Heortology

The remaining four Sundays of the Greek ecclesiastical year serve to fill up the inequality due to Easter falling earlier or later, in the same manner as in the Latin rite. One, two, or all four of them, as occasion requires, are inserted after Epiphany. They are the Sundays (1) κυριακὴ μετὰ τὰ φῶτα, the first after Epiphany, which is pressed into use when Easter falls in March; (2) the twelfth Sunday after St Luke; (3) the fifteenth after St Luke (the two Sundays in the Christmas season are reckoned as the thirteenth and fourteenth after St Luke since their gospels are taken from that evangelist); (4) the seventeenth Sunday after St Matthew. All four are required when Easter falls on the 22-25 April. In this way the gaps between the end of the old ecclesiastical year and the beginning of the new are filled up.

As far as the immovable feasts are concerned, the Greeks divide all feasts, both movable and immovable, into four classes. The first and highest class contains: Christmas, Epiphany (6th January), Candlemas (2nd February, ὑπαπάντη τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν), the Annunciation (ὁ εύαγγελισμός), Easter, Palm Sunday, the Ascension, Pentecost, the Transfiguration, the Assumption (ἡ κοίμησις, 15th August), our Lady’s Nativity (8th September), the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (14th September), and the Presentatio B.M.V. (21st November).

Somewhat lower in rank are the Circumcisio, Nativitas S. Joannis Bapt. (24th June), SS. Peter and Paul (29th June), and the Decollatio S. Joannis Bapt. (29th August). It is not necessary here to enumerate the remaining feasts.

X

(p. 248)
English Writers and the Feast of the Immaculate Conception

The well known Doctor of the Church, Anselm, was born of a German stock, as his name implies, at Aosta in 1036. In 1053 he entered the Benedictine order at Bec in Normandy where Lanfranc was at that time abbot. In 1078 he was himself elected abbot of the monastery, and in this capacity was brought into relation with William the Conqueror and William Rufus. During an illness of the latter, he was chosen Archbishop of Canterbury at the end of 1093 and his appointment was confirmed by the king. Serious misunderstandings soon arose between them on the questions of investiture and Church property, and Anselm was obliged to go to Rome, where he remained until the king’s death. Further misunderstandings, moreover, soon arose between him and William’s successor, Henry I., which detained him in France, until an agreement was arrived at in 1106, by which he was enabled to return to England and to his bishopric. He died there on the 21st April 1109.

His nephew, Anselm the younger, came from Lombardy, and as a youth had entered the monastery of St Michael at Chiusa, and received his theological training from the Benedictines of Canterbury.[866] After his uncle’s death, he was for a short time abbot of St Saba in Rome. In 1115 he was chosen by the pope to bring the pallium to the newly elected Archbishop of Canterbury, Radulf. As legate, he strongly maintained the rights of the pope in the election of bishops, and consequently fell under King Henry’s displeasure, and had to retire to France until a reconciliation had been effected between the King and Pope Calixtus II. He was then elected abbot of Bury St Edmond’s and confirmed as such in 1121. Here he remained until his death on the 11th January 1148. The attempt of a section of the chapter of St Paul’s in 1136 to make him bishop led to no result, but rather caused him much annoyance.

The Anglo-saxon, Eadmer or Edmer, was a disciple and faithful attendant of the older Anselm. Born in Kent, he entered the monastery at Canterbury and accompanied Anselm in his banishment to Rome. After Anselm’s death, he lived in retirement from which he emerged for a short time in 1120 to be Bishop of St Andrews in Scotland. But after a year he resigned and returned to his monastery, where he died after 1124. He wrote a history of England, a number of lives of English saints, and some theological treatises, two of which were in praise of the Mother of God (De Excellentia Virg. Mariæ and De Quatuor Virtutibus Mariæ). It has been recently conclusively proved that he is also the author of a treatise on our Lady’s conception (De Conceptione S. Mariæ), hitherto generally attributed to one or other of the two Anselms.[867] In his work on the Excellences of our Lady, in which her share in the work and sufferings of Christ is brought into prominence, Eadmer adopts a neutral position with regard to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and admits the possibility that she was purified from original sin only at the Annunciation. In the last-named composition, however, which advocates the introduction of the festival, he endeavours to establish the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and defends it warmly, and not unskilfully, against many objections, having, as he says, upon more mature consideration of the matter, recognised its correctness. The circumstance that this is the first treatise which aims especially and avowedly at defending this opinion, endows it with a special interest.

XI

(pp. 243, 347)
Excursus on the so-called Typica

The term Typicum is used first of all by Greek liturgists and rubricists to denote those short parts of the liturgy which are composed of verses from the psalms in connection both with the Canonical Hours and with the Mass, there is nothing exactly corresponding in the Western rite. (Leo Allatius, De Libris Eccl. Græc., 14, 15. Daniel, Thes. Lit., iv. 313, 319). Typicum is also used as a technical term, in the Eastern Church especially during the Byzantine period, in the sense of statute, regulation, etc. It was applied chiefly to two kinds of documents. First, it designated the catalogues of the possessions of ecclesiastical establishments and corporations, especially in so far as they were based upon testamentary donations, along with the duties entailed by them upon the clergy. Typica of this kind were called (κτητορικά), and correspond to the chartularies and “traditiones” of Western monasteries and bishoprics. Secondly, typicum was a term of a liturgical character, and as such must be considered here. Typica, in this sense, were the lists of the feasts recurring in the course of the year, of liturgical observances, fasts, etc., such as were to be observed in one of the larger churches or monasteries, along with detailed descriptions of each; they correspond to the consuetudines of Western monasteries and cathedrals.

Typica of this last kind exist in large numbers, although only a few of them have been published, and these not in editions useful for critical purposes. The best known and most important are: (1) the Typicum S. Sabæ; (2) that belonging to the monastery of the Studium at Constantinople; and (3) that formerly belonging to the famous Monastery of St Auxentius in Bithynia, now Ka-ish-dagh, dating from the time of Michael Paleologus († 1268).

The typicum of St Sabas is sometimes valuable as a source of liturgical information, and for its references to the festivals of the Church, but it is only to be used with the greatest caution. It derives its name not so much from St Sabas himself as from the monastery called after him near Jerusalem. Leo Allatius gives the following account of its origin from a dialogue of Simeon of Thessalonica; St Sabas drew up an order for the canonical hours and divine service to be observed in his monastery; this “diatyposis” was destroyed owing to the ravages of the Saracens, but was re-established by the patriarch Sophronius from memory, and retouched by St John Damascene; later on it was altered yet again to meet the requirements of the time. In the sixteenth century it was printed for practical purposes, as, for example, in Venice in 1545. In this form the typicum contains the order for divine service throughout the year for monasteries following the rule of St Sabas, rubricks for the canonical hours, the fasts and festivals, with information as to the liturgy to be used, the gospels and epistles, the menology, instructions on the canonical hours, etc., also rules of life and statutes for the monks and selected passages from the Greek Fathers. It received its present form apparently from John Grammaticus in Constantinople in the twelfth century, and cannot, of course, be regarded as a work of St Sabas. This cannot be appealed to for evidence concerning ecclesiastical customs in use before the twelfth century.

In the Eastern Church typica are issued from time to time, somewhat corresponding to our directories.

With regard to the literature on this point, it is well to mention: Theodoras Toscanus, Ad Typica Græcorum Animadversiones, Romæ, 1864. Pitra in Spicil. Solem., iv. 466 seqq. Ehrhard, Röm. Quartalschr., 1893. Krumbacher, Byzant. Zeitschr., ii. 348; iii. 167 seqq. Waldemar Nissen, Die Diataxis des Michael von Attalia von 1077, Jena, 1894. Meyer in the Theol. Literaturztg. of Shürer and Harnack, 1894, 588 seq., and 1896, No. 10. Gedeon, Μιχαὴλ τοῦ Παλαιολὸγου τυπικόν, etc., Constantinople, 1895.