diff --git "a/C013/Y01276.json" "b/C013/Y01276.json"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/C013/Y01276.json"
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+[
+{"source_document": "", "creation_year": 1276, "culture": " English\n", "content": "Produced by Don Kostuch, from scans obtained from Internet Archive.\n[Transcriber's notes:]\n  This work is derived from files on the Internet Archive:\n  Page numbers in this book are indicated by numbers enclosed in curly\n  braces, e.g. {99}. They have been located where page breaks occurred\n  in the original book.\n  The honorific \"Mr\" is without a following period in the original.\n  The period has been inserted in this transcription.\n[End Transcriber's notes.]\nTHE SYMBOLISM\nOF\n_Churches and Church Ornaments_\nA TRANSLATION OF THE FIRST BOOK OF THE\n_Rationale Divinorum Officiorum_\nWRITTEN BY\nWILLIAM DURANDUS\nSOMETIME BISHOP OF MENDE\n_WITH AN INTRODUCTORY ESSAY AND NOTES_\nBY\nTHE REV. JOHN MASON NEALE, B.A.\nAND\nTHE REV. BENJAMIN WEBB, B.A.\nOF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE\n_New York_\nCHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS\n743 AND 745 BROADWAY\nDEDICATED TO\nTHE CAMBRIDGE CAMDEN SOCIETY\nBY\nTWO OF ITS FOUNDERS\n{vii}\nPREFACE\nThe interest which has lately been displayed, as on all subjects\nconnected with Ecclesiology, so more especially on the symbolical\nbearing of Church Architecture, has led us to imagine that a\ntranslation of the most valuable work on Symbolism which the middle\nages can furnish, might not, at the present time, be unacceptable to\nchurchmen.\nWritten, however, at a period when Christian Architecture had not\nattained its full glory, it necessarily leaves untouched many\narrangements of similar tendency, subsequently adopted; addressed to\nthose who had not yet learnt to doubt everything not formally proved,\nit assumes many points which may now seem to require confirmation: and\ncomposed for the use of a clergy habituated to a most figurative\nritual, it passes over much as well known, which is now forgotten or\nneglected. On these accounts we have considered it necessary to prefix\nan Essay on the subject; in which we have endeavoured to prove that\nCatholic Architecture must necessarily be symbolical; to answer the\nmore common objections to the system; and to elucidate it by reference\nto actual examples, and notices of the figurative arrangements of our\nown churches. We have also added notes, where any obscurity seemed\n{viii} to require explanation; and we have, both in them and in the\nAppendix, thrown together such passages from Martene, Beleth, S.\nIsidore of Seville, Hugo de S. Victore, and other writers, as tended\nto explain and to enforce the remarks of Durandus.\nWith reference to the author himself, but little is known; and that\nlittle has been told before.\nWilliam Durandus was born at Puy-moisson, in Provence, about the year\n1220. A legend of his native country is told in the present work.\n[Footnote 1] He became the pupil of Henry de Luza, afterwards Cardinal\nof Ostia; and taught canon law at Modena. On this subject he composed\na most learned work, the _Speculum Juris_; from which he obtained the\ntitle of _Speculator_: as also another treatise called _Repertorium\nJuris_: and a _Breviarium Glossarum in Textum Juris Canonici_. His\nhigh attainments marked him [Footnote 2] out for the office of\nChaplain to Pope Clement IV.\n  [Footnote 1: See p. 126]\n  [Footnote 2:  _Mutata fortuna_, says Doard: to what this refers, we\n  know not.]\nHe was afterwards Auditor of the Sacred Palace; and Legate to Pope\nGregory X at the Council of Lyons. He was then made Captain of the\nPapal forces; in which post he assisted at the reduction of several\nrebellious cities, and behaved with great courage. He finally became\nBishop of Mende in 1286. While in this post, and resident at Rome (for\nhe did not personally visit his diocese till 1291, the administration\nof the diocese being perhaps left to a nephew of the same name, who\nsucceeded him), he finished the work, of the first book of which a\ntranslation is presented to the reader. But it probably {ix} was\ncommenced before; for we find from a passage in its latter half, that\nso far had been written during the course of this same year 1286. And\nthere is no difficulty in the title, _Episcopus Miniatensis_, which he\ngives himself in the Proeme, as this could easily have been added\nafterwards. But it was certainly published, as Martene observes,\nbefore 1295; because Durandus speaks of the Feasts of the Holy\nApostles as _semi-doubles_, whereas in that year, by a constitution of\nPope Urban, they were commanded to be observed as doubles. The time at\nwhich the treatise was written more especially demands our attention;\nbecause, did we imagine it only a few years later than it really was,\nwe might well be astonished at finding no reference to the Symbolism\nof the Decorated Style. The interruptions amidst which the _Rationale_\nwas written are feelingly alluded to by its author, in the Epilogue\n(p. 161). He also wrote a treatise _De Modo Concilii Generalis\nhabendi,_ probably either suggested by, or preparatory to, that of\nLyons. He afterwards went on an embassy from the Pope to the Sultan;\nand is by some said to have ended this life at Nicosia in Cyprus. But\nthe fact is not so: for having governed his diocese ten years, and\nhaving refused the proffered Archbishopric of Ravenna, he departed at\nRome on the Feast of All Saints, 1296, being buried in the Church of\nSancta Maria super Minervam, where his monument is yet to be seen,\nwith the following inscription:--\n  Hic jacet egregius doctor proesul Mimatensis,\n  Nomine Duranti Guillelmus regula morum:\n  Splendor honestatis et casti candor amoris\n  Altum consiliis spatiosum mente serenum\n  Hunc insignibat immotum turbine mentis.\n  Mente pius, sermone gravis, gressuque modestus,\n  Extitit infestus super hostes more leonis:\n  Indomitos domuit populos, ferroque rebelles,\n  Impulit, Ecclesiae victor servire co\u00ebgit.\n  Comprobat officiis, paruit Romania sceptro\n  Belligeri comitis Martini tempore quarti:\n  Edidit in Jure librum, quo jus reperitur:\n  Et Speculum Juris, et patrum Pontificale:\n  Et Rationale Divinorum patefecit:\n  Instruxit clerum scriptis, monuitque statutis:\n  Gregorii deni, Nicolai scita perenni\n  Glossa diffudit populis, sensusque profundos:\n  Jure dedit mentes et corpus luce studentum:\n  Quem memori laude genuit Provincia dignum:\n  Et dedit a Podio Missone diaecesis ilium:\n  Inde Biterrensis, praesignis curia Papae:\n  Dum foret ecclesiae Mimatensis sede quietus,\n  Hunc vocat octavus Bonifacius; altius ilium\n  Promovet; hic renuit Ravennae praesul haberi.\n  Fit comes invictus simul hinc et marchio tandem,\n  Et Romam rediit: Domini sub mille trecentis\n  (Quatuor amotis) annis: tumulante Minerva.\n  Surripit hunc festiva dies, & prima Novembris.\n  Guadia cum Sanctis tenet Omnibus inde sacerdos:\n  Pro quo perpetuo datur haec celebrare capella.\nThe _Rationale_ was the first work, from the pen of an uninspired\nwriter, ever printed. The _editio princeps_ appeared at the press of\nFust in 1459; being preceded only by the Psalters of 1457 and 1459. It\nis, of course, of the most extreme rarity: the beauty of the\ntypography has seldom been exceeded. Chalmers mentions, besides this,\nthirteen editions in the fifteenth, and thirteen in the sixteenth\ncentury: all of them are very rare.\n{xi}\nThe editions with which we are acquainted, are those of Rome 1473;\ntranslation has been made from the editions of 1473 and 1599. The\nformer is a magnificent specimen of typography: the words are\nexcessively contracted; and there are double columns to each page. Our\ncopy is partially illuminated; and the binding is ornamented with a\nborder of the Evangelistic Symbols. The latter contains also the first\nedition of the work of Beleth, and is a reprint of Doard's Lyons\nedition of 1565. Doard dedicated it to his brother, Bishop of\nMarseilles; and prefixed a Preface, in which he bestows a well-merited\neulogium on Durandus, and mentions the care taken in correcting and\nrevising the work. He also added some notes, of little worth. The\nVenice reprint is so vicious a specimen of typography, that from it\nalone the sense could in many places hardly be explained. Our copy\nbelonged to Bishop White Kennett, who appears to have studied it\ndiligently.\nWe must now say a few words as on our own share in the work. With\nrespect to the Introduction, fully convinced as we are of the truth\nand importance of the general principle maintained in it, we do not\nwish to press, as matter of certainty, all or any of the minor details\ninto which that theory is carried. We believe, indeed, that the more\nthe subject has been studied, the more truthful our views will appear\nto be: but we wish the reader to bear in mind, that the weakness of\nany portion of them is no argument against their reception, as a\nwhole. At the same time, none can be more aware than ourselves how\nmuch more ably such views might have been advocated: we have not,\nhowever, spared {xii} time or pains in the study of the subject; 'and\nif we have done meanly, it is that we could attain unto.'\nIn the Translation, we have endeavoured, too often unsuccessfully, to\nretain the beautiful simplicity of the original. In the obscure\npassages, of which there are not a few, we have mentioned the\ndifficulty in the notes, lest the reader, by our mistake, should be\nled into error himself.\nThe quotations from Holy Scripture are given in the authorised\nversion, except where, to bring out the author's full meaning, it was\nnecessary to have recourse to the Vulgate; and we have then translated\nliterally from that.\nWe have felt no small pleasure in thus enabling this excellent\nprelate, though at so far distant a land from his own, and after a\nsilence of nearly six hundred years, being dead, yet to speak: and if\nthe following pages are at all useful in pointing out the sacramental\ncharacter of Catholic art, we shall be abundantly rewarded, as being\nfellow-workers with him in the setting forth of one, now too much\nforgotten, Church principle.\n_Michaelmas_, 1842.\nINTRODUCTORY ESSAY\nSACRAMENTALITY: A PRINCIPLE OF\nECCLESIASTICAL DESIGN\nANALYSIS OF THE INTRODUCTORY ESSAY\nINTRODUCTION.\n  1. Spread of the study of Church Architecture.\n  2. Obvious, but indefinable, difference between old and new churches.\n     Wherein this consists.\n     Not in association,\n     Nor in correctness of details,\n     Nor in the Picturesque,\n     Nor in the Mechanical advantages,\n     But in Reality considered, in an enlarged view, as Sacramentality.\n  3. This probable,\n     from examples, and\n        promises in Holy Scripture.\n        Catholic consent,\n        examples to the contrary,\n        philosophical reasons.\n  4. Enunciation of the subject.\n  5. Writers on the subject,\n     Pugin, Poole, Lewis, Coddington, the writers of the\n       Cambridge Camden Society.\nA. ARGUMENTS FOR SYMBOLISM.\n  I. A PRIORI.\n      Symbolising spirit of Catholic Antiquity, in\n        (a) Interpretation of Holy Scriptures.\n        (b) Analogy of the Jewish Ceremonies.\n        (c) Private manners.\n        (d) Emblems in Catacombs, etc.\n        (e) Symbolical interpretation of Heathen writers.\n  II. ANALOGICAL.\n      i. Examples of other nations.\n              (2) Legal observances.\n      (c) Infidels.\n          (1) Hindu and Egyptian Mythology\n          (2) Persian Poetry.\n      (d) Heretics.\n{xvi}\n      ii. From Nature.\n          (b) Resurrection.\n          (c) Self-sacrifice,\n      iii. From Art.\n          (a) Sculpture,\n          (d) Language of Flowers.\n      iv. Parabolical teaching.\n  III. PHILOSOPHICAL.\n    Objective answering to Subjective.\n    All effect sacramental of the efficient.\n    Sacramentality of all Religion.\n    Ritualism peculiarly and necessarily sacramental.\n    Church Architecture, a condition of Ritualism.\n    Necessities induce accidents: and these material expressions.\n    Example:\n       Necessities of Ritualism, and their expressions in earlier\n       and later ages.\n    Hence Symbolism.\n        Essential.\n        Intended.\n        Conventional, which again becomes intended.\n  IV. ANALYTICAL.\n      1. Cruciformity.\n      2. Ascent to Altar.\n      3. Orientation.\n      4. Verticality.\n  V. INDUCTIVE.\n      Express and continuous testimony.\n          (a) Apostolical Constitutions.\n          (c) Symbolical writers.\n      Actual examples.\n  VI. RECAPITULATION.\n  B. EXAMPLES OF SYMBOLISM.\n      I. DOCTRINES.\n          (a) The Holy Trinity, set forth in\n              i. Nave and Two Aisles.\n              ii. Chancel, Nave and Apse,\n              iii. Clerestory, Triforium, and Pier Arches,\n              iv. Triple windows.\n              vi. Triplicity of mouldings,\n              vii. Minor details.\n          (b) Regeneration.\n              i. The octagonal form of Fonts,\n              ii. The octagonal form of Piers,\n          (c) Atonement.\n              i. Cruciformity.\n              ii. Deviation of Orientation.\n              iii. Double Cross,\n              iv. The threat Rood.\n          (d) Communion of Saints.\n      II. DETAILS.\n         (a) Windows: a series of examples.\n             i. Norman tympana.\n             ii. Double doors in Early English.\n                (a) These explained in two ways,\n                    (1) Christ's entrance into the world.\n                   (2) Our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.\n                (b) Difference between mouldings of Chancel arches and doors.\n         (d) Chancel Arch and Rood Screen.\n         (e) Monuments.\n             (a) Difference of ancient and modern symbolism in these,\n                 (1) Sceptical character of the present age.\n                 (2) Paganism of modern design.\n                 (3) Reality of ancient design.\n             (b) Historical details of Monuments.\n         (f) Gurgoyles and Poppyheads.\n         (g) Flowers used in architecture.\n  C. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.\n      1. Inequality of type and antitype.\n      2. Difference of Symbolism in the same arrangement.\n      3. Mechanical origin.\n  D. HISTORY OF SYMBOLISM.\n      1. Norman; as symbolising facts.\n      2. Early English; as symbolising doctrines.\n      3. Decorated; as symbolising the connection of doctrines.\n      4. Perpendicular; as symbolising the progress of Erastianism.\n      5. Flamboyant, etc.\n      6. Post Reformation Symbolism.\n  E. CONCLUSION.\n      Contrast between a modern and ancient Church.\n_Laus Deo_\n{xix}\nINTRODUCTORY ESSAY\nCHAPTER I\nINTRODUCTORY\nThe study of Church Architecture has within the last few years become\nso general, and a love for it so widely diffused, that whereas, in a\nformer generation it was a task to excite either, in the present it is\nrather an object to direct both. An age of church-building, such as\nthis, ought to produce good architects, not only from the great\nencouragement given to their professional efforts, but from the\nincreasing appreciation of the principles and powers of their art. And\nyet it cannot be denied, however we may account for the fact, that (at\nleast among those for whom we write, the members of our own\ncommunion), no architect has as yet arisen, who appears destined to be\nthe reviver of Christian art. It is not that the rules of the science\nhave not been studied, that the examples bequeathed to us have not\nbeen imitated, that the details are not understood. We have (though\nthey are but few) modern buildings of the most perfect proportions, of\nthe most faultless details, and reared with lavish expense. It is that\nthere is an undefined--perhaps almost undefinable--difference between\na true 'old church,' and the most perfect of modern temples. In the\nformer, at least till late in the Perpendicular era, we feel that,\nhowever {xx} strange the proportions, or extraordinary the details,\nthe effect is church-like. In the latter, we may not be able to blame;\nbut from a certain feeling of unsatisfactoriness, we cannot praise.\nThe solution of the problem,--What is it that causes this difference?\nhas been often attempted, sometimes with partial, but never with\ncomplete, success. That most commonly given is the following:--The\neffect of association in old buildings,--the mellowing power of\ntime,--the evident antiquity of surrounding objects,--the natural\nbeauties of foliage, moss, and ivy, that require centuries to reach\nperfection;--as on the other hand, the bareness, the newness, nay even\nthe sharpness and vigour of new work; these, it is said, are\nsufficient to stamp a different character on each. There is doubtless\nsomething in this; but that it is not the whole cause is evident from\nthe fact, that give a modern church all the above mentioned advantages\non paper, and an experienced eye will soon detect it to be modern.\nThose writers who, as Grose, Milner, and Carter, lived before the\ndetails of Christian art were understood, seem to have placed its\nperfection in a thorough knowledge of these: experience has proved\nthem wrong. Others, as Mr. Petit,  [Footnote 3] have made a kind of\nideal picturesque; and, having exalted the phantasm into an idol, have\nfallen down and worshipped it. Others, again, have sought for an\nexplanation of the difficulty in mathematical contrivance and\nmechanical ingenuity; and the result has been little more than the\ndiscovery of curious eave-drains, and wonderful cast-iron roof-work.\nLastly, Mr. Pugin (_cum talis sis, utinain noster esses!_) has placed\nthe thing required in _Reality_. {xxi} That is, to quote his own\nwords, in making these the two great rules of design:--\n1. That there should be no features about a building which are not\nnecessary for convenience, construction, or propriety:\n2. That all ornament should consist of enrichment of the essential\nconstruction of a building.'  [Footnote 4] And we may add, as a\ncorollary, still quoting the same writer:--'The smallest detail should\nhave a meaning or serve a purpose: the construction itself should vary\nwith the material employed: and the designs should be adapted to the\nmaterial in which they are to be executed.' Still, most true and most\nimportant as are these remarks, we must insist on one more axiom,\notherwise Christian art will but mock us, and not show us wherein its\ngreat strength lieth.\n  [Footnote 3: See the review of his work in the _Ecclesiologist_,\n  [Footnote 4: Pugin's 'True Principles,' p. 1.]\nA Catholic architect must be a Catholic in heart. Simple knowledge\nwill no more enable a man to build up God's material, than His\nspiritual temples. In ancient times, the finest buildings were\ndesigned by the holiest bishops. Wykeham and Poore will occur to every\nchurchman. And we have every reason to believe, from God's Word, from\nCatholic consent, and even from philosophical principles, that such\nmust always be the case.\nHoly Scripture, in mentioning the selection of Bezaleel and Aholiab,\nas architects of the Tabernacle, expressly asserts them to have been\nfilled 'with the Spirit of God in wisdom, and in understanding, and in\nknowledge, and in all manner of workmanship, to devise cunning works,\nto work in gold, and in silver and in brass, and in cutting of stones\nto set them, and in carving of timber, to work in all manner of\nworkmanship.' And this indeed is only a part of the blessing of the\npure in heart: they see God, the Fountain of Beauty, even in this\nlife; as they shall see Him, the Fountain of Holiness, in the {xxii}\nnext. From Catholic consent we may learn the same truth. Why else was\nEcclesiastical Architecture made a part of the profession of Clerks,\nthan because it was considered that the purity and holiness of that\nprofession fitted them best for so great a work?   [Footnote 5]\n  [Footnote 5: Compare the general drift of the Address to Paulinus.\n  _Eusebius_. H. E. X. 4.]\nNay, we have remarkable proofs that feeling without knowledge will do\nmore than knowledge without feeling. There are instances of\nbuildings--Lisbon cathedral and S. Peter's College chapel, Cambridge,\nare cases in point--which, with Debased or Italian details, have\nnevertheless Christian effect. And we have several similar cases, more\nparticularly in the way of towers.\nNow, allowing the respectability, which attaches itself to the\nprofession of a modern architect, and the high character of many in\nthat profession, none would assert that they, as a body, make it a\nmatter of devotion and prayer; that they work for the Church alone\nregardless of themselves; that they build in faith, and to the glory\nof God.\nIn truth, architecture has become too much a profession: it is made\nthe means of gaining a livelihood, and is viewed as a path to\nhonourable distinction, instead of being the study of the devout\necclesiastic, who matures his noble conceptions with the advantage of\nthat profound meditation only attainable in the contemplative life,\nwho, without thought of recompense or fame, has no end in view but the\nraising a temple, worthy of its high end, and emblematical of the\nfaith which is to be maintained within its walls. It is clear that\nmodern architects are in a very different position from their\npredecessors, with respect to these advantages. We are not prepared to\nsay that none but monks ought to design churches, or that it is\nimpossible for a professional {xxiii} architect to build with the\ndevotion and faith of an earlier time. But we do protest against the\nmerely business-like spirit of the modern profession, and demand from\nthem a more elevated and directly religious habit of mind. We surely\nought to look at least for church-membership from one who ventures to\ndesign a church. There cannot be a more painful idea than that a\nseparatist should be allowed to build a House of God, when he himself\nknows nothing of the ritual and worship of the Church from which he\nhas strayed; to prepare both font and altar, when perchance he knows\nnothing of either Sacrament but that he has always despised them. Or,\nagain, to think that any churchman should allow himself to build a\nconventicle, and even sometimes to prostitute the speaking\narchitecture of the Church to the service of Her bitterest enemies!\nWhat idea can such a person have formed of the reality of church\narchitecture? Conceive a churchman designing a triple window, admitted\nemblem of the Most Holy Trinity, for a congregation of Socinians! We\nwish to vindicate the dignity of this noble science against the\ntreason of its own professors. If architecture is anything more than a\nmere trade; if it is indeed a liberal, intellectual art, a true branch\nof poesy, let us prize its reality and meaning and truthfulness, and\nat least not expose ourselves by giving to two contraries one and the\nsame material expression.\nIt is objected that architects have a right to the same professional\nconscience that is claimed, for instance, by a barrister. To which we\ncan only reply, that it must be a strange morality which will justify\na pleader in violating truth; and how much worse for an architect to\nviolate truth in things immediately connected with the House and\nworship of God? It may be asked, Do we mean to imply then that a\nchurch architect ought never {xxiv} to undertake any secular building?\nPerhaps, as things are, we cannot expect so much as this now: but we\ncan never believe that the man who engages to design union-houses, or\nprisons, or assembly-rooms, and gives the dregs of his time to\nchurch-building, is likely to produce a good church, or, in short, can\nexpect to be filled from above with the Spirit of Wisdom. The church\narchitect must, we are persuaded, make very great sacrifices: he must\nforego all lucrative undertakings, if they may not be carried through\nupon those principles which he believes necessary for every good\nbuilding; and particularly if the end to be answered, or the wants to\nbe provided for, are in themselves unjustifiable or mischievous. Even\nin church-building itself, he must see many an unworthy rival\npreferred to him, who will condescend to pander to the whims and\ncomfort of a church-committee, will suit his design to any standard of\nritualism which may be suggested by his own ignorance, or others'\nprivate judgment, who will consent to defile a building meant for\nGod's worship with pews and galleries and prayer-pulpits and\ncommodious vestries. But hard as the trial may be, a church architect\nmust submit to it, rather than recede from the principles which he\nknows to be the very foundation of his art. We would go further even,\nand deny the possibility of any architect's success in all the\ndifferent styles of Pointed architecture, not to mention the orders of\nGreece and Rome, Vitruvian, Palladian, Cinque Cento, Wrennian, nay\neven Chinese, Swiss, Hindoo, and Egyptian at once. We have not even\nnow exhausted the list of styles in which a modern architect is\nsupposed to be able to design. It is even more absurd than if every\nmodern painter were expected, and should profess, to paint equally\nwell in the styles of Perugino, Francia, Raphael, Holbein, Claude, the\nPoussins, Salvator Rosa, Correggio, Van Eyck, {xxv} Teniers, Rubens,\nMurillo, Reynolds, West, Gainsborough, Overbeck, and Copley Fielding\nall at once! An architect ought indeed to be acquainted, and the more\nthe better, with all styles of building: but if architecture, as we\nsaid before, is a branch of poesy, if the poet's mind is to have any\nindividuality, he must design in one style, and one style only. For\nthe Anglican architect, it will be necessary to know enough of the\nearlier styles to be able to restore the deeply interesting churches,\nwhich they have left us as precious heirlooms; enough of the Debased\nstyles, to take warning from their decline: but for his own style, he\nshould choose the glorious architecture of the fourteenth century;\nand, just as no man has more than one hand-writing, so in this one\nlanguage alone will he express his architectural ideas.\nWe cannot leave this topic without referring to what the Cambridge\nCamden Society has said with respect to architectural competition.\n[Footnote 6] _It is a fact_ that at this time many competing designs\nare manufactured in an architect's office, by some of his clerks, as\nif by machinery: if a given plan is chosen, the architect is summoned,\nand sees _his_ (!) design for the first time, when he is introduced to\nthe smiling committee-men. It is another fact that there is at this\ntime in London a small body of persons, with no other qualification\nthan that of having been draughtsmen in an architect's office, who\n_get up_ a set of competing designs for any aspirant who chooses to\ngive them a few instructions, and to pay them for their trouble. How\nmuch it is to be wished that there were some examination of an\narchitect's qualifications, before he should be allowed to assume the\nname! It seems strange that the more able members of the profession do\nnot themselves feel some _esprit de corps_, and do not at {xxvi} least\nendeavour to claim for their art its full dignity and importance. We\nfear however that very few, as yet, take that _religions_ view of\ntheir profession, which we have shown to be seemly, even if not\nessential. If, however, we succeed in proving that religion enters\nvery largely into the principles of church architecture, a religious\n_ethos_, we repeat, is _essential_ to a church architect. At all\nevents, in an investigation into the differences between ancient and\nmodern church architecture, the contrast between the ancient and\nmodern builders could not be overlooked: and it is not too much to\nhope that some, at least, may be struck by the fact, that the deeply\nreligious habits of the builders of old, the hours, the cloister, the\ndiscipline, the obedience, resulted in their matchless works; while\nthe worldliness, vanity, dissipation, and patronage of our own\narchitects issue in unvarying and hopeless failure.\n  [Footnote 6: See _Ecclesiologist_, vol. i, pp. 69, 85.]\nWe said that there were philosophical reasons for the belief that we\nmust have architects--before we can have buildings--like those of old.\nIf it be true that an esoteric signification, or, as we shall call it,\n_Sacramentality_,  [Footnote 7] ran through all the arrangements and\ndetails of Christian architecture, emblematical of Christian\ndiscipline, and suggested by Christian devotion; then must the\ndiscipline have been practised, and the devotion felt, before a\nChristian temple can be reared. That this esoteric meaning, or\nsymbolism, does exist, we are now to endeavour to prove.\n  [Footnote 7: It may be proper to distinguish between five terms, too\n  generally vaguely employed in common, and which we shall often have\n  occasion to use: we mean, _allegorical, symbolical, typical,\n  figurative_, and _sacramental_.\n  'Allegory employs fictitious things and personages to shadow out the\n  truth: Symbolism uses real personages and real actions (and real\n  things) as symbols of the truth:' _British Critic_, No. lxv. p. 121.\n  Sacramentality is symbolism applied to the truth [Greek text], the\n  teaching of the Church, by the hands of the teacher: a Type is a\n  symbol intended from the first: a Figure is a symbol not discovered\n  till after the thing figurative has had a being.]\n{xxvii}\nWe assert, then, that _Sacramentality_ is that characteristic which so\nstrikingly distinguishes ancient ecclesiastical architecture from our\nown. By this word we mean to convey the idea that, by the outward and\nvisible form, is signified something inward and spiritual: that the\nmaterial fabric symbolises, embodies, figures, represents, expresses,\nanswers to, some abstract meaning. Consequently, unless this ideal be\nitself true, or be rightly understood, he who seeks to build a\nChristian church may embody a false or incomplete or mistaken ideal,\nbut will not develope the true one. Hence, while the Parthenon, or a\nconventicle, or a modern church, may be conceived to have, on the one\nhand, so much _truthfulness_, as to symbolise respectively the\ngraceful, but pagan, worship of Athene--the private judgment of the\ndissenter--and the warped or ill-understood or puritanised religious\nethos of the modern churchman; and, on the other hand, to have so much\n_reality_ as to carry out most satisfactorily Mr. Pugin's canons; yet,\ninasmuch as in neither case was the builder's ideal the true one, so\nin neither case is his architecture in any way adapted to, or an\nembodiment of, the ideal of the Church. Reality, then, is not of\nitself sufficient. What can be more _real_ than a pyramid, yet what\nless Christian? It must be Christian reality, the true expression of a\ntrue ideal, which makes Catholic architecture what it is. This\nChristian reality, we would call _Sacramentality_; investing that\nsymbolical truthfulness, which it has in common with _every_ true\nexpression, with a greater force and holiness, both from the greater\npurity of the perfect truth which it embodies, and from the\nassociation which this name will give it with those adorable and\nconsummate examples of the same {xxviii} principle, infinitely more\ndeveloped, and infinitely more holy in the spiritual grace which they\nsignify and convey,--the Blessed Sacraments of the Church.\nThe modern writers who have treated on Symbolism seem to have taken\nrespectively very partial views of the subject. Mr. Pugin does not\nseem in his books to recognise the particular principle which we have\nenunciated. We have shown that his law about Reality is true so far as\nit goes, but that it does not go far enough. He himself, for example,\nis now contemplating a work on the reality of domestic, as before of\necclesiastical, architecture. Now, nothing can be more true, nothing\nmore useful, than this. Yet even he does not seem to have discerned\nthat as contact with the Church endues with a new sanctity, and\nelevates every form and every principle of art: so in a peculiar sense\nthe sacred end to which church architecture is subservient, elevates\nand sanctifies that reality which must be a condition of its goodness\nin common with _all_ good architecture; in short, raises this\nprinciple of Reality into one of Sacramentality. We should be sorry to\nassert that Mr. Pugin does not feel this, though we are not aware that\nhe has expressed it in his writings: but in his most lasting writings,\nhis churches namely, it is clear that the principle, if not\nintentionally even, and if only incompletely, has not been without a\ngreat influence on that master mind. Yet even in these we could point\nto details, and in some of his earlier works to something more than\ndetails, which shew that there is something wanting; that in the bold\nexpedients and fearless licence which his genius has led him to\nemploy, he has occasionally gone wrong; not from the fact of his\ndeparture from strict precedent, and his vindication of a certain\narchitectural freedom, but because in these escapements from\nauthority, he has not invariably kept in view the { xxix} principle\nnow advocated. However the author of the 'True Principles' might point\nto his churches, to prove that a reverent and religious mind, employed\nin administering to the material wants of the Church, (even though\nthat reverence be misapplied, and that Church in a schismatical\nposition), cannot fail to succeed, at least in some degree, in\nstamping upon his work the impress of his own faith and zeal, and in\nmaking it, at least to some extent, a living development and\nexpression of the true ideal.\nMr. Poole, the author of the 'Appropriate Character of Church\nArchitecture,' would appear to believe the symbolism of details rather\nthan any general principle. He was the first, we think, to reassert\nthat the octagonal form of fonts was figurative of Regeneration. In\nthe latter edition of his Book he has adopted several of the\nsymbolical interpretations advanced by the writers of the Cambridge\nCamden Society.\nMr. Lewis, in his illustrations of Kilpeck church (in an appendix to\nwhich he has printed a translation of some part of the 'Rationale' of\nour author), has given a treatise on symbolism generally, and has\napplied his principles to the explanation of the plan and details of\nthat particular church. His book excited some attention at the time of\npublication, and was met by considerable ridicule in many quarters. To\nthis we think it was fairly open, since the author did not seem to\nhave grasped the true view of the subject. He appears to believe that,\nfrom the very first, _all_ church architecture was _intentionally_\nsymbolical. Now this is an unlikely supposition, inasmuch as till\nchurch architecture was fully developed, we do not think that its real\nsignificancy was understood to its full extent by those who used it.\nThat it was, in its imperfect state, symbolical, we should be the last\nto deny; but it seems more in accordance {xxx} with probability, and\nmore in analogy with the progress of other arts, to believe that at\nfirst certain given wants induced and compelled certain adaptations to\nthose wants: which then _did_ symbolise the wants themselves; and\nwhich afterwards became intentionally symbolical. Now such a view as\nthis will explain satisfactorily how a Christian church might be\nprogressively developed from a Basilican model. Mr. Hope, in his essay\non Architecture, carries us back to the very earliest expedient likely\nto be adopted by a savage to protect him from weather, and from this\nderives every subsequent expansion of the art. Which may be true, and\nprobably is true, so far at least as this: that, however first\nacquired, the elementary knowledge of any method of building would be,\nlike all other knowledge, continually receiving additions and\nimprovements, till from the first bower of branches sprang the\nParthenon, and from that again Cologne or Westminster. But then it is\nclearly necessary to show some moral reason for so strange a\ndevelopment, so complete a change of form and style. Now the theory\nthat the ethos of Catholic architects working upon the materials made\nto hand, namely, the ancient orders of pagan architecture and (say)\nthe Basilican plan, gradually impressed itself upon these unpromising\nelements, and progressively developed from them a transcript of that\nethos in Christian architecture, is intelligible at least, and\npresents no such difficulty as Mr. Lewis's supposition that ancient\narchitects (he does not say when, or how long--but take Kilpeck church\nand say _Norman_ architects) designed intentionally on symbolical\nprinciples. We want in this case to be informed when the change took\nplace, from what period architects began to symbolise intentionally,\nat what time they forgot the traditions of church-building, which they\nmust have had, and commenced to carry new principles into practice.\n{xxxi} Nor, on this supposition, do we see why there should have been\nany progressive development, why the Basilican and Debased-Pagan\ntrammels were not cast away at once; nor why, if the _ideal_ of the\nNorman architect was true and perfect (that is if he were a true\nCatholic), its expression should not have been so too: nor why any\nNorman symbolism, thus originated, should ever have been discarded (as\nit has been in later styles), instead of remaining an integral and\nessential part of the material expression of the Church's mind. Now\nour view appears to be open to no such objection. On the one hand\nthere are given materials to work upon, and on the other a given\nspirit which is to mould and inform the mass. The contest goes on:\nmind gradually subdues matter, until in the complete development of\nChristian architecture we see the projection of the mind of the\nChurch. It is quite in analogy with the history and nature of the\nChurch, and with the workings of God's providence with respect to it,\nthat there should be this gradual expansion and development of truth.\nWe foresee the objection that will be raised against fixing on any\nperiod as that of the full ripeness of Christian art, and are prepared\nfor many sneers at our advocacy of the perfection of the Edwardian\narchitecture. But we are assured that, if there is any truth (not to\nsay in what is advanced in this essay, but) in what has ever been\nproposed by any who have appreciated the genius of Pointed\nArchitecture--to confine ourselves to our own subject--no other period\ncan be chosen at which all conditions of beauty, of detail, of general\neffect, of truthfulness, of reality are so fully answered as in this.\nAnd from this spring two important considerations. Firstly, the\ndecline of Christian art--which may be traced from this very period,\nif architecture be tried by any of the conditions which have been laid\ndown--was confessedly {xxxii} coincident with, and (if what we have\nsaid is true) was really symbolical of, those corruptions, which ended\nin the great rending of the Latin Church; the effects of, and\npenalties for, which remain to this day in full operation in the whole\nof Western Christendom. Secondly, the Decorated style may be indeed\nthe finest development of Christian architecture which the world has\nyet seen; but it does not follow that it is the greatest perfection\nwhich shall ever be arrived at. No: we too look forward, if it may be,\nto the time when even a new style of church architecture shall be\ngiven us, so glorious and beautiful and true, that Cologne will sink\ninto a fine example of a transitional period, when the zeal and faith\nand love of the reunited Church shall find their just expression in\nthe sacramental forms of Catholic art.\nBut besides the above objection to Mr. Lewis's theory we may mention\nthe arbitrary way in which he determines on things which are to be\nsymbolised, and then violently endeavours to find their expected\ntypes. This is quite at variance with the practice of any sober\nsymbolist; and more especially (as we shall hereafter have occasion to\npoint out) with that of Durandus. This forced sort of symbolism\nnaturally leads to a disregard of precedent and authority: and\naccordingly we remember to have heard of a design by this gentleman\nfor the arrangement of a chancel which professed to symbolise certain\nfacts and doctrines; but which, whatever might be the ingenuity of the\nsymbolism, was no less opposed to the constant rule of arrangement in\nancient churches, than it was practically absurd and inconvenient for\nthe purpose which it was meant to answer. Indeed, while Mr. Lewis\ninsists strongly on the symbolising of facts, he does not succeed in\ngrasping any general principle, any more than he sees the {xxxiii}\ndifficulty there is in the way of our receiving his supposition of an\nintention to symbolise from the first. No architect ever sat down with\nan analysed scheme of doctrines which he resolved to embody in his\nfuture building: in this, as in any other department of poesy, the\nresult is harmonious, significant, and complete, and may be resolved\ninto its elements, though these elements might never have been laid by\nthe poet as the foundation upon which to raise his superstructure.\nThat were like De La Harpe's theory that an epic poet should first\ndetermine on his moral, and then draw out such a plan for his poem as\nmay enable him to illustrate that moral.  [Footnote 8]\n  [Footnote 8: It is with pain that we have spoken of Mr. Lewis at\n  all, because every Ecclesiologist owes him a debt for his great\n  boldness in turning the public attention to the subject of\n  symbolism. Yet we believe that a prejudice has been excited by him\n  against that subject which it will be hard to get over; for we are\n  constrained to say, that greater absurdities were never printed than\n  some which have appeared in his book. His explanations of the west\n  end of Kilpeck church--his cool assumption when any bracket appears\n  more puzzling than usual that it is of later work, and therefore not\n  explainable--his random perversions of Scripture--his puerile\n  conceits about the door--deserve this criticism. This same south\n  door he extols as a perfect mine of ecclesiastical information,\n  while he confesses himself unable to explain the symbols wrought on\n  the two orders of the arch--that is about two-thirds of the whole!\n  It is strange, too, that in his restoration of the church, he should\n  have forgotten all about the bells--and have violated a fundamental\n  canon of symbolism, by terminating his western gable in a plain\n  Cross.]\nThe writers of the Cambridge Camden Society have carried out the\nsystem more fully and consistently than any others. It has evidently\ngrown upon them, during the process of their inquiries: yet in their\nearliest publications, we trace, though more obscurely, the same\nthing. Their 'Few Words to Church-Builders' acknowledged the principle\nto a far greater length; and the _Ecclesiologist_ has always acted\nupon it, even when not expressly referring to it. As a necessary\nconsequence, they were the first who dwelt on the absolute necessity\nof a distinct and spacious chancel; the first who recommended, and\n{xxxiv} where they could, insisted on, the re-introduction of the\nrood-screen; and the first to condemn the use of western triplets. The\nposition and shape of the font, the necessity of orientation, and some\nfew details, they have, but only in common with others, urged.\nThe Oxford Architectural Society have never recognised any given\nprinciples: and in consequence Littlemore is proposed by them as a\nmodel--a church either without, or else all, chancel; and either way a\nsolecism.\nAs might have been expected from a separatist, Rickman, in his\ntreatise, gives not a single line to the principle for which we\ncontend. Mr. Bloxam, in his excellent little work, though often\nreferring to it--more especially in the later editions which have\nappeared since the labours of the Cambridge Camden Society--yet\nhardly gives it that prominence which we might have expected from one\nwho possesses so just an idea of mediaeval arrangements and art.\nAmong the chief opposers of the system we may mention Mr. Coddington\nof Ware, who sees perfection in the clumsiness of Basilican\narrangements, and schism in the developed art of the middle ages. This\nwriter, as it has been observed in the _Ecclesiologist_, contends for\ntwo things:--1. That one great object of Romanism was to abolish the\ndistinction between the clergy and laity: 2. That another great object\nof the same Church, acting by its monks, (or, as he calls them,\nschismatical communities) was to exalt the clergy unduly above the\nlaity. The former assertion he does not attempt to prove: the latter\nhe supports by pointing to the arrangement of the rood-screen, which,\ntherefore, like the French Ambonoclasts, he wishes to pull down both\nin cathedrals and churches.\n{xxxv}\nThis brief review of the principal writers who have treated on the\nSymbolism of Churches and Church Ornaments, concludes our first\nchapter. In it we have endeavoured to point out an acknowledged\ndesideratum; to shew what suppositions have been advanced on the\nsubject; to set forth wherein, and for what reason, they fail of being\nsatisfactory; to enunciate the principle of _Sacramentality_ as\nessential for the full appreciation and successful imitation of\nancient church architecture; and finally, in referring to the works of\nsome later symbolists, to shew why their hypotheses are incomplete or\nuntenable. We have also brought under review the glaring contrasts\nbetween the methods of life of an ancient and modern architect; and,\nif we may so say, between the machinery of designing and the habit of\nmind in the two cases. We shall now proceed to examine those arguments\nwhich may lead us to suspect that some such principle as\nSacramentality really exists.\n{xxxvi}\nCHAPTER II\nTHE ARGUMENT A PRIORI\nIt will first be proper to consider whether, regarding the subject _\u00e0\npriori_, that is, looking at the habits and manners of those among\nwhom the symbolical system originated, if it originated anywhere, we\nhave reason to think them at all likely to induce that system. Now, as\nmatter of fact, we know that the train of thought, the every-day\nobservances, above all, the religious rites of the early Christians,\nwere in the highest degree figurative. The rite of Baptism gave the\nmost forcible of all sanctions to such a system; and while it\nsanctioned, it also suggested, some of the earliest specimens of\nChristian symbolism. Hence, when that rite was found to be, so to\nspeak, connected with the word formed by the initial letters of our\nBlessed Saviour's name and titles, arose the Mystic Fish: hence, as we\nshall see, the octagonal baptistery and font. Indeed, almost every\ngreat doctrine had been symbolised at a very early period of\nChristianity. The Resurrection was set forth in the Phoenix, rising\nimmortal from its ashes: the meritorious Passion of our Saviour, by\nthe Pelican, feeding its young with its own blood: the Sacrament of\nthe Holy Eucharist, by grapes and wheatears, or again by the blood\nflowing from the heart and feet of the Wounded Lamb into a chalice\nbeneath: the Christian's renewal of strength {xxxvii} thereby in the\nEagle, which descending grey and aged into the ocean, rises thence\nwith renewed strength and vigour: the Church, by the Ark, and the\nvessel  [Footnote 9] in which our Lord slept: the Christian's purity\nand innocence by the Dove:   [Footnote 10] again, by the same symbol\nthe souls   [Footnote 11] of those who suffered for the Truth: again,\nthough perhaps not so early, the Holy Spirit: the Apostles were also\nset forth as twelve Doves:   [Footnote 12] the Ascension of our\nSaviour by the Flying Bird; concerning which S. Gregory   [Footnote\n13] teaches, 'rightly is our Redeemer called a Bird, Whose Body\nascended freely into heaven': Martyrs also by birds let loose; for so\nTertullian,  [Footnote 14] 'There is one kind of flesh of fishes, that\nis of those who be regenerate by Holy Baptism; but another of birds,\nthat is of martyrs.'\n  [Footnote 9: Naviculum quippe ecclesiam cogitate,--turbulentum mare\n  hoc seculum.----_S. Aug. de Verb Dom_.]\n  [Footnote 10:\n    Quaeque super signum resident coeleste Columbae,\n    Simplicibus produnt regna patere Dei.\n  _S. Paulin. ep. 12, ad Sever_.]\n  [Footnote 11: Cum nollet idolis sacrificare (sc. S. Reparata) ecce,\n  gladio percutitur: cujus anima in Columbae specie de corpore egredi,\n  coelumque conscendere visa est.--_Martyrol. Rom. viii. Id. Oct._\n    Emicat inde Columba repens,\n    Martyris os nive candidior\n    Visa relinquere, et astra sequi:\n    Spiritus hic erat Eulaliae\n    Lacteolus, celer, innocuus.\n            _Pruden. Perist. Hymn. 9._\n  Compare also the Passion of S. Potitus,--Act. SS. Bollandi, 13 Jan.\n  So, in the cemetery of S. Calistus, a piece of glass was found by\n  Boldetti, on which S. Agnes was represented between two doves, the\n  symbols of her Virginity and Martyrdom.]\n  [Footnote 12:\n    Crucem corona lucido cingit globo\n    Cui coronas sunt corona Apostoli,\n    Quorum figura est in columbarum choro.\n  (S. Paulin. Epp.)]\n  [Footnote 13: In Evang. 29.]\n  [Footnote 14: De Resurrect. 52.]\n{xxxviii}\nThe caged bird is symbolical of the contrary; this has been found upon\nthe phial containing the blood of a martyr. Of this, Boldetti says,\n'It is represented on the mosaic of the ancient Tribune of S. Mary\nbeyond Tiber; one being seen at the side of Isaiah the Prophet, the\nother at that of the Prophet Jeremiah.' In the same way, partridges\nand peacocks, each with its own meaning are represented. So, again,\nlions, tigers, horses, oxen, strange fishes, and marine monsters,\nrepresent the fearful martyrdoms to which God's servants were exposed:\na point which the reader will do well to bear in mind, because in\ntreating of Norman mouldings we shall have occasion again to refer to\nthis matter. So, again, the extended hand symbolised Providence. We\nhave also the seven stars, the moon, and many other symbols of a\nsimilar kind. Nor must we forget the _Agnus Dei_, by which our Blessed\nLord Himself was represented; nor the _Pastor Bonus_, in which His own\nparable was still further parabolised. The Christian gems found in the\nCatacombs are all charged with some symbolical device. Upon these is\nthe ship for the Church, the palm for the martyr, and the instrument\nof torture: as well as the sacred monogram expressing our Saviour's\nname. The same symbol blazed on the _labarum_ of the first Christian\nEmperor; and the very coins symbolically showed that the Church had\nsubdued the kingdoms of this world. That fearful heresy, Gnosticism,\nwhich arose from an over-symbolising, shows, nevertheless how deeply\nthe principle, within due limits, belonged to the Church. The Gnostic\ngems exhibit the most monstrous perversions of symbolical\nrepresentations: the medals of Dioclesian bear a lying symbol of a\ncrushed and expiring Christianity. Later still, new symbols were\nadopted: mosaics, illuminations, ornaments, all bore some holy\nemblems. The monogram _ihs_ found in every church in Western\nChristendom: the corresponding symbol stamps the Eucharistic wafers of\nthe East.  [Footnote 15]\n  [Footnote 15: See on this subject the Cambridge Camden Society's\n  'Argument for the Greek Origin of the Monogram IHS.']\n{xxxix}\nThe symbols of the Evangelists were also of very early date, though\nnot, in all cases, appropriated as now: for the angel and the lion\nfluctuated between S. Matthew and S. Mark. Numbers, too, were fruitful\nof allegorical meaning; and the most ingenious combinations were used\nto elicit an esoteric meaning from them. By _one_, the Unity of the\nDeity was understood: by _two_, the divine and human Natures of the\nSaviour: by _three_, of course, the doctrine of the Most Holy Trinity:\nby _four_, the doctrine of the Four Evangelists: by _six_, the\nAttributes of the Deity: _seven_ represented the sevenfold graces of\nthe Holy Spirit: _eight_ (for a reason hereafter to be noticed),\nRegeneration: _twelve_, the glorious company, the Apostles, and,\ntropologically, the whole Church. And when a straightforward reference\nto any of these failed, they were added or combined, till the required\nmeaning was obtained. A single instance may suffice:--S. Augustine,\nwriting on that passage of S. Paul's, 'What? know ye not that the\nsaints shall judge the world?' after explaining (_Expos. super Psalm_.\nlxxxvi) the twelve thrones, which our Saviour mentions, of the whole\nChurch, as founded by and represented in the Apostles, finds a further\nmeaning. 'The parts of the world be four; the east, the west, the\nnorth, and the south:' and (adds the Father) 'they are constantly\nnamed in Holy Writ. From these four winds, saith the Lord in the\nGospel, shall the elect be gathered together: whence the Church is\ncalled from these four parts. Called, and how? By the Trinity. It is\nnot called, except by Baptism, in the name of the Father, and of the\nSon, and of the Holy Ghost. So four, multiplied by three, make\ntwelve.' In accidental numbers, too, a meaning was often found. No\nwonder that some beheld, in the three hundred and eighteen trained\nservants wherewith Abraham, the Father of the Faithful, routed the\ncombined kings, a type of the three hundred and eighteen Fathers of\nNicaea, by whom the Faithful rose triumphant over the Arian heresy.\n{xl}\nAgain, types and emblems without number were seen in the language of\nthe Psalmist, occurring so continuously in the services of the Church.\n'His faithfulness shall be thy buckler,' gives rise to a fine allegory\nof S. Bernard's, drawn from the triangular shape of the buckler used\nat the time when that Father wrote; even as we still see it, in the\neffigies of early knights. It protects the upper part of the body\ncompletely: the feet are less completely shielded. And so, remarks the\nsaint, does God's providence guard His people from spiritual dangers,\nimaged by those weapons which attack the upper, or more vital parts of\nthe body: but from temporal adversities He hath neither promised, nor\nwill give so complete protection.\nTo mention the symbolism which attached itself to the worship of the\nearly Church, would be to go through all its rites. Confirmation and\nMatrimony, and, above all, Baptism, were attended by ceremonies in the\nhighest degree symbolical. But it is needless to dwell on them; enough\nhas been said to prove the attachment which the Catholic Church has\never evinced to symbolism.\nBut the Sign of the Cross is that which gave the greatest scope to\nsymbolism.--Our readers will probably remember the passage of\nTertullian in which he says, 'we cross ourselves when we go out, and\nwhen we come in; when we lie down, and when we rise up,' etc. Indeed,\nas in everything they used, so in everything they saw, the Sign of the\nCross. The following lines from Donne are much to the purpose:\n{xli}\n  Since Christ embraced the Cross itself, dare I\n  His Image, th' Image of His Cross, deny?\n  Would I have profit by the Sacrifice,\n  And dare the chosen Altar to despise?\n  It bore all other sins, but is it fit\n  That it should bear the sin of scorning it?\n  Who from the picture would avert his eye,\n  How should he fly His pains, Who there did die?\n  From me no pulpit, nor misgrounded law.\n  Nor scandal taken, shall this Cross withdraw:\n  It shall not--nor it cannot--for the loss\n  Of this Cross were to me another Cross:\n  Better were worse: for no affliction.\n  No cross were so extreme, as to have none.\n  Who can blot out the Cross, which th' instrument\n  Of God dewed on him in the Sacrament?\n  Who can deny me power and liberty\n  'To stretch mine arms, and mine own Cross to be?\n  Swim--and at every stroke thou art thy Cross:\n  The mast and yard are theirs whom seas do toss.\n  Look down, thou seest our crosses in small things,\n  Look up, thou seest birds fly on crossed wings.\nWe will mention but one symbolical feature more in the trains of\nthought which were common among the early Christians. We refer to the\nesoteric meaning which was supposed to exist in the writings of\nheathen authors: as for example, when the Pollio of Virgil was\nimagined to point to the Saviour, and the Fortunate Isles of Pindar to\nParadise. It were easy but needless to dwell on this subject. The few\ninstances we have given are already amply sufficient to prove to some,\nto remind others, how symbolical was the religion of the early Church,\nand (we think) to establish our case _\u00e0 priori_.\n{xlii}\nCHAPTER III\nTHE ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY\nHaving dealt with the argument _\u00e0 priori_, we now proceed to show\nthat, from analogy, it is highly probable that the teaching of the\nChurch, as in other things, so in her material buildings, would be\nsymbolical.\nFirstly, let us look at other nations, and other religions. It need\nnot be said that the symbolism of the Jews was one of the most\nstriking features of their religion. It would be unnecessary to go\nthrough their tabernacle and temple rites, their sacrificial\nobservances, and their legal ceremonies. The Passover, the cleansing\nof the leper, the scape goat, the feast of tabernacles, the morning\nand evening sacrifice, the Sabbatical year, the Jubilee, were all in\nthe highest degree figurative. The very stones in the breastplate have\neach, according to the Rabbis, their mystical signification. And, as\nif still further to teach them the sacramentality, not only of things,\nbut of events, it pleased God to make all their most famous ancestors,\nchiefs, and leaders, _e.g._ Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses,\nJoshua, David, most remarkable types of the Messiah: nay, from the\nbeginning the principal doctrines of Christianity were, in some form\nor other, set forth. Regeneration and the Church, in the Flood and the\nArk: the Bread and Wine in the Manna and the Stricken Rock: the two\ndispensations in Sarah and {xliii} Hagar. Indeed the immense extent of\nsymbolism in the Old Testament was the mine of the Fathers. Every day\nthey brought to light some new wealth; and, if we press the symbolism\nof the Church further than it was actually intended, we are only\ntreading in the steps of her bishops and doctors. For while, of\ncourse, in commenting on and explaining the sacrifice of Isaac, the\ncovenant of circumcision, the captivity and exaltation of Joseph, they\nwere only developing the real meaning which God seems to have intended\nshould be set forth by those events, there are,--as we have already\nhinted,--many instances where their piety found an interpretation\nwhich was perhaps never intended. Thus, because Job, while all else\nthat belonged to him was restored double, had only the same number of\nchildren which he had lost--they have argued, that thus the separate\nexistence of souls was represented, as the Patriarch could not be said\nto have lost those who were in another state of existence.\nAnd if in the Old Testament we find authority for the principle of\nsymbolism, much more do we in the New. We shall presently have\noccasion to allude to the rise and progress of the sacramentality of\nBaptism: we may now refer more particularly to the frequency with\nwhich S. Paul symbolises the enactments of the law; as in the case of\nthe ox forbidden, while treading out the corn, to be muzzled. So\nagain, the Revelation is nothing but one continued symbolical poem.\nThe parabolic teaching of our Lord we shall presently notice.\nTo this we may add, the exoteric and esoteric signification of certain\nbooks, _e.g._, the Song of Solomon: the double interpretation of many\nof the prophecies, primarily of the earthly, principally of the\nheavenly Jerusalem: we may refer to the symbolical meaning attached,\nunder the Christian dispensation, to certain previously {xliv}\nestablished rites, as, for instance. Holy Matrimony. With symbolical\nwritings, enactments, events, personages, observances, buildings,\nvestments, for her guides and models, how could the Church Catholic\nfail of following symbolism, as a principle and a passion?\nBut not only is Christianity symbolical: every development of religion\nis, and must necessarily be so. On the Grecian mythology, we shall\nhave occasion to say something more presently. The symbolism of Plato,\nand still further development by Proclus and the later philosophers of\nhis school, will occur to every one. If it be asserted that the more\nit was touched and acted on by Christianity, the more symbolical did\nit become,--we only reply, So much the more to the purpose of our\nargument. But not only in Roman and Grecian Paganism is this the case.\nThe Hindoo religion has much of symbolism; and some of its most\nstriking fables, derived from whatever source--whether from unwritten\ntradition, or from contact with the Jews--possess this character\nwonderfully. Take, for instance, the example of Krishna suffering, and\nKrishna triumphant; represented, in the one case, by the figure of a\nman enveloped in the coils of a serpent, which fastens its teeth in\nhis heel; in the other, by the same man setting his foot on, and\ncrushing the head of the monster. Now here, it is true, the doctrine\nsymbolised has long been forgotten among those with whom the legend is\nsacred: we, on the contrary, have a very plain reference to the\npromise concerning the Seed of the Woman and the serpent's head. This\nis an instance of the fact, that Truth will live in a symbolical, long\nafter it has perished in every other form: and doubtless, when the\ntime for the conversion of India shall have arrived, thousands will\nreceive the truth the more willingly, in that they have had a\nrepresentation of it, distorted it is true, but not destroyed, set,\nfor so many centuries, before their eyes. {xlv} Some truths,\naccidentally impressed on a symbolical observance, may still live,\nthat otherwise must have perished: just as the only memory of some of\nthe beings that existed before the flood, is to be found in the\npetrified clay on which they accidentally happened to set their feet.\nThe Mahometan religion has also, though in an inferior degree, its\nsymbolism; and the reason of its inferiority in this respect is\nplain--because, namely, it is a religion of sense. Now Catholicity,\nwhich teaches men constantly to live above their senses, to mortify\ntheir passions, and to deny themselves;--nay even Hindooism, which, so\nfar as it approximates to the truth, preaches the same doctrine, must\nconstantly lead men by the seen to look on to the unseen. If\neverything material were not made sacramental of that which is\nimmaterial, so, as it were, bearing its own corrective with its own\ntemptation, man could hardly fail of walking by sight, rather than by\nfaith. But now, the Church, not content with warning us that we are in\nan enemy's country, boldly seizes on the enemy's goods, converting\nthem to her own use. Symbolism is thus the true Sign of the Cross,\nhallowing the unholy, and making safe the dangerous: the true salt\nwhich, being cast in, purified the unhealthy spring: the true meal\nwhich removed death from the Prophet's provision. Others may amuse\nthemselves by asserting that the Church in all that she does and\nenacts, is not symbolical:--we bless God for the knowledge that she\nis.\nWe need not dwell on the symbolism of heretics, insomuch as we shall\nhave occasion to refer to it in other parts of this essay. We will\nrather notice, that those to whom we have been but now referring,\nheathens and Mahomedans, have a way of discovering a subtle {xlvi}\nsymbolism in things which in themselves were not intended to have any\ndeeper meaning. We may mention the odes of Hafiz--the Anacreon, or\nrather perhaps, the Stesichorus, of Persia. These poems, speaking to\nthe casual reader of nothing but love, and wine, and garlands, and\nrosebuds, are seriously affirmed, by Persian critics, to contain a\ndeep esoteric reference to the communion of the soul with God; just as\nit has been wildly supposed, that under the name of Laura, Petrarch in\nfact only expressed that Immortal Beauty after which the soul of the\nChristian is constantly striving, and to which it is constantly\nadvancing. So in Dante, Beatrice is not only the poet's earthly love,\nbut, as it has been well shown by M. Ozanam, the representative of\nCatholic theology.\nTo dwell on the symbolism of Nature would lead us too far from our\npoint. But we must constantly bear in mind that Nature and the Church\nanswer to each other as implicit and explicit revelations of God.\nTherefore, whatever system is seen to run through the one, in all\nprobability runs through the other. Now, that the teaching of Nature\nis symbolical, none, we think, can deny. Shall we then wonder that the\nCatholic Church is in all her art and splendour sacramental of the\nBlessed Trinity, when Nature herself is so? Shall God have denied this\nsymbolism to the latter, while He has bestowed it on the former? Shall\nthere be a trinity of effect in every picture, a trinity of tone in\nevery note, a trinity of power in every mind, a trinity of essence in\nevery substance,--and shall not there be a trinity in the arrangements\nand details of church art? It were strange if the servant could teach\nwhat the mistress must be silent upon: that Natural Religion should be\nendued with capabilities not granted to Revealed Truth.\n{xlvii}\nIs not, again, the doctrine of the Resurrection wonderfully set forth\nby Nature? This symbolism is the more remarkable, in that to the\nancients the rising of the sun and the bursting forth of the leaf must\nhave appeared false symbolism, although they knew too well that of\nwhich autumn and evening were typical. So, to quote only one other\nexample, the law of self-sacrifice is beautifully shadowed out by the\ngrain that 'unless it die, abideth alone; but if it die, bringeth\nforth much fruit.' We may argue next from the analogy of all art.\nSculpture, perhaps, has least to offer in our support. But in painting\nwe may refer to the conventional colours appropriated to various\npersonages; and the mechanical symbolism of poetry is known to all.\nNor must we forget the conventional use of language. Archaisms,\nstudied inversions, quaint phrases, and the like, have always been\naffected by those who were treating of high and holy subjects. None\nhas employed these with happier effect than Spenser, whose language,\nit need not be said, never was and never could have been really used.\nThe solemnising effect of a judicious employment of this artifice is\nnowhere more strongly felt than in works of Divinity. Compare for\nexample the English language, where the conventional Thou is always\naddressed to the Deity, and where a stern simplicity runs through the\nwhole of our Divine Offices, with the French which can only employ\n_Vous_ in prayer, and with the Portuguese, where, in the authorised\ntranslation of the Holy Scriptures, Apostles, and Prophets--nay, our\nBlessed Lord Himself, speak in the polite phrases of conversational\nelegance.  [Footnote 16]\n  [Footnote 16:  It is on grounds similar to these, that, in our\n  translation of Durandus, we have adopted that conventional style\n  which has been objected to by some recent critics:--not that anyone\n  ever naturally conversed or wrote in it, but for the sake of\n  producing the effect which the subject seems to require. The\n  brilliancy of a summer's day is beautiful in its place: admitted\n  into a cathedral, it would be totally out of character.]\n{xlviii}\nMusic, however, has the strongest claims to our notice. We know, for\nexample, that each instrument symbolises some particular colour. So,\naccording to Haydn, the trombone is deep red--the trumpet,\nscarlet--the clarionet, orange--the oboe, yellow--the bassoon, deep\nyellow--the flute, sky blue--the diapason, deep blue--the double\ndiapason, purple--the horn, violet:--while the violin is pink--the\nviola, rose--the violoncello, red--and the double-bass, crimson. This\nby many would be called fanciful:--therefore let us turn to a passage\nof Haydn's works, and see if it will hold. Let us examine the sun-rise\nin the 'Creation.' At the commencement, as it has been well observed,\nour attention is attracted by a soft-streaming sound from the violins,\nscarcely audible, till the pink rays of the second violin diverge into\nthe chord of the second, to which is gradually imparted a greater\nfulness of colour, as the rose violas and red violoncellos steal in\nwith expanding beauty, while the azure of the flute tempers the\nmounting rays of the violin: as the notes continue ascending to the\nhighest point of brightness, the orange of the clarionet, the scarlet\nof the trumpet, the purple of the double diapason, unite in increasing\nsplendour--till the sun appears at length in all the refulgence of\nharmony.\nThis may serve as a specimen of the manner in which the expressions of\none art may be translated into that of another, because they each and\nall symbolise the same abstraction.\nAgain, the language of flowers is a case much in point. This is a\nspecies of symbolism which has prevailed among all nations, and which\nour devout ancestors were not slow in stamping with the impress of\nreligion. Witness, for example, the _Herb Trinity_, now generally\ncalled _Heartsease_, the _Passion Flower_, and the _Lacrima Christi_.\nAnd in the present day, who knows not that {xlix} the rose is for\nbeauty--the violet for modesty--the sunflower for faithfulness--the\nforget-me-not for remembrance--the pansy for thought--the cypress for\nwoe--the yew for trueheartedness--the everlasting for immortality?\nThe flowers introduced into the ornament of churches we shall consider\npresently.\nFurthermore, whatever was the character of our Lord's teaching--such\nis likely to be that of His Church. If the former were plain,\nunadorned, setting forth naked truths in the fewest and simplest\nwords; then we allow that there is a _prim\u00e2 facie_ argument against\nthe system which we are endeavouring to support. But if it were\nparabolic, figurative, descriptive, allegorical--why should not the\nChurch imitate her Master? His parables are at once the surest\ndefence, and the most probable originators, of her symbolism.\nWe shall have occasion in another place to draw from a consideration\nof the nature of our Lord's parables an argument in behalf of\nsymbolism against one of the most formidable objections that has been\nraised against the system. It would here be sufficient for our purpose\nto notice the figurative character of our Lord's general teaching. But\nwe have His own authority for much more than a general adoption of\nsuch a principle. Tradition hands down that He was within sight of the\nTemple when he pointed towards it, and uttered those gracious words,\n_I am the Door_. Be this as it may, we have from it a sufficient\nprecedent to justify us in seeking for an emblematical meaning in the\nexternal world, and more particularly in the material sanctuary. S.\nPaul, on the same principle, allegorises the Jewish Temple, detail by\ndetail:--the Holy of Holies was heaven; the High Priest, Christ; the\nveil, even his flesh. It is inconceivable that the Temple should be so\nsymbolical, and so holy that our Lord Himself cleansed it from its\ndefiling {l} money-changers: and yet that a Christian church, wherein\nthe Great Sacrifice is commemorated and our Lord is peculiarly\npresent, should be less symbolical--particularly when its arrangement\nis in exact conformity to that of the temple,  [Footnote 17] --or\nshould be less holy. At any rate the _Door_ must be significant: at\nany rate the Altar, which S. Paul claims for the Christian Church, in\nopposition to those who 'serve the tabernacle.'\n  [Footnote 17: See Appendix A. ]\nAgain, the holy Sacraments of the Church are examples, in the highest\ndegree, of this principle of figurative or symbolical teaching. They,\nindeed, are not only signs of unseen things, but the channels and\ninstruments of grace. The latter quality we do not claim for the\nspeaking symbolism of a material church: but architecture is an emblem\nof the invisible abstract, no less than Holy Baptism and the Lord's\nSupper. Besides the two Sacraments [Greek text] our Church recognises\nother offices, such as Marriage, Confirmation, and the like, as\nSacramentals. In short the whole Church system is figurative from\nfirst to last: not indeed therefore the less real, actual, visible,\nand practical; but rather the more real and practical, because its\nteaching and discipline are not merely material and temporary, but\nanticipative of the heavenly and eternal. This quality then of\nsymbolism cannot be denied to one, and a most important, expression of\nthe teaching of the Church, namely its architecture. The cathedral (to\nrepeat the general in the particular) is not the less material, the\nless solid, the less real, because we see in it the figurative\nexhibition of the peculiarities of our religion and the articles of\nour creed.\n{li}\nCHAPTER IV\nPHILOSOPHICAL REASONS FOR BELIEVING IN SYMBOLISM\nWe now propose to offer a few remarks on the philosophical reasons\nthere seem to be for concluding that Ecclesiastical Architecture has\nsome esoteric meaning, some figurative adaptation, more than can be\nappreciated, or even discerned, by the casual observer, to the uses\nwhich produced it, and which have always regulated it. We venture to\napproach this consideration, however, rather from a feeling that our\nEssay would be incomplete without some reference to this kind of\nargument, than from any idea of our own ability to treat on subjects\nso abstract and infinite; and fearing that we may not be able clearly\nto express or dissect those thoughts which, nevertheless, appear to\nour own minds both true and very important.\nIt is little better than a truism to assert that there is an intimate\ncorrespondence and relation between cause and effect: yet this thought\nopens the way to a very wide field of speculation. Mind cannot act\nupon matter without the material result being closely related to the\nmental intention which originated it: the fact that anything exists\nadapted to a certain end or use is alone enough to presuppose the end\nor use, who can see a [Greek text], without distinguishing its\nrelation to the {lii} want or necessity which brought about [Greek\ntext]? In short, the [Greek text], whatever it may be, not only\nanswers to that which called it forth, but, in some sort, represents\nmaterially, or symbolises, the abstract volition or operation of the\nmind which originated it. Show us a pitcher, a skewer, or any of the\nsimplest utensils designed for the most obvious purposes: do not the\ncavity of the one, and the piercing point of the other, at once set\nforth and symbolise the [Greek text] which was answered in their\nproduction? Now, from this thought, we might proceed to trace out the\ntruthfulness and reality of every [Greek text] considered in relation\nto the [Greek text]; for even a deceptive thing is true and real in\nits relation to the mental intention of deceiving: but we intend\nmerely to consider the way in which the abstract movements or [Greek\ntext] of mind are _symbolised_ by the material operations or results\nwhich they have produced. In other words, we would allege that\neverything material is symbolical of some mental process, of which it\nis Indeed only the development: that we may see in everything outward\nand visible some inward and spiritual meaning. It is this which makes\n'books in everything': finding in everything objective the material\nexhibition of the subjective and unseen; not claiming for the abstract\nmind an independence of matter, but acknowledging its union with it;\nand thus learning from the speculations of reason, to perceive the\nfitness for our nature of that system of sacramentality in which God\nhas placed us, and to bless Him more and more for the Church, a\nsacramental institution, and for _the_ Sacraments [Greek text], which\nit conveys. This method of viewing the subject will be our excuse for\nattempting on the one hand to learn by analysis from a material church\nitself, considered objectively, the symbolism which may be supposed to\nhave directed its design; and on the other {liii} hand to show from\nthe abstract necessities of the case that a material church might have\nbeen expected to be symbolically designed. But if this theory of\nsymbolism gives light and meaning and connection to the acknowledged\nfacts, whether abstract or material, with which we have to do; while\nno other view will explain _all_ the phenomena;--it certainly\nrecommends itself by its simplicity and harmony to a general\nreception. Considered in this light, the whole group of separate facts\nbecome linked together and adjusted, and so resolve themselves into a\ngreat fabric of truth, which (like the Pyramid of Cheops) is\nconsistent and real and intelligible, when seen from any point, under\nany circumstances, or in any light.\nBut if it be granted that there is this mutual connection between the\nabstract and its material exhibition in every case, it will be readily\nadmitted that a principle of sacramentality must be especially a\ncondition of all religious acts. If we were merely spirits, without\nbodies or any necessary connection with matter, it would be possible\nperhaps for us to worship the Great Spirit in an abstract way by a\nsort of volition of devotion; but not being so, our souls cannot\nengage in adoration without the company of their material home. Hence\nevery effort of devotion is attended by some bodily act. Whether we\nlift our eyes or hands to heaven, or kneel in prayer, we show forth\nthis necessity of our being: our body has sinned, has been redeemed,\nwill be punished or glorified, no less than the soul: it must\ntherefore worship with the soul. Now the symbolism of the bodily acts\nof devotion is understood by all. We have even personated Prayer by a\nprostrate figure with uplifted hands.  [Footnote 18]\n  [Footnote 18: The necessity which the body seems to feel for this\n  symbolism may be seen in the constantly occurring fact, that in\n  making signs, whether of inquiry or adieu, to a person at a\n  distance, we naturally speak the words, though inaudible to him,\n  which the gestures we use express.]\n{liv}\nIt has been felt not only right but necessary, in all ages and places,\nto accompany the inward feeling of devotion with some outward\nmanifestation of it. In other words, all religious actions are from\ntheir nature symbolical and figurative. But if the most obvious\ncorporeal accompaniments to spiritual worship show this clearly, how\nmuch more evidently must all ritual systems appear to be symbolical? A\nsystem of worship, whether heathen, Christian, or heretical, is only\nthe development and methodising of the simplest figurative acts of\ndevotion; the whole affected by the peculiar relation between the\nobject of adoration and the worshippers which in each particular\nsystem may have been pre-supposed. Why does the Mussulman take off his\nshoes, kneel on his carpet towards Mecca, and perform his stated\nablutions? Is not each act in itself figurative and full of meaning?\nHow could such a system, or any other system, have been originated,\nbut with some intended typification of certain given facts or\ndoctrines or feelings? Why does the heartless Quaker go with covered\nhead into his bare conventicle, and sit in enforced silence? He will\nanswer, to express his independence of idle forms, the spirituality of\nhis worship, his repudiation of any media in his intercourse with the\nDivine Being. We thank him for his admission of a symbolical purpose,\nbut we read the symbolism differently. We perceive it to express\nclearly enough the presumptuous pride and vanity of his sect, his\nrejection of all Sacraments, and his practical disbelief in the\nCommunion of Saints. Again, is the pulpit of the Brownist symbolical;\nand shall not our font and altar be so at least as much? The Catholic\nritual is indeed symbolical from first to last. Without the clue to\nits figurative meaning, we should never have understood its pregnant\ntruthfulness and force. {lv} No one, in short, ever ventured to regard\nthe ancient ritual as anything but highly figurative: this was claimed\nas its highest excellence by its observers and commentators, this was\nridiculed and despised by the enemies of the Church; but was confessed\nby all. The more anyone meditates on the ancient ritual of the Church,\nthe more this will be found not only the most prominent\ncharacteristic, but the only satisfactory explanation of many\notherwise unintelligible requirements. This is not the place to go at\nany length into the consideration of the whole symbolism of the ritual\nsystem: it will be enough if it is granted that some prescribed\nritual, however meagre, must be a necessary part of all religion; and\nthat every such system is in some degree figurative or symbolical. Now\nto apply this to church architecture. No one will deny that, in a\ngeneral point of view, the form of our churches is adapted to certain\nwants, and was chosen for this very adaptation. Indeed this is allowed\nby modern writers and builders: who defend a church which has no more\nthan an altar-recess, on this very ground, that there is no longer any\nwant of a deep chancel. 'I object to aisles,' says a modern architect,\n'because the great end of a church is to be an auditorium.' 'The cross\nform,' says another, 'I always adopt, because then everyone can see\nthe preacher if I place the pulpit in the middle.' But why not take a\ncircle or octagon at once, or the form which is always adopted for the\nlecture-rooms at Mechanics' Institutes? For these plans are obviously\n_most_ convenient for hearing and seeing. But then, everyone knows\nthat these are not _church_ forms. The modern builder then,\ntrammelled, at least in this respect, by rule and precedent, chooses\nthe cruciform plan, not (perhaps) for its true symbolism; but, by a\nwrong arrangement of this plan, still further symbolises (for example)\nhis own undue estimation of the ordinance {lvi} of preaching. So true\nit is that those who would most object to symbolism, as a rule of\ndesign, are themselves (did they but know it) symbolising, in every\nchurch they build, their own arbitrary and presumptuous ideas on the\nsubject. It is not our intention to prove here, (what has been pointed\nout, however, many times), the duty incumbent upon us of following in\nour modern churches the ancient principles of design: we are not\nwriting with the immediate practical end of improving modern church\narchitecture; but are endeavouring to illustrate the symbolical\nprinciples of ancient design. We shall, however, before finishing this\nchapter, choose an example, which will apply to us, as well as to any\nother branch of the Church, to show how essentially church\narchitecture in that respect at least is a part of the Ritual system.\nAnd if Catholic worship is expressed and represented by Catholic\nritual, and if church architecture is a part of this ritual, then is\nchurch architecture itself an expression and exponent of Catholic\nworship. A conclusion this which will well warrant the very strong\nlanguage in which the Cambridge Camden Society have always asserted\nthe great importance of this art, and have exacted from its professors\nsuch qualifications of personal holiness and liturgical knowledge as\nare no less above the attainment than the aspirations of the modern\nschool.\nIt may not be clear to some how in any sense architecture can be\ncalled symbolical, or the outward sign of something invisible: or\nrather what the process is by which a given arrangement, suggested\nperhaps by some necessity, becomes in turn suggestive and figurative\nof the very purpose for which it was planned. But let us take the case\nof a theatre. Here it is clearly necessary that there shall be a stage\nor orchestra, accommodation for spectators, and means of easy exit.\n{lvii} Accordingly every theatre displays all these requisites. And\ndoes not the building then in turn emblem the purpose for which it was\nplanned? The ruins of Roman theatres are not uncommon: do we fail to\nbe recalled by them to the idea of the Roman stage? are not the\nseveral parts of the material building highly figurative and\nsuggestive of the rules and orders of the abstract drama?\nWith respect to churches: let us suppose the institution and ritual of\nthe Church to be what we know it was; and that we have to adapt some\narchitectural arrangement to the performance of this ritual. Is there\nanything which will dictate any general form rather than another?\nSurely there is. We will not speak now of the propriety of setting\naside a place for the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, or of the\npropriety of retaining the plan of the typical Temple; but we are\nconsidering simply what is required by practical necessity. The\nworshippers who are to assemble in our church are not all on an\nequality. There are some who are endowed with high privileges as being\nthose consecrated to the immediate service of the sanctuary. In early\ntimes so real a thing was the distinction between the clergy and the\nlaity, that the Church being divided into these two classes, the\nmaterial edifice displayed a like division: and the nave and chancel\npreach to posterity the sacredness of Holy Orders, and the mutual\nduties arising from the relation in which the flock stand to their\nshepherds. But in early ages the laity were not all classed _en masse_\nas with us now. Among them were the Faithful, the Catechumens, who had\nnot yet been admitted to Holy Baptism, and the Penitents or those who\nhad lapsed. True to itself, church architecture provided then a\nseparate place for each of these divisions. Does not the ground plan\nof such a church symbolise minutely the then state of church\ndiscipline and the {lviii} conditions of church worship? The reality\nand meaning of such an arrangement may be shown thus also. After the\nReformation the great distinction between clergy and laity became lost\nor undervalued: accordingly the chancel-screens in many places\ndisappeared, as symbolical in their absence as in their existence. But\nstill there was a necessity for some material arrangement to protect\nthe Altar from insult: and so altar rails came in, manifest symbols of\nthat spirit which made their introduction allowable, if indeed not\nnecessary:  [Footnote 19] still these very rails, and the penned up\nreading-pew, teach that the clergy, at least when performing a\nfunction, are divided from the laity.\n  [Footnote 19: In the correspondence of the Rev. W. Humphrey, whose\n  atrocious treatment by the Church Missionary Society has so lately\n  excited the indignation of all true churchmen, it appears that one\n  of the noble designs of this zealous priest was to restore for the\n  peculiar congregation over which he was appointed, consisting of\n  Faithful, Catechumens, and Unbelievers, the distinct arrangement of\n  the ancient Church: the modern plan of having but one area for the\n  lay worshippers being found inconvenient and injurious. That is to\n  say, our modern church arrangement may suit and does symbolise the\n  present state of the Church with us, but does not suit and does not\n  symbolise the state of the missionary Church of India.]\nNow it is of no consequence whatever, whether the early builders of\nchurches intended this particular arrangement to be symbolical. The\narrangement being adopted becomes necessarily, even if\nunintentionally, symbolical, by the process we have endeavoured to\ntrace, and so things essentially symbolical give rise to intended\nsymbolism: for it is a simple historical fact that the weathercock,\nwhatever practical utility may have first suggested its use and\npeculiar form, has been for many centuries placed on the church spire\nfor its _intentional symbolism_.   [Footnote 20]And the process is\nrepeated: for suppose one only of the conventional symbolical meanings\nof the weathercock had been discovered: the thoughtful mind {lix} goes\non to find out other figurative senses in which its use is\nappropriate, and these conventional meanings become in their turn\nintentionally symbolised by future church builders. This may be\nillustrated also in the following way: The Jews, in the rite of\nBaptism, had probably no other idea than a reference to 'the mystical\nwashing away of sins.' But when S. Paul had once given to that rite\nthe new idea of a burial with Christ in the Baptismal water, and a\nrising again with Him, this typical meaning became an example of\nintended symbolism to all those who should hereafter use it.\n  [Footnote 20: See Rationale, p. 27.]\nAs we began this part of our subject with hesitation, so we finish it\nwith some degree of apprehension. To some what has been said may seem\nmore than ordinarily visionary and ridiculous: yet others, we hope,\nwill feel that, however feebly and inadequately expressed, there is\nsome truth in what has been advanced concerning the relation between\nthe material and immaterial: that the latter welding and moulding the\nformer into an expression of itself, makes it in turn a type of that\nwhich it expresses. So that if on the one hand, to take our particular\nbranch of the subject, the theoretical ritual and ordinances of\nreligion imply and require certain peculiar adaptations of the\nmaterial building in which they are to be celebrated; then in turn the\ncircumstances of the material fabric suggest and symbolise the\npeculiar conditions of ritual which induced them. In short we have\nendeavoured to prove that from our very nature every outward thing is\nsymbolical of something inward and spiritual: but, above all things,\noutward religious actions are sacramental; and particularly _any_\nprescribed ritual, of which the first characteristic is that it is\nfigurative: that the Catholic ritual is eminently symbolical, and from\nits nature very strikingly influences all its material appliances:\nthat church architecture is the {lx} eldest daughter of Ritual: that\nthe process, according to which architecture was influenced by the\nrequirements of Ritualism was at first as simple as that by which the\nform of a theatre sprang from the conditions which were to be\nfulfilled by its builder: that thus a church (built in the fully\ndeveloped style of Christian architecture) even if not built with any\nintention of symbolising, (though it is an historical fact that the\nsymbolism of each part was known and received _before_ the erection of\nany church of this style,) became nevertheless essentially a\n'petrifaction of our religion': a fact which, once admitted and\nrealised, becomes to succeeding church builders, whether they will or\nnot, a rule and precedent for intentional symbolical design.\n{lxi}\nCHAPTER V\nTHE ANALYTICAL ARGUMENT\nWe must arrive at the same conclusion, if we consider the subject in\nan analytical way. For example: suppose a person, hitherto\nunacquainted not only with the general peculiarities of Christian\nchurches, but also with Christianity itself, were to enter a\ncathedral; or (which will be a fairer case) were to visit a Catholic\ncountry, and examine its churches as a whole, would he not, if\npossessed of only ordinary intelligence, observe that the cross form,\nfor example, was of most common occurrence, and, in the case of the\nlarger buildings, was perhaps the only plan adopted? And would he not\nthen naturally inquire why there should be this marked preference for\na form, in itself inconvenient for purposes of hearing or seeing,\n[Footnote 21] and open to great mechanical objections, such as the\nalmost resistless pressure of the four arms on the piers which stand\nat the angles of intersection?\n  [Footnote 21: That is, a Catholic _arrangement_ of the church being\n  presumed.]\nBut if he learnt that the religion for which these temples were\ndesigned was that of the Cross, he would at once see the propriety of\nthis ground plan, and would confidently and truly conclude that this\nform was chosen in order to bring the Cross, by this symbolism,\nvividly and constantly before the eyes of the worshippers. To deny\nintended symbolism, in the case of such a person, would {lxii} clearly\nbe absurd: shall it be less obvious to us? Our traveller would\nprobably, being satisfied on this point, examine these buildings more\nclosely. He would find an altar raised conspicuously above the\nsurrounding level; and for this he might discover a practical reason;\nbut why in so many cases (so many as well nigh to make a rule) are the\nsteps either _three_ or some multiple of three? Surely the fundamental\ndoctrine of the Holy Trinity would, if explained to him, sufficiently\naccount for this all but universal arrangement. Why, again, in every\ncase does a screen separate one part of the church from the other?\nWhen our inquirer learns the principle of the separation of laity and\nclergy, this arrangement also will be at once intelligible and\nfigurative. How unreasonable would the position of the font by the\ndoor appear to him, till he learnt the symbolical reason for its being\nplaced there! And we may here remark that the practice of the last\ngeneration in removing old fonts, or using basins for substitutes, or\nin placing new fonts, near the altar, shows clearly enough that\nconvenience and utility would have pointed out a very different place\nfor the font from what is assigned by the canon, on symbolical\ngrounds; grounds adduced in this case, as it would seem, to give\nweight to a decision so clearly opposed to all merely practical and\nobvious reasons. Again, the marked deviation of the orientation of the\nchancel from that of the nave, would be quite inexplicable till the\nbeautiful and affecting symbolism of the arrangement were pointed out.\nAgain, it has not been left merely to the meditative ecclesiologist to\nobserve that Christian architecture has as decided a characteristic of\nverticality, as Pagan architecture had of horizontalism. A mere artist\ncould not fail of marking the contrast between Beauvais and the\ntemples of Paestum. {lxiii } The contrast must then be admitted: but\nhow must we explain it? Surely no accident could have developed the\ngrovelling Pagan into the aspiring Gothic. What mechanical reasons\ncould produce Westminster from even the Parthenon? But is not the\nphenomenon explained when we see in towering pier, spire, and\npinnacle, the symbolical exhibition of that religion which alone\naspires to things above, nay more, the figurative commemoration of\nthat Resurrection itself, which alone originates, and only justifies,\nthe same heavenward tendency. But if this be true; if these\nacknowledged peculiarities in Christian architecture be utterly\nunintelligible on any other supposition than this of a symbolical\nmeaning, surely it is not unreasonable to receive so ready a solution\nof the difficulty: and, the principle admitted, why may not reasons of\nthe same figurative nature be assigned for other arrangements, in\nthemselves on any other interpretation not only meaningless but\nobviously useless or absurd?\n{lxiv}\nCHAPTER VI\nTHE INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT\nWe have next to show, by a process of induction, that some principles\nof symbolism have always been observed in designing churches: that is\nto say, that without any actual acquaintance with the plan, details or\narrangement of existing churches, we might gather from other sources,\nnot only the probability, but the fact, that there was some reason\n(not merely mechanical or accidental) for the selection and universal\nobservation of particular forms and ornaments, and peculiar rules of\ndistribution.\nFirst, we shall refer to the celebrated passage of S. Clement of Rome,\n[Footnote 22] about performing the Divine Offices decently and in\norder, as to time, and place, and circumstance. 'Where and by whom God\nwilleth these to be performed He hath Himself defined by His most\nsupreme will.' 'But where,' says Mede,  [Footnote 23] (discussing the\npassage with the view of establishing a particular point, namely,\nbowing towards the altar) 'hath the Lord defined these things, unless\nHe hath left us to the analogy of the Old Testament?'\n  [Footnote 22: S. Clem. Rom., ad Corinth. I, 40.]\n  [Footnote 23: Mede, in Epist. lviii Folio, Lib. iv.]\n{lxv}\nThis indeed is obviously S. Clement's meaning: and not to go at any\nlength into the consideration of all the particular forms or\nceremonies of the Old dispensation which were perpetuated in the\nNew--as the threefold Ministry deduced by S. Jerome, from the High\nPriest, Priests, and Levites; the Canonical Hours; the Gospel\nanciently laid on the altar, answering to the Two Tables, and the\nlike--it will be sufficient to refer once more to the remarkable\nparallel between a Christian church and the Jewish Temple.  [Footnote\n24] There can be little doubt that Mede proved his point of the\npropriety of genuflexion towards the altar. We are contending for a\nmuch simpler thing: for no more indeed than the concession of a\nprobability that in the earliest Christian churches there was at least\nthis resemblance to the Temple; that there should be in both a Holy of\nHolies and an outer-court. Supposing this distinction to have been\nonly made by a curtain, our point is nevertheless gained; and we would\nrest here on this one particular of resemblance only (though others\nmight be insisted on); because, any one designed parallel being\ngranted, the inference for others is easy. And here it will be enough\nto observe that the almost constant practice in ancient writers of\napplying to some one part of a Christian church a name or names\nderived directly from the _Holy of Holies_ is a strong argument in our\nfavour: though the passages are often too incidental to be adduced as\nevidence of an intended symbolism.  [Footnote 25] But, we repeat, the\nfact that a particular part of a church--(if we were now arguing for\nrood screens, we {lxvi} should show that any such distinction of parts\nmade a _screen of some sort_ necessary, even if we did not know what\nsort of screens really existed)--the fact that a particular part of a\nchurch was distinguished by names directly carrying us back to the\nexactly corresponding particular part in the Temple, shows that in the\narrangement at least, if not in the building, of the earliest churches\nthere was, at least in this one point, an intention to produce an\nantitype to the typical Tabernacle. It is observed in a note to\nNeander's history   [Footnote 26] that if the interpretation of\nMichaelis be received there is evidence of a Christian church being\nbuilt at Edessa, A.D. 202, with three parts, expressly after the model\nof the Temple.\n  [Footnote 24: See this carried out by Durandus. Appendix A.]\n  [Footnote 25: Compare, amongst others, S. Cyprian, Ep. 55; Euseb. x,\n  4. [Greek text]; Id. vii, 18. [Greek text] (the word used in the lxx\n  for the _Sanctuary_)'. S. Dionys. Areop., Ep. 8, ad Demoph.; S.\n  Athanas., _Edit, Commel._ Tom. ii, p. 255; Theod. H. E. iv, 17, v,\n  18; Concil. Tours. (A. D. 557). can. 4; S. Germ. Constant. _In\n  Theor. rer. Eccles._; Card. Bona. _Rer Liturg._i, xxv, II; Dionys.\n  _Hierarch._ cap. 2; S. Chrysost. Lib vi, _De Sacerdotio._]\n  [Footnote 26: Rose's Neander, i, 246.]\nWhatever may be the authority allowed to the Apostolical\nConstitutions, the fact that they touch at some length upon the form\nof churches is enough for our purpose. 'The church,'  [Footnote 27]\nthey say, 'must be oblong in form, and pointing to the East' The\noblong form was meant to symbolise a ship,  [Footnote 28] the ark\nwhich was to save us from the stormy world. It would be perfectly\nunnecessary to support this obvious piece of symbolism by citations.\nThe orientation is an equally valuable example of intended symbolism.\nWe gain an additional testimony to this from the well-known passage of\nTertullian,  [Footnote 29] (a.d. 200,) about 'The house of our Dove.'\nWhether this corrupt extract be interpreted with Mede or Bingham,\nthere can be no doubt that its {lxvii} _in lucem_ means that the\nchurch should face the East or dayspring. The praying towards the East\nwas the almost invariable custom in the Early Churches, and as\nsymbolical as their standing in prayer upon the Festivals of the\nResurrection.  [Footnote 30] So common was orientation in the most\nancient churches, that Socrates  [Footnote 31] mentions particularly\nthe church at Antioch as having its 'position reversed; for the altar\ndoes not look to the east but to the west.' This rule appears to have\nbeen more scrupulously followed in the East than in the West; though\neven in Europe examples to the contrary are exceptions.\n  [Footnote 27: Apost. Const, 2,  57, (61.)]\n  [Footnote 28: See also what is said on this point by Buscemi, in his\n  Notizie della Basilica di San Pietro, ch. iii, p. 7. The church of\n  SS. Vincenzo and Anastatio at Rome, near S. Paolo alle Tre Fontane,\n  built by Honorius I, (A.D. 630) has its wall _curved_ like the ribs\n  of a ship. The constitution itself refers to the resemblance of this\n  oblong form to a ship. See also S. Clem. Alex., _Paedag_, iii, 246.]\n  [Footnote 29: Tertull. advers. Valent., cap. 2.]\n  [Footnote 30: See Origen, _Hom_. 5, in _Numer_. cap, 4. Tertull.\n  _Apol_. cap. 16, and _Ad Nation_, i, 13. S. Clem. Alex. _Strom_,\n  vii, _ante med._ quoted by Mede.]\n  [Footnote 31: Hist. Eccles. Lib. v, cap. [Greek text].]\nThe Apostolical Constitution in its other directions about the\nposition of the bishop, priests, and deacons, and the separate\nstations for the sexes, shows (as Father Thiers   [Footnote 32] has\nremarked) that there was even then a marked distinction between the\nclergy and laity though the method of division is not described. At\nany rate, what has been here adduced--compiled from notes taken some\ntime since for another object, and without access (from accidental\ncircumstances) to a library--seems enough to show that in the\nearliest notices of Christian churches there is distinct intimation of\nat least three particulars of intended symbolism.\n  [Footnote 32: Thiers, _Dissert, de la Cl\u00f4ture du Choeur des\n  Eglises._cap. 2.]\nThe circular form given to the church of the Holy Sepulchre was of\ncourse appropriate enough in that particular case, where the sepulchre\nwould naturally become the centre. The circular churches of Europe\nwere again imitated from this. The Cross form would appear to have\nmade its first appearance in Constantinople: that is, in the city\nwhich was the first to take a completely Christian character. {lxviii}\nFor example, the church of the Apostles built by Constantine was\ncruciform: and the symbolism of this is pointed out by S. Gregory\nNazianzen in his poem, 'the Dream of Anastasia,' quoted by Bingham.\n[Footnote 33] So Evagrius describes the church of S. Simon Stylites,\nas cited by Buscemi,  [Footnote 34] who also mentions a Cross church\nfounded by King Childebert, about the year 550. The cathedral of\nClermont, mentioned by S. Gregory of Tours, and the church of SS.\nNazarius and Celsus at Ravenna, both founded about 450, were\ncruciform. More than this, we have examples of an oblong church being\n_intentionally_ made cruciform by the addition of _apsides_, as at\nBlachernoe by Justin Junior, instanced by Bingham out of Cedrenus and\nZonaras. This has been remarked also in the case of some Italian\nchurches: though the early churches of the West seemed to have\nretained the oblong form, even when the details and general\narrangement were Byzantine, as in the _Capella Regia_ at Messina; the\nmore remarkable from the peculiar influence of Constantinople in the\nisland of Sicily. But in either case there was a symbolising intention\non the part of the founders of churches.\n  [Footnote 33: Carm. ix, tom ii, p. 79. [Greek text]]\n  [Footnote 34: Notizie etc. Note al Lib. 1, capo terzo. Nota 10 p. 15.]\nThere is mention also of octagonal churches, as at Antioch and\nNazianzum: but these seem to have been mere exceptions; and perhaps\nfrom being coupled with fonts in the inscription quoted by Mr. Poole\nfrom Gruter, may have been intended to symbolise Regeneration. The\nfirst two lines are as follows:--\n  Octachorum sanctos templum surrexit in usus:\n  Octagonus fons est munere dignus eo.\n{lxix}\nBingham mentions that the oblong form was sometimes called [Greek\ntext] which he explains as intimating that they had void spaces for\ndeambulation.  [Footnote 35] It seems however more likely that the\nname was derived from the resemblance between this form of church and\na stadium; the apsidal end answering to the curve round the goal.\n  [Footnote 35: Book viii, 3, following Leo Allatius and Suicer.]\nSome objection may be raised to our theory because Bingham, from whom\nof course almost all the existing passages in ancient writers about\nthe form of churches might be gathered, does not recognise any such\nprinciples, and rather seems on the other hand to believe that there\nwas at first no rule or law on these points. But it is not detracting\nfrom his fame for almost consummate learning to question whether his\npractical knowledge of church architecture, ancient or modern, was\nvery deep. It might be shown indeed to be far otherwise. But at any\nrate the principle now contended for never entered his mind, or he\nwould have seen that some of the very passages he adduces to show that\nthe form of ancient churches was accidental, because (for example)\nthey were often made out of Basilicae or even heathen temples, really\ntell against such a supposition. He quotes from Socrates   [Footnote\n36] a description of the conversion of a Pagan island to Christianity,\nabout 380, and the turning the heathen temple into a church. But the\nwords of the original, given in our note, are very remarkable: 'The\nguise of the temple they transformed unto the type (or pattern) of a\nchurch.' We want to prove nothing more than that there was _some_ type\nof a church. It was not a mere ejection of idols that was required to\nmake a temple into a church: but some change of form and arrangement.\nSo also in a passage from Sozomen (vii, 15), 'The temple of Dionysus\nwhich {lxx} they had, was changed in fittings ([Greek text]) into a\nchurch.' Again, a very interesting passage about the conversion of\nIberia by means of a female captive in the time of Constantine is\ncited from Theodoret,  [Footnote 37] to show that churches _did exist_\nat that date. But we find a particular form of building clearly\nalluded to in the original: and, more than this, 'He Who filled\nBezaleel with a wise spirit for building, judged this captive also\nworthy of grace, so as to design the divine temple. And so she\ndesigned, and they built.' And this passage brings us at once to the\nfamous panegyric on Paulinus, Bishop of Tyre, and builder of the\nchurch there preserved by Eusebius. In this speech the prelate is\nthroughout supposed to have been inspired for his work, and is\ncompared to Bezaleel, Solomon and Zerubbabel, the builders of the\nTabernacle, and the First and Second Temples. And not only is the\ngeneral spirit assumed to be a directly religious one: but the details\nare described as having a symbolical meaning.\n  [Footnote 36: Socrates iv, 24, [Greek text].]\n  [Footnote 37: Theodoret I. xxiv. [Greek text]]\nIn the comparison between the material temple and the 'living temple'\nthe Spiritual Church, there are several points worthy of observation.\nThe symbolical explanation of the corner stone as our Lord, of the\nfoundation as the Apostles and Prophets, of the stones as the members\nof the Church, are of course taken directly from Holy Scripture. It is\nscarcely necessary to remark the great authority for considering the\nfabric of the church as symbolical which these passages convey. Many\nof our readers will remember how S. Hermas carries out into\nconsiderable detail the same idea. But the Panegyrist in Eusebius\ndistinctly refers to 'the most {lxxi} inward recesses [of that\nspiritual temple] which are unseen of the many, and are essentially\nholy and holy of holies';  [Footnote 38] that is, of course, to a\nSanctuary; which he goes on to describe as having 'sacred inclosures,'\nand as being accessible to the priest alone; with a distinct reference\nto S. Paul's   [Footnote 39] illustration taken from the Jewish\nTemple. Again he proceeds to compare the Bishop Paulinus with the\n'great High Priest,' not only in being permitted to enter the holy of\nholies, but in doing what Christ has done, just as the Son did what He\nsaw the Father do. 'Thus he, looking with the pure eyes of his mind\nunto the Great Teacher, whatsoever he seeth Him doing, as if making\nuse of archetypal patterns, has, by building ([Greek text]) as much\nlike them as possible, wrought out images of them as closely as can\nbe; having in no respect fallen short of Bezaleel, whom God Himself,\nhaving filled him with the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge and other\nskilful and scientific lore, called to be the builder of the material\nexpression of the heavenly types in the symbols of the temple. In this\nway then Paulinus also, carrying wholly like a graven image in his\nsoul Christ Himself, the Word, the Wisdom the Light . . . has\nconstructed this magnificial temple of the most High God, resembling\nin its nature the pattern of the better (temple) as a visible (emblem)\nof that which is invisible.'  [Footnote 40]\n  [Footnote 38: Euseb. H. E., x, 4, 21.]\n  [Footnote 39: Hebrews, ix, 6, 7.]\n  [Footnote 40: Euseb. X, iv, 24, 25.]\nThis remarkable passage appears to assert (i) the inspiration of the\narchitect, (ii) the fact of this heavenly type, which (iii) material\nchurches ought to follow; and (iv) the general symbolism of the\nSpiritual Church by the visible fabric. We must pass over a great deal\nof this oration, with a general request that such as are interested in\nthis discussion will read the whole in the original for the sake of\nseeing its general spirit and bearing. {lxxii } The description of the\ndetails is of great interest. The arrangement of the porticoes, etc.,\nis of course quite adapted to the wants of the Church in that age: it\nis fair to own that the chief entrance appears to have faced the East\nin this church. Mention is made also of seats in order for the bishops\nand presbyters, and of the altar in the midst: the whole being\nencompassed with wooden network, exquisitely worked, in order to be\nmade inaccessible to the multitude. [Footnote 41] Further on\n[Footnote 42] we read that Paulinus rebuilt his church, 'such as he\nhad been taught from the delineation of the holy oracles.' And again,\n'More wonderful than wonders are the _archetypes_, and the intelligent\nand godlike _prototypes_ and _patterns_ (of earthly church building):\nnamely, I say, the renewing of the divine and reasonable building in\nthe soul';   [Footnote 43] assuming that material churches are but\ncopies from some heavenly type. Again, a passage, in which the ruined\nfabric and the persecuted Church are mixed up, speaks of the Church as\n'having been made after the image of God,' [Footnote 44] and more to\nthe same effect. The symbolical prophecy of the 'fair edification' of\nthe Gentile Church   [Footnote 45] is quoted as being almost literally\nfulfilled in the Tyrian church, and is still further symbolised by the\nPanegyrist. [Footnote 46] The four-square atrium is said to set forth\nthe four Gospels of the scripture.  [Footnote 47]\n  [Footnote 41: Euseb. H. E., x, 43]\n  [Footnote 42: Ibid 53.]\n  [Footnote 43: Ibid 54.]\n  [Footnote 44: Ibid 57.]\n  [Footnote 45: Isaiah liv, 11.]\n  [Footnote 46: Euseb. X. iv, 60.]\n  [Footnote 47: Ibid 61.]\nThe whole arrangement of the church is symbolised at much length, as\nsetting forth the different divisions of the laity and the states of\nthe faithful with respect to advance in holiness. The great portico\nsymbolised God the Father: the side porticoes the other Two Persons of\nthe Most Holy Trinity. The seats represented the souls of the\nfaithful, upon which, {lxxiii} as on the Day of Pentecost, the cloven\ntongues would descend and _sit_ upon each of them. 'The revered and\ngreat and only altar, what could this be but the spotlessness of soul\nand holiness of holies of the common Priest of us all?'  [Footnote 48]\nOnce more, the parallel between the spiritual and the material\nChurches being continued, the Word, the Great Demiurgus of all things,\nis said to have Himself made upon earth a copy of the heavenly pattern\nwhich is the Church of the Firstborn written in heaven, Jerusalem that\nis above, Sion the Mount of God, and the city of the living God.\n  [Footnote 48: Euseb. H. E., x, 65.]\nIt appears then that throughout this description a symbolical meaning\nis found attached to the material church: and this not far-fetched or\nnow first fancifully imagined; but appealing, as it seems, to what the\nauditors would be prepared to grant, and admitted by the historian\nwithout a comment, as one specimen of a class.\nWe have before remarked that every notice of the particular\ndistribution of a church for the reception of the different classes of\nChristians, may be taken as an argument on our side: for if it can be\nshown that the form of churches was not arbitrary, but was adapted to\ncertain peculiar wants, it must be granted that there was some\nparticular law of design, and that law connected with Ritual: and\nthen, as before pointed out, this arrangement becomes itself\nsymbolical, and that _intentionally_. We shall only refer here to a\npassage quoted by Bingham,  [Footnote 49] in which S. Gregory\nThaumaturgus describes the places in church assigned respectively to\nthe five degrees of Penitents. Mede   [Footnote 50] argues for the\n_existence_ of churches in the first three centuries, from the\nuniversal custom of praying towards the East, the necessity of {lxxiv}\nproviding distinct places for the Penitents, Hearers, Catechumens, and\nFaithful, and from the patterns of the Jewish _proseuchae_ and\nsynagogues. But all these arguments seem to tell as much for some\nparticular form of churches as for their existence: that is they prove\nthat the earliest churches were designed on rules which, even if not\nintentionally symbolical (though we have shown that many were so),\nbecame by a natural process intentional among later church-builders.\n  [Footnote 49: Greg. Nyssen, iii, 567.]\n  [Footnote 50: Discourse of Churches, Folio Edn., p. 333.]\nSo also with respect to the great division into nave and sanctuary by\na screen of some sort: concerning which the passages that might be\ncited from ancient writers would be innumerable. We shall only give\none quoted by Father Thiers from a Poem of S. Gregory of Nazianzum, in\nwhich the _balustrade_ or rood-screen is said to be 'between two\nworlds, the one immovable, the other changeful; the one of gods (or\nheaven) the other of mortals (or earth); that is to say between the\nchoir and the nave, between the clergy and the laity.'\nWe have attempted to prove then that the earliest Christian churches\nwere designed, or described, symbolically: by showing that there was a\nreason for their shape, whether oblong, cruciform, or circular; for\ntheir main division into choir and nave, and their subdivision for the\npenitents: for their orientation; and even to some extent for their\nminor internal arrangements: and that some type or pattern of a church\nwas universally recognised.  [Footnote 51]\n  [Footnote 51: Much stress is laid by some on the acknowledged\n  Bascilican origin of churches as an argument against the principle\n  here contended for. But we find a great authority on the Antiquities\n  of Christian Rome deciding differently: 'There seems to be in the\n  building of churches, as in the mosaics, and other works of art of\n  the old Christian times in Rome one constant type in which the art\n  of building could show little freedom or variety.-- _Beschreibung\n  der Stadt Rom. Basiliken._vol, i, p. 430.]\n{lxxv}\nIt would require more reading than we can boast of to give a catena of\nwriters who have asserted the symbolism of churches. But if the point\nhas been in any way proved for the first four centuries, enough will\nhave been done: since from that period we can trace from existing\nedifices the gradual relinquishment of the peculiar Basilican plan,\nand general adoption of the Latin Cross, or oblong, in the West, while\nthe East consistently retained the Greek Cross. We observe it stated\n[Footnote 52] that Mr. E. Sharpe, in a paper read before the Cambridge\nCamden Society, described the gradual  _typical_ additions' to the\nBasilican ground plan. Indeed symbolism, to any extent, once made\nknown, must have become a rule and precedent to later church\narchitects.\n  [Footnote 52: Ecclesiologist, vol. i, p. 120.]\nS. Isidore, of Seville, incidentally mentions many symbolical\narrangements: they will be found in the notes to the text of the\nRationale. Many pieces of symbolism are to be found incidentally in\nthe Decretum of Gratian.\nIn mentioning Durandus himself, it seems proper to anticipate an\nobjection which may occur to some readers. The authority, it may be\nsaid, of that writer must be very small who can give such absurd\nderivations as _cemeterium_ from _cime, altare_ from _alta res,\nallegory_ from _allon_ and _gore_. But it must be remembered, firstly,\nthat in the thirteenth century, Greek was a language almost unknown in\nEurope: next, that our author nowhere professes an acquaintance with\nit: further, that the science of derivation was hardly understood till\nwithin the last few years: and lastly, that Cicero's authority led\nDurandus into some errors; for instance, his derivation of _templum_\nfrom _tectum amplum_.\nOne proof of the _reality_ of Durandus's principles we must not fail\nto notice. It is the express allusion which he makes to, and the\ngraphical description which he {lxxvi} gives of, that which we know to\nhave been the style of architecture employed in his time. The tie\nbeams, the deeply splayed windows, the interior shafts, all prove that\nwe are engaged with a writer of Early English date.\nIt is very remarkable, that Durandus, S. Isidore, Beleth, and the\nrest, seem to quote from some canons of church symbolism now unknown\nto us. Their words are often, even where they are not very connected\nnor intelligible, the same. One example may suffice. 'In that this\nrod,' says Hugh of S. Victor, 'is placed above the Cross, it is shown\nthat the words of Scripture be consummated and confirmed by the Cross:\nwhence our Lord said in His Passion, \"It is Finished.\" _And His Title\nwas indelibly written over Him_' (p. 200). 'In that the iron rod,'\nsays Durandus, 'is placed above the Cross, on the summit of the\nchurch, it signifieth that Holy Scripture is now consummated and\nconfirmed. Whence saith our Lord in his Passion, \"It is Finished,\"\n_and that Title is written indelibly over Him_(p. 28). The following,\nby way of another instance, is the symbolical   [Footnote 53]\ndescription of a church, written on a fly-leaf, at the beginning of a\nMS. 'Psalterium Glossatum,' in the public library at Boulogne, though\nformerly in that of S. Bertin's Abbey, at S. Omer.\n  [Footnote 53: _British Magazine_, 1843, p. 393.]\nThe text is either of the tenth or eleventh century; but it will be\nseen that the words of Durandus, writing at so great a distance of\ntime and place, are nearly the same in some passages.\n  Fundamentum ipsius Camerae est Fides.\n  Altitudo ejus est Spes.\n  Latitudo ejus est Caritas.\n  Longitudo ejus est Perseverantia.\n  Latera ejus sunt Concordia et Pax.\n{lxxvii}\n  Frontes ipsius sunt Justicia & Veritas.\n  Pulchritudo ejus est exemplum bonorum operum.\n  Fenestrae ejus sunt dicta sanctorum.\n  Pavimentum ejus est humilitas cordis.\n  Camera est conversatio coelestis.\n  Pilastri ejus sunt spiritales virtues.\n  Columnae ejus sunt boni pontifices & sacerdotes.\n  Interlegatio ejus est vinculum pacis.\n  Tectum ejus est fidelis dispensator.\n  * isces ejus sunt mediatio celestis.\n  Mensa Christi est in camera bona conversatio.\n  Ministerium Christi in camera sua est bona memoria.\n  Facinus Christi est bona voluntas.\n  Canterellus Christi est nitor conscientiae.\n  Cathedra Christi est serenitas mentis.\n  Sponsa Christi est sancta anima.\n  Camerariae Christi spiritales virtutes sunt:\n  Prima Sancta Caritas dicta est; illa Christi regit cameram.\n  Secunda est Sancta Humilitas; illa est thesauraria in camera Christi\n  Tertia est Sancta Patientia; illa facit luminaria in camera Christi.\n  Quarta Sancta Puritas; illa scopat cameram Christi.\nBut besides, and in our opinion stronger than this express and\ncontinuous testimony to the fact that Catholic architecture is\nsymbolical, we have the testimony of all other branches of Catholic\nart, which none ever did, or could deny to be figurative and\nsacramental. Let us take merely the rites which accompany the close of\nEaster week. We enter a darkened church, illuminated only by the\nlighted 'Sepulchre': we hear the history of the Passion chaunted by\nthree voices in three recitatives: we have the most mournfully\npathetic strain for the 'Reproaches' which perhaps the human mind ever\nimagined:--we pray for Pagans--and we kneel; we pray for Turks--and we\nkneel; we pray for the Jews, and we kneel not; in abhorrence of the\nmockery that bowed the knee to the King of the Jews. We enter that\nchurch again, now perfectly darkened, except for the one lamp that\nrenders the lectern and the books {lxxviii} thereon just visible: the\nsolemn litanies seem in that obscurity, and amidst the silent crowd of\nworshippers, more solemn than usual. There is a short pause: then in\none second, priests and people, voices and instruments, burst forth\nwith the Easter Alleluia: light pours in from every window of the\ncathedral: showers of rose leaves fall from the roof: bells--silent\nfor three long days, peal from every church tower: guns fire and\nbanners wave: _Dominus resurrexit vere, Alleluia, et apparuit Sinioni\nAlleluia_.\nNow, without being concerned to defend, or the contrary, any or all of\nthese ceremonies, we ask:--Is it possible to conceive that the Church\nwhich invented so deeply symbolical a system of worship--should have\nrested content with an unsymbolical building for its practice? This\nconsideration, perhaps, belongs to the analogical branch of our essay:\nyet it may also find a place here, as one of the strongest parts of\nthe inductive argument.\nSeeing then that there are strong reasons _\u00e0 priori_ for believing\nthat the ritual and architecture of the Church would partake of a\ndecidedly symbolical character: that by the analogy of the practice\namongst all religionists, of the operations of God in nature, of the\nconditions of Art, and especially of the whole sacramental system of\nthe Church, it is likely that church architecture itself would be\nsacramental: that from the nature of things everything material is in\nsome sort sacramental, and a material fabric essentially figurative of\nthe purpose for which it was designed: that an actual Christian church\n(taken as we find it) has such accidents as can be explained on no\nother than a symbolical supposition, and might be analysed into just\nthose elements from which, by induction, we first constructed an\nhypothetical Christian church: and lastly, that from express and\n{lxxix} continuous historical testimony without any actual\nacquaintance with existing fabrics we might have deduced that the\nmaterial church would be itself, to some extent, a figurative\nexpression of the religion for the celebration of which it was\nconstructed: it does not seem too much to assert that Christian\narchitecture owes its distinctive peculiarities to its sacramental\ncharacter, and that consequently we can neither appreciate ancient\nexamples nor hope to rival them, at least in their perfection, without\ntaking into account this principle of their design. In other words,\nthe cause of that indefinable difference between an ancient and modern\nchurch which we were led to discover at the beginning of this\ntreatise, is neither association of ideas nor correctness of detail,\nnor picturesqueness, nor of a mechanical nature, but (in the most\ngeneral point of view) is the sacramentality, the religious symbolism,\nwhich distinguished and sanctified this as every other branch of\nmediaeval art.\n{lxxx}\nCHAPTER VII\nEXAMPLES OF SYMBOLISM\nIn endeavouring shortly to develop the practice of symbolism,\naccording to our view of the subject, we are fully aware that to those\nwho have never yet bestowed a thought upon it, we shall appear mere\nvisionaries or enthusiasts. It has been the fashion of late to smile\nat the whole theory, as amusing and perhaps beautiful: but quite\nunpractical and indeed impracticable. We cannot hope to convince by\naesthetics those who are deaf to more direct arguments, and who refuse\nto view everything, as churchmen ought to do, through the medium of\nthe Church. But those who agree with us in the latter duty, will\nperhaps suffer themselves to think twice on what will be advanced\nbefore they condemn it.\nWe shall consider the practice of symbolism as connected with, 1. The\nHoly Trinity; 2. Regeneration; 3. The Atonement; 4. The Communion of\nSaints; and then we shall notice several parts of a church, such as\nwindows, doors, etc., with their specific symbolical meaning.\nThe doctrine of the Holy Trinity has left, as might be expected,\ndeeper traces in the structure of our churches than any other\nprinciples of our faith. We have already noticed that possibly the\nBasilican arrangement might be providentially ordered with reference\nto this. {Ixxxi} In Saxon times we find the idea carried out, not only\nby the Nave and two Aisles, but also by the triple division in length,\ninto Nave, Chancel, and Sanctum Sanctorum. This triple division is\nmost frequently given in Norman buildings, by a central tower; with\nchancel and nave: we also find in this style a triple chancel arch, an\narrangement never occurring at a later epoch. Thus length and breadth\nwere made significant of this Mystery; nor was height less so. The\nclerestory, the triforium, and the piers cannot fail to suggest it.\nIndeed, where a triforium was not needed, there is often, as at Exeter\nand Wells, an arrangement of arcading in niches to resemble it, made\nthat the triplicity might be retained. It is only in late\nPerpendicular, such as the nave of Canterbury cathedral, that the\narrangement is omitted: there the eye is at once dissatisfied. Again,\nthe triple orders of moulding, which are so much more frequent than\nany other number, may be supposed to refer to the same thing. The\naltar steps, three, or some multiple of three, certainly do. So do the\nthree fingers with which Episcopal Benediction is given. And this is a\nvery early symbolism. It occurs in illuminated MS. We may mention one\n(Harl. 5540) of the thirteenth century, where it forms a part of the\nfirst letter of S. John's gospel. So, as we shall presently see, are\nEastern triplets. And reference is constantly made to the same\ndoctrine in bosses: we may mention as a remarkable instance one that\noccurs in Stamford, S. Mary's, a figure with an equilateral triangle\nin its mouth: thereby setting forth the duty of the preacher to\nproclaim the doctrine of the Trinity. In large churches, the three\ntowers undoubtedly proclaim the same doctrine. We shall hereafter show\nthat neither in nave and aisles, in triplets, or any thing else, is\nthe _inequality_ any thing else than what might have been expected.\n{lxxxii}\nII. The Doctrine of Regeneration\nWe know, as a fact, that from the earliest times, baptisteries and\nfonts were octagonal. We know also that the reason assigned, if not by\nS. Ambrose himself at least by one of his contemporaries, for this\nform was, that the number eight was symbolical of Regeneration. For as\nthe old Creation was complete in seven days, so the number next\nensuing may well be significative of the new.\nNow none can deny that very much the greater number of fonts are in\nthis shape. To prove this we will refer to those selected by the\nCambridge Camden Society in the appendix to the second edition of\ntheir 'Few Words to Church-Builders.' There we find.\n               Octagonal.    Of all other shapes\n  Early English  19    30\n  Perpendicular   57    2\nNow, it is to be remembered, that the superior convenience of a\ncylindrical or circular form, together with the wont of Norman\narchitects rather to symbolise facts than doctrine, accounts for the\ncomparatively small number of octagonal fonts in that style: in later\nages their preponderance is overwhelming.\nThe symbolism sculptured on the sides of the font hardly falls under\nour consideration in this place. And besides, it has been fully\ndetailed in the publications of the Cambridge Camden Society, and of\nMr. Poole. Whether the general octagonal uses of piers may not arise\nfrom a similar design, we do not pretend to decide.\n{lxxxiii}\nOne of the most apposite illustrations in _corbels_, consists in three\nfishes intertwined in an equilateral triangle; and thus typifying our\nregeneration in the Three Persons of the Ever-Blessed Trinity. For it\nneed not be said, that the fish is the emblem of the Christian, as\nbeing born again of water. The mystical vesica piscis of this form ()\nwherein the Divinity, and (more rarely) the Blessed Virgin are\nrepresented has no reference, except in its name to a fish; but\nrepresents the almond, the symbol of virginity, and self-production.\nIII. The Atonement\nWe will notice in the third place, the symbolical representation of\nthe great doctrine of the Atonement, in the ground lines and general\narrangement of our churches.\nAs soon as ever Christianity possessed temples of her own, the\ncruciform shape was, we have seen, sometimes adopted. And so, as we\nall know, has it continued down to the present day. England, perhaps,\nhas fewer examples of cross churches than any other country: the\nproportion of those which bear this shape being not so much as one in\nten. In France, on the contrary, the ratio would probably be inverted.\nInto the reason of this remarkable difference we shall not now\ninquire: but will merely remark, that many churches which do not, in\nan exterior view, appear cruciform, are nevertheless, from their\ninternal arrangements, really so. The transepts do not project beyond\nthe aisles: but have distinct transept arches, and a window of much\nlarger dimensions than those in the aisles. This principally occurs in\ncity churches, or where the founders were confined for want of room.\nAnd this is the case as well in churches which have aisles to the\nchancel, as in Godalming, Surrey, as where the nave alone has them,\n{lxxxiv} as in Holy Rood, Southampton. They will be distinguished\nreadily on the outside by the northern and southern gable. In some\ncathedral churches, there is a double cross: in York, this perhaps\nsignifies the metro-political dignity of that church; in other cases,\nit was probably merely a method of imparting greater dignity to the\nbuilding. Some churches--though they are not frequent--are in the form\nof a Greek Cross: that is, the four arms are all of equal length.\nDarlington, Durham, is an example: in this case there is a central\ntower. In some, as at Westminster, Gloucester, and S. Albans, the\nchoir runs westward of the transept; in Seville, almost the whole of\nthe choir is locally in the nave; in others, as Ely, it does not\nextend westward so far. These peculiarities, curious in themselves, do\nnot affect the symbolism: and probably no modification of meaning is\nto be attached to them.\nMr. Lewis has asserted, that in early churches, a cross was marked on\nthe pavement, the upper part running into the chancel, the arms\nextending into the transepts, and the body occupying the nave. And\nsome such arrangement, or rather the traces of it, we have ourselves\nperhaps noticed. The reason it was given up, was probably the anathema\npronounced by the second OEcumenical Council, on those who should\ntread on that holy symbol.\nThus, in the ground plan, the Cross of Christ was preached. It is\noften said, that the adjacent chapels, more especially the Lady\nChapel, obscured the symbolism. But it must be remembered that a\nground plan can only be judged of in two methods: either from a height\nabove, for example, the tower of the church; or when marked out on\npaper. It is surprising, in either of these cases, how easily the most\ncomplex cathedral resolves itself to the spectator's eyes into a\ncross.\n{lxxxv}\nIn looking at the details of churches, the Cross is marked on the\nDos-d'\u00e2nes and plain coffin lids of the earliest times: it commences\nthe later inscriptions on brass: it surmounts pinnacle, and gable, and\nporch; it is often imprinted on the jambs of the principal entrance,\nshowing the exact spot touched in the consecration with chrism,\n[Footnote 54] and possibly having reference to the blood sprinkled at\nthe Passover on the Door Post: and finally, in a more august form, is\nerected in the churchyard. And here we may notice another curious and\nbeautiful expression of Catholic feeling.  [Footnote 55]\n  [Footnote 54: It is proper to distinguish between Dedication\n  Crosses, which are generally of considerable size,\n  examples of which may be seen in Moorlinch, Somersetshire,\n  and those small crosses in door jambs, as in Preston,\n  Sussex, the use of which is not very clear, but which\n  were perhaps intended to remind the entering worshipper to\n  cross himself. At Yatton, Somersetshire, inside the\n  northern door, and towards the east, is a large\n  quatrefoil-fashioned cross: this perhaps pointed out a\n  now destroyed benatura.]\n  [Footnote 55: That there are some plain crosses, cannot be\n  denied--more especially that on which the weathercock is placed. A\n  little consideration will, perhaps, clear up this difficulty. The\n  cross may be viewed in two distinct lights. It may either set forth\n  that on which our Redeemer suffered--in which case it is the symbol\n  of glory: or it may image that Cross which every true Christian is\n  to take up--in which case it may still be called the Symbol of\n  Shame. In the latter signification, it may well be quite plain. But,\n  inasmuch as our ancestors looked more to the Passion of Christ than\n  to their own unworthiness, the former symbol is that which generally\n  occurs. Yet not always on the church spire, perhaps for this\n  reason:--the spire urges us, by its upward tendency, to press on\n  towards our heavenly home--a home which can only be reached by the\n  cheerful bearing of that cross by means of which (as it were) it\n  points. The cross therefore is here, with propriety, plain.]\nIt is very uncommon to find a plain cross surmounting a church: the\nwhole force of Christian art has sometimes been expended in wreathing\nand embellishing the instrument of redemption: flowers, and figures,\nand foliage are lavished upon it. And why? Because that which was once\nthe by-word of Pagans, the instrument of scorn and of suffering, has\nbecome the symbol of Hope and of Glory, of Joy, and of Eternal\nFelicity; and its material expression has altered proportionately.\n{xxxvi} In that the arms frequently end in leaves and flowers, they\nsignify the flourishing and continual increase of that Church which\nwas planted on Mount Calvary. The Crown of Thorns is sometimes\nwreathed around them: but so, that it should rather resemble a Crown\nof Glory. The instruments of the Passion are, as every one knows, of\nthe most ordinary occurrence. The commonest of these are--the Cross,\nthe Crown of Thorns, the Spear, the Scourge, the Nails, and the Sponge\non the pole. But in the Suffolk and Somersetshire churches many others\nare added. Their position is various: sometimes, as in Stogumber,\nSomersetshire, they appear amidst the foliage of a perpendicular\ncapital: sometimes, as in the Suffolk churches, they are found in the\nopen seats: often in bosses, often in brasses, often in stained glass;\nand sometimes the angel that supports a bracket holds them portrayed\non a shield. The Five Wounds are also often found. These are\nrepresented by a heart, between two hands and two feet, each pierced;\nor by a heart pierced with five wounds, as in a brass at King's\nCollege chapel, Cambridge. The instruments of the Passion may\nsometimes be seen amongst the volutes of the stem of the churchyard\ncross: examples occur at Belleville, near Havre, in Normandy, and\nSanta Cruz, in Madeira.\nAgain, the very position of our blessed Saviour on the Cross as\nrepresented in the great rood and in stained glass, is not without a\nmeaning. In modern paintings, the arms are high above the head, the\nwhole weight of the body seeming to rest upon them. And this, besides\nits literal truth, gives occasion to that miserable display of\nanatomical knowledge in which such pictures so much abound. The\nCatholic representation pictures the arms as extended horizontally:\nthereby signifying how the Saviour, when extended on the Cross,\nembraced the {lxxxvii} whole world.  [Footnote 56] Thus, as it ever\nought to be, is physical sacrificed to moral truth. Perhaps for a\nsimilar reason S. Longinus is represented as piercing the Right Side,\ninstead of the Left: and in a representation of the Five Wounds, it is\nthe right side of the breast that is pierced (as in a brass at\nSouthfleet, Kent); that being the side of the greatest strength, and\nthereby typifying the strength of that love wherewith our Redeemer\nloved us. [But this may be doubted. For it appears pretty clear that\nthe ancient Church considered the Right Side to have been that which\nwas really pierced. According to modern ideas, the effusion of the\nwater was not a miracle. S. John undoubtedly considered it not only a\nmiracle, but one of the most extraordinary which he had to relate,\nseeming to stop the mouth of the objector by insisting on the fact,\nthat he himself was an eye-witness.] In some old roods, a still\nfurther departure was made from literal truth: the Saviour was\nrepresented on the Cross, as a crowned king, arrayed in royal apparel.\n[Footnote 57] And his figure was constantly represented as larger than\nthat of His attendants, His Blessed Mother, and S. John, thereby\nsignifying his immeasurable superiority over the highest of human\nbeings.\n  [Footnote 56: However, in late stained glass, the modern position is\n  sometimes found  as in a Crucifixion represented in the east window\n  of the north aisle, in Wiscombe church, Somersetshire. ]\n  [Footnote 57: To this we may add the conventional representation of\n  Royal Saints, such as S. Edmund, wearing their kingly crowns during\n  their passion. That such conventional symbolism is _natural_ to us\n  may be shown by alluding (without irreverence in this connection) to\n  the way in which kings are always figured with crown and orb in\n  popular prints: and even, as in a sign-post at Leighterton,\n  Gloucestershire, King Charles II, hiding himself in the Royal Oak,\n  is arrayed in all the insignia of majesty.]\nAnother reference to the Atonement will be found in the deviation\nwhich the line of the chancel often presents from that of the nave. It\nis sometimes to the north, but more frequently to the south.\n{lxxxviii} There are many more churches in which it occurs than those\nwho have not examined the subject would believe: perhaps it is not too\nmuch to say that it may be noticed in a quarter of those in England.\nOf our cathedrals, it is most strongly marked in York and Lichfield:\namong the parish churches in which we have observed it, none have it\nso strongly as Eastbourne and Bosham, in Sussex, and S. Michael's at\nCoventry: in all of which the most casual glance could not but detect\nthe peculiarity of appearance it occasions. This arrangement\nrepresents the inclination of our Saviour's Head on the Cross. In\nroods the Head generally inclines to the left.\nMr. Poole, after noticing the fact in York minster, seems inclined to\nattribute it to a desire of evading the old foundation lines of that\nchurch, which induced the builders to deviate a little from the\nstraight line, rather than encounter the difficulty of removing this\nobstacle. But in the first place, however much modern church builders\nmight bethink themselves of such an expedient, it is not at all in the\ncharacter of the church architects of other days: and in the second,\nthe explanation is applicable to York alone, one only out of many\nhundred churches so distinguished.\nIV. The Communion of Saints\nNext, we will notice the effect which the Doctrine of the Communion of\nSaints has exercised in the designs of churches.\nIn the ground plan of small churches there is little which seems to\nbear on this subject. The principal references to departed saints\noccur in the stained glass, in the rood screen, in niches, in the\ncanopies of monuments, and in brasses. Monuments, in particular, often\nafford some beautiful ideas, among which we may notice {lxxxix} the\nangels which often are seated at the head of the effigy, supporting\nthe helmet or pillow, and seeming to point out the care of angels for\nthe saints. In cathedrals, however, the chapels have a very\nconsiderable effect upon the ground plan: though we cannot agree with\nMr. Poole that such a modification of the principal lines of the\nbuilding for the reception of these shrines and oratories, is\nnecessarily uncatholic. He principally objects to the position of the\nLady Chapel at the east end, above, as he expresses it, the High\nAltar. Now we believe the Lady Chapel to have occupied that place\nmerely on grounds of convenience: not from any design--which it is\nshocking to imagine--of exalting the Blessed Virgin to any\nparticipation in the honours of the Deity. Sometimes, as at Durham,\nthis chapel is at the west end: in country churches, it generally\noccupied the east end of the north or south aisle: and sometimes is\nplaced over the chancel, as in Compton, Surrey, Compton Martin,\nSomerset, and Darenth, Kent; or over the porch, as at Fordham,\nCambridgeshire. At Bristol cathedral it is on the north side of the\nchoir. That the position of the Lady Chapel at the east end adds\ngreatly to the beauty of the building wall hardly be denied on a\ncomparison of York, or Lincoln, or Peterborough with Lichfield, _as it\nnow is_.\n{xc}\nCHAPTER VIII\nEXAMPLES OF SYMBOLISM CONTINUED\nWe come now, according to the plan we laid down, to speak of the\nsymbolism of some particular features of a church, which do not fall\nso well under any of the four heads which we have been considering.\nAnd firstly, of windows.\nThe primary idea shadowed forth in every one of the styles, is the\nsaying of our Lord to His disciples, _ye are the light of the world_.\nMore simply set forth at first, this notion acquired, in the course of\ntime, various methods of expression, and was subjected to different\nmodifications; but we must retain it as the ground work or we shall be\nin danger of mistaking the true meaning of ancient church architects.\nIn Norman, then, and early English, the single lights north and south,\nset forth the Apostles and Doctors who have shined forth in their time\nas the lights of the Church: and the rich pattern of flowerwork\nwherewith the stained glass in them was decked, represented the\nvariety of graces in each. But to have symbolised the servants without\nthe Master, the members without the Head, had been at variance with\nall the Catholic Church has ever practised. Looking therefore to the\neast end, we behold that well-known feature, the Triplet: setting\n{xci} forth the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.  [Footnote 58] Nor is\nthis all: to denote that all the Church has, and all She is, is from\nabove, the string course, springing from the eastern triplet, runs\nround the whole church (often both within and without,) binding it, as\nit were, in and connecting every other light, with those at the east.\nAgain, the Western Door, as we shall see, symbolised Christ: and two\nlights, typical of His two natures, are therefore generally placed\nover it. There are, undoubtedly, instances of western triplets: though\nwe think that the Camden Society has well explained these.\n  [Footnote 58: We read, in the legend of S. Barbara, that, being\n  confined by her father in a room where were two windows only, she\n  added a third, by way of setting forth this Mystery.]\nIn some cases, there is a series of couplets on each side of the\nchurch: and, taking the hint from Durandus, we may interpret this\narrangement of the mission of the Apostles two and two.\nA series of triplets as in Salisbury cathedral, and the Lady Chapel of\nBristol, is very rare: and, of course, not objectionable on any other\ngrounds than that of the too cheap use of a most beautiful feature.\nSo far all is simple: but as we approach the decorated style, the\nsymbolism becomes excessively complicated. The principal doctrines of\nthe Catholic Church are set forth in each window: and to unravel the\nwhole of these is often a task of no small difficulty. We shall\nproceed to give a few examples, with the explanation which appears to\nus probable: entreating the reader to remember, that if in any\ninstance our conjectures should appear unfounded, the failure of\nprobability in one case throws no discredit on the others, and still\nless does it invalidate the system. Durandus's silence on the language\nof tracery is easily explained by the consideration, that assign as\nlate a date as we will to the {xcii} publication of his work, it came\nforth while the Early English style was yet in existence: and his\nsilence on triplets only proves, what is well known to\necclesiologists, that they are far less common in foreign than in our\nown architecture.\nIn Norman windows the wheel window is conspicuous. This, whether\nformed with the _radii_ like those of Barfreston, or of the Temple\nchurch, represent (as we shall presently observe that Norman symbolism\nusually _does_ represent) an historical fact: namely, the martyrdom of\nS. Catherine. The celebrity of this Virgin Martyr may tend to explain\nwhy she should be so far honoured: a celebrity which has descended to\nour own day in the common sign of the Cat and Wheel: as well as the\nfirework so denominated.\nOf Norman triplets there are not many to which we can refer. The tower\nof Winchester, however, presenting one on each face, is a noble\nexample. The southeastern transept of Rochester, though later, is\nequally in point: it contains two triplets, far apart, and one\ndisposed above the other. The west front of S. Etienne at Caen is a\nwell-known instance.\nThe earliest symbolism of Early English triplets represented the\nTrinity alone; the Trinity in Unity was reserved for a somewhat later\nperiod. And this was typified by the hood moulding thrown across the\nthree lights. At other times a quatre-foiled, or cinque-foiled, circle\nwas placed at some little distance above the triplet: thus typifying\nthe Crown which befits the Majesty of the King of Kings. And the same\nCrown is often exhibited above the western couplet. But, for as much\nas we are 'compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every\nperson by Himself to be God and Lord,' a crown is sometimes\nrepresented over each light of the triplet, as in Wimborne minster.\n{xciii}\nAnother method of representing the same doctrine was by a simple\nequilateral triangle for a window: whether plain, of which there are\nmany examples, or with the toothed ornament, as in the famous example\nat York minster.\nS. Giles's at Oxford has windows, the tracery of which will serve as\nan example of many: it has _three tre_-foiled lights, with _three_\nquatre-foiled circles, arranged triangle-wise in the head.\nThis type is a little varied in S. Mary Magdalene's church, in the\nsame city, by the introduction of the ogee form.\nBerkeley church has a wheel window containing _three_ quatre-foils:\nthe three spaces left between them and the line being _tre_-foiled.\nThe east windows of Dunchurch and Fen Stanton have been explained in\nthe publications of the Cambridge Camden Society: the former in their\n'Few Words to Church-Builders,' the latter in their illustrations of\nmonumental brasses. Part iv.\nThe south transept of Chichester cathedral is a glorious specimen of\ndecorated symbolism. In the gable is a Marygold, containing two\nintersecting equilateral _tri_-angles: the _six_ apices of these are\n_sex_-foiled; the interior _hex_-agon is beautifully worked in _six_\nleaves. The lower window seven lights: in the head is an equilateral\nspherical _tri_-angle, containing a large _tre_foil, intersected by a\nsmaller _tre_-foil. Here we have the Holy Trinity, the Divine\nAttributes, the perfection of the Deity.\nA window in Merton College chapel has _three_ lights: with a circle in\nthe head containing _six sex_-foils.\nBroughton, Oxon, has in the head of one of its windows a circle,\ncontaining two intersecting equilateral triangles, the _six_ apices,\nand _six_ spaces around, being _tre_-foiled.\n{xciv}\nThe east end of Lincoln, though far inferior to the south transept of\nChichester, is nevertheless highly symbolical. The east window of each\nof the aisles has _three_ lights, with _three_ foliated circles,\ndisposed _triangle_-wise in the head. The great east window has eight\nlights in two divisions, each whereof has _three_ foliated circles in\nthe head: and in the apex of the window is a circle containing seven\nfoliations. The upper window has a circle of eight foliations in the\nhead: and in the apex of the gable is an equilateral trefoil.\nThe next element introduced was the consideration of the Six\nAttributes of the Deity. One of the simplest examples was to be found\nin the west window of the north aisle of S. Nicholas, at Guildford: a\nplain circle, containing six _tre_-foils: these are arranged in two\n_tri_-angles, each containing _three tre_-foils, and the two sets are\nvaried.\nThe clerestory of Lichfield cathedral (circ. 1300), is a series of\nspherical _tri_-angles, each containing _three tre_-foils.\nA similar clerestory occurs in the north-west transept of Hereford\ncathedral, and the same idea is repeated in its triforium: a series of\n_three tre_-foiled lights, with _three_ circles in the head.\nThe east end of Lichfield symbolises most strikingly the same glorious\ndoctrine. The apse is _tri_-gonal: the windows of each side are the\nsame: each is of _three_ lights, with six _tre_-foils (emblematical of\nthe six attributes) disposed above in the form of an equilateral\n_tri_-angle.\nThe east end of Chichester is rather earlier, but introduces yet\nanother element. Here we have a triplet: and at some height above it,\na wheel-window of seven circles: symbolising therefore eternity and\nperfection.\n{xcv}\nThe triforium and clerestory of Carlisle are singular symbols of the\ndoctrine of the Trinity. The former has in each bay three adjacent\nequal lancets. The latter is a series of triplets; the central window\nin each being composed of three lights. We may observe, by the way,\nthat three _adjacent_ equal lancets are hardly ever found, whatever\nthe reason may be. We know but of three examples: in the churches of\nBosham, Sussex, Godalming, Surrey, and S. Mary-le-Crypt, Gloucester:\nand in all these cases they occupy the same position, the south east\nend of the chancel, or chancel aisle.\nDorchester church, Oxfordshire, has for one of its windows an\nequilateral spherical triangle with three heads, or knops, one at each\nangle.\nWe are now in a purely decorated age. And as one of its earliest\nwindows we may mention that in the Bishop of Winchester's Palace at\nSouthwark. It was a wheel, and contained two intersecting equilateral\n_tri_-angles: around them were _six sex_-foiled triangles the hexagon\nin the centre containing a star of _six_ greater and _six_ smaller\nrays. Here, of course, the Blessed Trinity and the divine and human\nnatures were set forth.  [Footnote 59]\n  [Footnote 59: We may perhaps be allowed to say a few words here on\n  the subject of those singular windows which the Cambridge Camden\n  Society has called _Lychnoscopes_.\n  It appears, that in Early English churches, the westernmost window\n  on the south side of the chancel is both lower than, and in other\n  ways (particularly by a transom) distinguished from the rest. It is\n  sometimes merely a square aperture, as in some churches in the Weald\n  of Sussex: sometimes a small ogee-headed light, as in old Shoreham:\n  sometimes, where the south side of the chancel is lighted by a\n  series of lancets, the westernmost, as in Chiddingfold, Sussex, is\n  transomed, where the others end, and carried down lower; sometimes\n  the lower part appears to have been _originally_ blocked, as in\n  Kemerton, Gloucestershire, and Kingstone next Lewes, Sussex:\n  sometimes there are remains of clamps, as at Buckland, Kent,\n  sometimes of shutters. Again, sometimes there are two, one north,\n  the other south of the chancel: sometimes the same arrangement is\n  found S.E. of the nave. On the other hand, it is never found in any\n  but a parish church: never in late work: seldom is it ornamented. We\n  will give a few remarkable instances. I. _Dinder_, Somersetshire.\n  Here there is a double lychnoscope, north and south: the date is\n  late Early English, and the specimen is unique from there being a\n  rude moulding in the window arch. 2. _Othery_, Somersetshire. The\n  lychnoscope itself is here blocked: it is square-headed, and of two\n  lights: date probably Early Decorated. The church is cruciform, and\n  a central perpendicular tower was subsequently erected. One of the\n  diagonal buttresses is thrown out at a distance of some three feet\n  from the window, so as to hide it: and an oblique square hole has\n  been cut through the masonry of the buttress. This is the more\n  remarkable, because there are stalls in the chancel, of\n  perpendicular work, which would seem to render any window in that\n  position useless. 3. _Christon_, Somersetshire. Here, _almost close\n  to the ground_, is a horizontal slit which appears never to have\n  been glazed. This is an early Norman church. So at Albury, Surrey,\n  at the S.E. end of the south aisle. 4. _S. Appolline_, Guernsey.\n  This church is of the same date as, or may be earlier than, the\n  last. The windows are rude and square-headed slits: the lychnoscope\n  is transomed. 5. _Preston_, Sussex. There are three windows in the\n  south of the chancel, which rise one above the other, like sedilia,\n  to the east. 6. _Loxton_, Somersetshire. This is an Early English\n  church with a south western tower serving as porch. From the eastern\n  side of this a long slit is carried through the nave wall, a\n  distance of some twenty feet, and exactly commanding a view of the\n  altar. It is _grated_ at the west end, not glazed: the eastern end\n  has long been blocked up. Way is made for it by a bulge of the wall\n  in the angle formed towards the east by the tower and nave. This\n  seems to form a kind of connecting link between the hagioscope and\n  the lychnoscope.\n  With these windows we will venture to connect those extremely rare\n  ones, three adjacent, unconnected, equal, lancets, as occurring of\n  the same date at the same position. There is again another kind of\n  lychnoscope only found where the chancel has aisles. A panel of the\n  parclose, or wooden screen, behind the longitudinal stalls, is\n  sometimes found pierced with a small quatrefoil, at the S.W. part of\n  the chancel. This is vulgarly called a confessional. It seems,\n  however, clearly connected with the lychnoscope. Examples are found\n  at Erith, Kent, and Sundridge in the same county. Perhaps also the\n  curious slit in the south wall of the chancel of S. Michael's\n  church, Cambridge, communicating with a south chantry chapel is\n  another variety.\n  From the above facts we deduce the following remarks: 1. That the\n  necessity for a lychnoscope must in some cases have been very\n  urgent: as may be proved by the example, at Othery, where a buttress\n  is much injured to form one. 2. But yet this need was not universal,\n  because there are many churches in which the arrangement does not\n  occur. 3. That it appears, strictly speaking, a parochial\n  arrangement, not being found in cathedral or collegiate churches. 4.\n  That smaller buildings rather than larger are marked with it: it\n  seldom occurs where there are aisles to the chancel. 5. That, where\n  employed, lychnoscopes were only used occasionally; else the\n  shutters which have evidently sometimes existed, would have been\n  useless. 6. That they are very seldom ornamented, and never have\n  stained glass. 7. That in the Perpendicular era they generally,\n  though not universally, ceased to be used. 8. That, a large sill\n  seems to have been a requisite to them. 9. That, where the upper\n  part is glazed, the lower part often was not, as in the Decorated\n  lychnoscope at Beckford, Gloucestershire. The principal hypotheses\n  to explain the use of this arrangement are: 1. Dr. Rock's. That it\n  was a contrivance by which lepers might see the Elevation of the\n  Host. But the structure of the greater part of these windows forbids\n  this idea: many instances occur in which it is splayed away from the\n  Altar, none (except that at Loxton, and a doubtful case at\n  Winscombe, Somersetshire, where a perpendicular addition has been\n  made) in which it is splayed towards it. 2. That of the Cambridge\n  Camden Society, that it was for watching the Paschal light. But\n  this, besides being _\u00e0 priori_ improbable is refuted by that at\n  Othery. Here the eye has to look through two apertures at some\n  distance from each other, and therefore can command only a very\n  small field on exactly the opposite side of the chancel. 3. It has\n  been imagined by some that it was for confession. The idea of\n  confession near an altar sufficiently refutes itself; but\n  furthermore, some of these openings are so very low down that the\n  thing would be impossible. Two solitary facts more, though they\n  throw no light on the subject, may yet be mentioned. 1. In the\n  church of S. Amaro, near Funchal, in Madeira, is a grating at the\n  west-end like that at Loxton. Its use is _now_ said to be to cool\n  the church, though in that case one should have expected to meet it\n  elsewhere. 2. In Sennen church by the Land's End, there is said to\n  have been a lychnoscope (now no longer existing) used to take in the\n  tithe-milk. We may gather on the whole, 1. that lychnoscopes could\n  not have been used to look into a church 2. Nor to hand anything in\n  or out. Both these are sufficiently disproved by Othery, 3. Nor to\n  speak through. But one can hardly imagine any other use, except it\n  were to look _out_ of the church. We are inclined to think that it\n  was in some way connected with the ringing of the bells, or of the\n  sancte bell. Where the tower is central, we very often find it: as\n  at Old Shoreham and Alfriston, Sussex: at Loxton it is evidently for\n  some purpose connected with the tower. So in Beckford, which has a\n  central tower; and Uffington, Berks, a cross church. And the place\n  where the sancte bell was rung is exactly between a double\n  lychnoscope. But what the particular use might have been we will not\n  pretend to guess. We will conclude this long note by a question as\n  to the authority for calling the small chancel door, the _Priest's\n  Door_. It is never (originally) furnished with a lock, but always\n  with an interior bar, thus showing that it could only have been used\n  from the inside. So the priest could never have _entered_ the church\n  by this way, unless the door were previously opened for him.]\n  [End footnote]\n{xcvi}\nThe symbolism of the more complicated decorated windows it is next to\nimpossible to explain. Carlisle and York have doubtless their\nappropriate meaning; but who will now pretend to expound it?\n{xcvii}\nOne exception we may make:--the east window of Bristol cathedral. It\nis of seven lights, but so much prominence is given to the three\ncentral ones, as strongly to set forth the Most Holy Trinity: over\nthem is a crown of six leaves and by the numerous winged foliations\naround them, the Heavenly Hierarchy may, very probably, be understood.\n{xcviii}\nII. Doors\nDurandus has given us a clue to the symbolical meaning which these\ngenerally present, by directing our attention to that saying of our\nLord's, _I am the door_. And this, uttered as tradition reports it to\nhave been, in reference to the Gate of the Temple, on which the\nSaviour's eyes were then fixed, gives additional force to the\nallusion.\nIn small churches, doors are seldom the subject of much symbolical\nornament, except in the Norman style; but in cathedrals, some of the\nmost strikingly figurative arrangements are often thrown into them.\nThe Person, the Miracles, or the Doctrines of our Lord are here\nfrequently set forth. He is sometimes, especially in the tympanum of\nNorman doors, as at Egleton in Rutland, represented as described in\nthe Apocalyptic vision; with a sword in His mouth. More frequently,\nhowever, with His Blessed Mother; in order, perhaps, to connect His\n_entrance_ into the world with ours into the Church, which He thereby\ngathered together. This in the south entrance of Lincoln minster, is\nenclosed in a quatre-foil: because the birth of Christ is announced by\nthe four evangelists; and angels are represented around it in\nattitudes of adoration. A singular, and indeed irreverent symbol, is\nto be seen in a door of Lisieux church: the Holy Ghost descending on\nthe Blessed Virgin, and the infant Saviour following Him. In the\nentrance to the cloisters of Norwich cathedral, the door arch is\nfilled by nine niches, the central one being occupied by the Saviour,\nthe others by saints. But this arrangement is much more common in\nFrench churches: where two, or even three rows of saints in the\narchitrave are not uncommon: witness the south and west doors of S.\nGermain, at Amiens, and a west door of S. Etienne, at Beauvais. {xcix}\nThis is sometimes, in late Flamboyant work, carried to an absurd\nextent: in a south door of Gisors, two niches actually hang down out\nof the soffit. Early English doors are generally double, thereby\nrepresenting the Two Natures of our Saviour: but embraced by one arch,\nto set forth His One Person. So the celebrated door in Southwell\nminster: the west door in the Galilee of Ely cathedral: the entrance\nto the chapter House, at Salisbury; the west door of the same: so the\ndecorated west door of York; so the door to the Chapter House there,\nof which the inscription truly says: _Ut Rosa Phlos phlorum, sic est\ndomus ista Domorum:_so the west door and entrance to the Chapter House\nof Wells. The west door of Higham Ferrars has the Saviour's triumphal\nentrance into Jerusalem, over the double western doors. And this is\nthe case in one of the doors of Seville cathedral. Both these connect\nthe ideas of His entrance into the temporal, with that of ours into\nthe spiritual, Jerusalem. In these symbolical doorways, we have one\nproof of the immeasurable superiority of English over French\narchitecture: compare any of the above named with the celebrated west\ndoor of Amiens, with its twenty-two sovereigns in its soffit. Again,\nby way of contrast to the second Adam, by whom we enter into Heaven,\nwe sometimes, especially in Norman churches, have the Forbidden Tree,\nwith Adam and Eve in the tympanum: setting forth the one man by whom\nsin entered into the world.\nThe Crucifixion seldom occurs over doors: while over porches a\ncrucifix is very common. The cause of the difference is explained by a\nconsideration that the former are shut, the latter open: and 'when\nThou hadst overcome the sharpness of Death, Thou didst _open_ the\nkingdom of heaven to all believers.' Indeed it may almost be asserted\nthat a crucifix is never seen over a {c} closed door, except where it\nforms a part of the usual representation of the Trinity. For the\nTrinity is also, in Norman churches, there represented: and that not\ninappropriately: inasmuch as the Trinity is the beginning of all\nthings. A Holy Lamb is sometimes found in Norman tympana: as saith the\nSaviour, _I am the door of the sheep_. A hasty glance at Durandus\n[Footnote 60] might lead us to imagine that we should find the\nApostles set forth under the similitude of doors: but he there\nprobably refers to the well-known passage in the Apocalypse. Apoc.\n  [Footnote 60: Durand. i, 26.]\nThis however leads us to another, and that a totally different,\nmeaning attached to doors. We have already noticed the fact, that many\nNorman and Early English mouldings refer to various kinds of\nmartyrdom: those which do so occur more frequently on doors than\nanywhere else; for it is written, 'We must through much tribulation\nenter into the kingdom of God.' And here we may observe a very curious\nand beautiful progression in symbolism. In the early ages of\nChristianity, it was a matter requiring no small courage to make an\nopen profession of Christianity, to join one's self to the Church\nMilitant:--and this fact has left its impress in the various\nrepresentations of martyrdom surrounding the nave-doors of Norman and\nthe first stage of Early English churches: as well as in the frightful\nforms which seem to deter those who would enter. But in process of\ntime, as the world became evangelised, to be a member of the visible\nChurch was an easy matter: the difficulty was transferred from an\nentrance into _that_, to the so living, as to have part in the\nCommunion of Saints:--in other words, to an entrance into the Church\nTriumphant. And therefore in late Early English, and Decorated, the\nsymbols which had occupied the nave-doors in the former period, are\nnow transferred to the chancel arch.\n{ci}\nThe different agricultural operations, the signs of the zodiac, and\noccupations of various kinds, sometimes found on the _outside_ of\nNorman doors, signify that we must turn our backs on, and leave behind\nus, all worldly cares and employments, if we would enter into the\nKingdom of God. In later porches, true love knots are sometimes found\non the bosses: because part of the service of Holy Matrimony was\nperformed there. The serpent, in which the handle is so universally\nfashioned, has probably reference to that text, 'They shall lay their\nhands upon serpents,' to signify that God's arm will protect us, when\nengaging, or about to engage in, His service. For the serpent with his\ntail in his mouth is not a Christian, and indeed by no means a\ndesirable, emblem of eternity, and therefore the door handle cannot be\nso interpreted.\nThe doors are of course placed near the west end: for it is only by\nway of the Church Militant that we can hope to enter the Church\nTriumphant. One door, indeed, the priest's door, conducts at once into\nthe chancel. Durandus is probably right in interpreting this of\nChrist's coming into the world; though it involves a little confusion\nof symbolism, inasmuch as the chancel, properly speaking, denotes the\nblessed place which He left: not the abode to which he came. It is to\nbe noted as an instance of the decline of symbolism in the\nPerpendicular age, that in churches which have aisles to the chancel\nof that date, we sometimes, as at Bitton, Gloucestershire, Godalming,\nSurrey, and Wivelsfield and Isfield, Sussex, find an entrance at the\neast end of the south aisle. Though used as a priest's door, this is\nentirely to be blamed: what shall we say then of modern churches,\nwhich have two doors at the east end, one on {cii} each side of the\naltar, as Christchurch, Brighton? In Seville cathedral, a late,\nalthough fine flamboyant building, there are large doors at the east\nend of each choir aisle.\nPorches are usually on the south side. For as the east was considered\nin an especial manner connected with the Kingdom of Heaven, so was the\nnorth imagined to be under the Prince of the Power of the Air. It is\ncurious how diametrically opposed in both these ideas were\nChristianity and Paganism. For as by the latter the west was known as\n'the better country, where lay the Isles of the Blest in their\nabundant peace,' so in the north dwelt the deathless and ageless\nHyperboreans: whose state was the model of good government and secure\nhappiness. That the belief of our ancestors is not yet extinct, a very\nslight knowledge of our country churchyards will prove: the north side\nof the churchyard has generally not more than one or two graves. To be\nburied there is, in the language of our eastern counties, to be buried\n_out of Sanctuary_: and the spot is appropriated to suicides,\nunbaptised persons, and excommunicates. A particular portion is, in\nsome churchyards of Devonshire, separated for the second class and\ncalled the _chrisomer_. Where the contrary is the case, it may be\nworth inquiring how far it does not arise from the accidental position\nof the Churchyard Cross on the north side. There the spell seems\nbroken: and the villagers' graves cluster around it, as if the\npresence of that sacred symbol were a sufficient protection to the\nsleeping dust. A remarkable instance of this occurs at Belleville,\nbetween Dieppe and Abbeville, in Normandy.\nThe doors in the transepts are, in small churches, almost invariably\neast or west: much more frequently the latter. This, however, is\nprobably not symbolical: but an arrangement adopted to prevent any\nresemblance in the porches and transepts:--and it is a rule which\nneeds to be much impressed on modern church builders.\n{ciii}\nThe rule as to the western position of the doors, seems to apply\ngenerally to the churchyard.\nIt is worthy of remark that in the matter of doors, Protestantism\npresents us, as is so frequently the case, with a very unintended\npiece of symbolism. When we see, as in the beautiful church of Bisley,\nGloucestershire, _thirteen_ different openings, with external\nstaircases, made into the church, through windows and elsewhere, can\nwe forbear thinking of him who cometh not by the doors into the\nsheepfold, but climbeth up some other way?\nIII. Chancel Arch and Rood Screen\nWe come now to speak of the chancel arch and the rood screen, two of\nthe most important features in a church. These, as separating the\nchoir from the nave, denote literally the separation of the clergy\nfrom the laity: but symbolically the division between the Militant and\nTriumphant Churches: that is to say, the Death of the Faithful. The\nfirst great symbol which sets this forth, is the Triumphal Cross: the\nImage of Him  [Footnote 61] who by His Death had overcome Death, and\nhas gone before His people through the valley of its shadow.\n  [Footnote 61: 'Let us consider Him,' says Bishop Hall, 'now, after a\n  weary conflict with the Devil, looking down from the Triumphal\n  Chariot of the Cross on His Church.']\nThe images of Saints and Martyrs appear in the lower panelling, as\nexamples of faith and patience to us. The colours of the rood screen\nitself represent their passion and victory: the crimson sets forth the\none, the gold the other. The curious tracery of net-work typifies the\nobscure manner in which heavenly things are set forth, while we look\nat them from the Church Militant. And for as much as the Blessed\nMartyrs passed from this {civ} world to the next through sore\ntorments, the mouldings of the chancel arch represent the various\nkinds of sufferings through which they went. Faith was their support,\nand must be ours: and Faith is set forth either in the abstract, by\nthe limpet moulding on the chancel arch; or on the screen, as in\nBishop's Hull, Somersetshire, by the Creed in raised gilt letters: or\nis represented by some notable action of which it was the source: so\nin Cleeve, Somersetshire, the destruction of a dragon runs along, not\nonly the rood screen, but the north parclose also. But in that the\npower of evil spirits may be exercised against us till we have left\nthis world, but not after, horrible forms are sometimes sculptured in\nthe west side of the chancel arch. The foregoing remarks may perhaps\nexplain what has been felt by some ecclesiologists as a difficulty:\nhow it happens, since the chancel is more highly ornamented than the\nnave, that it is the western, or nave side, not the eastern or chancel\nside, of the chancel arch which invariably receives the greatest share\nof ornament. The straitness of the entrance to the Kingdom of Heaven\nis set forth by the excessive narrowness of Norman chancel arches. And\nthe final separation of the Church Triumphant from everything that\ndefileth was almost invariably represented by the Great Doom painted\nin fresco over the rood screen: of which there are still several\nexamples, as the celebrated one in Trinity church, Coventry: and many\nmore might be found, if the whitewash in that place were scraped off.\nAnd not only is the judgment of the world, but that of individuals\nhere set forth: on the south side of the chancel wall of Preston\nchurch, Sussex, is a fresco of S. Michael weighing the souls: the\nDevil stands by, eager to secure his prize, but by the intervention of\nthe Blessed Virgin, the scale preponderates in favour of the sinner.\n{cv} There might probably be an altar to the Blessed Virgin under this\npicture. Also deeds of faith are represented in similar positions:\n--so in the same church on the north chancel wall, is the fresco of\nthe Martyrdom of S. Thomas of Canterbury. We have already noticed the\ntriplicity, in some instances, of Norman chancel arches. A very\ncurious triple chancel arch is to be seen at Capel-le-Ferne, Kent. We\nmay also refer to those singular double ones, Wells and Finedon, and\nin another manner, Darlington, in Durham, and Barton, in Cumberland.\nIt may be well, finally, to note the entire absence in the ground\nplans of our churches of any reference to Purgatory. The only instance\nin which chancel and nave are separated by any intervening object, is\nthe chantry of Bishop Arundell in Chichester cathedral. Of the triple\ndivision of the church by two (so to speak) chancel arches, we have\nalready spoken.\nIV. Monuments\nWe now proceed to _Monumental Symbolism_. But it will be proper first\nto consider a very curious subject: namely the reason of the\ndifference between the personages with which the effigies of the\ndeparted were of old time, and are now, surrounded. In the former case\nthey were always real: Our Lady, S. John, S. Pancras, S. Agatha, and\nso on. In the latter, they are always allegorical: Faith, Virtue,\nCourage, Eloquence and the like. Nay, in the very ground which is\ncommon to the two--the representations of angels--we may observe a\ngreat difference: in modern monuments any angel is represented: in\nthose of ancient date the particular one is often named: S. Gabriel,\nS. Raphael, etc. Now there are, we think, three good reasons to be\nassigned for this.\n{cvi}\nI. The _enlightened_, or in plainer terms, the sceptical character of\nthe present age. Unaccustomed to view any great examples of heroic\ndevotion and self-sacrifice now, we naturally, though scarcely\nallowing it to ourselves, begin to doubt whether there ever were any\nsuch. In thinking of Patience, our forefathers would naturally have\nhad S. Vincent presented to their mind: but we, who, some of us have\nscarcely heard of his name, and some, are totally ignorant of his\ncharacter, have of course no such ideas suggested. So again, where our\nancestors would have represented S. Lawrence, we content ourselves\nwith a representation of Fidelity. And it is in accordance with this\neasy and self-indulgent age, rather to personify a thing, which as\nhaving never had real existence, cannot be brought into comparison\nwith ourselves, than by representing a really existing person, to run\nthe risk of a contrast between his virtues and our own.\n2. This allegorising spirit is more in accordance with the general\npaganism of our architectural designs: though, be it observed, a\nfeature of the very worst and most corrupt state of Paganism. It is\nworth noting that in heathen countries, evil qualities have always\nbeen personified before good. Paganism like every other false system,\nbecame worst at its close. In the early times of Grecian mythology the\nattributes of purity, and truth, and mercy, were so strongly felt to\nreside in the gods, that a separate personification of them was\nneedless: whereas strife, and violence and fury, qualities which had\nno place in heaven, demanded, and obtained a separate existence. But\nin process of time, when the divinities themselves became invested\nwith the attributes of sinful humanity, the qualities of goodness\nwhich were no longer supposed theirs, found separate embodiments and\nexpressions.\n{cvii}\n3. We may assign as a reason for the difference we have noticed the\nfar greater reality with which our ancestors looked on the connections\nsubsisting between ourselves and the other world. Thus, tempests and\nhurricanes, which we coldly explain on philosophical principles, they\nconsidered as directly proceeding from the violence of evil spirits:\n[Footnote 62] --earthquakes and volcanoes they regarded as outbreaks,\nso to speak, of that place of punishment, which they believed locally\nsituated within the earth:--diseases and pestilences they held to be\nthe immediate work of the devil: madness and lunacy were, in their\nview, synonymous with possession. Whether theirs, as it certainly was\nthe most pious, were not also the most philosophical view, has been so\nably discussed in the 'Church of the Fathers' under the chapter _S.\nAnthony in Conflict_, that we need here only allude to it. But the\nsame spirit led them to adopt the effigies of those saints who had\nbeen members of the same Church Militant with themselves, and who now\nwere members of that Triumphant Church which they hoped hereafter to\njoin: and its contrary leads us to adopt the cold, vague, dreamy\nunsubstantialities of allegorism.\n  [Footnote 62: A Master of Philosophy travelling with others on the\n  way, when a fearful thunderstorm arose, checked the fear of his\n  fellows, and discoursed to them of the natural reasons of that\n  uproar in the clouds, and those sudden flashes wherewith they seemed\n  (out of the ignorance of causes) to be too much affrighted; in the\n  midst of his philosophical discourse, he was struck dead with that\n  dreadful eruption which he slighted. What could this be but the\n  finger of that God Who will have His works rather entertained with\n  wonder and trembling than with curious scanning? Neither is it to be\n  otherwise in those violent hurricanes, devouring earthquakes, and\n  more than ordinary tempests, and fiery apparitions which we have\n  seen and heard of; for however there be natural causes given of the\n  usual events of this kind, yet nothing hinders but the Almighty, for\n  the manifestations of His power and justice, may set spirits,\n  whether good or evil, on work, to do the same things sometimes in\n  more state and magnificence of horror.--Bishop Hall, 'The Invisible\n  World,' sect. vi.]\nThe earliest kind of monumental symbolism is that which represents the\ntrade or profession of the person commemorated. And these principally\noccur on Lombardic slabs and Dos d'Anes. The distaff represents\n{cviii} the mother of a family:   [Footnote 63] a pair of gloves a\nglover:   [Footnote 64] so we have a pair of shears: and the like. But\nthe Cross constantly appears; and in a highly floriated form:\nsometimes at its foot are three steps representing the Mount:\nsometimes a Holy Lamb.  [Footnote 65] And so ecclesiastical personages\nhave their appropriate symbols: so the chalice or the ring  [Footnote\n66] represents a priest:--another type is the hand raised in\nbenediction  [Footnote 67] over a chalice: brasses abound in\nsymbolical imagery. The animal at the feet varies with the varying\ncircumstances of the deceased: a married lady has the dog, the emblem\nof fidelity: with which we may compare the speech of Clytemnestra, of\nher absent Lord,   [Footnote 68]\n  [Greek text]\nThere are, doubtless, instances (there is one in Bristol, S. Peter's)\nwhere the unmarried are so represented: but they are very rare, and\nquite in the decline of the art. The knight again has, generally, a\nterrier at his feet, as the emblem of courage: sometimes the\ngreyhound,  [Footnote 69 ] the symbol of speed. Lord Beaumont\n[Footnote 70] has an elephant: it is a bearing in his coat-armour.\n  [Footnote 63: See on this subject an interesting article in the\n  _Church of England Quarterly_, for September, 1841. ]\n  [Footnote 64: As in Fletching, Sussex.]\n  [Footnote 65: As in Lolworth, Cambridgeshire.]\n  [Footnote 66: As in S. Mary, Castlegate, York.]\n  [Footnote 67: As in Hedon, Yorkshire.]\n  [Footnote 68: Agamemnon, 606. (Ed. Dindorf.)]\n  [Footnote 69: As in Sir Grey de Groby, S. Alban's.]\n  [Footnote 70: Engraved in the 5th number of the Cambridge Camden\n  Society's _Illustrations of Monumental Brasses_.]\nEarly priests have a lion   [Footnote 71] also at their feet; but this\ntypified their trampling on the devil: as servants of Him concerning\nwhom it is written, 'And the Devil shall go forth before   [Footnote\n72] His feet' They have also a dragon for the same reason. And this\nposition doubtless also has reference to the verse, 'Thou shalt tread\nupon the lion   [Footnote 73] and adder: the young lion and the dragon\nshalt thou trample under feet.' In the decline of the art, effigies\nhave the crest of the departed at their feet.\n  [Footnote 71: As in Watton, Herts, and Cottingham, Yorkshire.]\n  [Footnote 72: Habaccuc III. v, _Et egredietur diabolus ante pedes\n  ejus_.]\n  [Footnote 73: Psalm xc. _Qui habitat_.]\n{cix}\nWhether those knights who are represented with crossed legs are to be\nconsidered as crusaders, or at least as having taken the vow, is a\nquestion which has been much discussed. The general belief seems now\nto be in the negative:--and Mr. Bloxam in his work on Monumental\nArchitecture gives it as his opinion that this posture was chosen by\nthe artist, for the more graceful arrangement of the _surcoat_. And it\nis to be remarked that some illuminations, as in the Life of S. Edward\nthe Confessor, in the Cambridge University Library, represent the\nknights as sitting cross legged. For our own part we must confess that\nwe incline to the old belief:--as better supported by tradition, and\nmore in accordance with the general principles of Catholic artists.\nThe knight's hand is sometimes represented as resting on the hilt of\nhis sword:--or as it is called _drawing it_. We are astonished that a\nwriter in the _Quarterly Review_ should fall into this popular error:\nespecially when the idea was completely opposed to the whole course of\nhis argument. There can be no doubt that this typifies the\naccomplishment of the vow, the taking which was set forth by the\ncrossed legs. The contrary--an act of war in the House of Peace--is\nnot for a moment to be thought of. As emblematical of deep humility,\nsome effigies are represented naked: some in shrouds: some, as\nemaciated corpse: and sometimes, still more strikingly, the tomb will\nbe divided into two partitions: and while the departed appears in rich\nvests, and with a gorgeous canopy above--below there is a skeleton, or\na worm eaten figure. There is a remarkable instance at Tewkesbury, in\nthe cenotaph of the last Lord Abbot: and we may refer to the monument\nof William Ashton, in S. John's College chapel, Cambridge.\n{cx}\nThe symbolism of ecclesiastics, lying principally in their vestments,\ndoes not so much fall within the scope of this essay. The same may be\nsaid of the allusion to the Holy Trinity in the benedictory attitude\nof the bishop: and the distinction between the mitred abbot and the\nbishop in the former holding his pastoral staff with the crook\ninwards, as signifying his dominion to be _internal_, _i.e._ within\nhis own house;--the latter outwards, to set forth his external\ndominion over his diocese.\nThe reception of the soul of the departed into Abraham's bosom is\noften represented. Sometimes angels are bearing it, in the likeness of\na newborn child, (a figure symbolical of its having now returned into\nits baptismal state of purity) and presenting it before the throne.\nThe founders or rebuilders of churches are known by the building which\nthey hold in their hands.\nThe carving of the _open seats_ is one of those parts of\necclesiastical symbolism, which it is very hard to explain. The\nmonsters which constantly occur on them may be perhaps regarded as\ntypical of the evil thoughts and bad passions which a life of ease and\nrest encourages, and it will be observed, that in the choir, a gentler\nclass of ideas often is suggested: we have here flowers and fruit, and\nbirds making their nests, and flocks feeding. There, are however,\ncertain other types to be found here, and also in string courses, and\ncorbel heads, of which we shall presently speak in terms of\ndisapprobation.\nNothing, with this exception, shows the exuberance and beauty of ideas\nwhich distinguished the architects of the ages of Faith--and the depth\nand variety of the scriptural knowledge we are pleased to deny\nthem--than their wood carvings.  [Footnote 74]\n  [Footnote 74: The astonishing scriptural knowledge of Durandus may\n  by him. ]\n{cxi}\nThere is perhaps hardly a scriptural subject which they have not\nhandled: and it requires no small degree of ecclesiastical knowledge\nto be able at all to comprehend many of their allusions: while\nprobably many more are lost to us. The Annunciation is one of the most\nfavourite topics. The almond tree blossoming in the flower pot--the\nbud terminating in a cross or crucifix--the prayer desk at which the\nBlessed Virgin kneels--the temple seen in the distance--the Holy Dove\ndescending on a ray of light--these are its general accompaniments.\nThe descent of our Saviour into hell--the delivery of souls--\n  'Magnaque; de magna praeda petita domo:'\nthe visions of the Apocalypse: the final doom: the passions and\ntriumphs of martyrs--all here find their expression.\nV. Corbels, Gurgoyles, Poppy Heads, etc.\nThe corbels which occur in the interior of churches generally\nrepresent the Heavenly Host--often with various instruments of music,\nas if taking a share in the devotions of the worshippers. This idea is\nmost fully and beautifully carried out in late perpendicular roofs:\nwhere the various orders of the heavenly hierarchy hover, with\noutstretched wings, over the sacred building--an idea evidently\nderived from the cherubim that spread their wings over the ark, and\nthe apostle's explanation, 'which things the angels desire to look\ninto.' Often, however, benefactors to the Church are here portrayed.\nThe gurgoyles, on the contrary, represent evil spirits as flying from\nthe holy walls: the hideousness of the figures, so often, by modern\nconnoisseurs, ridiculed or blamed, is therefore not without its\nappropriate meaning.\n{cxii}\nWe must now say a few words on the least pleasing part of the study of\nsymbolism: we mean the satirical representations which record the\nfeuds between the secular and the regular clergy. Thus, in the\nchurches of the former, we have, principally as stallwork, figures of\na fox preaching to geese: in those of the latter an ass's head under a\ncowl: or, which is very frequent, both in woodwork and as a gurgoyle,\nthe cowled double face. As a specimen of these designs, we may mention\nthe stalls   [Footnote 75] in East Brent, Somersetshire. A fox hung by\na goose, with two cubs yelping at the foot of the gallows, a monkey at\nprayers, with an owl perched over his head: another monkey holding a\nhalbert: a fox with mitre and staff, a young fox in chains, a bag of\nmoney in his right paw, and geese and cranes on each side. To these\nobjectionable devices we may add those which to us appear simply\nprofane or indecent:  [Footnote 76]such as the baptism of a dog in one\nof the Stamford churches, and others in Northampton, S. Peter's, of\nNorman date. One of the grossest which we have ever seen is to be\nfound on the north side of the chancel arch of Nailsea, Somersetshire.\n  [Footnote 75: Rutter's _Delineations_, p. 89. ]\n  [Footnote 76: It is fair to observe that our designating them so\n  _may_ be the effect of our own ignorance.]\nOn the towers of some Norman churches, the evangelistic symbols are\nrepresented. So in Stow church, Lincolnshire. Tiles ought not to have\nthe cross on them: for though Christ is indeed the foundation of the\nChurch, yet these holy symbols should not be exposed to be trodden\nunder foot. Heraldic devices are here more proper, to signify the\nworthlessness of worldly honours in the sight of God.\n{cxiii}\nCHAPTER IX\nSOME OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED\nSeveral objections to the symbolical system have been noticed and\nanswered in the course of this treatise. We shall, however, devote a\ngreater space to the consideration of one difficulty which has often\nbeen raised by opponents, and has often been felt even by such as have\nadopted the theory. It is said, for example, that to assert the nave\nand two aisles, or a triplet of lancets, to be symbolical of the Most\nHoly Trinity, is both false and profane, when, as is almost always the\ncase, the aisles are much less broad than the nave, and the three\nlancets are unequal both in height and breadth: whereas in the Trinity\nnone is afore or after other, none is greater or less than another.\nBut the difficulty seems only to arise from carrying the similitude\ntoo far: the point of resemblance is in these cases a single one: the\nmere trinity of the arrangement is the only particular which gives\nrise to the symbol. 'Three mystic lines approach the shrine,' sings\nthe poet of the Christian year for Trinity Sunday. The number alone is\nanswerable for the emblem. We do not deny that an equilateral triangle\nis a more perfect symbol of the Blessed Trinity: but even here a\ncaptious man might object to the emblem, because the angles gain\ngreater or less prominence according to the position in which the\ntriangle is placed. {cxiv} The Catholic monogram of the Trinity, for\nexample, assigns to the Father and the Son the upper angles of a\ntriangle standing on the third point. On the other hand the modern\ntriangle, generally charged with the Hebrew word Jehovah, has the\nthird angle uppermost. We can quite conceive these differences being\nthought objectionable. The case is not so strong indeed as when the\nthree members are unequal, but still it is the same in kind and in\nreality.\nIt is a condition of emblems that the points of similitude must not be\npressed too far. The material Sun indeed typifies the Sun of\nRighteousness: but in what particulars? in its being _created_, in its\nrising on the dark world _every_ day, in its being matter? Surely not:\nbut in this one point, that it brings light and heat to the earth. _I\nam the Door_, said our Lord. In what particulars, we may again ask? It\nwould be profane to show by examples that it is only in this point:\nthat a door is for entrance into a material house just as we enter\ninto the Church through Christ. The ark, our Church teaches us, was an\nemblem of the Church: not in its human building, nor in its final\nperishing; but in that it saved souls by water. Did the Paschal Lamb\ntypify the Immaculate Victim in any thing more than its comparative\npurity and its bloody death? We need not multiply such examples.\nBut there is another consideration to be adduced. Our Lord's own\nparables must not be pressed too far. The history of the five wise and\nfive foolish virgins, must not be adduced to prove that the number of\nthe lost will equal that of the saved. This may be dangerous ground,\nbut the assertion is true. Every parable is figurative to a certain\npoint, and no further. Not that there is much danger of persons not\nknowing where the line is to be drawn: any more than there would be in\nthe case of { cxv} one of a reverent mind, who was told that the\ntriplicity of aisles and windows typified a great doctrine. The\n_British Critic_ made a very just observation on this point, that it\nargued a great blindness of spiritual vision to deny such an emblem,\nbecause the similitude was not complete in all points. Indeed if all\npoints answered so closely and exactly to each other, it is not clear\nhow a similitude would differ from a fac-simile. The very notion of a\nthing being like another involves the fact that the two are not\nidentical. Nothing more is found or expected, than a similarity, an\nanalogy, in certain qualities. For in all symbolism it is quality and\nnot essence in which resemblance is sought.\nWhich leads us to consider another objection sometimes urged to the\neffect that if a thing mean one thing it cannot mean another. For\nexample, if the nave and aisles represent the Holy Trinity, they\ncannot also represent the Church Militant here on earth, or in another\npoint of view the true fold. Again, if the piers and arches set forth\nthe foundation of the apostles and prophets, they must not bear a part\nin the representation of the Trinity together with the cleristory and\ntriforium. But this difficulty vanishes if we remember that the\nresemblance, for the most part, is derived from grouping independent\nthings together and viewing them in a particular light. We do not deny\nthe _real_ essential symbolism of a material result: but this its\nparticular significancy need not obtrude itself at all times: the\nthing itself in other combinations, and viewed under other aspects,\nmay acquire an additional and occasional meaning. For example, it is\nthe union of the rose, thistle, and shamrock, which is the emblem of\nour United Empire: they have each their own figurative sense; in\ncombination they acquire a new meaning. The harp is not less the\nemblem of Ireland, because it must primarily represent music. {cxvi}\nLeaven was of old the symbol of wickedness: our Lord spake of the\nleaven of the Scribes and Pharisees: yet we hear from His own lips,\nThe kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven.  [Footnote 77]\n  [Footnote 77: We have the highest authority for believing that one\n  type can symbolise two things quite independent of each other, in\n  that the Jewish Sabbath, commanded from Sinai to be observed in\n  commemoration of the Rest after the Creation, is enforced in\n  Deuteronomy as the representation of the rest of the children of\n  Israel from Egyptian bondage. 'Remember,' says Moses, 'that thou\n  wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God\n  brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out\n  arm: _therefore_ the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath\nAnother objection is as follows: If this theory be true, how will you\naccount for churches with nothing but a nave, or with only one aisle;\nhow for churches with neither cleristory nor triforio; or, on the\nother hand, for those with double triforia, or with four or five\naisles? Now we never asserted that it was necessary that all, or\nindeed any, given things should be intentionally symbolised. We have\npointed out that some things are essentially symbolical; others\naccidentally and occasionally. We might attempt to classify what\n_must_ be symbolised in church building, and what _may_ be. But we\ndecline to do so because we do not think that the principles of\nsymbolism are yet sufficiently investigated or apprehended. However,\nin a general way, _every_ building must, from the nature of things,\nhave some accidents, as of material, of parts, of plan; every\nparticular building must have particular accidents, as of use and\npurpose. These accidents _must_ be symbolical, from their nature, in a\ngeneral way: they may derive, from purpose added to their nature, a\nfurther or modified symbolism in a particular way. With the first sort\nit is that Durandus chiefly concerns himself A building must have\nwalls, must have roof, piers, windows, corners, and floor. For each\nthen he finds a meaning. {cxvii} He does not quite neglect the second\nsort. Early English windows must have a splay: the spire may have a\nweathercock: for these then there is an appropriate signification. So\nwe do not mean to insist that certain things _shall_ be symbolised, we\nsay they _may_ be symbolised. Perhaps when more is known, we shall be\nable to criticise ancient buildings, to show their faults or their\nshortcomings in this particular. As it is, we have framed a sort of\n_beau ideal_ of a church, fully formed and developed, which we should\npropose as a perfect model. We are not qualified as yet to blame the\nancient churches which do not come up to this ideal, but we cannot be\nwrong in praising such as do.\nIn discussing Mr. Lewis's illustrations of Kilpeck church, we touched\nupon the Basilican origin of churches considered as an argument\nagainst the reception of the symbolical theory. Our last remarks will\napply to the same question. It has been thought quite sufficient\nground for turning into ridicule the whole principle, that the Roman\njustice halls had three or more aisles, or that a barn or banquetting\nroom may have three longitudinal divisions. But what if mechanical\nconvenience suggested the arrangement? (though we do not grant this).\nIt is clear that many churches, many barns, and many refectories have\nnever had a triple arrangement. It has never been asserted that every\nchurch shall have nave and aisles: but if a church has nave and aisles\nit will be symbolical of a great doctrine; and for this reason it is\nbetter for a church to have nave and aisles. Why do not such writers\nargue that the cross form is not symbolical, because many barns are\ncruciform? Now it is instructive to observe that there is a great and\nobvious utilitarian advantage in this shape for a barn: but not in the\ncase of churches as _anciently arranged_; in which the transepts were\nutterly useless for the {cxviii} accommodation of worshippers; and in\nwhich there is a mechanical evil (as before mentioned) from the\nlateral pressure on the lantern piers. Yet it is undeniable that the\ncross form was chosen for its symbolical meaning: and this in spite of\nmechanical disadvantages. A mechanical reason fails here, as in the\nformer case, in accounting for the fact. How will they account for the\ncross form? Their own argument tells against them. We may still\nfurther remark that in modern times we have had some curious practical\nlessons upon this cross form. Messrs Britton and Hosking, in their\natrocious plan for rearranging S. Mary Redcliffe church, unwittingly\ntestified to the inconvenience, and want of any utilitarian end, of\nthis plan by placing the pulpit under the lantern, and ranging the\ncongregation in the four arms so as to face it. On the other hand,\nsome modern architects confessedly employ the cross form because it\nallows of people arranged as in the last case, all seeing the\npreacher. But why do they not look deeper into things? Why have the\ncross at all? Why not have an amphitheatre, an octagon, an\naccoustically designed Mechanic's Institute Lecture Room? Then all\ncould hear, all could see much better, and the building would not cost\nhalf so much. They may think that they are designing on utilitarian\nprinciples. In truth they are unknowingly, unwillingly, symbolising\nthe Cross.\n{cxix}\nCHAPTER X\nDEVELOPMENT OF SYMBOLISM\nIt is now our intention to attempt a brief sketch of the history of\nsymbolism, confining ourselves to its rise, progress, and decline in\nEngland. For of its earlier development we have already had occasion\nto speak, both in the first and in the eighth chapter, when we\nreferred to its use among the primitive Christians, and to such\nparticulars of information as could be gained concerning it from the\nlater fathers, and from mediaeval authors.\nAmong all nations the facts of Christianity have been received before\nits doctrines. The inhabitants of a heathen country are first called\non to believe, as matter of history, that our Blessed Lord was\nconceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under\nPontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, before any attempt is\nmade to set before them the doctrine of the Atonement, the mystery of\nthe Trinity, or the compatibility of God's foreknowledge with man's\nfree action. And it is in the infancy of individuals, as in that of\nnations. We may therefore, from all analogy, conclude, that the things\nset forth in the earlier development of church art would be facts\nrather than doctrines.\n{cxx}\nNow, if we look to Norman buildings, we shall find this to be the\ncase. Excepting the doctrine of the Holy Trinity (which, after all,\nperhaps rather ranks, through all the stages of Christian art, under\nthe head of essential, than under that of intended symbolism), we\nshall find an almost exclusive reference to history, in arrangements\nand details. That God was the Creator of heaven and earth, is set\nforth in door mouldings, and capitals, sometimes by the heavenly\nconstellations or signs of the zodiac, sometimes by the animals\nbrought to Adam to be named, sometimes by the references to\nagriculture, which, as we have before seen, often occur. The\nIncarnation of our Saviour is set forth, as it has been already\nhinted, by representations so physical and earthly, as to be to our\neyes almost profane. The Fall of Man, which appears on the sides of\nfonts, well reminds us of that stain which must be washed away in Holy\nBaptism. A great many of the events of our Lord's life are sculptured\nin various positions: above all, of course, His Passion. Again, duties\nare symbolically represented, so in the chancel arch of Egleton,\nRutland, we have the figure of a deacon ringing a bell; doubtless to\nremind the worshippers of the duty of attending God's house. And a\nstill more practical method of representing the evil consequences\nattending the breach of duty, and one which speaks much of the\nrudeness of the age, is where some local event well-known at the time\nof the erection of the church, finds a commemoration in it. Thus\n(though at a later epoch) among the capitals of the south transept of\nWells cathedral, the architect has represented a theft, which\ndoubtless, at the time, had made a considerable noise in that place.\nIn the first group, a man is seen stealing apples; then follows the\nstruggle and apprehension: finally, his trial and condemnation. And\nsuch practical admonitions might not have been without their use.\nSometimes they are refined and exalted into such an one as may be seen\nin the northern apse of S. Mary's, at Guildford, where heavenly and\nearthly judgment are portrayed. {cxxi} Victory over the devil is\nsingularly enough symbolised in Oxford, S. Peter's, by the piers which\nrest on, and crush, a monster. We have before noticed that Norman\narchitecture, true to its love of facts, delighted in the\nrepresentation of instruments of martyrdom, or the deeds of faith, as\nthe victory of S. George. The final doom was also a favourite subject;\nso was the descent of Christ into hell. In fact, its whole character,\nwhether in string courses, tympana, capitals, or chancel arches, was\ngraphicalness, and that obtained sometimes at the expense of grace,\nsometimes almost at that of decorum, but probably well adapted to the\nparticular development which the minds of the people had then reached.\nOne point we must remark, to the eternal honour of the Anglo-Norman,\nand indeed also of the Saxon Church, deadly as was the hatred existing\nbetween the two peoples, for at least a hundred and fifty years after\nthe conquest, it has left no symbolical trace, either in the churches\nof the vanquishers, or of the vanquished. Much as the one had\nsuffered, and much as the other despised the conquered nation, this\nfeeling vanished in the house of God.\nIn advancing to Early English, we still find strong traces of the\nhistoricalism of ornaments, both in some of the mouldings, as in the\ntoothed, and in the capitals, though the latter begin now to assume a\nmore allegorical form. Indeed, the observation seems worth making,\nthat this style is the only one which appears to have dealt much in\nallegory, we mean in that sense which we have already attached to the\nword. That is, it employs fictitious representations to set forth real\ntruths; as in Wells cathedral, the fall of the barren tree forms a\nbeautiful corbel. We do, however, find some traces of this in Norman\nwork, as the fable of the crow and the fox may occasionally be\ndiscovered in it. {cxxii} The works of the creation were often set\nforth, rather with reference to their beauty than from any other\nreasons. Such as the birds making their nests in the thick foliage,\nflowers, and fruit. Yet, on the whole, facts such as those which\nprincipally occupied the attention of Norman architects, began rather\nto find expression among the details, than to usurp any important part\nin church arrangement. We are in possession of too little wood work of\nthis date--and in that many references of this kind were probably to\nbe found--to be able to speak with so much certainty as we can in the\nlater styles: but that this was the tendency of the progress of\narchitecture, it requires but little knowledge to discover. Impressed,\nbut evidently, now, not only essentially but intentionally, on every\nbuilding, was the doctrine of the Ever Blessed Trinity: for triplets\nwere so common at the east end as to form the rule of Early English\ndesign. Fonts, instead of bearing a representation of the Fall of Man,\nand thereby implying our need of regeneration, began to be octagonal,\nthereby setting forth the doctrine itself, a strong confirmation of\nour previous observation respecting facts and doctrines. The shape of\npiers is also to be noticed. For there appears to have been almost a\nrule, either that the octagonal and circular shape should alternate;\nor that one aisle should present the one kind, the other the other.\nThis we can hardly, in our present state of knowledge, profess to\nexplain. Durandus's observations about windows, their splay and\nshafts, are very curious: and again, he evidently recognises in the\ntiebeams, the knitting together of the elect in one communion and\nfellowship: a strong argument, this, that we are justified in\nregarding arrangements, which arise from mechanical necessity, as\nnevertheless truly and really symbolical. In the bases of piers we now\noften find flowers, which indeed, sometimes, as in Rochester\ncathedral, occur in transition work; principally the fleur de lys,\nwhich we may interpret to signify that humility is the foundation of\nall Christian graces.\n{cxxiii}\nOn the whole, however, we conclude that in this style, while churches\ntaken as a whole became more symbolical, their details, as details,\nbecame less so.\nIn proceeding to the next development of Catholic art, we are almost\nafraid of expressing a belief, that Decorated, in its early dawn, gave\npromise of a brighter day than it ever reached. It had not shown its\nwonderful resources and capabilities in windows and flying buttresses,\nbefore the boldness of its capitals and bases began to decline. We can\nimagine that, had it so been ordered, Christian architecture might,\nabout the year 1300, have taken a different direction, and attained to\na glory, inconceivable to us--perhaps attainable only when the whole\nCatholic Church shall be at unity. As it is, we cannot but consider,\nthat about that period, or a few years later, it took a wrong turn,\nand being hurried in a short space through the hectic of a rare flush\nof beauty, declined thenceforward slowly but surely. Now, if we ask,\nwhy was this? it will lead us to look at Church history as connected\nwith the development of church architecture. Contemporary with the\nchange from Saxon to Norman (for we are none of those who hold that\nthe former extended till Oct. 14, 1065, and the latter began the next\nday), was finally the victory of the Anglican Church over Paganism in\nthe conversion and civilisation of the Danes. Contemporary with the\nappearance of Early English, was the great victory of the Church over\nErastianism, by the martyrdom of S. Thomas of Canterbury, and the\nabrogation of the constitutions of Clarendon. But, hardly had Early\nEnglish finished its course of splendour, when while traces of rare\nglory were developing daily, the statute of Mortmain began to tell\nupon the Church: {cxxiv} and though the impulse already given yet\ncontinued for some time to act, the end was near. No magnificent\ncathedral was built after the full effects--not so much of that act,\nas of the Erastianism which contrived and allowed it--were felt. The\nnave of Winchester can hardly be called a solitary exception; because,\nin truth, it may be doubted whether the pious exertions of William of\nWykeham were not, so far as concerns the actual beauty of his\ncathedral, misplaced. Thenceforward, the State interfered more and\nmore with the Church; and not allowed to carry out her own designs, it\nis no wonder if the latter quickly began to forget her own symbolical\nlanguage. After, for the first few years of the fourteenth century,\nusing it with precision and elegance before unattainable, she\nthenceforward began to disuse it. We need not give examples of\ndecorated symbolism, because all that was new in it lay in its\nwindows: and these we have already discussed at considerable length.\nAnd having sufficiently explained why there should be a decline, we\nhave only now to examine why that decline should have been so\ndifferent in England, France, and Italy. In England, from the time\nthat Edward IV directed the execution of Archbishop Scrope, when the\nState interfered, it was with a strong arm, cramping and confining,\nobliging the Church to confine herself to ritual observances, and\nforbidding her to expatiate in the grand objects for which she was\nordained. Now could there be a more fitting expression of this than\nthe Perpendicular style? Does not its stiffness, its failure in\nharmony, its want of power and adaptation, its continual introduction\nof heraldry, its monotony, its breaking up by hard continued lines,\nits shallowness, its meretriciousness, its display--set forth what we\nknow to have been the character of the contemporary Church? {cxxv }\nAbove all, do not the reintroduction of Horizontality, the Tudor arch,\nthe depressed pier, speak of her want of spirituality? Everything\nteaches us that there was no want of power in her architects;\nconsidered merely as specimens of art, King's College, and Henry the\nSeventh's chapels, are matchless. And here and there we may trace some\ntokens of vastness and holiness of conception worthy of a better age;\nsuch as the Suffolk roofs, which, as it has been well said, never\nattained their full development. It must be borne in mind, that\nPerpendicular   [Footnote 78] was the first style, which in its full\ndevelopment was used first for a secular building. Far be it from us,\nhowever, to depreciate the excessive magnificence it assumes in\nshrines and chapels: indeed, this is one of the features which\nDecorated has not, and the absence of which in that style renders it\npossible to believe that a still more magnificent may be in store for\nus. Perpendicular introduced no new element of symbolism.\n  [Footnote 78: We deeply regret that the Oxford Architectural Society\n  should ever have allowed itself to put on paper the opinions\n  expressed by one of its members, that Perpendicular windows are\n  those best suited to the spirit of Christian architecture.]\nBut if this were the state of the Anglican Church, the Gallican,\nthough not better off, was acted on in a very different manner. The\nState gradually interfered with it, embraced it with its dangerous\nfriendship, made its observances meaningless, while sustaining their\nsplendour; secularised its abbeys, by appropriating them to political\nends; made statesmen of its bishops, gave it outside show, while\neating out its heart. Does not Flamboyant express this? A vast\ncollection of elegant forms, meaninglessly strung together: richness\nof ornament, actually weakening construction: vagaries of tracery, as\nif the hand possessed of church art were suddenly deprived of church\nfeelings: nothing plain, simple, intelligible, holy: parts neglected,\nparts ostentatious: the west front of Abbeville to a choir that would\ndisgrace a hamlet.\n{cxxvi}\nIn Spain, again, where Christianity unfolded itself later, so also was\nchurch art later in its development. San Miguel, at Seville, which was\nactually built in 1305, would, in England, be set down to the date of\nabout 1180.\nIn Italy, where there was no State to interfere with the Church,\nPaganism, which had always been more or less at work, sprang up at\nonce, at the time of the Great Schism, and has ever since prevailed.\nBut to return to England. Perpendicular, unable to express any idea by\nits ornaments, soon began to imitate those of earlier styles: first\nEarly English, in the wretched banded capitals of the western\ncounties, and then Decorated in its windows. While, however, the\nChurch was yet united with the rest of Christendom, Paganism\ninterfered but in a very slight degree: the Italian example of Henry\nthe Seventh's tomb was not followed. Even after the Dissolution, there\nwere some good churches built: the symbolism which lingered longest\nwas that of the chancel and nave. Nor was this destroyed summarily:\nthe importance of the chancel had been gradually, all through the\nPerpendicular era, weakened by chancel aisles, and the omission of the\nchancel arch: it was but to omit the rood screen and parclose, and (as\nat Hawkshead, Lancashire, circ. 1564) the mystical division vanished.\nThe symbolisms which Protestantism introduced were few and easily\nunderstood.\nThe removal, and material, of the altar, the change of vestments, the\ngradual introduction of close pews, the innovation of a reading pew,\nwere all figurative enough. Something like a return to church art was\nmade just before the great Rebellion: chancels became elongated,\n{cxxvii} altars resumed their old position, copes reappeared, and the\nlike. Details began to improve: and (which we could hardly have\nexpected) intentional symbolism is sometimes to be discovered in them.\nSo, in Baltonsburgh, Somersetshire, a stone pulpit of the date of\n1621, has among other devices, an equilateral triangle, containing,\nand surrounded by, a _tre_-foil: and evidently setting forth the Holy\nTrinity. After the Rebellion, but still more after the Revolution,\nthose faint traces of symbolism died away into that _ne plus ultra_ of\nwretchedness, the Georgian style.\n{cxxviii}\nCHAPTER XI\nGENERAL CONCLUSION\nIt is very remarkable, as has been already observed, that the\nbuildings of those who most strongly object to the principle of\nsymbolism, do in effect contain as striking an exemplification of it\nas it would be possible to find.\nLet us look at a Protestant place of worship. It is choked up and\nconcealed by surrounding shops and houses, for religion, nowadays,\nmust give way to business and pleasure: it stands north and south, for\nall idea of fellow-feeling with the Church Catholic is looked on as\nmere trifling, or worse: the front which faces the High Street is of\nstone, because the uniformity of the street so required it: or (which\nis more likely) of stucco, which answers as well, and is cheaper: the\nsides, however, are of brick, because no one can see them: there is at\nthe entrance a large vestibule, to allow people to stand while their\ncarriages are being called up, and to enter into conversation on the\nnews of the day, or the merits of the preacher: it also serves the\npurpose of making the church warmer, and contains the doors and\nstaircases to the galleries. On entering, the pulpit occupies the\ncentral position, and towards it every seat is directed: for preaching\nis the great object of the Christian ministry: galleries run all round\nthe building, because hearing is the great object of a Christian\ncongregation: {cxxix} the altar stands under the organ gallery, as\nbeing of no use, except once a month: there are a few free seats in\nout-of-the-way places, where no one could hear, and no pews would be\nhired, and therefore no money is lost by making the places free: and\nwhether the few poor people who occupy them can hear or not, what\nmatters it? The font, a cast-iron vase on a marble pillar, stands\nwithin the altar rails; because it there takes up no room: the reading\npew is under the pulpit, and faces the congregation; because the\nprayers are to be read to them and not addressed to God. Look at this\nplace on Sunday or Thursday evening. Carriages crash up through the\ncast-iron gates, and, amidst the wrangling and oaths of rival\ncoachmen, deposit their loads at the portico: people come, dressed out\nin the full fashion of the day, to occupy their luxurious pew, to lay\ntheir smelling-bottles and prayer-books on its desk, and reclining on\nits soft cushions, to confess themselves--if they are in\ntime--miserable sinners: to see the poor and infirm standing in the\nnarrow passages, and close their pew doors against them, lest\nthemselves should be contaminated, or their cushions spoilt, at the\nsame time beseeching God to give their fellow-creatures the comfort\nwhich they refuse to bestow: the Royal Arms occupy a conspicuous\nposition; for it is a chapel of the Establishment: there are neat\ncast-iron pillars to hold up the galleries, and still neater pillars\nin the galleries to hold up the roof; thereby typifying that the whole\nexistence of the building depends on the good-will of the\ncongregation: the roof is flat, with an elegant cornice, and serves\nprincipally to support a gas-lighted chandelier: and the\nadministration of this chapel is carried on by clerk, organist,\nbeadle, and certain bonnetless pew-openers.\n{cxxx}\nWe need not point out how strongly all this symbolises the spiritual\npride, the luxury, the self-sufficiency, the bigotry of the\ncongregations of too many a pew-rented Episcopal chapel.\nIn contrast to this, let us close with a general view of the symbolism\nof a Catholic church.\nFar away, and long ere we catch our first view of the city itself, the\nthree spires of its cathedral, rising high above its din and turmoil,\npreach to us of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. As we approach,\nthe transepts, striking out cross-wise, tell of the Atonement: the\nCommunion of Saints is set forth by the chapels clustering round choir\nand nave: the mystical weathercock bids us to watch and pray and\nendure hardness: the hideous forms that seem hurrying from the eaves\nspeak the misery of those who are cast out of the Church: spire,\npinnacle, and finial, the upward curl of the sculptured foliage, the\nupward spring of the flying buttress, the sharp rise of the window\narch, the high-thrown pitch of the roof, all these, overpowering the\nhorizontal tendency of string course and parapet, teach us, that\nvanquishing earthly desires, we also should ascend in heart and mind.\nLessons of holy wisdom are written in the delicate tracery of the\nwindows: the unity of many members is shadowed forth by the multiplex\narcade: the duty of letting our light shine before men, by the pierced\nand flowered parapet that crowns the whole.\nWe enter. The triple breadth of nave and aisles, the triple height of\npier arch, triforium, and clerestory, the triple length of choir,\ntransepts, and nave, again set forth the Holy Trinity. And what\nbesides is there that does not tell of our Blessed Saviour? that does\nnot point out 'Him first' in the two-fold western door: 'Him last' in\nthe distant altar: 'Him midst' in the great rood: 'Him without end' in\nthe monogram carved on boss and corbal, in the Holy Lamb, in the Lion\nof the tribe of Judah, in the Mystic Fish? Close by us is the font;\n{cxxxi} for by regeneration we enter the Church: it is deep and\ncapacious; for we are buried in baptism with Christ: it is of stone;\nfor He is the Rock: and its spiry cover teaches us, if we be indeed\nrisen from its waters with Him, to seek those things that are above.\nBefore us, in long drawn vista, are the massy piers, which are the\nApostles and Prophets: they are each of many members, for many are the\ngraces in every saint: there is delicate foliage round the head of\nall; for all were plentiful in good works. Beneath our feet are the\nbadges of worldly pomp and glory, the charges of kings and nobles and\nknights: all in the presence of God as dross and worthlessness. Over\nus swells the vast 'valley' of the high-pitched roof: from the\ncrossing and interlacing of its curious rafters hang fadeless flowers\nand fruits which are not of earth: from its hammer-beams project\nwreaths and stars, such as adorn heavenly beings: in its centre stands\nthe Lamb as it had been slain: from around Him the Celestial Host,\ncherubim and seraphim, thrones, principalities, and powers, look down\npeacefully on the worshippers below. Harpers there are among them\nharping with their harps: for one is the song of the Church in earth\nand in heaven. Through the walls wind the narrow cloister galleries:\nemblems of the path by which holy hermits and anchorites, whose\nconflicts were known only to their God, have reached their home. And\nwe are compassed about with a mighty cloud of witnesses: the rich deep\nglass of the windows teems with saintly forms, each in its own fair\nniche, all invested with the same holy repose: there is the glorious\ncompany of the apostles: the goodly fellowship of the prophets: the\nnoble army of martyrs: the shining band of the confessors: the\njubilant chorus of the virgins: there are kings who have long since\nchanged an earthly for an heavenly crown: and bishops who have given\nin a glad account to the Shepherd and Bishop of souls. {cxxxii} But on\nnone of these things do we rest; piers, arch behind arch, windows,\nlight behind light, arcades, shaft behind shaft, the roof, bay behind\nbay, the saints around us, the heavenly hierarchy above with dignity\nof pre-eminence still increasing eastward, each and all, lead on eye\nand soul and thought to the image of the crucified Saviour as\ndisplayed in the great east window. Gazing steadfastly on that, we\npass up the nave, that is through the Church Militant, till we reach\nthe rood screen, the barrier between it and the Church Triumphant, and\ntherein shadowing forth the death of the faithful. High above it\nhangs, on His triumphal cross, the image of Him Who by His death hath\novercome death; on it are portrayed saints and martyrs, His warriors,\nwho fighting under their Lord have entered into rest and inherit a\ntearless eternity. They are to be our examples, and the seven lamps\nabove them typify those graces of the Spirit, by Whom alone we can\ntread in their steps. The screen itself glows with gold and crimson:\nwith gold, for they have on their heads golden crowns: with crimson,\nfor they passed the Red Sea of martyrdom to obtain them. And through\nthe delicate net-work, and the unfolding holy doors, we catch faint\nglimpses of the chancel beyond. There are the massy stalls; for in\nheaven is everlasting rest: there are the sedilia, emblems of the\nseats of the elders round the throne: there is the piscina; for they\nhave washed their robes and made them white: and there, heart and soul\nand life of all, the altar with its unquenched lights, and golden\ncarvings, and mystic steps, and sparkling jewels: even Christ Himself,\nby Whose only merits we find admission to our heavenly inheritance.\nVerily, as we think on the oneness of its design, we may say:\n_Jerusalem edificatur ut civitas cujus participatio ejus in idipsum_.\n{cxxxiii}\nPOSTSCRIPTUM\nOn concluding their work, which from circumstances that need not be\nspecified has been a year in the press, the writers must apologise for\nthe numerous typographical errors which have been allowed to remain.\nTheir separation from each other, and distance from the printer, must\nplead in excuse.\nThey take this opportunity of expressing their thanks to the Reverend\nDr. Mill, Christian Advocate of the University of Cambridge, and to F.\nA. Paley, Esq., M.A., of S. John's College, Cambridge, Honorary\nSecretary of the Cambridge Camden Society, for their advice and\nassistance.\nIt remains to say that some doubt has been felt by persons who have\nread the Introductory Essay in proofs, whether the writers have given\nMr. Pugin sufficient credit for several passages in his works which\nseem to _involve_ the principle now contended for. We had thought that\nno misapprehension could be feared on this head. It was enough to know\nthat the principle in question, even though _felt_ (as we indeed\nallowed) by this architect, had not been _expressed in terms_. In\nshort, we took this fact for our ground: that whereas Mr. Pugin's book\nprofessed to assert the _true principles_ of Christian architecture,\nyet reality, according to his definition, was not at least so\naccurately a 'true principle' as sacramentality. The principles\nthemselves, as enunciated by Mr. Pugin, apply as well to any secular\nbuilding as to a church: they are true for _construction_, but not\nadequate in themselves to form a rule for ecclesiastical design.\nKemerton, _August_ 16, 1843.\n{cxxxiv}\nThe following very curious passage ought to have come in at page\nlxxvii of the Introductory Essay, but was not accessible at the time.\nIt is an extract from the 'Fardle of Facions' printed A.D. 1555.\nFROM THE 'FARDLE OF FACIONS,' PRINTED 1555\nOratories, temples, or places of praier (whiche we calle churches)\nmight not to be built without the good will of the bishoppe of the\ndiocese. And when the timbre was redy to be framed, and the foundacion\ndigged, it behoved them to sende for the bishoppe, to hallowe the\nfirste corner stone of the foundacion, and to make the signe of the\nCrosse thereupon, and to laie it, and directe it juste easte and west.\nAnd then might the masons sette upon the stone, but not afore. This\nchurche did they use to builde after the facion of a crosse, and not\nunlike the shape of a manne. The channcelle (in the whiche is\nconteined the highe altare and the quiere) directe fulle in the easte,\nrepresenteth the heade, and therefore ought to be somewhat rounde, and\nmuche shorter than the body of the churche. And yet upon respect that\nthe heade is the place for the eyes, it ought to be of more lighte,\nand to bee seperate with a particion, in the steade of a necke, from\nthe bodye of the churche. This particion the Latine calleth cancelli,\nand out of that cometh our terme channcelle. On eche side of this\nchanncelle peradventure (for so fitteth it beste) should stand a\nturret; as it were for two ears, and in these the belles to be hanged,\nto calle the people to service, by daie and by night. Undre one of\nthese turretts is there commonly a vaulte, whose doore openeth into\nthe quiere, and in this are laid up the hallowed vesselles and\nornamentes, and other utensils of the churche. We call it a vestrie.\n{cxxxv} The other parte oughte to be fitted, that having as it were on\neche side an arme, the reste maye resemble the bodye with the fete\nstretched in breadthe, and in lengthe. On eche side of the bodye the\npillers to stande, upon whose coronettes or heades the vaulte or rophe\nof the churche maye reste. And to the foote beneth aulters to be\njoyned. Those aulters to be orderly alway covered with two aulter\nclothes, and garnished with the crosse of Christe, or some little\ncofre of reliques. At eche ende a candelsticke, and a booke towarde\nthe middes. The walls to be painted without and within, and diversely\npaineted. That they also should have in every parishe a faire round\nstone, made hollowe and fitte to holde water, in the whiche the water\nconsecrate for baptisme maye be kept for the christening of children.\nUpon the right hand of the highe aulter that ther should be an\nalmorie, either cutte into the walle, or framed upon it, in the whiche\nthey woulde have the sacrament of the Lorde's bodye, the holy oyle for\nthe sicke, and chrismatorie, alwaie to be locked. Furthermore they\nwould that ther should be a pullpite in the middes of the churche,\nwherein the prieste maye stonde upon Sondaies and holidays to teache\nthe people those things that it behoveth them to knowe. The channcelle\nto serve only for the priests and clerks; the rest of the temporalle\nmultitude to be in the bodye of the churche, seperate notwithstanding,\nthe men on the righte side, and the women on the left.\n_Here beginneth the First Book of_ GULIELMUS\nDURANDUS _his_ RATIONALE _of the_ DIVINE OFFICES.\nTHE PROEME\nImportance and Difficulty of the Study of Symbolism--Necessity of its\nCultivation by Priests--Consideration of Unlearned Priests--Mystical\nand Moral Meaning of the Law--Four-fold Sense of Scripture: the\nHistorical, the Allegoric, the Tropologic, the Anagogic--Different\nCeremonies used by Different Churches--Name of Rationale, whence\nderived--Division of the Work.\n1. All things, as many as pertain to offices and matters\necclesiastical, be full of divine significations and mysteries, and\noverflow with a celestial sweetness; if so be that a man be diligent\nin his study of them, and know how to draw 'honey from the rock, and\noil from the hardest stone.'   [Footnote 79] But who 'knoweth the\nordinances of heaven, or can fix the reasons thereof upon the earth?'\n[Footnote 80] For he that prieth into their majesty, is overwhelmed by\nthe glory of them. Of a truth 'the well is deep, and I have nothing to\ndraw with':   [Footnote 81] unless He giveth it unto me Who 'giveth to\nall men liberally, and upbraideth not':  [Footnote 82] so that 'while\nI journey through the mountains'  [Footnote 83] I may 'draw water with\njoy out of the wells of salvation.'  [Footnote 84] {2} Wherefore,\nalbeit of the things handed down from our forefathers, capable we are\nnot to explain all, yet if among them there be anything which is done\nwithout reason, it should forthwith be put away. 'Wherefore I,\nWilliam, by the alone tender mercy of God, Bishop of the Holy Church\nwhich is in Mende,'  [Footnote 85] will knock diligently at the door,\nif so be that 'the key of David'  [Footnote 86] will open unto me:\nthat the King may 'bring me in to His treasury,'   [Footnote 87] and\nshow unto me the heavenly pattern which was showed unto Moses in the\nMount: so that I may learn those things which pertain to rites\necclesiastical, whereof they teach and what they signify: and that I\nmay be able plainly to reveal and make manifest the reasons of them,\nby His help, 'Who hath ordained strength out of the mouth of babes and\nsucklings':   [Footnote 88] 'Whose spirit bloweth where it listeth,'\n[Footnote 89 ] dividing to 'each severally as it will'  [Footnote 90]\nto the praise and glory of the Trinity.\n  [Footnote 79: Deut. xxxii, 13.]\n  [Footnote 80: Job xxxviii, 33]\n  [Footnote 81: S. John iv, 11.]\n  [Footnote 82: S. James i, 5.]\n  [Footnote 83: Psalm ciii. Vulgate.]\n  [Footnote 84: Isaiah xii, 3. ]\n  [Footnote 85:  A city of France, and capital of the department of\n  Loz\u00e9re, situated on an eminence near the Lot: before the Revolution,\n  the See of a Bishop. The number of inhabitants is about\n  5000.'--Cruttwell's _Gazetteer_,  s.v.]\n  [Footnote 86:  Apocalypse iii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 87: Cant, ii, 4.]\n  [Footnote 88: Psalm viii, 2. See also Wisdom x, 21.]\n  [Footnote 89: S. John iii, 8. ]\n  [Footnote 90: I Cor. xii, II.]\n2. Sacraments we have received to be signs or figures, not in\nthemselves virtues, but the significations of virtues, by which men\nare taught as by letters. Now of signs there be that are natural, and\nthere be that are positive: concerning which, and also of the nature\nof a Sacrament, we shall speak hereafter.\n3. Therefore the priests and the bishops to whom 'it is given to know\nthe mysteries of the kingdom of God,'   [Footnote 91] as He saith in\nLuke, and who be the stewards and dispensers of sacred things, ought\nboth to understand the sacred mysteries, and to shine in the virtues\nwhich they signify: so that by their light others may be illuminated:\notherwise 'they be blind leaders of the blind.'   [Footnote 92] As\nsaith the Prophet, 'Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not.'\n[Footnote 93] But, woe therefore is me! in these days they apprehend\nbut little of those things which day by day they handle and perform,\nwhat they signify, and wherefore they were instituted: so that the\nsaying of the Prophet seemeth to be fulfilled, 'As is the people, so\nis the priest.'   [Footnote 94] For when they bear the bread of\nProthesis   [Footnote 95] to the Lord's Table and the Mysteries, they\nunderstand not its signification more than brute beasts which carry\nbread for the use of others. Of which ignorance they shall give\naccount in the day of vengeance and wrath. 'When the cedars of\nParadise shall tremble, what shall the bush of the desert do?'\n[Footnote 96] For to them is that saying of the Prophet, 'They have\nnot known My ways: so I swear in my wrath, if they shall enter into My\nrest.'   [Footnote 97]\n  [Footnote 91: S. Luke viii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 92: S. Matthew xv, 14.]\n  [Footnote 93:  Psalm lxix, 23.]\n  [Footnote 94: Isaiah xxiv, 2.]\n  [Footnote 95: Here is a distinct reference to the Prothesis: the\n  more valuable because in writers of the Middle Ages it does not hold\n  so prominent a place as we might have expected: and the table of\n  Prothesis appears not to have occupied a certainly defined situation\n  in Catholic churches. There is also a reference to Lev. xxi, 8, and\n  the showbread.]\n  [Footnote 96: S. Luke xxii, 3.]\n  [Footnote 97: Psalm xcv, 11.]\n4. Now the professors of the arts liberal, and of all other arts, seek\nhow they may clothe, support, and adorn with causes and hidden reasons\nthose things which be nakedly and without ornament therein set forth;\npainters moreover, and mechanics and handicraftsmen of what {4} sort\nsoever, study in every variety of their works to render and to have at\nhand probable reasons thereof. So, also, unseemly is it to the\nmagistrate to be ignorant of this world's laws; and to the pleader to\nknow nothing of the law, wherein he is exercised.\n5. But although learning be necessary unto priests for the sake of\ndoctrine: yet must not scholastics think slightingly of unlettered\npriests; according to that saying in Exodus, 'Thou shalt not revile\nthe gods.'  [Footnote 98] Whence, saith S. Augustine, they shall not\nderide if they hear the priests and ministers of the Church, either\ninvoking God with barbarisms and solecisms, or not understanding and\nmisdividing the words which they pronounce. Not but that such things\nare to be corrected; but they must firstly be tolerated of the more\nlearned. But that which priests ought to learn, shall be said below.\n  [Footnote 98: Exodus xxii, 28.]\n6. Furthermore, the symbolism which existeth in things and offices\necclesiastical, is often not seen, both because figures have departed,\nand now it is the time of truth; and also because we ought not to\njudaise. But, albeit those types of which the truth is made manifest\nhave departed, yet even to this time manifold truth is concealed,\nwhich we see not; wherefore the Church useth figures. For so by white\nvestments we understand the beauty in which our souls shall be\narrayed, or the glory of our immortality, which we cannot manifestly\nbehold: and in the Mass, by the oblation on the altar,  [Footnote 99]\nthe Passion of Christ is represented, that it be held in the memory\nmore faithfully and more firmly.\n  [Footnote 99: The prayer of oblation is as follows--'Suscipe,\n  Sancta Trinitas, hanc oblationem quam Tibi offerimus _ob memoriam\n  Passionis_, resurrectionis et ascensionis Jesu Christi Domini\n  nostri,' etc.]\n7. Furthermore, of the things which be commanded in the law, some be\nmoral, and others mystical. They be moral which inform the morals, and\nare to be understood in the simple tenour of the words: 'Love God:\nhonour thy father: thou shalt do no murder,' and such like. Mystical\nbe such as are typical: where something is set forth beyond the\nliteral meaning. Of these, some be sacramental, and some ceremonial.\nSacramental be such as may be accounted for, why thus they were\nordered: such as circumcision, and the observance of the Sabbath, and\nthe like. Ceremonial be they for which no reason can be given. Such\nbe, 'Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together:'  [Footnote\n100] Thou shalt not wear a garment of linen and woollen mixed.'\n[Footnote 101]\n  [Footnote 100: Deut. xxii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 101: Deut. xxii, 11.]\n8. Now in things that are moral commands, the law hath received no\nchange: but in things sacramental and ceremonial its outward form is\naltered: yet not one of the mystical significations is done away: for\nthe law is not done away. Though the 'priesthood being changed, there\nis made of necessity a change likewise of the law.'  [Footnote 102]\n  [Footnote 102: Hebrews vii, 12.]\n9. Now, in Holy Scriptures there be divers senses: as historic,\nallegoric, tropologic, and anagogic. Whence, according to Boethius,\nall divine authority ariseth from a sense either historical or\nallegorical or from both. And according to S. Hierom, we ought to\nstudy Holy Scriptures in three ways:--firstly, according to the\nletter; secondly, after the allegory, that is, the spiritual meaning;\nthirdly, according to the blessedness of the future.\nHistory is _things signified by words:_ as when a plain relation is\nmade how certain events took place: as when the children of Israel,\nafter their deliverance from Egypt, made a tabernacle to the Lord. And\nhistory is derived from [Greek text], which is to gesticulate:\n[Footnote 103] whence gesticulators (that is, players) are called\n_histriones_.\n  [Footnote 103: Here is a notable instance of Durandus's\n  misderivations, of which we have spoken in the Introduction.]\n10. Allegory is when one thing is said and another meant: as when by\none deed another is intended: which other thing, if it be visible, the\nwhole is simply an allegory, if invisible and heavenly, an _anagoge_.\nAlso an allegory is when one state of things is described by another:\nas when the patience of Christ, and the sacraments of the Church are\nset forth by mystical words or deeds. As in that place: 'There shall\ncome forth a rod of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of\nhis roots:'   [Footnote 104] which is in plain language. The Virgin\nMary shall be born of the family of David, who was the son of Jesse.\n[This is an example of mysticism in words.] Truth is also set forth by\nmystic deeds: as the children of Israel's freedom from Egyptian\nslavery, wrought by the blood of a lamb, signifieth that the Church is\nfreed by the Passion of Christ from demoniacal servitude.  [Footnote\n105] The word allegory is derived from the Greek _allon_, which means\n_foreign_, and _gore_, which is _sense_; that is, a _foreign sense_.\n  [Footnote 104: Isaiah xi, 1.]\n  [Footnote 105: See Appendix I.]\n11. _Tropology_ is an injunction unto morality: or a moral speech,\neither with a symbolical or an obvious bearing, devised to evince and\ninstruct our behaviour. _Symbolical_; as where he saith, 'Let thy\ngarments be always white: and let the oil of thy head never fail.'\n[Footnote 106] That is, let all thy works be pure, and charity never\nfail from thy mind. And again, It is fit that David should slay the\nGoliath within us: that is, that humbleness may subdue our pride.\n_Obvious_ as in that saying, 'Deal thy bread to the hungry.'\n[Footnote 107] And in that text: 'Let us not love in word, neither in\ntongue: but in deed and truth.'   [Footnote 108] Now tropology hath\nhis name from _tropos_, a turning, and _logos_, which is a discourse.\n  [Footnote 106: Ecclesiastes ix, 8. ]\n  [Footnote 107: Isaiah lviii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 108: 1 S. John iii, 18.]\n12. Anagoge is so called from _ana_, which is upwards, and _goge_, a\nleading: as it were an upward leading. Whence the anagogic sense is\nthat which leadeth from the visible to the invisible: as light, made\nthe first day, signifieth a thing invisible, namely the angelic nature\nwhich was made in the beginning. _Anagoge_, therefore, is that sense\nwhich leadeth the mind upwards to heavenly things: that is to the\nTrinity and the orders of angels, and speaketh concerning future\nrewards, and the future life which is in the heaven: and it useth both\nobvious and mystical expressions; obvious, as in that saying, 'Blessed\nare the pure in heart: for they shall see God:'   [Footnote 109]\nmystical, as that, 'Blessed are they that have made white their robes:\nthat they may have right unto the tree of life, and enter in through\nthe gate into the city.'   [Footnote 110] Which signifieth, Blessed\nare they who make pure their thoughts, that they may have a right to\nsee 'God, who is the way, the truth, and the life:'   [Footnote 111]\nand after the example of the fathers, enter into the kingdom of\nheaven.\n  [Footnote 109: S. Matthew v, 8.]\n  [Footnote 110: Apocalypse vii, 14.]\n  [Footnote 111: S. John xiv, 6.]\nIn like manner, Jerusalem is understood historically of that earthly\ncity whither pilgrims journey; allegorically, of the Church Militant;\ntropologically, of every faithful soul; anagogically, of the celestial\nJerusalem, which is our country.  [Footnote 112] Of these things, more\nexamples may be seen in the lessons for Holy Saturday.  [Footnote 113]\nBut in this work many senses are applied: and speedy changes are made\nfrom one to another, as the diligent reader will perceive.\n  [Footnote 112: How beautifully, observes a writer in the _British\n  Critic_, do old ecclesiastical writers use _patria_ and _domus_ of\n  our celestial country, and our everlasting home!]\n  [Footnote 113: Reference is here apparently made to the fifth\n  chapter of the book, of Lamentations, which appears as the 3rd\n  lesson at Matins.]\n13. For as none is prohibited from using divers grounds of exception\nand manners of defence, so neither are they forbidden to employ divers\nexpositions in the praise of God, so that faith be not injured.\n14. Notice must also be taken of the variety of rites used in the\ndivine worship. For nearly every Church hath her own observances, and\nattacheth to them a full meaning of her own: neither is it thought\nblameworthy or absurd to worship with various chants, or modulations\nof the voice, nor yet with different observances: when the Church\nTriumphant herself is surrounded,  [Footnote 114] according to the\nProphet, with the like diversity, and in the administration of the\nsacraments themselves a variety of customs is tolerated, and that\nrightly.\n  [Footnote 114: The author appears to refer here to the XLV Psalm,\n  'Eructavit cor meum.']\n15. Whence, according to Austin of ecclesiastical institutions in the\ndivine office, some we have received from Holy Scriptures: some from\nthe traditions or writings of the apostles, being confirmed by their\nsuccessors: some, moreover, of which, however, the institution is\nunknown, are confirmed by custom and approved by use: and to them\nequal observance is due as to the others.\n16. Let not, then, the reader be angry if he perchance read in this\nwork of observances which he never saw in his own church: or does not\nread of some that are there in use. For we endeavour not to go through\nthe particular rites of particular places, but those which be more\ncommon and usual: because we labour to set forth that doctrine which\nis of universal, and not that which is of particular bearing, nor\nwould it be possible for us to examine the particular rites of every\nchurch. Therefore we have determined, for the health of our soul and\nthe benefit of the readers, to set forth and to arrange the secret\nmysteries of divine offices in a clear state, to the best of our power\nand to inculcate and thoroughly to explain that which appears\nnecessary for ecclesiastics, towards the understanding of the daily\nservice: even as it is well known that, when in a different condition\nof life, we did faithfully in our _Mirror of Magistrates_ do the like\nfor the use of those who were employed in secular courts.\n17. But it must diligently be noted that in the divine offices\nthemselves  [Footnote 115] many ceremonies there be of usual\nemployment which have, from their institution, respect neither to a\nmoral nor mystical signification. Of these, some are known to have\narisen of necessity: some of congruity: some of the difference of the\nOld and New Testament; some of convenience; and some for the mere\nhonour and reverence of the offices themselves: whence saith blessed\nAustin, so many things are varied by the different customs of divers\nplace, that seldom or never can those causes be discovered which men\nfollowed in constituting them.\n  [Footnote 115: This passage is worth noting, as showing that our\n  Author does not proceed with the determination of making a meaning\n  where he could not find one: but that he is willing to leave much,\n  explained only in the principles of necessity, or convenience, or\n  reverence.]\n18. This work is described as a Rationale. For as in the 'breastplate\nof judgment'  [Footnote 116] which the Jewish high priest wore was\nwritten manifestation and truth, so here the reasons of the variations\nin divine offices and their truths are set forth and manifested: which\nthe prelates and priests of churches ought faithfully to preserve in\nthe shrine of their breasts: and as in the breastplate there was a\nstone by the splendour of which the children of Israel knew that God\nwas well pleased with them: so also the pious reader who hath been\ntaught the mysteries of the divine offices from the clearness of this\nwork will know that God is favourably disposed towards us, unless we\nrashly incur His indignation by our offence and fault. The breastplate\nwas woven of four colours and of gold: and here, as we said before,\nthe principles on which are founded the variations in ecclesiastical\noffices, take the hues of four senses, the historic, the allegoric,\nthe tropologic, and the anagogic, with faith as the  [Footnote 117]\ngroundwork.\n  [Footnote 116: Vulg. In Rationali Judicii. Exodus xxviii, 3.]\n  [Footnote 117: Such appears the meaning of this beautiful\n  comparison. The words are rather obscure, _quatuor sensibus fide\n  media colorantur_.]\n19. It is divided into eight parts: which we shall go through, by the\nLord's favour, in order. The first treateth of churches, and\necclesiastical places and ornaments: and of consecrations and\nsacraments. The second of the members of the Church, and their duties:\nthe third of sacerdotal and other vestments: the fourth of the Mass,\nand of the things therein performed: the fifth of the other divine\noffices: the sixth of the Sundays and holydays, and feasts specially\npertaining to our Lord: the seventh of Saints' days, and the feast of\nthe dedication of a church, and the office of the dead; the eighth of\nthe method of computing time, and the calendar.\n_Tradatus Gulielmi Durandi de ecclesia et ecclesiasticis locis et\nsacramentis et ornamentis et de consecrationibus incipit feliciter._\nCHAPTER I\nOF A CHURCH AND ITS PARTS\nTwo-fold Meaning of the Word--Different Synonyms for the Term--Form of\na Church--Of the Tabernacle--The Foundation, how to be laid--To Point\nEast, and Why--The Spiritual Church, how Built up--Of Cement--What\nArms the Spiritual Church Employeth--Of the Materials of the\nTabernacle--Of Shittim Wood--Analogy of a Church with the Human\nBody--Of what the Spiritual Church consisteth--Of its Foundations--Of\nthe Walls--Of the Choir--Of Apses--Of the Cloister Court--Of the\nTowers--Of the Cock--Of the Pinnacles--Of the Windows--Of the Lattice\nWork--Of the Doors--Of the Piers--Of the Beams--Of the Roof--Of the\nStalls--Of the Pulpit--Of the Rood Loft--Of the Hours--Of the\nSanctuary--Of the Sacristy--Of the Roof Tiles--Of the Lights--Of the\nCrosses--Of the Cloister--Of the Bishop's Throne--Why we go together\nto Church--Of the Separation of the Women from the Men--Of the\nCovering of Women's Heads--Of Speech in Church--Of Immunity for\nMalefactors--Why Churches may be rebuilt in other Places.\n1. First of all, let us consider a church  [Footnote 118] and its\nparts. The word church hath two meanings: the one, a material\nbuilding, wherein the divine offices are celebrated: the other, a\nspiritual fabric, which is the collection of the faithful. The Church,\n_that_ is the people forming it, is assembled by its ministers, and\ncollected together into {13} one place by 'Him who maketh men to be of\none mind in an house.'  [Footnote 119]For as the material church is\nconstructed from the joining together of various stones, so is the\nspiritual Church by that of various men.\n  [Footnote 118: It has been found advisable to print the word church\n  in the following pages with a great or a small initial letter,\n  according as 'The Blessed Company of all Faithful People,' or the\n  material building, were intended.]\n  [Footnote 119: Psalm lxviii (_Exsurgat Deus_), 6.]\n2. The Greek _ecclesia_ is in Latin translated by convocation because\nit calleth men to itself: the which title doth better befit the\nspiritual than the material church.\nThe material typifieth the spiritual Church: as shall be explained\nwhen we treat of its consecration.  [Footnote 120] Again, the Church\nis called Catholic, that is universal, because it hath been set up in,\nor spread over, all the world, because the whole multitude of the\nfaithful ought to be in one congregation, or because in the Church is\nlaid up the doctrine necessary for the instruction of all.\n  [Footnote 120: See below, chapter vi.]\n3. It is also called in Greek _synagoga_, in Latin _congregatio_,\nwhich was the name chosen by the Jews for their places of worship: for\nto them the term synagogue more appropriately belongeth, though it be\nalso applied to a church. But the Apostles never call a church by this\ntitle, perhaps for the sake of distinction.\n4. The Church Militant is also called _Sion_: because, amidst its\nwanderings, it expecteth the promise of a heavenly rest: for Sion\nsignifieth _expectation_. But the Church Triumphant, our future home,\nthe land of peace, is called Jerusalem: for Jerusalem signifieth _the\nvision of peace_.  [Footnote 121]\n  [Footnote 121: So the hymn in the Parisian Breviary, for the\n  dedication of a church:\n      Urbs beata, vera pacis\n      Visio, Jerusalem.]\nAlso, the church is called the _House of God_: also, sometimes, [Greek\ntext], that is, the _Lord's House_. At others _basilica_ (in Latin, a\nroyal palace), for the abodes of earthly kings are thus termed: and\nhow much more fittingly our houses of prayer, the dwelling-places of\nthe King of Kings! Again, it is called _temple_, from _tectum amplum,_\n{14} where sacrifices are offered to God: and sometimes the\n_tabernacle of God_, because this present life is a journey, and a\nprogress to a lasting country: and a tabernacle is an hostelrie:\n[Footnote 122] as will be explained when we speak of the dedication\n[Footnote 123] of a church. And why it is called the _Ark of the\nTestimony_, we shall say in the ensuing chapter, under the title\nAltars. Sometimes it is called _Martyrium_, when raised in honour of\nany martyr; sometimes _capella_  [Footnote 124] (chapel), (see under\nthe head Priest in the second part); sometimes _coenobium_, at others\n_sacrificium_; sometimes _sacellum_; sometimes _the house of prayer_:\nsometimes _monastery_: sometimes _oratory_. Generally, however, any\nplace set apart for prayers is called an oratory. Again, the church is\ncalled the _Body of Christ_ sometimes a _virgin_, as the Apostle\nsaith, 'that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ':\n[Footnote 125] sometimes a _bride_, because Christ hath betrothed her\nto Himself, as saith the Gospel: 'he that hath the bride is the\nbridegroom':   [Footnote 126] sometimes a _mother_, for daily in\nbaptism she beareth sons to God: sometimes a _daughter_, according to\nthat saying of the Prophet, 'Instead of thy fathers thou shalt have\nchildren':   [Footnote 127] sometimes a _widow_, because 'she sitteth\nsolitary through her afflictions, and, like Rachel, will not be\ncomforted.' Sometimes she is set forth under the emblem of an\n_harlot_, because she is called out of many nations, and because she\ncloseth not her bosom against any that return to her.\n  [Footnote 122: Compare Cicero de Senect. xxiii. Et ex vita ita\n  discedo tanquam ex hospitio, non tanquam ex domo: commorandi enim\n  Natura diversorium nobis, non habitandi dedit.]\n  [Footnote 123: Chapter vi, sect. 5, ad fin.]\n  [Footnote 124: Durandus, II. 10. 8. 'In many places, priests be\n  called chaplains. For of old the Kings of France, when they went\n  forth to war, carried with them the Cope of Blessed Martin, which\n  was kept in a certain tent (where Mass was said), and from the cope\n  (cappa) the tent was called chapel (capella).'\n  We may observe that chapel was used in former times with much\n  greater latitude than now. An additional aisle or chantry was so\n  called. So in Haddenham, Cambridgeshire, on a brass in the north\n  aisle, _Orate pro Aniniabus fundatorum hujus Capellae_: that is, the\n  aisle itself.]\n  [Footnote 125: 2 Cor. xi, 2.]\n  [Footnote 126: S. John iii, 29.]\n  [Footnote 127: Psalm xlv (_Eructavit cor meum_), 16.]\nSometimes she is called a city, because of the communion of her holy\ncitizens, being defended by the munitions of the Scriptures, whereby\nheretics are kept off: having stones and beams of divers kinds,\nbecause the merits of the saints are of divers kinds also, as shall be\nsaid below. Whatever the Jewish Church received by the law, that doth\nthe Christian Church receive, and with large increase by grace, from\nChrist whose bride she is. The setting up of an oratory, or church, is\nnot new. For the Lord commanded Moses in Mount Sinai, that he should\nmake a tabernacle of curiously wrought materials. This was divided by\na veil into two parts: the outer, called the holy place, where the\npeople attended the sacrifices: the inner, the holy of holies, where\nthe priests and Levites ministered before the Lord (see the Preface to\nthe Fourth Book and also Appendix A).\n5. This tabernacle having decayed through age, the Lord commanded that\na temple should be built, which Solomon accomplished with wonderful\nskill: this also had two parts, like the tabernacle. From both of\nthese, namely, from the tabernacle and the temple, doth our material\nchurch take its form. In its outer portion, the laity offer their\nprayers, and hear the Word. In the sanctuary, the clergy pray, preach,\noffer praises and prayers.\n6. The tabernacle, built as it was amidst the journeyings of the\nIsraelites, is sometimes taken as a type of the world which 'passeth\naway, and the lust thereof'   [Footnote 128] Whence it was formed with\ncurtains of four colours, as the world is composed of four elements.\n'God,' said the Prophet, 'is in His tabernacle':   [Footnote 129] God\nis in this world, as in a temple dyed scarlet by the blood of Christ.\n  [Footnote 128: S. John ii, 17.]\n  [Footnote 129: Psalm xi (_In Domino confido_), 4.]\nThe tabernacle is, however, more especially symbolical of the Church\nMilitant, which hath 'here no continuing city, but seeketh one to\ncome.'   [Footnote 130] Therefore is it called a tabernacle, for\ntabernacles or tents belong to soldiers: and this saying, God is in\nhis tabernacle, meaneth, God is among the faithful collected together\nin His name. The outer part of the tabernacle, where the people\nsacrificed, is the active life, wherein men give themselves up to the\nlove of their neighbour: the interior, wherein the Levites ministered,\nis the contemplative life, where a band of religious men devote\nthemselves to the love and contemplation of God. The tabernacle gave\nplace to the temple: because after the warfare cometh the triumph.\n  [Footnote 130: Hebrews xiii, 14.]\n7. Now a church is to be built on this fashion: The foundation being\nprepared, according to that saying, 'It fell not, for it was founded\nupon a rock,'  [Footnote 131] the bishop, or a priest  [Footnote 132]\nas the bishop's deputy, must sprinkle it with holy water, to banish\nthe foul forms of evil spirits, and lay the first stone, whereon a\ncross must be engraved.  [Footnote 133]\n  [Footnote 131: S. Matthew vii, 25. In general illustration of the\n  foregoing sections the reader is referred to the first chapter of\n  the eighth book of Bingham's 'Antiquities.']\n  [Footnote 132: In the account of the dedication of S. Michael the\n  Archangel, in the Isle of Guernsey, preserved in the 'Black Book of\n  the Bishop of Coutances,' it appears that the ceremony was performed\n  by a priest though it is believed that such has seldom been the case\n  in the Anglican Church. But see chapter vi, section 2. ]\n  [Footnote 133: A cross was not only inscribed on the foundation\n  stone, but a cross was placed where the church was to be: and this\n  in the Eastern Church; where the _Stauropegia_ was a ceremony of\n  much importance.]\n8. The foundation must be so contrived, as that the head of the church\nmay point due east (see Appendix B); that is, to that point of the\nheavens, wherein the sun ariseth at the equinoxes; to signify, that\nthe Church Militant must   [Footnote 134] behave herself with\nmoderation, both in prosperity and adversity: and not towards that\npoint where the sun ariseth at the solstices, which is the practice of\nsome.\n  [Footnote 134:  This passage is valuable as proving that in the\n  country of our Bishop nothing was known of a practice undoubtedly\n  prevalent in England; the direction of a church to that part of the\n  sky in which the sun arose on the Feast of the Patron Saint.]\nBut if the walls of Jerusalem, 'which is built as a city that is at\nunity with itself,'   [Footnote 135] were, by the Prophet's command,\nraised by the Jews, with how much greater zeal should we raise the\nwalls of our churches! For the material church, wherein the people\nassemble to set forth God's holy praise, symboliseth that Holy Church\nwhich is built in heaven of living stones.\n  [Footnote 135: Psalm cxxii (_Laetatus sum_), 3. ]\n9. This is that House of the Lord, built with all strength, 'upon the\nfoundations of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being\nthe chief cornerstone.  [Footnote 136] Her   [Footnote 137]\nfoundations are in the holy mountains.' The walls built upon these are\nthe Jews and Gentiles; who come from the four parts of the world unto\nChrist, and who have believed, believe, or shall believe on Him.\n  [Footnote 136: Eph. ii, 20.]\n  [Footnote 137: Psalm lxxxvii (_Fundamenta ejus_), I. ]\nThe faithful predestinated to eternal life, are the stones in the\nstructure of this wall which shall continually be built up unto the\nworld's end. And one stone is added to another, when masters in the\nChurch teach and confirm and strengthen those who are put under them:\nand whosoever in Holy Church undertaketh painful labours from\nbrotherly love, he as it were beareth up the weight of stones which\nhave been placed above him. Those stones which are of larger size, and\npolished, or squared, and placed on the outside and at the angles of\nthe building, are men of holier life than others, who by their merits\nand prayers retain weaker brethren in Holy Church.\n10. The cement, without which there can be no stability of the walls,\nis made of lime, sand, and water. The lime is fervent charity, which\njoineth to itself the sand, that is, undertakings for the temporal\nwelfare of our brethren: {18} because true charity taketh care of the\nwidow and the aged, and the infant, and the infirm: and they who have\nit study to work with their hands, that they may possess wherewith to\nbenefit them. Now the lime and the sand are bound together in the wall\nby an admixture of water. But water is an emblem of the Spirit. And as\nwithout cement the stones cannot cohere, so neither can men be built\nup in the heavenly Jerusalem without charity, which the Holy Ghost\nworketh in them. All the stones are polished and squared--that is,\nholy and pure, and are built by the hands of the Great Workman into an\nabiding place in the Church: whereof some are borne, and bear nothing,\nas the weaker members: some are both borne and bear, as those of\nmoderate strength: and some bear, and are borne of none save Christ,\nthe corner-stone, as they that are perfect. All are bound together by\none spirit of charity, as though fastened with cement; and those\nliving stones are knit together in the bond of peace. Christ was our\nwall in His conversation: and our outer wall in His Passion.\n11. When the Jews were rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem, their\nenemies strove hard to let the works: so that 'they built with one\nhand, and held their weapons of war in the other.' And round us too do\nenemies gather, while we are building the walls of our Church: our own\nsins, or ungodly men, willing to hinder our success. Whence, while we\nbuild our walls, that is, while we add virtue to virtue, we must fight\nwith the enemy, and grasp our weapons firmly: we must 'take the helmet\nof salvation, the shield of faith, the breastplate of righteousness:\nand for our sword the word of God,'  [Footnote 138] that we may defend\nourselves against them: and God's priest shall be unto us in Christ's\nstead, to teach us by his lessons, and defend us by his prayers.\n12. Furthermore, of what the tabernacle was made the Lord hath told\nus, saying unto Moses, 'Take the first fruits,'--that is, the most\nprecious gifts--'of the children of Israel: but from him alone who\nwillingly offereth gold, and silver, and brass, and precious stones,\nand purple and linen twice dyed'; namely cloth of the colours of blue,\npurple, and scarlet: and of biss, which is a kind of Egyptian linen\nwhite and soft: 'and goat's hair, and rams' skins dyed red,' which we\ncall Parthian, because the Parthians first dyed them thus, 'and purple\nskins and shittim wood' (shittim is the name of a mountain, and also\nof a tree: its leaves are like the white thorn, and to be injured\nneither by fire nor by decay): 'and oil for the lights, frankincense,\nand ointment of a sweet savour, onyx stones, and sard-onyxes, and\njewels: and let them make Me a house, that I may dwell in the midst of\nthem: and that they may not weary themselves in returning to this\nmountain.'   [Footnote 139]\n  [Footnote 139: Exodus xxv, 2.]\n14. The arrangement of a material church resembleth that of the human\nbody: the chancel, or place where the altar is, representeth the head:\nthe transepts, the hands and arms, and the remainder--towards the\nwest--the rest of the body. The sacrifice of the altar denoteth the\nvows of the heart. Furthermore, according to Richard de Sancto\nVictore, the arrangement of a church typifieth the three states in the\nChurch: of virgins, of the continent, of the married. {20} The\nsanctuary  [Footnote 140] is smaller than the chancel, and this than\nthe nave: because the virgins are fewer in number  [Footnote 141] than\nthe continent, and these than the married. And the sanctuary is more\nholy than the chancel: and the chancel than the nave: because the\norder of virgins is more worthy than that of the continent, and the\ncontinent more worthy than the married.\n  [Footnote 140: The sanctuary of course means that eastermost\n  division in churches consisting of three parts, which still remains\n  in many Norman buildings, and of which Kilpeck, in Herefordshire,\n  may be taken as a type. These churches are generally apsidal: but\n  there are instances to the contrary, as Bishopstone, in Sussex. A\n  view of the sanctum sanctorum and chancel arches in this church is\n  given in the Cambridge Camden Society's 'Illustrations of Monumental\n  Brasses,' part iv.]\n  [Footnote 141: This passage is somewhat obscure; but the difference\n  between the virgins and the continent appears to be this: by the\n  former are meant those who have taken vows of celibacy; by the\n  latter, those who practise it, without, however, having bound\n  themselves to it by vow.]\n15. Furthermore, the church consisteth of four walls, that is, is\nbuilt on the doctrine of the Four Evangelists; and hath length,\nbreadth, and height: the height representeth courage, the length\nfortitude, which patiently endureth till it attaineth its heavenly\nhome; the breadth is charity, which, with long suffering, loveth its\nfriends in God, and its foes for God; and again, its height is the\nhope of future retribution, which despiseth prosperity and adversity,\nhoping 'to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.'\n[Footnote 142]\n  [Footnote 142: Psalm xxvii (_Dominus illuminatio_), 13.]\n16. Again, in the temple of God, the foundation is faith, which is\nconversant with unseen things: the roof, charity, 'which covereth a\nmultitude of sins.'   [Footnote 143] The door, obedience, of which the\nLord saith, 'If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.'\n[Footnote 144] The pavement, humility, of which the Psalmist saith,\n'My soul cleaveth to the pavement.'   [Footnote 145]\n  [Footnote 143:  I S. Peter iv, 8.]\n  [Footnote 144:  S. Matthew xix, 17.]\n  [Footnote 145: Psalm cxix (_Adhaesit pavimento_), 25.]\n17. The four side-walls, the four cardinal virtues, justice,\nfortitude, temperance, prudence. Hence the Apocalypse saith, 'The city\nlieth four-square.'  [Footnote 146] The windows are hospitality with\ncheerfulness, and tenderness with charity.\n  [Footnote 146: Rev. xxi, 16.]\nConcerning this house saith the Lord, 'We will come unto him, and make\nour abode with him.'   [Footnote 147] But some churches are built in\nthe shape of a cross, to signify, that we are crucified to the world,\nand should tread in the steps of the Crucified, according to that\nsaying, 'If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take\nup his cross, and follow Me.'   [Footnote 148] Some also are built in\nthe form of a circle:   [Footnote 149] to signify that the Church hath\nbeen extended throughout the circle of the world, as saith the\nPsalmist: 'And their words unto the end of the world.'   [Footnote\n150] Or because from the circle of this world, we reach forth to that\ncrown of eternity which shall encircle our brows.\n  [Footnote 147: S. John xiv, 23.]\n  [Footnote 148: S. Matthew xvi, 18.]\n  [Footnote 149: This of course refers to the Church of the Holy\n  Sepulchre, the prototype of these buildings. There are four, as it\n  is well known, in England yet standing, and two in ruins--namely,\n  Temple Aslackby, in Lincolnshire, and the church in Ludlow Castle.]\n  [Footnote 150: Psalm xix (_Caeli enarrant_), 4.]\n18. The choir is so called from the harmony of the clergy in their\nchanting, or from the multitude collected at the divine offices. The\nword _chorus_ is derived from _chorea_, or from _corona_. For in early\ntimes they stood like a crown round the altar, and thus sung the\nPsalms in one body: but Flavianus and Theodorus taught the antiphonal\nmethod of chanting, having received it from S. Ignatius, who himself\nlearnt it by inspiration. The two choirs then typify the angels, and\nthe spirits of just men, while they cheerfully and mutually excite\neach other in this holy exercise. Others derive _chorus_ from\n_concord_, which consisteth of charity; because he who hath not\ncharity, cannot sing with the spirit. But what this choir signifieth,\nand why the greatest in it sit last, shall be explained in the fourth\nbook.  [Footnote 151] And observe, that when one sings, it is called\nin Greek a _monody_, in Latin _tycinium_. When two sing, it is called\n_bicinium_; when many, a _chorus_.\n  [Footnote 151: We may observe that Prynne perverts the fact, that\n  the westernmost seats in the choir are the most honourable, to a\n  depreciation of the Catholic custom of the position of the altar.\n  See his 'Pacific Examination,' s.v.]\n19. The exedra is an apsis, separated a little from a temple or\npalace; so called because it projecteth a little from the wall (in\nGreek [Greek text]), and signifieth the lay portion of the faithful\njoined to Christ and the Church. The crypts, or subterranean caves,\nwhich we find in some churches, are hermits who are devoted to a\nsolitary life.\n20. The open court signifieth Christ, by Whom an entrance is\nadministered into the heavenly Jerusalem: this is also called porch,\nfrom _porta_, a gate, or because it is _aperta_, open.\n21. The towers are the preachers and prelates of the Church, which are\nher bulwark and defence. Whence the bridegroom in the Canticles saith\nto the bride, 'Thy neck is like the tower of David builded for an\narmoury.'   [Footnote 152] The pinnacles of the towers signify the\nlife or the mind of a prelate which aspireth heavenwards.\n  [Footnote 152: Canticles iv, 4.]\n22. The cock at the summit of the church is a type of preachers. For\nthe cock, ever watchful even in the depth of night, giveth notice how\nthe hours pass, wakeneth the sleepers, predicteth the approach of day,\nbut first exciteth himself to crow by striking his sides with his\nwings. There is a mystery conveyed in each of these particulars. The\nnight is this world: the sleepers are the children of this world who\nare asleep in their sins. The cock is the preacher, who preacheth\nboldly, and exciteth the sleepers to cast away the works of darkness,\nexclaiming, 'Woe to them that sleep! Awake thou that sleepest!\n[Footnote 153] And these foretell the approach of day when they speak\nof the Day of Judgment, and the glory that shall be revealed: and like\nprudent {23} messengers, before they teach others, arouse themselves\nfrom the sleep of sin by mortifying their bodies. Whence the Apostle,\n'I keep under my body.'   [Footnote 154] And as the weathercock faceth\nthe wind, they turn themselves boldly to meet the rebellious by\nthreats and arguments: lest they should be guilty, 'when the wolf\ncometh, of leaving the sheep and fleeing.'   [Footnote 155] The iron\nrod, whereon the cock sitteth, representeth the discourse of the\npreacher, that he speaketh not of man but of God: according to that\nsaying, 'If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God.'\n[Footnote 156] But in that the iron rod is placed above the cross, on\nthe summit of the church, it signifieth that Holy Scripture is now\nconsummated and confirmed. Whence saith our Lord in His Passion, 'It\nis finished': and that title is written indelibly over Him.\n  [Footnote 153: Eph. v, 14.]\n  [Footnote 154: 1 Cor. ix, 27.]\n  [Footnote 155:  S. John x, 12.]\n  [Footnote 156:  I S. Peter iv, 11.]\n23. The cone, that is the summit of the church, of great height, and\nof round shape, signifieth how perfectly and inviolably the Catholic\nfaith must be held: which faith except a man do keep whole and\nundefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.\n24. The glass windows in a church are Holy Scriptures, which expel the\nwind and the rain, that is all things hurtful, but transmit the light\nof the true Sun, that is, God, into the hearts of the faithful. These\nare wider   [Footnote 157] within than without, because the mystical\nsense is the more ample, and precedeth the literal meaning. Also, by\nthe windows the senses of the body are signified: which ought to be\nshut to the vanities of this world, and open to receive with all\nfreedom spiritual gifts.\n  [Footnote 157: This passage is particularly to be observed, for the\n  reason given in the Introduction.]\n25. By the lattice work  [Footnote 158] of the windows, we understand\nthe prophets or other obscure teachers of the Church Militant: in\nwhich windows there are often two shafts, signifying the two precepts\nof charity, or because the apostles were sent out to preach two and\ntwo.\n  [Footnote 158: See Appendix I.]\n26. The door of the church is Christ: according to that saying in the\nGospel, 'I am the door.'   [Footnote 159] The apostles are also called\ndoors.\n  [Footnote 159: S. John x, 9.]\n27. The piers of the church are bishops and doctors: who specially\nsustain the Church of God by their doctrine. These, from the majesty\nand clearness of their divine message, are called silver, according to\nthat in the Song of Songs, 'He made silver columns.'   [Footnote 160]\nWhence also Moses at the entering in of the tabernacle, placed five\ncolumns, and four before the oracle, that is, the holy of holies.\nAlthough the piers are more in number than seven, yet they are called\nseven, according to that saying, 'Wisdom hath builded her house, she\nhath hewn out her seven pillars':   [Footnote 161] because bishops\nought to be filled with the sevenfold influences of the Holy Ghost:\n[Footnote 162] and SS. James and John, as the Apostle testifieth,\n'seemed to be pillars.'   [Footnote 163] The bases of the columns are\nthe apostolic bishops,  [Footnote 164] who support the frame of the\nwhole church. The capitals of the piers are the opinions of the\nbishops and doctors. For as the members are directed and moved by the\nhead, so are our words and works governed by their mind. The ornaments\nof the capitals are the words of Sacred Scripture, to the meditation\nand observance of which we are bound.\n [Footnote 160: Canticles viii, 9.]\n  [Footnote 161: Prov. viii, I.]\n  [Footnote 162: Compare the _Veni Creator_:\n      Thou the anointing Spirit art,\n      Who dost Thy sevenfold gifts impart.]\n  [Footnote 163: Gal ii, 9.]\n  [Footnote 164: That is, it may be supposed, bishops of those sees\n  which were founded by the apostles themselves, e.g. Rome, Crete,\n  Ephesus.]\n28. The pavement of the church is the foundation of our faith. But in\nthe spiritual Church, the pavement is the poor, of Christ: the poor in\nspirit, who humble themselves in all thing: wherefore on account of\ntheir {25} humility they are likened to the pavement. Again, the\npavement, which is trodden under foot, representeth the multitude, by\nwhose labours the Church is sustained.\n29. The beams  [Footnote 165] which join together the church are the\nprinces of this world or the preachers who defend the unity of the\nChurch, the one by deed, the other by argument.\n  [Footnote 165: _Beams_. That is, probably, tie-beams: here is\n  another reference to the architectural arrangements of Early English\n  date.]\n30. The stalls in the church signify the contemplative, in whom God\ndwelleth without hindrance, who, from their high dignity and the glory\nof eternal life, are compared to gold. Whence He saith in the\nCanticles, 'He made a golden seat.'   [Footnote 166]\n  [Footnote 166: See Appendix I.]\n31. The beams in the church are preachers, who spiritually sustain it.\nThe vaulting also, or ceiling, representeth preachers, who adorn and\nstrengthen it, concerning whom, seeing that they are not corruptible\nthrough vice, the bridegroom glorieth in the same Canticles, saying\n'the beams of our house are cedar, and its ceiling, fir.' For God hath\nbuilt His Church of living stones, and imperishable wood, according to\nthat saying, 'Solomon made himself a litter of cedar wood;' [Footnote\n167] that is, Christ, of His saints who wear the white robe of\nchastity.\n  [Footnote 167: It is very difficult to find the right meaning of the\n  word ferculum here. The English version gives the passage from the\n  Canticles, 'King Solomon made himself a _chariot_ (marg. reading,\n  _bed_) of the wood of Lebanon. In the extremely beautiful treatise\n  of Hugo de S. Victore, _De Nuptiis Spiritualibus_(cap. iii), the\n  _fercula nuptialia_ appear to mean the _marriage feast_, which is to\n  perform its part in the general _Sensuum refectio_, by its sweet\n  savours; as the bed or chariot of Solomon is noted for the odour of\n  its cedar wood. However, the same writer devotes five Tituli of his\n  _Erudit. Theolog. Ex Miscellan._ namely, lix--lxii of the first\n  book, and cxxi of the second, to the consideration of this Ferculum\n  Solomonis: which he decides to be a _lectica sen vehiculum_, a\n  litter or sedan (such as is now used in Sicily under the name of\n  _lettiga_), differing from the _lectulus_ or _bed_ (Cant, i, 16),\n  inasmuch as this denotes the repose of the contemplative life, while\n  the ferculum typifies the laborious exercise of the active life; and\n  differing again from the _currus_ or chariot (the only other vehicle\n  mentioned in Holy Scripture), since the latter is drawn on the earth\n  with a grating noise, and represents a depraved heart clinging to\n  earthly things, but the former is borne smoothly and quietly above\n  the ground, an image of the righteous soul despising earthly and\n  seeking heavenly things. Lastly, the _ferculum_, or litter, typifies\n  the Church, from carrying, _a ferendo_, as doth the Church her\n  children unto Heavenly Rest.]\nThe chancel, that is, the head of the church, being lower  [Footnote\n168] than its body, signifieth how great humility there should be in\nthe clergy, or in prelates, according to that saying, 'And the more\nthou art exalted, humble thyself in all things.' The rail, by which\nthe altar   [Footnote 169] is divided from the choir, teacheth the\nseparation of things celestial from things terrestrial.\n  [Footnote 168: The fact that in many unaltered and unmutilated\n  churches the chancel is lower than the nave, appears to have been\n  unnoticed by ecclesiologists. Wherever it occurs, William Dowsing,\n  or some of his puritanical coadjutors, have been supposed agents in\n  the matter. But there exist chancels, which, whether from the height\n  of the piscina and sedilia, or on other accounts, cannot have been\n  lowered, to which nevertheless there is a descent from the nave.\n  Such an one is that of S. Giles's at Cambridge: and the arrangement\n  is very common in the little churches of the south-west part of\n  Sussex.]\n  [Footnote 169: This is another very remarkable passage: and one\n  which proves that the injunction of Abp. Laud for the erection of\n  altar rails was not a novelty. And though their abolition is much to\n  be wished, as well from the ugliness of all existing specimens, as\n  from the irreverence which they seem to pre-suppose, the Church in\n  England can scarcely be charged with the adoption of an innovation\n  in giving her sanction to them.]\n32. The seats in the choir admonish us that the body must sometimes be\nrefreshed: because that which hath not alternate rest wanteth\ndurability.\n33. The pulpit in the church is the life of the perfect: and is so\ncalled from being public, or placed in a public place. For we read,\n'Solomon made a brazen scaffold, and set it in the midst of the\ntemple, and stood upon it, and stretching forth his hands spake to the\npeople of God.' Esdras also made a wooden scaffold for speaking: in\nwhich when he stood, he was higher than the rest of the people.\n[Footnote 170]\n  [Footnote 170: 3 Kings vi, 13.]\n34. The analogium (rood-loft) is so called because in it the Word of\nGod is read and delivered. Which also is called ambo, from _ambire_,\n[Footnote 171] to surround, because it surroundeth him that entereth\nin.\n  [Footnote 171: This is, of course, a false derivation. The important\n  subject of Rood-lofts has been treated with admirable learning by\n  Father Thiers, in his treatise 'Sur les jub\u00e9s,' to which the reader\n  is referred. See also Appendix C.]\n35. The horologium, by means of which the hours are read, teacheth the\ndiligence that should be in priests to observe at the proper times the\ncanonical hours: as he saith, 'Seven times a day do I praise thee.'\n[Footnote 172]\n  [Footnote 172: Psalm (cxix), _Beati immaculati_, 164.]\n36. The tiles   [Footnote 173] of the roof which keep off the rain are\nthe soldiers, who preserve the Church from paynim, and from enemies.\n  [Footnote 173: This passage deserves to be noticed, as proving that\n  lead was not the only roofing employed in the Norman churches.]\n37. The circular staircases, which are imitated from Solomon's temple,\nare passages which wind among the walls, and point out the hidden\nknowledge which they only have who ascend to celestial things.\nConcerning the steps, by which ascent is made to the altar, hereafter.\n38. The sacristy, or place where the holy vessels are deposited, or\nwhere the priest putteth on his robes, is the womb of the Blessed\nMary, where Christ put on his robes of humanity. The priest, having\nrobed himself, cometh forth into the public view, because Christ,\nhaving come from the womb of the Virgin, proceeded forth into the\nworld.\nThe bishop's throne in the church is higher than the rest.\n39. Near to the altar, which signifieth Christ, is placed the piscina,\nor lavacrum, that is, the pity of Christ, in which the priest washeth\nhis hands, thereby denoting that by baptism and penitence we are\npurged from the filth of sin: which is drawn from the Old Testament.\nFor he saith in Exodus, 'And Moses made a laver of brass, with his\nbasin, in the which Aaron the priest and his sons should wash, before\nthey went up to the altar, that they might offer an offering.\n[Footnote 174]\n  [Footnote 174: Exodus xxxviii, 8.]\n40. The lamp in the church is Christ: as He saith, 'I am the light of\nthe world';  [Footnote 175] and again, 'That was the true light.'\n[Footnote 176] 'Or the light in a church may denote the apostles and\nother doctors, by whose doctrine the Church is enlightened, as the sun\nand moon: concerning whom saith the Lord, 'Ye are the light of the\nworld:   [Footnote 177] that is, an example of good works. Wherefore\nHe saith to them in His admonitions, 'Let your light shine before\nmen.'   [Footnote 178] But the Church is enlightened by the precepts\nof the Lord; wherefore it saith in the before-quoted place, 'Speak\nunto the sons of Aaron that they offer oil-olive most pure, that the\nlamp may burn continually in the tabernacle of the testimony.'\n[Footnote 179] Moses made also seven lights, which are the seven gifts\nof the Holy Ghost: for they in the darkness of this world shine forth\nwith brightness: and they rest in candlesticks, because in Christ\nrested 'the spirit of wisdom and knowledge, the spirit of counsel and\nmight, the spirit of learning and piety, the spirit of the fear of the\nLord, by which He preached wisdom to the captives.'   [Footnote 180]\nThe number of lights showeth the number of graces in the faithful.\n  [Footnote 175: S. John viii, 12.]\n  [Footnote 176: S. John i, 6.]\n  [Footnote 177: S. Matthew v, 14.]\n  [Footnote 178: S. Matthew v, 16.]\n  [Footnote 179: Lev. xxiv, 2.]\n  [Footnote 180: Isaiah lxi, i.]\n41. In many places a triumphal cross is placed in the midst of the\nchurch; to teach us, that from the midst of our hearts we must love\nthe Redeemer: who, after Solomon's pattern, 'paved the midst of his\nlitter (_ferculum_) with love for the daughters of Jerusalem:'\n[Footnote 181] and that all, seeing the sign of victory, might\nexclaim. Hail, thou Salvation of the whole world, Tree of our\nRedemption: and that we should never forget the love of God, who, to\nredeem His servants, gave His only son, that we might imitate Him\ncrucified. But the cross is exalted on high, to signify the victory of\nChrist. Why a church is ornamented within and not without, shall be\nsaid hereafter.\n  [Footnote 181: Cantic. iii, 10.]\n42. The cloisters, as Richard, Bishop of Cremona, testifieth, had\ntheir rise either in the watchings of the Levites around the\ntabernacle, or from the chambers of the priests, or from the porch of\nSolomon's temple. 'For the Lord commanded Moses, that he should not\nnumber the Levites with the rest of the children of Israel; but should\nset them over the tabernacle of the testimony to carry it and to keep\nit.'   [Footnote 182] On account of which divine commandment, while\nthe Holy Mysteries are in celebration, the clergy should in the church\nstand apart from the laity. Whence the Council of Mayence ordained\nthat the part which is separated with rails from the altar should be\nappropriated altogether to the priests choral. Furthermore, as the\nchurch signifieth the Church Triumphant, so the cloister signifieth\nthe celestial Paradise, where there will be one and the same heart in\nfulfilling the commands of God and loving Him: where all things will\nbe possessed in common, because that of which one hath less, he will\nrejoice to see more abounding in another, for 'God shall be all in\nall.'   [Footnote 183] Therefore the regular clergy who live in the\ncloisters, and are of one mind, rising to the service of God and\nleaving worldly things, lead their lives in common. The various\noffices in the cloister signify the different mansions, and the\ndifference of rewards in the Kingdom: for 'In My Father's House are\nmany mansions,'   [Footnote 184] saith our Lord. But in a moral sense\nthe cloister is the contemplative state, into which the soul betaking\nitself, is separated from the crowd of carnal thoughts, and meditateth\non celestial things only. In this cloister there are four sides:\ndenoting, namely, contempt of self, contempt of the world, love of\nGod, love of our neighbour. Each side hath his own row of Columns.\nContempt of self hath humiliation of soul, mortification of the flesh,\nhumility of speech, and the like. The base of all the columns is\npatience.\n  [Footnote 182: Numbers i, 47; xviii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 183: I Corinth, xv, 28.]\n  [Footnote 184: S. John xv, 2.]\n43. In this cloister the diversity of office-chambers is the diversity\nof virtues. The chapter-house is the secret of the heart: concerning\nthis, however, we shall speak differently hereafter. The refectory is\nthe love of holy meditation. The cellar, Holy Scripture. The\ndormitory, a clean conscience. The oratory, a spotless life. The\ngarden of trees and herbs, the collection of virtues. The well, the\ndew of God's heavenly gifts; which in this world mitigateth our\nthirst, and hereafter will quench it.\n44. The Episcopal throne, which according to the injunctions of Saint\nPeter has been of old consecrated in each city (as shall be said\nbelow), the piety of our forefathers dedicated, not in memory of\nconfessors, but to the honour of apostles and martyrs, and especially\nof the Blessed Virgin Mary.\n45. But we therefore go to church, that we may there ask for the\npardon of our sins, and assist in the divine praises: as shall be said\nin the proeme of the fifth book, and that there we may hear God's\nproceedings   [Footnote 185] with the good and the ill, and learn and\nreceive the knowledge of God, and that we may there feed on the Lord's\nbody.\n  [Footnote 185: Such is probably the meaning of the passage. The\n  original is _ut iti bona sive mala judicia audiamus_.]\n46. In church, men and women sit apart: which, according to Bede, we\nhave received from the custom of the ancients: and thence it was that\nJoseph and Mary lost the Child Jesus; since the one who did not behold\nHim in his own company, thought Him to be with the other. . . . But\nthe men remain on the southern, the {31} women on the northern side:\n[Footnote 186] to signify that the saints who be most advanced in\nholiness should stand against the greater temptations of this world:\nand they who be less advanced, against the less; or that the bolder\nand the stronger sex should take their place in the position fittest\nfor action: because the Apostle saith, 'God is faithful, Who will not\nsuffer you to be tempted above that ye are able.'   [Footnote 187] To\nthis also pertaineth the vision of S. John, who 'beheld a mighty angel\nplacing his right foot in the sea.'   [Footnote 188] For the stronger\nmembers are opposed to the greater dangers. But, according to others,\nthe men are to be in the fore part [_i.e._ eastward], the women\nbehind: because 'the husband is the head of the wife,'   [Footnote\n189] and therefore should go before her.\n  [Footnote 186: This is the practice in some parts of England even to\n  this day: more especially in Somersetshire. Bp. Montague in his\n  'Visitation Articles' (reprinted Camb. 1841) asks (p. 17), 'Do men\n  and women sit together in those seats indifferently and\n  promiscuously? or (as the fashion was of old), do men sit together\n  upon one side of the church, and women upon the other?' And, indeed,\n  of old there was a still further separation on each side, into the\n  married and unmarried. The restoration of the practice recommended\n  by Bp. Montague is much to be wished.]\n  [Footnote 187:  1 Corinth, x, 13.]\n  [Footnote 188: Apocalypse x, 7.]\n  [Footnote 189: Eph. v, 23.]\n47. A woman must cover her head in the church, because she is not the\nimage of God, and because by woman sin began. And therefore in the\nchurch, out of respect for the priest, who is the vicar of Christ, in\nhis presence, as before a judge, she hath her head covered, and not at\nliberty: and on account of the same reverence she hath not the power\nof speaking in the church before him. Of old time, men and women\nwearing long hair stood in church with uncovered heads glorying in\ntheir locks: which was a disgrace unto them.\n48. But what should be our conversation in church the Apostle\nteacheth, saying, 'Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and\nspiritual songs.'  [Footnote 190] Whence we must, when we be there,\nabstain from superfluous words: {32} according to that saying of S.\nChrysostome, When thou goest into a king's palace, set in order thy\nconversation and thy habit. For the angels of the Lord are there: and\nthe House of God is full of incorporeal virtues.  [Footnote 191] And\nthe Lord saith to Moses, and so doth the angel to Joshua, 'Put off thy\nshoes from off thy feet: for the place where thou standest is holy\nground.'   [Footnote 192]\n  [Footnote 190: Coloss. iii, 16.]\n  [Footnote 191: The passage referred to is as follows:--' Regiam\n  quidem ingrediens, et habitu et aspectu et incessu et omnibus aliis\n  te ornas et componis: Hic autem vera est Regia et plane hic talia\n  qualia caelestia:--et rides? Atque scio quidem quod tu non vides.\n  Audi autem quod ubique adsunt angeli, et maxima in Domo Dei\n  adsistunt Regis, et omnia sunt impleta incorporeis illus\n  Potestatibus.]\n  [Footnote 192: Exod. iii, 5.  Josh, v, 15.]\n49. In the last place, a consecrated church defendeth murderers who\ntake sanctuary in it from losing life or limb, provided that they have\nnot offended in it, or against it. Whence it is written that 'Joab\nfled to the tabernacle, and laid hold on the horns of the altar.'\n[Footnote 193] The same privilege is possessed also by an\nunconsecrated church, if the divine offices be therein celebrated.\n  [Footnote 193: 2 Kings i, 28.]\n50. But the body of Christ received by such persons, doth not defend\nthem nor those who fly to it: partly because the privilege is granted\nto a church as a church: and therefore not to be misbestowed on other\nthings: partly because that food is the support of the soul, and not\nof the body: whence it freeth the soul and not the body.\n51. Churches are moved from one place to another on three accounts.\nFirst, on account of the necessity arising from persecutors: secondly,\non account of the difficulty of access or habitation, such as the\nunwholesomeness of air: thirdly, when they are oppressed with the\nsociety of evil men: and then with the consent of the Pope or the\nbishop. Wherefore he that entereth into a church fortifieth himself\nwith the sign of the cross, shall be said in the proeme of the fifth\nbook.'  [Footnote 194]\n  [Footnote 194:  See Appendix.]\nCHAPTER II\nOF THE ALTAR\nThe First Builders of Altars--The Difference between Altare and\nAra--Various Significations of Various Kinds of Altars--The Ark of the\nTestimony--It is preserved in the Lateran Church--What a Man needeth\nthat he may be the Temple of God--What the Table Signifieth--Of the\nCandlestick--Of the Ark--Of the Altar--Of the Altar Cloths--Of Steps\nto the Altar.\nI. The altar hath a place in the church on three accounts, as shall be\nsaid in speaking of its dedication. We are to know that Noe\n[Footnote 195] first, then Isaac  [Footnote 196] and Abraham [Footnote\n197] and Jacob made, as we read, altars: which is only to be\nunderstood of stones set upright, on which they offered and slew the\nvictims and burnt them with fire laid beneath them. Also Moses made an\naltar  [Footnote 198] of shittim wood: and the same was made as an\naltar of incense, and covered with pure gold: as we read in the xxvth\nchapter of Exodus, where also the form of the altar is described. From\nthese of the ancient fathers, the altars of the moderns have their\norigin, being erected with four horns at the corners. Of which some\nare of one stone, and some are put together of many.\n  [Footnote 195: Gen. viii, 20.]\n  [Footnote 196: Gen. xxvi, 25. xxxiii, 20.]\n  [Footnote 197: Gen. xiii, 18.]\n  [Footnote 198: Exodus xxvii, i.]\n2. And sometimes the words altare and ara are used in the same sense.\nYet is there a difference. For _altare_, derived from _alta res_, or\n_alta ara_, is that on which {34} the priests burnt incense. But\n_ara_, which is derived from _area_, or from _ardeo_, is that on which\nsacrifices were burnt.  [Footnote 199]\n  [Footnote 199: The true ecclesiastical distinction between _altare_\n  and _ara_ is that the former means the altar of the true God, and is\n  therefore alone used in the Vulgate, answering to the Greek [Greek\n  text], as opposed to ara ([Greek text]), an altar with an image\n  above it. See _Mede_. Folio 386. ]\n3. And note, that many kinds of altars are found in Scripture: as a\nhigher, a lower, an inner, an outer; of which each hath both a plain\nand a symbolical signification. The higher altar is God the Trinity:\nof which it is written, 'Thou shalt not go up by steps to my altar.'\n[Footnote 200] And it also signifieth the Church Triumphant: of which\nit is said, 'Then shall they offer bullocks upon mine altar.'\n[Footnote 201] But the lower altar is the Church Militant, of which it\nis said, 'If thou wilt make an altar of stone, thou shalt not make it\nof hewn stone.'   [Footnote 202] Also it is the table of the temple.\nOf which he saith, 'Appoint a solemn day for your assembly even unto\nthe horns of the altar.'   [Footnote 203] And in the Third of Kings,\nit is said that Solomon made a golden altar.  [Footnote 204 ] But the\ninterior altar is a clean heart, as shall be said below. It is also a\ntype of faith in the incarnation, of which in Exodus, 'An altar of\nearth ye shall make Me.'  [Footnote 205] And an interior altar is the\naltar of the cross. This is the altar on which they offered the\nevening sacrifice. Whence in the Canon of the Mass it is said, _Jube\nhoc in sublime Altare Tuum perferri_.  [Footnote 206] Moreover the\nexternal altar representeth the sacraments of the Church: of which it\nis said, 'Even thine altars, O Lord of hosts, my King, and my God.'\n[Footnote 207] Again, the altar is our mortification in our heart, in\nwhich carnal motions are consumed by the fervour of the Holy Spirit.\n  [Footnote 200: Exodus XX, 26.]\n  [Footnote 201: Psalm li (_Miserere mei_), 19.]\n  [Footnote 202: Exodus XX, 25.]\n  [Footnote 203: Psalm cxviii (_Confitemini_), 27.]\n  [Footnote 204: III Kings vi. 22.]\n  [Footnote 205: Exodus xx 26.]\n  [Footnote 206: This prayer, which immediately precedes the\n  Commemoration of the Dead, runs thus: Supplices Te rogamus,\n  omnipotens Deus, jube hoc perferri per manus Sancti Angeli Tui, in\n  conspectu Divinae Majestatis Tuae: ut quotquot ex hac Altaris\n  participatione sacrosanctum Filii Tui Corpus et Sanguinem\n  sumpserimus, omni benedictione caelesti et gratia repleamur. Per.]\n  [Footnote 207: Psalm lxxxiv (_Quam dilecta_), 4.]\n4. Secondly, it also signifieth the Spiritual Church: and its four\nhorns teach how she hath been extended into the four quarters of the\nworld. Thirdly, it signifieth Christ, without whom no gift is offered\nacceptable to the Father. Whence also the Church addresseth her\nprayers to the Father through Christ alone. Fourthly, it signifieth\nthe body of Christ, as shall be explained in the fifth book. Fifthly,\nit signifieth the table at which Christ did feast with His disciples.\n5. It is written in Exodus, that in the Ark of the Testament or of the\nTestimony the witness was laid up:  [Footnote 208] that is, the tables\non which the law was written: and it is said that the _Testimony_ was\nthere laid up, because it was a bearing witness that the law imprinted\non our hearts by nature God had reimprinted by writing. Also, there\nwas laid up the golden pot full of manna, for a testimony that He had\ngiven the children of Israel bread from heaven. And the rod of Aaron,\nfor a testimony that all power is from God. And the second tables of\nthe law, in testimony of the covenant in which they had said, 'All\nthat the Lord hath spoken we will do.'   [Footnote 209] And on these\naccounts it is called the Ark of the Testimony or Testament; and also\nthe tabernacle of the testimony thence deriveth its title. But over\nthe ark was made a mercy seat: of which we shall speak in the proeme\nof the fourth book. In imitation whereof some churches have over the\naltar an ark or tabernacle, in which the body of the Lord and relics\nare preserved. The Lord also commanded that a candlestick should be\nmade of beaten pure gold. It is written in the third book of Kings,\nthat in the Ark of the Covenant was nothing else than the two tables\nof stone which Moses put therein in Horeb: when the Lord made a\ncovenant with the children of Israel in the day that they came out of\nthe land of Egypt.\n  [Footnote 208: Exodus xxv, 16.]\n  [Footnote 209: Exodus xix, 8.]\n6. And note that in the time of S. Silvester, Pope,  [Footnote 210]\nConstantine the Emperor built the Lateran church, in which he placed\nthe Ark of the Testament, which the Emperor Titus had brought from\nJerusalem, and the golden candlestick with his seven branches. In\nwhich ark are these things: the rings and the staves of gold: the\ntables of the testimony: the rod of Aaron: manna: barley loaves: the\ngolden pot: the seamless garment: the reed: a garment of S. John\nBaptist, and the scissors with which the hair of S. John the\nEvangelist was shorn.\n  [Footnote 210: It is very remarkable that no notice whatever is\n  taken of these relics by Ciampini in his very minute description of\n  the Lateran Basilica: although in his account both of this, and of\n  all the other Basilican churches built by Constantine, he copies\n  _verbatim_ the list of the donations of the Emperor which is given\n  in the life of Pope S. Sylvester, compiled by an unknown librarian\n  of the Vatican. It is clear that either Durandus was misinformed, or\n  that the present passage is corrupt. Again, it is not likely that\n  the vest of S. John Baptist, or the scissors of S. John Evangelist\n  would have been kept in the ark besides its proper contents. Yet\n  Durandus had obviously some facts to go upon, since the Lateran\n  Church, having been originally dedicated to the Saviour, was now\n  under the Invocation of the two SS. John; and the sufferings of both\n  these saints were depicted in a very ancient mosaic, those of the\n  Evangelist having over them the following inscription, which we give\n  as describing a Confession of this _Martyr in will_, now little\n  known.\n  Martyrii calicem bibit hic Athleta Johannes\n      Principium Verbi cernere qui meruit.\n  Verberat hunc fuste Proconsul, _forfice tondet_,\n      Quem fervens oleum laedere non valuit.\n  Conditus hic oleum, dolium, cruor, atque capilli,\n      Quae consecrantur libera Roma tibi.\n  To return, we may be satisfied that these Jewish memorials did not\n  exist, since Ciampini, while composing his account, consulted the\n  former writers upon the Lateran Basilica; viz. the poet Prudentius,\n  an unedited MS. of Panvinius, Severanus De Septem Urbis Ecclesiis,\n  and the work of Caesar Cardinal Rasponus.]\n7. Man, if he hath an altar, a table, a candlestick, and an ark, he is\nthe temple of God. He must have an altar, whereon rightly to offer and\nrightly to distribute. The altar is our heart, on which we ought to\noffer. {37} Whence the Lord commandeth in Exodus: 'Thou shalt offer\nburnt offerings on mine altar.'  [Footnote 211] Since from the heart\nwords, set on fire of charity, ought to proceed. _Holocaust_ is\nderived from _holos, whole_, and _cauma, a burning:_ therein\nsignifying a thing wholly burnt. On this altar we must rightly offer,\nand we must rightly divide. We offer rightly when we bring any good\nthought to perfection. But we do not rightly divide if we do it not\ndiscreetly. For a man often thinketh to do good, and doeth ill: and\nsometimes with one hand he doeth good and with the other ill; and thus\nhimself buildeth, and himself knocketh down. But we then rightly\ndivide when the good which we do we attribute, not to ourselves, but\nto God alone.\n  [Footnote 211: Exodus ix, 2.]\n8. It behoveth also man to have a table, whence he may take the bread\nof the Word of God. By the table we understand Holy Scripture,\nconcerning which the Psalm, 'Thou preparest a table before me in the\npresence of mine enemies.'  [Footnote 212] That is, Thou hast given me\nScripture against the temptations of the devil. This table then we\nmust have, that is, must lay up in our minds, that thence we may take\nthe Word of God. Of the deficiency of this bread saith Jeremiah: 'The\nlittle ones sought bread, and there was none to break it unto them.\n[Footnote 213] It behoveth man likewise to have a candlestick, that he\nmay shine with good works.\n  [Footnote 212:  Psalm xxiii (_Dominus regit me_), 5.]\n  [Footnote 213: Jeremiah xvi, 7.]\n9. A candlestick that giveth light without is a good work, which by\nits good example inflameth others. Of which it is said, 'No man\nlighteth a candle and putteth it under a bushel, but in a\ncandlestick.'   [Footnote 214] This candle, according to the Word of\nthe Lord, is a good intention: of which He saith Himself: 'Thine eye\nis a light.'   [Footnote 215] But the eye is the intention. {38}\nTherefore we ought not to put the candle under a bushel, but in a\ncandlestick. Because, if we have a good intention, we ought not to\nhide it: but to manifest our good deeds to others, for a light and an\nexample.\n  [Footnote 214: S. Matthew v, 15.]\n  [Footnote 215: S. Matthew vi, 22.]\n10. Man must also have an ark. Now _area_ is derived from _arcendo_:\ndiscipline, therefore, and regular life may be called the ark; by\nwhich crimes are driven away (_arcentur_) from us. Now in the ark were\nthe rod, the tables, and the manna: because in the regular life there\nmust be the rod of correction, that the flesh may be chastised; and\nthe table of love, that God may be loved. For in the tables of the law\nwere written the commands which pertain to the love of God. Therein\nmust also be the manna of divine sweetness: that we may 'taste and see\nhow gracious the Lord is: for it is good to have to do with Him.'\n[Footnote 216] According to that proverb of the prudent woman, 'She\ntasted and saw that it was good.'  [Footnote 217] Therefore, that we\nmay be the temple of God, let us have in ourselves an altar of\noblation, lest we appear empty in His presence, according to that\nsaying, 'Thou shalt not appear empty before the presence of thy God':\n[Footnote 218] let us have a table for refection lest we faint,\nthrough hunger, in the way: as saith the Evangelist, 'If I send them\naway empty, they will faint in the way,'   [Footnote 219] a\ncandlestick by good works that we be not idle, as he saith in\nEcclesiasticus, 'Idleness hath taught much mischief,'  [Footnote 220]\nlet us have an ark, that we be not as sons of Belial, that is,\nundisciplined, and without the yoke: for discipline is necessary, as\nthe Psalmist teacheth, saying, 'Be instructed, lest He be angry.'\n[Footnote 221] Concerning which, and other ornaments, we shall speak\nin the following chapter.\n  [Footnote 216: Psalm xxxiv (_Benedicam Dominum_), 8.]\n  [Footnote 217: Prov. xxxi, 18. Marg. reading.]\n  [Footnote 218:  Exodus xxiii, 15.]\n  [Footnote 219: S. Mark viii, 3.]\n  [Footnote 220:  Ecclesiasticus xxii, 2.]\n  [Footnote 221: Psalm ii (_Quare fremuerunt_), 12.]\n11. He buildeth this altar who adorneth his heart with true humility\nand other virtues. Whence Gregory: He who gathereth together virtues\nwithout humility, is as he who scattereth dust to the wind. For by the\naltar he understandeth our heart, as it shall be said when we treat of\nthe dedication of the altar: it is in the middle of the body, as the\naltar is in the middle of the church.  [Footnote 222]\n  [Footnote 222: Lev. vi, 9.]\n12. Concerning which altar the Lord commandeth in Leviticus: 'The fire\nshall always be burning upon Mine altar.'   [Footnote 223] The fire is\ncharity. The altar is a clean heart. The fire shall always burn on the\naltar, because charity should always burn in our hearts. Whence\nSolomon in the Canticles: 'Many waters cannot extinguish charity,'\n[Footnote 224] for that which ever burneth cannot be extinguished. Do\nthou, therefore, as the prophet commandeth, keep holy day and a solemn\nassembly, even to the horns of the altar: because the rest of thy\nthoughts will keep holy day. Concerning this the Apostle showeth 'unto\nus a more excellent way.'   [Footnote 225] He calleth charity a more\nexcellent way, because she is above all virtues: and whoever\npossesseth her possesseth all virtues. This is the short word that the\nLord speaketh over the earth: which is so short that it only saith,\n'Have charity, and do whatsoever thou wilt. For from these two\ncommandments hang all the law and the prophets.'   [Footnote 226]\n  [Footnote 223: Canticles viii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 224: I Corinth xii, 31.]\n  [Footnote 225: S. Matthew xxii, 40.]\n  [Footnote 226: See Appendix I.]\n13. Or by the altar we understand the soul of every man, which is by\nthe Lord built up of various living stones, which are various and\ndifferent virtues.\n14. Furthermore, the white cloths wherewith the altar is covered\nsignify the flesh of the Saviour, that is, His humanity: because it\nwas made white with many toils, as also the flesh of Christ born of\nearth, that is, of Mary, {40} which attained through many tribulations\nto the glory of the Resurrection, and the purity and joy of\nimmortality. [Concerning which the Son exulteth, saying to the Father,\n'Thou hast girded me with gladness, and exalted Me on every side.'\n[Footnote 227] When, therefore, the altar is covered, it signifieth\nthe joining of the soul to an immortal and incorruptible body.]\n[Footnote 228]  Again, the altar is covered with white and clean\ncloths, because the pure heart is adorned with good works. Whence the\nApocalypse: 'And put on white garments, that the shame of thy\nnakedness do not appear.'  [Footnote 229] And Solomon: 'Let thy\ngarments be always white,'   [Footnote 230] that is, let thy works be\nclean. [But it little profiteth him that approacheth to the altar to\nhave high dignity, and a life sunk low in sins. Whence Benedict: It is\na monstrous thing, exalted faith, and abandoned life. The highest step\nand the lowest state, is mighty authority joined with instability of\nsoul.  [Footnote 231]] The silken coverings placed over the altar are\nthe ornaments of divers virtues wherewith the soul is adorned. The\nhanging wherewith the altar is beautified setteth forth the saints, as\nbelow shall be said. [The beginning and the end of the Mass take place\nat the right side of the altar: the middle portion at the left: as\nshall be said when we treat of the changes of the priest. The ancients\nmade their altars concave; as it is written in Ezekiel, that in the\naltar of God was a trench. And this, according to Gregory, lest the\nwind should scatter the sacrifices laid upon it. Also he saith in\nEzekiel that the inner part of the altar was bent downwards in all its\ncircumference.  [Footnote 232]\n  [Footnote 227: Psalm lxxi (_Juste, Domine_), 21. ]\n  [Footnote 228:  This passage does not appear in the edition of\n  Durandus published at Venice, in 1609.]\n  [Footnote 229: Apocalypse iii, 18.]\n  [Footnote 230: Ecclesiastes ix, 8.]\n  [Footnote 231: This passage also is not found in the Venetian edition.]\n  [Footnote 232: This passage also is not found in the Venetian edition.]\n15. But the steps to the altar [spiritually set forth the apostles and\nmartyrs of Christ, who for His love poured out their blood. The bride\nin the Canticles of Love calleth it a purple ascent. Also, the fifteen\nvirtues are set forth by them: which were also typified by the fifteen\nsteps by which they went up to the temple of Solomon:]   [Footnote\n233] and by the prophet in fifteen Psalms of degrees, therein setting\nforth that he is blest who maketh ascents in his heart. This was the\nladder that Jacob beheld: 'And his top reached to the heavens.' By\nthese steps the ascent of virtues is sufficiently made manifest, by\nwhich we go up to the altar, that is, to Christ: according to that\nsaying of the Psalmist, 'They go from virtue to virtue.'   [Footnote\n234] And Job, 'I will seek him through all my steps.' Yet it is said\nin Exodus, 'Neither shalt thou go up by steps to my altar, that thy\nnakedness be not discovered thereon.'  [Footnote 235] For perhaps the\nancients did not as yet use trousers. In the Council of Toledo, it is\ndecreed that the priest, who for the sake of grief at the misfortune\nof another, strippeth the altar or any image of its garments, [or\ngirdeth himself with a mourning vest, or with thorns,  [Footnote 236]]\nor extinguisheth the lights of the church, shall be deposed. But if\nhis church be undeservedly spoiled, he is allowed to do this for\ngrief: or, according to some, he may on the day of the Passion of our\nLord make bare the altars as a sign of grief. Which is, however,\nreprobated by the Council of Lyons. Lastly, altars which have been\nbuilt at the instigation of dreams, or the empty revelations of men,\nare altogether reprobated.\n  [Footnote 233: This passage also is not found in the Venetian\n  edition.]\n  [Footnote 234: Psalm lxxxiv (_Quam dilecta_), 7]\n  [Footnote 235: Exodus xx, 26.]\n  [Footnote 236: This passage also is not found in the Venetian edition.]\nCHAPTER III\nOF PICTURES, AND IMAGES, AND CURTAINS,\nAND THE ORNAMENTS OF CHURCHES\nUse of Pictures and Curtains--Objections against the Use, answered--\nPlace of Pictures--The Saviour, how Represented--The Angels--The\nEvangelists--The Apostles--The Patriarchs--S. John Baptist--\nMartyrs--Confessors--Institution of Pictures--Of Crowns--Of\nParadise--Of the General Ornament of Churches--Of Pyxes--Of\nRelicaries--Of Candlesticks--Of Cups--Of the Cross--Of Altar Cloths\nand Veils--The Treasures of the Church, when Displayed, and why--Of\nOstrich Eggs--Of Vessels for the Holy Mysteries--Of Chalices--General\nObservations on the Respect due to Church Ornaments.\n1. Pictures and ornaments in churches are the lessons and the\nScriptures of the laity. Whence Gregory: It is one thing to adore a\npicture, and another by means of a picture historically to learn what\nshould be adored. For what writing supplieth to him which can read,\nthat doth a picture supply to him which is unlearned, and can only\nlook. Because they who are uninstructed thus see what they ought to\nfollow: and _things_ are read, though letters be unknown. True is it\nthat the Chaldeans, which worship fire, compel others to do the same,\nand burn other idols. But Paynim adore images, as icons, and idols;\nwhich Saracens do not, who neither will possess nor look on images,\ngrounding themselves on that saying, 'Thou shalt not make to thyself\nany graven image, nor the likeness of anything that is in heaven\nabove, nor in the earth beneath, nor in the waters {43} under the\nearth,'  [Footnote 237] and on other the like authorities: these they\nfollow incontinently, casting the same in our teeth. But we worship\nnot images, nor account them to be gods, nor put any hope of salvation\nin them: for that were idolatry. Yet we adore them for the memory and\nremembrance of things done long agone.  [Footnote 238 ] Whence the\nverse,  [Footnote 239]\n  What time thou passest by the rood, bow humbly evermore;\n  Yet not the rood, but Him which there was crucified, adore.\nAnd again:  [Footnote 240]\n  That thing, which hath his being given, 'tis fond for God to own:\n  A form material, carved out by cunning hands, in stone.\nAnd again:  [Footnote 241]\n  The form is neither God nor man, which here thou dost behold:\n  He very God and Man, of whom thou by that form art told.\n  [Footnote 237: Exodus xx, 4.]\n  [Footnote 238: _Veneramur_.--We here use the word _adore_ in the\n  sense given to it by the great and good Bishop Montague, in his\n  'Just Treatise of Invocation': where he says, speaking of the\n  Saints, 'I do admire, reverence, _adore_ them in their kind.']\n  [Footnote 239:\n    Effigiem Christi, quum transis, pronus honora:\n    Non tamen effigiem, sed quem designat, adora.]\n  [Footnote 240:\n    Esse Deum, ratione caret, cui consulit esse:\n    Materiale lapis, effigale manus.]\n  [Footnote 241:\n    Nec Deus est, nec homo, quam praesens cernis imago;\n    Sed Deus est et Homo, quem sacra figurat imago.\n The later editions add--\n   Nam Deus est, quod imago docet, sed non Deus ipse;\n  Hunc videas, sed mente colas, quod noscis in ipsa.]\n2. The Greeks, moreover, employ painted representations, painting, it\nis said, only from the navel upwards, that all occasion of vain\nthoughts may be removed. But they make no carved image, as it is\nwritten, 'Thou shalt not make a graven image.'   [Footnote 242] And\nagain: 'Thou shalt not make an idol, nor a graven image.'   [Footnote\n243] And again, 'Lest ye be deceived, and make a graven image.'\n[Footnote 244] And again: 'Ye shall not make unto you gods of silver:\n[Footnote 245] {44} neither shall ye make with Me gods of gold.' So\nalso the Prophet, 'Their idols are silver and gold, the work of man's\nhand. They that make them are like unto them: and so are all they that\nput their trust in them.'   [Footnote 246] And again: 'Confounded be\nall they that worship graven images: and that put their glory in their\nidols.'   [Footnote 247]\n  [Footnote 242: Deut. v, 8.]\n  [Footnote 243:  Lev. xxvi. 1.]\n  [Footnote 244: Deut. iv, 16.]\n  [Footnote 245: Exodus xx, 20.]\n  [Footnote 246: Psalm cxv, 4.]\n  [Footnote 247: Psalm xcvii, 7.]\n3. Also, Moses saith to the children of Israel, 'Lest perchance thou\nshouldest be deceived, and shouldest worship that which the Lord thy\nGod hath created.'   [Footnote 248] Hence also was it that Hezekiah\nKing of Judah brake in pieces the brazen serpent which Moses set up:\nbecause the people, contrary to the precepts of the law, burnt incense\nto it.\n  [Footnote 248: Deut. iv, 19.]\n4. From these forementioned and other authorities, the excessive use\nof images is forbidden. The Apostle saith also to the Corinthians, 'We\nknow that an idol is nothing in the world: and there is no god but\nOne.'   [Footnote 249] For they who are simple and infirm may easily\nby an excessive and indiscreet use of images, be perverted to\nidolatry. Whence he saith in Wisdom, 'There shall be no respect of the\nidols of the nations, which have made the creatures of God hateful,\nand temptations for the souls of men, and snares for the feet of the\nunwise.'   [Footnote 250]  [Footnote 251] But blame there is none in a\nmoderate use of pictures, to teach how ill is to be avoided, and good\nfollowed.\n  [Footnote 249: I Corinth, viii, 4.]\n  [Footnote 250: Wisdom xiv, 11.]\n  [Footnote 251: A more solemn protest against the sin of idolatry can\n  hardly be found than the above passage: and they who brand every\n  return to, and every wish for the restoration of, Catholic\n  practices, by so hateful a name, would do well to bear it in mind.]\nWhence saith the Lord to Ezekiel, 'Go in, and behold the abominations\nwhich these men do. And he went in, and saw the likeness of reptiles\nand beasts, and the abominations, and all the idols of the house of\nIsrael portrayed on the wall.'  [Footnote 252] Whence saith Pope\nGregory in his Pastorale, When the forms of external objects are drawn\ninto the heart, they are as it were painted there, because the\nthoughts of them are their images. Again, He saith to the same\nEzekiel, 'Take a tile, and lay it before thee, and describe in it the\ncity Jerusalem.'   [Footnote 253] But that which is said above, that\npictures are the letters of the laity explaineth that saying in the\nGospel, 'He saith. They have Moses and the prophets: let them hear\nthem.'   [Footnote 254] Of this, more hereafter. The Agathensian\n[Footnote 255] Council forbids pictures in churches: and also that\nthat which is worshipped and adored should be painted on the walls.\nBut Gregory saith, that pictures are not to be put away because they\nare not to be worshipped: for paintings appear to move the mind more\nthan descriptions; for deeds are placed before the eyes in paintings,\nand so appear to be actually carrying on. But in description, the deed\nis done as it were by hearsay: which affecteth the mind less when\nrecalled to memory. Hence, also, is it that in churches we pay less\nreverence to books than to images and pictures.\n  [Footnote 252: Ezekiel viii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 253: Ezekiel iv, 1.]\n  [Footnote 254: S. Luke xvi, 29.]\n5. Of pictures and images some are above the church, as the cock and\nthe eagle: some without the church, namely, in the air in front of the\nchurch, as the ox and the cow: others within, as images, and statues,\nand various kinds of painting and sculpture: and these be represented\neither in garments, or on walls, or in stained glass. Concerning some\nof which we have spoken in treating of the church: and how they are\ntaken from the tabernacle of Moses and the temple of Solomon. For\nMoses made carved work, and Solomon made carved work, and pictures,\nand adorned the walls with paintings and frescoes.\n6. The image of the Saviour is more commonly represented in churches\nthree ways: as sitting on  [Footnote 256] His throne, or hanging on\nHis cross, or lying on the bosom of His Mother.\n  [Footnote 256: Durandus had doubtless in his mind the ancient mosaic\n  over the apsides of the earliest churches in Rome. The extremely\n  beautiful one in San Clemente represents our Lord as crucified. The\n  frescoes with which the walls of our own churches were anciently\n  adorned, seem usually to have represented the Saviour as seated on\n  the Throne of His Majesty. In the chancel of Widford, Herts, is, or\n  was till lately, a fresco of the Saviour seated on a rainbow, a\n  sword proceeding from His mouth, His feet and His hands pierced. In\n  Alfriston, Sussex, there was, we believe, before it was whitewashed\n  over by Bishop Buckner's order, a painting of a similar kind. There\n  is a singular, and, we believe, undescribed painting over the altar\n  in Llandanwg church, Merion. The Saviour is seated in judgment, as\n  before: at His side is His Blessed Mother in a kneeling posture:\n  around Him are angels blowing trumpets, and S. Peter in\n  eucharistical vestments. There is a representation of the souls\n  under the altar. Below are devils torturing souls in cauldrons of\n  brimstone. The evangelistic symbols are also represented.\n  In a fresco at Beverstone, Gloucestershire, our Saviour is\n  represented on the Cross, with blood flowing from His side into a\n  chalice. (See App. I.) There are remains also of a crucifixion in\n  fresco, in the exquisite, but desecrated chapel of Prior Crauden, in\n  the Deanery, Ely. On the Iconostasis of the Greco-Russian Church,\n  all the three positions are to be found.\n  In stained glass, the Crucifixion generally supplies the place of\n  any other representation of the Saviour. Brasses occasionally, as a\n  very curious one in Cobham, Surrey, represent His nativity or\n  epiphany: but most commonly the Crucifixion, or a Trinity.\n  There can be no doubt, that many of the most graphic pictures in our\n  old poets owed their origin to the then undestroyed fresco paintings\n  of churches. Some painting, like that above described, of hell, very\n  probably suggested the noble lines of Spenser (i. ix. 50. 6):\n    He showed him painted in a table plaine.\n    The damned ghosts that doe in torments waile.\n    And thousand feends that doe them endless paine\n    With fire and brimstone, which for ever shall remaine.\n  Who can estimate the effect of such pictorial representations on the\n  minds of our ancestors? or the good which might be the result, if\n  our churches were again frescoed with similar subjects, wrought with\n  the genius and Catholic feeling of an Overbeck or Cornelius?]\n  [End footnote]\nAnd because John Baptist pointed to Him, saying, 'Behold the Lamb of\nGod,'  [Footnote 257] therefore some represented Christ under the form\nof a lamb.\n  [Footnote 257: S. John i, 29.]\nBut because the light passeth away, and because Christ is very man,\ntherefore, saith Adrian, Pope, He must be represented in the form of a\nman. A holy lamb must not be depicted on the cross, as a principal\nobject: but there is no let when Christ hath been represented as a\nman, to paint a lamb in a lower or less prominent part of the picture:\nsince He is the true Lamb which 'taketh away the sins of the world.'\nIn these and divers other manners is the image of the Saviour painted,\non account of diversity of significations.\n7. Represented in the cradle, the artist commemorateth His nativity:\non the bosom of His Mother, His childhood: the painting or carving His\ncross signifieth His Passion (and sometimes the sun and moon are\nrepresented on the cross itself, as suffering an eclipse): when\ndepicted on a flight of steps, His ascension is signified: when on a\nstate or lofty throne, we be taught His present power: as if He said,\n'All things are given to Me in heaven and in earth:'   [Footnote 258]\naccording to that saying, 'I saw the Lord sitting upon His throne:'\n[Footnote 259] that is, reigning over the angels: as the text, 'Which\nsitteth upon the cherubim.'   [Footnote 260] Sometimes He is\nrepresented as He was seen of Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, on the\nmountain: when 'under His feet was as it were a paved work of sapphire\nstones, and as the body of heaven in His clearness:'  [Footnote 261]\nand as 'they shall see,' as saith S. Luke, 'the Son of Man coming in\nthe clouds with power and great glory.   [Footnote 262] Wherefore\nsometimes He is represented surrounded by the seven angels that serve\nHim, and stand by His throne, each being portrayed with six wings,\naccording to the vision of Isaiah, 'And by it stood the seraphim: each\none had six wings: with twain he covered his face, and with twain he\ncovered his feet, and with twain he did fly.'   [Footnote 263]\n  [Footnote 258: S. Matt, xxviii, 18.]\n  [Footnote 259: Isaiah vi, 1.]\n  [Footnote 260: Psalm lxxx, 1.]\n  [Footnote 261: Exodus xxiv, 10.]\n  [Footnote 262: S. Matthew xxiv, 30.]\n  [Footnote 263: Isaiah vi, 2.]\n8. The angels are also represented as in the flower of youthful age:\nfor they never grow old.  [Footnote 264] Sometimes S. Michael is\nrepresented trampling the dragon, according to that of John, 'There\nwas war in heaven: Michael fought with the dragon.' Which was to\nrepresent the dissensions of the angels: the confirmation of them that\nwere good, and the ruin of them that were bad: or the persecution of\nthe faithful in the Church Militant. Sometimes the twenty-four elders\nare painted around the Saviour, according to the vision of the said\nJohn, with 'white garments, and they have on their heads crowns of\ngold.'  [Footnote 265]By which are signified the doctors of the Old\nand New Testament; which are twelve, on account of faith in the Holy\nTrinity preached through the _four_ quarters of the world: or\ntwenty-four, on account of good works, and the keeping of the gospels.\n[Footnote 266] If the seven lamps be added, the gifts of the Holy\nSpirit are represented: if the sea of glass, baptism.  [Footnote 267]\n  [Footnote 264: Many of our readers will call to mind the peculiar\n  expression always given to the countenances of angels in Catholic\n  illuminations or paintings, a conventional propriety uniformly\n  neglected by modern artists. The same character was beautifully\n  given in the relieved figures of angels upon the shrine of S. Henry\n  lately exhibiting in London.]\n  [Footnote 265: Apocalypse xii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 266:  Apocalypse iv, 4.]\n  [Footnote 267: This very obscure passage is an instance of the\n  symbolism in the combination of numbers. It seems to mean that faith\n  in the Holy Trinity preached through the four quarters of the world,\n  may be represented by three multiplied into four or twelve: and\n  again, this symbolical fact multiplied by general good works and\n  keeping of the Gospels, may be set forth in twenty-four. It is to be\n  remarked that the princeps edition alone gives _Evangeliorum_: the\n  later have _Evangelistarum_, which with _observantia_ is scarcely\n  intelligible. Compare S. August, Expos. in Psalm lxxxvi. Non solum\n  ergo illi duodecim (sc. Apostoli) et Apostolus Paulus, sed quotquot\n  judicaturi sunt, propter significationem universitatis ad sedes\n  duodenas pertinent . . . partes enim mundi quatuor sunt, Oriens,\n  Occidens, Aquilo, et Meridies. Istae quatuor partes assidue\n  inveniuntur in Scripturis. Ab istis quatuor ventus, sicut dixit\n  Dominus in Evangelio vocatur Ecclesia. Quomodo vocatur? Undique in\n  Trinitate vocatur. Quatuor ergo ter ducta duodecim inveniuntur. See\n  also S. Isidore, Alleg. in S. S. folio 353, C. D.]\n9. Sometimes also representation is made of the four living creatures\nspoken of in the visions of Ezekiel and the aforesaid John: the face\nof a man and the face of a {49} lion on the right,--the face of an ox\non the left, and the face of an eagle above the four. These be the\nFour Evangelists. Whence they be painted with books by their feet,\nbecause by their words and writings they have instructed the minds of\nthe faithful, and accomplished their own works. Matthew hath the\nfigure of a man, Mark of a lion. These be painted on the right hand:\nbecause the nativity and the resurrection of Christ were the general\njoy of all: whence in the Psalms: 'And gladness at the morning.'\n[Footnote 268] But Luke is the ox: because he beginneth from Zachary\nthe priest, and treateth more specially of the Passion and Sacrifice\nof Christ: now the ox is an animal fitted for sacrifice. He is also\ncompared to the ox, because of the two horns,--as containing the two\ntestaments; and the four hoofs, as having the sentences of the four\nEvangelists.  [Footnote 269]By this also Christ is figured, who was\nthe sacrifice for us: and therefore the ox is painted on the left\nside, because the death of Christ was the trouble of the apostles.\nConcerning this, and how blessed Mark  [Footnote 270] is depicted, in\nthe seventh part. But John hath the figure of the eagle: because,\nsoaring to the utmost height, he saith, 'In the beginning was the\nword.'  [Footnote 271]\n  [Footnote 268: Psalm xxx (_Exaltabo Te_), 5. These symbols, however,\n  were not at first definitely settled, and as we are informed by S.\n  Austin, the lion was sometimes given to S. Matthew and the angel and\n  or man, to S. Mark. The reasons of the appropriation of the various\n  symbols are beautifully expressed in a hymn quoted in the Camden's\n  Society's 'Illustrations of Monumental Brasses,' Part I, p. 30.]\n  [Footnote 269: This passage is very obscure. Durandus's words are,\n  _quasi quatuor evangelistorum sententias_. We cannot but think that\n  the two sentences have been misplaced. The sense is then plain.\n  Christ is also signified by the ox--as containing in Himself the Law\n  and the Gospel--and accomplishing that which is written of Him by\n  the four Evangelists, e.g. His promises of the descent of the Holy\n  Ghost, of being always with His Church, etc. S. Peter Chrysologus,\n  Sermo v. de Christo, Hic est _Vitulus_, qui in Epulam nostram\n  quotidie, et jugiter immolatur.]\n  [Footnote 270: S. Mark is painted with a contracted brow, a large\n  nose, fair eyes, bald, a long beard, fair complexion, of middle age,\n  with a few grey hairs. Durand. vii, 44, 4.]\n  [Footnote 271: S. John i, 1.]\nThis also representeth Christ, 'Whose youth is renewed like the\neagle's':   [Footnote 272] because, rising from the dead, He ascendeth\ninto heaven. Here, however, it is not portrayed as by the side, but as\nabove, since it denoteth the ascension, and the word pronounced of\nGod. But how, since each of the living creatures hath four faces and\nfour wings, they can be depicted, shall be said hereafter.  [Footnote\n  [Footnote 272: Psalm ciii (_Benedic, anima mea_), 5.]\n  [Footnote 273: Durandus, book vii, 44, 'S. Matthew is signified by a\n  man, because his Gospel is principally occupied concerning the\n  humanity of Christ: whence his history beginneth from his human\n  pedigree. S. Mark by a lion, which roareth in the desert: for he\n  chiefly describeth the Resurrection: whence his Gospel is read on\n  Easter day. But the lion is said to rouse his whelps on the third\n  day after their birth. His Gospel beginneth, 'The voice of one\n  crying in the wilderness.' S. Luke by the ox, an animal fit for\n  sacrifice: because he dwelleth on the Passion of Christ. S. John by\n  the eagle, because he soareth to the Divinity of Christ, while the\n  others walk with their Lord on earth. The Evangelists be likewise\n  set forth by the four rivers of Paradise: John by Pison; Matthew by\n  Gihon; Luke by Euphrates; Mark by Tigris:--as is clearly proved by\n  Innocent III, in a certain sermon on the Evangelists.'--We may add,\n  that the finest representation of the evangelistic symbols with\n  which we are acquainted in this country', occurs in the chancel of\n  Oxted church, Surrey.]\n10. Sometimes there are painted around, or rather beneath, the\nApostles; who were His witnesses by deed and word to the ends of the\nearth: and they are portrayed with long hair, as Nazarenes, that is,\nholy persons. For the law of the Nazarenes was this: from the time of\ntheir separation from the ordinary life of man, no razor passed upon\ntheir heads. They are also sometimes painted under the form of twelve\nsheep: because they were slain like sheep for the Lord's sake: and\nsometimes the twelve tribes of Israel are so represented. When,\nhowever, more or less sheep than twelve are painted, then another\nthing is signified, according to that saying of Matthew, 'When the Son\nof Man shall come in His glory--then shall He sit on the throne of His\nglory: and before Him shall be gathered all nations, and He shall\nseparate them one from the other, as a {51} shepherd divideth the\nsheep from the goats.'  [Footnote 274] How the Apostles Bartholomew\nand Andrew are to be painted, shall be said hereafter.  [Footnote 275]\n  [Footnote 274: S. Matthew xxv, 1.]\n  [Footnote 275:  S. Bartholomew is represented with black and\n  grizzled hair, fair complexion, large eyes, straight nose, long\n  beard, few grey hairs, moderate height, with a high white neck,\n  clothed in purple, with a white pall, having purple gems at each\n  angle. Durand. vii, 25, 2.\n  S. Andrew had a dark complexion, long beard, moderate height. This\n  is therefore said, that ye may know how he ought to be painted:\n  which should be known of the other apostles and saints. Durand. vii,\n11. And note that the patriarchs and prophets are painted with wheels\nin their hands. Some of the apostles with books and some with wheels:\nnamely, because before the advent of Christ the faith was set forth\nunder figures, and many things were not yet made clear; to represent\nthis, the patriarchs and prophets are painted with wheels, to signify\nthat imperfect knowledge. But because the apostles were perfectly\ntaught of Christ, therefore the books, which are the emblems of this\nperfect knowledge, are open. But because some of them reduced their\nknowledge in writing, to the instruction of others, therefore\nfittingly they are represented with books in their hands like doctors.\nSo Paul, and the Evangelists, Peter, James, and Jude. But others, who\nwrote nothing which has lasted, or been received into the canon by the\nChurch, are not portrayed with books but with wheels, as a type of\ntheir preaching. Whence the Apostle to the Ephesians, 'And he gave\nsome apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some\npastors and teachers for the work of the ministry.'   [Footnote 276]\n  [Footnote 276: Ephes. iv, 11.]\n12. But the Divine Majesty is also portrayed with a closed book in the\nhands: 'which no man was found worthy to open but the Lion of the\ntribe of Juda.'   [Footnote 277] And sometimes with an open book: that\nin it every one may read that 'He is the Light of the world':\n[Footnote 278] and the Way, the Truth, and the Life':  [Footnote 279]\nand the Book of Life [is also portrayed]. But why Paul is represented\nat the right, and Peter at the left of the Saviour, we shall show\nhereafter.\n  [Footnote 277: Apocalypse v, 2.]\n  [Footnote 278: S. John viii, 12.]\n  [Footnote 279:  S. John xiv, 6.]\n13. John Baptist is painted as a hermit.\n14. Martyrs with the instruments of their torture: as S. Laurence with\nthe gridiron: S. Stephen with stones: and sometimes with palms, which\nsignify victory, according to that saying, 'The righteous shall\nflourish like a palm-tree:  [Footnote 280] as a palm-tree   [Footnote\n281] flourishes, so his memory is preserved. Hence is it that palmers,\nthey who come from Jerusalem, bear palms in their hands in token that\nthey have been the soldiers of that King Who was gloriously received\nin the earthly Jerusalem with palms: and Who afterwards, having in the\nsame city subdued the devil in battle, entered the palace of heaven in\ntriumph with His angels, where the just shall flourish like a\npalm-tree, and shall shine like stars.\n  [Footnote 280: Psalm xcii, 12.]\n  [Footnote 281: This explanation differs from that usually received:\n  namely, that the righteous flourishes best in adversity: as the\n  palm-tree grows fasteth when loaded with weights.]\n15. Confessors are painted with their insignia, as bishops with their\nmitres, abbots with their hoods: and some with lilies,  [Footnote 282]\nwhich denote chastity. Doctors with books in their hands: virgins,\naccording to the Gospel,  [Footnote 283] with lamps.\n  [Footnote 282: So in the beautiful hymn at Lauds in the\n  commemoration of a virgin martyr, of the Parisian Breviary:\n    Liliis Sponsus recubat, rosisque;\n    Tu, tuo semper bene fida Sponso\n    Et rosas Martyr, simul et dedisti\n        _Lilia Virgo_.]\n  [Footnote 283: S. Matthew xxv, 1.]\n16. Paul with a book and a sword: with a book, as a doctor, or with\nreference to his conversion: with a sword as [Footnote 284] a soldier.\nWhence the verse:\n  The sword denotes the ire of Saul,\n  The book, the power converting Paul.\n    [Footnote 284: This is undoubtedly a mistake: the sword represents\n    in this case, as in others, the instrument of martyrdom.]\n17. Generally the effigies of the holy fathers are portrayed on the\nwalls of the church, or on the back panels of the altar, or on\nvestments, or in other various places, so that we may meditate\nperpetually, not indiscreetly or uselessly, on their holiness. Whence\nin Exodus it is commanded by the divine law, that in the breast of\nAaron, the breastplate of judgment should be bound  [Footnote 285]\nwith strings: because fleeting thoughts should not occupy the mind of\na priest, which should be girt by reason alone. In this breastplate\nalso, according to Gregory, the names of the twelve patriarchs are\ncommanded to be carefully inscribed.\n  [Footnote 285: Exodus xxviii, 22.]\n18. To bear the fathers thus imprinted on the breast, is to meditate\non the lives of ancient saints without intermission. But then doth the\npriest walk blamelessly when he gazeth continually on the example of\nthe fathers which have gone before, when he considereth without\nceasing the footsteps of the saints, and represseth unholy thoughts,\nlest he wander beyond the limits of right reason.\n19. It is to be noted that the Saviour is always represented as\ncrowned, as if he said, 'Come forth, children of Jerusalem, and behold\nKing Solomon in the diadem with which his mother crowned him.'\n[Footnote 286] But Christ was triply crowned. First by His Mother on\nthe day of His conception, with crown of pity: which was a double\ncrown: on account of what He had by nature, and what was given Him:\ntherefore also it is called a diadem, which is a double crown.\nSecondly, by His step-mother in the day of His Passion, with the crown\nof misery. Thirdly, by His Father in the day of His Resurrection, with\nthe crown of glory: whence it is written, 'O Lord, {54} Thou hast\ncrowned Him with glory and honour.' [Footnote 287] Lastly, He shall be\ncrowned by His whole family, in the last day of Revelation, with the\ncrown of power. For He shall come with the judges of the earth to\njudge the world in righteousness. So also all saints are portrayed as\ncrowned, as if they said: Ye children of Jerusalem, behold the martyrs\nwith the golden crowns wherewith the Lord hath crowned them. And in\nthe book of Wisdom: 'The just shall receive a kingdom of glory, and a\nbeautiful diadem from the hand of their God.'   [Footnote 288]\n  [Footnote 286: Canticles iii, 11.]\n  [Footnote 287: Psalm viii (_Domine Dominus_), 5.]\n  [Footnote 288: Wisdom v, 16.]\n20. But their crown is made in the fashion of a round shield: because\nthe saints enjoy the divine protection. Whence they sing with joy:\n'Lord, Thou hast crowned us with the shield of Thy favour.'  [Footnote\n289] But the crown of Christ is represented under the figure of a\ncross: [Footnote 290] and is thereby distinguished from that of the\nsaints: because by the banner of His cross He gained for Himself the\nglorification of His humanity, and for us freedom from our captivity,\nand the enjoyment of everlasting life. But when any living  [Footnote\n291]prelate or saint is portrayed, the glory is not fashioned in the\nshape of a shield, but four-square: that he may be shown to flourish\nin the four cardinal virtues: as it is contained in  [Footnote 292]\nthe legend of blessed Gregory.\n  [Footnote 289:  Psalm v (_Verba mea_), 12.]\n  [Footnote 290:  See Appendix I.]\n  [Footnote 291: This does not appear to have prevailed in England.\n  The nearest contemporary effigy of a saint which we have observed in\n  stained glass, is that of S. Thomas, of Hereford, in the church of\n  Cothelstone, Somersetshire. Here the glory is, as usual, of the\n  circular form. As also in the fresco of the martyrdom of S. Thomas\n  of Canterbury, in Preston church. Sussex, which is nearly\n  contemporary. (See Appendix 1.)]\n  [Footnote 292: This refers to the account given by Paulus Diaconus\n  of the visible effulgence which surrounded the head of this great\n  doctor when he was dictating his works.]\n21. Again, sometimes Paradise is painted in churches, that it may\nattract the beholders to a following after its rewards: sometimes\nhell, that it may terrify them by the fear of punishment.'  [Footnote\n293] Sometimes flowers  [Footnote 294] are portrayed, and trees: to\nrepresent the fruits of good works springing from the roots of\nvirtues.\n  [Footnote 293: A monk named Constantine set before the prince those\n  judgments of God which are in all the world, and the retribution of\n  the life to come: his discourse powerfully affected the heathen\n  monarch (Vladimir, afterwards S. Vladimir); and this was\n  particularly the case when the monk pointed out to him on an icon,\n  which represented the Last Judgment, the different lot of the good\n  and the wicked. \"Good to those on the right hand--woe to those on\n  the left,\" exclaimed Vladimir, deeply affected.'--Mouravieff's\n  'Hist, of the Russian Church,' p. 11, On which his translator, the\n  Rev. R. W. Blackmore, sensibly remarks, 'Whatever may be the right\n  view of the abstract question respecting icons, and the showing\n  outward respect to them, the Russians at least cannot reasonably be\n  blamed for revering a usage which was made the means, in part at\n  least, of so blessed a result as the conversion of the great Prince\n  Vladimir, the Constantine of their church and nation.']\n  [Footnote 294:  This flower work is excessively common in Norman\n  churches: that of S. Sepulchre's, at Cambridge, was a notable\n  example of it. ]\n22. Now the variety of pictures denoteth the diversity of virtues. For\n'to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom: to another the word\nof knowledge,' etc.  [Footnote 295] But virtues are represented under\nthe forms of women: because they soothe and nourish. Again, by the\nceilings or vaultings, which are for the beauty of the house, the more\nunlearned servants of Christ are set forth, who adorn the Church, not\nby their learning, but by their virtues alone.\n  [Footnote 295: I Corinth, xii, 8. ]\nThe carved images which project from the walls, appear as it were to\nbe coming out of it: because when by reiterated custom virtues so\npertain to the faithful, that they seem naturally implanted in them,\nthey are exercised in all their various operations. How a synagogue is\ndepicted, shall be said hereafter: as also how the pall of the Roman\nPontiff: and the year  [Footnote 296]and the zodiacal signs and its\nmonths. But the diverse histories of the Old and New  Testaments may\nbe represented after the fancy of the painter. For\n      Pictoribus atque poetis\n  Quod libet  [Footnote 297] addendi semper fuit seque potestas.\n  [Footnote 296: These are often to be found round Norman doors: as in\n  that of S. Laurence, at York, and Egleton, Rutland.]\n  [Footnote 297: A false reading, of course; yet not without its\n  appropriate sense--the power of _adding_ any ornamental circumstance\n  to the main subject.]\n23. Furthermore, the ornaments of the church consist of three\nthings:--the ornaments of the nave,  [Footnote 298]the choir, and the\naltar. The ornaments of the nave consist in dorsals, tapestry,\nmattings, and cushions of silk, purple, and the like. The ornaments of\nthe choir consist in dorsals, tapestry, carpets, and cushions. Dorsals\nare hangings of cloth at the back of the clergy. Mattings, for their\nfeet. Tapestry is likewise strewed under the feet, particularly under\nthe feet of bishops, who ought to trample worldly things under their\nfeet. Cushions are placed on the seats or benches of the choir.\n  [Footnote 298: _Ecclesiae:_ here undoubtedly the nave: as often\n  _church_ is so used in our prayer-book.]\n24. But the ornament of the altar consists in portfolios, altar\ncloths, relicaries, candlesticks, crosses, an orfray, banners,\nmissals, coverings, and curtains.\n25. And notice, that the portfolio in which the consecrated host is\nkept, signifieth the frame of the blessed Virgin, concerning which it\nis said in the Psalms, 'Arise, O Lord into Thy resting place.'\n[Footnote 299] Which sometimes is of wood: sometimes of white ivory:\nsometimes of silver: sometimes of gold: sometimes of crystal: and\naccording to the different substances of which it is made, designateth\nthe various dignities of the body of Christ. Again, the pyx which\ncontaineth the host, whether consecrated or not consecrated, typifieth\nthe human memory. For a man ought to hold in remembrance continually\nthe benefits of God, as well temporal, which are represented by the\nunconsecrated, as spiritual, which are set forth by the consecrated\nhost. {57} Which was also set forth by the urn in which God commanded\nthat the manna should be deposited: which, albeit it was temporal,\nprefigured nevertheless this our spiritual sacrifice, when the Lord\ncommanded that it should be laid up for an everlasting memorial unto\nfuture generations. But the pyx, being placed on the altar, which is\nChrist, signifieth apostles and martyrs. And the altar cloths and\ncoverings are confessors and virgins, or all saints: of whom saith the\nProphet to the Lord, 'Thou shalt be clothed with them as with a\ngarment.' And of these we have spoken above.\n  [Footnote 299:  Psalm cxxxii (_Domine, memento_), 8.]\n26. Now there is a difference between _phylacterium_ and\n_phylacteria_. _Phylacterium_ is a scroll on which the ten\ncommandments were written: and this kind of scroll the Pharisees used\nto wear on the front part of their garments, as a sign of devotion.\nWhence in the Gospel, 'They make broad their phylacteries.'\n[Footnote 300] And the word is derived from _philare_, which is _to\nkeep_, and _teras_, which is _law_. But _phylacteria_ (a relicary) is\na vessel of silver or gold, or crystal, or ivory, or some substance of\nthe same kind, in which the ashes and relics of the saints are kept.\nFor when Vigilantius called the faithful _Cinericii_,  [Footnote 301]\nbecause they preserved the ashes themselves, to testify contempt of\nhis decision, it was ordered by the Church that they should be\nhonourably preserved in precious vessels. And the name is derived from\n_philare_, which is to _preserve_, and _teron_, which is an extremity,\nbecause in them some {58} portion of the extremities of the bodies of\nsaints is preserved: such as a tooth or a finger, or somewhat of the\nlike kind. Over the altar in some churches also is placed a shrine: of\nwhich we have spoken in our section on the Altar.\n  [Footnote 300: S. Matthew xxiii, 5.]\n  [Footnote 301: Ais, Vigilantium, qui [Greek text] hoc vocatur nomine\n  (nam Dormitantius rectius diceretur), os foetidum rursum aperire, et\n  putorem spurcissimum contra sanctorum martyrum proferre relliquias,\n  et nos, qui eas suscepimus, appellare _cinerarios_.--S. Hieron, in\n  Epp. See also the 'Church of the Fathers,' 2nd ed. chapter xv.]\n27. At the horns of the altar  [Footnote 302] two candlesticks are\nplaced to signify the joy of Jews and Gentiles at the nativity of\nChrist: which candlesticks, by means of a flint, have their wicks\nlighted. For the angel saith to the shepherds, 'I bring you good\ntidings of great joy, which shall be to all people: for to you is born\nthis day the Saviour of the world.  [Footnote 303] He is the true\n_Isaac_,  [Footnote 304] which being interpreted, is laughter. Now the\nlight of the candlestick is the faith of the people. For to the Jewish\npeople, saith the Prophet, 'Arise, shine, for thy light is come: and\nthe glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.'  [Footnote 305] But to the\nGentiles the Apostle saith, 'Ye were sometimes darkness, but are now\nlight in the Lord.'   [Footnote 306] For before the birth of Christ a\nnew star appeared to the wise men, according to the prophecy of\nBalaam. 'There shall rise,' saith he, 'a star out of Jacob, and a\nsceptre out of Israel.'   [Footnote 307] Concerning this we have also\nspoken in our section of the Altar.\n  [Footnote 302: This use of _two_ candlesticks is very remarkable: as\n  giving fresh authority to the custom of the English Church. ]\n  [Footnote 303: S. Luke ii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 304:  Genesis xvii, 17, 19.]\n  [Footnote 305:  Isaiah lx, 1. ]\n  [Footnote 306: Ephes. V, 8. ]\n  [Footnote 307: Numbers xxiv, 7.]\n28. The snuffers or scissors for trimming the lamps are the divine\nwords by which men amputate the legal titles of the law, and reveal\nthe shining spirit, according to that saying, 'Ye shall eat old store,\nand bring forth the old because of the new.'  [Footnote 308] The\nvessels in the which the wicks, when snuffed, are extinguished, are\nthe hearts of the faithful, which admit the legal observance to the\nletter.\n  [Footnote 308:  Leviticus xxvi, 10.]\n29. Again, the tongs, by the double tooth of which the fire is\narranged, are preachers; who instruct us by the accordant pages of\nboth Testaments, and by their behaviour setting us right, inflame us\nto the practice of charity.\n30. But the scuta, that is cups, of equal size at top and bottom, made\nfor warming water, are those doctors who do not conceal the treasure\nof their hearts: but 'bring forth out of it things new and old':\n[Footnote 309] as a 'candle which is not put under a bushel, but in a\ncandlestick,'  [Footnote 310]that they who are in the house of the\nLord may receive the light and the heat of the Holy Ghost.\n  [Footnote 309: S. Matthew xiii, 52.]\n  [Footnote 310:  S. Matthew v, 15.]\n31. The cross also is to be placed on the altar that the cross-bearers\nmay thence raise it: in which action we commemorate how Simon the\nCyrenian took the cross from the shoulders of Christ and bore it.\nBetween the two candlesticks the cross is placed on the altar: because\nChrist standeth in the church, the Mediator between two peoples. For\nHe is the Corner-stone, 'Who hath made both one':   [Footnote 311] to\nWhom the shepherds came from Judaea, and the wise men from the East.\nConcerning this we shall hereafter speak in another sense, when\ntreating of the priest's approach to the altar.\n  [Footnote 311: Ephesians ii, 14.]\n32. Again, the front of the altar is ornamented with an orfray. As it\nis written: 'Thou shalt make Me an altar, and shalt make a crown in a\ncircle about it of four fingers' breadth.'   [Footnote 312] The altar,\nye know, sometimes signifieth the heart: in which the sacrifice of\ntrue faith must be offered by contrition: and then the orfray\nsignifieth the taking in hand of a good occupation: wherewith we ought\nto adorn our foreheads, that we may give light to others. Sometimes\nthe altar signifieth Christ: and then by the orfray the ornament of\ncharity {60} is fitly represented. For as gold hath the superiority\nover all metals, so hath charity over other virtues. Whence the\nApostle, in the first to the Corinthians: 'But the greatest of these\nis charity.'  [Footnote 313] For our faith ought to be adorned with\nthe orfray of charity, that we may be ready to lay down our lives for\nChrist's sake. Banners are also suspended above the altars: that in\nthe church that triumph of Christ may evermore be held in mind, by\nwhich we also hope to triumph over our enemy.\n  [Footnote 312: Exodus xxvii, 4.]\n  [Footnote 313: I Corinth, xiii, 13.]\n33. The book of the Gospel is fixed on the altar, because the Gospel\nhath Christ for its author, and beareth witness, to Him. Which book is\ntherefore adorned on his outside, for the cause that we shall make\nmention of hereafter. Next, the vessels and utensils in the house of\nthe Lord had their origin from Moses and Solomon: which in the Old\nTestament were many and diverse, as it is written in Exodus, and\nhaving divers significations, concerning which, for the sake of\nbrevity, we will not in this place treat.\n34. Now all things which pertain to the ornament of a church, must be\nremoved or covered over in the season of Lent: which according to some\ntaketh place on Passion Sunday, because after that time the Divinity\nof Christ was hidden and concealed in Him. For He gave Himself up to\nbe betrayed and scourged, as if He were only man, and had not in Him\nthe virtue of divinity: whence in the Gospel of this day it is\nwritten, 'But Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple.'\n[Footnote 314]\n  [Footnote 314: S. John viii, 59.]\nThen therefore the crosses are covered, that is, the virtue of His\ndivinity is hidden. Others do this from the first Sunday of Lent:\nbecause after that time the Church beginneth to treat of His Passion.\nWhence in that time the cross must not be borne in procession {61}\nfrom the church, except it be covered; and, according to the use of\nsome places, two coverings or curtains are then only retained: of\nwhich the one is hung all round the choir, the other is suspended\nbetween the altar and the choir: that those things which be within the\nHoly of Holies may not appear. In that the Sanctuary and Cross are\nthen veiled, we be taught the letter of the Law, that is, its carnal\nobservance, or that the understanding of Holy Scriptures before the\nPassion of Christ was veiled, hidden, and obscure: and that in that\ntime there was a veil: that is, men had an obscurity before their\neyes. It signifieth also the sword which was set before the gate of\nParadise: because the carnal observance we have spoken of, and this\nobscurity, and the sword at the gate of Paradise, were removed by the\nPassion of Christ. Therefore the curtains and veils of this kind are\nremoved on Good Friday. But in that in the Old Testament, there were\nbeasts that chewed the cud, and cleft the hoof, as oxen used in\nploughing, that is discerning and spiritually perceiving the mysteries\nof Scripture: therefore in Lent only a few priests, to whom 'it is\ngiven to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of God'   [Footnote 315] go\nbehind the veil.\n  [Footnote 315: St. Matthew xiii, 11.]\n35. Concerning this it is to be noted that there be three kinds of\nveils which be hung in churches: that which concealeth the mysteries:\nthat which divideth the sanctuary from the clergy: that which divideth\nthe clergy from the laity. The first denoteth the law: the second\ndenoteth our unworthiness, in that we are unworthy, nay unable to\nbehold things celestial. The third is the coercion of our carnal\npleasures. The first, namely, the curtain that is hung from each side\nof the altar, when the priest goeth into the holy place, is typified\nby that which is written in Exodus. {62} 'Moses put a veil over his\nface, for the children of Israel could not sustain the brightness of\nHis countenance.'   [Footnote 316] And as the Apostle saith, 'Even to\nthis day is this veil over the hearts of the Jews.  [Footnote 317] The\nsecond, namely the curtain that in the office of the Mass during Lent\nis suspended before the altar, was set forth by the veil which was\nhung up in the tabernacle, and divided the Holy of Holies from the\nholy place, as shall be declared in the proeme to the fourth part: by\nwhich the ark was concealed from the people: and it was wrought\ncunningly, and adorned with a fair variety of devices. This was it\nthat was rent in the Passion of the Lord: and after its pattern, the\ncurtains at this day are cunningly wrought with divers patterns.\nConcerning the aforesaid veil, and of what sort the curtains ought to\nbe, it is written in Exodus. The third kind of veil deriveth its\norigin from thence, that the _peribolus_ in the primitive Church, or\nwall which encompasseth the choir, was only raised as far as the\nelevation of the choir;   [Footnote 318] which even to this day is\nobserved in some churches: which was done that the people {63} seeing\nthe clergy singing psalms, might follow their good example. But at\nthis time as it were a veil or wall is suspended or interposed between\nthe clergy and the laity, that they may not be able to behold each\nother: as if to say, in very deed, 'turn away mine eyes, lest they\nbehold vanity.'  [Footnote 319]\n  [Footnote 316: Exodus xxxiv, 33.]\n  [Footnote 317: 2 Corinth, iii, 15.]\n  [Footnote 318: There is much difficulty in this passage. We conceive\n  that Durandus while writing it had in his mind's eye the arrangement\n  of many of the Basilican churches, in which the choir was raised\n  over the crypt (called Confessio, or Martyrium), in which the ashes\n  of the saints were laid, and was detached from the nave by two\n  flights of steps, one on each side of the descent to this\n  undercroft. In this case the _appodiation_ would mean the elevation\n  of the choir, itself considered as a sufficient distinction from the\n  nave. The usual representations of Basilican churches, however,\n  always show some rails, or cancelli, besides this _appodiation_. The\n  learned Father Thiers devotes the third section of his 'Dissertation\n  sur la Cl\u00f4ture du Choeur des Eglises' to the consideration of this\n  passage. 'Guillaume Durand, Ev\u00eaque de Mande, assure que dans la\n  Primitive Eglise, le choeur etait s\u00e9par\u00e9 de la Nef par une _muraille\n  d'appui_, afin que le peuple voiant la Clerg\u00e9 chanter les louanges\n  de Dieu en f\u00fbt \u00e9difi\u00e9. Mais comme il parle d'un fait beaucoup\n  \u00e9loign\u00e9 de son tems, et qui n'est attache par aucun ancien auteur,\n  je ne pense pas que l'on doive faire grande fonds sur son\n  temoignage.' We suspect that Thiers is wrong in construing\n  _appodiatio_ by _muraille d'appui:_ the latter would well express\n  the real Basilican arrangement, with which the translator was\n  probably acquainted. Durandus, therefore, is wrong in his fact; and\n  Thiers wrong in his understanding of Durandus, as well as in the\n  theory stated in the next section, that 'Depuis Constantin le choeur\n  de quelques Eglises etoit distingue de la Nef par des tapisseries ou\n  des voiles.' For he grounds this chiefly on the next assertion of\n  Durandus about the use curtains, 'hoc tempore, vers la fin du 13\n  siecle.' If we did not know from facts that before this time\n  roodscreens were in ordinary use, the words of Durandus _velum aut\n  murus_ would show us that he means the _wall_ to be taken\n  metaphorically for a _veil_. And so Thiers may have seen, since he\n  concludes his section thus--'  Mais peut \u00eatre que Theodoret parle\n  des tapisseries et Durand des voiles qui convroient la Cl\u00f4ture du\n  Choeur par le dedans, et que sous ces tapisseries et ces voiles il y\n  avoit une veritable cl\u00f4ture de balustres, ou de muraillcs pleines.']\n   [Footnote 319: Psalm cxix (_Beati immaculati_), 37.]\n36. But on Holy Saturday all the curtains are taken away, because on\nthe Passion of the Lord the veil of the temple was rent: and by that\nthing the spiritual intelligence of the Law was revealed unto us,\nwhich till that time lay hid, as is said afore: and the door of the\nkingdom of heaven is opened, and power was given unto us, that we\ncannot be overcome of our carnal concupiscence, unless we ourselves do\nyield. But the veil which separateth the sanctuary from the choir, is\ndrawn or lifted up at vespers on every Saturday of Lent: when the\noffice of the Sunday is begun, that the clergy may be able to look\ninto the sanctuary: because the Sunday commemorateth the Resurrection.\n37. This therefore is done on the six Sundays of Lent: because there\nwas no age in which joy, and that joy eternal, was not made in some\nsort manifest, that joy which is concealed in heaven, as is signified\nby that veil. Thence is it that we fast not on the Sundays, and this\non account of the glory of the Resurrection. For the first Sunday\nsignifieth the joy which our parents enjoyed in the Paradise before\nthe fall. {64} The second Sunday signifieth the joy of the few who\nwere preserved in the ark of Noah, when all else were drowned in the\ndeluge. The third, the gladness of the children of Israel, when in the\ntime of Joseph others were afflicted with famine. The fourth, their\njoy when they lived with all peace under Solomon.   [Footnote 320] The\nfifth, their gladness when returning from the Babylonian captivity.\nThe sixth, that of the disciples from the Resurrection to the\nAscension: when the bridegroom was with them in presence.\n  [Footnote 320: 3 Kings iv, 20.]\n38. In feasts likewise of nine lessons,  [Footnote 321] when they\noccur in Lent, the before-mentioned veil is raised and lifted up. But\nthis is not of the institution of the earliest times, because then no\nfeast was celebrated in Lent. But then on whatever day a feast\noccurred, commemoration was made of it on the Saturday and Sunday\nfollowing, according to the canon of Pope Martin; and so in the xiiith\nbook of Burchardus.  [Footnote 322] And all this on account of the\nsadness of that time. Afterwards the contrary use prevailed: that\nfeasts of nine lessons occurring in Lent should be solemnly observed,\nand a fast nevertheless kept.\n  [Footnote 321: For an explanation of the whole Catholic system of\n  feasts, double, semi-double, and simple, the reader is referred to\n  the _Tracts for the Times_, vol. iii.]\n  [Footnote 322:  S. Burchardus of Worms flourished in 1025: and is\n  not to be confounded with John Burchardus, who wrote an explanation\n  of the Mass for the use of the Venetian Church, which was published\n39. Again, on festivals curtains are hung up in churches, for the sake\nof the ornament they give; and that by visible, we may be led to\ninvisible beauty. These curtains are sometimes tinctured with various\nhues, as is said afore: so that by the diversity of the colours\nthemselves we may be taught that man, who is the temple of God, should\nbe ordained by the variety and diversity of virtues. {65} A white\ncurtain signifieth pureness of living: a red, charity: a green,\ncontemplation: a black, mortification of the flesh: a livid-coloured,\ntribulation. Besides this, over white curtains are sometimes suspended\nhangings of various colours: to signify that our hearts ought to be\npurged from vices: and that in them should be the curtains of virtues,\nand the hangings of good works.\n40. Moreover, on the Feast of the Nativity of the Lord some churches\nexhibit no hangings: some poor, and some good. Those which have none,\nsignify our shame; for even if we are filled with the greatest joy at\nthe birth of a Saviour,  [Footnote 323] we ought not, however, to be\nwithout shame that such was our sin that the 'Son of God emptied\nHimself on our account, and took upon Him the form of a servant.'\n[Footnote 324] And on that account also we solemnise His Passion not\nwith joy, but with a severe fast; whereas when we celebrate the\npassion of other saints we do it with gladness, and indulge ourselves\nsomewhat in meat and drink, as shall be said in the sixth book. But\nour Lord's Passion is a source of shame to us on account of our sins.\nThe saints, on the other hand, died not for our sins, but suffered for\nChrist. Those churches which on the Nativity suspend curtains of poor\ntexture thereby typify that Christ did then 'take upon Himself the\nform of a servant,  [Footnote 325 ] and was clothed in miserable rags.\nThose which employ richer hangings, set forth by them the gladness\narising from the Birth of a King: and teach what manner of persons we\nought to be in our reception of so great a Guest.\n  [Footnote 323: In accordance with this feeling, the first Psalm at\n  the second vespers of the nativity in the Benedictine Breviary is\n  the _De profundis_.]\n  [Footnote 324: Philip, ii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 325: Philip, ii, 7.]\n41. In some churches the altar at Easter-tide is decked with precious\nhangings, and veils of three colours are placed over it: red, pale,\nand black, which denote three seasons. When the first lesson and its\nresponse are finished, the black veil is removed; which signifieth the\ntime before the Law. When the second lesson and its response are\nfinished, the pale veil is removed: which signifieth the time of the\nLaw. The third being finished, the red is removed, which setteth forth\nthe time of Grace: that is, that by the Passion of Christ an entrance\nis administered unto us to the Holy of Holies and to eternal glory.\nBut concerning the coverings and cloths of the altars we have spoken\nin our sections on the same.\n42. On high feasts, the treasures of the church are brought forth on\nthree accounts. Firstly, by way of safeguard: that it may be made\nmanifest that he who hath them in charge hath been careful in his care\nof them. Secondly, for the more reverence of the solemnity. Thirdly,\nfor the memory of their oblation; namely, for the commemoration of\nthem that bestowed them on the church.\nBut in that the church is gloriously adorned within and not without,\nit is thereby signified that 'all its glory is from within.' [Footnote\n326] For although its outward appearance be despicable, the soul which\nis the seat of God is illuminated from within: according to that\nsaying, 'I am black but comely.'  [Footnote 327] And the Lord saith to\nthe Prophet: 'I have a goodly heritage.'  [Footnote 328] Which the\nProphet considering in his mind, saith, 'Lord, I have loved the beauty\nof Thine house':  [Footnote 329] which is spiritually adorned by\nFaith, Hope, and Charity. Sometimes the church, both material and\nspiritual, hath need to be cleansed: concerning which in the seventh\nbook.\n  [Footnote 326: Psalm xlv (_Eructavit_), 6.]\n  [Footnote 327: Cantic. i, 5.]\n  [Footnote 328: The bishop probably refers to Psalm xvi (_Conserva\n  me_), 6. The words in reality spoken by David are understood by him\n  as if spoken by the Almighty.]\n  [Footnote 329: Psalm xxvi (_Judica me_), 8.]\nIn some churches two eggs of ostriches and other things which cause\nadmiration, and which are rarely seen, are accustomed to be suspended:\nthat by their means the people may be drawn to church, and have their\nminds the more affected.\n43. Again, some say that the ostrich, as being a forgetful bird,\n'leaveth her eggs in the dust':   [Footnote 330] and at length, when\nshe beholdeth a certain star, returneth unto them, and cheereth them\nby her presence. Therefore the eggs [Footnote 331] of ostriches are\nhung in churches to signify that man, being left of God on account of\nhis sins, if at length he be illuminated by the Divine Light,\nremembereth his faults and returneth to Him, Who by looking on him\nwith His Mercy cherisheth him. As it is written in Luke that after\nPeter had denied Christ, the 'Lord turned and looked upon Peter.'\n[Footnote 332] Therefore be the aforesaid eggs suspended in churches,\nthis signifying, that man easily forgetteth God, unless being\nilluminated by a star, that is, by the Influence of the Holy Spirit,\nhe is reminded to return to Him by good works.\n  [Footnote 330: Job xxxix, 14.]\n  [Footnote 331: Perhaps this custom was introduced by the Crusaders.\n  'As the ostrich is good for food, so, it seems, are its eggs: to say\n  nothing of their being objects of attention, as being used much in\n  the East by way of ornament; for they are hung up in their places of\n  public worship, along with many lamps.' Harmer's 'Observations,'\n  vol. iv, p. 336, who refers to Pococke's 'Travels,' vol. i, p. 31,\n  and imagines that Dr. Chandler, in his travels in Asia Minor, was\n  mistaken when he supposed that the Turkish Mosque of Magnesia was\n  ornamented with lamps pendent from the ceiling intermixed with balls\n  of polished ivory, p. 267. Ostrich eggs might easily be mistaken for\n  ivory balls. The following passage from De Moleon is curious: 'At\n  the conclusion of matins,' he says, speaking of the rites of S.\n  Maurice at Angers on Easter Day, 'two chaplains take their place\n  behind the altar curtains. Two corbeliers (_Cubiculares_) in\n  dalmatics, amices, and _mitellae_, with gloves on their hands,\n  present themselves before the altar. The chaplains chant. _Quem\n  quaeritis_? The corbeliers representing the Maries, reply, Jesum\n  _Nazarenum Crucifixum._ The others answer, _Resurrexit, non est\n  hic_. The corbeliers take from the altar _two_ ostrich eggs wrapped\n  in silk, and go forth, chanting, _Alleluia resurrexit_ Dominus,\n  _resurrexit Leo Fortis_, Christus, _Filius_ Dei.'--_Voyag. Lit._ p.\n  [Footnote 332: S. Luke xxii, 61.]\n44. Now in the Primitive Church, the sacrifice was offered in vessels\nof wood, and common vests: for then were 'chalices of wood, and\npriests of gold': whereof the contrary is now. But Severinus, Pope,\ndecreed that it should be offered in glass:  [Footnote 333] but\nbecause such vessels were easily broken, therefore, Urban, Pope, and\nthe Council   [Footnote 334] of Rheims decreed that gold or silver\nvessels should be used: or on account of poverty, tin, which rusteth\nnot: but not in wood nor in brass. Therefore it might not be in glass\non account of the danger of effusion: nor of wood since being porous\nand spongy, it absorbeth the blood: nor of brass nor of bronze, the\nrust of which is unseemly.\n  [Footnote 333: See Martene, Tom. IV, ii, 9; the _Ducretum_, fol.\n  [Footnote 334: 'A.D. 874, Vid. Concil. Coll. Reg. Tom. I. p. 288.'\n  See also P. Tunoc. iv, Ep. ad Otton. Carel. xiii _Hardouin_ vii,\n45. And note that the name of chalice is derived from the Old\nTestament: whence Jeremiah, 'Babylon is a golden chalice that maketh\ndrunk the nations.'   [Footnote 335] And David: 'In the hand of the\nLord is a chalice, and the wine thereof is red':   [Footnote 336] and\nin another place, 'I will receive the chalice of salvation, and will\ncall on the name of the Lord.'   [Footnote 337] Again, in the Gospel:\n'Are ye able to drink the chalice that I shall drink?'   [Footnote\n338] And again, 'When He had taken the chalice He gave thanks.'\n[Footnote 339] A golden chalice signifieth the 'treasures of wisdom\nthat be hid in Christ.'   [Footnote 340] A silver chalice denoteth\npurity from sin. A chalice of tin denoteth the similitude of sin and\npunishment. For tin is as it were halfway between silver and lead: and\nthe Humanity of Christ, albeit it were not lead, that is, sinful, yet\nwas it like to sinful flesh. And therefore not silver: and although\nimpassible for His own sin, passible He was for ours: since 'He thus\ntook our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.'   [Footnote 341]\nConcerning the Chalice and the Paten we shall speak hereafter.\n  [Footnote 335: Jeremiah li, 7.]\n  [Footnote 336: Psalm lxxv (_Confitebimur_), 8.]\n  [Footnote 337: Psalm cxvi (_Dilexi_), 13.]\n  [Footnote 338: S. Matthew x, 22.]\n  [Footnote 339:  S. Matthew xxvi, 27. ]\n  [Footnote 340: Coloss. ii, 3.]\n  [Footnote 341: S. Matthew viii, 17.]\n46. But if anyone, through cause of his little religion, should say\nthat the Lord commanded Moses to make all the vessels of the\nTabernacle for every use and ceremony whatever, of brass, as it is\nwritten in the eight and twentieth chapter of Exodus, and that\nprecious vessels of this sort, 'could be sold for much, and given to\nthe poor,'  [Footnote 342] he is like Judas, and acteth contrarywise\nto the woman which brought the alabaster box of ointment. This we\nreply to him: not that God is better pleased with gold than brazen\nornaments: but that when men offer to God that which they value, by\nthe worship of the Almighty they vanquish their own avarice. Moreover,\nthese offices of divine piety be moral, and significative of future\nglory. Whence also under the old law the priest's garments were to be\nmade of gold, and jacinth, and purple, and scarlet twice dyed, and\nwoven linen, and other precious things: that thereby might be made\nmanifest with how great diversity of virtues the priest ought to\nshine: and it was also commanded that the altar, and the mercy-seat,\nand the candlestick, and the other vessels and ornaments of the altar\nshould be made of gold and silver. The Tabernacle also was to be made\nof divers precious materials, as is said in our section concerning the\nChurch. Also the high priest under the Law used divers precious\nornaments, as we have both noted, and shall hereafter note.\n  [Footnote 342: S. Matthew xxvi, 9.]\n47. Moreover, it was forbidden in the Council of Orleans,  [Footnote\n343] that the divine ornaments should be used for the adorning of\nnuptials, lest they should be polluted by the touch of the wicked, or\nby the pomp of secular luxury. By this doubtless it is shown that a\nchasuble, or any other ornament intended for the divine mysteries,\nmust not be made out of a common person's vest.\n  [Footnote 343: A.D. 535. Decret. viii. See also the Council of\n48. Stephen, Pope, moreover, forbade that anyone should have the use\nof the vests of a church, or of those things which be touched by\nreligious men alone, for other purposes: lest that vengeance come upon\nthese transgressors which befel Belshazzar the King.  [Footnote 344 ]\n  [Footnote 344: Daniel v, i.]\n49. Also Clement, Pope, forbade that the dead should be buried or\nwrapped or covered, they or their bones, with the altar cloth, or\ncovering for the chalice, or napkin wherewith the priest washeth his\nhands before consecrating.\n50. But when the palls, that is the corporals, and the veils, that is\nthe ornaments of the altar, or the curtains hanging over it shall have\nbecome unclean, the deacons with their ministers shall wash them\nwithin the sanctuary, and not without. But when the veils, used in the\nservice of the altar, be washed, let there be a new basin. And let the\npalls, that is the corporals, be washed in another basin. And let the\nveils for doors, that is, the curtains which are hung up in churches\nat high feasts, and in Lent, be washed in another. This is it that was\ndecreed of the Council of Lerida:   [Footnote 345] that for washing\nthe corporal, and the altar palls certain vessels be appropriated and\nkept within the church: in which nothing else ought to be washed. But\naccording to the afore-mentioned Clement, if the altar pall or\ncovering, or the covering of the seat where the priest sitteth, in his\nholy vests, or of the candlestick, or the veil, that is the cloth or\ncurtains hanging over the altar be consumed by old age, let them be\nburnt; and their ashes cast in the baptistery, or on the wall, or in\nthe drains, where there is no treading of passers by. And note that\necclesiastical ornaments be consecrated: as shall be said under the\nsection of Consecrations and Unctions.\n  [Footnote 345: 'A.D. 524, Concil. Coll. Reg. Tom XI, p. 24.']\nCHAPTER IV\nOF BELLS\nBells, what and where first used--Why Blessed--Analogy between Bells\nand Trumpets--Mystical Signification--Of the Bell-Frame--Of the\nBell-Ropes--Use of Bells at the Canonical Hours--Six kinds of\nBells--Bells when Silent--Of the Passing Bell--Of the Prayer Bell--Of\nthe Storm Bell.\n1. Bells are brazen vessels, and were first invented in Nola, a city\nof Campania: wherefore the larger bells are called _Campanae_, from\nCampania the district, and the smaller _Nolae_, from Nola the town.\n2. The reason for consecrating and ringing bells is this: that by\ntheir sound the faithful may be mutually cheered on towards their\nreward; that the devotion of faith may be increased in them; that\ntheir fruits of the field, their minds and their bodies may be\ndefended; that the hostile legions and all the snares of the Enemy may\nbe repulsed; that the rattling hail, the whirlwinds, and the violence\nof tempests and lightning may be restrained; the deadly thunder and\nblasts of wind held off; the spirits of the storm and the powers of\nthe air overthrown; and that such as hear them may flee for refuge to\nthe bosom of our holy Mother the Church, bending every knee before the\nstandard of the sacred rood. These several reasons are given in the\noffice for the blessing of bells.   [Footnote 346]\n  [Footnote 346: See the account of the consecration of several\n  churches in the island of Guernsey, taken from the Black Book of the\n  Diocese of Contances, in a paper by the Rev. W. C. Lukis, B.A.,\n  Trinity College, published in the First Part of the Transactions of\n  the Cambridge Camden Society.]\n3. You must know that bells, by the sound of which the people\nassembleth together to the church to hear, and the clergy to preach,\n'in the morning the mercy of God and His power by night,  [Footnote\n347] do signify the silver trumpets, by which under the Old Law the\npeople were called together unto sacrifice. (Of these trumpets we\nshall speak in our sixth book.) For just as the watchmen in a camp\nrouse one another by trumpets, so do the ministers of the Church\nexcite each other by the sound of bells to watch the livelong night\nagainst the plots of the devil. Wherefore our brazen bells are more\nsonorous than the trumpets of the Old Law, because then God was known\nin Judea only, but now in the whole earth. They be also more durable:\nfor they signify that the preaching of the New Testament will be more\nlasting than the trumpets and sacrifices of the Old Law, namely, even\nunto the end of the world.\n  [Footnote 347: Psalm xcii (_Bonum est confiteri_), 2]\n4. Again bells do signify preachers, who ought after the likeness of a\nbell to exhort the faithful unto faith: the which was typified in that\nthe Lord commanded Moses to make a vestment for the high priest,\nhaving seventy-two bells to sound when the high priest entered into\nthe Holy of Holies.  [Footnote 348] Also the cavity of the bell\ndenoteth the mouth of the preacher, according to the saying of the\nApostle, 'I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal.'\n[Footnote 349]\n  [Footnote 348: Exodus xxviii, 35.]\n  [Footnote 349: I Cor. xiii, 1.]\n5. The hardness of the metal signifieth fortitude in the mind of the\npreacher: whence saith the Lord, 'Behold I have made thy face strong\nagainst their faces.'   [Footnote 350] The clapper or iron, which by\nstriking on either side maketh the sound, doth denote the tongue of\nthe teacher, the which with the adornment of learning doth cause both\nTestaments to resound.\n  [Footnote 350:  Ezekiel iii, 8.]\n6. Wherefore a prelate which hath not the skill of preaching will be\nlike unto a bell without a clapper: according to that saying of\nGregory, 'A priest, if he knoweth not how to preach nor what voice of\nexhortation he can deliver, is a dumb preacher, and also as a dumb dog\nwhich cannot bark.' The striking the bell denoteth that a preacher\nought first of all to strike at the vices in himself for correction,\nand then advance to blame those of others: lest indeed, contrary to\nthe teaching of the Apostle, 'when he hath preached to others, he\nhimself should be a castaway.'  [Footnote 351] Which also the Psalm\ndoth testify, 'But unto the ungodly, saith God: why dost thou preach\nmy laws, and takest my covenant in thy mouth?'  [Footnote 352] Because\ntruly by the example of his own suffering he often gaineth access to\nthose whom by the learning of his discourse he cannot move. The link\nby which the clapper is joined or bound unto the bell is moderation:\nby which, namely, by the authority of Scripture, the tongue of the\npreacher who wisheth to draw men's hearts is ruled.  [Footnote 353]\n  [Footnote 351: I Corinthians ix, 27.]\n  [Footnote 352:  Psalm I (_Deus deorum_), 16. ]\n  [Footnote 353: The passage is very unintelligible in the original,\n  and is probably corrupted or transposed.]\n7. The wood of the frame upon which the bell hangeth, doth signify the\nwood of our Lord's Cross: which is on this account suspended on high,\nbecause the Cross is preached by the ancient Fathers. The pegs by\nwhich the wooden frame is joined together or fastened, are the Oracles\nof the Prophets. The iron cramps by which the bell is joined with the\nframe, denote charity, by which the preacher being joined indissolubly\nunto the Cross, doth boast and say, 'God forbid that I should glory\nsave in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.'  [Footnote 354] The\nhammer affixed to the frame by which the bell is struck, signifieth\nthe right mind of the preacher, by which he himself, holding fast to\nthe Divine commands, doth by frequent striking inculcate the same on\nthe ears of the faithful.\n  [Footnote 354: Gal. vi, 14. _Cavilla_ is thus explained by Belethus.\n  Expl. Divin. Off. xxiv. Cavilla, sic enim ferrum illud pensile\n  vocat, quod Graeci rectius [Greek text] nominant, cujus pulsu\n  campana sonum reddit.]\n8. The rope hanging from this, by which the bell is struck, is\nhumility, or the life of the preacher: the same rope also showeth the\nmeasure of our own life. Besides these, since the rope hath its\nbeginning from the wood upon which the bell hangeth, by which is\nunderstood our Lord's Cross, it doth thus rightly typify Holy\nScripture which doth flow down from the wood of the Holy Cross. As\nalso the rope is composed of three strands, so doth the Scripture\nconsist of a Trinity: namely, of history, allegory, and morality.\nWhence, the rope coming down from the wooden frame into the hand of\nthe priest is Scripture descending from the mystery of the Cross into\nthe mouth of the preacher. Again, the rope reacheth unto the hands by\nwhich it is grasped, because Scripture ought to proceed unto good\nworks. Also the raising and the lowering of the rope in ringing doth\ndenote that Holy Scripture speaketh sometimes of high matters,\nsometimes of low: or that the preacher speaketh sometimes lofty things\nfor the sake of some, and sometimes condescendeth for the sake of\nothers: according to that saying of the Apostle: 'Whether we exalt\nourselves it is for God, or whether we humble ourselves it is for\nyou.'  [Footnote 355] Again, the priest draweth the rope downwards,\nwhen he descendeth from contemplation unto active life: but is himself\ndrawn upward when under the teaching of Scripture he is raised in\ncontemplation. Also he draweth it downwards when he understandeth the\nScripture according to the 'letter which killeth'; he is drawn upwards\n{75} when he expoundeth the same according to the Spirit. Again,\naccording to Gregory, he is drawn downwards and upwards when he\nmeasureth himself in Scripture, namely, how much he still lieth in the\ndepths and how much he advanceth in doing good.\n  [Footnote 355: This appeals to be a reference to 2 Cor. v, 13.]\nFurthermore, when the bell doth sound from the pulling of its rope,\nthe people are gathered in one for the exposition of Holy Scripture,\nthe preacher is heard, and the people are united in the bond of faith\nand charity. Therefore when a priest acknowledgeth unto himself that\nhe is a debtor unto preaching, he must not withdraw himself from\ncalling men together by his bells, just as also the sons of Aaron did\nsound their silver trumpets. He therefore moveth the ropes who doth of\nhis office call his brethren or the people together.\nThe ring (or pully) in the length of the rope, through which in many\nplaces the rope is drawn, is the crown of reward, or perseverance unto\nthe end, or else is Holy Scripture itself. Moreover, Savinianus, Pope,\nhath commanded that the hours of the day should be struck in churches.\n9. And note that bells are commonly rung for the Divine Offices\n[Footnote 356] twelve times during the twelve hours of the day:\nnamely, once at prime, and in like manner once at the last hour,\nbecause all things come from one God, and God is One, All in All. At\ntierce they are rung three times, for the second, third, and fourth\nhours which are then chanted. In like manner three times at sexts, for\nthe fifth, sixth, and seventh hours. Also three times at nones for the\nthree hours. But at vespers, which is the twelfth hour, not one only\nbut many times are they rung, because in the time of grace the\npreaching of the Apostles was multiplied. Also in the night for matins\nthey are rung often, because we ought often to call out, 'Wake, thou\nthat sleepest, and arise from the dead.'  [Footnote 357]\n [Footnote 356: The reader will scarcely need reminding that the day\n is canonically divided into two parts of twelve hours each,\n beginning' at six o'clock respectively. Prime therefore is at our six\n a.m., tierce at nine, sexts at twelve, nones at three p.m., vespers\n at six p.m., and compline at bedtime.\n    Haec sunt septenis propter quae psallimus horis.\n    _Matutina_ ligat Christum, qui crimina purgat:\n    _Prima_ replet sputis; causam dat _Tertia_ Mortis:\n    _Sexta_ Cruci nectit: latus Ejus _Nona_ bipertit:\n    _Vespera_ deponit: tumulo _Completa_ reponit.\n  Which may thus be translated;\n    At _matins_ bound: at _prime_ revil'd: condemn'd to death at _tierce_:\n    Nail'd to the cross at _sexts_: at _nones_ His blessed side they pierce:\n    They take him down at _vesper_-tide; in grave at _compline_ lay\n    Who thenceforth bids His Church to keep her sevenfold hours alway.\n  The twelve hours of the night are divided into three nocturns, which\n  may be supposed to be said at twelve, two, and four, and are\n  immediately followed by lauds at five. Nocturns and lauds (together\n  called matins), with the six hours above-mentioned, make the seven\n  canonical hours. On this subject we can but refer our readers to the\n  extremely beautiful fifth book of Durandus, and particularly his\n  first chapter, in which all the pregnant symbolism of the canonical\n  hours is set forth. Hugo de Sancto Victore has briefly touched upon\n  the same in the third chapter of the _In Speculum Ecclesiae_, but\n  nearly the whole of his account is contained in Durandus. See also\n  S. Isidore 'De Eccles. Offic.' lib, I, cap. xix--xxiii; and Belethus\n  whose account is valuable for its conciseness. 'Explic. Divin.\n  Offic.' Caps, xxi--xxix.\n  The twelve ringings mentioned in the text as being in 'the twelve\n  hours of the _day_' are thus to be made out. At prime, one; at\n  tierce, three; at sexts, three; at nones, three; at vespers, one\n  (the ringing 'many times' being only thus accounted); and at the\n  last hour, one; in whole twelve, Hugo de S. Victor has a passage\n  almost identical with this. 'The bells be also rung twelve times. At\n  prime, once, and again at the last hour once; because all things be\n  from One God, and the Same will be All in All. But at tierce, three\n  times for the second, third, and fourth hours; and so at sexts, for\n  three hours, namely, the seventh, eighth, and ninth; but at vespers\n  many times, because in the time of grace the preaching of the\n  Apostles was multiplied. Also at matins oftentimes, because we\n  should often exclaim, 'Arise, thou that sleepest.' It will be\n  observed that this passage is corrupt, nones being omitted, and its\n  three hours given to sexts. Matins also, as in the text, are\n  belonging to the twelve hours of the _night_.]\n  [End Footnote]\n  [Footnote 357: Eph, v, 14.]\n10. Commonly also they be rung three times at nocturns. First with a\n_squilla_  [Footnote 358] or hand-bell, which by its sharp sound\nsignifieth Paul preaching acutely. The second ringing signifieth\nBarnabus joined to his company. The third intimateth that, when the\n'Jews put from them the word of God, the Apostles turned themselves to\nthe Gentiles,' whom also they instructed in the faith of the Trinity\nby the doctrine of the four Evangelists. Whence also some do use,\n_four_ peals.\n  [Footnote 358: _Squilla_ is properly a _sea onion_. We conceive that\n  the sort of a bell here meant is a kind of hand-bell, formed out of\n  a hollow ball of metal, furnished with a slit for the sound, and\n  with a loose pellet inside. This answers to the squilla in shape and\n  utters a very shrill sound. We find below that it was used chiefly\n  in the refectory. So in a note to Martener vol iv, p. 32, we read\n  'ad gratiarum actionem Sacrista sciliam (the other form of squillam)\n  pulsabat. Cons. S. Benigni, cap. 9. Fratribus exeuntibus de prandio\n  sive de coena sciliam pulsare non negligat Hebdomadarius Sacrista.']\n11. And note that there be six kinds of bells which be used in the\nchurch; namely, the _squilla_, the _cymbalum_, the _nola_, the\n_nolula_ (or double _campana_), the _signum_ [and the _campana_]. The\nsquilla is rung in the _triclinium_, that is, in the refectory; the\ncymbalum in the cloister; the nola in the choir; the nolula or double\ncampana in the clock, the campana in the campanile, the signum in the\ntower. Either of these, however, may be called generally a bell. And\nthese be known by diverse names, because the preachers signified\nthereby be necessary for diverse ends.\n12. During the whole Septuagesima, in the which Quadragesima [or Lent]\nis contained, on common days the bells be not chanted, nor chimed, but\ntolled, that is rung singly, at the hours of the day, or at matins.\n[Footnote 359] In well-ordered churches, they be struck twice at\nprime; first to call unto prayer, secondly to begin: three times at\ntierce, according to the number of hours then struck, {78} as was said\nabove; once to call to prayer, twice to assemble them together, thrice\nto begin. In like manner it is done at sexts and nones. But for matins\nthe same bells are rung and in the same order. For a mass or for\nvespers only two bells be rung. But in smaller churches they simply\nring the bells as aforesaid, and this on the common days. But on\nSundays and holy days, they chime them, as at other times. For because\npreachers who be figured by bells, do the more abound in a season of\ngrace, and 'are instant in season,' therefore on festivals which\npertain to grace, the bells do sound more pressingly and are rung for\na longer time, to arouse those 'that sleep and be drunken,' lest they\nsleep beyond measure. But what is signified by the ringing of bells\nwhen the Te Deum is chanted we shall speak hereafter.  [Footnote 360]\n  [Footnote 359: It is to be remarked that throughout this chapter\n  there is no allusion to ringing the bells by raising them and\n  causing them to revolve on axes as practised in England. This and\n  the beautiful science of bell-ringing consequent on it are peculiar\n  to ourselves. The method of sounding the bells here understood is by\n  a hammer acting on the rim, or by pulling the clapper, as is used\n  with us for chimes, and where the bell frame is weak. This accounts\n  for the much larger bells which are found abroad, and which were\n  never meant to be poised and swung. Owing to the above difference\n  between the Continental and English methods of bell-ringing, it is\n  not easy to express the difference between _simpulsare, compulsare_,\n  and _depulsare_.\n  _Depulsare_ is to ring by tying a rope to the _clapper_ of a bell,\n  and pulling the rope to and fro: we have accordingly translated it,\n  to chant a _bell_.\n   _Simpulsare_ is to ring by tying a rope to the hammer, and pulling\n   it back; this we have translated _to toll_. Tolling is of course\n   performed by swinging the bell round: but as there is no English\n   word which expresses _simpulsare_, we thought it better to use an\n   old term in a new sense, than to coin a new one.\n  _Compulsare_ is to do to several bells what _depulsare_ is to do to\n  one: and we have translated it to _chime_.\n  _Pulsare_ we have translated _to ring_.\n  It may be worthy of remark, how completely the ringing of the bells\n  is here considered a part of the priest's office.]\n  [End footnote]\n  [Footnote 360: In Book V, chapter iii, '_of Nocturns_,' Durandus\n  says, 'When the nocturns be finished, the bells be rung and the _Te\n  Deum laudamus_ is chanted with uplift voice, to denote that the\n  Church doth openly and wonderfully laud God in the time of grace,\n  and to show that if by good works we answer rightly to holy\n  doctrine, we shall attain to singing heavenly praises in concert\n  with the angels. The chant also is then made with a loud voice, to\n  signify the joy of the woman at finding the lost 'piece of silver.'\n  And the versicle _Day by day we magnify Thee_, and the following, be\n  chanted still more loudly to set forth the gratulations of the\n  neighbours over the finding of the piece of silver: and the ringing\n  of the bells representeth the calling together of the neighbours. In\n  some churches also the candles be lighted, because the woman also\n  'lighted a candle and sought diligently till she found it.' This\n  also signifieth that the Church Catholic is drawn by Christ out of\n  hell. And the hymn itself representeth the future joy and gladness,\n  which the Church resting from her labours shall attain in the day of\n  judgment.' Hugo de S. Victore, and Belethus agree as to this ringing\n  of the bells at matins: a practice of which perhaps we may find the\n  shadow in our own use in many places of ringing the bells at eight\n  o'clock on Sunday mornings, to which day our services are now\n  chiefly confined.]\n13. Moreover, the bells ought to be rung when anyone is dying, that\nthe people hearing this may pray for him.  [Footnote 361] For a woman\nindeed they ring twice, because she first caused the bitterness of\ndeath: for she first alienated mankind from God; wherefore the second\nday had no benediction.  [Footnote 362] But for a man they ring three\ntimes, because the Trinity was first shown in man. For Adam was first\nformed from the earth, then the woman from Adam, afterwards was man\ncreated from both, and so there is therein a trinity. But if the dying\nman be an ecclesiastic, they toll so many times as he hath received\norders. And at the last time they ought to chime, that so the {80}\npeople may know for whom they have to pray. The bells ought also to be\nchimed when the corpse is brought to the church, and when carried out\nfrom the church to the grave.\n  [Footnote 361: For an account of the 'passing-bell,' and the\n  authority for its right use among ourselves, the reader is referred\n  to Bp. Montague's 'Articles of Inquiry.' Camb. 1841, pp. 76, 116. It\n  is to be observed that the bells are here said to be rung, not\n  _tolled_, as is generally the case now. Many will remember a\n  beautiful passage upon this custom in one of the Rev. F. E. Paget's\n  'Tales of the Village.' The practice of their distinguishing the sex\n  of the dying person is still in most places retained.]\n  [Footnote 362: '_Wherefore the second day had no benediction_.' It\n  will be observed that of this day only it is not said expressly that\n  'God saw that it was good.' We give a chapter of Hugo S. Victore\n  upon this question.\n  'But it is admirable wherefore God did not see the works of the\n  second day that they were good: since in each other day He is said\n  to have seen them, and that they were good. For either it was not\n  His work, and so not good; or if it were His work, it was good. But\n  if it was good, it was also His work: and then He saw it was good,\n  Who could not be ignorant what it was, whether good or bad.\n  Wherefore then is it not said here as elsewhere \"God saw that it was\n  good?\" For if this be said elsewhere only because the work was made,\n  why ought it not also to be said here since it was made? Perhaps\n  because _dual_ is the sign of division; since it first recedeth from\n  _unity_: and so here we perceive some sacrament. Thus the works of\n  the second day be not praised, not because they were not good, but\n  because they were signs of evil. For God made His first works \"and\n  behold they were all very good:\" in the which neither was corruption\n  present, nor perfection absent. But afterwards cometh the devil and\n  man, and they also made their works: and these second works came\n  after the first; the evil after the good: and God was unwilling to\n  behold these works because they were evil; but beholding them by His\n  wisdom, He disapproved them by his judgment.' 'De Sacramentis,' Lib.\n  i, Pars I, cap. xx. S. Isodore (Sentent. I, xx de Mundo) does not\n  allude to this, nor S. Augustin upon Genesis.]\n14. Also bells be rung at processions, that the evil spirits may hear\nthem and flee, as shall be said hereafter.  [Footnote 363] For they do\nfear when the trumpets of the Church Militant, that is the bells, be\nheard, like as a tyrant doth fear when he heareth on his own land the\ntrumpets of any potent king his foe.\n  [Footnote 363: 'The bells be rung in processions. For as an earthly\n  monarch hath in his army royal insignia, namely trumpets and\n  banners; so Christ the Eternal King hath in His Church Militant\n  bells for trumpets, and crosses for banners. Thus the ringing of the\n  bells doth signify the prophets, who foretold the advent of Christ.'\n  Durandus, book iv, chapter 6, 'Of the priest's approach to the\n  altars,' sec. 19. The same idea is applied by Belethus to the matin\n  bells in his 24th chapter.]\n15. And this is the reason also why the Church, when she seeth a\ntempest to arise, doth ring the bells; namely, that the devils hearing\nthe trumpets of the Eternal King, which be the bells, may flee away\nthrough fear and cease from raising the storm; and that the faithful\nalso may be admonished at the ringing of the bells and be provoked to\nbe urgent in prayer for the instant danger.  [Footnote 364]\n  [Footnote 364: See note I to this chapter.]\nBut for three days before Easter the bells be silent, as shall be said\nhereafter.  [Footnote 365] Also the bells be silent in time of an\ninterdict, because often for the fault of those put under them the\ntongue of the preachers is hindered; according to that of the Prophet,\n'I will make thy tongue cleave to the roof of thy mouth, for they are\na rebellious house';   [Footnote 366] that is, for the people are\ndisobedient.\n  [Footnote 365: See Appendix.]\n  [Footnote 366: Ezekiel iii, 26.]\nThe Church also hath organs, of which we shall speak hereafter.\n[Footnote 367]\n  [Footnote 367: Durandus, in his fourth book, chapter xxxiv, '_Of the\n  Sanctus_,' says, 'Moreover in this conceit of angels and men, the\n  organs do from time to time add their harmony: the which was\n  introduced by David and Solomon, who did cause hymns to be sung at\n  the sacrifice of the Lord, with the concert of organs and other\n  instruments of music, and the people also to join in chorus.']\nCHAPTER V\nOF CEMETERIES AND OTHER PLACES, SACRED AND RELIGIOUS\nHoliness of Places; its Origin--Difference between Sacred, Holy, and\nReligious--Different Names for Cemetery--First use of Cemeteries--Who\nare not to be Buried in the Church--Ancient Method of Burial--Who are\nto be Buried in a Cemetery.\n1. Now we will Speak of cemeteries and other sacred and religious\nplaces. Of consecrated places, some be appropriated to human\nnecessity, others to prayers. Those of the first sort be a\n_xenodochium_ or _xenostorium_, which is the same: a _vasochonium_, a\n_gerontocomium_, an _orphanotrophium_, a _brephotrophiuin_. For holy\nfathers and religious princes have founded places of this kind, where\nthe poor, the pilgrims, old men, orphans, infants, men past work, the\nhalt, the weak, and the wounded should be received and attended. And\nnote that _geronta_ in Greek is the same as _senex_ in Latin.\nBut of places appropriated to prayer, there be that are _sacred_,\nthere be that are _holy_, and there be that are _religious_.\n2. _Sacred_ be they which by the hands of the bishop have duly been\nsanctified and set apart to the Lord, and which be called by various\nnames, as hath been said in the section on Churches. _Holy_ be they\nwhich have immunity or privilege: and be set apart for the servitors\nor ministers of the Church, concerning which, under threat of condign\npunishment, either by the canon law or by special privilege, it is\nordained that no man shall presume to violate them. Such be the courts\nof churches, and in some places the cloisters, within which be the\nhouses of the canons. To which when criminals of whatever kind betake\nthemselves they have safety. And so according to the statutes of the\ncivil law be the gates and theatres of cities.\n3. _Religious_ places be they where the entire body of a man, or at\nleast the head is buried: because no man can have two sepulchres. But\nthe body or any member without the head doth not make the place\nwherein it is buried religious. But according to the civil law the\ncorpse of a Jew, or paynim, or unbaptised infant maketh the place of\nits sepulchre religious: yet by the Christian religion and the\ncanonical doctrine the body of a Christian alone maketh it so. And\nnote that whatever is _sacred_ is _religious_; but the contrary\nholdeth not. But the afore-named religious place hath divers\nappellations: such be _cemetery, polyandrum_, or _andropolis_ (which\nis the same thing), _sepulchrum, mausoleum_ (which is also the same),\n_dormitorium, tumulus, monumentum, ergastulum, pyramid, sarcophagus,\nbustum, urna, spelunca_.\n4. _Cemetery_ hath its name from _cimen_ which is _sweet_, and\n_sterion_, which is a _station_: for there the bones of the departed\nrest sweetly, and expect the advent of their Saviour. Or because there\nbe therein _cimices_, that is reptiles of intolerable odour.\n5. _Poliantrum_, from _pollutum antrum_, on account of the carcases of\nmen therein buried. Or _poliantrum_ signifieth a multitude of men,\nfrom _polus_, which is a _plurality_, and _andros_, which is a man;\nand therefore a cemetery is so called on account of the number of men\ntherein buried.'   [Footnote 368]\n  [Footnote 368: It has been thought right to give a few of the\n  bishop's derivations, lest his translators should be accused of\n  concealing a circumstance which may weaken, with some, his testimony\n  on other points (though, as we have before shown, most unjustly): it\n  has not, however, been thought necessary to follow him through all\n  his names of a cemetery: since to do so would be a mere waste of the\n  reader's time.]\n[Sections 6 to 10 elided.]\n11. Cemeteries are said to have their beginning from Abraham, who\nbought a field from Hebron: in which was a double cave,  [Footnote\n369] where he and Sarah were buried: there also Isaac and Jacob were\nburied: there also Adam and Eve.  [Footnote 370] Therefore there was a\ndouble cave there: since they who buried therein were placed side by\nside, every man and his wife; or the men in the one, and their wives\nin the other: or because everyone there interred had a double cave,\nafter the fashion of a chair. Whence saith Hierome, Three patriarchs\nare buried in the city Hebron, with their three wives. But they were\nburied as it were in a sitting posture: the upper part of the cave\nheld the trunk from the loins: the lower the thighs and legs.\n  [Footnote 369: Genesis xxiii, 9: 'We take this word Machpelah for a\n  proper name, as many others do: but the Talmudists generally think\n  it to have been a double cave, as the lxx also, with the vulgar\n  Latin, understand it. Yet they cannot agree in what sense it was so:\n  whether they went through one cave into another, or there was one\n  above the other.'--Bishop Patrick, s.l.]\n  [Footnote 370: One might almost have thought that this is a false\n  reading for _Leah and Rebecca_. For the common tradition was that\n  Adam and Eve were buried in Mount Calvary: so that where the first\n  Adam fell before death, the second Adam triumphed over death. And\n  the bishop speaks below of _three_ patriarchs, and their _three_\n  wives buried in Machpelah: which is at variance with the text as it\n  stands: but would agree with the proposed emendation.\n  Yet S. Isidore says, 'De morte Abrahae,' fol. 295: 'Sepultusque est\n  in spelunca duplici; in cujus interiore parte Adam esse positum\n  traditio Hebraeorum testatur.' S. Victor upon Spelunca duplex:\n  'Domus quaedam fuit subterranea, in qua erat solarium, et multi\n  fuerant sepulti, in ea et diversis foveis et subter et supra;' and\n  in another place, 'Spelunca in qua est sepulta spiritualem designat\n  vitam, quae est occulta: quae recte duplex vocatur; propter bonam\n  actionem et contemplationem.']\n12. But all men ought not to be buried promiscuously in the church:\nfor it seemeth that that place of sepulchre profiteth not. Lucifer was\nthrown down from Heaven, and Adam cast out of Paradise; and what\nplaces be better than these? Also Joab was slain in the Tabernacle,\nand Job triumphed in the dunghill. Nay rather, it is to his hurt if a\nman unworthy or a sinner be buried in a church. We read in the\n'Dialogues' of Blessed Gregory, book the fourth, chapter the\nfifty-sixth, that when a certain man of notorious wickedness\n[Footnote 371] had been buried in the church of S. Faustinus at\nBrescia, in the same night Blessed Faustinus appeared to the warden of\nthe church, saying, Speak unto the bishop that he cast out the body;\notherwise he shall die in thirty days. Now the warden feared to tell\nthe thing to the bishop: and the bishop on the thirtieth day suddenly\ndeparted out of this life. It is also written in the same book,\nchapter the fifty-seventh, that another wicked man was buried in a\nchurch, and that afterwards his body was found outside the church, the\ncerecloths remaining in their own place. And Austin says, they who are\nguilty of notorious sins, if they be buried in the church by their own\ndesire, shall be judged for their presumption; for the sacredness of\nthe place doth not free those whom the accusation of temerity\ncondemns.\n  [Footnote 371: A similar story has been parodied in the 'Ingoldsby\n  Legends': a work which for irreverence and profanity has hardly an\n  equal. Disgraceful as it would be to any author, it is trebly so, if\n  (as it is said) that author is a clergyman.]\nNo body, therefore, ought to be buried in a church, or near an altar,\nwhere the Body and Blood of our Lord are made, except the bodies of\nholy fathers, who be called patrons, that is defenders, who defend the\nwhole country with their merits, and bishops, and abbots, and worthy\npresbyters, and laymen of eminent sanctity. But all ought to be buried\nabout the church, or in the court of the cloisters, or in the porch:\nor in the exedroe and apses which are joined to the church, or in the\ncemetery. {85} Some also say that a space of thirty feet round the\nchurch ought to be set apart for that purpose. But others say that the\nspace enclosed by the circuit which the bishop makes around the church\nmust suffice for this. S. Augustine saith in his book 'On the Care of\nthe Dead,' towards the end, that to be buried near the tombs of\nmartyrs advantageth the dead in this, that by commending him to the\nguardianship of the martyrs, the earnestness of our supplication for\nhim may be increased.\n13. Of old time men were buried in their own houses: but on account of\nthe stench thereby engendered, it was decreed that they should be\nburied without the city, and certain places should be set apart by\nsanctification for that purpose. But noblemen were buried in\nmountains, both in the middle of them and at the foot: and also under\nmounds raised of their own expense.  [Footnote 372] But if anyone be\nslain in besieging a town, where there is no cemetery, let him be\nburied where he can. But if a merchantman or pilgrim die by sea, and\nany inhabited land be near, let him be buried in it: but if no port be\nnear, let him be buried in some island. If, however, land cannot be\nseen, let a little house of timbers (if they can be had) be made for\nhim, and let him be cast into the sea.\n  [Footnote 372: _Sub propriis podiis_. For some account of the\n  curious word _podium_, whence _pew_ or _pue_ is derived, see the\n  Cambridge Camden Society's 'History of Pews' (or the 'Supplement,'\n14. In a Christian cemetery none may be buried but a baptised\nChristian: nor yet every such an one neither: one, namely, slain in\nthe act of sin, if it be mortal sin, as if he were slain in adultery,\nor theft, or some forbidden amusement. And also where a man is found\ndead, there let him be buried, on account of the doubtful cause of his\ndeath. {86} But if anyone dieth suddenly in games accustomably used,\nas the game of ball, he may be buried in the cemetery, because it was\nnot his desire to injure anyone: but because he was occupied in\nworldly matters, some say that he ought to be buried without psalms\nand the other obsequies of the dead. But if anyone attacking another\nin a strife or tumult dieth impenitent, and hath not sought the\npriest, he ought not, as some say, to be buried in the cemetery: nor\nyet he who hath committed suicide. But if anyone dieth, not from any\nmanifest cause, but from the visitation of God alone, he can be buried\nin a cemetery. For the just man, in what hour soever he dieth, is\nsaved. The rather if he were following some lawful occupation. To\ndefenders of justice and those who are engaged in a pious fight, the\ncemetery and the office of burial are freely conceded: yet they who\ncome to a violent death are not borne into the church, lest the\npavement be polluted with blood. But if anyone returning from any\nplace of fornication be slain in the way, or be slain anywhere, where\nby unforeseen case, he hath tarried, he is not to be buried in the\ncommon cemetery; and this if it can be proved, by evidence sufficient\nfor a court of law, that he had not confessed after the act of\nfornication nor was contrite: otherwise he ought to be buried.\n15. Again, a woman who dieth in child-birth ought not to be carried\ninto the church, as some say, but her obsequies must be said without\nthe church, to which I agree not: otherwise it would be as if she died\nin fault. Whence she may allowably be borne into the church.\n16. But stillborn and unbaptised children are to be buried without the\ncemetery. Some say, however, that they should be buried with the\nmother as being a part of her body.\n17. A man and wife are to be buried in the same sepulchre, after the\nexample of Abraham and Sarah (unless a wish be specially expressed to\nthe contrary). {87} Whence also Tobias commanded his son, that when\nhis mother had accomplished her days, he should bury her in the same\ngrave with himself.  [Footnote 373] Also everyone is to be buried in\nthe sepulchre of his fathers, unless from a principle of devotion he\nhath chosen another sepulchre. But it was decreed in the Moguntine\nCouncil, that they who have paid the extreme penalty for their crimes,\nif they have confessed, or have desired to confess and have\ncommunicated, may be buried in the cemetery, and the Mass and\noblations may be offered for them. How the human body is to be buried,\nshall be said under the section of the Office for the Dead.\n  [Footnote 373: Tobit xiv, 10]\nCHAPTER VI\nOF THE DEDICATION OF A CHURCH\nRise of the Dedication of Churches--By whom Performed--Particulars of\nConsecration--The Twelve Crosses--Banners--Dedication--Re-consecration\nConsidered--Reconciliation--In what Cases--Of Scandals\n--Reconciliation of Cemeteries.\n1. Twice in the former part of this treatise we have described the\nmaterial church and the altar; it followeth that we must add something\nabout their dedication: stating,\n  I. Whence the consecration of churches hath its origin.\n  II. At whose hands a church is consecrated.\n  III. For what reason.\n  IV. In what form; and what is signified, as well by the dedication\n  itself, as by each of the ceremonies observed therein.\n  Of the offices for the festival of the dedication of a church we\n  shall speak in the seventh book.  [Footnote 374]\n  [Footnote 374: Appendix H.]\n2. We have first to state whence the dedication of churches hath had\nits rise. Upon which, note that under the teaching of the Lord, Moses\nmade the tabernacle, and consecrated it together with its table of\nshow-bread, and altar, and brazen vessels, and utensils for performing\nthe divine worship. {89} And these he not only consecrated with\nprayers to God, but also anointed, at the command of the Lord, with\nsacred oil. For  [Footnote 375] we read that the Lord taught Moses to\nprepare a chrism, with which to anoint the tabernacle and the ark of\nthe testimony at the time of their dedication. Solomon also the son of\nDavid, at the command of the Lord, completed the temple and its altar,\nand consecrated what was still necessary for the performance of the\ndivine worship; as it is written in the third book of Kings.\n[Footnote 376] Nebuchadnezzar the king also summoned all his satraps,\nchief men, and governors to the dedication of the golden image which\nhe had made.  [Footnote 377] The Jews therefore, as we read in\nBurchardus,  [Footnote 378] used to have the places in which they\nsacrificed to the Lord consecrated by divine petitions, nor used they\nto offer gifts to God in any places but such as were dedicated unto\nHim. If then they who were in bondage to the shadow of the Law used to\ndo this, how much the more ought we, to whom the truth hath been made\nmanifest--'grace and truth came by Jesus Christ'   [Footnote 379]--to\nbuild temples to the Lord, and adorn them as best we may, and devoutly\nand solemnly consecrate (according to the institution of Pope Felix\nIII)  [Footnote 380] by divine prayers and holy unctions both them and\ntheir altars and vessels, and vestments also, and other utensils for\nfulfilling the divine service?\n  [Footnote 375: Exodus xxx, 23-34.]\n  [Footnote 376: I Kings iii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 377:  Daniel iii, 2.]\n  [Footnote 378: Book iii, ch. I. ]\n  [Footnote 379: S. John i, 17.]\n  [Footnote 380: 'The solemnities of the consecration of churches and\n  of priests ought to be celebrated year by year, after the example of\n  our Lord Himself, Who at the feast of the Dedication of the Temple\n  did set us a pattern of this in that He celebrated this festival\n  with the rest of the people; as it is written in S. John, \"And it\n  was at Jerusalem the feast of the Dedication, and it was winter, and\n  Jesus walked in the Temple in Solomon's porch.\" Felix Papa in\n  'Epist. ad Episc. per divers, provincias,' cap. i.]\nAgain, when once in Syria, in the city of Baruth, the Jews had\ntrampled underfoot an image of the Crucified, and had pierced its\nside, there soon came forth therefrom blood and water. But the Jews\nmarvelled at this spectacle, and their sick when anointed with this\nblood were freed from all their infirmities: by reason of which all,\nhaving received the faith of Christ, were baptised, and proceeded to\nconsecrate their synagogues into churches. And hence hath grown the\ncustom that churches should be consecrated, whereas before this altars\nalone used to be consecrated. On account of this miracle also the\nChurch ordained that a memorial of the Lord's Passion should be made\non the fifth day before the Calends of December: and for the same\nreason the church was consecrated to the honour of the Saviour, in\nwhich a vessel containing some of the blood is preserved, and a solemn\nfestival is celebrated on that day.  [Footnote 381]\n  [Footnote 381: The editors have not been able to find any other\n  account of this legend.]\n3. Secondly, it is to be noted that a bishop alone can dedicate\nchurches and altars: since he beareth the image and figure of the\nChief Bishop, Christ, dedicating spiritually, without Whom we can do\nnothing stable in the Church: whence He hath Himself said, 'Without Me\nye can do nothing';   [Footnote 382] and the Psalm saith, 'Unless the\nLord build the house their labour is but lost that build it:\n[Footnote 383] hence the Council of Carthage prohibiteth a priest from\ndoing this, nor can this office be deputed to anyone of an inferior\norder.\n  [Footnote 382: S. John xvii, 5.]\n  [Footnote 383:  Psalm cxxvii (_Nisi Dominus_), I.]\n4. Further, as the Sacred Canons instruct us, a church must not be\ndedicated, unless it be first endowed, and that from goods lawfully\nacquired. For we read how when a certain bishop was consecrating a\nchurch built out of the fruits of usury and pillage, he saw behind the\naltar the devil in a pontifical vestment, standing in the bishop's\nthrone: who said unto the bishop, Cease from {91} consecrating the\nchurch: for it pertaineth to my jurisdiction, since it is built from\nthe fruits of usuries and robberies. Then the bishop and the clergy\nhaving fled thence in fear, immediately the devil destroyed that\nchurch, with a great noise.\n5. Again, a church which hath been erected from the profit of avarice\nmust not be consecrated; nor one for which a sufficient endowment hath\nnot been assigned; nor one in which a paynim or an infidel hath been\nburied, until he shall have been cast forth thence, and the church\nreconciled, the walls and timbers having been first scraped. The case\nis the same also with respect to an excommunicate person. But if a\nwoman with child be buried there, though she be not removed, the\nchurch may be consecrated, even if the child hath not been baptised.\nAlthough certain learned authors have written otherwise the church may\nalso be consecrated on ordinary days as well as on Sundays: and more\nbishops than one and more altars than one may be consecrated at the\nsame time by the same person in one church.\n6. Thirdly, we have to say for what reason a church is dedicated: and\nindeed there be five reasons. First, that the devil and his power may\nbe entirely expelled from it. Gregory relateth in a dialogue, in his\nthird book, that when a certain church of the Arians having been\nrestored to the Orthodox was being consecrated, and relics of S.\nSebastian and the Blessed Agatha had been conveyed thither, the people\nthere assembled of a sudden perceived a swine to be running to and fro\namong their feet; the which regaining the doors of the church could be\nseen of none, and moved all to marvel. Which sign the Lord showed for\nthis cause, that it might be manifest to all that the unclean\ninhabitant had gone forth from that place. {92} But in the following\nnight a great noise was made on the roof of the same church, as if\nsomeone were running confusedly about upon it. The second night the\nuproar was much greater. On the third night also so vast a noise was\nheard as if the whole church had been overthrown from its foundations:\nbut it immediately ceased and no further inquietude of the old enemy\nhath appeared in it. Secondly, that those who fly for refuge to it may\nbe saved, as we read in the Canons of Gregory. And with this view Joab\nfled into the tabernacle and laid hold of the horns of the altar.\nThirdly, that prayers may be heard there. Whence in the prayer of the\nMass of Dedication it is said, 'Grant that all who shall meet together\nhere to pray may obtain, whatsoever be their trials, the benefits of\nthe consolation.' Thus also Solomon prayed at the dedication of the\nTemple, as we read in the eighth chapter of the third book of Kings.\n[Footnote 384] Fourthly, that praises may there be offered to God, as\nhas been already mentioned under the head of the Church. Fifthly, that\nthere the sacraments of the Church may be administered. From which the\nchurch itself is called a tabernacle, as it were the hostelrie of God,\nin which the divine sacraments be contained and adminstered.\n[Footnote 385]\n  [Footnote 384: I Kings viii, 30.]\n  [Footnote 385: See chapter i, 4.]\n7. Fourthly, we have to speak of the manner in which a church is\nconsecrated. All being excluded from the church, a single deacon\nremaining shut up within, the bishop with his clergy before the doors\nof the church proceedeth to bless water mixed with salt. In the\nmeanwhile within the building twelve lamps be burning before twelve\ncrosses which be depicted on the walls of the church. Next, the\nbishop, the clergy and people following him and performing the circuit\nof the church, sprinkleth from a rod of hyssop the external walls with\n{93} holy water; and as he arriveth each time at the door of the\nchurch he striketh the threshold with his pastoral staff, saying,\n'Lift up your heads, O ye gates,' etc. The deacon from within\nanswereth, 'Who is the King of Glory?' To whom the Pontiff, 'The Lord\nof Hosts,' etc. But the third time, the door being thrown open, the\nbishop entereth the church with a few of his attendants, the clergy\nand people remaining without, and saith, 'Peace be to this house'; and\nthen the Litanies. Next on the pavement of the church, let a cross be\nmade of ashes and sand; upon which the whole alphabet is described in\nGreek and Latin characters.  [Footnote 386] And then he sanctifieth\nmore water with salt and ashes and wine, and consecrateth the altar.\nLastly, he anointeth with chrism the twelve crosses depicted on the\nwall.\n  [Footnote 386: See the Appendix on the 'Dedication of a Church']\n8. In good truth whatsoever things be here done visibly, God by His\ninvisible power worketh the same in the soul which is the temple of\nthe true God: in which Faith layeth the foundation, Hope buildeth up,\nand Charity perfecteth. For the Catholic Church herself, made one out\nof many living stones, is the Temple of God, because many temples make\none temple, of which the true God is one, and the Faith one. The\nhouse, therefore, must be dedicated; the soul sanctified.\n9. And it is to be observed that consecration effecteth two things;\nfor it appropriateth the material church itself to God, and doth\ninsinuate our own betrothal, as well namely of the church as of the\nfaithful soul. For a house not consecrated is as a damsel designed for\nsome man, but not furnished with dowry or united in the commerce of\nwedlock. But in consecration it is endowed, and passeth into the\nproper spouse of Jesus Christ, which further to violate is sacrilege.\nFor it ceaseth to be the resort of demons, as is evident in the\nconsecration of that temple, which used formerly to be called the\nPantheon, or place of all demons.  [Footnote 387]\n  [Footnote 387: 'Pope Boniface the Fourth did consecrate to the most\n  Blessed Virgin and All Saints the famous monument of Agrippa, the\n  _Pantheon_, having purified it from the base herd of vain gods.'\n  _Ciampini_ IV, vi, 55. This is now called Santa Maria Rotonda.\n  Doard.]\n10. First, however, we have to speak of the benediction of water,\nconcerning which the Lord saith, 'Unless a man be born again of water\nand of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.'  [Footnote\n388] For water which is designed for washing the body, hath merited to\nreceive from God so great a virtue, that as it washeth the body from\nimpurities, so also it should cleanse the soul from sins. It is\nmanifest indeed that this water, by the aspersion of which a church is\nconsecrated, signifieth baptism, because in some sort the church\nitself is baptised; and the church itself assuredly denoteth that\nChurch which is contained in it, namely, the multitude of the\nfaithful. Whence also it is called a church because it contains the\nChurch; the thing containing, namely, for the thing contained.\n  [Footnote 388: S. John iii, 5.]\n11. But we must inquire wherefore salt is to be mixed with this water,\nsince our Saviour, speaking of baptism, made no mention of salt. For\nHe saith not 'unless a man be born again of salt water or water mixed\nwith salt,' or anything of this sort: but He said 'unless a man be\nborn again of water and of the Holy Spirit,' etc. And the very same\ninquiry may be made concerning oil and chrism. But we must note that\nsalt in the divine language is often put for wisdom; according to that\nsaying, 'Let your speech be savoured with salt' And the Lord saith to\nHis disciples, 'Have salt in yourselves and have peace one with\nanother.'  [Footnote 389] And again, 'Ye are the salt of the earth;\nbut if the salt have lost its savour wherewithal shall it be salted?'\n[Footnote 390] Hence also it is that {95} according to the law no\nvictim was offered without salt, but salt was a part of every\nsacrifice. From all which passages it is clearly shown that salt is\nput for wisdom. And wisdom indeed is the seasoning of all virtues, as\nsalt is of all meats. Hence therefore it is that no one is baptised\nbefore he hath tasted salt; and in order that even infants may have by\nthe symbolical meaning of the sacrament that which they cannot have in\nfact, the water is not blessed without a mixture of salt. Of the\nsecond benediction of water we shall speak in the following treatise.\n  [Footnote 389: S. Mark ix, 50.]\n  [Footnote 390: S. Mark v, 13.]\n12. Again, the trine aspersion within and without with hyssop and holy\nwater signifieth the threefold immersion in baptism. And it is done\nfor three reasons. First, to drive away evil spirits. For holy water\navaileth from its own proper virtue to drive away demons. Whence in\nthe Office for Exorcising the Water we say--'that this water may\nbecome exorcised in order to put to flight all the power of the enemy,\nand may avail to eradicate the enemy himself,' etc. Secondly, for the\ncleansing and expiation of the church itself. For all earthly things\nbe corrupted and defiled by reason of sin. Hence it is also that in\nthe Law almost everything was cleansed by water. Thirdly, to remove\nall malediction, and to bring in a blessing instead. For the earth\nfrom the beginning received the curse with all its fruits, because\nthat the great deceit was made out of its fruit. But water hath not\nbeen under any curse. Hence it is that our Lord ate fish, but we do\nnot read expressly that he ate flesh, unless of the Paschal Lamb; and\nthis on account of the precept of the Law, as an example, namely,\nsometimes to abstain from lawful things, sometimes to eat the same.\nAgain, the aspersion in going the circuit signifieth that the Lord\nhaving a care of His own, sendeth His angel round about them that fear\nHim.\n13. But the three responses which be chanted in the meantime testify\nthe joy of the three ages of men receiving the faith, namely, Noah,\nDaniel, and Job. And since at this invocation the grace of Faith,\nHope, and Charity, is poured out as the sprinkling is directed to the\nfoot and middle part, as well as to the upper part of the walls. We\nwill now also speak of the interior aspersion. (Of the virtue of the\nhyssop, we will speak under the next head.)\n14. But the trine circuit, which the bishop maketh while sprinkling,\ndenoteth the thrice-repeated circuit which Christ made for the\nsanctification of the Church. The first was that by which He came down\nfrom heaven to the world: the second in which He descended into hell\nfrom the world: the third in which returning from hell and rising\nagain He ascended into heaven. The trine circuit also showeth that\nthat church is dedicated to the honour of the Trinity. It showeth also\nthe three states of such as shall be saved in the Church, which be the\nvirgins, the continent, the married: which also the arrangement of the\nmaterial church itself showeth, as hath been said under the head of\nthe Church.\n15. Moreover, the trine striking on the lintel of the door signifieth\nthe threefold right which Christ hath in His Church why it ought to be\nopened unto Him. For it hath from Him Creation, Redemption, and\npromise of Glorification. For the bishop representeth Christ, and the\nrod His power. Again, by the triple striking of the door with the\npastoral staff, the preaching of the Gospel is understood. For what\nelse is the pastoral rod than the divine Word? According to that of\nEsaias, 'He shall smite the earth with the rod,' _i.e._ the word, 'of\nHis mouth,' etc.  [Footnote 391] Wherefore to strike the door with the\nrod is to strike the ears of the hearers by the word of preaching.\n{97} For the ears are the gates by which we bring in the words of holy\npreachings to the hearts of the hearers. Whence in the Psalm, 'Who\nliftest me up from the gates of death that I may show all Thy praises\nwithin the ports of the daughter of Sion.'   [Footnote 392] For what\nare the gates of the daughter of Sion but the ears and hearing of the\nfaithful? Thirdly, the trine striking with the staff, and the opening\nof the gates, signifieth that by the preaching of the pastors the\nunbelieving shall come to the agreement of the Faith. For by it the\ngates of justice be opened, and they that enter therein do confess the\nfaith. Whence the Psalm, 'Open unto me the gates of righteousness: I\nwill go into them and I will praise the Lord: this is the gate of the\nLord, the righteous shall enter into it.'  [Footnote 393] Wherefore\nthe bishop striketh the lintel, namely, of reason, saying, 'Lift up\nyour heads, ye princes,' that is, ye evil spirits: or rather, 'Lift\nup, ye men,' that is, remove the gates, that is, your ignorances,\nnamely, from your hearts.  [Footnote 394]\n  [Footnote 391: Isaiah xi, 4.]\n  [Footnote 392: Ps. ix (_Confitebor tibi_), 13, 14.]\n  [Footnote 393: Ps. cxviii (_Confitemini Domino_), 19, 20.]\n  [Footnote 394: Ps. xxiv (_Domini est terra_), 'Attollite portas\n  principes vestras.']\n16. Again, the question of the deacon shut up within answering in the\ncharacter of the people, 'Who is the King of glory?' is the ignorance\nof the people which knoweth not Who He is Who ought to enter.\n17. The opening of the doors is the ejection of sin. Rightly,\ntherefore, doth the bishop strike three times, because that number is\nmost known and most sacred; and in any consecration the bishop ought\nto smite the doors three times, because without the invocation of the\nTrinity, there can be no sacrament in the Church.\n18. The threefold proclamation, 'Lift up your heads,' etc., signifieth\nthe threefold power of Christ, that, namely, which He hath in heaven,\nand in the earth, and in hell. Whence it is said in the hymn for the\nAscension, 'That the threefold frame of things, whether heavenly,\nearthly, or infernal, may bow the head, having been subdued.\n[Footnote 395]\n  [Footnote 395: This hymn, by S. Gregory, is used in the office of\n  matins in the Roman Breviary.]\n19. Next the bishop entereth by the open door to denote that if he\nduly exercise his office, nothing can resist him; according to that\nsaying, 'Lord, who shall resist Thy power?' And he entereth,\naccompanied by two or three, that in the mouth of two or three\nwitnesses every word of the consecration may stand sure. Or else\nbecause the Lord in His Transfiguration, in the presence of a few,\nprayed for the Church. And the bishop as he entereth saith, 'Peace be\nto this house and to all them that dwell therein'; because Christ\nentering the world made peace between God and man; for He came that He\nmight reconcile us to God the Father.\n20. After this while the Litany is being said the bishop prostrateth\nhimself and prayeth for the sanctification of the house. For Christ\nalso humbling Himself before His Passion prayed for His disciples and\n'them that should believe through His word,' saying, 'Father, sanctify\nthem in Thy name.'   [Footnote 396] But after he hath risen up he\nprayeth without benediction, since he saith not 'The Lord be with\nyou'; because the Church is not yet as it were baptised, and because\nCatechumens only are not worthy that this mark of approval should be\ngiven to them, since they are not yet sanctified: but nevertheless\nprayer is to be made for them.\n  [Footnote 396: S. John xvii.]\n21. The clergy praying and chanting the Litany representeth the\nApostles who intercede with God for the sanctification of the Church\nand of souls.\nThe alphabet is written on the pavement of the church in this manner.\nA cross made with ashes and sand is described athwart the church, upon\nwhich cross of dust the alphabet is written in the shape of a cross in\nletters of Greek and Latin, but not of Hebrew, because the Jews have\ndeparted from the faith; and it is written with the pastoral staff.\n22. This alphabet written upon the cross representeth three things.\nFirst, the writing made in Greek and Latin characters in the shape of\na cross representeth the conjunction or union in faith of both people,\nnamely, the Jews and the Greeks, which is made through the Cross of\nChrist: according to the saying that Jacob blessed his sons with his\nhands crossed. But the cross itself or the legend that is described in\na direction athwart the church, namely, the one arm from the left\ncorner of the east to the right of the west, and the other from the\nright of the east to the left of the west,  [Footnote 397] signifieth\nthat that people, which was before on the right is now made on the\nleft, and that which was first is now made last, and the converse: and\nthis owing to the power of the Cross. For Christ passing from the\neast, left the Jews on His left hand, because they were unbelieving,\nand came to the Gentiles, to whom, though they had been in the west,\nHe grants to be on the right hand: and at length returning from the\nGentiles, who are situated at the right hand of the east, He visited\nthe Jews in the left corner of the west; who it is evident are worse\nthan He before found the Gentiles. But on this account the characters\nare written obliquely and in the shape of a cross, and not in a\nstraight line, because such an one as doth not receive the mystery of\nthe Cross and doth not believe that he must be saved by the Passion of\nChrist, is not able to attain to this holy wisdom. Wisdom will not\nenter into the evil-disposed mind, and where Christ is not the\nfoundation, no edifice can be built upon it.\n  [Footnote 397: We understand this to mean that the cross described\n  in the church is a saltire, or S. Andrew's Cross, and not a plain\n  one. Upon this again consult the Appendix.]\n23. Secondly, the writing of the alphabet representeth the page of\nboth Testaments, because they be fulfilled by the Cross of Christ. For\nthe veil of the temple was rent asunder at His Passion, because then\nthe Scriptures were opened, and the Holy of Holies revealed. Whence He\nHimself said when dying, 'It IS FINISHED.' In these few letters also\nall knowledge is contained; and the alphabet is written crosswise,\nbecause one Testament is contained in the other. For there was a wheel\nwithin a wheel.\n24. Thirdly, it representeth the articles of faith; for the pavement\nof the church is the foundation of our faith. The elements written\nthereon, are the articles of faith, in which ignorant men and\nneophytes from both peoples be instructed in the Church; who indeed\nought to esteem themselves dust and ashes. Just as Abraham saith in\nthe xviii chapter of Genesis, 'Shall I speak to my Lord, who am but\ndust and ashes?' Wherefore the writing of the alphabet on the pavement\nis the simple teaching of faith in the human heart.\n25. The _sambuca_ or staff, with which the alphabet is written,\nshoweth the doctrine of the apostles, or the mystery of the teachers,\nby which the conversion of the Gentiles hath been effected, and the\nperfidy of the Jews. Afterwards approaching the altar the bishop\nstandeth, and beginneth by saying, 'O God, make speed to save us;'\nbecause he is then beginning the principal part of office. And the\nversicle, 'Glory be to the Father,' etc., is then said.\n26. Because this benediction is used to set forth the glory of the\nTrinity, Alleluia is not then uttered, as will be set forth in the\nnext chapter. Then the bishop consecrateth the altar, for which he\nblesseth other water, as {101} shall also be declared in the next\nchapter. With which water also, after that the altar hath been\nsprinkled seven times, the whole interior of the church is sprinkled\nthree times, as at first without any distinction between greater and\nsmaller stones, since 'there is no respect of persons with God.' For\nthis reason is the interior sprinkled, to signify that an external\nablution profiteth nothing without an internal charity. And for this\nreason three times, because, as hath been premised, that aspersion\nsignifieth the aspersion and cleansing of baptism, which is conferred\nthrough the invocation of the Trinity, according to the saying, 'Go ye\nand teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and\nof the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:'   [Footnote 398] for since a\nchurch cannot be immersed in water as a man in baptism is immersed, it\nis on this account sprinkled three times with water, as if in the\nplace of a threefold immersion.\n  [Footnote 398: S. Matt, xxviii, 19.]\n27. Again, the bishop performeth the aspersion proceeding from the\neast to the west and once through the middle in the form of the cross;\nbecause Christ gave instructions to baptise the whole of Judea and all\nnations in the name of the Trinity, to which baptism He gave efficacy\nin the ministry of His Passion, beginning from the Jews, from whom He\nhad His birth. And what remains of the water is poured away at the\nfoot of the altar, as shall be mentioned in the next chapter. Some,\nhowever, do not bless any fresh water, but perform the whole office\nwith that which was blessed at first. In the meanwhile, however, the\nchoir is chanting the Psalm _Exsurgat Deus_ ('let God arise and let\nHis enemies be scattered,' etc.), and the _Qui habitat_ ('whoso\ndwelleth,' etc.), in which mention is made of the church and its\nconsecration, as is plain in that verse, 'He is the God {102} that\nmaketh 'men to be of one mind in an house.'  [Footnote 399] But the\nbishop saith, 'My house shall be called an house of prayer,' because\nit is his duty to cause that the church should be a house of God, not\nof merchandise.\n  [Footnote 399: Psalm lxviii (_Exsurgat Deus_), v, 5.]\n28. Next, when the altar hath been anointed with chrism, the twelve\ncrosses painted on the walls of the church are also anointed. But the\ncrosses themselves be painted; first, as a terror to evil spirits,\nthat they, having been driven forth thence, may be terrified when they\nsee the sign of the cross, and may not presume to enter therein again;\nsecondly, as a mark of triumph. For crosses be the banners of Christ,\nand the signs of his triumph.  [Footnote 400] Crosses therefore are\nwith reason painted there that it may be made manifest that that place\nhath been subdued to the dominion of Christ.\n  [Footnote 400: Compare the hymn, _Vexilla Regis prodeunt_.]\n29. For even in the pomp of an earthly sovereign it is customary when\nany city hath been yielded, for the imperial standard to be set up\nwithin it. And to represent the same thing, Jacob is said to have set\nup the stone, which he had placed under his head, as a historical,\ntraditional, and triumphal monument.  [Footnote 401]\n  [Footnote 401:  Genesis xxviii.]\n30. Thirdly, that such as look on them may call to mind the Passion of\nChrist, by which he hath consecrated His Church, and their belief in\nHis Passion. Whence it is said in the Canticles, 'place me as a signet\nupon thy arm,' etc.  [Footnote 402] The twelve lights placed before\nthese crosses signify the twelve Apostles who have illumined the whole\nworld by the faith of the Crucified, and whose teaching hath dispersed\nthe darkness: whence Bernard saith, 'All prophecy is verified in the\nfaith of the crucified One;' and the Apostle, 'I determined not to\nknow anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.'\n[Footnote 403] {103} Wherefore the crosses on the four walls of the\nchurch are lighted up and anointed with chrism, because the apostles\npreaching the mystery of the cross have by the faith of Christ\nillumined the four quarters of the earth unto knowledge, have lighted\nthem up unto love, have anointed them unto purity of conscience--which\nis signified by the oil; and unto the savour of a good\nreputation--which is signified by the balsam. In addition to this,\nafter the anointing of the altar, the altar itself and the church are\nornamented; the lamps lighted up; a Mass is said, in which the priest\nuseth different vestments from those which he hath used in the\naspersion, as shall be explained in the sequel.\n  [Footnote 402: Cant, viii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 403: I Cor, ii, 2.]\n31. Lastly, it is to be noted that a church is said to be consecrated\nin the blood of someone; whence, according to Pelagius and Pope\nNicholas, the Roman Church was consecrated in the martyrdom of the\nApostles, Peter and Paul.  [Footnote 404] A church therefore is\nconsecrated in the way just described; and an altar, as will be set\nforth in the next chapter; and a cemetery and other things, as is\ndeclared under the head of its consecration. And although we read in\nthe Old Testament that the Temple was consecrated three times: first,\nin the month of September; secondly, in March under Darius; thirdly,\nin December by Judas Maccabaeus.\n  [Footnote 404:  This passage is obscure. A confession or martyrium\n  was built over the place of S. Peter's martyrdom in the earliest\n  times, and is now covered by the Vatican. See Ciampini de Vaticana\n  Basilica. The expression probably means, in honour of the\n  martyrdom.]\n32. Yet a church once consecrated, is not to be consecrated again\nunless it shall have been profaned, which happeneth in three ways.\nFirst, if it hath been burnt so as that all the walls or the greater\npart of them be destroyed. But if only the roof or some part of it\nhath been burnt, the walls remaining entire, or at least only {104}\npartially destroyed, it need not be reconsecrated. Secondly, if the\nwhole church or the greater part of it hath fallen to the ground at\nthe same time, and hath been repaired entirely or not with the\noriginal stones. For the consecration of a church consisteth mainly in\nthe exterior anointings, and in the conjunction and arrangement of the\nstones. If, however, all the walls shall have fallen in, not at the\nsame time, but in succession, and shall have been repaired, the church\nis to be considered the same. And so it need not be reconsecrated, but\nonly exorcised with water and reconciled by the solemnisation of a\nMass: however, some learned authors have said that it ought to be\nreconsecrated. Thirdly, a church must be reconsecrated, if it be\ndoubtful whether it ever hath been consecrated, should there remain no\nwriting or painting or inscription to that effect, nor even a single\neye-witness, nor yet an ear-witness, who (as some say) would be\nsufficient.\n33. An altar also which hath been once consecrated must not be\nconsecrated again unless it should happen that it become profaned.\nWhich taketh place first if the table, that is the upper surface on\nwhich the principal part of the consecration is bestowed, be moved or\nchanged in its form, or broken beyond measure, for instance above a\nhalf. However, a disproportion of this sort may rightly be referred to\nthe decision of the bishop. The same also is especially the case, if\nthe whole structure of the altar hath been moved and repaired.\nNevertheless, the church is not to be reconsecrated on account of\neither the movement or the breaking of the structure of the altar:\nbecause the consecration of an altar and of a church be two different\nthings. So conversely if when the church is entirely destroyed the\naltar be not injured, the church only is to be repaired, and the altar\nnot reconsecrated although in such case it is fitting that it be\nwashed with exorcised water.\n34. Further, when the chief altar hath been consecrated the inferior\naltars are not the less to be consecrated: although some have said\nthat it is sufficient for the rest to be pointed out with the finger\nwhile the former is under consecration.\n35. If, however, the altar hath suffered a trifling injury, it is not\non this account to be reconsecrated.\nSecondly, an altar is reconsecrated, if the _seal_ of the altar--that\nis the little stone by which the sepulchre or cavity in which the\nrelics be deposited is closed or sealed--be moved or broken. And the\ncavity itself is made sometimes on the top part of the block, and\nsometimes no other seal is put over it, but the _table_, being placed\nover it, is considered as the seal. But sometimes it is placed in the\nhinder part, and sometimes in the front: and in the same cavity the\nbishop's letters of consecration be generally carefully deposited in\ntestimony of the consecration: containing his own name and that of the\nother bishops present at the consecration: and declaring in honour of\nwhat saint the altar is consecrated, and also the church itself, when\nboth be consecrated at the same time, and the year also and day of\nconsecration.\nThirdly, an altar is reconsecrated, if the junction of the seal to the\ncavity, or of the _table_ to the block, where there is no other seal\nthan this slab, be disturbed; or if any of the stones of the junction\nor the block, which toucheth either the table or the seal, be either\ndisturbed or broken. For in the conjunction of the seal and cavity,\nand of the table and block or inferior structure, the consecration is\nmost especially perceived.\nFourthly, an altar is reconsecrated, if to it or to the conjunction of\nthe table with the under structure so great an enlargement be made as\nthat it loseth its original form, since the form giveth the existence\nto the thing. Yet it doth not become profaned on account of a trifling\nenlargement: but in that case the sacred part draweth over to itself\nthe part not sanctified: so long as the conjunction of the top slab\nand under structure be not greatly changed.\nFifthly, an altar, just as a church, is reconsecrated in cases of\ndoubt.\nSixthly, a travelling altar, if the stone be removed from the wood in\nwhich it is inserted, which in some sort representeth its _seal_, and\nbe replaced again in the same or in other wood, some think should be\nreconsecrated, but others only reconciled. But although it be often by\nthe command of the bishop transferred from place to place, and carried\non a journey (on which account it is called a portable or a travelling\naltar) yet it is not reconsecrated in consequence of this, nor yet\nreconciled.\n36. But if a consecrated chalice be regilt, is it therefore to be\nreconsecrated? It seemeth so, since it appeareth to become a new\nchalice. For he who doth renew the old fashion of a work seemeth to\nmake a new work: and he doth remake, who doth mend a thing already\nmade. And assuredly consecration doth pertain to the outer surface.\nAnd hence it is that I have said above that a church, if its walls be\nstripped of their outer coat, must be reconsecrated.\n37. The converse is nevertheless true, that neither on account of\nwhitewashing or painting the walls, nor of any small addition to them,\nis a church to be reconsecrated; as I have already said. Wherefore, if\nthe shape of the chalice be not changed, it remaineth the same\nchalice, and is not to be reconsecrated; just as also a church being\nrepaired, since it remaineth the same church, is not to be\nreconsecrated, as aforesaid. {107} But if the former shape be changed,\nthe case were otherwise, since, as I have said, the shape giveth\nexistence to the thing. Nevertheless, it is decent, as well by reason\nof its contact with unclean hands as also of the increment of\nunconsecrated matter, that a chalice, being regilded, should be washed\nwith exorcised water before that the most Holy Body and Blood of the\nLord be sacrificed therein. Let us now say something about\nReconciliation.\n38. Upon this head it is to be noted that the spiritual temple, which\nis man, is ofttimes polluted. Whence we do read in the twentieth of\nLeviticus what men be polluted, and how they may not enter the church\nuntil they be washed with water and cleansed: as also in the\nnineteenth of Numbers, 'He that toucheth the dead body of a man shall\nbe unclean .... wherefore he shall purify himself and wash his clothes\nand bathe himself in water and shall be clean.' And the Prophet saith,\n'Thou shalt purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean.   [Footnote\n  [Footnote 405: Psalm li (_Miserere mei_), 7.]\n39. The material temple also, which as Pope Gregory doth testify, is\nthe church, is sometimes polluted, as we do read in Leviticus.\n[Footnote 406] Whence saith the Prophet, 'Thy holy temple have they\ndefiled and made Jerusalem an heap of stones.'  [Footnote 407] And the\nmaterial temple is also washed with water in order to be reconciled.\n[Footnote 408] Reconciliation is also effected by the celebration of a\nMass, and the aspersion of water duly consecrated with salt, wine, and\nashes. For by the salt, is signified discretion; by the water, the\npeople; by the wine, the Divinity; by the ashes, the remembrance of\nthe Passion of Christ; by the wine mixed with water, the union of\nGodhead and Manhood.\n  [Footnote 406: Levit. xv, 31.]\n  [Footnote 407: Psalm lxxix (_Deus, venerunt_), I. ]\n  [Footnote 408: Some of our readers may not know that reconciliation\n  is the technical term for the restoring a desecrated church to a\n  state fit for the performance of the divine offices.]\nThese things, therefore, be put together to denote that the people,\nbeing cleansed by a discerning remembrance of the Passion of Christ,\nare made one with Him. Also if the church hath once been consecrated,\nthe reconciliation can be made by a bishop only. And albeit he might\ndevolve upon a fellow-bishop the whole office, namely, both the\nblessing of the water and the reconciliation; or the benediction of\nthe water only; or even the reconciliation alone with water blessed\nbeforehand by himself; yet can neither be devolved upon a mere priest,\nunless perchance this be competent to him by a special privilege. But\nif the church hath not been consecrated, it ought, according to the\nConstitution of Gregory, to be washed forthwith with exorcised water:\nthe which washing some do affirm may be done by a mere priest, though\nat the bidding of the bishop: since it hath to be done by exorcised\nwater, which every priest may use. Yet some skilful men of the highest\nauthority have written that it is safer for this also to be done by\nnone but a bishop, and that this may not be devolved by him to a\npriest; for certain canons do call exorcised water that which is\nsolemnly blessed with wine and ashes:--and this is true indeed in\nregard of a church which although not consecrated hath been dedicated\nunto God. For it is otherwise with a mere oratory, which is neither a\nholy nor a religious place, inasmuch as any man doth order it at his\nwill--at least for prayers, albeit perchance not for celebration\nwithout the license of the diocesan--and at his will assigneth the\nsame place to another use.\n40. A church then is to be reconsecrated in the aforesaid case: and\nalso if any uncleanness be committed therein, whether by clerk,\nlayman, heretic, or paynim. But albeit some wise men have thought\notherwise, we opine that the case is different in regard of\nunintentional pollution.  [Footnote 409]\n  [Footnote 409: The editors have ventured to make a few omissions in\n  this and some of the following sections.]\n41. A church also must be reconciled on account of any homicide, in\nany way intentionally committed therein, whether with or without the\nshedding of blood: and also, besides homicide, for any violence or\ninjurious shedding of human blood, whether from a wound or not, or\nfrom the nose or the mouth. For we read in the Old Testament, in the\nfourteenth and fifteenth of Leviticus, how that any man shedding\nblood, or polluted in divers ways, may not enter the temple. If,\nhowever, without violence or injury blood should flow in any natural\nway whatsoever within the church; or if any animal should be slain\ntherein, or if anyone should die suddenly, or be killed by a falling\nstone or timber, or by lightning; for these and the like occasions the\nchurch is not reconciled. Nor again, if anyone, having been wounded\nelsewhere, should flee to a church and die there even with great\neffusion of blood: since then the homicide is not committed in the\nchurch. But conversely, if anyone having been wounded in a church\ndieth without, or even if blood flow from the wound away from the\nchurch, the case is otherwise, even if the blood did not flow at all\nwithin the church: since the law regardeth the blow which causeth the\nwound. But and if blood be shed or other pollutions be caused on the\nroof of a church, no reconciliation is made, because the deed is\ncommitted without the church.\n42. But if theft and rapine be committed in a church, it is reconciled\nby the custom which usually obtaineth in such matters. And some do\naffirm that the same ought to be done in any case of violence\ncommitted therein without the shedding of blood; for example, if\nanyone having taken refuge therein should be drawn forth with\nviolence. Also if anyone should break into the church or any quarrel\nshould be tumultuously carried on, though without shedding of blood:\nor if anyone should be grievously beaten therein, so as his bones\nshould be broken, or he be covered with weals and bruises, though\nwithout blood; {110} or again, if anyone, being condemned while\npresent in a church either to death or mutilation, be led forth to go\nto the place of execution. But since these cases be not expressed in\nthe law, it is not necessary for the church to be solemnly reconciled\nby the bishop. Yet we think it is decent for it to be washed by the\npriest with exorcised water at the command of the bishop: and the same\nis to be said, if the church being a long-time without roof or doors,\nshould have been open to all impurities, to animals and the natural\nuse of men, as if a common inn: nor perchance would it be amiss for it\nin such case to be solemnly reconciled by the bishop. Again, if\nanyone, slain without the church, be shortly borne into the church,\nand there the murderer or anyone else thinking he will not die should\ninflict on his yet warm body a blow causing blood to flow, then the\nchurch must be reconciled, as well by reason of the horror and\nabomination, as of the violence and intention of sinning: for though a\ndead man be not a man, yet is his human blood shed there by violence;\nand to the corpse itself is violence, horror, and injury offered. But\nthe case is otherwise if anyone, having died a natural death, be,\nthrough respect of, and honour to his body, dismembered in the church\nor disembowelled, that perhaps one part may be buried in one place,\nand another in another.\n43. A church must also be reconciled, in which an infidel, or one\npublicly excommunicated be buried; and then the walls are to be\nscraped.\nIn the aforesaid cases, however, in which a church is to be\nreconciled, it is requisite that the fact causing the reconciliation\nshould be known at least by report.\n44. For this is a scandal to the church, the horror and abomination of\nbaseness and sin and violence committed in a sacred place, or in a\nchurch: wherein the pardon for offences is besought, wherein there\nought to be a refuge of defence, wherein is offered the saving\nsacrifice for sins, wherein also those that flee for refuge be saved,\nand praises be rendered unto God. Furthermore, the intention and\ndesign of sinning mortally therein do cause a church to be reconciled.\nBut if this design be hidden, reconciliation is not necessary, since\nthe church itself, being holy, cannot be polluted; nay, the holiness\nof the place itself doth do away with the infamy: albeit some do think\nthe contrary of this, as that it ought to be reconciled at least\nprivately, so that the delinquents be not exposed.\n45. For reconciliation is performed for an example and warning, that\nall who behold the church, which hath in no wise sinned, washed and\npurified for the delict of another, may reflect how they themselves\nmust work out the expiation of their own sins.\n46. Also a cemetery, in which a paynim, or an infidel or one\nexcommunicate be buried, is to be reconciled; the bones, however, of\nthe paynim, if they can be distinguished from those of the faithful,\nbeing interred elsewhere. A cemetery also is reconciled in the\nabove-mentioned cases, in which a church is to be reconciled: for a\ncemetery enjoyeth the same privileges as doth a church, as we shall\nsay in the chapter of Sacred Unctions; for it is a holy place from the\ntime of its benediction; and it is reconciled by the bishop, just as a\nchurch, by the aspersion of water, blessed with wine and ashes.\n47. But this is to be noted, that in whatsoever part of the church or\nthe cemetery the violence or pollution be committed, both the church\nand the cemetery, and also the several parts of either, by reason of\ntheir contiguity, are understood to be violated. This first hath of\nlate been set straight by Pope Boniface. For albeit the consecrations\nof the church, the altar, and the cemetery be diverse, yet is the\nimmunity of them one and the same and is not to be restricted to any\none of them separately, nor to any individual part of either. {112}\nThis indeed is true if the church and cemetery be adjacent: but if the\none be at a distance from the other, one may well be violated without\nthe other. If therefore when one is violated or polluted, the other be\nalso violated and polluted; by the like reason, if one only be\nreconciled the other is also taken to be reconciled: since nothing is\nmore natural than that everything should be loosed in the same method\nas it is bound, and that the relation of binding and loosing should be\nthe same. Wherefore when the cemetery is violated or polluted, it\nsufficeth that the church be reconciled. There be nevertheless some\nwho do affirm simply that by the pollution of the one, the other is in\nno wise polluted, and by consequence that each should be reconciled\nseparately. Yet these doth the authority of the Pontifical oppose, in\nwhich is found a special form for the reconciliation of a cemetery.\nLastly, if a church or a cemetery, or any such thing, be consecrated\nor blessed by a bishop under excommunication, these, some affirm, do\nnot require reconciliation, since sacraments administered by such in\nthe form of the Church be valid. But since (as aforesaid) one or more\nexcommunicate persons do profane a cemetery or church, much more\nindeed do the external sacraments and benedictions, which proceed from\nthe hands and mouth of an excommunicate person, appear so far as\npertaineth to their own merits to be contaminated and to stink before\nGod. Wherefore it is decent that we should reconcile them before the\nfaithful use these sacraments; as in truth the reading of the sacred\ncanons doth evidently teach. For the Lord saith by the Prophet, 'I\nwill curse your blessings.'   [Footnote 410]\n  [Footnote 410: Malachi ii. 2.]\nCHAPTER VII\nOF THE CONSECRATION OF AN ALTAR\nRise of the Consecration of Altars--Manner of the Same--The\nBenediction of Water--The Aspersions--The Hyssop--Consideration of\nRelics--The Altar must be of Stone--The Incense--The Benediction of\nChurch Ornaments.\n1. Not only is a church consecrated, but also the altar: and this for\nthree reasons. First, with regard to the sacrament thereon to be\noffered to God. Noah   [Footnote 411] built an altar to the Lord, and\noffered a sacrifice upon it, taking some of all clean birds and\nbeasts. But this sacrament is the Body and Blood of Christ which is\nsacrificed in remembrance of the Lord's Passion, according to the\ncommand, 'This do in commemoration of Me.'   [Footnote 412]\n  [Footnote 411: Genesis viii.]\n  [Footnote 412:  S. Luke xxii, 19.]\n2. Secondly, with regard to the invocation in that place of the name\nof God: whence [Footnote 413] Abraham built an altar to God who\nappeared unto him, and called there upon the name of the Lord. But\nthis invocation, which takes place over the altar, is properly called\nthe Mass.\n  [Footnote 413: Genesis xii.]\n3. Thirdly, with regard to chanting: 'He gave him patience against his\nenemies, and caused singers also to stand before the altar, that by\ntheir voices they might make sweet melody.'   [Footnote 414]\n  [Footnote 414: Eccles. xlvii, 9.]\n4. The consecration of an altar is performed in this method and order.\nThe bishop beginneth, 'O God, make speed to save us.' Afterwards he\nblesseth the water, and then at the four horns   [Footnote 415] of the\naltar he describeth four crosses with the consecrated water. Next, he\ngoeth round the altar seven times, and sprinkleth the _table_\n[Footnote 416] of the altar seven times with holy water, by means of\nan aspersory of hyssop. The church also is again sprinkled, and the\nremainder of the water is poured at the foot of the altar: and then\nfour crosses be made with chrism at the four corners of the sepulchre\nin which the relics are to be deposited; and the relics themselves be\nplaced in a case, together with three grains of frankincense, and so\nbe buried in the sepulchre. Then is placed upon the sepulchre its\ncover,  [Footnote 417] strengthened in the middle by the sign of the\ncross: afterwards the stone, which is called the table, is fitted to\nthe top of the altar, and when fitted is anointed with oil in five\nplaces, and in the same way is further anointed afterwards with\nchrism, as hath been said when speaking about oil. The altar also is\nconfirmed in front by the chrism applied in the form of the cross, and\nincense is burnt upon it in the five places. After this the altar is\ncovered up, and is spread with clean cloths, and then at length the\nsacrifice is celebrated upon it. Now let us follow out each of the\nabove-mentioned ceremonies in succession.\n  [Footnote 415: The word _horn_ appears to be used simply for\n  _corner_, evidently with reference to the altar of the temple, which\n  had raised projections, or horns at its angles.]\n  [Footnote 416: We shall use the word _table_ to denote the _mensa_\n  or upper surface of the altar, on which the chief part of the\n  ceremonies of consecration were performed.]\n  [Footnote 417: This passage is obscure, and receives no light from\n  other ritualists who have not spoken much on the consecration of\n  altars. From the 25 of the chapter we apprehend that this slab, or\n  cover of the sepulchre, was marked with a cross of chrism before it\n  was fitted on to the cavity.]\n5. First, then, it is to be noted, that an altar is consecrated by the\nunction of chrism and act of blessing intervening, and that it is only\nand entirely of stone. The bishop standing up beginneth, 'O God, make\nspeed to save us,' because the Lord Himself saith, 'Without Me ye can\ndo nothing.'   [Footnote 418]\n  [Footnote 418:  S. John xv, 5.]\n6. And because this dedication signifieth that those must be baptised,\nwho, after receiving the faith, are preparing themselves to fight, and\nwho are still situated amongst the sighs and struggles of this world;\non this account the Alleluia is omitted, since those who be not\nbaptised be not worthy to join in the praises of angels: whence it is\nwritten in Tobit, 'And all her streets shall say Alleluia.'\n[Footnote 419] But after that the consecration of the church or of the\naltar is completed, the Alleluia is chanted, because the delusions of\ndevils having been expelled, God shall be praised thereupon. For\nChrist even when approaching to the altar of the cross in order to\nmanifest the glory of His Eternity, paid the penalty of death: not\nuntil after His resurrection sang He Alleluia.\n  [Footnote 419: Tobit xiii, 18.]\n7. Secondly, with respect to the blessing of water, it is to be noted\nthat this kind of exorcising water is performed in order to expel the\nenemy from it. In which blessing four things be necessary; namely,\nwater, wine, salt, and ashes. And this for three reasons.\n8. (i) Because there be four things which expel the enemy. The first\nis the outpouring of tears, which is denoted by the water: the second\nis the exultation of the soul, which is denoted by the wine: the third\nis natural discretion, which by the salt; the fourth, a profound\nhumility, which is signified by the ashes. Wherefore the water is\npenitence, the wine exaltation of mind, the salt wisdom (as was shown\nin the preceding chapter), the ashes the humility of penitence. Whence\nit is said of the Ninevites that their 'king rose up from his throne,\nand clothed himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.'  [Footnote 420]\n{116} Hence also David saith, 'For I have eaten ashes as it were\nbread.'   [Footnote 421] Hence also Abraham saith, 'Shall I speak to\nmy Lord, who am but dust and ashes?'   [Footnote 422]\n  [Footnote 420: Jonah iii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 421: Psalm cii (_Domine exaudi_), 9.]\n  [Footnote 422: Genesis xviii, 27.]\n9. (ii) In a second sense water is the people or mankind, because many\nwaters are many peoples; wine is the Deity; salt, the teaching of the\ndivine law which is the salt of the covenant; ashes, that which\npreserveth the remembrance of the Lord's Passion. Wine mixed with\nwater, is Christ, God and Man. For by means of faith in the Lord's\nPassion (_ashes_), which is had through the teaching of the Divine Law\n(_salt_), the people, denoted by the water, is joined through the\nunion of faith, to its Head, God and Man.\n10. (iii) In a third method we may say also that this consecrated\nwater signifieth the Holy Spirit, without Whose influence nothing ever\nis sanctified, and without Whose grace there is no remission of sins.\nThat the Holy Spirit is called water, truth itself showeth when He\nsaith, 'Whosoever believeth in Me, out of his belly shall flow rivers\nof living water':   [Footnote 423] which the Evangelist explaining\nsaith, 'This He spake of the Holy Ghost which they should receive who\nbelieved upon Him.'\n  [Footnote 423: S. John vii, 38, 39.]\n11. And note the order of the sacrament; the church is consecrated\noutwardly by water, inwardly by the Spirit. For this is what the Lord\nsaith, 'Unless a man shall be born again of water and of the Holy\nGhost,' etc.  [Footnote 424] Here is the water: here the Holy Spirit.\nFor in the sacrament of baptism, neither is the water without the\nSpirit, nor the Spirit without the water: which element indeed the\nSpirit Himself did sanctify, when in the first creation of the world\n'He moved upon the face {117} of the waters.'  [Footnote 425] With\nthis water therefore, both the altar itself and the whole interior of\nthe church is sprinkled, when both it and the altar are dedicated on\nthe same occasion.\n  [Footnote 424: S. John iii, 5.]\n  [Footnote 425: Genesis i, 2.]\n12. Although therefore the Spirit and water would suffice for the\nperfect operation of baptism and the consecration of a church, yet the\nholy fathers who have made this constitution, wished to satisfy us not\nonly in those particulars which pertain to the efficacy of the\nsacraments, but in those also which relate to its greater\nsanctification: and on this account they have added salt, wine, oil,\nashes, and chrism. (For Philip, when he baptised the eunuch, had\nneither oil nor chrism.) Therefore not one of these ingredients ought\nto be wanting; and they ought all to be mixed together, because the\npeople of God, which is the Church, is neither sanctified nor released\nfrom sins without the union of these qualities. On this I shall treat\nalso in the chapter upon consecrations. With respect to water indeed\nthe case is evident, because 'unless a man be born again,' etc.\n13. With respect to the salt also; because without the seasoning of\nfaith, which is typified by the salt, no one shall ever be saved,\nalbeit he be sprinkled by the water of baptism. Also with respect to\nwine, by means of which the spiritual intelligence of the divine law\nis denoted. Whence the Lord at the marriage in Cana turned the water\ninto wine. But if anyone shall not have been sprinkled with this, that\nis, shall not have drunk of this or have believed those who offered it\nto him to drink, he shall not attain to the blessedness of eternal\nlife. The aspersion of ashes also, by which the humility of penitence\nis understood, is so necessary, that without it there is no remission\nof sins in adults; for through it they come to baptism, and it is the\nsole refuge for such as have sinned {118} after baptism. Whence not\nwithout reason is baptism called from it: the Lord speaking in the\ngospel concerning John Baptist 'that he came into the whole region of\nGalilee, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of\nsins.' [Footnote 426] Note also that there be four kinds of\nconsecrated water, of which we shall speak in the fourth book, and at\nthe head of 'The aspersion of holy water.'  [Footnote 427]\n  [Footnote 426: S. Mark i, 4.]\n  [Footnote 427: There be four kinds of holy water, one, by the which\n  is made the judgment of expurgation, which is no longer used; a\n  second, which doth sanctify in the consecration of a church or an\n  altar; a third, with which aspersions be made in the church; and a\n  fourth, the water of baptism.'--Durandus, Lib. IV, iv, 10.]\n14. When all these ingredients have been mixed, the bishop maketh four\ncrosses with this water at the four horns of the altar, and one in the\nmiddle;  [Footnote 428] the four crosses represent the fourfold\ncharity which they ought to have who approach the altar, viz., love\nfor God, themselves, their friends, and their enemies. Of which four\ncorners of charity it is said in Genesis, 'Thou shalt spread into the\neast, and the west, and the north, and the south': and for this reason\nbe the four crosses made at the four corners to show that Christ, by\nHis Cross, hath saved the four quarters of the world. Secondly, they\nbe made to point out that we ought to bear the cross of the Lord in\nfour ways; namely, in our heart by meditation, in our mouth by\nconfession, in our body by mortification of the flesh, in our face by\nconstant impression. The cross in the middle of the altar signifieth\nthe Passion which Christ underwent in the middle of the earth, by\nwhich He worked out salvation in the middle of the earth; that is, in\nJerusalem.\n  [Footnote 428: The _tables_, or upper slabs of the altar, were\n  inscribed with five crosses, one at each corner and one in the\n  middle: as are also the altar stones which are found in the middle\n  of the frightful wooden altars abroad at this day. See an\n  interesting list of altar slabs in the 'Few Hints' of the Cambridge\n  Camden Society.]\n15. Next, the bishop goeth seven times round the altar, (i) Firstly,\nto signify that he ought to exercise care for all, and to keep himself\nvigilant, which is denoted by the act of going round. Whence at that\ntime they chant, 'The watchmen that went about the city found me.'\n[Footnote 429] For a bishop ought to watch anxiously over the flocks\ncommitted to him: for as Gilbert saith, 'A ridiculous thing it is, a\nblind watchman, a lame leader, a negligent prelate, an untaught\nteacher, and a dumb preacher.'\n  [Footnote 429: Cant. v, 7.]\n16. (ii) Secondly, the seven circuits of the altar do signify the\nseven meditations which we ought to entertain respecting the sevenfold\nvirtue of the humility of Christ, and of which we ought to make\nfrequent circuits in our minds. The first virtue is, that from being\nrich He became poor; the second, that He was laid in a manger: the\nthird, that he was subject to His parents; the fourth, that He bowed\nHis Head under the hand of a slave; the fifth, that He bore with a\nthief and a betrayer as a disciple; the sixth, that He stood gentle\nbefore an unrighteous judge; the seventh, that He mercifully prayed\nfor them that crucified Him.\n17. (iii) Thirdly, by the seven circuits be indicated the seven\njourneys of Christ. The first was from heaven to the Virgin's womb;\nthe second, thence into the manger; the third, from the manger into\nthe world; the fourth, from the world to the cross; the fifth, from\nthe cross to the sepulchre; the sixth, from the sepulchre to the place\nof spirits; the seventh, from the place of spirits to heaven.\n18. After this, the bishop sprinkleth the altar. But what the altar\nsignifieth in a temple, the Apostle telleth us: 'For the Temple of God\nis holy, which temple ye are.'  [Footnote 430] Wherefore, if we be the\nTemple of God, 'we {120} have an altar.'  [Footnote 431] Our altar is\nour heart: for the heart is in a man what the altar is in a temple. On\nthis altar is made the sacrifice of praise and joy, according to the\nsaying of the Psalmist: 'The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,'\netc.  [Footnote 432] On this altar is made the commemoration of the\nBody and Blood of Christ. From it do prayers rise to heaven, because\nGod looketh to the heart. This altar, therefore, is sprinkled with\nwater when the hearts of men, by means of the preaching of the gospel,\nare cleansed from sin. For preaching is water, according to that\nsaying: 'All ye that thirst, come to the waters.'   [Footnote 433] By\nthis water, therefore, that is, by the preaching of the gospel and the\nsanctification of the Holy Ghost, both the altar of the heart and the\nwhole man are cleansed and sanctified. For the altar of the heart is\nconsecrated by the conception of fear, inviting to good, and by the\naffection of love, confirming to the better. 'For the fear of the Lord\nis the beginning of wisdom.'  [Footnote 434]\n  [Footnote 431: Heb. xiii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 432: Ps. li (_Miserere mei Deus_), 17.]\n  [Footnote 433: Isaiah lv, 1.]\n  [Footnote 434: Ps. cxi (_Confitebor tibi_), 10.]\n19. But the altar is sprinkled seven times with water to notify that\nin baptism the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit be conferred. By this\nalso it is set forth that we ought to have a remembrance of the Lord's\nPassion. For the seven aspersions of water be the seven outpourings of\nthe Blood of Christ. The first whereof was at circumcision; the second\nin prayer, when His sweat was as drops of blood; the third, at the\nscourging; the fourth, from the crown of thorns; the fifth, from His\npierced hands; the sixth, when His feet were nailed to the cross; the\nseventh, when His side was opened. Some, however, sprinkle three\ntimes, because we baptise in the name of the Holy Trinity; or because\nthe church is cleansed from sins of thought, word, and deed; whence\nalso at that time the _Miserere mei_ is said.\n20. Moreover, these aspersions be made with an aspersory made of\nhyssop, by which herb, because it is lowly, the lowliness of Christ is\nconveniently represented: since the above-mentioned effusions of blood\nwere accompanied by the hyssop, of the humility and inextinguishable\nlove of Christ by which the Catholic Church being sprinkled is\npurified. This herb also groweth naturally upon rock: and lowliness of\ndisposition hath grown upon Christ the rock. For according to the\nApostle, 'That rock was Christ.'   [Footnote 435] It is also of a warm\nnature; and the humility of Christ inflameth cold hearts to the\npractice of works of love. Its roots also penetrate the rocks; and\nhumility breaketh through the hardest of obstinacy. It availeth for\ndiseases of the breast and against swelling: so doth humility heal the\nswelling of pride. The former also is born from, and rooted in, the\nearth: whence by it the whole multitude of the faithful may be\nunderstood; and those especially be figured by the hyssop, who, rooted\nand grounded in Christ, cannot be plucked up or separated from His\nlove. By whom what can we understand better than the bishops and\npresbyters, because the more dignity they obtain in the Church, the\nmore firmly ought they to cleave to the faith of Christ. By these\nassuredly is the water aspersed; by and through these be the faithful\nof Christ baptised; to these is it given to perfect the sacrament of\nbaptism.\n  [Footnote 435: I Corinthians x, 4.]\n21. But whilst the altar is being sprinkled with water the bishop\nchanteth, 'My house shall be called an house of Prayer,' etc.,\n[Footnote 436] and again, 'I will tell out thy name to my brethren.'\n[Footnote 437] And because without God no work is perfectly\nconsummated, he prayeth that those who enter therein to seek for\nblessings may be heard.\n  [Footnote 436:  S. Matthew xxi, 13.]\n  [Footnote 437: Psalm xxii (_Deus Deus meus_), 22.]\nAfterwards, when the church and altar are consecrated at the same\ntime, the whole church is sprinkled with that water, as was discussed\nin the preceding chapter, which being done, the bishop approacheth the\naltar repeating Psalms, and what remains of the water is poured away\nat the foot of the altar, as in the old Testament  [Footnote 438] what\nremained of the blood was poured away at the bottom of the altar; by\nwhich it is signified that the remainder in so great a sacrament,\nwhich is beyond human power, is given over unto God, Who is the Chief\nHigh Priest, Whose part it is to supply the defect of other priests.\nBut the sepulchre or cavity in which relics ought to be deposited,\nsignifieth the golden pot full of manna, which was placed in the ark\nof the testimony, as hath been explained under the head of the Altar.\n  [Footnote 438: Exodus xxix, 12.]\n22. A sepulchre of this sort, which by some is termed a _confession_,\nis our heart; and it is consecrated by four crosses made with chrism,\nbecause there be four virtues described in the book of wisdom--namely,\nPrudence, Fortitude, Temperance, and Justice--with which our heart is,\nas it were, anointed, when it is prepared by the gift of the Holy\nSpirit to receive the mysteries of the heavenly secrets. But this\nsepulchre is made sometimes at the upper part of the altar, sometimes\nin the front side of it.\n23. Without the relics of saints, or, where they cannot be had,\nwithout the body of Christ,  [Footnote 439] there is no consecration\nof a fixed altar: but there may be of a travelling or portable one.\nRelics in truth are, after the example of both Testaments, evidences\nof the suffering of martyrs and lives of confessors; which things be\nleft to us as examples. These we enclose in a case, because we retain\nthem, in order to imitate them in our heart: but if we hear and\nunderstand and do no works, {123} it tendeth rather to damnation than\nto salvation; because 'not the hearers of the law are just before God,\nbut the doers only';  [Footnote 440] whence the Apostle saith, 'Be ye\nimitators of me as I am also of Christ.'  [Footnote 441]\n  [Footnote 439: See chapter ii.]\n  [Footnote 440: Romans ii, 13.]\n  [Footnote 441: I Corinthians xi, 1.]\n24. But the solemn carrying of relics is in imitation of what is read\nin the xxv chapter of Exodus. In the ark of the testament there were\ntwo golden rings, going through the whole thickness of the wood, and\nthrough these were put the staves of shittim wood overlaid with gold,\nby which the ark was borne. And before the bishop entereth the church\nhe goeth round it with the relics in order that they may be protectors\nof that church. We read also in the viii chapter of the third book of\nKings that at the dedication of the temple 'there were assembled\ntogether all the elders of Israel, with the chiefs of the tribes, and\nthe heads of families to King Solomon in Jerusalem, to carry the ark\nof the covenant of the Lord; and there came all the elders of Israel,\nand the priests brought in the ark of the covenant of the Lord into\nhis place, into the oracle of the house, to the most holy place, even\nunder the wings of the cherubims. For the cherubims spread forth their\ntwo wings over the place of the ark, and the cherubims covered the ark\nand the staves thereof above. And King Solomon, and all the\ncongregation of Israel that were assembled unto him, marched with him\nbefore the ark.'   [Footnote 442] In remembrance of this event, the\nprelates, great men, and people   [Footnote 443] of the province meet\ntogether, even at this day, for the dedication of churches, and follow\nin procession him that consecrateth: and relics are solemnly carried\nby priests under a pavilion or canopy. Afterwards the bishop, before\nhe entereth the church with these, addresseth the people. For Solomon\nalso, after the ark had been {124} carried, 'turned his face about,\nand blessed all the congregation of Israel,' and prayed for such as\nshould pray in the church. 'For all the congregation of Israel stood,\nand Solomon said, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,' etc., as is read\nin the same place.  [Footnote 444 ]\n  [Footnote 442:  I Kings viii, 2, 6, 7.]\n  [Footnote 443: The Venice edition of 1609 reads _Apostoli_ here.]\n  [Footnote 444: I Kings, viii.]\n25. But the relics of saints are enclosed in a case together with\nthree grains of frankincense, because we ought to retain in our\nrecollection the examples of the saints, together with faith in the\nTrinity, that is, in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For we ought to\nbelieve one God, one faith, one baptism, because 'the just liveth by\nfaith,'   [Footnote 445] without which, as the Apostle hath said, 'It\nis impossible to please God.'   [Footnote 446] There is placed upon\nand fitted to the sepulchre itself a certain board fortified by the\nsign of the cross made with chrism.  [Footnote 447] For by chrism is\nunderstood the gift of the Holy Spirit, with which this board, that is\ncharity, is anointed; because our heart is fortified by the grace of\nthe Holy Spirit to observance of the heavenly mysteries. The board\ntherefore fortified by this sign is placed over the relics, because by\nthe example of the saints is inflamed charity, 'which covereth a\nmultitude of sins,'   [Footnote 448] just as also the board covereth\nthe relics. Whence saith the Apostle, 'The love of God is spread\nabroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.'\n[Footnote 449] But this slab or stone containeth, or is called, the\n_seal_ of the sepulchre; as saith Pope Alexander III.\n  [Footnote 445: Romans i, 17.]\n  [Footnote 446: Hebrews xi 6.]\n  [Footnote 447: See above, section 4, note 7.]\n  [Footnote 448: I S. Peter iv, 8.]\n  [Footnote 449: Romans v, 5.]\nAfter this, however, the stone, which is called the _table_ of the\naltar, is fitted to the top of the altar; by which we may understand\nthe perfection and solidity of the knowledge of God; and it ought to\nbe of stone, not because of the hardness, but the solidity of faith.\nJust as the Lord said unto Peter, 'Thou art Peter, and upon this\nrock'--that is, upon this firmness of faith--'I will build My Church.'\n[Footnote 450]\n  [Footnote 450: S Matthew xvi, 18.]\n26. For as this _table_ is the completion and finishing of the altar,\nso is the knowledge of God the confirmation and perfection of all good\ngifts. Whence in the book of Wisdom it is said unto the Lord, 'For to\nknow Thee is perfect wisdom, and to know Thy justice and Thy virtue is\nthe root of immortality.'  [Footnote 451] The Lord saith by Jeremiah,\n'Let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and\nknoweth Me.'  [Footnote 452]\n  [Footnote 451: Wisdom xv, 3.]\n  [Footnote 452: Jeremiah ix, 24.]\n27. Or, again, by this stone itself is understood Christ, of Whom the\nApostle saith, 'Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone.'\n[Footnote 453] By the stone indeed the humanity of Christ is denoted.\nConcerning which we read in Daniel that a stone was cut out of the\nrock without hands--because Christ was born of the Blessed Virgin (who\nfor the excellency of her virtues is called a Mountain), without human\nagency--and, becoming a huge mountain, filled the whole earth.\nConcerning which it is said also by the Psalmist, 'The stone which the\nbuilders refused hath become the head stone of the corner:'\n[Footnote 454] since Christ--Whom the builders, that is the Jews,\nrefused, saying, 'We will not have this man to reign over us'\n[Footnote 455] --hath been made the head of the corner. Because as\nsaith the Apostle, 'God hath exalted Him, and given Him,' [Footnote\n456] etc. Or else by this stone, which ought to be great and wide,\ncharity is understood, as was stated before; since the command of\ncharity is wide, extending even unto our enemies; according to that\nprecept of our Lord, 'Love your enemies.'   [Footnote 457]\n  [Footnote 453: Ephesians ii, 20.]\n  [Footnote 454:  Psalm cxviii (_Confitemini Domino_), 22.]\n  [Footnote 455: S. Luke xix, 14.]\n  [Footnote 456: Philippians ii. 10.]\n  [Footnote 457: S. Matthew v, 44.]\n28. Altars therefore, unless they be of stone, are not anointed,\nbecause Christ signified by the altar is the Stone growing into a\nmountain: as it is said, The mountain itself is fat, 'being anointed\nwith the oil of gladness, above his fellows.'   [Footnote 458]\nNevertheless we read in Exodus that the Lord ordered the altars to be\nmade of shittim wood, which does not decay;  [Footnote 459] and the\nLatern altar is of wood. Solomon also made an altar of gold, as we\nread in the eighth chapter of the third book of Kings: but these\nthings were done for a type.  [Footnote 460] And in the county of\nProvince, in the castle of S. Mary by the Sea, there is also an altar\nof earth, which Mary Magdalene, and Martha and Mary the mother of\nJames, and Mary the mother of Salome, made there.  [Footnote 461]\nAfter this, the altar having been sprinkled and baptised with water,\nit remaineth for it to be anointed with oil and chrism. The bishop\nthen poureth over it oil and chrism, and chanteth, 'Jacob set up the\nstone for a memorial, and poured oil upon it.'  [Footnote 462] For\nthat church hath been the memorial of other churches; 'For the law\nhath gone out from Sion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.'\n[Footnote 463]\n  [Footnote 458:  Psalm xlv (_Eructavit cor meum_), 8.]\n  [Footnote 459:  Exodus xxvii, I, etc.]\n  [Footnote 460: The same examples are briefly adduced in the notes to\n  the Decretal. Ciampini describes the wooden altar of the Lateran,\n  and mentions its numerous escapes from fire. It was made of\n  firewood, because 'abies non cedit vermibus unquam, nec putret\n  facile.' See also Stephen Durantus, _De Rit. Ecc. Cathol._Lib. I,\n  xxv, 3, quoting from De Turrecremata, about the Lateran altar, and\n  generally about the subject of this chapter.]\n  [Footnote 461: According to the Golden Legend, S. Mary Magdalene,\n  with other saints, amongst whom was S. Lazarus, were placed by the\n  Jews in a ship which was borne by the sea to Marseilles. The country\n  was converted, and S. Lazarus became the first bishop. The people of\n  Vezelay, in Burgundy, also claimed the honour of possessing the\n  relics of S. Mary Magdalene. Durandus, a native of Provence, gives\n  it to the latter country. This curious passage of our author seems\n  to have been overlooked by some who have attempted to adjust the\n  dispute.]\n  [Footnote 462: Genesis xxviii, 18.]\n  [Footnote 463: Isaiah ii, 3.]\n29. But first he maketh upon it the five crosses, with the oil of the\nsick, according to the Roman order; but according to the use of some\nother Churches, with both sorts of oil; one cross in the middle, and\nfour at the corners: afterwards, he maketh the same number of crosses\nin the same way with chrism. {127} By the oil assuredly is understood\nthe grace of the Holy Ghost, of which saith Esaias the Prophet, 'The\nyoke shall be destroyed because of the anointing.'  [Footnote 464] For\nas the bishop poureth oil upon the altar, so Christ, who is the Chief\nHigh Priest, poureth His grace upon our altar, which is our heart: for\nHe is the distributor of all graces through the Holy Ghost, as saith\nthe Apostle, 'To one is given the word of wisdom, to another the word\nof knowledge, to another faith, to another the gift of healing,' etc.\n[Footnote 465] And just as the bishop, by means of oil, cleanseth the\n_table_ of the altar, so also cloth the Holy Ghost purify our heart\nfrom all vices and sins.\n  [Footnote 464: Isaiah x, 27.]\n  [Footnote 465:  I Corinthians xii, 8.]\n30. Christ also was anointed with oil, not with visible oil indeed,\nbut with invisible; that is with the grace of the Holy Ghost. Whence\nDavid, 'The Lord thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness\nabove thy fellows';   [Footnote 466] that is above all the saints who\nhave been partakers of His Grace, that is, Christ. Whence unction more\nexpressedly agreeth with Christ (the Anointed One) than with others,\nbecause God hath anointed Him above all others to have the fulness of\ngood things, and therefore his name is interpreted 'The Anointed.'\nUnction also with oil signifieth mercy, according to that saying of\nthe Evangelist, 'Anoint thy head with oil, and wash thy face':\n[Footnote 467] because as oil is among fluids, so is mercy superior\namong good works. For whatever liquid you pour upon oil, yet it always\nswimmeth at the top. Of mercy it is written, 'The Lord is loving unto\nevery man, and His mercy is over all His works,'  [Footnote 468] and\n'Mercy rejoiceth against judgment.'  [Footnote 469] With this oil,\ntherefore, is the {128} altar of our 'heart anointed, that being\nalways mindful of mercy, we may never lose the effect of the aspersion\nof water, and of regeneration and of baptism.\n  [Footnote 466:  Psalm xlv (_Eructavit cor meum_), 8.]\n  [Footnote 467:  S. Matthew vi, 17.]\n  [Footnote 468: Psalm cxlv (_Exaltabo te Deus_), 9.]\n  [Footnote 469: S. James ii, 13.]\n31. The five crosses made with the oil signify that we ought always to\nhave a remembrance of the five wounds of Christ, which He suffered for\nour sakes upon the Cross. For He suffered five wounds; namely, in His\nhands, His feet, and in His side.\n32. They denote further the five feelings of pity which be necessary\nfor us. For it is necessary for a man to pity Christ, by sympathising\nin His Passion: whence Job, in the person of Christ, saith, 'Pity me,\npity me,' etc.   [Footnote 470] A man must also pity his neighbours\nwhose calamities he seeth; whence in Ecclesiasticus, 'The pity of a\nman towards his neighbour.'   [Footnote 471] And a man must pity\nhimself: and this in three ways; namely, for the sins of commission,\nby bewailing them; whence Jeremiah, 'There is no one who hath\npenitence for his sin, saying, What have I done?'   [Footnote 472]\n--for his sins of omission: whence Isaiah, 'Woe is me, for I have held\nmy peace,'   [Footnote 473] that is, for I have not spoken; as if he\nshould say, For I have omitted the good that I might have done:--and\nfor good deeds done for less pure motives; whence S. Luke saith, 'When\nwe have done all good deeds, we must say that we are unprofitable\nservants,' etc.;   [Footnote 474] as if we should say, We have done\ngood, but not well, not purely, and therefore we have done it\nunprofitably; just as anyone giving alms for vain glory doth good\nindeed, but not well and not purely. Of this threefold compassion it\nis said in Ecclesiasticus, 'Have pity on thy soul and please God;'\n[Footnote 475] because true compassion of mind ought to coexist with\nthe exhibition of good works. {129} Wherefore the crosses be twice\nmade; the first time of oil, the second of chrism: whence the Psalm,\n'A good man is merciful and lendeth';  [Footnote 476] that is, pitieth\nin mind, and lendeth in deed. And since it sufficeth not to have\ncompassion in mind together with the exhibition of good deeds, without\nthe savour of a good report, according to that saying of the gospel,\n'Let your light so shine before men that they may glorify God';\n[Footnote 477] therefore the crosses be made with chrism, which\nconsisteth of balsam and oil.\n  [Footnote 470: Job xix, 21.]\n  [Footnote 471: Eccles. xviii, 12--_Vulgate_.]\n  [Footnote 472: Jeremiah viii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 473: Isaiah vi, 5--_Vulgate_.]\n  [Footnote 474: S. Luke xvii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 475: Eccles. xxx, 24--_Vulgate_.]\n  [Footnote 476: Psalm cxii (_Beatus vir_), 5.]\n  [Footnote 477: S. Matthew v. 16.]\n33. Balsam indeed, on account of its good odour, signifieth good\nreport; oil, on account of its brightness, signifieth the clearness of\nconscience which we ought to have: according to the saying of the\nApostle, 'Our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience.'\n[Footnote 478] Again, balsam is properly conjoined with oil, because\ngood report is added to mercifulness.\n  [Footnote 478: 2 Corinthians i, 12.]\n34. Again, by the five crosses made of oil and of chrism the five\nsenses of our body be understood, which are doubled and made into ten,\nbecause by properly using the senses of our body, we both keep\nourselves, and confirm others by our example and teaching in\nwell-doing. Whence that good trader boasted, saying, 'Behold I have\ngained five more talents.'   [Footnote 479] But whilst these\nanointings are going on, they chant, 'The Lord thy God hath anointed\nthee,'   [Footnote 480] which was said of Christ.\n  [Footnote 479:  S. Matthew xxv, 20.]\n  [Footnote 480: Hebrews i, 9.]\nThe altar therefore is anointed three times; twice with oil, and once\nwith chrism; because the Church is marked by Faith, Hope, and Charity,\nwhich last is greater than the others. And while the chrism is used\nthey chant, 'See the smell of my son is as the smell of a field.'\n[Footnote 481] This field is the Church, which is verdant with\nflowers, which shineth in virtues, which is fragrant with good works;\n{130} and wherein be the roses of martyrs, the lilies of virgins, the\nviolets of confessors, and the verdure of beginners in the faith.\nAfter the unction there is incense burnt, which signifieth the\ndevotion of prayer. For he that hath the seven gifts of the Holy\nGhost, and is made like unto God, is able to offer unto Him devout\nprayer, of which he hath this similitude.\n  [Footnote 481:  Genesis xxvii, 27.]\n35. It is burnt in five places, namely, at the four corners and in the\nmiddle, because we ought so to exercise the five senses of the body\nthat the report of our good works may extend to our neighbours. Of\nwhich saith the Apostle, 'We are the sweet savour of Christ in every\nplace.'   [Footnote 482 ] And in the Gospel, 'Let your light so shine\nbefore men,' etc. Besides this, the frequent use of incense is the\ncontinual mediation of Christ the Priest, and our High Priest, for us\nunto God the Father.\n  [Footnote 482: 2 Corinthians, ii, 15.]\n36. To describe a cross with the incense, is to exhibit His Passion to\nthe Father and Him interceding for us. The burning incense plenteously\nin the middle and at the corners is to multiply prayers through\nJerusalem and in the Catholic Church.\n37. Next to this the bishop confirmeth the altar with the sign of the\ncross, saying, 'Confirm this altar, O Lord,' etc. And this\nconfirmation performed by the bishop with chrism on the front of the\nstone, signifieth the confirmation which is performed daily by the\nHoly Spirit, through charity, upon the altar of the heart, so that no\ntribulation should avail to separate our heart from the love of God:\nwhence saith the Apostle, 'Who shall separate us from the love of\nChrist? shall tribulation?' etc.'  [Footnote 483] Then there is added\nthe _Gloria Patri_ in praise of the Trinity.\n  [Footnote 483: Romans viii, 35.]\n38. The last benediction of the altar signifieth that final\nbenediction when it shall be said, 'Come, ye blessed of my Father,'\netc.   [Footnote 484] Afterwards the altar is wiped over with a white\nlinen cloth, to notify that we ought to cleanse our heart by chastity\nof life. Then the vessels, vestments, and linen cloths, devoted to the\ndivine worship are blessed. For Moses also during the forty days was\ninstructed by the Lord to provide linen cloths and the ornaments\nnecessary for the Temple.\n  [Footnote 484: S. Matthew xx, 34.]\n39. Assuredly, thus to bless the utensils is to refer all our works\nunto the Lord. After this, the altar is covered with white and clean\ncloths: concerning which ceremony we have spoken under the head of the\nAltar. Lastly, the church is ornamented and the lamps are lighted: for\nthen shall the works of the just shine forth, 'Then shall the just\nshine, as sparks run swiftly among the stubble.'   [Footnote 485] And\nthen upon the altar, consecrated after this order, the Mass is\ncelebrated and the sacrifice offered unto the Most Highest: that\nsacrifice, namely, of which the Prophet speaketh, 'The sacrifices of\nGod are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou\nwilt not despise':   [Footnote 486] as shall be declared in the\nintroduction to the fourth book.  [Footnote 487] For consecration\nought not to be performed without a Mass, according to Pope Gelasius,\n[Footnote 488] because then there is revealed a sacrament, which hath\nbeen hidden from the angels even from the beginning.\n  [Footnote 485: Wisdom iii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 486: Psalm li (_Miserere mei Deus_). 17.]\n  [Footnote 487: The blessed Bernard saith, My brethren, let us in\n  sacrificing add the sacrifice of praise unto our words, let us add\n  sense to sense, affection unto affection, exaltation unto\n  exaltation, maturity unto maturity, and humility unto humility.\n  Wherefore, he that is about to celebrate must offer unto the Highest\n  that sacrifice of which the Psalmist speaketh, 'The sacrifices of\n  God are a troubled spirit.' And again, 'Offer unto God the sacrifice\n  of thanksgiving.' And the Apostle, 'Present your bodies a living\n  sacrifice holy acceptable unto God which is your reasonable service,\n  mortifying upon the altar of your heart your members which are upon\n  the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil\n  concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry'; in order to\n  sacrifice yourselves with a pure heart and chaste body unto\n  God.--Proem, lib. iv, 17.]\n  [Footnote 488: Quoted also in the Decretal _De Consecrat. Distinct._\nAnd observe, that in the aspersion of the church the bishop useth only\nthe linen and inferior vestments: but at the Mass he is adorned with\npontifical and precious vestments, because the high priest in the law\nused to expiate the sanctuary in a linen ephod, and afterwards used to\noffer the ram for the burnt offering being washed and arrayed in the\nhigh priest's vestments. But because he used to send forth the\nscapegoat after the expiation being clothed in the same linen ephod,\non this account some, in the consecration of fonts and immersion of\nthe catechumens where their sins are transferred, do use the simple\nlinen vestments.\nCHAPTER VIII\nOF CONSECRATIONS AND UNCTIONS\nOf Chrism--Of the name Christ, and of Christians--The Heresy of the\nArnaldistae--The Anointing of Priests--Of Bishops--Of Kings--Of the\nConsecration of Chalices and Patens--Of Extreme Unction--Of the\nBenediction of Church Ornaments.\n1. We read that the Lord commanded Moses  [Footnote 489] to make a\nchrism, with which unguent to anoint the tabernacle at the time of the\ndedication, and the ark of the testimony, and the table, together with\nthe vessels; and with which also the priests and kings should be\nanointed. Yet Moses himself is not said to have been anointed, except\nwith a spiritual unction, as also was Christ.\n  [Footnote 489: Exodus xxx, 22.]\n2. Christ hath willed that we should be anointed with a material\nunction in order that we may by it obtain the spiritual unction: and\non this account our loving Mother, the Church, provideth different\nsorts of unction. Upon which let us here touch lightly, Saying--\n  I. What unctions of this sort signify.\n  II. Of what they be made.\n  III. Of the unction before baptism.\n  IV. Of the unction after baptism, which is performed\n    by the bishop on the forehead.\n  V. Of the unction in ordination.\n  VI. Of the unction in consecrating bishops and princes.\n  VII. Of the unction of a church, altar, chalice, and\n    other ecclesiastical instruments.\n  VIII. Of extreme unction.\n  IX. Of the consecration and benediction of a cemetery,\n    vestments, and other ecclesiastical ornaments.\n  X. Of the consecration and benediction of virgins.\n3. Firstly; with respect to the first, then, it is to be noted that\nthere be two kinds of unction: an _external_, which is material or\ncorporeal, and visible; and an _internal_, which is spiritual and\ninvisible. The body is anointed visibly with the external unction; the\nheart invisibly by the internal. Of the first, the Apostle S. James\nsaith, 'Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the\nChurch; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name\nof the Lord; and the prayer of faith shall save the sick.'   [Footnote\n490] Of the second the Apostle S. John saith, 'But the anointing which\nye have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man\nteach you: but the same anointing teacheth you of all things.'\n[Footnote 491] The external unction is a sign of the internal. But the\ninternal is not only a sign, that is a thing signified, but a\nsacrament also; because if it be worthily received, it either\neffecteth, or without doubt increaseth, that which it doth\nsignify--for instance, healing: according to the saying, 'They shall\nlay their hands upon the sick, and they shall be healed.'   [Footnote\n  [Footnote 490: S. James v, 14.]\n  [Footnote 491:  I S. John ii, 27.]\n  [Footnote 492:  See Acts xxviii, 8.]\nSecondly; with respect to the second point, you must know that in\nmaking use of the external and visible unction, two sorts of oil are\nconsecrated: namely, holy oil, or the oil of the catechumens, with\nwhich catechumens are anointed; and the oil of the sick, with which\nthe sick are anointed. Of which kind of unction the authority of S.\nJames quoted above doth speak, 'Is any sick among you,' etc.\nBut in what way the benediction of these two sorts of oil and of\nchrism is performed will be declared in the sixth book in the chapter\nupon the Fifth Day of the Holy Week.  [Footnote 493]\n  [Footnote 493: It has not been thought necessary to translate the\n  passages referred to.]\n4. But is it asked why the sick and the catechumens are anointed with\noil? I answer, in order that the invisible benefits may be more easily\nreceived through the visible signs: for as oil by expelling weakness\nrefresheth the wearied limbs, and as it from its own natural qualities\naffordeth light, so it is to be believed that unction with consecrated\noil, the which is a type of faith expelling sin, doth impart health to\nthe soul and doth afford it light. Herein the visible oil is in the\noutward sign, the invisible oil in the inward sacrament; and the\nspiritual oil is within. For the oil of the sick we have received\nauthority from the apostles; for the oil of the catechumens from\napostolical men.\n5. And although God can grant the spiritual oil without the material,\nyet because the apostles have used this rite in the case of the sick,\nand apostolical men in the case of catechumens, this practice which\ntheir authority hath consecrated cannot be omitted without sin (as\nhath been said in the chapter upon the Altar): just as anciently the\njust pleased God without circumcision; but after it had been enjoined\nthem to be circumcised, such as omitted this rite were subjected to\nsin.\nThirdly; we have to speak of the unction before baptism. And indeed in\nthe New Testament not only kings and priests be anointed, as hath been\nalready said, but also--(because Christ by His Blood hath made us\nkings and priests, that is, royal priests, unto our God, as the {136}\nApostle S. Peter saith,  [Footnote 494] 'Ye are a chosen generation,'\nthat is, chosen out from the tribes of men, 'a royal priesthood,' that\nis, governing yourselves well)--also, I say, all Christians be\nanointed twice before their baptism with consecrated oil--first, on\nthe breast: secondly, between the shoulders: and twice after their\nbaptism, with holy chrism--first, on the crown of the head; and\nsecondly, by the bishop on the forehead.\n  [Footnote 494: I S. Peter ii, 9.]\n6. And, according to Augustine, the first three unctions have been\nintroduced rather by use than by any written authority. The candidate\nfor baptism is anointed with oil--first, on the breast, in which is\nthe locality of the heart; first, in order that by the gift of the\nHoly Ghost he may cast away error and ignorance and embrace a right\nfaith; because 'the just liveth by faith,'   [Footnote 495] and 'with\nthe heart we believe unto justification.'   [Footnote 496] But he is\nanointed between the shoulders, in order that he may, by the grace of\nthe Holy Ghost, shake off indifference and sloth, and practise good\nworks (because 'faith without works is dead'),'  [Footnote 497] so\nthat by means of sacraments of faith there may result a purity of\nthoughts. On the breast, again, that by the practising of good works\nthere may arise a boldness of labour: between the shoulders, to the\nend that 'faith (according to the Apostle) may work by love.'\n[Footnote 498] The oil therefore is carried over from the heart to the\nshoulders, since faith, which is conceived in the mind, is perfected\nin works (because, that is, faith consisteth in making our _deeds_\nlike our _words_).  [Footnote 499] But the person after baptism is\nanointed by the priest on the head with chrism, that 'he may be ready\nalways to give an answer to every man that asketh him a reason for the\nfaith that is in him,'   [Footnote 500] because by {137} the head is\nunderstood the mind: as it is written, 'The eyes,' that is the\nunderstanding, 'of the wise are in his head,'  [Footnote 501] that is,\nhis mind; of which mind, the superior part is reason and the inferior\nsensuality. Hence, by the crown, which is the upper part of the head,\nis well represented reason, which is the superior part of the mind. Of\nthis we shall speak in the sixth book also, under the head of Easter\nEve, in which confirmation is treated of.  [Footnote 502] But this is\nthe reason that before baptism one is anointed with consecrated oil,\nand after baptism with holy chrism; because chrism is competent to a\nChristian alone.\n  [Footnote 495: Habakkuk ii, 4.]\n  [Footnote 496: Romans x, 10.]\n  [Footnote 497: S. James ii, 26.]\n  [Footnote 498: Gal. v, 6.]\n  [Footnote 499: This clause does not occur in the _Princeps_\n  Edition.]\n  [Footnote 500:  S. Peter iii, 15.]\n  [Footnote 501: Ecclesiasticus ii, 14.]\n  [Footnote 502: The passage referred to speaks of the diverse graces\n  conferred by the several unctions, and does not illustrate our more\n  particular object.]\n7. For Christ is so named from _chrism_, or rather _chrism_ is so\ncalled from Christ, not according to the form of the name only, but\naccording to the rational order of faith. For _Christians_ are called\nfrom Christ, as _the anointed_ would be derived from the Anointed One,\nnamely, Christ; so that all may unite in the odour of that unguent,\nnamely, Christ, Whose name is as oil poured out: but according to the\npower of the word, _Christians_ are called so from _chrism_, according\nto Isidorus.  [Footnote 503] This subject is treated in the\nintroduction to the second book.  [Footnote 504]\n  [Footnote 503:  'For Christ is named of _chrism_, and meaneth the\n  Anointed One. For it was commanded the Jews to make a holy unguent\n  for such as were called unto the priesthood or the kingdom: and as\n  now the vestment of purple is unto kings the mark of kingly power,\n  so upon these did the unction with sacred unguent bestow the name\n  and kingly power: and hence were they called _Christi_, from\n  _chrism_, which is unction. For _chrisma_ in Greek is _unctio_ in\n  Latin. And this unction did aptly give this name unto our Lord,\n  because He was anointed of the Father by the Spirit, as is said in\n  the Acts of the Apostles, \"Against Thy Holy Child Jesus, Whom Thou\n  hast anointed, were they gathered together\": not, that is, with\n  visible oil, but with the gift of grace, which is denoted by the\n  visible oil.' S. Isidore of Seville, _Orig_. vii, 2. See also\n  _Orig_. vii, 4, and _De Off. Ecc._ i, 1.]\n  [Footnote 504: 'Christians be named from Christ, and Christ from\n  _chrism_, being _anointed_. For He was anointed by God from the\n  beginning \"with the oil of gladness above His fellows.\" In the Old\n  Testament priests and kings be called _Christs_ (or Anointed),\n  because they were anointed with a temporal unction. As it is\n  written, \"Touch not my Christs\" (_i.e._ mine anointed). Wherefore,\n  Christ is not a peculiar name of our Saviour, but is a common\n  appellation of dignity. But the name Jesus is peculiar to the person\n  of our Saviour alone, and was given Him, as the Evangelist doth\n  testify by the angel, Gabriel, at the Conception, and by men at His\n  Circumcision.'--Durand. _loco cit._ This will explain the reason,\n  to many persons so puzzling, why it is only to the name of Jesus\n  that our Church, after the Apostle, commands due obeisance to be\n  made: and will reprove the erroneous, though pious, zeal which makes\n  so many of the poor even now bow at the other names of our Blessed\n  Lord.]\n8. Again, according to Augustine, the first unction with oil showeth\nus to be prepared fully to hear the faith, and called to the sweet\nodour of Christ, and warned to renounce the devil. The second unction,\naccording to Rabanus, is upon the breast and between the shoulders,\nthat we may be fortified on both sides by faith, and confirmed by the\ngrace of God for the performance of good works. For by the breast is\nrightly understood the virtue of faith: but by the shoulders--upon\nwhich any burden is borne--the strength and working of a man:\naccording to that saying, 'They bind heavy burdens and lay them on the\nshoulders of men,' etc.  [Footnote 505] A man is anointed therefore on\nthe breast and between the shoulders, that both in thought and deed he\nmay relinquish the works of the devil, and become capable of\nunderstanding the Word of God, and strong enough to bear its yoke and\nthe burden of the law.\n  [Footnote 505: S. Matthew xxiii, 4.]\n9. But the unction upon the crown, that is the top part of the head\nover the brain, is performed according to the same authority in order\nthat he who is so anointed may become a partaker of the heavenly\nkingdom: and because the soul of the baptised person is espoused unto\nthe Head, that is Christ, therefore this unction is made with chrism,\ncompounded of oil and balsam, in order that we may know that the Holy\nGhost, Who worketh invisibly, is given unto him: for oil, as we said\nabove, cherisheth the wearied limbs and affordeth light. {139} But\nbalsam giveth it a sweet odour. If so be the limbs of the soul be\nwearied, when it repenteth of having acted in opposition to God, the\nHoly Ghost cometh to it, giving light to its understanding and showing\nit that its sins are, or may be, forgiven, and bestowing on it good\nworks which breathe out a sweet odour amongst others: all which is\ndenoted by the fragrant balsam. Also because the seat of\nhigh-mindedness, which according to the name is always seeking higher\nthings, appears to exist in the head, therefore the unction on this\npart is rightly performed in the form of the cross and in token of\nhumility.\n10. Pope Sylvester appointed that this unction might be administered\nby priests upon occasion of death: whence it is likely that before his\ntime  [Footnote 506] the anointing both of the crown of the head and\nof the forehead was reserved for the bishop. For when the bosom of the\nChurch was extended, and bishops could no longer be at hand for each\nindividual in confirmation, he then ordered, lest any should perish\nwithout the unction of chrism, that all should be anointed on the\ncrown of the head over the brain, which is the seat of wisdom, at the\nhands of a priest, for the increasing of strength and grace. Whence if\nafterwards they should have died, saith Richard (of Cremona), they\nshall receive an increase of grace and glory.\n  [Footnote 506: S. Sylvester was the contemporary of Constantine.\n11. Yet nevertheless we believe that a man may be saved by baptism\nalone even without the unction, and that the Holy Ghost is given\nwithout the laying on of hands to such as God may will, as we read in\nthe Acts of the Apostles.\n12. Yet the faithless heretics, the Arnaldistae,  [Footnote 507]\nassert that men never receive the Holy Ghost through the baptism of\nwater; and that Samaritans who were baptised did not receive Him until\nthey received the laying on of hands. Both these unctions are\nadministered, according to Rabanus, in the form of the cross, that the\ndevil, whose vessel the person is, recognising the sign of his own\ndiscomfiture, the sign of the Holy Cross, may know that from that\nmoment the vessel is Another's, being alienated from him.\n  [Footnote 507: Our author mentions another heresy of the Arnaldistae\n  in the 19th section of the proem of book iv. These heretics were the\n  followers of Arnaldus de Brixio (of Bresse), a disciple of Abelard.\n  His opinions were condemned in the second General Lateran Council,\n  1139.--_Baron. Sub. Anno._ tom. xviii. See also S. Bernard, _Epist_.\n13. According to the same writer the unction on the breast is\nafterwards administered with invocation of the Trinity, in order that\nno remains of the hidden enemy may abide therein, but the mind be\ncomforted in the faith of the Holy Trinity, and receive and understand\nthe commandments of God. Therefore each of the faithful is anointed\nfirst twice with oil, next in like manner twice with chrism. First in\nbaptism on the crown of the head: secondly after baptism, namely at\nconfirmation, on his forehead: because to the apostles also was the\nHoly Ghost twice given, as will be set forth in the sixth book on Holy\nSaturday.  [Footnote 508]\n  [Footnote 508: It has not been judged necessary to translate the\n  passages referred to, for the same reason as stated above in note\nFourthly; in the fourth place we were to speak of the unction which is\nadministered by the bishop on the forehead of such as have been\nbaptised: but of this we shall speak in the same place.  [Footnote\n  [Footnote 509: It has not been judged necessary to translate the\n  passages referred to, for the same reason as stated above in note\n14. Fifthly; in the fifth place, with respect to the unction of\nordination, it is to be noted that the hands of the priest are\nanointed by the bishop, that he may know that he in this sacrament\ndoth receive by the Holy Ghost the power and grace of consecrating.\nWhence the bishop, whilst anointing them, saith: 'Deign, O Lord, by\nmeans of this unction and our benediction to consecrate and sanctify\nthese hands, that whatsoever they consecrate may be consecrated, and\nwhatsoever they bless may be blessed in the name of the Lord.' {141}\nAnd for this cause devout men kiss the hands of priests immediately\nafter their ordination, believing by this to become partakers of their\nprayers and blessings. And the anointing is with holy oil, because\nthey ought to work with their hands the works of mercy with all their\nmight towards all men: for the works are denoted by the hands; mercy\nby the oil. Whence the good Samaritan coming near to the wounded man\npoured wine and oil into his wounds. The hands are anointed with oil\nalso that they may be supple for offering the host unto God for the\nsins of men, and that they may be open to all acts of piety and not be\nkept dry and clenched. For both these things, namely the grace of\nhealing and the charity of loving, are denoted by the oil. Wherefore\nfurther the laying on of hands, together with oil upon the heads of\nsuch as be ordained, is done because by the hands the operation, by\nthe fingers the gifts, of the Holy Ghost, and by the head the mind, be\nunderstood. The hand then is laid on because it is sent forth imbued\nwith the gifts of the Holy Ghost to perform the works of Christ.\n15. Sixthly, with respect to the unction of bishops and of temporal\nprinces, it is to be known that the former hath derived its origin\nfrom the Old Testament. For in the 21st chapter of Leviticus the high\npriest is said to be he 'upon whose head the anointing oil is poured,'\n[Footnote 510] and whose hands were consecrated in priesthood. A\nbishop, however, is anointed with chrism, which (as we said before) is\ncomposed of oil and balsam; and he is anointed therewith both\noutwardly, and inwardly in his heart, in order that by the inward oil\nhe have a clear conscience towards God, and by the outward oil may\nhave the odour of good report towards his neighbour: which is {142}\ndenoted by the balsam. The Apostle saith of a clear conscience, 'For\nour rejoicing is this the testimony of our conscience.'   [Footnote\n511] 'For the king's daughter is all glorious within,'   [Footnote\n512] that is, her glory proceedeth from within. Concerning the odour\nof a good report the same Apostle saith, 'For in every place we are\nunto God a sweet savour of Christ,' that is, an example and imitation,\nand, 'to some we are the savour of life unto life,' etc.,  [Footnote\n513] as if he had said, we are an example of love and a good opinion\nleading unto eternal life, 'and to others a savour of death unto\ndeath,' that is, of hatred and evil opinion leading unto eternal\ndeath.\n  [Footnote 510: Leviticus xxi, 10.]\n  [Footnote 511: 2 Corinthians i, 12.]\n  [Footnote 512:  Psalm xlv (_Eructavit cor meum_), 14.]\n  [Footnote 513: 2 Corinthians ii, 15.]\n16. For a bishop ought to have in himself 'a good report' both of them\nwhich are within and 'them which are without';   [Footnote 514] so\nthat one curtain, that is, the faithful, may draw on the other\ncurtain, that is, the unbeliever, namely, unto belief;   [Footnote\n515] and 'he that heareth,' namely, by learning and believing, 'say,\ncome,'   [Footnote 516] namely, by preaching and teaching. With this\nunguent be the head and hands of a bishop consecrated: for by the head\nis understood the mind, as the gospel saith, 'anoint,'   [Footnote\n517] that is, humble, 'thy head, and wash thy face,' that is, thy\nconscience, namely, with tears: by the hands be denoted good works, as\nis said in the Canticles, 'my hands,' that is, my good works, 'dropped\nwith myrrh,' that is, gave to others a good example.   [Footnote 518]\n  [Footnote 514:  I Timothy iii, 7.]\n  [Footnote 515: There appears to be here some mystical reference to\n  the coupling of the curtains of the tabernacle. See Exod. xxvi.]\n  [Footnote 516: Apocalypse xxii, 17.]\n  [Footnote 517: S. Matthew vi, 17.]\n  [Footnote 518: Canticles v, 5.]\n17. The head, therefore, is anointed with the balsam of charity, (i)\nThat the bishop may love God with his whole heart and with his whole\nmind and whole soul, and also, after the example of Christ, 'love his\nneighbours as,' that is, as much as, 'himself.' For according to {143}\nGregory, oil on the head is charity in the soul, (ii) Secondly, the\nhead is anointed by reason of authority and dignity; since not only\nbishops but also kings are consecrated. (iii) Thirdly, to show that a\nbishop representeth the person of Christ, as being his vicar, of whom\nit is said by the Prophet, 'it is like the precious ointment upon the\nhead.'   [Footnote 519] For the head of man is Christ, the head of\nChrist is God: Who saith of Himself, 'the Spirit of the Lord is upon\nMe, because He hath anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.'\n[Footnote 520] For Christ, our Head, was anointed with the invisible\noil He intercedeth for the Church Universal, a bishop for that Church\ncommitted unto him.\n  [Footnote 519: Psalm cxxxiii (_Ecce quani bonum_), 2.]\n  [Footnote 520:  Isaiah lxi, 1.]\n18. But his _hands_ also are anointed, on account of his mystery and\noffice; and for the anointing of these, which do signify works, is\nemployed _oil_, that is, the chrism of piety and mercy, (i) First, in\norder that the bishop may 'do good unto all men, and especially unto\nthem that are of the household of faith,'   [Footnote 521] his hands\nshould be closed to none, but be open to all; according to the saying,\n'He hath opened his hands to the poor, and extended his arm to the\ndestitute.'   [Footnote 522] A hand that is dried up, that is\navaricious, that is tenaciously held clenched, cannot be opened:\ntherefore his hands are anointed, in order that they may be healed and\nopened, and may bestow alms on the indigent.  (ii) Secondly, to show\nthat he hath received the power of blessing and consecrating. Whence\nthe consecrating bishop, when he anointeth them, saith, 'Deign, O\nLord, to consecrate and sanctify these hands,' and so forth, as we\nquoted above. (iii) That they may be clean for offering sacrifices for\nsins. And note, that although a bishop's hands were anointed with oil\nbeforehand when he was ordained a priest, yet {144} they be again\nanointed with chrism when he is consecrated a bishop. Herein by the\nhands are typified good works; by the oil, the abundance of the Holy\nGhost of grace; by the balsam, which is mixed with the oil in making\nthe chrism, the savour of good report; as in Ecclesiasticus, 'My sweet\nodour is as myrrh unmixed.'   [Footnote 523] Wherefore because in the\nworks of bishops and other superiors there ought to appear more than\nin their inferiors the gifts of the Holy Ghost and the savour of good\nreport; according to that saying, 'For we are unto God a sweet savour\nof Christ';  [Footnote 524] for even in the heavenly hierarchy the\nsuperior angels excel the inferior in blessings and grace; hence,\ntherefore, at their consecration as bishops their hands, already\nanointed with oil, are with reason again anointed with chrism.\n  [Footnote 521: Galatians vi, 10.]\n  [Footnote 522: Proverbs xxxi, 20.]\n  [Footnote 523: Ecclesiasticus xxiv, 15.]\n  [Footnote 524: 2 Corinthians ii, 15.]\n19. The thumb also is fortified with chrism, that the laying on of the\nthumb may profit all men for salvation.\n20. Further, in the Old Testament, not only was a priest anointed, but\nalso a king and prophet: as we find in the books of Kings. Whence the\nLord enjoined Elias, 'Go return on thy way to the wilderness of\nDamascus: and when thou comest, anoint Hazael to be king over Syria;\nand Jehu the son of Nimshi shalt thou anoint to be king over Israel;\nand Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abel-Meholah shalt thou anoint to be\nprophet in thy room.'   [Footnote 525] Samuel also anointed David to\nbe king. But after that Jesus of Nazareth, 'Whom (as we read in the\nActs of the Apostles) God anointed with the Holy Ghost, was anointed\nwith oil above his fellows,  [Footnote 526] Who is (according to the\nApostle) 'the Head of the Church, which is also His body';   [Footnote\n527] after this the anointing of a sovereign was transferred from the\nhead to the arm: whence princes since the time of Christ are not {145}\nanointed on the head but on the arm, or on the shoulder; by which\nparts of the body kingly power is aptly represented, as we read, 'and\nthe government was laid upon his shoulder':   [Footnote 528 ] to\nsignify the same, Samuel caused the shoulder to be laid before Saul,\nwhen he placed him at the head of the table before those who had been\nbidden.   [Footnote 529] But in the case of a bishop the sacramental\nanointing is applied to the _head_, because in his episcopal office he\nrepresenteth the Head of the Church, that is, Christ.\n  [Footnote 525: I Kings xix, 15.]\n  [Footnote 526: See Acts iv, 27, and Hebrews i, 9.]\n  [Footnote 527: Ephesians v, 23.]\n  [Footnote 528: Isaiah ix, 6.]\n  [Footnote 529: I Samuel x, 24.]\n21. There is this difference, then, between the anointing of a bishop\nand a prince, that the head of the bishop is consecrated with chrism,\nwhile the arm of the prince is anointed with oil: to show, namely, how\ngreat a difference there is between the authority of a bishop and the\npower of a prince. And observe that, as we read in the gospel,\n[Footnote 530] a certain man called his servants and gave unto them\nten talents. Herein the calling of a servant is the canonical election\nof a bishop, which taketh place according to the calling of the Lord\nWho called Aaron. A talent is given to him, when he who hath laid his\nhands upon him giveth him the text of the gospel, saying, 'Go and\npreach.' And the bishop himself, according to the use of some\nchurches, when first he entereth his see, carrieth the gospels in his\nbosom, showing his talent as if to trade with it. In some churches\nalso when the archbishop giveth the bishop his pastoral staff, he\nsaith, 'Go and preach,' and he immediately blesseth the people: by\nwhich is represented that Moses was sent into Egypt with a rod.\n  [Footnote 530:  S. Matthew xxv.]\n22. Furthermore, bishops on the day of their consecration have been\nwont to ride on horses covered with white robes; to represent that\nwhich we read in the Apocalypse, 'The armies which are in heaven\nfollow him riding on white horses.'   [Footnote 531] The armies which\nare in heaven are good and just men and prelates, who as these\nheavenly riders do daily follow God in all good works: who for this\nreason are said to be in heaven, because they love and seek after\nheavenly things alone; whence the Apostle saith, 'Our conversation is\nin heaven.'  [Footnote 532] These armies, that is good and just men\nand prelates, follow Jesus, whensoever they vanquish vices in\nthemselves by discipline, in their neighbours by admonition. Whence S.\nJames saith, 'He which converteth the sinner from the error of his way\nshall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.'\n[Footnote 533] These armies have white horses and chaste bodies.\n  [Footnote 531: Apocalypse xix, 14.]\n  [Footnote 532: Philippians iii, 20.]\n  [Footnote 533: S. James v, 20.]\n23. The bodies of good men are also called horses, because, just as\nhorses are governed by the will of the rider, so are the bodies of the\njust ruled according to the will of Christ. These horses ought to be\nwhite, or covered with white trappings: that is, the bodies of just\nmen and prelates ought to be chaste and pure. For if they be not pure\nthey cannot follow Christ. And S. Peter saith, 'Christ also suffered\nfor us, leaving us an example that we should follow His steps, who did\nnot sin, neither was guile found in his mouth.'   [Footnote 534]\nFurther, the clergy of the holy Roman Church, by the grant of the\nEmperor Constantine, do ride upon horses adorned with trappings of the\nmost snowy white. On what day a bishop ought to be consecrated, and\nwhy a copy of the gospels is put upon his shoulders in consecration,\nshall be declared in the second book, under the chapter upon Bishops.\n[Footnote 535]\n  [Footnote 534:  I S. Peter ii, 21.]\n  [Footnote 535: The consecration of a bishop, in the which the Holy\n  Ghost is present unto such as receive it worthily, is administered\n  always on the Lord's day, and at the third hour. For bishops do\n  obtain the office of apostles, unto whom the Holy Ghost was given on\n  the Day of Pentecost and at the third hour. When a bishop is to be\n  ordained, the suffragans of the province should assemble with their\n  metropolitan, and two bishops place and hold a volume of the gospels\n  above his head and neck, or upon his shoulders, one shedding the\n  benediction over him, and the rest, such as are present, touching\n  his head with their hands. This book is held above his head; first,\n  that the Lord may confirm the gospel in his heart; secondly, that he\n  may understand by this, unto what burthen and labour he is\n  subjected: because everyone that is pre-eminent, that is, a prelate,\n  is more troubled with griefs than rejoiced with honours; thirdly, to\n  denote that he ought not to be backward to carry with him everywhere\n  the burthen of the preaching of the gospel; fourthly, to admonish\n  him to submit himself more than ever to the yoke, and to obey the\n  gospel.--_Rationale_, Book II, c. xi, 6.]\nSeventhly, we have to speak of the unction of altars, chalices, and\nother instruments of the church; which according to the rule are\nanointed at their dedication; and this not only from the command of\nthe divine law, but also because Moses 'sprinkled with blood the\ntabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry, and almost all things\nare by the law cleansed with blood;'   [Footnote 536] and also again\nafter the example of S. Sylvester, who when he consecrated an altar\nused to anoint it with chrism. For the Lord commanded Moses to make\noil of unction with which to anoint the tabernacle of the testimony,\nthe table, the ark of the covenant, the candlestick, and other\nfurniture as aforesaid. Which unctions are performed on things that\nhave not been anointed, to show greater reverence to them and to\nbestow more grace upon them. And of these unctions we have spoken and\nshall again speak in their right places. But the sacrament of unction\nhath indeed some further effect and meaning both in the Old and New\nTestament: whence the Church doth not Judaize, when she observeth the\nunctions in her sacraments, as some old writers, who know neither the\nScripture nor the power of God, do falsely say. Of the unctions of the\nchurch and altar we have spoken under their own heads.\n  [Footnote 536: Hebrews ix, 2.]\n24. Further the paten is consecrated and anointed for the\nadministration of the body of Christ, who willed to be sacrificed upon\nthe altar of the cross for the salvation of all men. 'Almighty God\nalso did order the flour to be brought to His Altar scattered on\ngolden and silver patens. The chalice also is consecrated and\nanointed, that by the grace of the Holy Ghost it may be made a new\nsepulchre of the body and blood of Christ, and then He, Himself, may\ndeign to make it overflow with his virtue, as He made the cup of\nMelchizedech, His servant, to flow over.\n25. Eighthly; in the eighth place we have to speak of extreme unction,\nwhich from the institution of Pope Felix the Fourth, and from the\ncommand of the Apostle S. James, is administered unto such as are at\nthe point to die. Concerning which some say that it is not so properly\na sacrament as the anointing of the forehead or any other part with\nchrism, because (as they assert) it may be repeated and since there is\noffered a prayer over the man; a circumstance which is not a condition\nof a sacrament. This unction also may be administered by a single\npriest if more cannot be present: and by it venial sins are remitted,\naccording to S. James, 'If any rich among you,' etc., as before, 'and\nif he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him.'   [Footnote\n537] And this unction is applied to divers parts of the body or the\nlimbs, for reasons which may be gathered from the prayers then used;\nand especially on those parts in which the five senses chiefly reside,\nthat whatever sins the rich man may have committed by means of these\nmay be abolished by virtue of this unction. Concerning some other\nrules we ordinarily read, that the party to be anointed must be at the\nleast eighteen years of age, and that he ought to be anointed in\nsickness once only during a year, though he may be sick many times,\nand that no one must be anointed, unless, being in his senses, he\nshall have first demanded it either by words or signs:-- {149} and\nbesides this, that the shoulders ought not to be anointed, because\nthey were anointed in baptism, and that a confirmed person ought not\nto be anointed on his forehead but on his temples, and a priest's\nhands ought to be anointed on the backs and not inside, because they\nwere anointed on the inside at his ordination:--and that one who hath\nbeen once anointed by a bishop ought not in respect to him to be\nfurther anointed by a priest:--and that if a sick man who hath been\nanointed should recover, the anointed places should be washed, and the\nwater used be thrown into the fire; but should he depart, his body\nought not to be washed because of the recent unction. But if the sick\nman be at the point of death, he should be immediately anointed lest\nhe die without the unction. Besides this, some penitents, and dying\nmen, put on sackcloth and lay themselves down on ashes as we shall\nexplain in the sixth book, when we speak of Ash Wednesday.  [Footnote\n  [Footnote 537: S. James v, 24.]\n  [Footnote 538: 'On this day also ashes are blessed, and scattered\n  over the head in token of humiliation. \"Dust thou art, and unto dust\n  thou shalt return,\" was said unto Adam (Gen. iv). And Job \"repented\n  in dust and ashes\" (Job xlii, 6). And the Lord saith, \"In the house\n  of Aphrah (marg. read dust) roll thyself in the dust\" (Mic. i 10).\n  Also in Judith we read, \"The children of Israel humbled themselves\n  in fasting, and dust on their heads\" (Chronicles iv). And Abraham\n  saith, \"Shall I speak unto the Lord, who am but dust and ashes?\"\n  (Gen. 18). And \"Mordecai put on sackcloth with ashes\" (Esther iv,\n  i). And \"the daughters of Zion have cast ashes on their heads\"\n  (Samuel iii). Hence, we read in the Pontifical, penitents and the\n  dying, in token of repentance and humility and that they are dust\n  and ashes, do prostrate themselves in ashes and put on sackcloth--an\n  use drawn from the Old Testament. For we read in Isaiah the\n  fifty-eighth, that penitents do lie in sackcloth and ashes. And\n  Hieremiah saith the same in the twenty-fifth chapter, \"Wallow\n  yourselves in the ashes, for the days are accomplished.\" Also in the\n  third of Jonah, \"The king of Ninevah put on sackcloth and sat in\n  ashes.\" Also in the Lamentations, \"The virgins of Jerusalem are\n  clothed in sackcloth.\"'--_Rationale_ vi, 28, 18.]\n26. Ninthly, a cemetery, which enjoyeth the same privileges as a\nchurch, is also consecrated and blessed; just as the Lord blessed by\nthe hands of his servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the land bought\nfor a burial ground from the sons of Ephron. It is blessed also in\norder that it may cease from that time forward to be the abode of\nunclean spirits, and that the bodies of the faithful may therein rest\nin peace until the day of judgment; unless the bodies of paynims or\ninfidels, or even of excommunicate persons should be buried there,\nuntil they shall be cast out thence.\n27. This also is to be noted, that the palls of the altar, the\npriestly vestments, and ecclesiastical ornaments of this kind are to\nbe blessed. For we have already read that Moses, by command of the\nLord, consecrated the tabernacle with divine prayers, together with\nthe table and altar, and vessels and utensils for performing the\ndivine worship. If therefore the Jews, who served the 'shadow of the\nLaw and of good things to come,'  [Footnote 539] did this, how much\nthe more ought we to do it to whom the truth hath been made known by\nChrist! Whence we read in the last chapter but one of Exodus, 'Moses\nblessed all the vessels of the ministry.'   [Footnote 540] And should\nan additional piece or a fringe be attached to it, it is proved by the\ntestimony of right that the blessing need not on this account be\nrepeated. But the reason why these things and other like things are\nconsecrated is evidently gathered from the forms of blessing them. Of\nthe sacred vestments we shall speak in the introduction to the third\nbook.  [Footnote 541] And observe: That the blessing or consecration\nof a church, and of vestments, and of ecclesiastical ornaments is not\nperformed as if they were capable of receiving grace, for they are\ninanimate: but this practice is introduced, because as men are, so\nalso are these things, by the act of blessing and consecration\nrendered suitable and fit for divine worship, and are {151} made of\ngreater holiness. Whereas on _persons_ greater grace is bestowed by\nunction and benediction. But some in the benediction of ornaments, let\nfall their hands, of which we shall speak in the second book under the\nhead of the Deacon.   [Footnote 542]\n  [Footnote 539: Hebrews x, 1.]\n  [Footnote 540:  Exodus xxxix.]\n  [Footnote 541:  The history, use, and symbolism of the sacred\n  vestments would themselves require a volume to be fully\n  illustrated.]\n  [Footnote 542:  Observe that when a person in confirmation is\n  blessed on the forehead, and when salt, and water, and palls, and\n  vestments, and the like be consecrated, the hands are held over\n  them, because there is a certain virtue in consecrated hands, which\n  is as it were stirred up when benediction is poured out over\n  anything with the hands suspended in this way. Whence the Apostle\n  admonishing his disciple Timothy, saith, \"I put thee in remembrance\n  that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee, by the laying\n  on of my hands.\" So that devotion may be stirred up in the body by\n  the suspension of hands, just as in the heart by the effect. For\n  virtue existeth not only in animate things, but also in inanimate.\n  Whence some do affirm that by the virtue of a church, if anyone\n  entereth therein from devotion, his venial sins be forgiven. Again,\n  the hands are thus held in cases of exorcism especially, as if the\n  priest by the bodily act would put to flight and threaten the devil\n  by the virtue of the consecration of his hands.'--Durandus ii, 9,\nTenthly, we were to speak of the consecration of Virgins, but of this\nwe shall treat in the preface to the second book.  [Footnote 543]\n  [Footnote 543: This point is not sufficiently connected with our\n  subject to need illustration.]\nCHAPTER IX\nOF THE SACRAMENTS OF THE CHURCH\nDifference between a Sacrament and a Mystery--Distinction of Sacraments\n--Of Matrimony--Of the Ring--Of Second Marriages--Why Sacraments\nwere Instituted.\n1. With respect to the sacraments of the Church, it is to be noted\nthat, according to Gregory, there is a _sacrament_ in any celebration\nwhen an outward act is so performed as that we receive inwardly some\ndegree of the thing signified; the which is to be received holily and\nworthily. Also a _mystery_ is that which the Holy Ghost worketh\nsecretly, and invisibly, so as to sanctify by His operation, and bless\nby His sanctification. A mystery is said to exist in sacraments; a\nministry only in ornaments.\n2. But, according to Augustine, a sacrament is a visible sign of an\ninvisible grace. Again, a sacrifice is visible; a sacrament invisible.\nAgain, the same sign is a thing which bringeth under cognisance some\nthing different from itself over and above the outward appearance\nwhich it presenteth to the senses.\n3. A sacrament is said also to be a sign of a sacred thing, or a\nsacred concealment of a thing. Of this we shall further speak in the\nfourth book, under the seventh part of the Canon of the Mass, upon the\nword 'the mystery of faith,' and under the head of the Oblation.\n[Footnote 544]\n  [Footnote 544: The seventh part of the Canon of the Mass is,\n  'Likewise after supper He took the cup into His holy and venerated\n  hands; and when He had given thanks, He blessed it and gave it to\n  His disciples, saying, Take and drink ye all of this; for this is\n  the chalice of My blood, of the New and Everlasting Testament, the\n  _mystery of faith_, which is shed for you and for many for the\n  remission of sins: Do this as oft as ye shall drink it in\n  remembrance of me.'--See _Rationale_ iv. 42, 20.]\n4. Some of the sacraments be of necessity only; some of dignity and\nnecessity; some of order and necessity; some of dignity and choice;\nand some of choice only. The sacrament of necessity only is baptism,\nwhich when administered by anyone, so it be in the form of the Church,\nin the greatest extremity profiteth unto salvation. And it is said to\nbe 'of necessity,' because without it no one can be saved, if it be\nneglected through contempt. Of this sacrament we shall speak in the\nsixth book, under the head of Holy Saturday.  [Footnote 545] The\nsacrament of dignity and necessity is confirmation: of dignity,\nbecause it is conferred by the bishop alone; of necessity, because he\nwho neglecteth it through contempt of it, cannot be saved. Of this\nalso we shall speak under the head just specified.\n  [Footnote 545: The chapter referred to treats of holy baptism\n  doctrinally, and does not therefore fall within the province of this\n  volume.]\n5. The sacraments of order and dignity are Penance, the Eucharist, and\nExtreme Unction. Of order; because they ought only to be administered\nby such as are rightly ordained according to the Church's power of the\nkeys; except in necessity, in which one may _confess_ even unto a\nlayman: of necessity; since such as neglect them through contempt of\nthem cannot be saved. About penance, see the sixth book, upon the\nfifth day of Holy Week, the _Caena Domini_:  [Footnote 546] about the\nEucharist, we shall speak in the fourth book, upon the Canon;\n[Footnote 547] about Extreme Unction we have spoken in the preceding\nchapter.\n  [Footnote 546: What we call _Maunday Thursday_, from _Mandatum\n  novum_ ('A new commandment I give unto you,' etc.), which the Church\n  of England retains as a Lesson for the day, is more properly called\n  _The Caena Domini_, or _Lord's Supper_, in remembrance (as Bishop\n  Andrewes says) _of the mighty mystery of Thy holy body and precious\n  blood, instituted on the evening of this day_.--See S. Isidore, _De\n  Offic. Eccles._ i, 28. The chapter referred to (73 of the sixth\n  book), shows that penitents were restored to communion on this day,\n  and with what ceremonies.]\n  [Footnote 547:  These, besides their great length, are not required\n  for the explication of our more immediate subject.]\n6. But the sacrament of dignity and choice is Orders: of dignity;\nbecause conferred by bishops alone, and because no one is admitted\nthereunto save a worthy person and in a worthy way: of choice; because\nanyone may be saved without it. Of this we shall speak in the preface\nto the second book.  [Footnote 548]\n  [Footnote 548:  These, besides their great length, are not required\n  for the explication of our more immediate subject.]\n7. The sacrament of choice only is matrimony; and it is said to be of\nchoice, because anyone may be saved without it. Indeed a man seeking\nto marry is not inclined to tend towards the kingdom of heaven.\nWith respect to this it is to be remarked that, according to the\ncanons, the solemnity of marriage ought not to be celebrated from\nSeptuagesima Sunday, because it is a season of sorrow, until the\noctave of Easter, nor in the three weeks before the Feast of S. John.\n[Footnote 549] But according to the custom of the Catholic Church,\nmarriages may be solemnised in the church from the morrow of Low\nSunday, namely, from the octave of Easter, until the first Rogation\nDay. And from the morning of the first Rogation Day this rite is\nprohibited until the octave of Whitsuntide inclusively: and so saith\nPope Clement in his Decretal. Again, marriages ought not to be\ncelebrated {155} from the First Sunday in Advent until the Epiphany:\nnor would they have been allowed until the octave of the Epiphany had\nnot the Lord honoured a marriage with His presence, and even with a\nmiracle.  [Footnote 550] Whence they then chant, 'To-day the Church is\nunited to her Heavenly Spouse.' Some, however, say that it is more\nholy to extend this prohibition unto the octave of the Epiphany.\n  [Footnote 549: Bp. Cosins says that marriages are not to be\n  solemnised from Advent Sunday, until eight days after (or the octave\n  of) the Epiphany; from Septuagesima Sunday until eight days after\n  Easter; and from Rogation Sunday until Trinity Sunday. Some of these\n  being times of solemn fasting and abstinence, some of holy festivity\n  and joy, both fit to be spent in such holy exercises, without other\n  avocations. See his 'Devotions,' republished by Messrs Rivington.]\n  [Footnote 550: We are accustomed to celebrate only the manifestation\n  of Christ to the Gentiles, on the Epiphany. But S. Isidore (_De Off.\n  Ecc._ i, 26) gives two other objects of commemoration upon this day:\n  viz. the baptism of our Lord, and his first miracle at the marriage\n  in Cana. And so the hymn in the Breviary:\n    Ibant Magi, quam viderant,\n    Lumen requirunt lumine,\n    Lavacra puri gurgitis\n    Peccata quae non detulit,\n    Novum genus potentiae!\n    Vinumque jussa fundere\n    Stellam sequentes praeviam;\n    Deum fatentur munere.\n    Caelestis Agnus attigit;\n    Nos abluendo sustulit.\n   Aquae rubescunt hydriae,\n   Nutavit unda originem.\n  Our own Church, however, retains the old Gospel for the second\n  Sunday after the Epiphany.]\nIn the aforesaid times, therefore, marriages are not to be contracted;\nbecause these seasons are set apart for prayer.\n8.  [Footnote 551] But although the solemnising of marriages is\nprohibited in these intervals, yet a contract of marriage holds good\nat whatever time it may have been duly made. But in that it is ordered\nby the canons that weddings should not be celebrated in the three\nweeks before the Festival of S. John Baptist, the rule was made that\nmen might be more at leisure for prayer. For the Church had formerly\nappointed two periods of forty days, besides the great one of\nLent:--the one preceding the nativity, usually called S. Martin's, and\nlasting from his day to the nativity;   [Footnote 552] the other,\nforty days before the Feast of S. John Baptist:--in which men should\ngive especial heed unto prayers, alms, and fastings. But in regard of\nthe frailty of man, these two seasons have been reduced to one, and\nthat one again divided into the three weeks of advent, and three\nbefore the nativity of S. John: at which times men ought to fast and\nabstain from marriage.\n  [Footnote 551: A few passages have been omitted in the course of\n  this chapter.]\n  [Footnote 552: Martinmas is the 11th November. The forty days are\n  not exactly made out between this and the Nativity. ]\n9. According to S. Isidore (of Seville), women wear veils, when they\nare married, so that they may know that they must always be subject to\ntheir husbands: and because Rebecca, when she saw Isaac, veiled\nherself. The same saith also that married persons after the\nbenediction are coupled by a fillet, to show that they must not break\nthe tie, that is the fidelity, of conjugal unity. And the same fillet\nis both white and purple mixed; because the white signifieth purity of\nlife, and purple their lawful raising of offspring: so that by this\nsymbol, their continuance and mutual 'defrauding one another for a\ntime is signified, as well as their coming together again'  [Footnote\n553] and return afterwards to conjugal duties.\n  [Footnote 553: See S. Paul I Corinthians vii, 5. The whole of this\n  passage is quoted from S. Isidore, who is, however, more\n  circumstantial than Durandus, and much more elegant and intelligible\n  in his language. The extreme corruption of the printed copies of our\n  author may be exemplified by referring the reader to the original in\n  S. Isidore.--_De Off. Eccles._ ii, 19. See also Hugo de S. Victore,\n  _Exercit. Theol. Summ. Sent._, Tract vii.]\n10. Also in that at the beginning of the ceremony the husband giveth a\nring to the bride, this is done as a sign of mutual love, or rather in\norder that their hearts may be united by the same pledge. And the same\nring is put on the fourth finger, because (as some say) a certain vein\nrunneth through it which reacheth to the heart. Also one Protheus is\nsaid to have first made a ring of iron as a pledge of love, and to\nhave enclosed an adamant therein: and from this he founded the custom\nof betrothing brides, because as iron subdueth all things, so doth\nlove conquer all things, since nothing is more violent than its\nardour.\n11. And as an adamant cannot be broken, so love cannot be overcome:\nfor love is as strong as death. Therefore also he founded the custom\nof putting the ring on the ring-finger through which a vein passeth to\nthe heart. Afterwards, however, golden rings were substituted for\niron, and were set with gems, instead of adamant, because as gold\nexcelleth other metals, so doth love excel all other blessings. And as\ngold is set off by the gems, so is conjugal love by other virtues. But\nthe word _nuptials_ (marriage) is so called according to Ambrose, a\n_nubendo_ (from covering the head). For brides are wont to veil the\nhead and abstain from speaking. Whence also Rebecca, when she saw\nIsaac to whom she was about to be espoused, began to veil her face.\nFor bashfulness ought to precede marriage, inasmuch as bashfulness\nmore highly commendeth wedlock itself: and the bride should appear\nrather to be sought by the husband, than herself to have sought after\n12. We have further to note that a threefold spiritual sacrament is\nsignified by the consummation of marriage. The first sacrament is the\nspiritual union of the soul to God, through faith, love, and charity;\nor the union of will, namely charity which consisteth in the spirit,\nbetween God and a just soul. Whence saith the Apostle, 'but he that is\njoined unto the Lord is one spirit.'   [Footnote 554] This sacrament\nis signified by the union of soul which takes place at the first\nbetrothal in carnal matrimony. The second is the union of the human\nnature with the divine, which took place in the incarnation of the\nWord of God; or the conformity of nature, which existeth in the flesh,\nbetween Christ and His Holy Church. To which that saying referreth,\n'The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.'   [Footnote 555] The\nthird sacrament is the unity of the Church, gathered out of all\nnations and subjected to one spouse, namely Christ. This sacrament is\ntypified in the case of such as, having had one wife and her a virgin,\nhave afterwards been admitted into holy orders.\n  [Footnote 554: I Corinthians vi, 17.]\n  [Footnote 555: S. John i, 14.]\n13. But when anyone yieldeth to a second marriage, he giveth up this\nunity, and the signification of this third sacrament does not hold in\nhis case: wherefore marriage should not advance beyond _one_, because\nsuch advance cannot signify unity. Besides, by a second marriage he\ndeparteth from the union of his former marriage: but the Church ever\nsince she hath united herself to Christ, hath never departed from Him,\nneither hath Christ ever departed from her. Wherefore one who hath\ntwice married cannot signify such an unity. Whence also deservedly\nfrom the defect of this sacramental signification marriage cannot be\nrepeated.\n14. Note also this, that according to the statute of the Council of\nCarthage the bridegroom and bride are to be presented by the parents\nor bridesmen unto the priest in order to be blessed. And having\nreceived the blessing, out of reverence to it, they do not consummate\nthe marriage till the next day.\n15. Again by the appointment of Pope Evaristus marriages are to be\nblessed by the priest not without prayers and offerings. However, a\nman and woman who contract a second marriage must not be blessed by\nthe priest, since, they having been already blessed, the ceremony may\nnot be repeated. Nor ought marriages to be blessed unless both parties\nare still unmarried, for the reason given in the preface to the second\nbook.  [Footnote 556]\n  [Footnote 556: It is laid down that a _widow_ on taking the vows is\n  not veiled by the bishop, as is the case with a virgin. 'A priest,'\n  Durandus continues, 'is prohibited from taking a part in second\n  marriages and from giving the benediction to such as are twice\n  married. But a widow taking the vows is married as it were twice,\n  first to her late husband, and secondly unto Christ in her\n  profession, wherefore the veil of consecration, or even of\n  profession, is not given unto her, but she herself takes it from the\n  altar. . . . Yet in the Pontifical, according to the Roman Order, we\n  find the benediction of a widow professing continence, and also of\n  her veil. For the Lord also comforted the widow of Serepta by the\n  hand of Elias the prophet. And I have myself seen in the city (Rome,\n  of course) the [Cardinal] Bishop of Ostia bless two widows among the\n  virgins who took the vows' (Proem. II, c. 47).]\nAnd any priest who shall have given the blessing in such a second\nmarriage is to be suspended from his office and benefice and to be\nsent to the apostolical see; a custom this, introduced as an\nincitement to continence. According to the custom of some places, if\nanyone contracts a second marriage with an unmarried woman the\nbenediction is repeated: but this does not avail unless our Lord the\nPope know of it and approve it. Some also say that if any unmarried\npersons were not blessed when they contracted marriages, they may when\nmarrying a second time receive the benediction; but if they were\nblessed at first, it cannot be repeated at a second marriage even\nthough the first were never consummated. Of the benediction of virgins\nwe shall speak in the preface and the second book.  [Footnote 557]\n  [Footnote 557: See chap. viii, note 57.]\n16. But it is to be noted that one sacrament may be more worthy than\nanother in four ways: namely, in efficacy, as baptism; in sanctity, as\nthe eucharist; in significancy, as marriage (though some do not admit\nthis way); in the dignity of the administrator, as confirmation and\norders.\n17. But is it asked why sacraments are appointed, when without them\nGod could have given eternal life and His Grace unto mankind? I\nanswer, for three reasons. First, for our humiliation; in order that\nwhen man reverently humbleth himself by the command of God unto\ninsensible and inferior things, he may from this obedience become more\nacceptable unto Him. Secondly, for our instruction; that by that which\nis seen objectively in a visible form, our mind may be instructed in\nthat invisible virtue, which is to be perceived within. {160} Thirdly,\nfor our exercising: in order that, since man ought not to be idle,\nthere may be set before him a useful and healthy exercise in the\nsacraments; so that he may avoid vain and hurtful occupation.\nAccording to that saying, 'Always be doing some good work, that the\ndevil may find you occupied.' Wherefore, as we said in the foregoing\nchapter, they must never be neglected.\nEND OF THE FIRST BOOK\nEPILOGUE TO THE WHOLE WORK  [Footnote 558]\n  [Footnote 558: Job xxxviii, 31. See the Proeme towards the\n  beginning.]\nLet none imagine that in the foregoing work the divine offices be\nsufficiently set forth, lest by extolling that which is human, he\nrashly depreciate that which is divine. For in the divine offices of\nthe Mass, so many and so great be the mysteries involved, that none,\nunless he be taught of the spirit, is sufficient to explain them. 'For\nwho knoweth the ordinances of heaven, or can explain the reasons of\nthem upon earth?   [Footnote 559] For he that prieth into their\nMajesty is overwhelmed by their glory. But I, who cannot from the\nweakness of mine eyes behold the sun in his brightness, have looked on\nthese mysteries, as through a glass, darkly: and, not penetrating into\nthe interior of the palace, but sitting at the door, have done\ndiligently, as I could, not sufficiently, as I would. For on account\nof the innumerable and inevitable business of the Apostolic See,\n[Footnote 560] pressing on me daily, like a flood, and holding down\nthe mind of him that would diligently rise to a contemplation of\nheavenly things: I, perplexed as it were, and entangled in the knots\nof various employments, could not have the leisure that I wished for,\nand could scarcely either dictate what I had composed, or compose what\nI had conceived. {162} For the mind that is divided in several trains\nof thought hath less power in each. Wherefore I not only ask pardon of\nthe courteous reader, but implore the assistance of a friendly\ncorrector. For I cannot deny that many things are inserted in this\nbook which may be blamed, and that justly and without temerity. But if\nanything worthy be found in it, let the praise thereof be ascribed\nentirely to Divine Grace: for 'every good gift, and every perfect gift\nis from above, and cometh down from the Father of Light.'   [Footnote\n561] But let that which is unworthy, be set down to human\ninsufficiency, 'for the corruptible body presseth down the soul, and\nthe earthly tabernacle weigheth down the mind that museth upon many\nthings.'  [Footnote 562] That which is worthy hath been taken from the\nsayings of others, whose words I have introduced, rather by way of\nrecital  [Footnote 563] after than of approval. I have collected from\ndiverse books, the manner of the honey making bee, not without profit,\nof those things which divine grace hath held forth to me: and this\ndoctrine, flowing with sweetness like the honeycomb, I offer, trusting\nin God's help, to those who desire to meditate on the divine offices:\nexpecting this reward alone of my great toil among men, that they will\npray earnestly to the merciful Judge for the pardon of my\ntransgressions.\n    GULIELMI DURANDI, _Epi Mimatensis Liber de ecclesiis et ornamentis\n    ecclesiasticis explicit feliciter_.\n  [Footnote 559: See the Preface.]\n  [Footnote 560: Book viii, chap. 14.]\n  [Footnote 561: S. James i, 17.]\n  [Footnote 562: Wisdom ix, 17.]\n  [Footnote 563: The passage seems corrupt: but the sense appears to\n  be, 'reciting them, as testimonies in my favour, and not presuming\n  to add my testimony to their worth.]\nSUPPLEMENT\n[For the avoiding continual reference, for the extreme beauty of the\ntreatise itself, for its value as an older document than the\n'Rationale,' and for the advantage of comparison with the latter in\nsubject, sentiment, style, and often language, the Editors have\nsubjoined a translation of the first and second chapters of the\n'Mystical Mirror of the Church' of Hugo de Sancto Victore.]\n  (_Folio Edition_, 237 E)\nA Prologue to the 'Mystical Mirror of the Church,' made by Master Hugh\nof S. Victor.\nYour love hath asked of me to treat of the sacraments of the Church,\nand to set forth unto you their mystical sweetness. But since with the\nmore willingness, because with the more ease and boldness I do evolve\n(after my custom) points of logic rather than of theology; I began to\ndoubt whether to withstand your admonition or the rather to write. But\nwhen I presently remembered how that every good thing when shared with\nothers becometh more bright and beautiful when it is shared, I\nincontinently betook myself to my pen, having invoked the aid of 'Him\nWho openeth and no man shutteth, and shutteth and no man openeth.'\n[Footnote 564] Wherefore I have put into the lips of your\nunderstanding the tractate which you did desire, flowing within with\nnectar like the honeycomb: and the same, because therein ye may see as\nin a mirror what every thing in the church doth mystically denote, I\nhave called 'The Mystical Mirror of a Church.'\n  [Footnote 564: Apocalypse iii, 7.]\nCHAPTER I\nOF A CHURCH\nThe material church in which the people cometh together to praise God,\nsignifieth the Holy Catholic Church, which is builded in the heavens\nof living stones. This is the Lord's house which is firmly builded.\nThe 'chief corner-stone is Christ.' _Upon_ this, not _besides_ this,\nis the 'foundation of the apostles and prophets'; as it is written,\n'Her foundations are upon the holy hills.'  [Footnote 565] The walls\nbuilded thereon, be the Jews and Gentiles coming from the four\nquarters of the world unto Christ. All the stones be polished and\nsquared; that is, all the saints be pure and firm: the which also be\nplaced so as to last for ever by the hands of the Chief Workman. Of\nthese some be borne and do not bear, as the more simple folk in the\nChurch; some be borne and do also bear, as the middling sort; others\ndo only bear, and be not borne, save by Christ alone. Who is the\nsingle Cornerstone. And in this house by how much anyone doth differ\nfrom and excel others, by so much being the more humble doth he hold\nup more of the building. One charity doth join all together after the\nfashion of cement: and the living stones be bound together by the bond\nof peace. The towers be the preachers and the prelates of the Church:\nwho are her wards and defence.\n  [Footnote 565: Psalm lxxx (_Fundamenta ejus_), I.]\nWhence saith the bridegroom unto his spouse in the Song of Songs: 'Thy\nneck is like the tower of David builded for an armoury.'   [Footnote\n566] The cock which is placed thereon representeth preachers. For the\ncock in the deep watches of the night divideth the hours thereof with\nhis song: he arouseth the sleepers; he foretelleth the approach of\nday; but first he stirreth up himself to crow by the striking of his\nwings. Behold ye these things mystically: for not one is there without\nmeaning. The sleepers be the children of this world, lying in sins.\nThe cock is the company of preachers, which do preach sharply, do stir\nup the sleepers to cast away the works of darkness, crying, 'Woe to\nthe sleepers: awake thou that sleepest'; which also do foretell the\ncoming of the light, when they preach of the day of judgment and\nfuture glory. But wisely before they preach unto others do they rouse\nthemselves by virtues from the sleep of sin, and do chasten their\nbodies. Whence saith the Apostle, 'I keep under my body and bring it\ninto subjection.  [Footnote 567] The same also do turn themselves to\nmeet the wind when they bravely do contend against and resist the\nrebellious by admonition and argument, lest they should seem to flee\nwhen the wolf cometh. The iron rod upon which the cock sitteth,\nshoweth the straightforward speech of the preacher; that he doth not\nspeak from the spirit of man, but according to the scriptures of God:\nas it is said, 'If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of\nGod.'  [Footnote 568] In that this rod is placed above the cross, it\nis shown that the words of Scripture be consummated and confirmed by\nthe cross: whence our Lord said in His Passion, 'It is finished.'\n[Footnote 569] And His title was indelibly written over Him.\n  [Footnote 566: Cant. iv, 4. ]\n  [Footnote 567: I Corinthians ix, 27.]\n  [Footnote 568: I S. Peter iv, 2.]\n  [Footnote 569: S. John xix.]\nThe ball (_tholus_) upon which the cross is placed doth signify\nperfection by its roundness: since the Catholic faith is to be\npreached and held perfectly and inviolably: 'Which faith, except a man\ndo keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish\neverlastingly.' Or else the ball doth signify the world redeemed by\nthe price of the Cross: on which account the cross is placed over it.\nThe cock being set over the cross signifieth that the preacher ought\nto make sure this point, that Christ redeemed the world by His Cross.\nThe pinnacle and turret show the mind or life of a prelate who tendeth\nunto things above. The bells, by the voice of which the people are\ncalled together unto the church, typify also preachers: the which\nbeing necessary for many uses, are called by many names. The clapper,\nwhich causeth the sound from the two sides of the bell, is the tongue\nof the preacher which causeth both Testaments to resound. The wooden\nframe, whence the bell hangeth, signifieth the Cross; the cramps,\ncharity; by which charity the preacher, being fast bound to the Cross,\nboasteth, saying, 'God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of\nour Lord Jesus Christ'   [Footnote 570] The rope is the life and\nhumility of the preacher. Whence the Apostle saith, 'He condescendeth\ntowards others. Whether we exalt ourselves it is for God; whether we\nabase ourselves it is for you.'   [Footnote 571] The rings on the rope\nare perseverance and the crown of reward. The glazed windows of the\nchurch be the Holy Scriptures, which do ward off the wind and the\nrain, that is, do repel all hurtful things; and when they do transmit\nthe brightness of the True Sun by day into the church, they do give\nlight to them that be therein. These be wider within than without,\nbecause the sense mystical is more ample and more pre-eminent than the\nsense literal. These be frequented of preachers, 'who do fly as a\ncloud and as the doves to the windows.'   [Footnote 572]\n  [Footnote 570: Galatians vi, 14.]\n  [Footnote 571: 2 Corinthians v, 13. Vulgate.]\n  [Footnote 572: Isaiah lx, 8.]\nAlso by the windows the five senses of the body be signified: which\nought to be narrow without, lest they should take in vanities, but\nshould be wide within to receive spiritual good. The door is Christ:\nwhence the Lord saith in the Evangele, 'I am the door.'  [Footnote\n573] The pillars be doctors; who do hold up spiritually the temple of\nGod by their doctrine, as do the evangelists also the throne of God.\nThese, for the harmony of divine eloquence, be called silver columns:\naccording to that of the Song of Songs, 'He made the pillars thereof\nof silver.'   [Footnote 574] The stalls do denote the contemplative:\nin whom God doth rest without offence. These, for that they do\ncontemplate the highest divinity and glory of the eternal life, be\ncompared unto gold: whence in the aforesaid Song of Songs it is said,\n'He made a golden bed.'  [Footnote 575] The beams be such as\nspiritually sustain the Church: the ceilings such as adorn it and\nstrengthen it; of the which (because they be not corrupted by vices)\nthe bride glorieth in the same Canticles, saying, 'The beams of our\nhouse are cedar and our rafters of fir.'   [Footnote 576] For God hath\nbuilt His Church of living stones and imperishable wood: according to\nthat, 'Solomon made himself a litter of the wood of Lebanon;\n[Footnote 577] that is Christ of His saints made white by chastity.\nThe chancel, when lower than the body of the church, showeth\nmystically how great humility ought to be in the clergy: according to\nthe saying, 'The greater thou art the more humble thyself.'  [Footnote\n578] The altar signifieth Christ, without Whom no acceptable gift is\noffered unto the Father. Whence the Church uttereth her prayers unto\nthe Father _through_ Christ. The vestments with which the altar is\nadorned be the saints of whom the Prophet speaketh unto God, saying,\n'Thou shalt surely clothe Thee with them all as with an ornament.'\n[Footnote 579]\n  [Footnote 573: S. John x.]\n  [Footnote 574: Cant, iii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 575: Cant, iii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 576: Cant, i, 17.]\n  [Footnote 577: Cant, iii, 9.]\n  [Footnote 578: Eccles. iii, 18.]\n  [Footnote 579: Isaiah xlix, 18.]\nThe steps by which we ascend unto the altar do spiritually denote the\napostles and martyrs of Christ who have shed their blood for the love\nof Him. The bride in the Canticles saith, 'The ascent unto it is\npurple, the midst thereof being paved with love.'   [Footnote 580]\nFurthermore, the fifteen virtues be expressed by the fifteen steps\nwith which they went up unto the temple of Solomon: and the same be\nshown by the prophet in the fifteen continuous Psalms, which the\nrighteous man hath disposed as steps or degrees in his heart.\n[Footnote 581] This is the ladder which Jacob saw, the top of which\ntouched the heavens. The lights of the church be they by whose\ndoctrine the Church shineth as the sun and the moon; unto whom it is\nsaid by our Lord's voice,  [Footnote 582] 'Ye are the light of the\nworld.' They be also the examples of good works: whence He saith in\nHis admonitions, 'Let your light so shine before men.'   [Footnote\n583] In that the church is adorned joyfully within but not without, is\nshown morally that its 'Glory is all from within.'   [Footnote 584]\nFor although it be contemptible externally, yet doth it shine within\nin the soul, which is the abode of God: whence the Church saith, 'I am\nblack but comely.'   [Footnote 585] And again, 'Yea, I have a goodly\nheritage.'   [Footnote 586] Which the Prophet considering, saith,\n'Lord, I have loved the habitation of Thy house: and the place where\nThine honour dwelleth,'   [Footnote 587] which place also Faith, Hope,\nand Charity do spiritually adorn.\n  [Footnote 580: Cant, iii, 10. Vulgate.]\n  [Footnote 581: The fifteen Psalms, cxx-cxxxiv of our version, are\n  called Songs of Degrees.]\n  [Footnote 582: S. Matthew v.]\n  [Footnote 583:  Ibid.]\n  [Footnote 584: Here is an allusion to Psalm xlv (_Eructavit cor\n  [Footnote 585: Cant, i, 5.]\n  [Footnote 586: Psalm xvi (_Conserva me Domine_), 7.]\n  [Footnote 587: Psalm xxvi (_Judica me Domine_), 8. ]\nThe cross of triumph is placed in the middle of the church, because\nthe Church loveth her Redeemer in the middle of her heart, and 'the\nmidst thereof is paved with love for the daughters of Jerusalem.'\n[Footnote 588] The which as a sign of victory, let all who see say one\nand all, 'Hail, salvation of the whole world: hail, life-giving Tree!'\nWherefore, lest we should ever forget the love of God for us, 'Who\ngave his only-begotten Son' to redeem us His servants, the Church\narmeth herself in her bosom and forehead with this sign, signifying\nthat the mystery of the cross must always be believed by us in our\nheart, and confessed openly with our mouth. The figure of which went\nbefore her in Egypt. But when we cross ourselves from the forehead\ndownwards, and then from the left to the right, we do set forth this\nmystery, that God 'bowed the heavens and came down,' to teach us to\nprefer things eternal unto things temporal. But by this sign the army\nof the devil is overthrown; the Church triumpheth, 'terrible as an\narmy with banners.' [Footnote 589] 'How dreadful is this place: this\nis none other but the house of God.'  [Footnote 590] And the Hymn\nsaith, 'The banners of the King come forth: the Cross unfolds its\nmystery.'  [Footnote 591] Round this do the heavenly legions rally. Of\nthis it is written, 'I saw the holy city. New Jerusalem, coming down\nfrom God out of heaven.'   [Footnote 592]\n  [Footnote 588: Cant. iii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 589: Cant, vi, 10.]\n  [Footnote 590: Genesis xxviii, 17.]\n  [Footnote 591: The hymn, _Vexilla Regis_, occurs in the office for\n  Passion Sunday.]\n  [Footnote 592: Apoc. xxi, 2.]\nFor the Church is militant here; in her home she doth reign: a part is\nin pilgrimage, a part in glory. That which is in pilgrimage coming up\nfrom her exile through the desert, doth sigh for her home, from the\n'waters of Babylon for the heavenly Jerusalem;' while the other part,\ncontinually seeing peace, doth hold perpetual festival. Thus the\nheavenly city of Jerusalem is called the 'vision of peace.'\n[Footnote 593]\n  [Footnote 593: See note 4 on the _Rationale_, I. i, p. 13.]\nHow glorious is her kingdom, 'glorious things are spoken of thee, thou\ncity of God.'   [Footnote 594] Her guardians be the citizens of\nheaven, the legions of angels with the glorious company of the\napostles, the prophets, and the patriarchs, the armies of martyrs\nrobed in purple, the flowers of virgins, the verdant choir of\nconfessors, compassed about with the universal assembly of all the\nsaints, chaste and glorified! And this wondrous court of heaven is yet\nmore wondrously adorned by that one incomparable jewel, the Virgin\nMother, 'whose like there ne'er hath been, whose like there ne'er\nshall be.' But how great is the admiration of all in beholding the\nKing Himself, and how harmonious be the songs in praise of Him; this\nis known to those alone, who have deserved to stand amongst the happy\nthrong, and to behold the mystery of the Trinity and the glory of\nChrist: Who is encircled by the angelic choirs; upon Whom the angels\ndesire continually to gaze. To behold this the Immortal King face to\nface, the Church below is preparing herself: and while she keepeth\nhere her feasts of time, she is remembering the festivals of her home\nand of eternity; in which the bridegroom is hymned by angelical\ninstruments. And all the saints continually celebrating the day of\ngreat festivity 'which the Lord hath made,' cease not in their nuptial\nsongs to laud the eternal bridegroom, the beautiful in form above the\nsons of men; Him who hath chosen the Church for Himself of His free\nmercy. Of whom, as He had seen her from eternity, He saith, 'I will\nget Me to the mountain of myrrh, and to the hill of frankincense and\nwill speak unto my spouse.'   [Footnote 595] For whom 'He came forth\nas a bridegroom out of His chamber, and rejoiced as a giant to run his\ncourse';   [Footnote 596] when He went forth from His Father, and\nreturned unto His Father--went forth indeed even unto Hades, returned\nunto the Throne of God--to make all His elect, from the beginning even\nunto the end of the world, one kingdom in the vision of the Supreme\nTrinity: in which is glorified 'one God world without end.'\n  [Footnote 594: Psalm lxxxvii (_Fundamenta ejus_), 2.]\n  [Footnote 595: Cant, iv, 6.]\n  [Footnote 596: Psalm xix (_Caeli enarrant_), 5.]\nCHAPTER II\nOF THE DEDICATION OF A CHURCH\nWith what carefulness and love Christ doth adorn the bride for Himself\nand prepare her for her heavenly dedication, is in part signified by\nthe consecration of the material church. The bishop compasseth the\nchurch to be dedicated three times, sprinkling it with holy water, the\nclergy and people following him.\n239 A. In the meanwhile without and within there be burning twelve\nlamps. So often as he cometh to the door (which for a mystical reason\nis shut), the bishop smiteth the lintel with his pastoral staff,\nsaying 'Lift up your heads, O ye gates, and be ye lift up, ye\neverlasting doors, and the King of Glory shall come in.'   [Footnote\n  [Footnote 597: Psalm xxiv (_Domini est terra_).]\nThe deacon answereth, 'Who is the King of Glory?' To whom the bishop,\n'The Lord of Hosts: He is the King of Glory.' At the third time, the\ndoor being thrown open, he entereth with the clergy and people,\nsaying, 'Peace be to this house.' Then he performeth the other\nceremonies which pertain to dedication. But whatever things be here\ndone visibly, the same doth God work by His invisible power in the\nsoul, which is the true Temple of God: wherein Faith layeth the\nfoundation, Hope raiseth the buildings, and Charity finisheth it. Also\nthe Church Catholic herself, being made one out {172} of many stones,\nis the temple of God; because many temples make one temple, of which\nthere is one Lord and one Faith. Wherefore the house must be\ndedicated; the soul sanctified. Water is penitence: salt, wisdom; the\nthreefold aspersion, the threefold immersion in baptism; the twelve\nlights, the twelve apostles, preaching the mystery of the Cross; the\nbishop, Christ; his staff, Christ's power; the three strokes on the\ndoor, Christ's dominion over all things in heaven, earth, and hell:\n'that all the threefold frame of things may bow the knee to Him, their\nLord.' Again, the question of the deacon within is the ignorance of\nthe people; the opening of the door, the ejection of sin. The bishop\nentering, prayeth for peace on the house, and Christ entering the\nworld maketh peace between God and men. Then prostrate he prayeth unto\nthe Lord for its sanctification: and so Christ, humbled in His\nPassion, prayed for His disciples and them that should believe,\nsaying, 'Father, sanctify them in Thy truth.'   [Footnote 598]\n  [Footnote 598: S. John xvii.]\nArising he does not give the salutation but only prayeth: because they\nwho be not yet sanctified must not be blessed but only prayed for. The\nwriting the alphabet upon the pavement is the simple teaching of faith\nin the heart of man. The line drawn from the left corner of the east\nunto the right corner of the west, and the other line from the right\nof the east unto the left of the west, do express the Cross, and also\nthe gathering in of both peoples: according as Jacob blessed the\nchildren of Joseph with his hands crossed.  [Footnote 599]\n  [Footnote 599:  Genesis xxviii]\nFor although Christ passing from the east did leave the Jews, because\nthey would not believe, on His left hand, and did come unto the\nGentiles; to whom, though they had been in the west. He granteth to be\non the right hand: yet will he again, passing from the Gentiles who be\nplaced in the {173} right of the east, visit the Jews in the left hand\ncorner: who, it is evident, be worse than He first found the Gentiles.\nThe staff with which the alphabet is described typifieth the ministry\nof teachers, by which the conversion of the Gentiles is effected and\nthat of Jews perfected. In that afterwards the bishop standing before\nthe altar saith, 'O God, make speed to save us'; he doth signify those\nwho having received the faith are preparing themselves to fight. And\nbecause they be still in conflict, and as it were amongst sighs, the\nAlleluia is not yet added. After this the water is blessed with salt\nand ashes; wine mixed with water being also added. The water is the\npeople; the salt, doctrine; the ashes, the remembrance of the Passion\nof Christ. The wine mixed with water is Christ, God and Man; the wine\nHis Godhead, the water His Manhood. Thus the people is sanctified by\nthe doctrines of faith and remembrance of the Passion, being united\nwith its Head both God and Man. Whence the altar and the church be\nsprinkled within; to show that within, as without, the spiritual\nChurch must be sanctified. The aspersory, made of hyssop, denoteth\nhumility; with which grace the Catholic Church being sprinkled is\npurified. The bishop compasseth the church in lustration and as if\nbestowing his care upon all. In the meanwhile is chanted the Psalm,\n'Let God arise and his enemies be scattered,' with its proper response\nand antiphon, which is followed by another, 'Whoso dwelleth under the\ndefence of the most high.' Then the bishop chanteth, 'My House shall\nbe called an House of Prayer,' and also, 'I will tell out thy name\namong my brethren.' And because no work can prosper without God, he\nprayeth in conclusion that they may be heard who shall enter therein\nto pray for blessings. After this he approacheth unto the altar,\nsaying, 'I will go up unto the altar of the Lord,' with the whole\nPsalm: and what remains of the water {174} he poureth away at the base\nof the altar, committing unto God that which surpasseth human\nabilities in so great a sacrament. After this the altar is wiped with\na linen cloth. The altar is Christ, the cloth is his flesh, brought by\nthe beating of His Passion unto the whiteness and glory of\nimmortality. Next the bishop offereth upon the altar frankincense,\nwhich is burnt in the shape of a cross in the middle thereof; and at\nits four corners he maketh crosses with sanctified oil. Then upon each\nof the four walls of the church there be made three crosses with the\nsame oil: and the consecration being thus finished, the altar is\ncovered with a white veil. Incense, prayers, and oil do denote the\ngrace of the Holy Ghost. Whose fulness--'like the precious ointment\nupon the head that ran down unto the beard: even unto Aaron's beard,'\n[Footnote 600] --came down upon the apostles and their disciples: who\npreached the mystery of the Cross through the four quarters of the\nworld, the Lord working with them. The white covering doth typify the\njoy of immortality: concerning which the Son exulteth, saying unto the\nFather, 'Thou hast put off my sackcloth, and girded me with gladness.'\n[Footnote 601]\n  [Footnote 600: Psalm cxxxiii (_Ecce quam bonum_), 2.]\n  [Footnote 601: Psalm xxx (_Exaltabo te Domine_), 12.]\nAPPENDIX A\nCHANCELS\n'The temple of old was divided into two parts by a veil hung in the\nmiddle thereof. The first part was called the Holy Place, but the\ninner part the Holy of Holies. Whatever part then of the office of the\nMass cometh before the secret   [Footnote 602] is performed as it were\nin the outer place: but the secret itself within the Holy of Holies.\nThere were in the Holy of Holies the altar of incense, the ark of the\ntestimony, the mercy-seat above the ark, and over this two cherubims\nof glory with their faces looking towards each other. Herein the high\npriest entered alone once in the year, having the names of the\npatriarchs written upon the breastplate of judgment and the\nshoulderplates, and bearing a censer of burning coals and blood, and\nincense, which with prayer he placed in the thurible until the cloud\nof incense covered him.  [Footnote 603]\n  [Footnote 602: After the _Sanctus_, which, as we shall find, was\n  performed with the full choir and the accompaniment of organs, came\n  the _secret_, which embraced the whole _Canon of the Mass_,\n  performed by the celebrant alone, and the celebration of the Holy\n  Eucharist. 'It is called the secret because these things be hidden\n  from us, since the nature of man can in no wise fully comprehend so\n  great a mystery: for the denoting of which it is rightly performed\n  secretly. To signify the same also, the priest when entering upon\n  the secret is veiled as it were with the side curtains.' See other\n  mystical reasons adduced in the remainder of this passage, Book IV,\n  Chapter 35, and in Chapter 39 an account of the side curtains. Upon\n  the use of these see also the _Dublin Review_, vol. x, p. 339. ]\n  [Footnote 603: See Leviticus xvi; Exodus xxviii, xxxix, and xl.]\nAfterwards he sprinkled the mercy-seat and the altar with blood, and\nthen he went out to the people, and washed his vestments in the\nevening. These were types of old, but they have ceased since the\nthings signified thereby have come. But thus the former temple doth\ndenote the present church; the Holy of Holies, heaven; the high\npriest, Christ; the blood, His Passion; the coals, His love; the\nthurible. His flesh; the burning incense, prayers of sweet savour; the\naltar, the hosts of heaven; the ark, Christ in His humanity; the\nmercy-seat, God the Father; the two cherubims, the twain Testaments,\nthe which do look towards each other because the two do agree; the\nvestments which be washed, mankind. Wherefore consider what things\nwere done of old, and what things Christ hath done, and then see how\nthe minister of the Church doth represent the same in the office of\nthe Mass. By the ark also is signified the humility of Christ, from\nwhich through his mercy all good hath come unto us' (Durandus, Book\nIV, Preface 13, 14).\nIn the next section the same subject is further illustrated, though\nwithout reference to the immediate subject of this appendix, the\nnecessity of the division of every church into a chancel and nave.\nThe reader may consult a most interesting series of chapters in Hugo\nde Sancto Victore (Tituli ii-viii, Ex. Misc. II, Lib. IV) upon this\nsubject: the passages are far too long for insertion here.\nThe _absolute necessity_ of this twofold division is a point which it\nis more than painful at this time to have to prove. It is only within\nthe last two centuries that our own or any branch of the Church\nCatholic has dared to depart from an usage which, if any, has\nuniversality, antiquity, and consent on its side, and of whose\nauthority was never any doubt in the Church. {177} For some of the\narguments which have been adduced in the present controversy we must\nrefer to the publications of the Cambridge Camden Society, and\nparticularly the _Ecclesiologist_. There is nothing more wanted than a\ncareful treatise on the subject which shall in a compendious form put\nthis and several points depending upon it, such as orientation itself,\nand praying towards the east, in a clear light.\nAPPENDIX B\nORIENTATION\n'Furthermore albeit God is everywhere, yet ought the priest at the\naltar and in the offices to pray towards the east: according to the\nconstitutions of Vigilius, Pope. Whence in churches which have the\ndoors at the west, he that celebrateth turneth in the salutations to\nthe people: but in churches which have the entrance at the east,\n[Footnote 604] as at Rome, there is no need in the salutations for\nturning round, because the priest always turneth to the people. The\ntemple also of Solomon, and the tabernacle of Moses had their entrance\nfrom the east. Pray we therefore towards the east, being mindful,\nfirstly, that He, Who is the splendour of eternal light, hath\nilluminated 'them   [Footnote 605] that sit in darkness and the shadow\nof death, rising with healing in his wings':   [Footnote 606] of whom\nit is said, 'Behold the man, whose name is the East.'   [Footnote 607]\nFor the which cause he saith in the book of Wisdom,  [Footnote 608]\n{178} 'We ought to pray eastward, where the light ariseth.' Not\nbecause the Divine Majesty is locally in the east: which is\npotentially and essentially in all places; as it is written, 'Do not I\nfill  [Footnote 609] heaven and earth'; and in like manner speaketh\nthe Prophet,  [Footnote 610] 'If I ascend into heaven. Thou art there:\nif I go down to hell, Thou art there also': but because to those 'who\nfear His name shall   [Footnote 611] the sun of righteousness arise,'\n'which lighteth every man that Cometh into the world.'   [Footnote\n  [Footnote 604:  S. John Lateran is an instance. We may observe that\n  the reasons for the orientation of churches must have been very\n  strong to have caused an universal disregard of an example thus set\n  at the centre of Western Christendom.]\n  [Footnote 605: S. Luke i, 79.]\n  [Footnote 606: Malachi iv, 2.]\n  [Footnote 607: Zechariah vi, 12. ]\n  [Footnote 608: Wisdom xvi, 28.]\n  [Footnote 609: Jeremiah xxiii, 24.]\n  [Footnote 610:  Psalm cxxxix (_Domine probasti_), 7.]\n  [Footnote 611: Malachi iv, 2.]\n  [Footnote 612: S. John i, 9.]\nSecondly, that our souls be thereby taught to turn themselves to the\nthings that are more desirable.\nThirdly, because they who praise God ought not to turn their backs on\nHim.\nFourthly, according to Joannes Damascenus (who giveth also the three\nfollowing reasons),  [Footnote 613] to show that we seek our country.\n  [Footnote 613:  _Quatuor orationes._ We should probably read,\n  _rationes_.]\nFifthly, that we may look upon Christ crucified, who is the True East.\nSixthly, that we may prove that we expect Him to come to be our Judge.\nFor Damascenus saith in that place, 'God planted a garden eastward';\n[Footnote 614] whence man's sin made him an exile, and instead of\nParadise made him to dwell in the west: therefore, looking to our\nancient home, we pray towards the east.\n  [Footnote 614: Genesis ii, 8.]\nSeventhly, because our Lord, at His Crucifixion, looked towards the\neast: and also when he ascended into heaven. He ascended towards the\neast: and thus the apostles adored Him: and thus 'He shall come again\nin like manner as they saw Him go into heaven.'   [Footnote 615]\n  [Footnote 615:  Acts i, 11.]\nEighthly, Daniel likewise in the Jewish captivity prayed towards the\ntemple.\nYet Augustine saith that 'no Scripture hath taught us to pray towards\nthe east' [He, however, says also, 'Though I find not a thing on\nrecord in Scripture, yet I receive it as proceeding from the apostles\nif the Universal Church embrace it']   [Footnote 616] (Durandus V, ii,\n  [Footnote 616: This section is in several places corrupt: for\n  example--from Damascenus the quotation in the sixth head belongs\n  properly to the seventh.\n  Our readers may perhaps be reminded of the anecdote of the good Earl\n  of Derby (who, if the Reformed Church in England should ever have a\n  calendar of her own, will assuredly be one of its martyrs), when on\n  the scaffold. The church of Bolton was in sight: and the Earl\n  requested that he might be allowed to kneel on the western side of\n  the block, so that the last object on which his eyes were fixed\n  might be God's house. His executioners showed their poor malice to\n  the last, by denying him this wish.]\nS. Isidore has a curious passage about orientation. A place, he says,\ndesigned so as to face the east was called _templum_, from\n_contemplating_. Of which there were four parts; the front facing the\neast, the back the west, the right hand the south, and the left hand\nthe north: whence also when they builded temples, they took their east\nat the equinox, so that lines drawn from east to west would make the\nsections of the sky on the right and left hands equal, in order that\nhe who prayed might look at the direct east (Orig. XV, iv).\nAPPENDIX C\nON THE DESIGN OF THE ANALOGIUM, AMBO OR ROOD LOFT,\nAND THE READING OF THE GOSPEL FROM IT\n1. We have noted afore, that the priest, in the celebration of Mass,\nwhen it is not High Mass, himself readeth the gospel. But when a\nbishop or priest celebrateth High Mass with the highest solemnity,\nthen, in some churches, as at Rome, the deacon having kissed the {180}\nright hand of the bishop, taketh the book of the gospel from the\naltar, and giveth it to the sub-deacon to bear, and asketh and\nreceiveth the bishop's or priest's blessing. But in other churches, he\nfirst asketh for the blessing before he taketh the book. The\nbenediction having been bestowed, the deacon proceedeth along the\nsouth side  [Footnote 617] of the choir to the rood loft, and before\nhim goeth the sub-deacon with the volume of the gospel, and before him\nthe incense-bearer with incense; and before him the torch-bearer with\nlighted tapers, and before him in some churches the banner of the\ncross: and thus they ascend the rood loft. And the deacon readeth the\ngospel: the which being finished, they return to the priest or bishop\ntogether. Which things we will more particularly go through. It is\nalso to be noted, that in some churches, the deacon, when about to go\nto the rood loft, beginneth the antiphon which followeth benedictus in\nthe nocturns, and while he is going thither, it is taken up, and\nfinished by the chorus, to set forth charity: and it is sung without\ninstruments, to denote that God commandeth us to have love alone. And\nnow is the figure changed: for the deacon, who before represented S.\nJohn Baptist, now setteth forth S. John Evangelist: because 'the law\nand the prophets were until John:   [Footnote 618] and after him the\nkingdom of heaven is preached.'\n  [Footnote 617: As is well known, double staircases to rood lofts\n  appear to have been almost as common in England as single ones: and\n  there are sometimes, especially in Norfolk churches, two\n  corresponding rood turrets.]\n  [Footnote 618: 2 S. Luke xvi, 16.]\n2. And the word _evangelium_ meaneth good tidings; from [Greek text],\nwell, and [Greek text], a messenger. For the preaching of Christ and\nHis apostles is indeed a gospel, as proclaiming Life after death, Rest\nafter labour, a Kingdom after slavery.\n3. And ye are to wit, that as the head hath pre-eminence over the\nother members of the body, and as the other members obey it: so the\ngospel is the principal thing of all that are said in the office of\nthe Mass, and hath the pre-eminence, and whatever things be there\nread, or sung, they consent to it, as may well be perceived.\n4. The deacon therefore first kisseth the hand of the bishop in\nsilence, because the preacher must proclaim the gospel for the sake of\neternal glory, as saith the spouse in the Canticles, 'His right hand\nshall embrace me.'   [Footnote 619] Also because the angel which came\nto announce the glory of Christ's Resurrection did sit on the right\nhand, clothed in white.  [Footnote 620] In other churches, however, he\ndoth not kiss, but only bowing asketh for a blessing. But the\nsub-deacon or deacon doth not kiss the hands, but the feet, of the\nRoman Pontiff, that he may exhibit the greatest reverence to the\ngreatest bishop, and show that he is His Vicar, Whose feet the woman\nthat was a sinner kissed.  [Footnote 621] For his footstool is to be\nadored because it is holy. Whose feet also, when He had risen from the\ndead, the woman held and adored. Generally, none ought to kiss the\nhand of the Roman Pontiff, unless when he receiveth something from his\nhands, or giveth something to them: to show that we ought on both\naccounts to give thanks unto Him, Who giveth to all of His own, and\nreceiveth from none.\n  [Footnote 619: Canticles ii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 620: S. Mark xvi, 5.]\n  [Footnote 621: S. Luke vii, 37.]\n5. The deacon incontinently thereafter taketh the book of the gospel\nfrom the altar, because the 'Law shall go forth out of Sion, and the\nWord of the Lord from Jerusalem':   [Footnote 622] not the Mosaic Law\nwhich went forth of Sinai, but the Gospel Law, of which the Prophet\nsaith, 'Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new\ncovenant with the house of Jacob and with the house of Israel.'\n[Footnote 623]\n  [Footnote 622: Micah iv, 2.]\n  [Footnote 623: Jeremiah xxxi, 31.]\nThe book is also taken from the altar, because the apostles received\nthe gospel from the altar, when they went about preaching the Passion\nof Christ. Or the altar in this place signifieth the Jews, from whom\nthe kingdom of God is taken, and given unto a nation that will do its\nfruits: and from this, that the gospel is taken from the altar, we\nlearn, that it is the Word of God, which is signified by the altar,\naccording to that saying, 'An altar of earth shall ye make unto me.'\n[Footnote 624]\n  [Footnote 624: Exodus xx, 24.]\n6. But he taketh it, according to some, from the right side of the\naltar: because the Church of the Jews, whence our Church springeth,\nwas situate in the east: and placeth it on the left, as it is written,\n'His left hand is under my head, and his right hand doth embrace me':\n[Footnote 625] and that for a threefold cause. Firstly, the gospel\nteacheth that things celestial, which be signified by the right, be\npreferred to things terrestrial, which the left hand setteth forth.\nSecondly, the book is inclined on the left shoulder, to signify that\nthe preaching of Christ shall pass from the Gentiles, as it is\nwritten: 'In those days Israel shall be saved.'   [Footnote 626]\nThirdly, because in temporal life, which is set forth by that side,\nneedful is it that Christ should be preached: and the book of the\ngospel is in some churches adorned on the outside with gold and gems.\nBut the book remaineth on the altar, from the time that the priest\ngoeth there, till the gospel be read, because it, in this respect,\nsignifieth Jerusalem: since the gospel was first preached in\nJerusalem, and remained there from the advent of the Lord till it was\npublished to the Gentiles. As he saith, 'From Sion shall go forth the\nlaws.'  [Footnote 627] For Jerusalem was the place of the Passion,\nwhich is also set forth by the altar.\n  [Footnote 625: Canticles ii, 6.]\n  [Footnote 626: Romans xi, 26.]\n  [Footnote 627: Micah iv, 2.]\n7. Thereafter he seeketh the benediction: because none must preach\nunless he be sent. According to that saying, 'How shall they preach,\nexcept they be sent?'   [Footnote 628] And the Lord saith to His\ndisciples, 'Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest that He may send\nforth labourers into His harvest.'   [Footnote 629] But Esaias, when\nhe had heard the voice of the Lord, saying, 'Whom shall I send, and\nwho will go for us?'   [Footnote 630] made answer and said, 'Here am\nI, send me.' And the Lord said, 'Go and tell this people,' etc.\n  [Footnote 628: Romans x, 15.]\n  [Footnote 629: S. Matt, ix, 38.]\n  [Footnote 630: Isaiah vi, 8, 9.]\n8. Again, Moses prefigured this kind of blessing: who, when he had\nascended unto the mountain, received the tables of the law and the\nblessing, and gave the commandment to the people. And the Lord also\nHimself blessed the order of deacons, and gave it the Holy Spirit and\nsent it to preach through the whole world. The bishop therefore, or\nthe priest, visibly blesseth the deacon who is about to read the\ngospel, which he did not do to the sub-deacon when about to read the\nepistle, because Christ sent the law and the prophets, which be\nsignified by the epistle, while he remained hidden from the world: but\nafter that he had visited it, and conversed with men He sent forth His\napostles and evangelists, and taught them, saying, 'Go and teach,\nsaying, the kingdom of heaven is at hand.'   [Footnote 631] 'And they\nwent through the villages, evangelising, and doing cures everywhere.'\nAnd he sendeth him to read the gospel, to note that Christ sent the\napostles to preach the kingdom of God.\n  [Footnote 631: S. Matthew x, 7.]\n9. But the deacon, laying up in his heart the things which were said\nin the benediction, must study to show himself pure in heart, clean in\nwords, chaste in deed, that he may be able to set forth the gospel\nworthily, because the fountain of living waters, that is, the gospel,\ndoth not flow freely, except from Libanus, that is, from a chaste\nheart, and a pure mouth. {184} For praise is not seemly in the mouth\nof a sinner; nay rather of the sinner saith God, 'What hast thou to do\nto set forth My ordinances, and take My covenant into thy mouth.'\n[Footnote 632] And therefore he is fortified by the sign of the cross,\nand then having received license and benediction, as is aforesaid, and\nhaving made the sign of the cross, that he may walk in safety,\nproceedeth to the rood loft in silence, with his eyes fixed on the\nground: bearing, according to the custom of some churches, nothing in\nhis hand, as the Lord commanded the apostles whom He sent to preach\nthe kingdom of God. 'Take,' saith He, 'nothing for the journey, and\nsalute no one.'   [Footnote 633] But in other churches the deacon\nbeareth a book, as shall be said hereafter. But when he cometh to the\nrood loft, he saluteth it, as entering into a house to which he\noffereth peace, and passeth from the right side of the choir to the\nleft, as he had before transferred the book from the right to the left\nside. For when the Jews had refused the Word of God, it was preached\nto the Gentiles, who are understood by the left side.\n  [Footnote 632: Psalm 1 (_Deus Deorum_) 16.]\n  [Footnote 633:  S. Matthew x, 10.]\n10. In the Roman Church, and in certain others, the sub-deacon\nascendeth the rood loft one way,  [Footnote 634] and the deacon\nanother: because the one proceedeth to an increase of knowledge by\nteaching, the other by learning: and because the minister by the merit\nof his works, and the preacher by the merit of his words, proceedeth\nto an increase of righteousness. Whence the Psalmist: 'Thy\nrighteousness standeth like the mountains of God':  [Footnote 635] but\nthey both return to the bishop by the same way, because by final\nperseverance they attain their reward, {185} as the Lord testifieth,\nsaying: 'He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.'\n[Footnote 636] And that preaching sufficeth not without good deeds.\nFor 'Jesus began both to do and to teach.'   [Footnote 637] Therefore\nthe preacher returneth by the same way by the which the minister had\ngone up. Moreover, he that is about to read the gospel goeth and\nascendeth by one way, and returneth by another, according to that\nsaying, 'They returned into their own country another way':\n[Footnote 638] because the apostles did first preach to the Jews and\nthen to the Gentiles: as it is written, 'Since ye have cast from you\nthe Word of God,'  [Footnote 639] and the rest.\n  [Footnote 634: _Per dextram partem._ We are to imagine, in the whole\n  of this description, the spectators supposed to face the altar. So\n  in the fifteenth chapter of this book, the epistle is said to be\n  read _in dextera parte_.]\n  [Footnote 635: Psalm xxxvi (_dixit injustus_), 6. ]\n  [Footnote 636: S. Matthew x, 22.]\n  [Footnote 637: Acts i, 1]\n  [Footnote 638: S. Matthew ii, 12.]\n  [Footnote 639: Acts xiii, 46.]\n11. The sub-deacon precedeth the deacon (because John and his\npreaching preceded Christ and His preaching), carrying in some\nchurches a cushion; which he may place under the book. By the cushion,\non which the book resteth, be set forth the temporal things of life,\nas it is written: 'If we have sown spiritual things, is it a great\nmatter if we reap your temporal things?'   [Footnote 640] For\naccording to the Apostle, 'They which serve the altar, eat of the\naltar.'   [Footnote 641] For 'the labourer is worthy of his hire.'\n[Footnote 642] And the Lord taught us the law, 'Thou shalt not muzzle\nthe ox when it treadeth out the corn.'   [Footnote 643] Again, a\ncushion is placed under the book to denote that which the Lord saith,\n'My yoke is easy, and My burden light.'   [Footnote 644] Austin saith,\n'To this yoke whosoever is subject, hath all things subject to him.'\n  [Footnote 640: I Corinth, ix, 11.]\n  [Footnote 641: I Corinth, ix, 13. ]\n  [Footnote 642: S. Luke x, 7.]\n  [Footnote 643: Deuteron. xxv, 4.]\n  [Footnote 644: S. Matthew xi, 30.]\nThe cushion therefore denoteth the sweetness and pleasure that ariseth\nfrom the commands of God. Whence the Prophet, 'Thou, O God, hast of\nThy goodness prepared for the poor.'  [Footnote 645]\n  [Footnote 645: Psalm lxviii (_Exurgat Deus_), 10.]\nAnd again, 'O how sweet are Thy words unto my taste.'  [Footnote 646]\nYet in the Roman Church, the deacon goeth first, as the teacher:\nsub-deacon followeth as the learner: the one precedeth, that he may\npreach, the other followeth, that he may minister. But after the\nreading of the Gospel, the sub-deacon, as being now sufficiently\ninstructed, returneth first, having in his hand the gospel, as\nbringing back the gospel as the fruit of his ministrations: according\nto that which the Lord promised: 'He that receiveth a prophet in the\nname of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward.'  [Footnote 647]\nWhom therefore the deacon sendeth aforehand to the bishop, to show\nthat he is bringing back the fruit of his preaching: concerning which\nthe Lord commanded, 'I have called you that ye should go and bring\nforth fruit, and that your fruit should remain.'  [Footnote 648]\nMoreover, the deacon, bearing back the cushion and gospel, signifieth\nthat the preacher ought, by his good works, to offer his life to God.\nWhence the Apostle, 'Whatsoever ye do in word and deed, do all in the\nname of our Lord Jesus Christ.'  [Footnote 649]\n  [Footnote 646: Psalm cxix (_Beati immaculati_), 103.]\n  [Footnote 647:  S. Matthew x. 41.]\n  [Footnote 648: S. John xv, 16.]\n  [Footnote 649:  Colos. iii 17.]\n12. The deacon also sendeth aforehand the thurible with incense,\nbecause the works of Christ preceded His doctrine. As it is written,\n'Jesus began to do, and to teach.' But the thurible with incense\nsignifieth prayer with devotion, which the faithful then chiefly ought\nto employ when they hear the word of God. Again, he doth it, because\nthe preacher must send forth the sweet odour of good works: according\nto that saying of the Apostle: 'We are a sweet savour of Christ in\nevery place.'  [Footnote 650] He whose life is despised needs is it\nthat His preaching also is contemned.\n  [Footnote 650: 2 Corinth, ii, 15.]\nThe cross precedeth the gospel in token that the preacher must follow\nthe Crucified. Whence the Lord saith to Peter, 'Follow Me.' After\nthis, the deacon ascendeth the _ambo_ [the rood loft].\n17. Now _ambo_ meaneth the pulpit, whence the gospel is read, so\ncalled from _ambio_ [to surround] because that place is surrounded\nwith steps. In some churches also there be two ascents, one left,\nnamely towards the east, where the deacon ascendeth; one to the right,\nnamely towards the west, where he descendeth.\n18. He ascendeth that he may read the gospel with a loud and clear\nvoice: as that which is to be heard of all, according to that saying\nof the Prophet, 'O thou that evangelisest to Sion, get thee up into\nthe high mountain.'   [Footnote 651]\n  [Footnote 651: Isaiah xi, 9.]\nAlso that we may imitate our Lord, Who went up into a mountain,\n[Footnote 652] that He might preach the gospel. The gospel is also\nread in a lofty and eminent place, because it hath been preached\nthroughout all the world: as it is written: 'Their sound is gone out\nunto all lands.'   [Footnote 653] But the epistle is read in a lower\nplace, as typifying the law, which was confined to Judea alone, as it\nis written: 'In Jewry is God known.'   [Footnote 654]\n  [Footnote 652: S. Matthew v, i.]\n  [Footnote 653: Psalm xix (_Coeli enarrant_), 4.]\n  [Footnote 654: Psalm lxxv (_Notus in Judea_), I.]\n19. But in a Mass of requiem the gospel is not read in that exalted\nplace, but at the altar, to signify that preaching profiteth not the\ndeparted.\n20. Also the gospel is read from an eagle, according to that saying,\n'He came flying upon the wings of the winds.'   [Footnote 655] And the\neagle itself is covered with a covering of cloth or silk, on certain\nfeasts, to signify the softness of the heart: as he saith, 'I will\ntake away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will give you a heart\nof flesh.'   [Footnote 656]\n  [Footnote 655: Psalm xviii (_Diligam Te_), 10]\n  [Footnote 656: Ezekiel xi, 19. ]\n21. But he that readeth the gospel passeth to the left side: and\nsetteth his face to the north, that the saying may be fulfilled, which\nis written, 'I will say to the north give up, and to the south keep\nnot back'   [Footnote 657] (Durandus, Book IV, chap. xxiv).\n  [Footnote 657: Isaiah xliii, 6.]\nAPPENDIX D\nON THE SIGN OF THE CROSS\nIn the second chapter of his fifth book Durandus enters at great\nlength into this subject. The reason for making the sign is to drive\naway evil spirits, who, as S. Chrysostome says, 'always flee when they\nsee the sign of the cross, as fearing that staff by which they have\nbeen wounded.' The pole on which the brazen serpent was raised, the\ncrossing of Jacob's hands when blessing Joseph's children, the mark\n_tau_ (Ezekiel ix, 4) on the forehead, and the seal on the forehead in\nthe Apocalypse, are some of the representations of the cross here\nalleged. The cross is to be made with three fingers, that is, the\nthumb and two fingers, in honour of the Trinity. The Jacobites and\nEutychians use only one finger. Next the different methods of crossing\nare discussed. The sign ought to be made at the end of the gospel, the\ncreeds, the Lord's Prayer, the _Gloria in excelsis_, the _Sanctus_,\nthe _Agnus Dei_, the _Benedictus_, _Magnificat_, _Nunc dimittis_, at\nthe beginning of the hours, the end of the Mass, when the priest gives\nthe benediction, and whenever mention is made of the Cross of the\nCrucified. See also our author in his sixth book _De die Parasceu_.\nAPPENDIX E\nON THE FOUR COLOURS USED IN CHURCH HANGINGS, ETC.\n1. There be four principal colours, by which, according to the\ndiversity of days, the Church distinguisheth her vestments: to wit,\nwhite, red, black, and green. For we read that in the garments of the\nlaw there were four colours, fine linen, purple, jacinth, scarlet. The\nRoman Church also useth violet and saffron, as shall be said below.\n2. White vestments be used in the festivals of holy confessors, and\nvirgins which be not martyrs, on account of their integrity and\ninnocence. For it is written, 'Her Nazarites were whiter than snow.'\n[Footnote 658] And again: 'They shall walk with Me in white:\n[Footnote 659] for they are virgins: and follow the Lamb whithersoever\nHe goeth.' On account of the same thing white is used on the festivals\nof angels; concerning whom the Lord saith to Lucifer:   [Footnote 660]\n  [Footnote 658: Lamentations iv, 7.]\n  [Footnote 659: The bishop here confuses two passages, Apocal. iii,\n  4, and xiv, 4. Of the same subject Laevinus Torrentius says\n  beautifully in his hymn on the Holy Innocents:\n    Ergo supremi parte coeli, lactea qua lucidum fulget via,\n    Qua picta dulci stillat uva nectare, et nectar exhalant rosae,\n    Loeti coronis luditis, et insignium mixti puellarum choris\n    Sacrum canentes itis agnum candido quacunque praecedat pede.]\n  [Footnote 660: A misquotation of the bishop's. The words are\n  addressed to Job. Job xxxviii, 7.]\n'Where wast thou .... when the morning stars sang together?' Also in\nall the festivals of the Holy Mother of God. In the feast of All\nSaints: yet some then use red. In the principal festival of S. John\nEvangelist.  [Footnote 661] In the conversion of S. Paul. In the\ncathedra of S. Peter.  [Footnote 662] Also from the vigil of the\nnativity of our Lord to the octave of the Epiphany: both inclusive;\nexcepting the festivals of the martyrs included in that period.\n[Footnote 663] In the nativity of our Lord, and also of His\nForerunner, because each was born pure. 'For the Lord rode upon a\nlight cloud,'  [Footnote 664] that is, took unto Himself sinless\nhumanity, 'and entered Egypt,' that is, came into the world: as saith\nthe angel to the virgin, 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the\npower of the Highest shall overshadow thee.'   [Footnote 665] But\nJohn, although he were born in sin, was sanctified from the womb:\naccording to that saying, 'Before thou camest forth from the womb I\nsanctified thee.'   [Footnote 666] And the angel saith to Zecharias,\n'He shall be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb.'\n[Footnote 667] Also white is used in the Epiphany, on account of the\nsplendour of that star which led the wise men, as saith the Prophet,\n'and the Gentiles shall come to thy light,  [Footnote 668] and kings\nto the brightness of thy rising.' In the purification also, on account\nof the purity of the Virgin Mary: which, according to Simeon, gave\nbirth to 'a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people\nIsrael.'   [Footnote 669]\n  [Footnote 661: That is, on the 27th of December, the day of his\n  'deposition': the other feast, kept in memory of his deliverance\n  from the boiling oil, before the Latin gate, and therefore called\n  _S. Joannes ante Portam Latinam_, is the 5th of May.]\n  [Footnote 662: The 22nd of February.]\n  [Footnote 663: Which are S. Stephen, the Holy Innocents, S. Thomas\n  of Canterbury.]\n  [Footnote 664: Isaiah xix, 3.]\n  [Footnote 665: S. Luke i; 35.]\n  [Footnote 666: Jeremiah i, 3.]\n  [Footnote 667: S. Luke i, 15.]\n  [Footnote 668: Isaiah Ix, 3.]\n  [Footnote 669: A very harsh construction: but surely preferable to\n  that by which the Blessed Virgin herself is spoken of as the\n  promised light.]\nOn Maundy Thursday, to set forth the anointing, which is consecrated\nto the purification of the soul. For the gospel on that day\nprincipally setteth forth purity; 'He that is washed needeth not save\nto wash his feet, but is clean every whit': and again, 'If I wash thee\nnot, thou hast no part with me.'   [Footnote 670] It is also used with\nthe office of the Mass from Easter Eve until the octave of the\nAscension inclusive: except on the rogation days and intervening\nfestivals of martyrs. On Easter Day, on account of the angel who\nbrought the tidings of the Resurrection, who appeared in white\ngarments: concerning whom Matthew testifieth, saying, 'His countenance\nwas as lightning, and his garment white as snow':   [Footnote 671] and\nalso because children, when baptised, are clothed in white. So also on\nthe Ascension, because of the bright cloud in which Christ ascended.\n'For two men stood by them in white garments, which also said. Ye men\nof Galilee,'   [Footnote 672] etc.\n  [Footnote 670: S. John xiii, 10.]\n  [Footnote 671: S. Matthew xxviii, 3.]\n  [Footnote 672: Acts i, 11.]\n3. And this is to be noted, that albeit in the consecration of\nbishops, the vestments be of the colour suitable for the day, at the\ndedication of a church they be ever white, on what day soever the\nceremony be celebrated: since in the consecration of a bishop the Mass\nof the day is sung, but in the dedication of a church, the Mass of\ndedication is sung. For the Church is called by the title of a virgin:\naccording to that saying of the Apostle, 'For I have betrothed you to\none man, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.'\n[Footnote 673] Concerning which saith the bridegroom in the Canticles:\n'Thou art altogether fair, my love, and there is no spot in thee.'\n[Footnote 674] But this vestment ought to be white, to signify that\nher garments must at all times be pure, that is, her life must be\nspotless. Also in the octaves of those of the aforesaid feasts which\nhave octaves, the white colour is used.\n  [Footnote 673: 2 Corinthians ii, 11.]\n  [Footnote 674: Canticles i, 15.]\n4. Scarlet vestments are used on the festivals of the apostles,\nevangelists, and martyrs, on account of the blood of their passion,\nwhich they poured out for Christ. For 'these be they which came out of\ngreat tribulation.'  [Footnote 675] Except on the feast of the\ninnocents, as shall be said below. Also on the feast of the Cross,\nbecause Christ on the cross poured out His blood for us. Whence the\nProphet, 'Wherefore is thine apparel red, as one that treadeth out the\nwine vat?'   [Footnote 676] But according to others, we then use white\nvestments: because it is not the feast of the passion, but of the\ninvention, or exaltations.  [Footnote 677] Also from the vigil of\nPentecost to Trinity Sunday inclusively: and this on account of the\nfervour of the Holy Ghost, which appeared in fiery tongues on the\napostles. 'For there appeared unto them divers tongues as of fire.'\n[Footnote 678] Whence the Prophet: 'He sent a fire in their bones.'\nAlthough in the martyrdom of SS. Peter and Paul both red and white be\nused: and in the nativity of S. John Baptist, white: but in his\ndecollation, red.\n  [Footnote 675: Apocalypse vii, 14.]\n  [Footnote 676: Isaiah lxiii, 2.]\n  [Footnote 677: Both retained by our Church. The former (May 3)\n  instituted in commemoration of the discovery of the True Cross, by\n  S. Helena: the other (Sept. 14), which regulates the ember days in\n  that month, in honour of its recapture from Chosroes by the Emperor\n  Heraclius. ]\n  [Footnote 678: Acts i, 1.]\n5. But when her festivity is celebrated, who was both a virgin and\nmartyr, the martyrdom taketh precedence of the virginity; because it\nis a sign of the most perfect love: according as the Truth saith,\n'Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for\nhis friends.'   [Footnote 679] Wherefore on the commemoration of All\nSaints, some use scarlet: but others, and among them the Roman Church,\nwhite: at which time the Church saith, 'They shall walk in the sight\nof the Lamb with white garments: and palms in their hands.'\n[Footnote 680]\n  [Footnote 679: S. John xv, 13.]\n  [Footnote 680: Apocalypse vii, 9.]\nWhence the spouse saith in the Canticles: 'My beloved is white and\nruddy: white in His confessors and virgins, ruddy in His apostles and\nmartyrs.' For these are the flowers of roses, and the lilies of the\nvalley. Again they who use scarlet on the feast of All Saints, do it\nwith that intent because that feast was first instituted in honour of\nAll Martyrs.  [Footnote 681] But answer may be made that it was also\nin honour of the blessed Virgin: and that at the present time, after\nthe decree of S. Gregory VII, the Church keepeth that day holy to the\nmemory of confessors and virgins. Also, the octaves of these days\nfollow the colour of the feasts themselves.\n  [Footnote 681: This alludes to the history of the feast of All\n  Saints. Pope Boneface obtained a grant of the Pantheon from the\n  Emperor Phocas: and dedicated it in honour of S. Mary and All\n  Martyrs. This was on the 11th of May: and the feast of All Martyrs\n  was kept on that day under the title of _S. Maria ad Martyres_. S.\n  John, having confessed before the Latin gate on the 6th, the feast\n  was subsequently kept on that day. But Gregory IV transferred it to\n  Nov. 1st, because the harvest was then gathered in: and because the\n  feast of All Apostles being kept on May 1st, the other would answer\n  to it half-yearly. _All Martyrs_ occurs, in a solitary instance, as\n  an English dedication: _All Apostles_ not to be found in this\n  country, has been adopted in Germany.  ]\n6. Black is used on Good Friday: and on days of abstinence and\naffliction: and also in rogations. Moreover, in those processions\nwhich the Roman Pontiff maketh with bare feet: and in Masses of\nrequiem, and Septuagesima to Easter Eve. For the spouse saith in the\nCanticles, 'I am black but comely,'   [Footnote 682] etc. But on the\nfeast of the Innocents, some use black on account of sadness, some\nscarlet. The former allege the text, 'In Rama was a voice heard,'\n[Footnote 683] etc. And for the same cause canticles of joy are\nomitted: and the mitre is brought without the orfrey, on account of\nthe martyrdoms to which the Church hath principally an eye, when she\nsaith, 'I saw beneath the throne the souls,'   [Footnote 684] etc.\n  [Footnote 682: Canticles i, 5.]\n  [Footnote 683: Jeremiah xxxi, 15; S. Matthew ii, 18.]\n  [Footnote 684: Apocalypse vi, 9.]\n(So also on Sunday, Laetare   [Footnote 685] Jerusalem, the Roman\nPontiff beareth a mitre, beautified with the orfrey, on account of the\njoy which the golden   [Footnote 686] rose signifieth, but on account\nof the time being one of sadness, he weareth black vestments.) But the\nRoman Church, when the festival falleth on a week-day, useth violet,\nbut on the octave, red.\n  [Footnote 685: Palm Sunday.]\n  [Footnote 686: This refers to the celebrated golden rose blessed by\n  the Roman Pontiff on that day: and sent in token of approval to some\n  Catholic prince. Some of our readers may remember that which was\n  lately exhibited along with the golden altars of Basle.]\n7. In fine, on common days green vestments be employed: because green\nis the middle colour between black, white, and red; and specially\nbetween the octave of Epiphany and Septuagesima: and between Pentecost\nand Advent, in the Sunday office, this colour is used.\n8. As he saith, 'Cypress with nard, nard and crocus.'   [Footnote 687]\nTo these four colours be the others referred; to wit, the scarlet to\nthe red,  [Footnote 688] the violet to the black, the fine linen to\nthe white, the saffron to the green. But some refer the roses to\nmartyrs, the saffron to confessors, the lilies to virgins.\n  [Footnote 687: Canticles iii, 6. But the quotation is not exact.]\n  [Footnote 688: This passage seems very corrupt.]\n9. It is not unmeet to use the violet on those days for which black is\nappointed. Whence the Roman Church useth it from the first Sunday in\nAdvent, to the Mass of the vigil of the nativity, inclusive: and from\nSeptuagesima to Easter Eve exclusive. But on the feasts of Saints on\nSeptuagesima and Advent, violet or black is not to be used. And note\nthat on Easter Eve in the whole office before Mass violet is used,\nexcept that the deacon who blesseth the taper, and the sub-deacon who\nministereth, wear a white dalmatic and tunic, respectively: because\nthat benediction pertaineth to the Resurrection, as doth also the\nMass. But the benediction being finished, the deacon putteth off the\ndalmatic, and putteth on a violet chesible: the sub-deacon, however,\nchangeth not his vestments. {195} Some also use white in the\nprocession on Palm Sunday: and in the blessing of the boughs, and\nwhile the hymn _Gloria, laus, et honor_, is sung, on account of the\njoy of that festivity. But the Roman Church useth violet: as it doth\nalso in the procession on Candlemas Day; because that office treateth\nof the anxious expectation of Simeon, and savoureth of the Old\nTestament.\n10. It also useth that colour in the September ember days, and on the\nvigils of saints, when the Mass is of the vigil: and on the rogation\ndays, and in Mass on S. Mark's Day.  [Footnote 689] For when we fast,\nthen we bring under our flesh, that it may be conformed to that of\nChrist, 'By the lividness of whose stripes we be healed.'   [Footnote\n  [Footnote 689: Whether there be any superstitious fasting on S.\n  Mark's Day?' is a question which sometimes occurs in the Visitation\n  Articles of Archbp. Parker and his contemporaries.]\n  [Footnote 690: Isaiah liii, 5.]\nThe which to express we use violet, which is a pale, and as it were, a\nlivid colour (Durandus, Book III, 18).\nAPPENDIX F\nOF BELLS BEING NOT RUNG FOR THREE DAYS BEFORE EASTER\n'On these three days the bells be silent, because the apostles and\npreachers and others who be understood by bells were then silenced.\nFor the sound of bells doth signify the sound of preaching: of which\nit is said, \"Their sound hath gone out into all lands.\" For at that\ntime they no longer went round the towns and villages preaching the\ngospel, but \"after they had sung an hymn they went out with Jesus to\nthe Mount of Olives.\" To whom when the Lord had said, \"Behold he is at\nhand {196} that doth betray Me,\" they slumbered for sadness, and\nceased from praises. Whence also from compline, or vespers, when our\nLord was betrayed beginneth the silence of the bells. Others, however,\ndo not sound their bells beyond prime of this fifth day of passion\nweek.' (Durandus, Book VI, 72, 73).\nAPPENDIX G\nThe authority for the dedication festival is our Lord's observing the\nfeast of the dedication of the Temple. This festival has an octave: as\nalso had the Jewish feast, though the Passover and feast of\nTabernacles had not.\n'But this festival specially denoteth that eternal dedication, in\nwhich that other church, the holy soul, shall be so dedicated and\nunited to God that it shall never be transferred to other uses: which\nwill take place in the octave of the Resurrection.' The Psalms for the\noffice of the festival are the _Domini est terra, Judica me Domine,\nDeus noster refugium, Magnus Dominus, Quam dilecta, Fundamenta ejus_,\nand _Domine Deus_ (Durandus, Book VII, 48).\nAPPENDIX H\nON THE DEDICATION OF A CHURCH\nThe following particulars are extracted and condensed from Martene's\ninvaluable work: and as his account is not easily accessible, and\nsomewhat long, it has been thought well to subjoin them here.\nChurches were often, in the primitive ages, dedicated by more than one\nbishop. Constantine having completed a magnificent church at\nJerusalem, invited the prelates, then assembled in council at Tyre, to\nassist in its consecration (Euseb. _Vit. Const._ iv, 43; Sozomen. i,\nConstantius his son, having finished a church erected by his father at\nAntioch, Eusebius of Nicomedia, the intruding patriarch of\nConstantinople, summoned a council under pretence of consecrating the\nchurch, however much in reality to decide against the Catholic\ndoctrine of Consubstantiality. Ninety-seven bishops were present\n(Sozomen. iii, 5).\nSo it was also in the Western Church. This is proved by the Preface to\nthe Fourth Council of Aries, holden in 524: which begins, 'When the\npriests of the Lord had assembled in the will of God to the dedication\nof the church of S. Mary at Aries.'\nIn the time of S. Louis, Pope Pascal I consecrated the church of S.\nVincent, with the Sacred College of Bishops and Cardinals. About the\nyear 1015, the crypt of the monastery of S. Michael was consecrated by\nS. Bernard of Hildersheilm and two other bishops; and three years\nafterwards, the church being finished, it was consecrated by the same\nS. Bernard with three other bishops (_Vita S. Bernardi._ cap. xxxix,\nxl).\nAll these bishops took an actual part in the service. In the\nconsecration of the church of Mans, in 1120, the high altar was\nconsecrated by Gilbert, Archbishop of Mans: S. Julians by Galfred of\nRouen: Hildebert of Mans consecrated S. Mary's; Reginald of Anglers\nthat of the Holy Cross. There is a fine passage to the same point in\nSugerius's book on the dedication of the church of S. Denis: 'Right\nearly in the morning,' saith he, 'archbishops and bishops, archdeacons\nand abbots, and other venerable persons, who had lived of their proper\n{198} expense, bore themselves right bishopfully; and took their\nplaces on the platform raised for the consecration of the water, and\nplaced between the sepulchres of the holy martyrs and S. Saviour's\naltar. Then might ye have seen, and they who stood by saw, and that\nwith great devotion, such a band of so venerable bishops, arrayed in\ntheir white robes, sparkling in their pontifical robes and precious\norfreys, grasp their pastoral staves, call on God in holy exorcism,\npace around the consecrated enclosure, and perform the nuptials of the\nGreat King with such care, that it seemed as though the ceremony were\nperformed by a chorus of angels, not a band of men. The crowd, in\noverwhelming magnitude, rolled around to the door; and while the\naforesaid episcopal band were sprinkling the walls with hyssop, the\nking and his nobles drive them back, repress them, guard the portals.'\nYet the principal actor on the occasion was the bishop of the diocese.\nThe thirty-sixth canon of the second Council of Aries decrees, 'If a\nbishop be minded to build a church in another diocese, let its\ndedication be reserved for the diocesan.' S. Columbanus, being only a\npriest, dedicated the church of S. Aurelia (Walfrid. Strabo. _Vita S.\nGallo_, cap. vi).\nThe preceding night was spent either in the church or in neighbouring\nchurches in a solemn vigil. S. Ambrose testifies that this was done on\noccasions of the dedication of the Ambrosian church (_Epist_. 22, _ad\nMarcellina_). So S. Gregory of Mans, in his dedication of the church\nof S. Julian, removed the relics of that saint into the church of S.\nMartin, and there kept vigil (_De Glor. Mart_, ii, 34).\nRelics were considered indispensably necessary: so S. Paulinus\n(_Epist_, xxxii, _ad Sever_.) This church was dedicated in the name of\nChrist, the Saint of saints, the Martyr of martyrs, the Lord of lords,\nand was honoured {199} with the relics of the blessed apostles. See\nalso the beautiful epistle of S. Ambrose, translated in 'The Church of\nthe Fathers.' The phrase was, _Consecrare ecclesiam de reliquiis Beati\nYet some churches were consecrated without relics. The second Nicene\nCouncil decreed that in this case they should be supplied. Those\nportions of the consecrated elements were placed with these: to which\nperhaps that expression of S. Chrysostom is to be referred--'What is\nthe altar by nature but a stone? But it is made holy, when it hath\nonce received the body of Christ.'\nThese relics occupied different positions. In the church of S.\nBenedict, consecrated by Pope Alexander II, there were relics in the\nchapel-apse of S. John, in the bases of the piers, in the four angles\nof the bell tower, in the cross on the western gable, in the cross of\nthe tower (_Chron. Cass_, iii, 30).\nAshes were sprinkled on the floor, and the bishop with his pastoral\nstaff wrote on them the alphabet, sometimes in Latin alone, sometimes\nin Greek also.\nThe whole ceremony concluded with the endowment of the church: or, as\nit was termed, presenting its dowry.\nBy way of setting before our readers as clearly as possible the\nancient form of dedication, we have chosen, among ten forms preserved\nby Martene, that of S. Dunstan.\n_Here beginneth the order of the dedication of a church. The bishops\nand other ministers of the church advance singing the antiphon_,\n'Zaccheus, make haste and come down,' etc.\nPrevent us, O Lord, in all our, etc.\n_Then twelve candles are to be lighted, and placed round the church,\nwith the antiphon_, three from the east, three from the west, three\nfrom the north, three from the south.\nGod, which by the preaching of Thine apostles, didst open to Thy\nChurch the Kingdom of Heaven, and didst call them the Lights of the\nworld, grant, we beseech Thee, that being assisted by their prayers,\nby whose teaching we are guided, and splendour illuminated, we may\nmake these our actions pleasing to Thy Divine Majesty.\n_Here followeth the Litany: the priests going thrice round the church,\nand beginning from that door at which they be after to enter, namely,\nthe south door._\nO Christ, hear us, etc.\nPrevent us, O Lord, with Thy tender mercy, and by the intercession of\nThy saints, receive our prayers graciously.\nLet our prayers, O Lord, come up before Thee, and expel all wickedness\nfrom Thy Church.\nGod, which rulest heaven and earth, graciously give us the aid of Thy\ndefence.\n_Then one of the deacons entering the church, and shutting the door\nstandeth before it, the others remaining without: and the bishop\nstriking it with his staff, saith:_\nLift up your heads, O ye gates, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting\ndoors, and the King of Glory shall come in.\n_The deacon within answereth_, and saith: Who is the King of Glory?\n_The Bishop._ Lift up, etc.\n_The Deacon._ Who is, etc.\n_The Bishop._ Lift up, etc.\n_The Deacon._ Who is, etc.\n_Chorus._ The Lord of Hosts, He is the King of Glory.\n_The bishop again striking the door it is opened: and he entereth: the\nchorus singing after him_, Lift up your heads, etc., _to the end of\nthe Psalm_.\n_The Bishop_. The Lord be with you.\n_Response_. And with thy spirit.\n_The Bishop_. Let us pray:\nWe beseech Thee, O Lord, of Thy mercy, to enter Thy house, and to make\nfor Thyself an habitation in the hearts of the faithful. Through, etc.\n_Then the bishop entereth the choir, saying:_\nPeace be to this house, and to all that are in it; peace to them that\ncome in, and to them that go out.\nBless, O Lord, this house, which the sons of men have built for Thee:\nhear those which shall come up to this place: hear their prayers in\nthe lofty throne of Thy glory.\n_The clerks begin the Litany; the bishop, with certain priests and\ndeacons, remaining prostrate at the altar._\nLord have mercy upon us, etc.\n_As soon as_ Agnus Dei _is said, the bishop, rising, saith:_\nLet us pray.\nBe Thou exalted. Lord, in Thine own strength, etc.\n_Then the bishop shall write the alphabet along the pavement,_\n[Footnote 691] _first from east to west, then from north to south, the\nchorus saying the Psalm_, Fundamenta ejus.\n  [Footnote 691: In the treatise of the Mart. Remigius, _De\n  Dedicatione Ecciesiae_, we have the following explanation of this\n  singular custom: 'A thing which might appear puerile, unless it had\n  been instituted by men, great in dignity, spiritual in life,\n  apostolical in discipline. In all things of this kind, the Lord by\n  His example hath gone before us: and what He hath done, remaineth\n  unchangeable in his successors. What is understood by the alphabet\n  save the beginnings and rudiments of sacred doctrine? Whence S.\n  Paul, \"Ye have need that one teach you again, which be the first\n  principles of the oracles of God.\" Therefore the bishop writeth the\n  alphabet, to signify that he teacheth the pure doctrine of the\n  gospel. He writeth the alphabet twice, and that in the figure of a\n  cross, to signify that the Passion of Christ is set forth by the\n  gospel in its purity. He writeth it in the angles of the church,\n  because by them be set forth the four corners of the world. He\n  beginneth from the east, because the gospel began from the Jews.'\n  There is probably some reference to the Saviour's stooping down, and\n  writing in the sand. We may also compare those singular and rare\n  bells, in which the only inscription round the crown consists of the\n  letters of the alphabet.]\n_The Bishop_. O God, make speed, etc.\n_Response_. O Lord, make haste, etc.\n_The Bishop_. Glory be, etc.\n_Response_. As it, etc.\n_Then followeth the exorcism of the salt, and the water, and the\nashes._\n_Then the bishop maketh the sign of the cross at the four corners of\nthe altar, with hyssop, going round it seven times. The chorus sing\nthe Psalm_, Miserere mei Deus. _Then the bishop sprinkleth the water\nthree times round the church: the chorus singing_ Deus noster\nrefugium. _Then the bishop sprinkleth the water over the altar: the\nchorus singing_ Qui habitat. _Then the bishop sprinkleth the whole\nchurch inside with the water thrice: to signify the Church's inward\nfaith in the Trinity: and once outside, to signify the one baptism.\nThe chorus sing_ Fundamenta ejus; _and while the priests are ascending\nthe turrets,_ Jacob beheld a ladder, etc., _and the Psalm_ Deus noster\nrefugium.\n_Then the bishop entereth the church: and sprinkleth water on the\npavement in the form of a cross: the chorus singing_ Benedicite, omnia\nopera.\n_The Bishop._ Lift up your hearts.\n_Response._ We lift, etc.\n_The Bishop._ Let us give thanks, etc.\n_Response._ It is meet, etc.\n_Then the bishop goeth to the altar, and poureth the remainder of the\nwater at its base._\n_Then he blesseth the altar-stone, the altar clothes, the sacerdotal\nvestments, the corporal, the paten, the chalice, the thurible._\n_Here followeth the Mass of Dedication._\n_The post communion ended, the Bishop saith:_\nIncline, O Lord, Thine ears unto me, and hear me: Look down, O Christ,\nfrom heaven, on thy flock and thy sheep: stretch Thine hand over them:\nbless their bodies and their souls: that in the communion of the\nsaints they may receive celestial benediction, light angelical, the\nHoly Ghost, the Paraclete. Amen.\nThey who be regenerate of water and the Holy Ghost who be redeemed on\nearth by Thy precious blood, who have received Thy sign on their\nforeheads, grant them to be Thine on the day of judgment. Amen.\nAnd as Thou didst bless patriarchs and prophets and apostles, martyrs\nand confessors, virgins and priests, so bless this flock, who are\nassembled to-day in Thy name in this church. Amen.\nAnd as by Thine angel Thou didst free the three children from the\nburning fiery furnace, so free this flock from everlasting death and\nthe power of the devil, and from earthly lusts and all manner of\nweaknesses. Amen.\nSpare their faults, remit their sins, and present them pure and\nundefiled in the day of judgment: as Thou didst receive Enoch and\nElias into the kingdom of heaven. Amen.\nGod Almighty bless and keep you, and make this house to shine with the\nglory of His presence, and open the eyes of His pity upon it day and\nnight. Amen.\nAnd grant of His mercy, that all, who have assembled together at this\ndedication, by the intercession of Blessed N., and all other saints\nwhose relics rest here, may obtain the remission of their sins. Amen.\nThat ye may be made a holy temple in the spirit, where the Holy\nTrinity may ever deign to dwell; and after this short life ye may\nattain to everlasting felicity. Amen.\nWhich He grant. Who liveth and reigneth, world without end. Amen.\nAPPENDIX I\nADDENDA\nPage 6.--It shows how little Durandus can rightly be charged with\nfancifulness, when we find him classing among ceremonial precepts,\nrites for which the Rabbis and many modern expositors have given a\nsymbolical reason.\nPage 23.--'The lattice work of the windows.' Wrongly translated in\nLewis, 'the screens before the windows.'\nPage 25.--This passage proves that in the time and country of Durandus\nseats or chairs except in the choir were unknown. Though in England\nEarly English or Early Decorated open seats do occur, as in\nClapton-in-Gordan, Somersetshire, they are very rare, and take up much\nless of the church than is the case in later examples. See 'Hist, of\nPage 39.--The reader is aware that the words _in medio_ of the early\nChristian altars gave rise to the warmest disputes between the\nPuritans and the Catholics of the 17th century. The Puritans insisted\nthat they meant in the _body_ of the church: the Catholics generally,\nand more particularly that most able defender of altars, Dr. Laurence,\ninsisted that when the fathers spoke of an alter _in medio_, they only\nmeant one so placed as to be where all might see it. The words\nundoubtedly may bear this meaning: yet perhaps it is better to\nunderstand them, as they must be understood in this passage of\nDurandus, of an altar placed in the chord of the segment of a circle\nformed by the apse. See _Ecclesiologist_, vol. ii, p. 13.\nPage 46, note 20.--This is a mistake. The fresco alluded to represents\na priest repeating the Pater Noster (which is written in his open\nbook) at the N. W. angle of an altar. Upon the altar are two\ncandlesticks and a ciborium: rising out of the latter is the figure of\nour Blessed Lord. There can be no doubt of the objectionable nature of\nsuch a representation.\nPage 54--The nimbus of the Saviour, it is perhaps needless to observe\nin explanation, is always inlaid, as it were, with a cross: at least\nthe exceptions are excessively rare.\nPage 54--These 'carved figures' probably signify the corbels.\nPage 54, note 54.--There is a valuable article on the nimbus by M.\nDidron from the _Revue G\u00e9n\u00e9rale de l'Architecture_ in the _Literary\nGazette_ for Dec. 1842. An example is there given of the square nimbus\nin the case of Pope Nicholas, as represented in a contemporary MS. The\nwhole is well worth reading.\nPage 102.--Dedication crosses. We have seen a valuable example of\nthese in the church of Moorlinch, Somersetshire. There are four\ncircles containing crosses patt\u00e9es on the north and south sides of the\nchancel; and two at the east end, in all ten: the other two have\ndisappeared.\nPage 146.--The bodies of good men called horses. The same idea is\nworked out at great length in S. Chrysostom's earlier homilies on the\nStatues.\nPage 170.--But how great is the admiration, etc. Compare S.\nHildebert's hymn, _Exrta portam_, towards the conclusion:\n  Qauntum tui gratulentur,\n  Quam festive conviventur\n  Quis affectus eos stringat,\n  Et quae gemma muros pingat,\n  Quis chalcedon, quis jacintus,\n  _Norunt isti, quis sunt intus!_\nThe last line has the same beautiful turn with the expression of Hugh\nof S. Victor.\nPage 180.--Most of the following practices are observed to this day in\nthe Metropolitical Church of Seville. There are two ambones, but no\nrood loft: the sub-deacon chants the epistle by himself, in the\nsouthern ambo; the deacon, preceded by a taper, chants the gospel from\nthe northern.\nPage 182.--So S. Bernard in his commentary on that verse of the 90th\nPsalm, 'A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy\nright hand.'\nAbbots, how represented, 52\nAgathensian, the Council, 45\nAgnus Dei, The, 47\nAlexander, Pope, 124\nAlphabet, inscription of, 98\nAllegory, 6\nAltar candlesticks, 58\nAltar rails, 26\nAltars, stripped on Good Friday, 61\nAltars, their consecration, 113\nAltars, why encircled seven times at consecration, 119\nAltare distinguished from ara, 34\nAnagoge, 7\nAnalogium, _see_ Rood Loft\nAngels, how represented, 47\nAntioch, Council of, 197\nAntiphonal chanting, 21\nApostles, the, how represented, 50\nAppodiatio, explained, 62\nArk of Testimony 35\n  its contents, 36\nAries, Fourth Council of, 197\nArnaldistae, 139\nBasilica, 13\nBaruth, legend of, 89\nBell rope, 74\nBells, when first used, 71\n  what they signify, 72\n  silent, when, 196\nBeverstone church, 46\nBishop, the consecration of a, 145\nBishopstone, 19\nBlack, when used, 194\nBoneface IV', Pope, 94\nBreastplate, how made, 10\nBurchardus, S., 64\nBurial of heretics in cemeteries, 111\nCambridge Camden Society, 85\nCambridge, S. Sepulchre, 55\nCambridge, S. Giles, 26\nCapella, whence derived, 14\nCarthage, Council of, 158\nCavilla, 74\nCellar, 30\nCement, its symbolism, 17\nCemetery, 82\nCoenobium, 14\nChalices, their materials, 68\nChancels, lower than nave, 26\nChancels, 175\nChancel, more holy than nave, 20\nChrism, 137\nChristmas, how churches are to be adorned at, 65\nChrysologus, S. Peter, 49\nChurch, its meanings, 12\nChurches, when to be moved, 32\nClement, S., of Rome, 46\nCloister, 29\nCobham church, 46\nCothelstone church, 54\nCock, the, 165\nCommands, moral, 5\nCone, 23\nConfessors, how represented, 52\nConsecration of a church, 88\nConstantine builds a church at Jerusalem. 197\nCosins, Bishop, 154\nCiampini, 103, 126\nCross, the sign of the, 188\nCross triumphal, 28\nCross churches, 21\nCrosses, the five, that mark an altar, 114\nCrypts, 22\nCurtains, of the tabernacle, 15\nCymbalum, 77\nDedication crosses, 98\nDegrees, songs of, 43\nDepulsare distinguished from compulsare, 78\nDerby, the Earl of, 179\nDivine Majesty, the, how represented, 53\nDivision, of the whole work, 11\nDoor, 24\nDormitory, 30\nDorsals, 56\nDowsing, William, 26\nDunstan, S., his form of dedication, 199\nDurandus, his many occupations, 161\nDying, the, lay in sackcloth and ashes, 149\nEgleton church, 55\nEpiphany, what events celebrated thereon, 155\nEvangelistic symbols, 48\nEvaristus, Pope, 158\nExeter cathedral, 21\nExtreme unction, 139, 148\nFaustinus, S., his legend, 84\nFelix III, Pope, 89\nFerculum, 28, 167\nFrescoes, 45\nGlass, 23\nGospel, the, fixed on the altar, 60\n  why not read from the rood loft in a Mass of requiem, 187\nGreen, when used, 194\nGreeks, the, how they paint saints, 43\nHaddenham, 14\nHenry, S., his shrine, 48\nHoly, distinguished from _sacred_, 81\nHorologium, 27\nHorses, the bodies of good men, why so called, 146\nHours, the, explained, 75\nHugh of S. Victor, his 'Mystical Mirror' 163\nHuman body, its resemblance to a church, 19\nHyssop, its virtues, 95\nIdolatry, a protest against, 44\nIngoldsby Legends, their profanity, 84\nJerusalem, its variety of significations, 8\n  rebuilt, 18\nJohn, S., Evangelist, his confessions, 38\nJourneys, the Saviour's seven, 119\nKilpeck church, 19\nKyriake, 13\nLateran, S. John, its altar to the west, 177\nLattice-work, 23\nLitter, 34, 167\nLlandanwg church, 46\nLudlow church, 21\nLyons, Council of, 41\nMachpelah, 83\nMans, dedication of a church there, 198\nMarriages, when forbidden, 154\n  second, 159\nMartyrs, how represented, 52\nMartyrium, 14\nMary, S., Magdalene, 126\nMaundy Thursday, 153\nMende, 2\nMirror of Magistrates, 9\nMoleon, De, his 'Voyage Liturgique,' 67\nMontague, Bishop, 31\nMurderers, limits of right of sanctuary. 32\nMystical, its meaning, 5\nNola, 77\nNolula, 77\nNimbus, the, 54\nOrientation, 19, 177, seq.\nOrfrey, the, 59\nOrnaments of churches not to be profaned, 69\nOstrich eggs, why hung in churches, 67\nOxted church, 50\nPalmers, 52\nParadise, how represented, 54\nParthian skins, 19\nPatriarchs, how represented, 51\nPavement, 24\nPhylacterium, difference between it and phylacteria, 57\nPictures, their use, 45\nPiers, 24\nPiscina, 27\nPity, how five-fold, 130\nPodium, 85\nPortfolio, the, what it represents, 56\nPriests, unlettered, 4\n  allowed to consecrate churches, 16\nProphets, how represented, 51\nPreston church, 54\nProthesis, table of, 3\nPrynne, 21\nPyx, the, 56\nPulpit, 26\nRationale, reason of the name, 10\nReconciliation of a church, 107\nReconsecration, when to be practised, 105\nRemigius Monk, 201\nRelics required for the consecration of a church, 198\nRichard of Cremona, 139\nRing, the wedding, 156\nRinging, various kinds of, 77\nRod of weathercock, 23\nRood loft, 26\n  turrets, two, common in Norfolk, 180\nRound churches, 21\nSacraments defined, 152\n  their nature, 2\nSacramental, distinguished from ceremonial, 5\nSugerius, 197\nSambuca, the, 100\nSanctuary, the, 20\nSaviour, our, various representations of, 46\nSavinianus, Pope, 75\nScarlet, when used, 189\nScuta, the, 59\nSeal, the, of an altar, 105\nSecond Day, why it had no blessing. 79\nSenses of Holy Scripture, 5\nSeparation of men and women, 30\nSignum, 77\nSion, distinguished from Jerusalem, 13\nSnuffers, the, 58\nSacristy, 27\nStalls, 25\nSquilla, 76\nStephen, Pope, 70\nStones of a church, their symbolism, 17\nSylvester, S., 139\nSynagogue never applied to a church, 13\nTe Deum, method of chanting, 78\nTemple, Aslackby church, 21\nThiers, Father, 26\nTie-beams, 25\nTiles, 27\nToledo, Council of, 41\nTongs, the, 59\nTorrentius, Laevinus, 189\nTowers, 22\nTreasures of the church, why exhibited, 66\nUnctions, 134\nVariety of rites, 8\nVeils, their various kinds, 61\nVigilantius, 57\nVigil, of the dedication of a church, 198\nViolet, when used, 193\nVirgins, difference between and continent, 20\n  how represented, 52\nVladimir, S., his conversion, 55\nWalls, why four, 20\nWater, Holy, 115, 171\nWeathercock, 22\nWhite cloths cover the altar, why, 40\nWhite, when used, 189\nWidford church, 46\nWomen, their heads to be uncovered, 31\nYork, S. Lawrence, 55\nEnd of Project Gutenberg's Churches and Church Ornaments, by William Durandus", "source_dataset": "gutenberg", "source_dataset_detailed": "gutenberg -  The Symbolism of Churches and Church Ornaments\n"}
+]
\ No newline at end of file