father of numerous tribes, eldest son and heir of Noe's civil and priestly power, was stripped of all authority in this revolt. Left alone in his old age, his children gone, an angel told him to come and he would show him where to bury Adam's skull. For full many a day they went west, till they came to a little hill, whereon he entombed our first father's relic, and called it Golgotha, a Babylonian word meaning "The Place of the Skull." Greeks later rendered it Cranion, and Romans Calvaria— Calvary. There the angel told him to guard the relic of the first man.
The Revelations of Moses, an ancient book the Jews honored, gives a long account of how the angels embalmed Adam's body. "And God said to Adam: "I will set thee in thy kingdom, on the throne of him that deceived thee, and he shall be cast down in this place (Calvary) that thou mayest sit upon him." Beside him they buried Abel's body, and there they laid Eve, when she died six days after Adam. Thus the thirty children of Adam laid to sleep our first parents with the priest Abel beside them. And the archangel Michael said to Seth: "Thus bury every man that dies until the day of the resurrection."

THE FOUNDING OF JERUSALEM.

We give this as a specimen of numerous doubtful Oriental traditions. On the way to Damascus, not far from the vast ruins of Baalbec, amid the Libanon mountains, they show you the tombs of Noe and the patriarchs. Perhaps Adam was buried there and later his skull taken up and guarded as the relic of the first sinner and saint. The Church in honoring the relics of the saints, follows the customs of ancient races, especially the Hebrews. In the Church of the Holy Sepulchre they point out Melchisedech's tomb.
Half a mile south rose rugged rocky heights surrounded on three sides by deep valleys, which Sem fortified and called Sion, "the Projecting." There he reared his palace, round which rose a little city he named Salem, "Peace," from the Oriental salute. Salama, "Peace," a word still used in these countries, as we say "How do you do?"
In the migrations of the tribes, Caanan's cursed sons, 26 Jebusites, Hittites, whom the Greeks called Phenicians, had colonized the land, where they had built many a city and town. Not knowing Sem, who he was, or whence he came, they called him "The Just King," the King of Salem, in their language Melchisedech.
Last of the great patriarchal fathers of the nations, heir of Noe's fatherhood, royalty and priesthood going back beyond the flood to Abel and to Adam, in his palace on Sion, on the very spot where Jesus Christ celebrated the Last Supper, this great high-priest king first offered the bread and wine of the Mass.
He was then the last link of the world before the flood. No writing, record, or monument of the ages before God wiped out the world's wickedness with waters of his wrath survived, but Sem, who had preserved them according to the patriarchal customs of that epoch, when the eldest son was sole depositary and heir of all his father's learning, property and priesthood.

MELCHISEDECH AND ABRAHAM.

In Chaldea, at Ur, "Light of the Moon," where she was worshiped, now the ruined Mughier, "The Betumined," lived Abraham. His father made a living manufacturing and selling idols, says the Talmud. But his son did not believe in them, and God gave him supernatural faith, and told him to go into Palestine, where he would meet this great pontiff-king from whom he would learn Adam's religion, the story of creation, the fall of man, the prophecy of the Redeemer, the story of the world before the flood. According to patriarchal custom, these truths passed down to Isaac, Jacob, to the Hebrews as traditions, till Moses gathered them up in the Book of Genesis.
Jewish rabbis say Sem called the little city Salem, "Peace"; 27 that after offering Isaac on Moriah, Abraham named the city Jireh, "Possession"; that the two great patriarchs disputed about the city's name; but then agreed to unite the two words making Jerusalem, "The city of Peace," 28 a word found six hundred times in the Old Testament, and seventy times in the New.
Hebrews called it Ariel, "Lion," or "Hearth of God"; 29 Grecian Jews said it was Agia Polls "The Holy City"; 30 when Hadrian destroyed it the Romans named it ælia after his first name. 31 It was the holiest of all the cities of earth, because of Him foretold to come and there redeem our race.
When Omar, Mohammed's cousin, captured it, Moslems called it El-Kuds, "The Holy," Beit-el-Makdis, "The House of the Holy Sanctuary"; Esh-Sherif, "The Venerable" or "The Noble." To them Jerusalem is a most sacred place, where lived the prophets they hold inspired, and in their eyes Jerusalem in sanctity is second only to Mecca where Mohammed was born, and Medina where he lived.
Sem, bearing the name of Melchisedech, lived on Sion, his palace being built on the very spot where Herod built the Cenacle in which Jesus Christ said the first Mass. 32 This great prophet-king priest of the most high God, 33 "bringing forth bread and wine," 34 offered this sacrifice of thanksgiving for the victory God gave Abraham; he offered this bread and wine to God as an image of the Mass, and not for food for Abraham's troops as Calvin wrote.
And Abraham "gave him tithes of all." 35 Why did he do this? To show that there was to come a priesthood,offering the Mass in bread and wine, superior to the Aaronic priesthood offering bloody sacrifices, suffering animals immolated in the Temple by the priesthood to be be born of Abraham's race.

DEATH OF SEM AND ABRAHAM.

Abraham gave tithes to Melchisedech because that was the custom in those days. Pagans gave tithes, that is the tenth part of the spoils of their victories to their priests. 36 Zenophon 37 says: "For of this money collected from the captives, the tenth part consecrated to Apollo or to Diana of Ephesus the pretors received." Agesilao writes: "Offerings, that is fruits of the earth, every two hundred years a hundred talents or more, the Ephesians dedicate the tenth part of that to God."
Christ was therefore a priest according to the order of Melchisedech when he offered bread and wine at the Last Supper, and a priest according to the order of Aaron when he brought the lamb of Passover to the Temple to be sacrificed. 38
Sem and Abraham slept with their fathers, and were buried one on Sion, the other at Hebron, sixty years of silent history passed, and Jebusites, sons of the third son of wicked Canaan, captured Sion, fortified its ramparts, and their dwellings rose round Melchisedech's fortress. They called the city Jebus, "Trodden down," in memory of their father.
It was a place of extraordinary strength. Recent excavations in Jerusalem laid bare the ancient ramparts running from near the Joppa gate, down deep into the Tyropoeon valley, separating Sion from Moriah, and continued along the southern slopes and to the west bordering the Hinnom vale to the place of beginning. They show Sion must have been in that day an acropolis, "A Citadel." They then called it "The Dry Rock." The Tyropoeon valley was then twenty-six, thirty-three and and eighty feet lower than now, while to the south and west the ramparts rose hundreds of feet over the Hinnom and Cedron vales.

1 Gen- xiv. 18-20.

2 Psalm cix. 4.

3 Hebrews v. 6-10, vi. 20, vii. 1 10, 11, 15-17

4 S. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, L. XVI C. i. and ii.

5 S. Augustine, Quest. in Gen. Quest. Ixxii.

6 Epiphanius, Heres, 56, St. Cyril, etc.

7 Theodorus, Eusebius, etc.

8 Hebrews vii. 3.

9 Epist. ad Philadel.

10 St. Augustine, De Doct. Christ., L. IV. XLV, Epist. clxxxii. v.

11 Rashi, in Gen. xiv.

12 Apud Bochart, Phaleg, Pt. I., b. ii., sec. 69.

13 Schotgen, Hor. Heb. II. 645.

14 Quoted by St. Epiphanius, Her. LV., 6.

15 See Bereshith Rabbah. S. 9, etc.

16 Eneid, III., V. 80.

17 Gen. v. 31.

18 Gen. xi.10, 11.

19 Gen. xi. 12-15.

20 Gen. xi. 12-26.

21 Gen. xi. 11.

22 Antiq. B. I., c. vi. n. 5.

23 Gen. iii. 15.

24 Josephus, Antiq. B. I. c. iv. n. 2.

25 Dutripon, Concord. S. Scripturæ, Babel.

26 Gen. x. 16.

27 S. Augustine, Enar in Ps. xxxiii. Ser. 1, V.

28 Young's Concord, of the Bible; Edershein, Temple. 3; Smith's Dic. of Bible, Jerusalem, etc.

29 Isaias xxix. 1, 2, 7. Ezech. 43-15.

30 Matt. iv. 5, xxvii. 53.

31 ælius Hadrianus.

32 See Josephus, Antiq. vii. c. iii. n. 2.

33 In Hebrew, veliu cohen.

34 Hotseti mincha.

35 See Migne, Cursus Comp. S. Scripturæ, v. 47; Gen. xiv. 20.

36 Livy, L. 6.

37 Cyro, L. 6.

38 See Migne, Cursus Comp. S. Scripturæ xxv. 319 to 325. v. 47, etc.

How Christ said the first mass, By Rev. James L. Meagher, D.D. Part 6.

The first page of the Vilna Edition of the Babylonian Talmud

In the middle ages all Jewish books were condemned to be destroyed, the Talmud was ordered burned; but they saved a few copies. A Jew learned in Talmudic lore was converted to the Catholic Church, and explaining to the Pope the contents of this work, the Pontiff forbade any further destruction of this product of antiquity. This decree saved the Talmud from utter destruction.

The Talmud is divided into six sections: "Seeds," "Festivals," "Women," "Jurisprudence," "Holiness," and "Purity," making sixty " Tracts," each treating of different matters—both Talmuds forming sixty volumes in quarto. 1

These Talmuds show you the Jewish mind before and during the time of Christ. There is little in them to be condemned, as many hold who never saw them, except that the Jerusalem Talmud, contains some scandalous attacks on Christ's character. But the Babylonian Talmud hardly alludes to Him.
You pass page after page of weary waste of discussion, disputes of learned sages, and their opinions of what the Torah "the Law," means reminding you of disputed points of moral theology. The oldest part, called the Mishna, the purest and best, is rich in information, for it comes down perhaps from beyond the Babylonian Captivity, when Israel was led by the prophets guided by the Holy Spirit.
The Gemara, coming after the Captivity, shows minds absolutely without faith, devoid of a spark of the supernatural. All is founded on the Torah, "the Law," as they call the Books of Moses,—the first five books of the Bible. The prophets are seldom quoted; the beautiful Temple service is explained, but they never look beyond and behind it to see the Christ it foretold.
They looked for two Christs—one to be born of David's family who was to establish a kingdom of matchless splendors, trample on his enemies, and wade through rivers of blood to his throne in Jerusalem, where he would make the Jews rulers over all the earth. Borrowing these ideas from the Jew, Mohammed and his successors spread their empire by the sword. The other Christ or Messiah, to be born of Joseph's tribe, was to be a suffering Christ to come and die; why, they do not explain.
Bible and Talmud, both written by Hebrews, differ in a striking degree—one is the product of inspired men, through whom God spoke to the world, the other was written by men of an outcast nation, spiritually dead, absolutely divested of every spark of supernatural faith. One pulsates with life; in every page you see, in the original, the foretold Redeemer, the face of the Holy Ghost; the other, the Talmuds, show the heart of a race punished for idolatry by the Babylonian Captivity, and for the crime of killing their Messiah driven by the Romans into all the earth fulfilling these words. "We will not have this, man rule over us," "His blood be on us and on our children."
We do not always realize what an Oriental tradition is. To us a tradition is a story, more or less true, changing from one generation to another, vague, or exaggerated, founded on truth, but developed by time.
But a tradition among the Jews was a religious truth coming down from their forefathers, told and repeated in the synagogues, in the Temple, at feasts, by family firesides, given exactly word for word as they had heard it. If it were not given as handed down, in almost the very same words, if a word were added to it, or left out, the whole company cried out, the relator was execrated and driven away. This was the way the patriarchs taught their children the story of the creation, the fall of man, the religious belief of ancient days. In this way they claim religion and history were handed down till Moses wrote them in Genesis.
Adam died in the year 930 when Mathusala was ninety-four years old. The latter lived till Sem, called also Melchisedech, was in his fiftieth years. Sem, or Melchisedech, died on Sion when Isaac was thirty-three years of age, and the latter lived till he was 180,—2288 years after the creation of Adam, and but a short time before the birth of Amram, Moses' father. Thus history came down from Adam and the patriarchs to Moses the great Lawgiver, Founder of the Hebrew nationality and writer of the first five books of the Bible. 2

In the same way, they claim, the teachings they called the "traditions" of the Jews, passed down till written in the Talmud. In the schools of Babylonia and Judea, the scholars received only what was taught, no deviation was allowed, not a word was changed. From his high seat, like a pulpit, the learned Rabbi gave the sayings of their fathers, the traditions of the elders held as sacred as the written word, sometimes more so, and the pupils learned them by heart and treasured them as the breath of their nostrils.
Living in Babylonia since the days of the Captivity, the Hebrews were not there disturbed by the Christ's life, his teachings, the tragedy of his death and the preaching of the apostles, The Talmud contains little relating to Christianity. We find in it Hebrew rules and customs of the Passover, as it was celebrated in the days of the Jewish kings.
We will describe the Temple worship on the Day of the Atonement, because we wish to lay before the reader the minute details of how God was worshiped in the days of Christ, because the Temple ceremonial was introduced into the synagogue and was followed by Christ on the night of the Last Supper, and because atonement of sin is the very foundation of every Old Testament offering fulfilled in the Last Supper and is now continued in the Mass.
The Temple high priest in the ceremonial, and the celebrant to-day offering the Mass, image Him, the High Priest of eternity who came into the world, offered his life and sufferings as a sacrifice, then passed back again into his heavenly sanctuary. Therefore ascending the altar steps, beginning Mass the celebrant recites these deep words of the Church's Liturgy :
"Take away from us, we pray thee, O Lord, our sins, that with pure minds we may be made worthy to enter into the Holy of Holies. Through Christ our Lord. Amen." 3
To link every offering with Christ and the Holy Spirit burning in him, following God's orders, every sacrifice was consumed or roasted on the altar with a fire which had come down from heaven. 4 But Nadab and Abiu, Aaron's sons, sacrificed with a strange fire, which did not typify the Holy Ghost or relate to the foretold Redeemer. For that awful sin God struck both dead. 5 Then the Eternal ordained the ceremonial the Hebrews were to follow each year on the Day of the Atonement. 6
The Bible does not go into the details of that sacred, holiest and most striking of all the Temple ceremonies. But before us is the Tract Yomah "Day of Atonement," of the Babylonian Talmud. We will go over the whole volume, search in the rubbish for the pure untarnished
gold of the days before Christ, and lay before the reader these interesting details. As we go along we will give explanations of the Hebrew texts that the reader may better understand how Christ and the Mass were foretold. 7
The high priest, representing Christ for the Hebrew nation, alone performed all the ceremonies of this solemn day which always fell on the tenth day of Tishri. In fear and trembling, he bore the sins of Israel behind the veil in the gold-walled room, the Holy of Holies, image of heaven, where the Shekina, the Holy Spirit, dwelled as a cloud by day and a fire by night, in the tabernacle and first Temple. Before the ceremonial of this day, priest and people, even the very sanctuary, were unclean, and without this ceremonial the services of the following year could not be carried on. The Law laid down numerous details, 8 but we will give the more minute descriptions of the Talmud. 9
"Seven days before the Day of Atonement, the high priest moves from his house, lest his wife might defile him, and takes up his abode in the Palhedrin Chamber, called in Greek Paraderon, (the Lord's Chamber), near the Nicanor Gate. Another priest, generally the Sagon, his substitute, is chosen and instructed to take his place if he becomes unclean. 10 Out of his own pocket he must buy all the animals for the sacrifice." 11
Thus he foretold the sinless Christ atoning for the iniquities of the world, and foreshadowed the unmarried clergy entering our sanctuary to offer Mass.
"Why was he separated six days before the feast? When God gave the Law on Sinai, he called Moses up the mountain. 'And the glory of the Lord dwelled on Sinai, covering it with a cloud six days, and on the seventh day he called him out of the midst of the cloud.' 12 During all these six days of preparation, they sprinkled the high priest with the ashes of all the red cows offered."
These animals, were sacrificed outside the walls of the city, led over the bridge spanning the Cedron, built by the high priest out of his own pocket. Across that same bridge they dragged Christ the night of his arrest. The red cows foretold Christ, red with his blood, offered in sacrifice for mankind. The high priest was sprinkled with water mixed with their ashes, to typify that the pontiff was typically in spirit sprinkled with the Redeemer's blood to clean him from sin to offer the sacrifice and enter the sacred sanctuary. Sprinkling the high priest foretold our holy water.
"Aaron was separated seven days, during which time Moses instructed him regarding the services of this day. During these days two men of the Beth Din 'The Court of Law' taught him (the high priest) the ceremony as it was written, as at this present it hath been done, that the rite of sacrifice might be accomplished.' 14 Moses ascended into the cloud and was sanctified in the cloud in order that he might receive the Torah ' The Law,' for Israel in a state of holiness." 15
"This happened the day after the Ten Commandments were given, which was the first of Moses', fast of the next-, forty days. 15a The high priest the Day of Atonement has not the gold plate with the engraved words; ' Holiness unto Jehovah' on his brow " for he represented our High Priest Christ" who his own self bore our sins in his body on the tree." 16
"The chamber where he took up his abode was first called the 'Chamber of the Lords,' but after the high priests bought their office with money, after the Roman occupation of Palestine, it was called the Hall of the Palhedrin, 'Officers.'"
All houses, chambers, etc., had hangings on the doorposts boxes of leather, in which on parchments were written the morning and evening prayers. "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul and with thy whole strength," etc. "And thou shall write them in the entry, and on the doors of thy house." 17 Did they give rise to the holy water founts of our churches and houses, that by taking the water, and blessing ourselves we may remember our baptism and redemption through Christ?
"No chamber of the Temple had these Muzuzahs except the Palhedrin Chamber, because for seven days it was the high priest's abode, and the Nicanor Gate through which the people entered the Temple.
" First he clothed himself in the eight vestments God prescribed for Aaron and his sons, went with the gold basin turned over the sacrifices burning on the altar to make it burn better. Every day he sprinkled the blood of the victims, offered the incense in the Holies, trimmed the lamps of the seven-branched candelabrum, and takes for his own use a part of the first offerings, which he eats. Incense he offers first, then he trims the lamps, and sacrifices the lamb morning and afternoon. (Incense typified the prayers of Christ offered to his Father before he was sacrificed.)" They drew lots to choose the priests to wait on him. The first lot was to select the priests to clean the ashes from the great altar, called the Ariel, ' Lion of God,' the second, for those who would kill the victim, sprinkle the blood, clear the ashes on the altar of incense in the Holies, trim the lamps and carry up the members of the sacrifices. The third lot was to choose the one among the nine priests to offer the incense in the Holies."
The incense was offered first, and that is the reason the candles are first lighted and the celebrant of the Mass first incenses the altar at the beginning of Mass. "And Aaron shall burn sweet-smelling incense upon it in the morning. When he shall dress the lamps, he shall burn it." 18
"Then follow directions to mark the horns of the great altar with the blood of the victims in the form of a cross which we will describe later." Four chambers were in the heating-house, like small rooms opening into a great hall, two belonged to the sanctuary (the Priests' Court in the middle of which stood the great altar of sacrifice), and two were profane, and small wickets parted the sacred ones from the profane. The southwestern was for the lambs for the sacrifice.

The southeastern was for the showbreads (the proposition bread in our Bible). In the northeastern the Machabees, the Asmoneans, had hidden the stones of the altar profaned by the Greeks. The northwestern was used as a passage to the bath-house. The chamber at the northeast was the place where the wood was kept, and blemished priests examined the wood there, as moldy wood was unfit for the altar. The northwestern chamber was the place for the cured lepers, who came to the Temple to be sprinkled. Wine and oil for the offerings were kept there, and it was called the chamber of oil.
"The altar stood in the middle of the court, and was in size thirty-two ells, ten ells opposite to the door of the Temple, twenty ells wide, eleven ells toward the north, and eleven ells to the south, so that the altar was opposite to the Temple, and its walls."

1 See Edersheim, Life of Christ, i. 47,103,104,175.

2 De Religione Hebrӕorum, n. 68.

3 Roman Missal.

4 Levit. ix. 24.

5 Levit. x. 2.

6 Levit, xvi. 16.

7 The words of the Old Testament in the Talmud are not the very same as those found in the translations Christians use, but the sense is the same. No two persons will give the same terms when translating from another language.

8 Levit. xvi.

9 See Geikie, Life of Christ, i. 95.

10 Levit. viii. 34.

11 Babylonian Talmud, Tract Yomah.

12 "Day of Atonement," Chap 1; Mishna and Gamaras.

13 Exod. xxiv. 16.

14 Levit. viii. 34.

15(a) Talmud, Tract Yomah, "Day of Atonement" p. 4.

16 I. Peter ii. 24.

17 Deut. vi. 4-9.

18 Exod. xxx. 7, 8, etc.

Simple instructions On The Holy Eucharist As A Sacrament And Sacrifice by The Very Rev. Geo. Edw. Canon Howe. Part 26.

THE CANON 

From the Sanctus to the Pater

This, the most sacred portion of the whole Sacrifice, is called the " Canon of the Mass," because, derived from a Greek word meaning a rule, it is the fixed rule to be strictly followed by the priest, there being only five Feasts during the ecclesiastical year, on which a slight variation in the words of one prayer is at all tolerated ; apart from these, there is never any change. The Church has a most jealous care of this part of her Liturgy, and severely forbids any innovation here, on account of its venerable antiquity, which all writers seem agreed to admit.

As an instance of this, it may be stated that in the year 1815, at a time when devotion to S. Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus, was spreading and gaining favour throughout the Church, an application was made, for this very reason, that his name might be added to those already found in the Canon. The reply, however, was in the negative, and his name has never been introduced; no addition has ever been made since the days of Pope Gregory the Great, in the sixth century.

The whole of the Canon, portions of which are probably the work of the Apostles themselves, is said in an inaudible voice, so as to promote recollection and devotion, in both priest and people, at this most solemn time. Moreover, it is desirable to prevent such sacred words becoming too familiar, as they might do, if they were recited aloud on every occasion, like other portions of the Mass. Silence, therefore, prevails, and, like a mysterious veil, envelops the Divine Mysteries, recalling Our Lord's sublime silence, at the time of His Passion, and also serving to remind us of the ancient Discipline of the Secret.

During the Canon, the Celebrant frequently makes the sign of the Cross over the Elements on the Altar, both before and even after the Consecration ! In the former case, it is the usual manner of imparting a benediction or blessing to creatures. But, in the second case, the idea of blessing the true Body and Blood of Our Lord, present on the Altar, is altogether repugnant. Then, the idea is to recall to our minds the Sacrifice of the Cross and its continuance in the Mass ; or, it is a profession of faith that, in the Mass, Christ crucified is present as priest and victim.

In the first prayer of the Canon, the Te igitur, we beg that God may vouchsafe to accept the gifts that are being offered to Him, and to grant peace to His Church ; we likewise pray for the Pope, the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church, for the Bishop of the diocese where Mass is being said, and finally for all members of the Church on earth.

The Memento of the Living is the second prayer of the Canon. Here the priest pauses a little while, to make a spiritual remembrance of those for whom he particularly wishes to pray, and especially of the person or object for which he is offering the Sacrifice.

A word should be said here on the ancient use of the Diptychs, often referred to in early Church history. The diptychs were folding tablets, on the inner sides of which were inscribed names of persons living and dead. Among the former were included the Supreme Pontiff, the Bishop, and the ruling Sovereign, those also for whose special benefit the Holy Sacrifice was being offered, who supplied the wants of the Altar, or contributed to the support of its ministers. In another column were inserted the names of deceased Faithful; to this reference will be made later.

These diptychs used to be read up to the assembled congregation, at High Mass by the Deacon, at Low Mass by the celebrant himself. This practice remained in vogue for many long centuries, till vanity led so many to have their names inscribed and announced, that in the eleventh century the Church thought well to discontinue what was proving to be a source of sin and disedification ; hence, the custom no longer exists, except in some churches of the East.

But a further instance of the Church's conservative spirit is seen in the fact that the letters N.N. are still to be retained in the Missal at this point, though the practice of reading up the names has long ceased to exist.

Next comes the Communicantes, wherein we beg of God to grant us His help and protection, through the merits and intercession of His Saints. The Mother of God and the twelve Apostles are first mentioned, and to their names are added those of twelve Martyrs, well known and honoured in and about Rome, who adorned the early days of the Church by shedding their blood in defence of her doctrines. Those who had died for the Faith, by being thus named in the Canon, were said to be canonised, that is, found worthy of being named at this point of the Mass; thus was canonisation originally effected.

A vestige of this is still retained at the present day ; for, when the Pope has solemnly declared any servant of God to be worthy of the honours of the Altar, he invokes him, in the Mass said on the occasion, after the other Saints named in the Canon.

While reciting the next prayer, Hanc igitur, the priest spreads his hands over the bread and wine, a ceremony borrowed from the Old Law, as we read in Exodus xxix. 10, 15, 19, where God commanded that Aaron should place his hands on the head of the victims he was about to offer in sacrifice. This action denotes that the priest charges the victim with his own sins and with those of the people whom he represents, the victim which is to mystically suffer and die instead of the sinner. What was symbolism in the olden day is reality now in the Christian Mass, wherein the Lamb of God, who took upon Himself the sins of the world, daily renews the sacrifice of Calvary for their expiation. As this prayer and its accompanying action so closely precede the Consecration, the Server here rings the bell, to remind the people of the near approach of the solemn moment.

During the next few words, five times does the priest again make the sign of the Cross over the oblations, recalling the five Wounds of Victim of Calvary, and reminding us it is the sacrifice of the Cross that is here being renewed.

And now we have reached the sacred moment of the Consecration, the essential act of the Sacrifice, when the Angels of Heaven are preparing to come down upon earth to adore their sacramental Lord. The words of this part of the Liturgy are almost the same as those of the Gospel, relating the institution of the Blessed Sacrament. Suiting the action to the words, the priest, in imitation of Our Lord, takes the bread in his hands, and raising his eyes heavenwards, as tradition says Our Lord did, he blesses it, and pronounces the mystical words: " This is my body," and behold! transubstantiation is thereupon effected—the bread has become the true Body of Christ!

How stupendous a change! How sublime a miracle! How awful an act! Yet how marvellously simple is it all! Man utters a few words, and God's love and power fulfil the wondrous change. It is a repetition of the act of creation : " Be light made : and light was made" (Gen. i. 3). It is a commemoration also of another sublime mystery, expressed in the simplest terms: " The Word was made flesh" (John i. 14). 22

At once the priest bends his knee to adore his Creator whom, all unworthy though he be, he now holds in his hands! The bell here rings gently, to remind the Faithful of what has taken place at the Altar, and invite their adoring worship. This tinkling of the bell should bring ease to our souls : there is joy in the very ringing of it, for does it not signify the new birth of the God-made-man, ever living to make intercession for us ?

" Sound, sound His praises higher still, And come, ye angels, to our aid : Tis God ! Tis God ! the very God Whose power both man and angels made ! "

This adoration of the Holy Eucharist is attested by all antiquity, even the earliest Fathers of the Church instructing their flocks to renew their faith in the Real Presence, and adore Him whom their faith acknowledges to have descended from Heaven to earth } surrounded by the invisible angels of His Court.

The priest rising immediately, elevates the Sacred Host for the Faithful to look upon and adore, symbolising the lifting up of Christ on the Cross. Reverence and devotion have led them to bow down during the whole time of the Consecration and Elevation, and the deep-rooted custom has become universal. Yet the very object of the priest's thus raising the Sacred Host is that the Faithful may rest their eyes on It and see their Lord in His sacramental form! To urge them to revert to the original idea, the late Pontiff Leo XIII. granted an indulgence to all such as should reverently look upon their uplifted Lord at this moment. Hence, such as assist at the Holy Sacrifice should raise their eyes, for a moment at least, and so justify the Elevation, which otherwise would have no meaning, while, at the same time, they will gain with ease the indulgence that is offered for the mere act of thus looking devoutly on the Sacred Host, as it is raised up before them!

The reader must here be reminded that this elevation of the consecrated elements did not take place till the eleventh century. In 1047 Berengarius, who has already been referred to, began to broach errors on the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament. These were promptly repudiated and condemned by the Church, and this ceremony — the Elevation — was unanimously adopted as a protest against the impieties and new doctrines of this heretic, and as a practical profession of faith in Our Lord's presence on the Altar, after the words of consecration have been uttered.

Devout Catholics must, during this solemn time, manifest both by outward demeanour and inward faith, the reverence they cherish towards the Eucharistic mysteries ; silent adoration is then their duty.' Silence during these moments produces a most impressive effect, and is by.all means to be encouraged.

Then follows the second Consecration, that of the wine in the chalice, with similar adoration and elevation. Thus two elements, bread and wine, are necessary for the Eucharistic Sacrifice, though one suffices for the Eucharistic Sacrament. This separate consecration of the bread and wine is, in a mystical sense, the painless immolation of the Divine Lamb, typifying that separation of His Blood from His Body, which took place on Calvary with the most painful reality.

It may be repeated here that, should the Celebrant die suddenly after either consecration, or be taken so seriously ill as to be unable to proceed further with the Mass, another priest must, if possible, be found to continue and complete it, even though (perhaps) he be not fasting; for, the Natural Law, requiring the completion of the Sacrifice, prevails over the law of fasting, which is merely of Ecclesiastical origin.

The first prayer after the Consecration is Unde et memores. The Mass of itself cannot but be pleasing in the sight of God, for Christ, the Victim, is His Own beloved Son, of infinite merit before him. Yet the priest and the Faithful also share in offering the Sacrifice, and this privilege should overpower them as they reflect upon their sins and unworthiness. Hence, as guilty beings, they here beg of God to accept their Sacrifice, as of old He was pleased to receive the offerings of Abel, Abraham, and Melchisedech. The sacrifices of the first two were, more than others, typical of the bloody Sacrifice of the Cross, while that of Melchisedech was a figure of the unbloody Sacrifice of the Mass. The Celebrant asks also that God's angel may carry the offering to the Altar on High, in sight of the Divine Majesty and His heavenly Court—a reference to the golden altar of the Apocalpyse viii. 3.

The sign of the Cross that the priest now makes over the consecrated elements is no longer here a blessing given, but a reminder that the Victim who died on the Cross now lies before us on the Altar. The Church avails herself of every occasion to impress on the minds of priest and people alike this great truth—that the Sacrifice of the Altar is the selfsame as that of the Cross. Hence, the frequent use of the Cross over the oblations, even after the Consecration.

The next point to notice is the Memento of the dead. The Church, from the days of the Apostles, has ever taught and practised prayer for her deceased children. It has ever been her belief that there is a Purgatory, or place of suffering after death, where those who die in the state of grace, but as yet not pure enough to enter Heaven, are detained for awhile, till their souls are sufficiently cleansed to appear in the presence of God. It was hardly likely, therefore, that the Church would pray for her living members, in this august Sacrifice, and omit to pray for those who are no longer with her on earth, but have entered the home of their eternity. Hence, we have at this point the " remembrance" of the dead, that is, the names of departed Faithful, inscribed on the Diptychs, were read up, and prayers were asked that they might be granted "a place of refreshment, light, and peace," that their sufferings might be mitigated, or even ended by their release from Purgatory and their entrance into Heaven. We are thus requested to pray, as S. Augustine remarks, " that such religious duty, whenever it becomes neglected by parents, children, relations, or friends, may be supplied by our pious and common mother, the Church."

Should a departed soul for whom Mass is offered be unable to benefit by it, either because eternally lost, or because already in Heaven, theologians commonly teach that such sacrifice is by no means lost, but the fruit of it becomes part of the general treasury of the Church, whence indulgences may be granted by the dispensers of God's mercy.

And next, the priest strikes his breast, like the Publican in the Temple, and utters aloud the words Nobis quoque peccatoribus, beginning the last prayer of the Canon. After interceding for the souls of the Faithful departed, he prays now for sinners upon earth, whose future is still uncertain and exposed to many dangers. By way of showing the earnestness of his petition, or as a sigh from the heart, he pronounces these first three words aloud, (the only words heard during the Canon,) all the rest being recited in a subdued voice throughout. Mention is made of Martyrs and Saints belonging to different orders and states in the Church, with whom we ask God to grant us, in spite of our sins, some part and fellowship.

At the end of this prayer, the priest holds the Sacred Host over the chalice and raises them a little from the Altar, and then replaces them. This was formerly the Elevation of the Mass, and, till the eleventh century, the only one. But it has been already explained how, during that century, the principal Elevation came to be made at the time of the Consecration, as a protest against the errors of Berengarius.

With the second (and now, minor elevation), the priest concludes the prayer, raising his voice, and saying per omnia secula seculorum, "World without end: amen." This ends the Canon of the Mass, and leads us into the last division.