__________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 1: Aachen-Assize Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916) Print Basis: 1907-1913 Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by permission CCEL Subjects: All; Reference LC Call no: BX841.C286 LC Subjects: Christian Denominations Roman Catholic Church Dictionaries. Encyclopedias __________________________________________________________________ THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE, DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EDITED BY CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D. EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J. ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES VOLUME 1 New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK __________________________________________________________________ The Making of the Catholic Encyclopedia (1917) The need of a Catholic Encyclopedia in English was manifest for many years before it was decided to publish one. Editors of various general Encyclopedias had attempted to make them satisfactory from a Catholic point of view, but without success, partly because they could not afford the space, but chiefly because in matters of dispute their contributors were too often permitted to be partial, if not erroneous, in their statements. This need was felt more acutely when, at the beginning of this century, new editions of several of these general Encyclopedias appeared, in which many subjects of special interest to Catholics were either ignored entirely or else scantily and even erroneously treated. For two years the publishers of some of these Encyclopedias made earnest efforts to amend the articles which provoked Catholic criticism, but their efforts served only to emphasize the need of a Catholic Encyclopedia. Actual work on the Encyclopedia was begun in January, 1905. It was completed in April, 1914. For two years before the formation of a Board of Editors those who were to be its editors and publishers met together occasionally to confer about its publication. These meetings resulted in an agreement among the editors on December 8, 1904, to begin the work early the next year and in the choice of those who were to be its publishers. The Board of Editors, five in number, was organized in January, 1905, and its membership remained the same throughout the production of the work. All the members had been engaged in editorial work before the Encyclopedia was thought of. As teachers and lecturers they had become familiar with the field of education and with the needs of Catholic literature. Through experience gained in different spheres of activity they had reached the same conclusions regarding the necessity of a Catholic Encyclopedia and the advisability of proceeding at once with its publication. The editors were elected also as members of the Board of Directors of the publishing company which was incorporated in February, 1905, and they were given full authority in all matters affecting the nature, contents and policy of the Encyclopedia. On February 25 they signed a contract to produce The Catholic Encyclopedia. Two years were spent in studying every phase of the project, in arranging its details and in selecting the requisite methods for carrying on the work carefully and expeditiously. While a systematic procedure was thus determined upon, it by no means precluded later discussion of ways and means; the system itself required that each step should be seriously considered, and for this purpose the regular meetings of the Board were continued during the entire course of publication. On January 11, 1905, Charles G. Herbermann, Professor of Latin and Librarian of the College of the City of New York, Edward A. Pace, then Professor of Philosophy in the Catholic University, Condé B. Pallen, Editor, Rt. Rev. Thomas J. Shahan, then Professor of Church History in the Catholic University, and John J. Wynne, S.J., Editor of The Messenger, held their first editorial meeting at the office of The Messenger, in West Sixteenth Street, New York. Between that date and April 19, 1913, they held 134 formal meetings to consider the plan, scope and progress of the work, besides having frequent informal conferences and constant intercommunication by letter. Until February, when offices were opened at 1 Union Square, meetings were held in The Messenger, or at the house of Dr. Herbermann, then on West Twenty-fifth Street. For two years the days for meetings were the first and third Saturdays of the month; after that a meeting was held on the second Saturday only. In the beginning every editor attended each meeting; after April, 1907, only one of the editors from the Catholic University was expected to be present. At the meetings a report was made by each editor of the work he had done since the last meeting, chiefly in selecting topics; assigning space for each; choosing contributors and specifying the time allowed them for each article. These reports were acted upon; criticisms of the work were considered; the progress of each volume carefully noted, and various problems solved especially about cross-references, repetitions, bibliography, illustrations, maps, and the delays and disappointments which are inevitable in a work depending upon the co-operation of over 1500 persons. In order to make clear what manner of work they were to publish, the editors issued, in February, 1906, a pamphlet containing specimen pages of text and illustrations. This specimen left no room for doubt about the character of the Encyclopedia. It indicated in general terms the scope, aim and chief characteristics of the Encyclopedia, as follows: The Catholic Encyclopedia, as its name implies, proposes to give its readers full and authoritative information on the entire cycle of Catholic interests, action and doctrine. What the Church teaches and has taught; what she has done and is still doing for the highest welfare of mankind; her methods, past and present; her struggles, her triumphs, and the achievements of her members, not only for her own immediate benefit, but for the broadening and deepening of all true science, literature and art -- all come within the scope of The Catholic Encyclopedia. It differs from the general Encyclopedia in omitting facts and information which have no relation to the Church. On the other hand, it is not exclusively a church Encyclopedia, nor is it limited to the ecclesiastical sciences and the doings of churchmen. It records all that Catholics have done, not only in behalf of charity and morals, but also for the intellectual and artistic development of mankind. It chronicles what Catholic artists, educators, poets, scientists and men of action have achieved in their several provinces. In this respect it differs from most other Catholic Encyclopedias. The editors are fully aware that there is no specifically Catholic science, that mathematics, chemistry, physiology and other branches of human knowledge are neither Catholic, Jewish, nor Protestant; but, when it is commonly asserted that Catholic principles are an obstacle to scientific research, it seems not only proper but needful to register what and how much Catholics have contributed to every department of knowledge. No one who is interested in human history, past and present, can ignore the Catholic Church, either as an institution which has been the central figure in the civilized world for nearly two thousand years, decisively affecting its destinies, religious, literary, scientific, social and political, or as an existing power whose influence and activity extend to every part of the globe. In the past century the Church has grown both extensively and intensively among English-speaking peoples. Their living interests demand that they should have the means of informing themselves about this vast institution, which, whether they are Catholics or not, affects their fortunes and their destiny. As for Catholics, their duty as members of the Church impels them to learn more and more fully its principles; while among Protestants the desire for a more intimate and accurate knowledge of things Catholic increases in proportion to the growth of the Church in numbers and in importance. The Catholic clergy are naturally expected to direct inquirers to sources of the needed information; yet they find only too often that the proper answers to the questions proposed are not to be met with in English literature. Even the writings of the best intentioned authors are at times disfigured by serious errors on Catholic subjects, which are for the most part due, not to ill-will, but to lack of knowledge. It would be fatuous to hope to call into immediate existence a Catholic English literature adequate to supply this knowledge and correct errors. The Encyclopedia, therefore, is the most convenient means of doing both, enabling, as it does, the foremost Catholic scholars in every part of the world to contribute articles in the condensed form that appeals to the man of action, and with the accuracy that satisfies the scholar. Designed to present its readers with the full body of Catholic teaching, the Encyclopedia contains not only precise statements of what the Church has defined, but also an impartial record of different views of acknowledged authority on all disputed questions, national, political or factional. In the determination of the truth the most recent and acknowledged scientific methods are employed, and the results of the latest research in theology, philosophy, history, apologetics, archaeology, and other sciences are given careful consideration. The work is entirely new, and not merely a translation or a compilation from other encyclopedic sources. The editors have insisted that the articles should contain the latest and most accurate information to be obtained from the standard works on each subject. Contributors have been chosen for their special knowledge and skill in presenting the subject, and they assume the responsibility for what they have written. Representing as they do Catholic scholarship in every part of the world, they give the work an international character. The Encyclopedia bears the imprimatur of the Most Reverend Archbishop under whose jurisdiction it is published. In constituting the editors the ecclesiastical censors, he has given them a singular proof of his confidence and of his desire to facilitate the publication of the work which he has promoted most effectively by his influence and kindly cooperation." In the execution of the plan thus outlined no essential feature has been changed or omitted; the Preface would be as appropriate to the fifteenth volume as it was to the first. Since it was written innumerable questions arose regarding matters of detail; but these were settled in accordance with the ideas and principles which were adopted by the editors before a page of the Encyclopedia was published. In accomplishing their preliminary task and in dealing with problems that presented no slight difficulty, the editors were encouraged by the widespread interest which the first announcement of the Encyclopedia aroused. Cordial approval and assistance was given by the Apostolic Delegate and by the members of the Hierarchy, particularly by his Eminence Cardinal Farley, to whom the project was formally submitted on January 27, 1905. Many useful suggestions were received from clergymen, teachers, authors, and publishers in the United States and in other countries. The project was welcomed with enthusiasm by the laity, and a large number of subscriptions were taken before the first volume appeared in March, 1907. As other volumes followed with promptness and regularity, the public soon became aware that the Encyclopedia was rapidly passing from the region of things possible and desirable to that of accomplished facts, and moreover that it was taking a unique position among the important publications of modern times. The Encyclopedia was to be "an international work of reference on the constitution, doctrine, discipline and history of the Catholic Church." With a scope so vast before them, the editors devoted their earliest efforts to the mapping out of the subject matter. This was arranged in thirty-two departments which were then distributed so as to allow each editor a certain group of departments for special supervision and yet leave to the Board as a whole the final decision upon the inclusion or exclusion of any proposed subject. In each department, the selection of subjects was determined to a considerable extent by the very nature and purpose of the Encyclopedia. Other titles were drawn from various sources -- such as Encyclopedias of a general character, standard works, and periodical publications. A large number of articles were suggested by scholars whose competence in special lines or in the preparation of works similar to the Encyclopedia gave weight to their opinions. No subject, however, was accepted or rejected until it had been passed on by each editor. The work was intended to show not only the inner life of the Church in organization, teaching, and practice, but also the manifold and far-reaching influence of Catholicism upon all that most deeply concerns mankind. Hence the introduction of many titles which are not specifically Catholic or even religious in the stricter sense, but under which some interest of the Church or some phase of its activity is recorded. Such are the accounts given of different religions and sects, of countries and states, of literatures and philosophies, of institutions and individuals that have been extraneous, or even antagonistic, to the Church. Special care, of course, was taken to include those subjects which are often treated in a way that gives false or inaccurate impressions regarding the Catholic position or the facts of history. Even where the same subject would naturally recur under different titles, it was, if sufficiently important, allotted a separate article. On the other hand, to avoid needless repetition, it was often found necessary to introduce the subject in alphabetical order with a cross-reference to the article in which, under a different title, it would be more appropriately treated. Finally, as no other extensive work of reference would be available to a large number of the purchasers of the Encyclopedia, due provision was made for supplying in every instance such general information as the ordinary reader might reasonably expect to find in connection with the subjects treated. As the vitality of an organization is manifested chiefly in the achievements of its prominent members, it is but natural that this work should contain a large number of biographies. In these articles, particularly judicious selection was necessary, as well as moderation in treatment. For obvious reasons biographies of living persons were not admitted; nor was distinction of whatever sort the chief criterion of selection, but rather, in the case of eminent Catholics, their loyalty to the Church. On grounds that are plainly different, the list of biographies includes various names that recall important controversies, heresies, errors or phases of conflict through which the Church has passed, and concerning which it was needful to set in clear light the Catholic position. From the outset the editors adopted the principle that each article should be prepared by the ablest available writer. The character of the work was such that it could not be done, as much encyclopedia writing is done, by a staff of office assistants. The contributors were selected, not on account of their official position, but with reference to their scholarship and their special qualifications for handling the subjects assigned them. In addition to the names already conspicuous in Catholic literature, the list was drawn up after consultation with well-informed persons in various countries. Inquiries were sent to the Catholic colleges, seminaries and universities in the United States, Canada, England, Ireland, Scotland and Australia. The Bishops in the English-speaking countries were requested to suggest writers for articles on their respective dioceses and the political divisions, such as the States of the Union, in which their dioceses are situated. The heads of religious orders and congregations were consulted regarding the assignment of each article in which they might be directly interested. Authorities on Catholic subjects in the non-Catholic institutions of learning in this country were also invited to cooperate. By correspondence or by personal visits, the editors secured contributions from prominent writers on the Continent of Europe, especially among the professors of the various universities and members of learned societies. The fact that the list includes 1452 names, representing 43 countries, sufficiently attests the international character of the Encyclopedia. Furthermore, it can be said without exaggeration that no other work has ever been produced by the joint labours of so many Catholic men and women representing the clergy, the laity, the professions, and the various lines of scientific and literary activity. The list of contributors to each volume is in itself an object lesson; it shows in a concrete way the intellectual forces that the Church has developed and animated with her spirit. It was not to be expected that every contributor would know by intuition just how an article should be written to answer the purposes of the Encyclopedia; nor would it have been possible to secure the desired uniformity of treatment if each writer had been left entirely to his own devices. The editors accordingly accompanied the assignment of articles with directions more or less detailed for their preparation. Certain classes of subjects, e.g. biographies, states, dioceses, were carefully outlined so that the writer might furnish the requisite information on all essential points. For the treatment of other subjects suggestions were offered with a view to having the articles include whatever might be of actual and practical interest at the present time. In some instances the contributors themselves requested more explicit instruction or indicated possible modifications. The exchange of views on all important matters was extremely helpful both in furthering the aims of the editors and in making each writer an active collaborator. Indeed so cordial, and, in many instances, so intimate were the relations of contributors and editors, that there was no need of establishing special editorial committees in certain countries as the editors had originally contemplated. It also facilitated, to a considerable extent, the editors' principal task. In the allotment of space for each article, the editors, who gave to this point their joint attention, were guided in every instance by the rule "quod requiritur et sufficit." The length of an article is not necessarily, therefore, an indication of its importance. This is true particularly of biographies, in which a line often predicates greater celebrity than a paragraph. The encyclopedic style admits no waste word, and though frequently our writers exceeded the space allotted to them, they rarely, if ever, objected to the condensation of their articles, regarding it commonly as an improvement. Every article was submitted to each of the editors for criticism, acceptance, or rejection. In case of acceptance -- and this fortunately was the usual verdict -- the article was handed over to the editor in charge of the department to which it belonged, for revision so far as this might be needed in order to meet the requirements of the Encyclopedia regarding space, content, and literary form. Whenever serious changes were found necessary, these were referred to the author. All articles of a doctrinal character were submitted to the censors appointed by ecclesiastical authority. In the case of an article written in a language other than English, it was translated by an expert, and the translation was then carefully compared by the editor with the original manuscript. Frequently brief paragraphs were added, with the writer's authorization, in order to bring out some phase or detail of the subject that possessed special importance for the English-speaking countries. Additions were also made to the bibliography of works that were more easily accessible to the readers of the Encyclopedia or that were published after the article had been received. Besides providing for the text of the Encyclopedia, the editors undertook the selection and arrangement of the illustrations, plates, and maps, which are a prominent feature in each volume. The wide range of subjects calling for illustration included personages of note, historic scenes and events, famous edifices, ecclesiastical or secular, monuments of Christian antiquity, codices, manuscripts, and the masterpieces of art in painting, sculpture, and architecture. The maps had to be specially prepared for the Encyclopedia, as they were designed to show not only the political or territorial divisions, but also the ecclesiastical conditions, such as the location of each episcopal or archiepiscopal see. The editors were aided by a well-trained corps of assistants numbering in the course of the work 151, through whose hands the edited article passed on its way to the press. The office staff rendered efficient service not only by the routine work of preparing copy, but also by keeping accurate records of assignments, transmissions of manuscripts, and reports from contributors. It was thus possible at any moment to ascertain precisely the stage which a given article had reached and the progress that had been made toward the completion of each volume. The staff was also charged with numerous matters of detail, such as the verification of dates and references, comparison of statements in different articles, and preparation of lists of subjects by way of suggestion to the Editorial Board. The Company which was organized to publish The Catholic Encyclopedia was originally known as the Robert Appleton Company. In 1912 its title was changed to The Encyclopedia Press, Inc. It has always been an entirely independent organization, expressly organized for the special purpose of publishing the Encyclopedia. Until it was completed the Company, therefore, did not undertake to bring out any other book or to enter any other field of business. Its members -- all men of prominence in business and financial circles -- have given their entire time and the fruits of their long experience to the production of this work. They have dealt successfully with the diverse problems which such an enterprise involves on the material and technical sides: printing, plate-making, advertising, and selling. The whole financial administration of the Encyclopedia has been conducted on sound business principles. From the appearance of the first volume of the Encyclopedia to the conclusion of the Index Volume, the work met with a cordial reception everywhere. Reviewers not only spoke of it in terms of unusual praise, but they also recognized in it at once the powerful influence for good. Hilaire Belloc, for instance, spoke of it as "one of the most powerful influences working in favor of the truth." Georges Goyau recommended it as expressing the genius of Catholicity and spoke of its vast army of contributors as forming a modern intellectual crusade. The Dublin Review pronounced it the "greatest triumph of Christian science in the English tongue." The Protestant Press commented most favorably on the scholarliness and fairness of the articles, one weekly recommending it as the "greatest work undertaken for the advancement of Christian knowledge since the days of Trent." According to the Saturday Review, London, it was a "model of reference works." According to the Athenoeum, it was a "thorough and learned enterprise." Churchmen, men of affairs, journalists, educators, librarians and editors all vied with one another in praising the scholarship of the Encyclopedia. Article courtesy the Jacques Maritain Center __________________________________________________________________ To the Knights of Columbus and Their Friends In taking under our auspices a special edition of The Catholic Encyclopedia, we are actuated by the motive which originally inspired the production of this work. From the start, as the Preface to Volume I declares, it was determined that this encyclopedia should not be exclusively a Church publication, containing only matters of special interest to the clergy. It is intended for the layman as well as for the priest; and, consequently, it contains all that he needs to know, treated from his point of view. The Editor-in-Chief and the Managing Editor are laymen, as were fully 500 of the contributors, and 150 editorial assistants. With them the clerical editors and contributors have co-operated in full appreciation of the importance of producing a work which in content and style would satisfy the scholar in his study and yet interest the man in the street. For this Encyclopedia is designed to be the starting-point of a movement among Catholics, a great educational movement in every Catholic home in the land, the source of a literature that will once more as in the days before the Reformation employ the English tongue in the cause of Catholic truth. It is verily an educational and literary crusade, and as such it must appeal strongly to every member of an Order whose members, in the words of Archbishop Ireland, "aim to be the trusted auxiliaries of the Church, her organized chivalry, ever first and foremost when her call is heard, or her banner leads". We have but lately completed our achievement of providing for the Catholic University America the half million dollar scholarship foundation which is to enable Catholic young men from every part of the land to take advantage of the educational facilities of that great institution. Here is an offer which brings all the advantages that The Catholic University can at present afford and more right into our own homes. The Catholic Encyclopedia is a veritable Catholic Home University. It has been truly styled "a university in print". Few, if any, of our membership, are in a position to take advantage of the Catholic University foundation; scarcely one is unable to avail himself of an offer, which brings to every Catholic home the best the University can give. As if divining that the Knights of Columbus would take on themselves the task of giving the widest possible circulation to The Catholic Encyclopedia, His Grace, Archbishop Ireland, discoursing on "The Typical Catholic Layman of America", before the Supreme Council of the Order lately assembled in St. Paul, recommended the work in the following eloquent terms: "An intelligent laity is the prime need of the Church to-day, in America. The battle is opened. It is a flood of contradiction, of misrepresentation, of calumnies. History is perverted; Catholic discipline is travestied. When the Church, as seen daily, cannot with be assailed, the appeal is to centuries of long ago, more unfamiliar to the reader -- to remote lands whence no contradiction may come. The remedy is intelligence of all important matters concerning the Church at home and abroad, intelligence that Catholics be guarded from poisonous inoculation, and be, at the same time, in a position to influence public opinion in favor of truth and justice. The most ready arm is the press: hence the duty of the hour is to give generous support to the Catholic newspaper, to read it, to distribute it, supplementing it, as occasion permits, with magazine and book. One book, the summary of thousands, I especially recommend, The Catholic Encyclopedia. JAMES A. FLAHERTY, JOSEPH C. PELLETIER, WILLIAM J. MCGINLEY, Catholic Truth Committee of the Knights of Columbus. __________________________________________________________________ Aachen Aachen (In French, Aix-la-Chapelle, the name by which the city is generally known; in Latin Aquae Grani, later Aquisgranum). The city of Aachen lies in a Prussian valley, surrounded by wooded heights, on the Wurm, a tributary of the Roer, on its way to the Meuse. Population, 1 December, 1905, 151,922 (including the Parish of Forst); Catholics, 139,485; Protestants, 10,552; Israelites, 1,658; other denominations, 227. [1990 Population: about 250,000 -- Ed.] The city owes its origin to its salubrious springs which were already known in the time of the Romans. There appears to have been a royal court in Aachen under the Merovingians, but it rose to greater importance under Charlemagne who chose it as his favourite place of residence, adorned it with a noble-imperial palace and chapel, and gave orders that he should be buried there. The precious relics obtained by Charlemagne and Otho III for the imperial chapel were the objects of great pilgrimages in the Middle Ages (the so-called "Shrine Pilgrimages") which drew countless swarms of pilgrims from Germany, Austria, Hungary, England, Sweden, and other countries. From the middle of the fourteenth century onwards, however it became customary to expose the four great relics only once in every seven years, a custom which still holds. These pilgrimages, the coronations of the German emperors (thirty-seven of whom were crowned there between 813 and 1531), the flourishing industries and the privileges conferred by the various emperors combined to make Aachen one of the first cities of the Empire. The decay of Aachen dates from the religious strife of the German Reformation. Albrecht von Muenster first preached Protestantism there in the year 1524 but was afterwards forbidden to preach the new views and executed on account of two murders committed during his stay in the cities of Maastricht and Wesel. A new Protestant community was soon, however formed in Aachen, which gradually attained such strength as to provoke a rising in 1581, force the election of a Protestant burgomaster, and defy the Emperor for several years. The Ban of the empire was, therefore, pronounced against the city in 1597 and put in force by the Duke of Julich, the Catholic overlord of the city. The Catholics were restored to their rights, and the Jesuits invited to Aachen, in 1600. In 1611, however, the Protestants rose afresh, plundered the Jesuit college, drove out the Catholic officials in 1612, and opened their gates to troops from Brandenburg. The Ban of the Empire was again laid on the city, and executed by the Spanish general, Spinola. The Protestant ringleaders were tried or exiled, and many other Protestants banished. These troubles, together with a great fire which destroyed 4,000 houses, put an end to the prosperity of the city. Two treaties of peace were concluded at Aachen during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. By the first, dated 2 May 1668, Louis XIV was compelled, by the Triple Aliiance between England, the Netherlands, and Sweden, to abandon the war against the Spanish Netherlands, to restore the Franche Comte, which he had conquered, and to content himself with twelve Flemish fortresses. The second treaty, dated 18 October, 1748, put an end to the War of the Austrian Succession. In 1793 and 1794, Aachen was occupied by the French, incorporated with the French Republic in 1798 and 1802, and made the capital of the Department of the Roer. By the terms of the French Concordat of 1801 Aachen was made a bishopric subject to the Archbishop of Mechlin, and composed of 79 first class, and 754 second class, parishes. The first and only bishop was Marcus Antonius Berdolet (b. 13 September, 1740, at Rougemont, in Alsace 3; d. 13 August, 1809), who, for the most part, left the government of his diocese to his vicar-general, Martin Wilhelm Fonck (b. 28 October, 1752, at Goch; d. 26 June, 1830, as Provost of Cologne Cathedral). After the death of Bishop Berdolet the diocese was governed by Le Camus, Vicar General of Meaux; after his death, in 1814, by the two vicars-general Fonck and Klinkenberg. The Bull of Pius VII, "De Salute Animarum," dated 16 July, 1821 which regulated church matters in Prussia anew, did away with the bishopric of Aachen, and transferred most of its territory to the archdiocese of Cologne; a collegiate chapter, consisting of a provost and six canons, taking the place of the bishopric in 1825. In 1815 Aachen became Prussian territory. The Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle sat there from 30 September to 11 November, 1818, and was attended by the sovereigns of Russia, Austria, and Prussia, and by plenipotentiaries from France and England, to determine the relations between France and the Powers. France obtained a reduction of the war indemnity and the early departure of the army of occupation, and joined the Holy Alliance; the other four Powers guaranteed the throne of France to the Bourbons, against any revolution that might occur. Aachen, under Prussian government, returned to prosperity, chiefly through the development of the coal mines in the neighborhood, which facilitated several extensive industries (such as the manufacture of linen, needles, machinery, glass, woolen, and half-woollen stuffs, etc.), but also in consequence of the large number of visitors to its hot springs. The minster ranks first among the church buildings; it consists of three distinct parts: the octagon, the choir, and the crown, or ring, of chapels, the octagon forming the central portion. This last is the most important monument of Carolingian architecture, it was built between 796 and 804, in the reign of Charlemagne, by Master Odo of Metz, and modelled after the Italian circular church of San Vitale at Ravenna. It was consecrated by Pope Leo III. It is an eight-angled, domed building, 54 feet in diameter, with a sixteen-sided circumference of 120 feet, and a height of 124 feet. The interior of the dome is adorned with mosaics on a gold ground, executed by Salviati of Venice, in 1882, representing Our Lord surrounded by the four and twenty Ancients of the Apocalypse. The main building was decorated with marble and mosaics in 1902, after the designs of H. Schaper. Over the spot supposed to be the site of Charlemagne's grave hangs an enormous corona of lamps, the gift of the Emperor Frederick I, Barbarossa; in the choir of the octagon, the so-called upper minster, stands Charlemagne's throne, made of great-slabs of white marble, where, after the coronation, the German emperors received the homage of their nobles. The rich upper choir, built in Gothic style, joins on to the eastern side of the octagon; it was begun in the second half of the fourteenth century, and dedicated in 1414. The thirteen windows, each 100 feet high, have been filled with new coloured glass; on the pillars betwen them stand fourteen statues (the Mother of God, the Twelve Apostles, and Charlemagne), dating from the fifteenth century. Among the treasures of the choir should be mentioned the famous Gospel-pulpit, enriched with gold plates, the gift of the Emperor Henry II, the throne canopy of the fifteenth century the new Gothic high altar of 1876, and the memorial stone which marks the spot where the Emperor Otto III formerly lay. The lower portions of the bell-tower, to the west of the octagon, belong to the Carolingian period, the Gothic superstructure dates from 1884. Of the chapels which surround the whole building, the so-called Hungarian chapel contains the minster treasury, which includes a large number of relics, vessels, and vestments, the most important being those known as the four "Great Relics," namely, the cloak of the Blessed Virgin, the swaddling-clothes of the Infant Jesus, the loin-cloth worn by Our Lord on the Cross, and the cloth on which lay the head of St. John the Baptist after his beheading. They are exposed every seven years and venerated by thousands of pilgrims. Among the other Catholic churches of Aachen, the following may be mentioned: + the Church of Our Lady, a Gothic church in brick, built by Friederich Statz in 1859 + the Church of St. Foillan, the oldest parish church in the city, which dates, in its present form, from the Gothic period, and was renovated between 1883 and 1888; and + the Romanesque Church of St. James, built between 1877 and 1888. The most important secular building is the Rathaus, built between 1333 and 1350, on the site of, and out of the ruins of, Charlemagne's imperial palace, and completely renovated between 1882 and 1903. The facade is adorned with the statues of fifty-four German emperors, the great hall ( Kaisersaal) with eight frescoes from designs by Alfred Rethel. In Aachen there are foundations established by the Franciscans, Capuchins, Alexians, and Redemptorists. A number of female orders also have establishments, including: + the Sisters of St. Charles, + the Christensians, + the Sisters of St. Elizabeth, + the Franciscan Sisters, + the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, + the Sisters of the Poor Child Jesus, + the Carmelites, + the Ursulines, and + the Sisters of St. Vincent. COUNCILS OF AACHEN A number of important councils were held here in the early Middle Ages. In the mixed council of 798, Charlemagne proclaimed an important capitulary of eighty-one chapters, largely a repetition of earlier ecclesiastical legislation, that was accepted by the clergy and acquired canonical authority. At the council of 799, after a discussion of six days Felix, Bishop of Urgel, in Spain, avowed himself overcome by Alcuin and withdrew his heretical theory of Adoptianism. In the synods of 816, 817, 818, and 819, clerical and monastic discipline was the chief issue, and the famous "Regula Aquensis" was made obligatory on all establishments of canons and canonesses (see WESTERN MONASTICISM), while a new revision of the Rule of St. Benedict was imposed on the monks of that order by the reformer Benedict of Aniane. The synod of 836 was largely attended and devoted itself to the restoration of ecclesiastical discipline that had been gravely affected by the civil wars between Louis the Pious and his sons. From 860 to 862 three councils were occupied with the question of the divorce of King Lothaire I from his wife, Theutberga. In 1166 took place the famous schismatic council, approved by the Antipope Paschal III, in which was decreed the canonization of Charlemagne, that was solemnly celebrated 29 December of that year. JOSEPH LINS Aaron Aaron Brother of Moses, and High Priest of the Old Law. I. LIFE Altogether different views are taken of Aaron's life, according as the Pentateuch, which is the main source on the subject, is regarded as one continuous work, composed by Moses or under his supervision--hence most trustworthy in the narration of contemporary events--or as a compilation of several documents of divers origins and dates, strung together, at a late epoch, into the present form. The former conception, supported by the decisions of the Biblical Commission, is held by Catholics at large; many independent critics adopt the latter. We shall study this part of the subject under this twofold aspect, although dwelling longer, as is meet, on the former. (a) Traditional Catholic Standpoint According to I Paral., vi, 1-3, Aaron (the signification of whose name is unknown) was the great-grandson of Levi, and the second of the children of Amram and Jochabed, Mary being the eldest and Moses the youngest. From Ex., vii, 7, we learn that Aaron was born eighty-three, and Moses eighty years, before the Exodus. It may be admitted, however, that this pedigree is probably incomplete, and the age given perhaps incorrect. We know nothing of Aaron's life prior to his calling. The first mention of his name occurs when Moses, during the vision on Mount Horeb, was endeavouring to decline the perilous mission imposed upon him, on the plea that he was slow of speech and lacking in eloquence. Yahweh answered his objection, saying that Aaron the Levite, who was endowed with eloquence, would be his spokesman. About the same time Aaron also was called from on high. He then went to meet Moses, in order to be instructed by him in the designs of God; then they assembled the ancients of the people, and Aaron, who worked miracles to enforce the words of his divine mission, announced to them the good tidings of the coming freedom (Ex., iv). To deliver God's message to the King was a far more laborious task. Pharao harshly rebuked Moses and Aaron, whose interference proved disastrous to the Israelites (Ex., v). These latter, overburdened with the hard work to which they were subjected, bitterly murmured against their leaders. Moses in turn complained before God, who replied by confirming his mission and that of his brother. Encouraged by this fresh assurance of Yahweh's help, Moses and Aaron again appeared before the King at Tanis (Ps. lxxvii, 12), there to break the stubbornness of Pharao's will by working the wonders known as the ten plagues. In these, according to the sacred narrative, the part taken by Aaron was most prominent. Of the ten plagues, the first three and the sixth were produced at his command; both he and his brother were each time summoned before the King, both likewise received from God the last instructions for the departure of the people, to both was, in later times, attributed Israel's deliverance from the land of bondage; both finally repeatedly became the target for the complaints and reproaches of the impatient and inconsistent Israelites. When the Hebrews reached the desert of Sin, tired by their long march, fearful at the thought of the coming scarcity of food, and perhaps weakened already by privations, they began to regret the abundance of the days of their sojourn in Egypt, and murmured against Moses and Aaron. But the two leaders were soon sent by God to appease their murmuring by the promise of a double sign of the providence and care of God for His people. Quails came up that same evening, and the next morning the manna, the new heavenly bread with which God was to feed His people in the wilderness, lay for the first time round the camp. Aaron was commanded to keep a gomor of manna and put it in the tabernacle in memory of this wonderful event. This is the first circumstance in which we hear of Aaron in reference to the tabernacle and the sacred functions (Ex., xvi). At Raphidim, the third station after the desert of Sin, Israel met the Amalecites and fought against them. While the men chosen by Moses battled in the plain, Aaron and Hur were with Moses on the top of a neighbouring hill, whither the latter had betaken himself to pray, and when he "lifted up his hands, Israel overcame: but if he let therm down a little, Amalec overcame. And Moses' hands were heavy: so they took a stone, and put under him and he sat on it: and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands on both sides" until Amalec was put to flight (Ex., xvii). In the valley of Mount Sinai the Hebrews received the Ten Commandments; then Aaron, in company with seventy of the ancients of Israel, went upon the mountain, to be favoured by a vision of the Almighty, "and they saw the God of Israel: and under his feet as it were a work of sapphire stone, and as the heaven when clear." Thereupon Moses, having entrusted to Aaron and Hur the charge of settling the difficulties which might arise, went up to the top of the mountain. His long delay finally excited in the minds of the Israelites the fear that he had perished. They gathered around Aaron and requested him to make them a visible God that might go before them. Aaron said: "Take the golden earrings from the ears of your wives, and your sons and daughters, and bring them to me." When he had received them, he made of them a molten calf before which he built up an altar, and the children of Israel were convoked to celebrate their new god. What was Aaron's intention in setting up the golden calf ? Whether he and the people meant a formal idolatry, or rather wished to raise up a visible image of Yahweh their deliverer, has been the subject of many discussions; the texts, however, seem to favour the latter opinion (cf. Ex., xxxii, 4). Be this as it may, Moses, at God's command, came down from the mountain in the midst of the celebration -- at the sight of the apparent idolatry, filled with a holy anger, he broke the Tables of the Law, took hold of the idol, burnt it and beat it to powder, which he strowed into the water. Then, addressing his brother as the real and answerable author of the evil: " What," said he, "has this people done to thee, that thou shouldst bring upon them a most heinous sin?" (Ex., xxxii 21). To this so well deserved reproach, Aaron made only an embarrassed answer, and he would undoubtedly have undergone the chastisement for his crime with the three thousand men (so with the best textual authority, although the Vulgate reads three and twenty thousand) that were slain by the Levites at Moses' command (Ex., xxxii, 28), had not the latter prayed for him and allayed God's wrath (Deut., ix, 20). In spite of the sin, God did not alter the choice he had made of Aaron (Hebr., v, 4) to be Israel's first High Priest. When the moment came, Moses consecrated him, according to the ritual given in Ex., xxix, for his sublime functions; in like manner Nadab, Abiu, Eleazar, and Ithamar, Aaron's sons he devoted to the divine service. What the high priesthood was, and by what rites it was conferred we shall see later. The very day of Aaron's consecration, God, by an awful example, indicated with what perfection sacred functions ought to be performed. At the incense-offering, Nadab and Abiu put strange fire into the censers and offered it up before the Lord, whereupon a flame, coming out from the Lord, forthwith struck them to death, and they were taken away from before the sanctuary vested with their priestly garments and cast forth out of the camp. Aaron whose heart had been filled with awe and sorrow at this dreadful scene, neglected also an important ceremony; but his excuse fully satisfied Moses and very likely God Himself, for no further chastisement punished his forgetfulness (Lev., x, Num., iii, 4, xxvi, 61). In Lev., xvi, we see him perform the rites of the Day of Atonement -- in like manner, to him were transmitted the precepts concerning the sacrifices and sacrificers (Lev., xvii, xxi, xxii). A few months later, when the Hebrews reached Haseroth, the second station after Mount Sinai, Aaron fell into a new fault. He and Mary "spoke against Moses, because of his wife the Ethiopian. And they said: Hath the Lord spoken by Moses only? " (Num., xii). From the entire passage, especially from the fact that Mary alone was punished, it has been surmised that Aaron's sin was possibly a mere approval of his sister's remarks; perhaps also he imagined that his elevation to the high priesthood should have freed him from all dependence upon his brother. However the case may be, both were summoned by God before the tabernacle, there to hear a severe rebuke. Mary, besides, was covered with leprosy; but Aaron, in the name of both, made amends to Moses, who in turn besought God to heal Mary. Moses' dignity had been, to a certain extent, disowned by Aaron. The latter's prerogatives likewise excited the jealousy of some of the sons of Ruben; they roused even the envy of the other Levites. The opponents, about two hundred and fifty in number, found their leaders in Core, a cousin of Moses and of Aaron, Dathan, Abiron, and Hon, of the tribe of Ruben. The terrible punishment of the rebels and of their chiefs, which had at first filled the multitude with awe, soon roused their anger and stirred up a spirit of revolt against Moses and Aaron who sought refuge in the tabernacle. As soon as they entered it " the glory of the Lord appeared. And the Lord said to Moses: Get you out from the midst of this multitude, this moment will I destroy them" (Num., xvi, 43-45). And, indeed, a burning fire raged among the people and killed many of them. Then again, Aaron, at Moses' order, holding his censer in his hand, stood between the dead and the living to pray for the people, and the plague ceased. The authority of the Supreme Pontiff, strongly confirmed before the people, very probably remained thenceforth undiscussed. God, nevertheless, wished to give a fresh testimony of His favour. He commanded Moses to take and lay up in the tabernacle the rods of the princes of the Twelve Tribes, with the name of every man written upon his rod. The rod of Levi's tribe should bear Aaron's name: "whomsoever of these I shall choose," the Lord had said "his rod shall blossom." The following day, when they returned to the tabernacle, they " found that the rod of Aaron . . . was budded: and that the buds swelling it had bloomed blossoms, which, spreading the leaves were formed into almonds." All the Israelites, seeing this, understood that Yahweh's choice was upon Aaron, whose rod was brought back into the tabernacle as an everlasting testimony. Of the next thirty-seven years of Aaron's life, the Bible gives no detail; its narrative is concerned only with the first three and the last years of the wandering life of the Hebrews in the desert, but from the events above described, we may conclude that the life of the new pontiff was passed unmolested in the performance of his sacerdotal functions. In the first month of the thirty-ninth year after the Exodus, the Hebrews camped at Cades, where Mary, Aaron's sister, died and was buried. There the people were in want of water and soon murmured against Moses and Aaron. Then God said to Moses: "Take the rod, and assemble the people together thou and Aaron thy brother, and speak to the rock before them, and it shall yield waters" (Num., xx, 8). Moses obeyed and struck the rock twice with the rod, so that there came forth water in great abundance. We learn from Ps. cv, 33, that Moses in this circumstance was inconsiderate in his words, perhaps when he expressed a doubt as to whether he and Aaron could bring forth water out of the rock. Anyway God showed himself greatly displeased at the two brothers and declared that they would not bring the people into the Land of Promise. This divine word received, four months later, its fulfilment in Aaron's case. When the Hebrews reached Mount Hor, on the borders of Edom, God announced to Moses that his brother's last day had come, and commanded him to bring him up on the mountain. In sight of all the people, Moses went up with Aaron and Eleazar. Then he stripped Aaron of all the priestly garments wherewith he vested Eleazar, and Aaron died. Moses then came down with Eleazar and all the multitude mourned for Aaron thirty days. Mussulmans honour on Djebel Nabi-Haroun a monument they call Aaron's tomb, the authenticity of this sepulchre, however, is not altogether certain. By his marriage with Elizabeth Nahason's sister four sons were born to Aaron. The first two, Nadab and Abiu, died without leaving posterity, but the descendants of the two others, Eleazar and Ithamar, became very numerous. None of them, however, honoured Aaron's blood as much as John the Baptist, who besides being the Precursor of the Messias, was proclaimed by the Word made Flesh "the greatest among them that are born of women" (Matt., xi, 11). (b) Independent Standpoint Aaron's history takes on an entirely different aspect when the various sources of the Pentateuch are distinguished and dated after the manner commonly adopted by independent critics. As a rule it may be stated that originally the early Judean narrative (J) did not mention Aaronif his name now appears here and there in the parts attributed to that source, it is most likely owing to an addition by a late redactor. There are two documents, principally, that speak of Aaron. In the old prophetic traditions circulating among the Ephraimites (E) Aaron figured as a brother and helper of Moses. He moves in the shadow of the latter, in a secondary position, as, for instance, during the battle against Amalec; with Hur, he held up his brother's hands until the enemy was utterly defeated. To Aaron, in some passages, the supreme authority seems to have been entrusted, in the absence of the great leader, as when the latter was up on Mount Sinai; but his administration proved weak, since he so unfortunately yielded to the idolatrous tendencies of the people. According to the document in question, Aaron is neither the pontiff nor the minister of prayer. It is Moses who raises his voice to God at the tabernacle (Ex., xxxiii, 7-10), and we might perhaps understand from the same place (v. 11) that Josue, not Aaron, ministers in the tent of meeting; in like manner, Josue, not Aaron, goes up with Moses on Mount Sinai, to receive the stone Tables of the Law (Ex., xxiv, 13). In the Priestly narratives (P) Aaron, on the contrary, occupies a most prominent place -- there we learn, indeed, with Aaron's pedigree and age, almost all the above-narrated particulars, all honourable for Moses' brother, such, for instance, as the part played by Aaron in the plagues, his role in some memorable events of the desert life, as the fall of the manna, the striking of water from the rock, the confirmation of the prerogatives of his priesthood against the pretensions of Core and the others, and, finally, the somewhat mysterious relation of his death, as it is found in Num., xx. From this analysis of the sources of his history Aaron's great personality has undoubtedly come out belittled, chiefly because of the reputation of the writer of the Priestly narrative; critics charge him with caste prejudices and an unconcealed desire of extolling whatever has reference to the sacerdotal order and functions, which too often drove him to exaggerations, upon which history can hardly rely, and even to forgeries. II. PRIESTHOOD Whatever opinion they adopt with regard to the historical value of all the traditions concerning Aaron's life, all scholars, whether Catholics or independent critics, admit that in Aaron's High Priesthood the sacred writer intended to describe a model, the prototype, so to say, of the Jewish High Priest. God, on Mount Sinai, instituting a worship, did also institute an order of priests. According to the patriarchal customs, the first born son in every family used to perform the functions connected with God's worship. It might have been expected, consequently, that Ruben's family would be chosen by God for the ministry of the new altar. According to the biblical narrative, it was Aaron, however, who was the object of Yahweh's choice. To what jealousies this gave rise later, has been indicated above. The office of the Aaronites was at first merely to take care of the lamp that should ever burn before the veil of the tabernacle (Ex., xxvii, 21). A more formal calling soon followed (xxviii, 1). Aaron and his sons, distinguished from the common people by their sacred functions, were likewise to receive holy vestments suitable to their office. When the moment had come, when the tabernacle, and all its appurtenances, and whatever was required for Yahweh's worship were ready Moses, priest and mediator (Gal., iii, 19), offered the different sacrifices and performed the many ceremonies of the consecration of the new priests, according to the divine instructions (Ex., xxix), and repeated these rites for seven days, during which Aaron and his sons were entirely separated from the rest of the people. When, on the eighth day, the High Priest had inaugurated his office of sacrificer by killing the victims. he blessed the people, very likely according to the prescriptions of Num., vi, 24-26, and, with Moses, entered into the tabernacle so as to take possession thereof. As they " came forth and blessed the people. And the glory of the Lord appeared to all the multitude: And behold a fire, coming forth from the Lord, devoured the holocaust, and the fat that was upon the altar: which when the multitude saw, they praised the Lord. falling on their faces" (Lev . ix. 23. 24 s So was the institution of the Aaronic priesthood inaugurated and solemnly ratified by God. According to Wellhausen's just remarks, Aaron's position in the Law with regard to the rest of the priestly order is not merely superior, but unique His sons and the Levites act under his superintendence (Num., iii, 4), he alone is the one fully qualified priest; he alone bears the Urim and Thummin and the Ephod -- he alone is allowed to enter the Holy of Holies, there to offer incense (Lev., xxiii, 27) once a year on the great Day of Atonement. In virtue of his spiritual dignity as the head of the priesthood he is likewise the supreme judge and head of the theocracy (Num., xxvii, 21- Deut., xvii). He alone is the answerable mediator between the whole nation and God, for this cause he bears the names of the Twelve Tribes written on his breast and shoulders; his trespasses involve the whole people in guilt, and are atoned for as those of the whole people, while the princes, when their sin offerings are compared with his, appear as mere private persons (Lev., iv, 3, 13, 22, ix, 7, xvi, 6). His death makes an epoch; it is when the High Priest, not the King, dies, that the fugitive slayer obtains his amnesty (Num., xxxv, 28). At his investiture he receives the chrism like a king and is called accordingly the anointed priest, he is adorned with a diadem and tiara like a king (Ex., xxviii), and like a king, too, he wears the purple, except when he goes into the Holy of Holies (Lev., xvi,4). Aaron, first High Priest of the Old Law, is most naturally a figure of Jesus Christ, first and sole Sovereign Priest of the New Dispensation. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews was the first to set off the features of this parallel, indicating especially two points of comparison. First, the calling of both Xigh Priests: "Neither doth any man take the honour to himself, but he that is called by God as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify himself, that he might be made a high priest, but he that said unto him: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Heb., v, 4, 5). In the second place, the efficacy and duration of both the one and the other priesthood. Aaron's priesthood is from this viewpoint inferior to that of Jesus Christ. If indeed, the former had been able to perfect men and communicate to them the justice that pleases God, another would have been useless. Hence its inefficacy called for a new one, and Jesus' priesthood has forever taken the place of that of Aaron (Heb., vii, 11-12) CHAS. L. SOUVAY Abaddon Abaddon A Hebrew word signifying: + ruin, destruction (Job 31:12); + place of destruction; the Abyss, realm of the dead (Job 26:6; Proverbs 15:11); + it occurs personified (Apocalypse 9:11) as Abaddon and is rendered in Greek by Apollyon, denoting the angel-prince of hell, the minister of death and author of havoc on earth. The Vulgate renders the Greek Apollyon by the Latin Exterminans (that is, "Destroyer"). The identity of Abaddon with Asmodeus, the demon of impurity, has been asserted, but not proved. In Job 26:6, and Proverbs 15:11, the word occurs in conjunction with Sheol. A.J. MAAS Abandonment Abandonment (More properly, Self-Abandonment) A term used by writers of ascetical and mystical books to signify the first stage of the union of the soul with God by conforming to His Will. It is described as the first step in the unitive or perfect way of approaching God by contemplation, of which it is the prelude. It implies the passive purification through which one passes by accepting trials and sufferings permitted by God to turn souls to Him. It implies also the desolation which comes upon the soul when relinquishing what it prizes inordinately in creatures, the surrender of natural consolations in order to seek God, and the loss for a time of the consciousness of strong and ardent impulses of the virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity; and finally aridity or a lack of fervent devotion in prayer and in other spiritual actions. According to some, it is equivalent to the "obscure night," described by St. John of the Cross, or the darkness of the soul in a state of purgation, without light, amid many uncertainties, risks, and dangers. It is also misused to express a quietistic condition of the soul, which excludes not only all personal effort, but even desires, and disposes one to accept evil with the fatalistic motive that it cannot be helped. JOHN J. WYNNE Pedro Abarca Pedro Abarca Theologian, born in Aragon in 1619; died 1 October, 1693, at Palencia. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1641, and passed almost all his religious life as professor of scholastic, moral, and controversial theology, chiefly in the University of Salamanca. Though not mentioned by Hurter in the "Nomenclator," he has left many theological works, among which are five volumes in quarto on the Incarnation and the Sacraments; one in quarto on Grace, and several minor treatises on moral and dogmatic subjects. He wrote also extensively on points of history, via: "The Historical Annals of the Kings of Aragon," "The First Kings of Pampeluna," and has left many manuscripts and one work, which he withheld, about the Church of del Pilar. T.J. CAMPBELL Abarim Abarim (Hebrew har ha'abharim, hare ha'abharim; Septuagint to oros to Abarim, en to peran tou Iordanou, mountain Abarim, mountains of Abarim). A mountain range across Jordan, extending from Mount Nebo in the north, perhaps to the Arabian desert in the south. The Vulgate (Deuteronomy 32:49) gives its etymological meaning as "passages." Its northern part was called Phasga, (or Pisgah) and the highest peak of Phasga was Mount Nebo (Deuteronomy 3:27; 34:1; 32:49; Numbers 23:14; 27:12; 21:20; 32:47). Balaam blessed Israel the second time from the top of Mount Phasga (Numbers 23:14); from here Moses saw the Land of Promise, and here Jeremias hid the ark (II Machabees 2:4-5). A.J. MAAS Abba Abba Abba is the Aramaic word for "father." The word occurs three times in the New Testament (Mark 14:36; Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6). In each case it has its Greek translation subjoined to it, reading abba ho pater in the Greek text; abba, pater in the Latin Vulgate, and "Abba, Father" in the English version. St. Paul made use of the double expression in imitation of the early Christians, who, in their turn, used it in imitation of the prayer of Christ. Opinions differ as to the reason for the double expression in our Lord's prayer: + Jesus himself used it; + St. Peter added the Greek translation in his preaching, retaining the archaic direct address; + the Evangelist added the Greek translation; + St. Mark conformed to an existing Christian custom of praying by way of hysteron proteron. A.J. MAAS Antoine d'Abbadie Antoine d'Abbadie Astronomer, geodetist, genographer, physician, numismatist, philologian, born 1810; died March 20, 1897. While still a young man, he conceived the project of exploring Africa. Having prepared himself by six years' study, he spent ten years exploring Ethiopia, and achieved scientific results of the greatest value. D'Abbadie was a fervent Catholic, and during his explorations in Ethiopia made every effort to plant there the Catholic Faith. It was at his suggestion and that of his brother Arnauld, companion and colabourer of Antoine, that Gregory XVI sent missionaries to carry on the work. He published in the "Revue des Questions Scientifiques," the organ of the society, a work on the abolition of African slavery. He gave his estate, called Abbadia, in southern France, to the Academy of Sciences of Paris, to carry on research. His will provided, furthermore, for the establishment of an observatory at Abbadia, where a catalogue of 500,000 stars must be made, the work to be confided to religious andto be completed before 1950. His principal writings are: "Catalogue raisonné de manuscrits éthiopiens" (Paris, 1859); "Résumé Géodésique des positions déterminées en Ethiopie: (Paris, 1859); "Géodésie d'Ethiopie ou Triangulation d'une patrie de la haute Ethiopie: (4 vols., Paris, 1860-73);"Observations relatives à la physique du globe, faites au Brésil et en Ethiopie" (Paris, 1873); "Dictionnaire de la langue Amariñña." --II. Abbadie, Arnauld Michel D', geographer, younger brother of preceding, b. in Dublin, Ireland, 1815; d. 8 November, 1893. In 1837 he accompanied his brother's expedition to Abyssinia, where he soon acquired considerable influence, and never failed to employ it in the interest of the Catholic missions. His most important work is "Douze ans dans la haute Ethiopie" (Paris, 1868). THOMAS J. SHAHAN St. Abban of Magheranoidhe St. Abban of Magheranoidhe (Magheranoidhe is also rendered Murneave or Murnevin). Nephew of St. Ibar, the apostle of Wexford (a predecessor and contemporary of St. Patrick), flourished 570-620. He was the son of Cormac, King of Leinster, and he founded numerous churches in the district of Ui Cennselaigh, almost conterminous with the present County Wexford and Diocese of Ferns. His principal monastery was at Magheranoidhe, subsequently known as "Abbanstown," today, Adamstown; but he also founded an abbey at Rosmic-treoin, or New Ross, which afterwards became famous as a scholastic establishment. He died 16 March, 620. (See also ST. ABBAN OF NEW ROSS.) W.H. GRATTAN FLOOD St. Abban of New Ross St. Abban of New Ross Also known as St. Ewin, Abhan, or Evin, but whose name has been locally corrupted as "Stephen," "Neville," and "Nevin," was the contemporary and namesake of St. Abban of Magheranoidhe. contemporary. Some writers have confounded him with St. Evin of Monasterevan, County Kildare. Even Colgan (Followed by Dr. Lanigan) fell into the error of identifying Rosglas (Monasterevan) with Ros-mic-treoin (New Ross). St. Evin of Rosglas, author of the "Tripartite Life of St. Patrick," died 22 December, at his own foundation, afterwards called Monaster Evin (County Kildare), whereas St. Abban, or Evin of Ros-mic-treoin, died at Ross, County Wexford. W.H. GRATTAN FLOOD St. Abban the Hermit St. Abban the Hermit Though he lived in Abingdon (England), he was certainly an Irishman. He is commemorated on 13 May, though the year of his death is not definitely known. He was undoubtedly pre-Patrician. W.H. GRATTAN FLOOD Abbe Abbé A French word meaning primarily and strictly an abbot or superior of a monastery of men. It came eventually to be applied, in France, to every man who wears the dress of a secular ecclesiastic (Littré). This extension of meaning dates from the time of Francis I (1515-47), who, by consent of the Holy See, named secular clerics Abbots in commendam (See ABBOT, under III, Kinds of Abbot). During the following centuries the name was applied to clerics, often not in sacred Orders, engaged as professors or tutors, or in some similar capacity in the houses of the nobility. JOHN J. A'BECKET Jean Baptiste Abbeloos Jean Baptiste Abbeloos Orientialist, born 15 January, 1836, at Goyck, Belgium; died 25 February, 1906. He was educated in the seminary of Malines, 1849-60. After his ordination to the priesthood, 22 September, 1860, he studied at Louvain and Rome, devoting himself especially to Syriac language and literature. He received the degree of Doctor in Theology from the University of Louvain, 15 July, 1867, spent the following winter in London. and on his return to Belgium was appointed Professor of Holy Scripture in the seminary of Malines. Failing health obliged him to abandon the work of teaching, and he became, in 1876, pastor at Duffel. He was appointed in 1883 vicar-general under Cardinal Dechamps and help that position until 10 February, 1887, when he was appointed Rector of the University of Louvain. During his administration the University grew rapidly in equipment and organization. Abbeloos, although in the midst of his official duties, was always the scholar and the man of high ideals, whose word and example stimulated younger men to earnest work. Modest and unassuming, he realized nonetheless the significance of his position as rector of a great Catholic university, and he exerted his influence in behalf of Church and country so effectually that his retirement in 1900 occasioned regret both in the Universtiy and in the whole kingdom. His published work are: De vitâ et scriptis S. Jacobi Sarugensis (Louvain, 1867); Gregorii Barhebraei Chronicon Ecclesiasticum (Paris and Louvain, 1872-77); aacta Santi Maris (Brussels and Leipzig, 1885); Acta Mar Kardaghi Martyris (Brussels, 1900). E.A. PACE Abbess Abbess The female superior in spirituals and temporals of a community of twelve or more nuns. With a few necessary exceptions, the position of an Abbess in her convent corresponds generally with that of an Abbot in his monastery. The title was originally the distinctive appellation of Benedictine superiors, but in the course of time it came to be a applied also to the conventual superior in other orders, especially to these of the Second Order of St. Francis (Poor Clares) and to these of certain colleges of canonesses. HISTORICAL ORIGIN Monastic communities for women had sprung up in the East at a very early period. After their introduction into Europe, towards the close of the fourth century, they began to flourish also in the West, particularly in Gaul, where tradition ascribes the foundation of many religious houses to St. Martin of Tours. Cassian the great organizer of monachishm in Gaul, founded a famous convent at Marseilles, at the beginning of the fifth century, and from this convent at a later period, St. Caesarius (d. 542) called his sister Caesaria, and placed her over a religious house which he was then founding at Arles. St. Benedict is also said to have founded a community of virgins consecrated to God, and to have placed it under the direction of his sister St. Scholastica, but whether or not the great Patriarch established a nunnery, it is certain that in a short time he was looked upon as a guide and father to the many convents already existing. His rule was almost universally adopted by them, and with it the title Abbess came into general use to designate the superior of a convent of nuns. Before this time the title Mater Monasterii, Mater Monacharum, and Praeposisa were more common. The name Abbess appears for the first time in a sepulchral inscription of the year 514, found in 1901 on the site of an ancient convent of virgines sacræ which stood in Rome near the Basilica of St. Agnes extra Muros. The inscription commemorates the Abbess Serena who presided over this convent up to the time of her death at the age of eighty-five years: "Hic requieescit in pace, Serena Abbatissa S. V. quae vixzit annos P. M. LXXXV." MODE OF ELECTION The office of an Abbess is elective, the choice being by the secret suffrages of the sister. By the common law of the Church, all the nuns of a community, professed for the choir, and free from censures, are entitled to vote; but by particular law some constitutions extend the right of an active voice only to those who have been professed for a certain number of years. Lay sister are excluded by the constitutions of most orders, but in communities where they have the right to vote their privilage is to be respected. In nonexempt monasteries the election is presided over by the ordinary of the diocese of his vicar; in exempt houses, under the immediate jurisdiction of the Holy See, the Bishop likewish presides, but only as the delegate of the Pope. In those under the jurisdiction of a regular prelate the nuns are obliged to inform the diocesan of the day and time of election, so that if he wish, he or his representative may be present. The Bishop and the regular prelate preside jointly, but in no instance have they aa vote, not even a casting vote. And the Council of Trent prescribes, further, that "he who preside at the election, whether it be the Bishop or other superior, shall not enter the enclosure of the monastery, but shall listen to or receive the vote of each at the grille." (Cone. Trid., Sess. XXV, De regular, et monial., Cap. Vii.) The voting must be strictly secret, and if secrecy be not observed (whether through ignorance of the law or not), the election is null and void. A simple majority of votes for one candidate is sufficient for a valid election, unless the constitutions of an order require more than the bare majority. The result is to be proclaimed at once, by announcing the number of votes cast for each nun, so that in case of a dispute an immediate opportunity may be afforded for checking the vote. In case no candidate should receive the require number of votes, the Bishop or the regular prelate orders a new election, and for the time appoints a superior. If the community again fails to agree upon any candidate, the Bishop or other superior can nominate the one whom he judges to be the most worthy and depute her as Abbess. The newly appointed Abbess enters upon the duties of her office immediately after confirmation, which is obtained for non-exempt convents from the diocesan, and for exempt houses either from the regular prelate, if they be under his jurisdiction, or from the Holy See directly. (Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca; Abbatisa.-Cf. Taunton, The Law of the Church.) ELIGIBILITY Touching the age at which a nun becomes eligible for the office, the discipline of the Church has varied at different times. Pope Leo I prescribed forty years. St. Gregory the Great insisted that the Abbesses chosen by the communities should be at least sixty-women to whom years had given dignity, discretion, and the power to withstand temptation. He very strongly prohibited the appointment of young women as Abbesses (Ep. 55 ch. xi). Popes Innocent IV and Boniface VIII, on the other hand, were both content with thirty years. According to the present legislation, which is that of the Council of Trent, no nun "can be elected as Abbess unless she has completed the fortieth year of her age, and the eighth year of her religious profession. "But should no one be found in any convent with these qualifications, one may be elected out of another convent of the same order. But if the superior who presides over the election shall deem even this an inconvenience, there may be chosen, with the convent of the Bishop or other superior, one from amongst those in the same convent who are beyond their thirtieth year, and have since their profession passed at least five of those years in an upright manner. . . In other particulars, the constitution of each order or convent shall be observed." (Conc. Trid., Sess, xxv, De regular. et monial., Cap. vii.) By various decision of the Sacred Congregation of the Council and of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, it is forbidden, without a dispensation from the Holy See, to elect a nun of illegitimate birth; one not of virginal integrity of body; or one who has had to undergo a public penance (unless it were only salutary); a widow; a blind or deaf nun; or one of three sisters alive at the same time in the same convent. No nun is permitted to vote for herself. (Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheea; Abbatissa.-Taunton, op, cit.) Abbesses are generally elected for life. In Italy, however, and the adjacent islands, by the Bull of Gregory XIII. "Exposcit debitum" (1 January, 1583), they are elected for three years only, and then must vacate the office for a period of three years, during which time they cannot act even as vicars. RITE OF BENEDIICTION Abbesses elected for life can be solemnly blessed according to the rite prescribeed in the Pontificale Romanum. This benediction (also called ordination or consecration) they must seek, under pain of deprivation, within a year of their election, from the Bishop of the diocese. The ceremony, which take place during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, can be performed of any day of the week. No mention is made in the Pontificale of a conferring of the staff, customary in many places at the installation of an Abbess, but the rite is prescribed in many monastic rituals, and as a rule the Abbess, like the Abbot, bears the crosier as a symbol of her office and of her rank; she has also a right to the ring. The induction of an Abbess into office early assumed a liturgical character. St. Redegundis, in one of her letters, speaks of it, and informs us that Agnes, the Abbess of Sainte-Croix, before entering on her charge, received the solemn Rite of Benediction from St. Germain, the Bishop of Paris. Since the time of St. Gregory the Great, the blessing was reserved to the bishop of the diocese. At present some Abbesses are privileged to receive it from certain regular prelates. AUTHORITY OF ABBESS An Abbess can exercise supreme domestic authority ( potestas dominativa) over her monastery and all its dependencies, but as a female, she is debarred from exercising any power of spiritual jurisdiction, such as belongs to an abbot. She is empowered therefore to administer the temporal possessions of the convent; to issue commands to her nuns "in virtue of holy obedience", thus binding them in conscience, provided the obedience she demands be in accordance with the rule and statutes of the order; and to prescribe and ordain whatever may be necessary for the maintenance of discipline in the house, or conducive to the proper observance of the rule, and the preservation of peace and order in the community. She can also irritate directly, the vows of her professed sisters, and indirectly, those of the novices, but she cannot commute those vows, nor dispense from them. Neither can she dispense her subjects from any regular and ecclesiastical observances, without the leave of her prelate, though she can, in particular instance declare that a certain precept ceases to bind. She cannot publicly bless her nuns, as a priest or a prelate blesses, but she can bless them in the way that a mother blesses her children. She is not permitted to preach, though she may in chapter, exhort her nuns by conferences. An Abbess has, morever, a certain power of coercion, which authorizes her to impose punishments of a lighter nature, in harmony with the provisions of the rule, but in no instance has she a right to inflict the graver ecclesiastical penalties, such as censures. By the decree "Quemadmodum", 17 December, 1890, of Leo XIII, abbesses and other superiors are absolutely inhibited "from endeavouring, directly or indirectly, by command, counsel, fear, threats, or blandishments, to induce their subjects to make to them the secret manifestations of conscience in whatsoever manner or under what name soever." The same decree declares that permission or prohibition as to Holy Communion "belongs solely to the ordinary or extraordinary confessor, the superiors having no right whatever to interfere in the matter, save only the case in which any one of their subjects had given scandal to the community since. . . her last confession, or had been guilty of some grievous public fault, and this only until the guilty one had once more received the Sacrament of Penance." With regard to the administration of monastic property it must be noted that in affairs of greater moment an Abbess is always more or less dependent on the Ordinary, if subject to him, or on the regular prelate if her abbey is exempt. By the Constitution "Inscrutabili," 5 February, 1622, of Gregory XV, all Abbesses, exempt as well as non-exempt, are furthermore obliged to present an annual statement of their temporalities to the bishop of the diocese. In medieval times the Abbesses of the larger and more important houses were not uncommonly women of great power and distinction, whose authority and influence rivalled, at times, that of the most venerate bishops and abbots. In Saxon England, "they had often the retinue and state of princesses, especially when they came of royal blood. They treated with kings, bishops, and the greatest lords on terms of perfect equality;. . . they were present at all great religious and national solemnities, at the dedication of churches, and even, like the queens, took part in the deliberation of the national assemblies, and affixed their signatures to the charters therein granted." (Montalembert, "The Monks of the West," Bk. XV.) They appeared also at Church councils in the midst of the bishops and abbots and priests, as did the Abbess Hilda at the Synod of Whitby in 664, and the Abbess Elfleda, who succeeded her, at that of the River Nith in 705. Five Abbesses were present at the Council of Becanfield in 694, where they signed the decrees before the presbyters. At a later time the Abbess "took titles from churches impropriated to her house, presented the secular vicars to serve the parochia churches, and had all the privileges of a landlord over the temporal estates attached to her abbey. The Abbess of Shaftesbury, for instance, at one time, found seven knights' fees for the King's service and held manor courts, Wilton. Barking, and Nunnaminster, as well as Shaftesbury, 'held of the king by an entire barony,' and by right of this tenure had, for a period, the privilge of being summoned to Parliament." (Gasquet, "English Monastic Life," 39.) In Germany the Abbesses of Quedimburg, Gandersheim, Lindau, Buchau, Obermünster, etc., all ranked among the independent princes of the Empire, and as such sat and voted in the Diet as members of the Rhenish bench of bishops. They lived in princely state with a court of their own, ruled their extensive conventual estates like temporal lords, and recognized no ecclesiastic superior except the Pope. After the Reformation, their Protestant successors continued to enjoy the same imperial privileges up to comparatively recent times. In France, Italy, and Spain, the female superiors of the great monastic houses were likewise very powerful. But the external splendour and glory of medieval days have now departed from all. CONFESSION TO THE ABBESS Abbesses have no spiritual jurisdiction, and can excrcise no authority that is in any way connceted with the power of the keys or of orders. During the Middle Ages, however, attempts were not infrequently made to usurp this spiritual power of the priesthood, and we read of Abbesses who besides being guilty of many minor encroachments on the functions of the sacerdotal office, presumed to interfere even in the administration of the sacrament of penance and confessed their nuns. Thus, in the Capitularics of Charlemagne, mention is made of "certain Abbesses, who contrary to the established discipline of the Church of God, presume to bless the people, impose their hands on them, make the sign of the cross on the foreheads of men, and confer the veil on virgins, employing during that ceremony the blessing reserved exclusively to the priest," all of which practice the bishops are urged to forbid absolutely in their respective dioceses. (Thomassin, "Vetus et Nova Ecclesae Disciplina," pars I, lib. II, xii, no. 17.) The "Monastieum Cisterciense " records the stern inhibition which Innocent III, in 1220, place upon Cistercian Abbesses of Burgos and Palencia in Spain, "who blessed their religious, heard the confession of their sins, and when reading the Gospel, presumed publicly to preach." (Thomassin, op. cit., pars I, lib. III. xlix, no. 4.) The Pope characterized the intrusion of these women as a thing "unheard of, most indecorous, and highly preposterous." Dom Martene, the Benedictine savant, in his work "De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus," speaks of other Abbesses who likewish confessed their nuns, and adds, not without a touch of humour, that "these Abbesses had evidently overated their spiritual powers a trifle." And as late as 1658, the Sacred Congregation Rites categorically condemned the acts of the Abbess of Fontevrault in France, who of her own authority, obliged the monks and nuns of her obedience to recite offices, say Masses, and observe rites and ceremonies which had never been sanctioned or approved of by Rome. (Analecta Juris Pontificii, VII, col. 348.) In this connection it must, however, be observed, that when the older monastic rule prescribe confession to the superor, they do not refer to sacramental confession, but to the "chapter of faults" or the culpa, at which the religious accuse themselves of ordinary external fault patent to all, and of minor infractions of the rule. This "confession" may be made either privately to the superior or publicly in the chapter-house; no absolution is given and the penance assigned is merely disciplinary. The "chapter of faults" is a form of religious exercise still practised in all the monasteries of the ancient orders. But reference must be made to certain exceptional cases, where Abbesses have been permitted, by Apstolical concession and privilege, it is alleged, to exercise a most extraordinary power of jurisdiction. Thus, the Abbess of the Cistercian Monastery of Santa Maria la Real de las Huelgas, near Burgos, in Spain, was, by the terms of her official protocol, a "noble lady, the superior, prclate, and lawful administratrix in spirituals and temporals of the said royal abbey, and of all the conents, churches, and hermitages of its filiation, of the villages and places under its jurisdiction, seigniory, and vassalage, in virtue of Bulls and Apostolical concessions, with plenary jurisdiction, privative, quasi-episopal, nullius diacesis." (Florez, "España sagada," XXVII, Madrid 1772, col. 578.) By the favour of the king, she was, moreover, invested with almost royal prerogatives, and exercised an unlimited secular authority over more than fifty villages. Like the Lord Bishops, she held heer own courts, in civil and criminal cases, granted letters dismissorial for ordination, and issued licenses authorizing priests, within the limits of her abbatial jurisdicttion, to hear confessions, to preach, and to engage in the cure of souls. She was privilege also to confirm Abbesses, to impose censures, and to convoke synods. ("España sagrada," XXVII, col. 581.) At a General Chapter of the Cistercians held in 1189, she was made Abbess General of the Order for the Kingdom of Leon and Castile, with the privilege of convoking annually a general chapter at Burgos. The Abbess of Las Huelgas retained her ancient prestige up to the time of the Council of Trent. A power of jurisdiction almost equal to that of the Abbess of Las Huelgas was at one time exercised by the Cistercian Abbess of Converano in Italy. Among the many privileges enjoyed by this Abbess may be specially mentioned, that of appointing her own vicar-general through whom she governed her abbatial territory; that of selecting and approving confessors for the laity; and that of authorizing clerics to have the cure of souls in the churches under her jurisdiction. Every newly appointed Abbess of Converano was likewise entitiled to receive the public "homage" of her clergy,--the ceremony of which was sufficiently elaborate. On the appointed day, the clergy, in a body repaired to the abbey; at the great gate of her monastery, the Abbess, with mitre and corsier, sat enthroned under a canopy, and as each member of the clergy passed before her, he made his obeisance, and kissed her hand. The clergy, however, wished to do away with the distasteful practice, and, in 1709, appealed to Rome; the Sacred Congregatior of Bishops and Regulars thereupon modified some of ceremonial details, but recognized the right of the Abbess to the homage. Finally, in 1750, the practice was wholly abolished, and the Abbess deprived of all her power of jurisdiction. (Cf. "Analecta Juris Pontificii," XXXVIII, col. 723: and Bizzari, "Collectanea," 322.) among other Abbesses said to have exercised like powers of jurisdiction, for aa period at least, may be mentioned the Abbess of Fontevrault in France, and of Quedlinburg in Germany. (Ferraris, "Biblioth. Prompta; Abbatissa.") PROTESTANT ABBESSES OF GERMANY In some parts of Germany, notably in Hanover, Wurtemberg, Brunswick, and Schleswig-Holstein, a number of Protestant educational establishments, and certain Lutheran sisterhoods are directed by superiors who style themselves Abbesses even to the present day. All these establishments were, at one time, Catholic convents and monasteries, and the "Abbesses" now presiding over them, are, in every instance, the Protestant successors of a former line of Catholic Abbesses. The transformation into Protestant community houses and seminaries was effected, of course, during the religious revolution of the sixteenth century, when the nuns who remained loyal to the Catholic faith were driven from the cloister, and Lutheran sisterhoods put in possessing of their abbeys. In many religious communities, Protestantism was forcibly imposed on the members, while in some few, particularly in North Germany, it was voluntarily embraced. But in all these houses, where the ancient monastic offices were continued the titles of the officials were likewise retained. And thus there have been, since the sixteenth century, both Catholic and Protestant Abbesses in Germany. The Abbey of Quedinburg was one of the first to embrace the Reformation. Its last Catholic Abbess, Magdalena, Princess of Anhalt, died in 1514. As early as 1539, the Abbess Anna II of Stolberg, who had been elected to the office when she was scarcely thirteen years of age, introduced Lutheranism in all the houses under her jurisdiction. The choir service in the abbey church was abandoned, and the Catholic religion wholly abrogated. The monastic offices were reduced to four, but the ancient official titles retained. Thereafter the institution continued as a Lutheran sisterhood till the secularization of the abbey in 1803. The last two Abbesses were the Princess Anna Amelia (d. 1787), sister of Frederick the Great, and the Princess Sophia Albertina (d. 1829), daughter of King Adolphus Frederick of Sweden. In 1542, under the Abbess Clare of the house of Brunswick, the Sclamalkaldic League forcibly imposed Protestantism on the members of the ancient and venerable Benedictinre Abbey of Gandersheim; but though the Lutheran intruders were driven out again in 1547 by Clare's father, Duke Henry the Younger, a loyal Catholic, Lutheranism was permanently introduced, a few years laater, by Julius, Duke of Brunswick. Margaret, the last Catholic Abbess, diied in 1589, and after that period Lutheran Abbesses were appointed to the foundation. These continued to enjoy the imperial privileges of their predecessors till 1802, when Gandersheim was incorporated with Brunswick. Among the houses of minor importance still in existence, the Abbey of Drubeck may be specially noticed. At one time a Catholic convent, it fell into Protestant hands during the Reformation. In 1687, the Elector Frederick William I of Brandenburg granted the revenues of the house to the Counts of Stolberg, stipulating, however, that women of noble birth and professing the Evangelical faith, should always find a home in the convent, be adequately provided for, and live there under the government of an Abbess. The wish of the Elector is apparently still respected. SECULAR ABBESS IN AUSTRIA In the Hradschin of Prague, there is a noted Catholic Imperial Institute, whose directress always bears the title Abbess. The institute, now the most exclusive and the best endowed of its kind in Austria, was founded in 1755 by the Empress Maria Theresa for impoverished noblewomen of ancient lineage. The Abbess is always an Austrian Archduchess, and must be at least eighteen years of age before she can assume the duties of her office. Her insignia are a pectoral cross, the ring, the staff, and a princely cornet. It was formerly an exclusive privilege of this Abbess to crown the Queen of Bohemia -- a ceremony last performed in 1808, for the Empress Maria Louisa. Candidates for admission to the Institute must be twenty-nine years of age, of irreproachable morals and able to trace back their noble ancestry, paternal and maternal, for eight generations. They make no vows, but live in community and are obliged to assist twice daily at divine service in the Stifskirche, and must go to confession and receive Holy Communion four times a year on appointed days. They are all Hoffähig. NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION, BY COUNTRIES, OF ABBESSES The Abbesses of the Black Benedictines number at present 120. Of these there are 71 in Italy, 15 in Spain, 12 in Austro-Hungary, 11 in France (before the Associations Law), 4 in England, 3 in Belgium, 2 in Germany, and 2 in Switzerland. The Cisterecians of all Observances have a total of 77 Abbesses. Of these 74 belong to the Cisterecians of the Common Observance, who have most of their houses in Spain and in Italy. The Cistercians of the Strict Observance have 2 Abbesses in France and 1 in Germany. There are no Abbesses in the United States. In England the superior of the following houses are Abbesses: St. Mary's Abbey, Stanbrook, Worcesster: St. Mary's Abbey, East Bergholt, Suffolk; St. Mary's Abbey, Oulton, Staffordshire; St. Scholastica's Abbey, Teignmouth, Devon; St. Bridget's Abbey of Syon, Chudleigh, Devon (Brigttine); St. Clare's Abbey, Darlington, Durham (Poor Clares). In Ireland: Convent of Poor Clares, Ballyjamesduff. MONTALEMBERT, The Monks of the West (GASQUET'S ed., in 6 vols., New York, 1896), Bk. XV; GASQUET, English Monastic Life (London, 1808), viii; TAUSTON, The English Black Monks of St. Benedict (London, 1808), I, vi; TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (St. Louis, 1906), ECNENSTEIX, Women under Monasticism (London 1896), FERRAIS, Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica (Rome 1885); BIZZARRI, Collectanea S. C. Episc. Et Reg. (Rome 1885); PETRA, Comment. ad Constitut. Apostolicas (Rome 1705); THOMASSINI, Vetus et Nova Ecclesia Disciplina (Mainz, 1787); FAGNANI, Jus Conon., s. Comment. in Decret, (Cologne, 1704); TAMBURINI, De jure et privilegiis abbat. pralat., abbatiss., et monial (Cologne, 1691); LAURAIN, De Vinterrention des laiques, des diacres et des abbesses dans Vadministration de lapcnitence (Paris, 1897); SAGULLER, Lehrbuch des katholischen Kirchenrechts (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1904). THOMAS OESTREICH Abbey Abbey A monastery canonically erected and autonomous, with a community of not fewer than twelve religious; monks under the government of an abbot; nuns under that of an abbess. An autonomous priory is ruled by a superior who bears the title of prior instead of that of abbot; but this distinction was unknown in the first centuries of monastic history. Such were the twelve great cathedral priories of England, immediately governed by a prior, the diocesan being considered the abbot. Other priories were founded as cells, or offshoots from the great abbeys, and remained dependent on the parent house, by whose abbot the prior was appointed, and was removable at will. Originally the term monastery designated, both in the East and in the West, the dwelling either of a solitary or of a community; while caenobium, congregatio, fraternitas, asceterion, etc. were applied solely to the houses of communities. Monasteries took their names from either their locality, their founders, or from some monk whose life has shed lustre upon them; and later, from some saint whose relics were there preserved, or who was locally an object of special veneration. The monks of Egypt and Palestine, as may be gathered from the "Peregrinatio Etheriae," also selected for their monasteries sites famous for their connection with some biblical event or personage. The first monks generally settled in solitary places, away from the haunts of men, though sometimes they were to be found also in cities like Alexandria, Rome, Carthage, and Hippo. Monasteries, founded in country places, not infrequently gathered around them settlements which, particularly in England and Germany, in the course of time developed into great centres of population and industry. Many important towns owe their origin to this cause; but the tendency never showed itself in Africa and the East. Though the sites selected were often beautiful, many settlements, especially in Egypt, were of set purpose made amid arid deserts. Nor was this form of austerity confined to them. In the Middle Ages, the more dismal and savage did this site appear to be, the more did it appeal to the rigid mood of the Cistercians. Still, the preference, at least with the majority of the monks of the West, was for fertile lands, suitable for cultivation and agriculture. The formation of communities dates from pre-Christian times, as witness the Essenes; but the earliest Christian monastic foundations of which we have definite knowledge were simply groups of huts without any orderly arrangement, erected about the abode of some solitary famous for holiness and asceticism, around whom had gathered a knot of disciples anxious to learn his doctrine and to imitate his way of life. Communities that had outgrown the accommodation afforded by their monasteries founded branch houses, and thus propagated themselves like the swarming of a beehive. Bishops founded many monasteries, while others owed their existence to the piety of princes and nobles, who also generously endowed them. The Council of Chalcedon (451) forbade the foundation of any monastery without the permission of the local bishop, thus obviating the difficulties likely to arise from irresponsible action. This became the universal law, and it also safeguarded these institutions against disbandment or ruin, since they enjoyed a certain sacredness of character in popular estimation. Double monasteries were those in which dwelt communities both of men and women at one and the same time, under the government of a common superior, either an abbot or an abbess. The Emperor Justinian suppressed them in the East on account of the abuses which this arrangement might lead to; but the custom long prevailed in England, France, and Spain, where strict rules, keeping the sexes entirely separate at all times, minimized the danger of scandals. Examples of these were the houses of the Order of St. Gilbert of Sempringham; and in France, Faremoutiers, Chelles, Remiremont, etc. In the beginning, solitaries attached no importance whatever to the form of design of their dwellings. They made use of anything that Nature afforded, or their circumstances suggested. In the East, especially in Egypt, abandoned tombs and burial caves; in the West, cave and rude huts constructed of branches of trees, mud, or sun-dried bricks, and furnished with the barest necessities, sheltered many an early solitary. When the number of such solitaries in a certain locality grew, and huts increased in proportion, gradually they came to subject themselves to a common superior and to follow a common rule of life; but they had no common buildings except a church to which they all repaired for the Sunday services. At Tabennae on the Nile, in Upper Egypt, however, St. Pachomius laid the foundations of the coenobitical life, arranging everything in an organized manner. He built several monasteries, each containing about 1,600 separate cells laid out in lines as an encampment, where the monks slept and performed some of their manual tasks; but there were large halls for their common needs, as the church, refectory, kitchen, even an infirmary and a guest-house. An enclosure protecting all these buildings gave the settlement the appearance of a walled village; but every part was of the utmost simplicity, without any pretense to architectural style. It was this arrangement of monasteries, inaugurated by St. Pachomius, which finally spread throughout Palestine, and received the name of laurae, that is "lanes" or "alleys." In addition to these congregations of solitaries, all living in huts apart, there were caenobia, monasteries wherein the inmates lived a common life, none of them being permitted to retire to the cells of a laurae before they had therein undergone a lengthy period of training. In time this form of common life superseded that of the older laurae. Monasticism in the West owes its development to St. Benedict (480-543). His Rule spread rapidly, and the number of monasteries founded in England, France, Spain, and Italy between 520 and 700 was very great. More than 15,000 Abbeys, following the Benedictine Rule, had been established before the Council of Constance in 1415. No special plan was adopted or followed in the building of the first caenobia,or monasteries as we understand the term today. The monks simply copied the buildings familiar to them, the Roman house or villa, whose plan, throughout the extent of the Roman Empire, was practically uniform. The founders of monasteries had often merely to install a community in an already existing villa. When they had to build, the natural instinct was to copy old models. If they fixed upon a site with existing buildings in good repair, they simply adapted them to their requirements, as St. Benedict did at Monte Cassino, not disdaining to turn to Christian uses what had before served for the worship of idols. The spread of the monastic life gradually effected great changes in the model of the Roman villa. The various avocations followed by the monks required suitable buildings, which were at first erected not upon any premeditated plan, but just as the need for them arose. These requirements, however, being practically the same in every country, resulted in practically similar arrangements everywhere. The monastic lawgivers of the East have left no written record of the principal parts of their monasteries. St. Benedict, however, mentions the chief component parts with great exactness, in his Rule, as the oratory, dormitory, refectory, kitchen, workshops, cellars for stores, infirmary, novitiate, guest-house, and by inference, the conference-room or chapter-house. These, therefore, find a place in all Benedictine abbeys, which all followed one common plan, occasionally modified to suit local conditions. The chief buildings were arranged around a quadrangle. Taking the normal English arrangement, it will be found that the church was situated as a rule on the north side, its high and massive walls affording the monks a good shelter from the rough north winds. The buildings of the choir, presbytery, and retrochapels extending more to the east, gave some protection from the biting east wind. Canterbury and Chester, however, were exceptions, their churches being on the southern side, where also they were frequently found in warm and sunny climates, with the obvious purpose of obtaining some shelter from the heat of the sun. The choir was ordinarily entered, in the normally planned English monasteries, by a door at the junction of the northern and eastern cloisters, another door at the western end of the north cloister being reserved for the more solemn processions. Although in the course of time there came into existence private rooms (chequer or saccarium) wherein the officials transacted their business, and later still private cells are to be met with, the cloisters were, in the main, the dwelling-place of the entire community, and here the common life was lived. The northern cloister, looking south, was the warmest of the four divisions. Here was the prior's seat, next to the door of the church; then those of the rest, more or less in order. The abbot's place was at the northeastern corner. The novice-master with his novices occupied the southern portion of the eastern cloister, while the junior monks were opposite in the western limb. The cold, sunless, southern walk was not used; but out of it opened the refectory, with the lavatory close at hand. In Cistercian houses it stood at right angles to the cloister. Near the refectory was the conventual kitchen with its various offices. The chapter-house opened out of the eastern cloister, as near the church as possible. The position of the dormitory was not so fixed. Normally, it communicated with the southern transept, hence it was over the eastern cloister; occasionally it stood at right angles to it, as at Winchester, or on the western side, as at Worcester. The infirmary usually appears to have been to the east of the dormitory, but no fixed position was assigned to it. The guest-house was situated where it would be least likely to interfere the privacy of the monastery. In later days, when books had multiplied, a special building for the library was added, at right angles to one of the walks of the cloister. To these may be added the calefactory, the parlour, or locutorium, the almonry, and the offices of the obedientiaries; but these additional buildings fitted into the general plan where they best might, and their disposition differed somewhat in the various monasteries. The English Cistercian houses, of which there are so many extensive and beautiful remains, were mainly arranged after the plan of Citeaux, in Burgundy, the mother-house, with slight local variations. The Carthusian monastery differed considerably in its arrangements from those of other orders. The monks were practically hermits, and each occupied a small detached cottage, containing three rooms, which they left only to attend the services of the church and on certain days when the community met together in the refectory. These cottages opened out of three sides of a quadrangular cloister, and on the fourth side were the church, refectory, chapter-house, and other public offices. Both laurae and caenobium were surrounded by walls which protected the inmates either from the intrusion of seculars or from the violence of marauders. No monk might go beyond this enclosure without permission. The monks of the earlier period considered this separation from the outer world as a matter of prime importance. Women were never permitted to enter the precincts of monasteries for men; even access to the church was oftentimes denied them, or, if accorded admission, as at Durham, they were relegated to a strictly limited space, farthest removed from the monks' choir. Even greater strictness was observed in safe-guarding the enclosure of nuns. The danger of attack from Saracen hordes necessitated, in the case of Eastern monasteries, the erection of lofty walls, with only one entrance place many feet above the ground, reached by a stairway or drawbridge that could be raised for defense. The monks of the West, not standing in fear of such incursions, did not need such elaborate safeguards, and therefore contented themselves with ordinary enclosure walls. A religious of mature age and character was selected for the responsible office of porter, and to act as the channel of communication between the inmates and the outside world. His chamber was always close by, so that he might be at hand to fulfill his duties of receiving the poor and of announcing the arrival of guests. In the Egyptian monasteries the guest-house, situated near the entrance gateway, was place under the charge of the porter, who was assisted by the novices. St. Benedict so arranged that it should be a building distinct from the monastery itself, although within the enclosure. It had its own kitchen, served by two of the brethren appointed for that purpose annually; a refectory where the abbot took his meals with distinguished guests, and, when he thought fit, invited some of the seniors to join him there; an apartment for the solemn reception of guests, in which the ceremony of washing their feet, as prescribed by the Rule was performed by the abbot and his community; and a dormitory suitably furnished. Thus the guests received every attention due to them by the laws of charity and hospitality, and the community, while gaining the merit of dispensing them in a large-hearted way, through the appointed officials, suffered no disturbance of their own peace and quiet. It was usual for the buildings dedicated for hospitality to be divided into four: one for the reception of guests of distinction, another for poor travelers and pilgrims, a third for merchants arriving on business with the cellarer, and the last for monk-visitors. Formerly, as now, monastic communities always and everywhere extended a generous hospitality to all comers as an important way of fulfilling their social duties; hence monasteries lying on or near the main highways enjoyed particular consideration and esteem. Where guests were frequent and numerous, the accommodation provided for them was on a commensurate scale. And as it was necessary for great personages to travel accompanied by a crowd of retainers, vast stables and other outhouses were added to these monastic hostels. Later xenodochia, or infirmaries, were attached to these guest-houses, where sick travelers could receive medical treatment. St. Benedict ordained that the monastic oratory should be what its name implied, a place exclusively reserved for public and private prayer. In the beginning it was a mere chapel, only large enough to hold the religious, since externs were not admitted. The size of these oratories were gradually enlarged to meet the requirements of the liturgy. There was also usually an oratory, outside the monastic enclosure, to which women were admitted. The refectory was the common hall where the monks assembled for their meals. Strict silence was observed there, but during the meals one of the brethren read aloud to the community. The refectory was originally built on the plan of the ancient Roman triclinium, terminating in an apse. The tables were ranged along three sides of the room near the walls, leaving the interior space for the movements of the servers. Near the door of the refectory was invariably to be found the lavatory, where the monks washed their hands before and after meals. The kitchen, was, for convenience, always situated near the refectory. In the larger monasteries separate kitchens were provided for the community (where the brethren performed the duties in weekly turns), the abbot, the sick, and the guests. The dormitory was the community bed-chamber. A lamp burned in it throughout the night. The monks slept clothed, so as to be ready, as St. Benedict says, to rise without delay for the night Office. The normal arrangement, where the numbers permitted it, was for all to sleep in one dormitory, hence there were often very large; sometimes more than one was required. The practice, however, gradually came in of dividing the large dormitory into numerous small cubicles, one being allotted to each monk. The latrines were separated from the main buildings by a passage, and were always planned with the greatest regard to health and cleanliness, a copious supply of running water being used wherever possible. Although St. Benedict makes no specific mention of a chapter-house, nevertheless he does order monks to "come together presently after supper to read the 'Collations.'" No chapter-house appears on the plan of the great Swiss monastery of St. Gall, dating back to the ninth century; in the early days, therefore, the cloisters must have served for the meetings of the community, either for instruction or to discuss the affairs of the monastery. But convenience soon suggested a special place for these purposes, and there is mention of chapter-rooms in the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle (817). The chapter-room was always on the cloister level, on to which it opened. The cloisters, though covered, were generally open to the weather, and were an adaptation of the old Roman atrium. Besides providing a means of communication between the various parts of the monastery, they were both the dwelling-place and the workshop of the monks, and thus the word cloister became a synonym for the monastic life. How the monks managed to live in these open galleries during the winter months, in cold climates, is a mystery; a room, called a "calefactory," heated by flues, or in which a fire was kept up, where the monks might retire occasionally to warm themselves, was provided in English monasteries. On the Continent the practice in regard to the novices differed somewhat from that prevailing in England. Not being as yet incorporated into the community, they were not permitted to dwell in the interior of the monastery. They had their places in choir during the Divine Office, but they spent the rest of their time in the novitiate. A senior monk, called the novice-master, instructed them in the principles of the religious life, and "tried their spirits if they be of God," as St. Benedict's Rule prescribed. This period of probation lasted a whole year. Abroad, the building set apart for the novices was provided with its own dormitory, kitchen, refectory, workroom, and occasionally even its own cloisters; it was, in fact, a miniature monastery within a larger one. The infirmary was a special building set apart for the accommodation of the sick and infirm brethren, who there received the particular care and attention they needed, at the hands of those appointed to the duty. A herbal garden provided many of the remedies. When death had brought its reward, the monks were laid to rest in a cemetery within the monastic precincts. The honour of burial amongst the religious, a privilege highly esteemed, was also sometimes accorded bishops, royal personages, and distinguished benefactors. No monastery was complete without its cellars for the storing of provisions. There were, in addition, the granaries, barns, etc., all under the care of the cellarer, as also such buildings and outhouses as were used for agricultural purposes. Gardens and orchards provided such vegetables and fruit as were cultivated in the Middle Ages. The work of the fields did not, however, occupy all the time of the monks. Besides cultivating the arts, and transcribing manuscripts, they plied many trades, such as tailoring, shoe-making, carpentering, etc., while others baked the bread for daily consumption. Most monasteries had a mill for grinding their own corn. It will thus be seen that an Abbey, especially if it maintained a large community, was a little city, self-contained and self-sufficing, as St. Benedict wished it to be, to obviate as far as possible any necessity for the monks to leave the enclosure. The enormous development of the monastic life brought in its train a similar development in the accommodation suitable for it. The monastic buildings, at first so primitive, grew in time till they presented a very imposing appearance; and the arts were requisitioned and ancient models of architecture copied, adapted, and modified. The Basilican plan, indigenous to Italy, was, naturally, that first adopted. Its churches consisted of a nave and aisles, lighted by clerestory windows, and terminating in a semicircular sanctuary or apse. As time went on, the round arch, typical of Basilican and Romanesque architecture, gradually gave place to the pointed arch, peculiar to the new Gothic style, which is defined as "perfected Romanesque." In England a tendency developed of making the sanctuary rectangular instead of apsidal. The Normans adopted this arrangement; and in their church-planning the English oblong type of chancel gradually took the place of the Romanesque and continental apse, and the Basilica plan was abandoned for that of the Gothic, of a crossing or transept, separating nave from chancel, the latter being extended to make room for the choir. The final evolution of the style peculiar to England is due to the Cistercians, the characteristic of whose Abbeys was extreme simplicity and the absence of needless ornament; their renunciation of the world was evidenced in all that met the eye. Pinnacles, turrets, traceried windows, and stained glass were, in their early days at least, proscribed. And during the twelfth century Cistercian influence predominated throughout Western Europe. The Cistercian churches of this period, Fountains, Kirkstall, Jervaulx, Netly, and Tintern, have rectangular chancels. These and other twelfth century churches belong to what is known as the Transitional or Pointed Norman style. Then followed the greater elaboration of Early and Decorated English, as seen at Norwich and Worcester, or rebuilt Westminster, culminating in the splendours of the Perpendicular, or Tudor style, of which Henry VII's Chapel, at Westminster, is so superb an example. Few English Abbeys of note, however, were of homogeneous architecture; in fact, the mixture of styles, though sometimes almost bewildering, adds to what is left of these stately piles a greater picturesqueness ever pleasing to archaeologist and artist. The routine of a monastery could be maintained and supervised only by the delegation of some of the abbot's authority to various officials, who thus shared with him the burden of rule and administration, and the transaction of business--considerable and ever increasing in volume, where a large and important monastery was concerned. The rule was exercised in subordination to the abbot by the claustral prior and sub-prior; the administration, by officials termed obedientiaries who possessed extensive powers in their own spheres. Their number varied in different houses; but the following were the ordinary officials, together with their duties, most commonly named in old Customals: The cantor, or precentor, regulated the singing in the church service, and was assisted by the succentor or sub-cantor. He trained the novices to render the traditional chant properly. In some places he acted as master to the boys of he claustral school. He was the librarian and archivist, and in this capacity, had charge of the precious tomes and manuscripts preserved in a special aumbry or book-cupboard, and had to provide the choirbooks and those for reading in the refectory. He prepared and sent round the briefs, or mortuary-rolls, announcing the death of any of the brethren to other monasteries. He was also one of the three official custodians of the convent seal, holding one of the keys to the chest where it was kept. To the sacrist and his assistants was committed the care of the church fabric, together with its sacred plate and vestments. He had to see to the cleaning and lighting of the church, its decking for great festivals, and the vestments used by the sacred vestments. The cemetery was also under his charge. To his office pertained the lighting of the entire of the entire monastery: and thus he superintended the candle-making, and bought the necessary stores of wax, tallow, and cotton for wicks. He slept in the church, and took his meals near at hand, so that day and night the church was never left without a guardian. His chief assistants were a revestiarius, who saw to the vestments, the linen, and the hangings of the church, and was responsible for their being kept in repair, or replaced when worn out; and the treasurer, who was in special charge of the shrines, reliquaries, sacred vessels, and other plate. The cellarer was the purveyor of all food-stuffs and drink for the use of the community. This entailed frequent absences, and hence exemption from much of the ordinary choir duties. He had charge of the hired servants, whom he alone could engage, dismiss, or punish. He superintended the serving up of the meals. To his office belonged the supplying of fuel, carriage of goods, repairs of the house, etc. He was aided by a sub-cellarer and, in the bakery, by a granatorius, or keeper of the grain, who saw to the grinding and quality of flour. The refectorian had charge of the refectory, or "fratry," keeping it clean, supplied with cloths, napkins, jugs, and dishes, and superintended the laying of the tables. To him, too, was assigned the care of the lavatory, and the providing it with towels and, if necessary, hot water. The office of the kitchener was one of great responsibility, for to him fell the portioning out of the food, and it was only great experience which could preserve the happy mean between waste and niggardliness. He had under him an emptor, or buyer, experienced in marketing. He had to keep a strict account of his expenditures and of the stores, presenting in books weekly to the abbot for examination. He presided over the entire kitchen department, seeing particularly that all the utensils were kept scrupulously clean. The discharge of his duty entailed frequent exemption from choir. The weekly servers helped in the kitchen, under the kitchener's orders, and waited at table during the meals. The concluded their week's work on Saturday evenings by washing the feet of the brethren. The infirmarian had to tend the sick with affectionate sympathy, and, as far as might be necessary, was excused from regular duties. If a priest, he said Mass for the sick; if not, he got a priest to do so. He always slept in the infirmary, even when there were no sick there, so as to be found on the spot in case of emergency. The curious practice of blood-letting, looked on as so salutary in ancient times, was carried out by the infirmarian. The chief duty of the almoner was to distribute the alms of the monastery, in food and clothing, to the poor, with kindness and discretion; and; while ministering to their bodily wants, he was not to forget those of their soul also. He superintended the daily maundy or washing of the feet of the poor selected for that purpose. Another of his duties was to take charge of any school, other than the claustral school, connected with the monastery. To him also fell the task of seeing to the circulation of the mortuary-rolls. In medieval days the hospitality extended to travelers by the monasteries was of such constant occurrences that the guest-master required a full measure of tact, prudence, and discretion, as well as affability, since the reputation of the house was in his keeping. His first duty was to see that the guest-house always ready for the reception of visitors, whom he was to receive, as enjoined by the Rule, as he would Christ Himself, and during their stay to supply their wants, entertain them, conduct them to the church services, and generally to hold himself at their disposal. The chief duties of the chamberlain of a monastery were concerned with the wardrobe of the brethren, repairing or renewing their worn-out garments, and preserving cast-off clothes for distribution to the poor by the almoner. He had also to superintend the laundry. As it belonged to him to provide cloth and other material for the clothing, he had to attend the neighbouring fairs to purchase his stock. On him, too, devolved the task of making preparation for the baths, feet-washing, and shaving of the brethren. The novice-master was of course one of the most important officials in every monastery. In church, in the refectory, in the cloister, in the dormitory, he kept a watchful control over the novices, and spent the day teaching them and exercising them in the rules and traditional practices of the religious life, encouraging and helping those who showed real signs of a monastic vocation. The weekly officials included, besides the servers already referred to, the reader in the refectory, who was enjoined to make careful preparation so as to avoid mistakes. Also, the antiphoner whose duty it was to read the invitatory at Matins, intone the first antiphon of the Psalms, the versicles and responsories, after the lessons, and the capitulum, or little chapter, etc. The hebdomadarian, or priest of the week, had to commence all the various canonical Hours, give all the blessings that might be required, and sing the High Mass each day. The greater Abbeys in England were represented through their superiors in Parliament, in Convocations, and in Synod. Their superiors were regularly included in the Commissions of Peace, and in all things acted as, and were considered the equals of, their great feudal neighbours. The alms bestowed on the poor by the monasteries, together with those furnished by law, by the parish priests, served to support them without recourse to the more recent poor-laws. The lot of the poor was lightened, and they knew that they could turn for help.and sympathy to the religious houses. Poverty as witnessed in these days was impossible in all the Middle Ages, because the monks, spread over all the country, acted as merely stewards of God's property, and dispensed it, if lavishly, yet with discretion. The relations between the monks and their tenants were uniformly kindly; the smaller cottagers were treated with much consideration, and if it became necessary to inflict fines, justice was tempered with mercy. The monastic manors were worked somewhat on the principle of a co-operative farm. If we may form a judgment on the whole of England from the "Durham Halmote Rolls," the conditions of village life left little to be desired. Provisions for watching over the public health were enforced, a guard kept over water supplies, stringent measures taken in regard to springs and wells, and the cleansing of ponds and milldams. A common mill ground the tenants' corn, and their bread was baked in a common oven. The relation of the monks to their peasant-tenants was rather that of rent-chargers than of absolute owners. HENRY NORBERT BIRT Abbo Cernuus Abbo Cernuus ("The crooked"). French Benedictine monk of St-Germain-des-Prés in Paris, sometimes called Abbo Parisiensis. He was born about the middle of the ninth century, was present at the siege of Paris by the Normans (885-86), and wrote a description of it in Latin verse, with an account of subsequent events to 896, "De bellis Parisiacae urbis." He also left some sermons for the instructions of clerics in Paris and Poictiers (P.L., CXXII). THOMAS WALSH St. Abbon St. Abbon (Or ABBO.) Born near Orléans c. 945; died at Fleury, 13 November, 1004, a monk of the Benedictine monastery of Fleury sur Loire (Fleuret), conspicuous both for learning and sanctity, and one of the great lights of the Church in the stormy times of Hugh Capet of France and of the three Ottos of Germany. He devoted himself to philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. In early life he was called to England to direct the school of the newly founded monastery of Ramsey, in the County of Huntingdon, after which he returned to Fleury. On the death of the Abbot Oilbold, Abbon was selected to succeed him, but one of the monks who had secured the support of the King and his son Robert, the Bishop of Orléans, contested the choice, and the matter assumed national importance in the political forces it brought into play. It was finally settled by the famous Gerbert (later Pope Sylvester II) in favour of Abbon. He was present at the Synod of St. Basolus (St. Basle), near Reims, at which Archbishop Arnolf was tried for treason and deposed, to make way for Gerbert.When the question arose about the marriage of Robert the Pious and Bertha, Abbon was commissioned to arrange it with the Pope. On the way to Rome he met Pope Gregory V, who was a fugitive from the city from which the Antipope John XVII had expelled him. Between the Pontiff and the Abbot the greatest esteem and affection existed. The royal petition for a dispensation was rejected. Abbon succeeded in bringing about the restoration of Arnulf to the see of Reims. His influence contributed largely to calm the excitement about the fear of the end of the world which is said to have been general in Europe in 1000. His glourious life had a sad ending. In 1004 he attemped to restore discipline in the monastery of La Reole, in Gascony, by transferring some of the monks of Fleury into that community. But the trouble increased; fighting began between the two parties and when St. Abbon endeavoured to separate them he was pieced in the side by a lance. He concealed the wound and reached his cell, where he died in the arms of his faithful disciple Aimoin, who has left an account of his labours and virtues. The miracles wrought at his tomb soon caused him to be regarded in the Church of Gaul as a saint and martyr. His feast is kept 13 November. Cochard, Les Saints de l'église d'Orléans (1879), 362-383; The Month (1874), XX, 163; XXI, 28-42; Sackur, Die Cluniacenser (1892), I, 270, 297; Pardiac, Hist. de St. Abbon de Fleury (Paris, 1872). T.J. CAMPBELL Abbot Abbot A title given to the superior of a community of twelve or more monks. The name is derived from abba, the Syriac form of the Hebrew word ab, and means "father". In Syria, where it had its origin, and in Egypt, it was first employed as a title of honour and respect, and was given to any monk of venerable age or of eminent sanctity. The title did not originally imply the exercise of any authority over a religious community. From the East the word passed over to the West, and here it was soon received into general use to designate the superior of an abbey or a monastery. In this article we shall treat: I. Historical Origin; II. Nature of the Office; III. Kinds of Abbots; IV. Mode of Election; V. Benediction of the Abbot; VI. Authority; VII. Rights and Privileges; VIII. Assistance at Councils; IX. Distribution of Abbots. I. HISTORICAL ORIGIN Monastic communities were first organized in Egypt at the beginning of the fourth century. St. Anthony introduced one form of community life the eremitical when, about the year A.D. 305, he undertook the direction and organization of the multitude of hermits who had gathered about him in the Thebaid; a second -- the coenobitical, or conventual, type of monachism -- was instituted by St. Pachomius, who, about the same time, founded his first coenobium, or conventual monastery, at Tabennae in the far south of Egypt. Both systems spread rapidly and were soon firmly established in Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor. By the middle of the fourth century monachism had also made its appearance in Europe, and here, at the beginning of the sixth, St. Benedict of Nursia, gave it the definite form and constitution which ultimately assured its triumph in the West. Every group of hermits and every coenobium naturally had its superior. The title given him varied. In the East he was usually styled the elder, the senior, or also father of the monastery. In Asia Minor and among the Greeks generally he was called archimandrite ( archos, a chief, and mandra, a fold, monastery) or hegumenos. Originally there seems to have been no appreciable difference in the signification of these two words, but after the period of Justinian the title archimandrite was jealously reserved for the superiors of the older or of the more important monasteries. Both names have, however, been permanently retained, and are to this day the titles given to monastic superiors in the Eastern Church. Cassian, who at the beginning of the fifth century had transplanted Egyptian monachism to Gaul, was addressed as Abbas, Pater, and Dominus; he himself termed the superior of the monastery Praepositus. The word praepositus, in the signification of a monastic ruler, appears also in Roman Africa and elsewhere in the West, but towards the close of the fifth century it had been almost entirely supplanted by the term abbas. St. Benedict, in his Rule, written about 529, assigned a subordinate position in the community to the praepositus, and restricted the use of the title abbas to the superior of the monastery. Through the Rule of the great Patriarch of Western Monachism the application of the title abbas was definitely fixed, and its use made general in the West. II. NATURE OF THE OFFICE St. Benedict's conception of a monastic community was distinctly that of a spiritual family. Every individual monk was to be a son of that family, the, Abbot its father, and the monastery its permanent home. Upon the Abbot therefore, as upon the father of a family, devolves the government and direction of those who are committed to his dare, and a paternal solicitude should characterize his rule. St. Benedict says that "an abbot who is worthy to have the charge of a monastery ought always to remember by what title he is called," and that "in the monastery he is considered to represent the person of Christ, seeing that he is called by His name" (Rule of St. Benedict, ii). The monastic system established by St. Benedict was based entirely upon the supremacy of the abbot. Though the Rule gives directions as to an abbot's government, and furnishes him with principles upon which to act, and binds him to carry out certain prescriptions as to consultation with others in difficult matters etc., the subject is told to obey without question or hesitation the decision of the superior. It is of course needless to say that this obedience did not extend to the commission of evil, even were any such command ever imposed (Gasquet, English Monastic Life, London, 1904, p. 42). The obedience shown to the Abbot is regarded as obedience paid to God Himself, and all the respect and reverence with which he is treated by the brethren of his house is paid him for Christ's love, because as abbot -- father -- he is the representative of Christ in the midst of the brethren. The whole government of a religious house depends upon the Abbot. His will is supreme in all things; yet, as the Rule says, nothing is to be taught, commanded, or ordered beyond the precepts of the Lord. All the officials who are to assist him in the government of the house, are appointed by him and have their authority from him. He may dismiss them at his discretion. The Abbot, by virtue of his office, administers the temporal possessions of the community, exercises a general supervision for the maintenance of monastic discipline, provides for the keeping of the Rule, punishes and, if need be, excommunicates the refractory, presides in choir during the recitation of the Office, and at Divine Service, and gives the blessings. In a word, uniting in his person the threefold office of father, teacher, and ruler, it is the duty of the Abbot to see that all things are administered wisely in the House of God. III. KINDS OF ABBOTS An Abbot canonically elected and confirmed, and exercising the duties of his office, is by the law of the Church styled a Regular Abbot. Regular Abbots are prelates in the full sense of the word, and their dignity is of three grades. An Abbot who presides only over such persons, ecclesiastical and lay, as are attached to his monastery, belongs to the lowest grade, and his jurisdiction carries with it what is called the simple passive exemption ( exemptio passiva) from the authority of the diocesan bishop. If an Abbot's jurisdiction extends beyond the limits of his abbey, over the inhabitants -- clergy and laity -- of a certain district or territory which forms an integral part of a bishop's diocese, he belongs to the middle grade ( praelatus quasi nullius dioecesis) and his exemption is termed active ( exemptio activa). And when an Abbot has jurisdiction over the clergy and laity of a district or territory (comprising one or several cities and places) which forms no part whatever of any diocese, his abbey is styled vere nullius dioecesis (of no diocese) and, excepting a few rights only, for the exercise of which the ordo episcopalis is required, his authority is in all things equal to that of a bishop. This is the third and highest grade of the dignity. There are no abbeys vere nullius in the United States or in England. Among abbeys of this class in other countries may be mentioned: in Italy, the arch-abbey of Monte Cassino, founded by St. Benedict himself about 529; the abbey of Subiaco, of which the titular is always a cardinal; the abbey of St. Paul extra Muros (Rome); that of Monte Vergine near Avellino, founded by St. William of Vercelli in 1124; and the abbey of the Most Holy Trinity at Cava, dating back to 1011; in Switzerland, the abbey of Einsiedeln, founded about 934; in Hungary (Austria), the arch-abbey of St. Martin's, (Martinsberg), established A.D. 1001 by St. Stephen, King of Hungary; and in West Australia the abbey of New Norcia. All exempt abbeys, no matter what the canonical title or degree of their exemption, are under the immediate jurisdiction of the Holy See. The term exempt is, strictly speaking, not applied to an Abbot nullius, because his jurisdiction is entirely extraterritorial. Within the limits of his territory such an Abbot has, with few exceptions, the rights and privileges of a bishop, and assumes all a bishop's obligations. Abbots of the second grade, however, whose authority (though quasi-episcopal) is intra-territorial, cannot be considered ordinaries, nor can they lay any claim to the rights and privileges of bishops, excepting those, of course, which have been especially granted them by the Holy See. When the monasteries in which the same regular observance is followed, or the abbeys of the same province, district, or country form a congregation i.e. a federation of houses to promote the general interest of the order, the presiding Abbot is styled the "Abbot President", or the "Abbot General." Thus, the Cassinese Congregation of the Primitive Observance has at its bead an Abbot General; the English Congregation, the American-Cassinese, and the American-Swiss, have each an Abbot President. The authority of the Abbot President is defined in the statutes or constitution of each congregation. In the recent confederation of the Benedictine Order all the Black Monks of St. Benedict were united under the presidency of an "Abbot Primate" (Leo XIII, Summum semper, 12 July, 1893); but the unification, fraternal in its nature, brought no modification to the abbatial dignity, and the various congregations preserved their autonomy intact. The powers of the Abbot Primate are specified, and his position defined, in a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars dated 16 September, 1893. The primacy is attached to the Abbey and International Benedictine College of St. Anselm, Rome, and the Primate, who takes precedence of all other Abbots, is empowered to pronounce on all doubtful matters of discipline, to settle difficulties arising between monasteries to hold a canonical visitation, if necessary, in any congregation of the order, and to exercise a general supervision for the regular observance of monastic discipline. Of late, however, certain branches of the Benedictine Order seem to have lost their original autonomy to some extent. The Reformed Cistercians of La Trappe, for instance, are by a Decree of Pope Leo XIII, 8 May, 1892, placed under the authority of an Abbot-General. The Abbot-General has full authority to pass decision upon all current affairs and difficulties. On account of the antiquity or the preeminence of the abbeys over which they preside, the honorary title of Arch-abbot is bestowed upon the superiors of certain monasteries. Monte Cassino, "the Cradle of Western Monachism", St. Martinsberg in Hungary, St. Martin's of Beuron, in Germany, and St. Vincent's, Pennsylvania, the first Benedictine foundation in America, are presided over by Arch-abbots. A further variety of Abbots-Regular are the "Titular Abbots." A Titular Abbot holds the title of an abbey which has been either destroyed or suppressed, but he exercises none of the functions of an Abbot, and has in actu no subjects belonging to the monastery whence he derives his title. The law of the Church recognizes also "Secular Abbots," i.e. clerics who, though not professed members of any monastic order, nevertheless possess an abbacy as an ecclesiastical benefice, with the title and some of the honours of the office. These benefices belonged originally to monastic houses, but on the suppression of the abbeys the benefice and the title were transferred to other churches. There are various classes of Secular Abbots; some have both jurisdiction and the right to use the pontifical insignia; others have only the abbatical dignity without either jurisdiction or the right to pontificalia; while yet another class holds in certain cathedral churches the first dignity and the privilege of precedence in choir and in assemblies, by reason of some suppressed or destroyed conventual church now become the cathedral. In the early Middle Ages the title Abbot was borne not only by the superiors of religious houses, but also by a number of persons, ecclesiastical and lay, who had no connection whatever with the monastic system. St. Gregory of Tours, for instance, employed it in his day to designate the principal of a body of secular clergy attached to certain churches; and later, under the Merovingians and Carlovingians, it was applied to the chaplain of the royal household, Abbas Palatinus, and to the military chaplain of the king, Abbas Castrenisis. From the time of Charles Martel onward to the eleventh century it came to be adopted even by laymen, the Abbacomites, or Abbates Milites, mostly nobles dependent on the court, or old officers, to whom the sovereign would assign a portion of the revenues of some monastery as a reward for military service. "Commendatory Abbots" (secular ecclesiastics who held an abbacy not in titulo, but in commendam) had their origin in the system of commendation prevalent during the eighth and succeeding centuries. They were in the first instance merely temporary trustees, appointed to administer the estates of an abbey during a vacancy; but in the course of time they retained the office for life, and claimed a portion of the revenues for their maintenance. The practice of nominating Commendatory Abbots eventually led to serious abuses; it was greatly checked by the Council of Trent, and has in modern times entirely disappeared from the Church. IV. MODE OF ELECTION In the early days of monastic institutions the founder of a religious house was usually its first superior; in every other instance the Abbot was appointed or elected. Some Abbots indeed selected their own successors, but the cases were exceptional. In many places, when a vacancy occurred, the bishop of the diocese would choose a superior from among the monks of the convent, but it appears that from the very beginning the appointment of an Abbot rested generally with the monks themselves. St. Benedict ordained (Rule, lxiv) that the Abbot should be chosen "by the general consent of the whole community, or of a small part of the community, provided its choice were made with greater wisdom and discretion." The bishop of the diocese, the Abbots and Christian men of the neighbourhood were called upon to oppose the election of an unworthy man. Every religious house professing his Rule adopted the method prescribed by the great monastic legislator, and in the course of time the right of the monks to elect their own Abbot came to be generally recognized, particularly so when it had been solemnly confirmed by the canons of the Church see Thomassin, Vetus et Nova Eccl. Disciplina, Pt. I, III, c. xxxii, no. 6). But during the Middle Ages, when monasteries had grown wealthy and powerful, kings and princes gradually encroached on the rights of the monks, until in most countries the sovereign had wholly usurped the power of nominating abbots for many of the greater houses in his realm. This interference of the court in the affairs of the cloister was in the process of time the source of many evils and the occasion of grave disorders, while in its effect, on monastic discipline it was uniformly disastrous. The rights of the cloister were finally restored by, the Council of Trent. According to the present legislation, the Abbot is elected for life by the secret suffrages of the community's professed members in sacris. To be eligible he must have all the qualifications required by the canons of the Church. It is furthermore necessary that he should be a priest, a professed member of the order, of legitimate birth, and at least twenty-five years of age. The election, to be valid, must be herd in the manner prescribed by the common law of the Church (cf. Quia propter. -- De elect., I, 6; and Cone. Trid., sess. XXV, c. vi, De reg.), and as determined in the statutes or constitutions of each congregation. In the English and American congregations the Abbot of a monastery is elected for life by a two-thirds vote of the professed members in sacris of the chapter. The Abbots themselves elect the abbot president. Exempt abbeys under the immediate jurisdiction of the Pope must, within the space of a month, apply to the Holy See for a confirmation of the election; non-exempt houses, within three months, to the bishop of the diocese. The confirmation confers upon the Abbot-elect the jus in re, and having obtained it he enters at once upon the duties and privileges of his office. A canonical perpetuity attaches to the abbatial dignity; semel abbas, semper abbas; and even after a resignation the dignity endures, and the title is retained. Benedictine abbeys in the United States and in England enjoy exemption; for America, the newly-elected Abbots are confirmed directly by the Pope; in England, however, according to the recent Constitution, "Diu quidem est" (1899), they are confirmed by the Abbot President in the name of the Holy See. V. BENEDICTION OF THE ABBOT After his ecclesiastical confirmation, the newly elected Abbot is solemnly blessed according to the rite prescribed in the "Pontificale Romanum" ( De benedictione Abbatis). By the Constitution of Benedict XIII, Commissi Nobis, 6 May, 1725, all Regular Abbots elected for life are now obliged to receive this blessing (or, at least, to thrice formally request it) within the space of a year, from the bishop of the diocese; if they fail to have the ceremony performed within the required time, they incur ipso jure a suspension from office for the period of one year. Should the petition be refused for the third time, either by the diocesan or the metropolitan, an Abbot is free to receive benediction from any bishop in communion with Rome. The Constitution at the same time expressly declares that the Abbot-elect may licitly and validly perform all the duties of his office during the interval preceding his solemn benediction. It must be noted, however, that the legislation enforced by Benedict XIII does not affect those Abbots who are privileged to receive the blessing from their regular superiors, nor those who by their election and confirmation are ipso facto regarded as blessed by the Pope. The blessing is not in se essential for the exercise of an Abbot's order and office; it confers no additional jurisdiction, and imparts no sacramental grace or character. An Abbot nullius may call upon any bishop in union with the Holy See to bestow the abbatial blessing. By the recent Constitution of Leo XIII, "Diu quidem est." 1899, the Abbots of the English Congregation are bound within six months of their election to present themselves to the ordinary of the diocese to be blessed by Apostolical authority; and, if the diocesan be prevented, they can receive the blessing from any Catholic bishop. The ceremony, which in solemnity differs but slightly from that of a bishop's consecration, takes place during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, after the Epistle. The essentials of the episcopal order are of course omitted, but before his benediction the Abbot takes the oath of allegiance to the Holy See and, like the bishop, is subjected to a canonical examination. He receives the insignia of his office -- the mitre, crosier, ring, etc. -- from the hands of the officiating prelate, and at the Offertory presents to him two small casks of wine, two loaves of bread, and two large wax tapers; he says the Mass. with the bishop and receives Holy Communion from him. During the singing of the Te Deum the newly blessed Abbot, with mitre and crosier, is conducted through the nave of the church by the two assistant Abbots, and blesses the people. Upon his returning to his seat in the sanctuary (if in his own church), the monks of the community come, one by one, and, kneeling before their new superior, pay him their homage, and receive from him the kiss of peace. The ceremony is concluded by a solemn blessing bestowed by the newly installed Abbot standing at the High Altar. According to the Pontificale Romanum, the day set apart for the function ought to be a Sunday or a feast day. The solemn rite of benediction, once conferred, need not be again received when an Abbot is translated from one monastery to another. VI. AUTHORITY OF THE ABBOT The authority of an Abbot is of two; kinds, one relating to the external government of the house, the other to the spiritual government of his subjects. The first is a paternal or domestic authority, based on the nature of religious life and on the vow of obedience, the second a power of quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, by virtue of which he is truly a prelate. His domestic authority empowers the Abbot to administer the property of the abbey, to maintain the discipline of the house, to compel the religious, even by penalties, to observe the Rule and the Constitutions of the Order, and to ordain whatever else may be essential for the preservation of peace and order in the community. The power of jurisdiction which the Abbot possesses, both in foro interno and in foro externo, authorizes him to absolve his subjects from all cases of conscience not specially reserved, and to delegate this power to the priests of his monastery; to reserve to himself the eleven eases enumerated in the Constitution of Clement VIII, "Ad futuram rei memoriam"; to inflict ecclesiastical censures; and to dispense the members of his house in certain eases for which a dispensation is usually obtained from the bishop of the diocese. He cannot, of course, dispense a religious from the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Abbots, like the monks over whom they ruled, were originally laymen, and subject to the bishop of the diocese. It was not long, however, before they were enrolled in the ranks of the clergy. Towards the close of the fifth century by far the greater number of Abbots in the East had received ordination. The change was effected more slowly in the West, but even here few were found at the end of the seventh century who had not been clothed with the dignity of the priesthood. A council held at Rome, 826, under Pope Eugene II, enjoined the ordination of Abbots, but the canon seems not to have been rigidly enforced, for as late as the eleventh century we read of some who were only deacons. The Council of Poitiers (1078) finally obliged all Abbots under pain of deprivation to receive priest's orders. (Thomassin, Pt. I, I, iii, passim.) From this time forward the power and influence of Abbots steadily increased in Church and State, until towards the close of the Middle Ages their position was everywhere regarded as one of the highest distinction. In Germany eleven Abbots held rank as princes of the Empire, and with all the rights and privileges of princes took part in the deliberation of the Diets. The Abbots of Fulda exercised even sovereign power over ten square miles round the abbey. In the Parliament of England "abbots formed the bulk of the spiritual peerage. The position held by them throughout every part of the country gave yet a further weight to their great position as noblemen and local magnates. As such they went pari passu with baron or earl of the noblest lineage. On the blazoned Roll of the Lords, the Lord Richard Whiting and the Lord Hugh Farringdon (Abbots of Glastonbury and of Reading) went hand in hand with a Howard and a Talbot" [Gasquet, Henry VIII and the English Monast. (London, 1888), I, 25]. In France, Spain, Italy, and Hungary their power and influence were equally great, and continued so generally up to the time of the Council of Trent. VII. RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES All regular Abbots have the right to give the tonsure and to confer minor orders on the professed members of their house. As early as 787 the Second Council of Nicaea permitted Abbots (provided they were priests, and had received the solemn rite of benediction) to give the tonsure and to advance their monks to the order of lector (Thomassin, Pt., I. c., I. iii, c. xvii, no. 3). The privilege granted by this Council was gradually extended until it embraced all the minor orders, and in the course of time Abbots were authorized to confer them not only on their regular but also on their secular subjects [Wernz, Jus Decretalium (Rome, 1899) ii, 47, note]. The Council of Trent, however, decreed that "it shall not henceforth be lawful for abbots, . . . howsoever exempted, . . . to confer the tonsure and minor orders on any but their regular subjects, nor shall the said abbots grant letters dimissory to any secular clerics to be ordained by others" [Can. et Decret. Conc. Trid. (ed. Richter et Schulte), p. 197]. From this decree of the Council it is quite clear that Abbots still have the right to confer the tonsure and minor orders, but it is equally clear that they may confer them lawfully only on their regular subjects. Novices, therefore. oblates, regulars of another order or congregation, and seculars cannot be advanced by the Abbot. Even the Abbots styled vere nullius, who exercise an episcopal jurisdiction in their territory, may not without a special privilege give minor orders to their secular subjects [Santi, Praelect. Jur. Can. (New York, 1898), I, 125 sq., and Can. et Decret. Cone. Trid. (ed. Richter et Schulte), 197 sq., where also the decisions of the Sacred Cong. of the Council on this subject may be found]. On the question of the validity of orders conferred by an Abbot who goes beyond the limits of the faculties extended by the Holy See, canonists disagree. Some pronounce such orders absolutely invalid, others maintain that they are illicitly conferred but nevertheless valid. The opinion of the latter seems to be sustained by various decisions of the Sacred Cong. of the Council (Santi, op. cit., p. 128 sq.; cf. Benedict XIV, De Syn. Dioec. II, c. xi, no. 13). It is a much-disputed question whether Abbots have ever been permitted to confer the subdiaconate and the diaconate. Many canonists hold that the subdiaconate, being of merely ecclesiastical institution, was formerly amounted one of the minor orders of the Church, and infer that before the time of Urban II (1099), Abbots could have given that order. But the further claim that Abbots have also conferred the diaconate cannot, apparently, be sustained, for the Bull of Innocent VIII, "Exposcit tuae devotionis" (9 April, 1489), in which this privilege is said to have been granted to certain Cistercian Abbots, makes no reference whatever to the diaconate -- "Factâ inspectione in Archivis (Vaticani) . . . bulla quidem ibidem est reperta, sed mentio de diaconatu in eâdem deest." [See Gasparri, Tract. can. de S. Ordinatione, II, n. 798; cf. also P. Pie de Langogne, "Bulle d Innoeent VIII aux abbés de Cîteaux pour les ordinations in sacris" (Etudes franciscaines, fév., 1901, 129 sq.)] Pauhölzl, in "Studien und Mittheil. aus dem Benedictiner und Cistercienser-Orden", 1884, I, 441 sq. gives the Bull and defends its authenticity. By the law of the Church Abbots may grant letters dimissorial to their regular subjects, authorizing and recommending them for ordination, but they cannot give dimissorials to seculars without incurring suspension. Abbots are furthermore privileged to dedicate their abbey church and the cemetery of the monastery, and authorized to reconcile them in case of desecration. They can bless church vestments, altar linens ciboria, monstrances, etc., for their own subjects, and consecrate altars and chalices for their own churches. As prelates, they hold the rank immediately after the bishops, being preceded only by the protonotarii participantes (see CURIA ROMANA), and by the vicar-general in his diocese. It may be added that the Abbots nullius dioecesis are preconized by the Pope in a public consistory, and that, within the territory over which they exercise jurisdiction, their name, like that of a diocesan, is inserted in the canon of the Mass. The use of the pontifical insignia -- mitre, crosier, pectoral cross, ring, gloves, and sandals -- which Abbots commonly have, is one of their most ancient privileges. It cannot be definitely ascertained when the privilege was first granted, but as early as 643 the Abbey of Bobbio in Italy is said to have obtained a constitution from Pope Theodore confirming a grant made to the Abbot by Honorius I. In England the pontifical insignia were assigned first to the Abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, in 1063 and nearly a hundred years later to the Abbot of St. Alban s. The privilege was gradually extended to other abbeys until, at the close of the Middle Ages, every monastic house of importance in Europe was presided over by a mitred Abbot. The rights of Abbots to pontificalia are now regulated by the Decree of Pope Alexander VII (S. Cong. of Rites, 27 September, 1659). By the terms of this decree the days on which an Abbot is permitted to pontificate are limited to three days in the year. The use of the seventh candle, customary at a solemn pontifical Mass, is forbidden. The Abbot's mitre is to be made of less costly material than a bishop's, and the pastoral staff is to be used with a white pendant veil. The Abbot is not to have a permanent throne in his monastic church, but is allowed, only when celebrating pontifically, to have a movable throne on two steps and a simple canopy. He has also the privilege of using mitre and crosier whenever the ritual functions require them. As a mark of special distinction, some Abbots are permitted by the Holy See to use the cappa magna, and all abbots nullius may wear a violet biretta and zucchetto. "A recent decree of the S.C.R. (13 June, 1902) has regulated in accordance with former legislation the rights of the abbots of the English Congregation to pontificalia. According to this decree the English abbots can celebrate pontifically not only in their own abbatial churches, but also without the leave of the diocesan bishop in all other churches served by their monks with cure of souls. They can also give leave to other abbots of their Congregation to pontificate in their churches. They can use the prelatical dress i.e. rochet, mozzetta and mantelletta outside their own churches" [Taunton, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), p. 3]. The Abbots of the American-Cassinese and of the American-Swiss Congregations have the same privileges. VIII. ASSISTANCE AT COUNCILS Ecclesiastical councils were attended by Abbots at a very early period. Thus, in 448, twenty-three archimandrites or Abbots assisted at that held by Flavian, the Patriarch of Constantinople, and with thirty bishops signed the condemnation of Eutyches. In France under the Merovingian kings, they frequently appeared at ecclesiastical synods as the delegates of bishops, while in Saxon England and in Spain the presence of monastic superiors at the councils of the Church was nothing uncommon. Their attendance did not, however, become a general practice in the West until after the Eighth Council of Toledo (653) where ten Abbots had been present, and had subscribed to the decrees by virtue of their pastoral charge. From the eighth century onward Abbots had a voice also in the oecumenical councils of the Church. It must be remarked that in later centuries Abbots were invited to assist at such councils and were permitted to give a decisive vote, mainly because they too, like the bishops, exercised a power of jurisdiction in the Church of God. In this connection Pope Benedict XIV says: "Item sciendum est quod quando in Conciliis generalibus soli episcopi habebant vocem definitivam, hoc fuit quia habebant administrationem populi . . . Postea additi fuere Abbates eâdem de causâ, et quia habebant administrationem subjectorum (De Syn. dioec. XIII, c. ii, no. 5). A newly appointed Abbot, before he receives the solemn benediction at the hands of the bishop takes an oath that he will discharge faithfully ail the duties of his office, specifying among others that of attending councils: "Vocatus ad synodum, veniam, nisi praepeditus fuero canonica praepeditione" (Pontif. Rom., De Benedictione Abbatis). In the performance of this duty the Abbot must be guided by the regulations of the sacred canons. According to the present practice of the Church all Abbots nullius dioecesis, or with quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, have a right to assist at oecumenical councils. They have moreover, the right of a decisive vote, and may subscribe to the decrees. The Abbots-President of congregations and the abbots-general of an entire order are also present and cast a decisive vote, though only by virtue of privilege. Other classes of Abbots were not admitted to the Vatican Council in 1870. In provincial synods and in plenary or national councils the Abbots nullius have de jure a decisive vote, and sign the decrees after the bishops. Attendance at these synods is for them not merely a right, but also an obligation. By the terms of the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIV, De ref., c. ii) they are obliged, "like the bishops who are not subject to any archbishop, to make choice of some neighbouring metropolitan, at whose synods they shall be bound to appear," and they are further directed "to observe and to cause to be observed whatsoever shall be therein ordained." Though other Abbots must not be called de jure to provincial or to national councils, it is yet the custom, in most countries, to invite also the mitred Abbots who have actual jurisdiction only over their monasteries. Thus, at the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore (1866) both the Abbot of the Cistercians and the Abbot-President of the American-Cassinese Benedictines were present, and signed the decrees. At the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1884) six mitred Abbots assisted, two of whom, the Abbots-President of the American-Cassinese and of the American-Swiss Congregations of Benedictines, exercised the right of a decisive vote, while the other four had only a consultative voice and subscribed to the decrees merely as assenting, not as defining. And this is the practice of the Church generally. Exempt Abbots have no obligation to attend diocesan synods. IX. DISTRIBUTION OF ABBOTS The Black Monks of St. Benedict have at present seven Abbots nullius dioecesis, located as follows: Italy, 4; Switzerland, 1; Hungary, 1; and West Australia, 1; 86 Abbots exercising actual jurisdiction over their monasteries: Austria, 19; United States, 14; France, 9 (before the Law of Associations); Italy, 9; Germany, 7; England, 6; Hungary, 5; Switzerland, 4; Brazil, S. A., 3; Holland, 3; Spain, 3; Belgium, 2; Scotland l; West Australia 1. They have also nine titular, and three resigned Abbots. The Cistercian Abbots of the Three Observances number fifty-seven. Of these the Cistercians of the Common and of the Lesser Observance have nineteen: Italy, 3; Belgium, 2; Austro-Hungarian Province, 8; and the Swiss-German Congregation 3. The Congregation of Sénanque, to which the three Abbots of the Lesser Observance belong, is now dispersed by the Associations Law of France. The Cistercians of the Strict Observance (Trappists) have thirty-eight: France, 18 (not expelled); Belgium, 4; Italy, 3; United States, Austria, and Ireland, two each; Canada, China, England, Germany, Holland, and Spain, one each. The Cistercians have also two Abbots nullius dioecesis. In Italy, the Camaldolese Vallombrosans, Silvestrines, and Olivetans, all branches of the Benedictine Order, have each a small number of Abbots. Monte Oliveto Maggiore belonging to the Olivetans is an abbey nullius dioecesis. Some few houses of the various Congregations of Canons Regular, of the Antonians, of the Armenian Benedictines, and of the Basilians, are also under the direction of Abbots. Mitred Abbots in the United States are the Abbots of St. Vincent's Arch-Abbey, Beatty, Pa.; St. John's Abbey, Collegeville, Minn.; St. Benedict's Abbey Atchison, Kan.; St. Mary's Abbey, Newark, N. J.; Maryhelp Abbey, Belmont, N. C.; St. Bernard's Abbey, St. Bernard, Ala.; St. Procopius's Abbey Chicago, Ill.; St. Leo's Abbey, St. Leo, Fla.; St. Meinrad's Abbey, St. Meinrad, Ind.; Immaculate Conception Abbey, Conception, Mo.; New Subiaco Abbey, Spielerville, Ark.; St. Joseph's Abbey, Covington, La.; St. Mary's Abbey, Richardton, N. Dak.; St. Benedict's Abbey, Mount Angel, Ore.; Gethsemani Abbey, Ky.; New Melleray Abbey, near Dubuque, Iowa; and the Sacred Heart Abbey, Oklahoma. Mitred Abbots in England are the Titular Abbot of Reading, the Abbot of St. Gregory's Abbey, Downside, Bath; St. Lawrence's Abbey, Ampleforth York; St. Edmund's Abbey of Douay, Woolhampton, Reading; St. Augustine's Abbey, Ramsgate; St. Thomas's Abbey, Erdington, Birmingham; Buckfast Abbey, Buckfastleigh, Devon; St. Michael's Abbey, Farnborough (Benedictines of Solesmes) Abbey of St. Pierre, Appuldurcombe, Isle of Wight (Benedictines of Solesmes); St. Bernard's Abbey Coalville, near Leicester (Cistercian), The Canons Regular of the Lateran, Spettisbury, Dorsetshire. In Scotland; St. Benedict's Abbey, Fort Augustus, Inverness. In Ireland: Mt. Melleray Abbey, Cappoquin, Mt. St. Joseph's Abbey, Roscrea, Tipperary. In West Australia: Holy Trinity Abbey, New Norcia (nullius dioecesis). In Canada: Abbey of Notre Dame du Lac, Lac des Deux Montagnes. Rule of St. Benedict in P.L., LXVI, 933 sq. (ed. SCHMIDT Ratisbon, 1880; 2d ed., ibid., 1893) GASQUET, English Monastic Life (London, 1904); TAUNTON, the English Black Monks of St. Benedict (London, 1898); IDEM, The Law of the Church (St. Louis, 1906); DIGBY, Mores Catholici; The Ages of Faith (London, 1845 reprint, New York, 1906 Bk. X, vol. III); MONTALEMBERT, The Monks of the West from St. Benedict to St. Bernard (ed. GASQUET, New York 1896) DOYLE, The Teaching of St. Benedict (London, 1887), DUGDALE, Monasticon (London, 1817) MABILLON, Annales Ordinis S. Benedicti (Lucca, 1739), I, ii; THOMASSIN, Vetus et Nova Eccl. Discipl. (Mainz, 1787) MARTÈNE, De Antiq. Eccl. Ritibus (Bassano, 1788), II; Du CANGE, Gloss. Med. et Infim. Latinit., s. v. Abbas; FERRARIS, Prompta Bibl. Can. (Rome, 1885) TAMBURINI, De Jure et Privileg. Abbat. Praelat. (Cologne, 1691) FAGNANI, Jus Canon., s. Commentaria in V Libros Decretalium (ibid., 1704) LUCIDI, De Visitatione Sacrorum Liminum (Rome, 1878); BESSE, Les moines d orient (Paris, 1900); CHAMARD, Abbés au moyen âge, in Rev. des questions historiques (1885), XXXVIII, 71-108 BESSE, in Dict. d'archéol. chrét. (Paris, 1903) LANGOGNE, in Dict. de théol. cath., s.v. Abbés (Paris, 1905) SÄGMÜLLER, Lehrb. des kathol. Kirchenrechts (Freiburg, 1905) HERGENR THER-HOLWECK, Lehrb. des kathol. Kirchenrechts (ibid. 1905); HEUSER in Kirchenlex., s.v. Abt (2d ed., ibid., 1882) For an extensive bibliography, see SCHERER, Handbuch des Kirchenrechts (Gratz, 1886), II, 729 sq. 753. THOMAS OESTREICH Henry Abbot Henry Abbot Layman, martyred at York, 4 July, 1597, pronounced Venerable in 1886. His acts are thus related by Challoner: A certain Protestant minister, for some misdemeanour put into York Castle, to reinstate himself in the favour of his superiors, insinuated himself into the good opinion of the Catholic prisoners, by pretending a deep sense of repentance, and a great desire of embracing the Catholic truth . . . So they directed him, after he was enlarged, to Mr. Henry Abbot, a zealous convert who lived in Holden in the same country, to procure a priest to reconcile him . . . Mr. Abbot carried him to Carlton to the house of Esquire Stapleton, but did not succeed in finding a priest. Soon after, the traitor having got enough to put them all in danger of the law, accused them to the magistrates . . . They confessed that they had explained to him the Catholic Faith, and upon this they were all found guilty and sentenced to die. The others, Errington, Knight, and Gibson, were executed on 29 November, 1596; Abbot was reprieved till the next July. PATRICK RYAN Methods of Abbreviation Methods of Abbreviation The use of abbreviations is due, in part, to exigencies arising from the nature of the materials employed in the making of records, whether stone, marble, bronze, or parchment. Lapidaries engravers, and copyists are under the same necessity of making the most of the space at their disposal. Such abbreviations, indeed, are seldom met with at the beginning of the Christian era material of all kinds was plentiful and there was consequently, no need to be sparing in the use of it. By the third or fourth century, however, it had grown to be scarce and costly, and it became the artist's aim to inscribe long texts on surfaces of somewhat scanty proportions. We shall not pause here to discuss the use of abbreviations in ordinary writing. The Romans possessed an alphabet known by the name of Notae Tironienses, which served the same purpose as our modern systems of Stenography. Its use necessitated a special course of study and there is still much uncertainty as to the significance of the characters employed. It is when we come to consider the subject of inscriptions cut in stone that we find the most frequent use of abbreviations. At certain late periods for example, in Spain in the Middle Ages this custom becomes abused to such an extent as to result in the invention of symbols which are undecipherable. In the best period of epigraphy certain rules are strictly observed. The abbreviations in common use fall under two chief heads: + The reduction of the word to its initial letter; + The reduction of a word to its first letters in a bunch or to several letters taken at intervals in the body a the word and set side by aide. This latter arrangement is almost conclusively Christian, whereas in heathen inscriptions the number of letters left in the abbreviation is more or less limited, yet no intermediate letter is omitted. The following readings may be noted: PON., PONT., PONTF., for Pontifex; DP., DEP., DPS., for Depositus; MCP for Municipii. Occasionally a phrase which has become stale by constant use and has grown into a formula, is rarely found in any other form than that of its abbreviation e.g. D.M. for Diis Manibus, IHS for Jesus, just as we have kept R.I.P. for requiescat in pace. Lastly a whole epitaph is often met with on tombs where the husband's epitaph to his wife takes the following form: DE qua N(ullum) D(olorem) A(cceperat) N(isi) M(ortis). Another form of Abbreviation consisted in doubling the last consonant of the word to be shortened as many times as there were persons alluded to, e.g. AVG for Augustus, AVGG for Augusti duo. Stone cutters however, soon began to take liberties with this rule, and, instead of Putting COSS for Consulibus duobus, invented the form CCSS. Still, when there was occasion to refer to three or four people this doubling of the last consonant gave way of necessity, in abbreviations, to the simple sign of the plural. A horizontal line over a letter or set of letters was also much used, and was destined indeed, to become almost universal in the Middle Ages. There is never any difficulty in settling the date of monuments where this sign of abbreviation occurs; the undulating line, or one curved at each end and rising in the middle only came into use at a comparatively late period. Certain marks of Abbreviation have had so widespread a use as to merit special note. The ancient liturgical manuscripts which contain recensions of Masses, and are known as Sacramentaries all have the letters VD at the beginning of the Preface, set side by side and joined by a transverse bar. Mabillon interprets this monogram as being that of the formula, "Vere dignum et justum est, aequum et salutare", an interpretation which is certainly the correct one. According to the various manuscripts, the monogram stands for the words vere dignum, or else for the whole formula; in the majority of instances the letters VD stand for the phrase Vere dignum et Justum est, which is followed by the rest of the context, oequum et, etc. In a large number of manuscripts these letters VD have fired the imagination of illuminators And copyists. It is however, impossible to enter into a general description of the subject. Under a growth of arabesques of foliage, of fancies of all kinds the outline of the two letters is sometimes hard to distinguish. The symbol encroaches more and more, and grows from a mere initial into an ornamental page. The essential type varies little, though variants of some importance are met with. It was inevitable that medieval writers should build a whole system of mysticism and allegory on the VD of the Preface. John Beleth rector of the theological school at Pads, devised an interpretation which found acceptance. The D, he wrote, a letter completely closed, signifies the Godhead, Which has neither beginning nor end; the half open V means the Manhood of Christ, which had a beginning, but has no end; the bar which intersects the upright lines of the VD and forms a cross, teaches us that the cross makes us fit for the life of God. Fancies of the same kind are to be found in Sicardus of Cremona and in Durandus of Mende. Various manuscripts contain hundreds of variable prefaces; the initial letters however are not drawn on a uniform pattern and tie chief attempts at ornamentation are invariably confined to the Praefatio Communis immediately preceding the Canon of the Mass. The first two letters of the Canon TE have also been made the theme of various decorations, though less curious and less varied than those above referred to. A word may be said concerning the abbreviation D.O.M., sometimes seen over the doors of our churches and which whatever may be said to the contrary, has never been a Christian symbol. The formula in full is Deo Optimo Maximo and referred originally Jupiter. The abbreviation, IHV, is found on a great number of different objects: ancient gems, coins, epitaphs, dedications and diplomas. The symbol IHS was destined to endure for many ages, but it is only since the time of St. Bernardine of Sienna that it has come into such widespread use. It is impossible, with the information available, to say whether it is of Greek or Latin origin. Lastly, the abbreviation, XM(GAMMA), meaning, Christon Maria genna is often found on monuments of eastern origin. LECLERCQ, in Dict. d arch ol. chr t. et de liturgie, I, 155-183, s.v.; MURATORI, Novus thesaurus veterum inscriptionum (Milan, 1739); DE ROSSI, Inscr. christ. urb. Romae (Rome, 1861); DUCHESNE, Origines du culte chr tien (Paris, 1898); ZELL, Handbuch der r mischen Epigraphik, 1850-57. H. LECLERCQ Ecclesiastical Abbreviations Ecclesiastical Abbreviations The words most commonly abbreviated at all times are proper names, titles (official or customary), of persons or corporations, and words of frequent occurrence. A good list of those used in Roman Republican and early Imperial times may be seen in Egbert's Latin Inscriptions (New York, 1896), 417-459. The Jewish scribes and Talmudic scholars also had frequent recourse to abbreviations. Between the seventh and ninth centuries the ancient Roman system of abbreviations gave way to a more difficult one that gradually grew up in the monastic houses and in the chanceries of the new Teutonic kingdoms. Merovingian, Lombard, and Anglo-Saxon scripts offer each their own abbreviations, not to speak of the unique scotica manus or libri scottice scripti (Irish hand, or books written in the medieval Irish hand). Eventually such productive centres of technical manuscripts as the Papal Chancery, the theological schools of Paris and Oxford, and the civil-law school of Bologna set the standards of abbreviations for all Europe. The medieval manuscripts abound in abbreviations, owing in part to the abandonment of the uncial, or quasi-uncial, and the almost universal use of the cursive, hand. The medieval writer inherited a few from Christian antiquity; others he invented or adapted, in order to save time and parchment. They are found especially in manuscripts of scholastic theology and canon law, annals and chronicles, the Roman law, and in administrative documents, civil and privileges, bulls, rescripts). They multiplied with time, and were never so numerous as on the eve of the discovery of printing; many of the early printed books offer this peculiarity, together with other characteristics of the manuscript page. The development of printing brought about the abandonment of many abbreviations, while it suggested and introduced new ones a process also favoured by the growth of ecclesiastical legislation, the creation of new offices, etc. There was less medieval abbreviation in the text of books much used on public occasions, e.g. missals, antiphonaries, bibles; in one way or another the needs of students seem to have been the chief cause of the majority of medieval abbreviations. The means of abbreviation were usually full points or dots (mostly in Roman antiquity), the semicolon (eventually conventionalized), lines (horizontal, perpendicular, oblong, wavy curves, and commas). Vowel-sounds were frequently written not after, but over, the consonants. Certain letters, like p and q, that occur with extreme. frequency, e.g. in prepositions and terminations, became the source of many peculiar abbreviations; similarly, frequently recurring words like et (and), est (is). Habit and convenience are today the principal motives for using abbreviations. Most of those in actual use fall under one or other of the following heads: I. Administrative; II. Liturgical; III. Scholastic; IV. Chronological. I. The first class of abbreviations includes those used in the composition of Pontifical documents. They were once very numerous, and lists of them may be seen in the works quoted below (e.g. Quantin, Prou). It may be well to state at once that since 29 December, 1878, by order of Leo XIII, the great papal documents ( Litterae Apostolicae) are no longer written in the old Gothic hand known as bollatico; all abbreviations, with the exception of a few obvious ones, like S.R.E., were abolished by the same authority (Acta S. Sedis, XI, 465-467). In the transaction of ordinary business the Roman Congregations are wont to use certain brief and pithy formulas (e.g. Negative = "No"; Negative et amplius = "No with emphasis"). They are not, correctly speaking, abbreviations. For a list of these see CANON LAW. This class includes also the abbreviations for the names of most sees. The full Latin titles of all existing (Latin) dioceses may be seen in the Roman annual, "Gerarchia Cattolica", a complete list of the Latin names of all known dioceses (extant or extinct) is found in the large folio work of the Comte de Mas Latrie, "Trésor de chronologie, d'histoire et de géographie" (Paris, 1884). For the same purpose the reader may also consult the episcopal catalogues of the Benedictine Gams, "Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae" (Ratisbon, 1873-86), and the Franciscan Conrad Eubel, "Hierarchia Catholica Medii Ævi" (Münster, 1898-1902). Under this general heading may be included all abbreviated forms of addresses in ordinary intercourse, whether of individuals or of members of religious orders, congregations, institutes, to which may be added the forms of addresses usual for members of Catholic lay societies and the Papal orders of merit. (See CATHOLIC SOCIETIES, ORDERS OF MERIT.) The abbreviations of the titles of Roman Congregations, and of the individual canonical ecclesiastical authorities, belong also to this class. II. A second class of abbreviations includes those used in the description of liturgical acts or the directions for their performance, e.g. the Holy Mass. the Divine Office (Breviary), the ecclesiastical devotions, etc. Here may also be classed the abbreviated forms for the name of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost; also for the names of the Blessed Virgin, the saints, etc.; likewise abbreviations used in the administration of the Sacraments, mortuary epitaphs, etc. (to which class belong the numerous Catacomb inscriptions); finally some miscellaneous abbreviations like those used in the publication of documents concerning beatification and canonization. III. In the third class belong scholastic abbreviations, used to designate honorific titles acquired in the schools, to avoid the repetition of lengthy titles of books and reviews, or to facilitate reference to ecclesiastical and civil legislation. IV. In the fourth class of abbreviations belong all such as are used to describe the elements of the year, civil or ecclesiastical. ABBREVIATIONS USED IN APOSTOLIC RESCRIPTS Absoluo. -- Absolutio ("Absolution") Alr. -- Aliter ("Otherwise") Aplica. -- Apostolica ("Apostolic") Appatis. -- Approbatis ("Having been approved") Archiepus. -- Archiepiscopus ("Archbishop") Aucte. -- Auctoritate ("By the Authority") Canice. -- Canonice ("Canonically") Card. -- Cardinalis ("Cardinal") Cens. -- Censuris ("Censures" -- abl. or dat. case) Circumpeone. -- Circumspectione ("Circumspection" -- abl. case) Coione. -- Communione ("Communion" -- abl. case) Confeone. -- Confessione ("Confession" -- abl. case) Consciae. -- Conscientiae ("Of [or to] conscience") Constbus -- Constitutionibus ("Constitutions" -- abl. or dat. case) Discreoni. -- Discretioni ("To the Discretion") Dispensao. -- Dispensatio ("Dispensation") Dnus -- Dominus ("Lord", "Sir", or "Mr.") Ecclae. -- Ecclesiae ("Of [or to] the Church") Ecclis. -- Ecclesiasticis ("Ecclesiastical") Effum. -- Effectum ("Effect") Epus. -- Episcopus ("Bishop") Excoe. -- Excommunicatione ("Excommunication" -- abl. case) Exit. -- Existit ("Exists") Fr. -- Frater ("Brother") Frum. -- Fratrum ("Of the Brothers") Gnalis -- Generalis ("General") Humil. -- Humiliter ("Humbly") Humoi. -- Hujusmodi ("Of this kind") Igr. -- Igitur ("Therefore") Infraptum. -- Infrascriptum ("Written below") Intropta. -- Introscripta ("Written within") Irregulte. -- Irregularitate ("Irregularity" -- abl. case) Lia. -- Licentia ("License") Litma. -- Legitima ("Lawful") Lre. -- Litterae ("Letters") Lte. -- Licite ("Lawfully", or "licitly") Magro. -- Magistro ("Master" -- dat. or abl. case) Mir. -- Misericorditer ("Mercifully") Miraone. -- Miseratione ("Pity" -- abl. case) Mrimonium. -- Matrimonium ("Matrimony") Nultus. -- Nullatenus ("Nowise") Ordinaoni. -- Ordinationi ("Ordination" -- dat. case) Ordio. -- Ordinario ("Ordinary" -- dat. or abl. case) Pbr. -- Presbyter ("Priest") Penia. -- Poenitentia ("Penance", or "repentance") Peniaria. -- Poenitentiaria ("Penitentiary"; i.e. Bureau of the Apostolic Penitentiary) Pntium. -- Praesentium ("Of those present", or, "Of this present writing") Poe. -- Posse ("To be able", or, "The ability to do a thing") Pontus. -- Pontificatus ("Pontificate") PP. -- Papa ("Pope") Pr. -- Pater ("Father") Pror. -- Procurator Ptur. -- Praefertur ("Is preferred", or, "Is brought forward") Ptus. -- Praefatus ("Aforesaid") Qd. -- Quod ("Because", "That", or, "Which") Qmlbt. -- Quomodolibet ("In any manner whatsoever") Qtnus. -- Quatenus ("In so far as") Relione. -- Religione ("Religion", or, "Religious Order" -- abl. case) Rlari. -- Regulari ("Regular") Roma. -- Romana ("Roman") Salri. -- Salutari ("Salutary") Snia. -- Sententia ("Opinion") Sntae., Stae. -- Sanctae ("Holy", or, "Saints" -- feminine) Spealer. Specialiter ("Specially") Spualibus Spiritualibus ("In spiritual matters") Supplioni. Supplicationibus ("Supplication" -- dat. or abl. case) Thia, Theolia. Theologia ("Theology") Tli. Tituli ("Titles") Tm. -- Tantum ("So much", or, "Only") Tn. -- Tamen ("Nevertheless") Venebli -- Venerabili ("Venerable") Vrae. -- Vestrae ("Your") ABBREVIATIONS IN GENERAL USE, CHIEFLY ECCLESIASTICAL A.B. -- Artium Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Arts") Ab. -- Abbas ("Abbot") Abp. -- Archbishop Abs. -- Absens ("Absent") A.C. -- Auditor Camerae (Auditor of the Papal Treasury) AC -- Ante Christum ("Before Christ") ACN -- Ante Christum Natum ("Before the Birth of Christ") A.D. -- Anno Domini ("Year of Our Lord") a.d. -- ante diem ("The day before") Adm. Rev. -- Admodum Reverendus ("Very Reverend") Adv. -- Adventus ("Advent") Alb. -- Albus ("White" -- Breviary) al. -- alii, alibi, alias ("others", "elsewhere", "otherwise") A.M. -- Anno Mundi ("Year of the World") A.M. -- Artium Magister ("Master of Arts") A.M.D.G. -- Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam ("For the greater glory of God") An. -- Annus ("Year") Ann. -- Anni ("Years") Ana, Ant. -- Antiphon Apost. -- Apostolus ("Apostle") Ap. Sed. -- Apostolica Sedes ("Apostolic See") Ap. Sed. Leg. -- Apostolicae Sedis Legatus ("Legate of the Apostolic See") Archiep. -- Archiepiscopus ("Archbishop") Archid. -- Archidiaconus ("Archdeacon") Archiprb. -- Archipresbyter ("Archpriest") A.R.S. -- Anno Reparatae Salutis ("In the year of Our Redemption") A.U. -- Alma Urbs ("Beloved City" -- i.e., Rome) Authen. -- Authentica ("Authentic" -- e.g. letters) Aux. -- Auxilium, Auxilio ("Help", "With the help of") B.A. -- Baccalaureus Artium ("Bachelor of Arts") B. BB. -- Beatus, Beati ("Blessed") B.C. -- Before Christ B.C.L. -- Baccalaureus Civilis [or Canonicae] Legis ("Bachelor of Civil [or Canon] Law") B.D. -- Bachelor of Divinity B.F. -- Bona Fide ("In Good Faith") Ben. -- Benedictio ("Blessing") Benevol. -- Benevolentia ("Benevolence") Bon. Mem. -- Bonae Memoriae ("Of Happy Memory") B.P. -- Beatissime Pater ("Most Holy Father") Bro. -- Brother B. Se. -- Baccalaureus Scientiarum ("Bachelor of Sciences") B.U.J. -- Baccalaureus Utriusque Juris ("Bachelor of Both Laws" -- i.e., civil and canon) B.T. -- Baccalaureus Theologiae ("Bachelor of Theology") B.V. -- Beatitudo Vestra ("Your Holiness") B.V. -- Beata Virgo ("Blessed Virgin") B.V.M. -- Beata Virgo Maria ("Blessed Virgin Mary") Cam. -- Camera (Papal Treasury) Cam. Ap. -- Camera Apostolica ("Apostolic Camera" -- i.e. Papal Treasury) Can. -- Canonicus Cane. -- Cancellarius ("Chancellor") Cap. -- Capitulum ("Little Chapter" -- Breviary) Cap. de seq. -- Capitulum de Sequenti ("Little chapter of the following feast" -- Breviary) Capel. -- Capella ("Chapel") Caus. -- Causa ("Cause") C.C. -- Curatus ("Curate" -- used chiefly in Ireland) CC. VV. -- Clarissimi Viri ("Illustrious Men") Cen. Eccl. -- Censura Ecclesiastica ("Ecclesiastical Censure") Cla. -- Clausula ("Clause") Cl., Clico. -- Clericus, Clerico ("Cleric") Clun. -- Cluniacenses ("Monks of Cluny") C.M. -- Causa Mortis ("On occasion of death") Cod. -- Codex (Manuscript) Cog. Leg. -- Cognatio Legalis ("Legal Cognation") Cog. Spir. -- Cognatio Spiritualis ("Spiritual Cognation") Coll. Cone. -- Collectio Conciliorum ("Collection of the Councils") Comm. Prec. -- Commemoratio Praecedentis ("Commemoration of the preceding feast" -- Breviary) Comm. Seq. -- Commemoratio Sequentis ("Commemoration of the following feast" -- Breviary) Compl. -- Completorium ("Compline" -- Breviary) Con. -- Contra ("against") Cone. -- Concilium ("Council") Conf. -- Confessor Conf. Doct. -- Confessor et Doctor (Breviary) Conf. Pont. -- Confessor Pontifex ("Confessor and Bishop" -- Breviary) Cons. -- Consecratio ("Consecration") Consecr. -- Consecratus ("Consecrated") Const. Ap. -- Constitutio Apostolica ("Apostolic Constitution") Cr. -- Credo ("Creed" -- Breviary) D. -- Dominus ("Lord") d. -- dies ("day") D.C.L. -- Doctor Civilis [or Canonicae] Legis ("Doctor of Civil [or Canon] Law") D.D. -- Doctores ("Doctors") D.D. -- Donum dedit; Dedicavit ("Gave", "dedicated") D.D. -- Doctor Divinitatis ("Doctor of Divinity" -- i.e. Theology) Dec. -- Decanus ("Dean") Def. -- Defunctus ("Deceased") D.G. -- Dei Gratia ("By the Grace of God") D.N. -- Dominus Noster ("Our Lord") D.N.J.C. -- Dominus Noster Jesus Christus ("Our Lord Jesus Christ") DN, DNS, DNUS -- Dominus ("Lord") Doct. -- Doctor (Breviary) Dom. -- Dominica ("Sunday") D.O.M. -- Deo Optimo Maximo ("To God, the Best and Greatest") Doxol. -- Doxologia ("Doxology" -- Breviary) D.R. -- Decanus Ruralis ("Rural Dean") DS -- Deus ("God") D.Se. -- Doctor Scientiarum ("Doctor of Sciences") D.V. -- Deo Volente ("God willing") Dupl. -- Duplex ("Double feast" -- Breviary) Dupl. Maj. -- Duplex Major ("Double Major feast") Dupl. I. Cl. -- Duplex Primae Classis ("Double First Class feast" -- Breviary) Dupl. II. Cl. -- Duplex Secundae Classis ("Double Second Class feast" -- Breviary) Eccl. -- Ecclesiasticus ("Ecclesiastic") E., Eccl. -- Ecclesia ("The Church") El. -- Electio, Electus ("Election", "Elect") Emus -- Eminentissimus ("Most Eminent") EPS, EP., Episc. -- Episcopus ("Bishop") Et. -- Etiam ("Also, Even") Evang. -- Evangelium ("Gospel" -- Breviary) Ex. -- Extra ("Outside of") Exe. -- Excommunicatus, Excommunicatio ("Excommunicated, Excommunication") Fel. Mem. -- Felicis Memoriae ("Of Happy Memory") Fel. Rec. -- Felicis Recordationis ("Of Happy Memory") Fer. -- Feria ("Weekday") Fr., F. -- Frater, Frere ("Brother") Fund. -- Fundatio ("Foundation") Gen. -- Generalis ("General") Gl. -- Gloria ("Glory to God", etc.) Gr. -- Gratia ("Grace") Grad. -- Gradus ("Grade") Grat. -- Gratias ("Thanks"); or Gratis ("Without expense") hebd. -- Hebdomada ("Week") Hom. -- Homilia ("Homily" -- Breviary) hor. -- hora ("hour") IC -- Jesus (first and third letters of His name in Greek) Id. -- Idus ("Ides") Igr. -- Igitur ("Therefore") I.H.S. -- Iesus Hominum Salvator ("Jesus Saviour of Men" -- usual interpretation). Really a faulty Latin transliteration of the first three letters of JESUS in Greek (IHS for IHC). Ind. -- Indictio ("Indiction") Ind. -- Index Inq. -- Inquisitio ("Inquisition") i.p.i. -- in partibus infidelium ("among the infidels") Is. -- Idus ("Ides") J.C. -- Jesus Christus ("Jesus Christ") J.C.D. -- Juris Canonici Doctor, Juris Civilis Doctor ("Doctor of Canon Law", "Doctor of Civil Law") J.D. -- Juris Doctor ("Doctor of Law") J.M.J. -- Jesus, Maria, Joseph ("Jesus, Mary, Joseph") Jo., Joann. -- Joannes ("John") J.U.D. -- Juris Utriusque Doctor ("Doctor of Both Laws" -- Civil and Canon) Jud. -- Judicium ("Judgment") J.U.L. -- Juris Utriusque Licentiatus ("Licentiate of Both Laws") Jur. -- Juris ("Of Law") Kal. -- Kalendae ("Calends") Laic. -- Laicus ("Layman") Laud. -- Laudes ("Lauds" -- Breviary) L.C.D. -- Legis Civilis Doctor ("Doctor of Civil Law") l.c.; loc. cit. -- Loco citato ("at the place already cited") Lect. -- Lectio ("Lesson") Legit. -- Legitime, Legitimus ("Legally", "legitimate") L.H.D. -- Litterarum Humaniorum Doctor ("Doctor of Literature") Lib., Lo. -- Liber, Libro ("Book", "In the book") Lic. -- Licentia, Licentiatus ("License", "Licentiate") Litt. -- Littera ("Letter") LL.B. -- Legum Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Laws") LL.D. -- Legum Doctor ("Doctor of Laws") LL.M. -- Legum Magister ("Master of Laws") Loc. -- Locus ("Place") Lov. -- Lovanium ("Louvain") Lovan. -- Lovanienses (Theologians of Louvain) L.S. -- Loco Sigilli ("Place of the Seal") Lud. -- Ludovicus M. -- Maria ("Mary") M.A. -- Magister Artium ("Master of Arts") Mag. -- Magister ("Master") Mand. -- Mandamus ("We command") Mand. Ap. -- Mandatum Apostolicum ("Apostolic Mandate", e.g. for a bishop's consecration) Mart., M., MM. -- Martyr, Martyres ("Martyr", "Martyrs" -- Breviary) Mat. -- Matutinum ("Matins" -- Breviary) Matr. -- Matrimonum ("Marriage") Mgr. -- Monseigneur, Monsignore ("My Lord") Miss. -- Missa ("Mass" -- Breviary); Missionarius ("Missionary") Miss. Apost., M.A. -- Missionarius Apostolicus ("Missionary Apostolic") M.R. -- Missionarius Rector ("Missionary Rector") m.t.v. -- mutatur terminatio versiculi ("the termination of the little verse is changed" -- Breviary) Nativ., D.N.J.C. -- Nativitas Domini Nostri Jesu Christi ("Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ") N. D. -- Nostra Domina, Notre Dame ("Our Lady") Nigr. -- Niger ("Black" -- Breviary) No. -- Nobis ("to us", "for us") Nob. -- Nobilis, Nobiles ("Noble", "Nobles") Noct. -- Nocturnum ("Nocturn") Non. -- Nonae ("Nones") Nostr. -- Noster, nostri ("Our", "of our") Not. -- Notitia ("Knowledge") N.S. -- Notre Seigneur, Nostro Signore ("Our Lord") N.S. -- New Style N.T. -- Novum Testamentum ("New Testament") Ntri. -- Nostri ("Of our") Nup. -- Nuptiae ("Nuptials") Ob. -- Obiit ("Died") Oct. -- Octava ("Octave" -- Breviary) Omn. -- Omnes, Omnibus ("All", "to all") Op. Cit. -- Opere Citato ("In the work cited") Or. -- Oratio ("Prayer" -- Breviary) Ord. -- Ordo, Ordinatio, Ordinarius ("Order", "Ordination", "Ordinary") Or. Orat. -- Orator ("Petitioner"), Oratorium ("Oratory") O.S. -- Old Style O.T. -- Old Testament Oxon. -- Oxonium, Oxonienses ("Oxford", "Theologians or Scholars of Oxford") P. -- Pater, Pere ("Father") Pa. -- Papa ("Pope"); Pater ("Father") Pact. -- Pactum ("Agreement") Pasch. -- Pascha ("Easter" -- Breviary) Patr. -- Patriarcha ("Patriarch") Pent. -- Pentecostes ("Pentecost" -- Breviary) Ph.B. -- Philosophiae Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Philosophy") Ph.D. -- Philosophiae Doctor ("Doctor of Philosophy") Phil. -- Philosophia ("Philosophy") Ph.M. -- Philosophiae Magister ("Master of Philosophy") P.K. -- Pridie Kalendas ("The day before the Calends") Poenit. -- Poenitentia ("Penance") Poenit Ap. -- Poenitentiaria Apostolica ("Office of the Apostolic Penitentiary") Pont. -- Pontifex ("Pontiff", i.e. Bishop -- Breviary) Pont. -- Pontificatus ("Pontificate") Pont. Max. -- Pontifex Maximus ("Supreme Pontiff") Poss. -- Possessor, Possessio ("Possessor", "Possession") PP. -- Papa ("Pope"); Pontificum ("Of the popes") P.P. -- Parochus ("Parish Priest" -- used mostly in Ireland) PP. AA. -- Patres Amplissimi ("Cardinals") P.P.P. -- Propria Pecunia Posuit ("Erected at his own expense") P.R. -- Permanens Rector ("Permanent Rector") Praef. -- Praefatio ("Preface" of the Mass -- Breviary) Presbit. -- Presbyter, Priest Prof. -- Professus, Professio, Professor ("Professed", "Profession", "Professor") Prop. Fid. -- Propaganda Fide (Congregation of the Propaganda, Rome) Propr. -- Proprium ("Proper" -- Breviary) Prov. -- Provisio, Provisum ("Provision", "Provided") Ps. -- Psalmus ("Psalm") Pub., Publ. -- Publicus, Publice ("Public", "Publicly") Purg. Can. -- Purgatio Canonica ("Canonical Disculpation") Quadrag. -- Quadragesima ("Lent", also the "Fortieth day" before Easter -- Breviary) Quinquag. -- Quinquagesima (The "Fiftieth day" before Easter -- Breviary) R. -- Responsorium ("Responsory" -- Breviary) R. -- Roma (Rome) Rescr. -- Rescriptum ("Rescript") R.D. -- Rural Dean Req. -- Requiescat ("May he [or she] rest", i.e. in peace) Resp. -- Responsum ("Reply") R.I.P. -- Requiescat In Pace ("May he or she rest in peace") Rit. -- Ritus ("Rite", "Rites") Rom. -- Romanus, Romana ("Roman") R. P. -- Reverendus Pater, Reverend Pere ("Reverend Father") RR. -- Rerum ("Of Things, Subjects" -- e.g. SS. RR. Ital., Writers on Italian [historical] subjects); Regesta Rt. Rev. -- Right Reverend Rub. -- Ruber ("Red" -- Breviary) Rubr. -- Rubrica ("Rubric") S., Sacr. -- Sacrum ("Sacred") Sab., Sabb. -- Sabbatum ("Sabbath", Saturday) Saec. -- Saeculum (Century) Sal. -- Salus, Salutis ("Salvation", "of Salvation") Salmant. -- Salmanticenses (Theologians of Salamanca) S.C. -- Sacra Congregatio ("Sacred Congregation") S.C.C. -- Sacra Congregatio Concilii ("Sacred Congregation of the Council", i.e. of Trent) S.C.EE.RR. -- Sacra Congregatio Episcoporum et Regularium ("Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars") S.C.I. -- Sacra Congregatio Indicis ("Sacred Congregation of the Index") S.C.P.F. -- Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide ("Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith") SCS -- Sanctus ("Saint") s.d. -- sine datâ (undated book) S.D. -- Servus Dei (Servant of God) Semid. -- Semiduplex ("Semi" double feast -- Breviary) Septuag -- Septuagesima ("Seventieth day" before Easter; always a Sunday -- Breviary) Sexag. -- Sexagesima ("Sixtieth day" before Easter -- Breviary) Sig. -- Sigillum ("Seal") Simpl. -- Simplex ("Simple" feast -- Breviary) Sine Com. -- Sine Commemoratione ("Without commemoration" of other feast, or feasts -- Breviary) s.l. -- sine loco ("without indication" of place of printing) s.l.n.d. -- sine loco nec data ("without indication of place" or "without date of printing") S.M. -- Sanctae Memoriae ("Of Holy Memory") Soc. -- Socius, Socii ("Companion", "Companions" -- Breviary) S. Off. -- Sanctum Officium (Congregation of the Holy Office, Inquisition) S.P. -- Sanctissime Pater ("Most Holy Father") S.P., S. Petr. -- Sanctus Petrus ("St. Peter") S.P. -- Summus Pontifex ("Supreme Pontiff", Pope) S.P.A. -- Sacrum Palatium Apostolicum ("Sacred Apostolic Palace", Vatican, Quirinal) Sr. -- Sister S.R.C. -- Sacra Rituum Congregatio ("Sacred Congregation of Rites") S.R.E. -- Sancta Romana Ecclesia, Sanctae Romanae Ecclesia ("Most Holy Roman Church"; or, "of the Most Holy Roman Church") SS. -- Scriptores ("Writers") SS.D.N. -- Sanctissimus Dominus Noster ("Our Most Holy Lord [Jesus Christ]", also a title of the Pope) S., SS. -- Sanctus, Sancti ("Saint", "Saints") S.T.B. -- Sacrae Theologiae Baccalaureus ("Bachelor of Sacred Theology") S.T.D. -- Sacred Theologiae Doctor ("Doctor of Sacred Theology") S.T.L. -- Sacrae Theologiae Licentiatus ("Licentiate of Sacred Theology") Suffr. -- Suffragia ("Suffrages" -- i.e. prayers of the saints; Breviary) S.V. -- Sanctitas Vestra ("Your Holiness") Syn. -- Synodus ("Synod") Temp. -- Tempus, Tempore ("Time", "in time") Test. -- Testes, Testimonium ("Witnesses", "Testimony") Theol. -- Theologia ("Theology") Tit. -- Titulus, Tituli ("Title", "Titles") Ult. -- Ultimo ("Last" -- day, month, year) Usq. -- Usque ("As far as") Ux. -- Uxor ("Wife") V., Ven., VV. -- Venerabilis, Venerabiles ("Venerable") V., Vest. -- Vester ("Your") Vac. -- Vacat, Vacans ("Vacant") Val. -- Valor ("Value") Vat. -- Vaticanus ("Vatican") Vba. -- Verba ("Words") Vers. -- Versiculus ("Versicle" -- Breviary) Vesp. -- Vesperae ("Vespers" -- Breviary) V.F., Vic. For. -- Vicarius Foraneus ("Vicar-Forane") V.G. -- Vicarius Generalis ("Vicar-General") Vid. -- Vidua ("Widow" -- Breviary) Vid., Videl. -- Videlicet ("Namely") Vig. -- Vigilia ("Vigil" of a feast -- Breviary) Viol. -- Violaceus ("Violet" -- Breviary) Virg. -- Virgo ("Virgin" -- Breviary) Virid. -- Viridis ("Green" -- Breviary) V.M. -- Vir Magnificus ("Great Man") V. Rev. -- Very Reverend V.T. -- Vetus Testamentum XC., XCS. -- Christus ("Christ" -- first, middle, and last letters of the Greek name) ABBREVIATIONS IN CATACOMB INSCRIPTIONS A.D. -- Ante Diem (e.g. in the phrase, "Ante Diem VI [or Sextum] Kal. Apriles", is equivalent to the sixth day before the Calends of April, counting both the Calends and the day intended to be indicated); or Anima Dulcis ("Sweet Soul") A.Q.I.C. -- Anima Quiescat In Christo ("May his [or her] Soul Repose in Christ") B., BMT. -- Bene Merenti ("To the Well-Deserving") B.M. -- Bonae Memoriae ("Of Happy Memory") B.F. -- Bonae Feminae ("To the Good Woman") I.C. -- Bibas [for Vivas] In Christo ("May you Live In Christ") B.M.F. -- Bene Merenti Fecit ("He erected this to the Well-Deserving") B.Q. -- Bene Quiescat ("May he [or she] Rest Well") C. -- Consul CC. -- Consules ("Consuls") C.F. -- Clarissima Femina ("Most Illustrious Woman") Cl. V. -- Clarissimus Vir ("Most Illustrious Man") C.O. -- Conjugi Optimo ("To my Excellent Husband") C.O.B.Q. -- Cum Omnibus Bonis Quiescat ("May he [or she] Repose With All Good souls") COI. -- Conjugi ("To my Husband [or Wife]") CS., COS. -- Consul COSS. -- Consules ("Consuls") C.P. -- Clarissima Puella ("Most Illustrious Maiden") D. -- Depositus ("Laid to rest"); or Dulcis ("Dear One") D.D. -- Dedit, Dedicavit ("Gave", "Dedicated") DEP. -- Depositus ("Laid to rest") D.I.P. -- Dormit In Pace ("Sleeps in Peace") D.M. -- Diis Manibus ("To the Manes [of]") D.M.S. -- Diis Manibus Sacrum ("Sacred to the Manes [of]") D.N. -- Domino Nostro ("To Our Lord") DD. NN. -- Dominis Nostris ("To Our Lords") E.V. -- Ex Voto ("In Fulfilment of a Vow") EX. TM. -- Ex Testamento ("In accordance with the Testament of") E VIV. DISC. -- E Vivis Discessit ("Departed from Life") F. -- Fecit ("Did"); or Filius ("Son"); or Feliciter ("Happily") F.C. -- Fieri Curavit ("Caused to be made") F.F. -- Fieri Fecit ("Caused to be made") FF. -- Fratres ("Brothers"); Filii ("Sons") FS. -- Fossor ("Digger") H. -- Haeres ("Heir"); Hic ("Here") H.L.S. -- Hoc Loco Situs ("Laid [or Put] in This Place") H.M.F.F. -- Hoc Monumentum Fieri Fecit ("Caused This Monument to be Made") H.S. -- Hic Situs ("Laid Here") ID. -- Idibus ("On the Ides") IDNE. -- Indictione ("In the Indiction" -- a chronological term) I.L.H. -- Jus Liberorum Habens ("Possessing the Right of Children" -- i.e., eligibility to public office under age) INB. -- In Bono ("In Good [odour]") IND. -- Same as IDNE INP -- In Pace ("In Peace") I.X. -- In Christo ("In Christ") K. -- Kalendas ("Calends"); or Care, Carus, Cara ("Dear One"); or Carissimus[a] ("Dearest") K.B.M. -- Karissimo Bene Merenti ("To the Most Dear and Well-deserving") L. -- Locus ("Place") L.M. -- Locus Monumenti ("Place of the Monument") L.S. -- Locus Selpuchri ("Place of the Sepulchre") M. -- Martyr, or Memoria ("Memory") or Monumentum ("Monument") MM. -- Martyres ("Martyrs") M.P. -- Monumentum Posuit ("Erected a Monument") MRT. -- Merenti ("To the Deserving") N. -- Nonas ("Nones"); or Numero ("Number") NN. -- Nostris ("To Our" -- with a plural) or Numeri ("Numbers") O. -- Hora ("Hour"); Obiit ("Died") OB. IN XTO. -- Obiit In Christo ("Died In Christ") OMS. -- Omnes ("All") OP. -- Optimus (Excellent, or Supremely Good) P. -- Pax ("Peace"); or Pius ("Dutiful"); or Ponendum ("To be Placed"); or Pridie ("The Day Before"); or Plus ("More") P.C. -- Poni Curavit ("Caused to be Placed") P.C., P. CONS. -- Post Consulatum ("After the Consulate") P.I. -- Poni Jussit ("Ordered to be Placed") P.M. -- Plus Minus ("More or Less"); or Piae Memoriae ("Of Pious Memory"); or Post Mortem ("After Death") PP. -- Praepositus ("Placed over") PR.K. -- Pridie Kalendas ("The Day Before the Calends") PRB. -- Presbyter ("Priest") PR.N. -- Pridie Nonas ("The Day Before the Nones") P.T.C.S. -- Pax Tibi Cum Sanctis ("Peace to Thee With the Saints") PZ. -- Pie Zeses ("May you Live Piously" -- Greek) Q., Qui. -- Quiescit ("He Rests") Q.B.AN. -- Qui Bixit [for Vixit] Annos ("Who lived . . . years") Q.I.P. -- Quiescat In Pace ("May he [or she] Rest in Peace") Q.V. -- Qui Vixit ("Who Lived") R. -- Requiescit ("He Rests"); or Refrigerio ("In [a place of] Refreshment") Reg. -- Regionis ("Of the Region") S. -- Suus ("His"); or Situs ("Placed"); or Sepulchrum ("Sepulchre") SC. M. -- Sanctae Memoriae ("Of Holy Memory") SD. -- Sedit ("He sat") SSA. -- Subscripta ("Subscribed") S.I.D. -- Spiritus In Deo ("Spirit [rests] in God") S.P. -- Sepultus ("Buried"); or Sepulchrum ("Sepulchre") SS. -- Sanctorum (Of the Saints) S.V. -- Sacra Virgo ("Holy Virgin") T., TT. -- Titulus, Tituli ("Title", "Titles") TM. -- Testamentum ("Testament") V. -- Vixit ("He Lived"); or Vixisti ("Thou didst Live") VB. -- Vir Bonus ("A Good Man") V.C. -- Vir Clarissimus ("A Most Illustrious Man") VV. CC. -- Viri Clarissimi ("Most Illustrious Men") V.H. -- Vir Honestus ("A Worthy Man") V. X. -- Vivas, Care [or Cara] ("Mayest thou Live, Dear One"); or Uxor Carissima ("Most Dear Wife") X., XPC., XS. -- Christus ("Christ") ABBREVIATIONS OF TITLES OF THE PRINCIPAL RELIGIOUS ORDERS AND CONGREGATIONS OF PRIESTS A.A. -- Augustiniani Assumptionis (Assumptionists) A.B.A. -- Antoniani Benedictini Armeni (Mechitarists) C.J.M. -- Congregation Jesu et Mariae (Eudist Fathers) C.M. -- Congregatio Missionis (Lazarists) C.M. -- Congregatio Mariae (Fathers of the Company of Mary) C.P. -- Congregatio Passionis (Passionists) C.PP.S. -- Congregatio Pretiosissimi Sanguinis (Fathers of the Most Precious Blood) C.R. -- Congregatio Resurrectionis (Resurrectionist Fathers) C.R.C.S. -- Clerici Regulares Congregationis Somaschae (Somaschi Fathers) C.R.I.C. -- Canonici Regulares Immaculate Conecptionis ("Canons Regular of the Immaculate Conception") C.R.L. -- Canonici Regulares Lateranenses ("Canons Regular of the Lateran") C.R.M. -- Clerici Regulares Minores ("Clerks Regular Minor", Mariani) C.R.M.D. -- Clerici Regulares Matris Dei ("Clerks Regular of the Mother of God") C.R.M.I. -- Clerici Regulares Ministrantes Infirmis ("Clerks Regular Attendant on the Sick", Camillini, Camilliani) C.R.P. -- Congregatio Reformatorum Praemonstratensium (Premonstratensians) C.R.S.P. -- Clerici Regulares Sancti Pauli (Barnabites) C.R.S.P. -- Clerici Regulares Pauperum Matris Dei Scholarum Piarum ("Clerks Regular of the Poor Men of the Mother of God for Pious Schools", Piarists) C.R.T. -- Clerici Regulares Theatini (Theatines) C.S.B. -- Congregatio Sancti Basilii (Basilians) C.S.C. -- Congregatio Sanctae Crucis (Fathers and Brothers of the Holy Cross) C.S.P. -- Congregatio Sancti Pauli (Paulists) C.S.Sp. -- Congregatio Sancti Spiritus (Fathers of the Holy Ghost) C.S.V. -- Clerici Sancti Viatoris (Clerks, or Clerics, of St. Viateur) C.SS.CC. -- Congregatio Sacratissimorum Cordium (Missionaries of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary) C. SS. R. -- Congregatio Sanctissimi Redemptoris (Redemptorists) Inst. Char. -- Institutum Charitatis (Rosminians) M.C. -- Missionaries of Charity M.S. -- Missionaries of La Salette [France] M.S.C. -- Missionarii Sancti Caroli ("Missionaries of St. Charles") M.S.C. -- Missionarii Sacratissimi Cordis ("Missionaries of the Most Sacred Heart") O.C. -- Ordo Charitatis (Fathers of the Order of Charity) O. Camald. -- Ordo Camaldulensium (Camaldolese) O. Cart. -- Ordo Cartusiensis (Carthusians) O. Cist. -- Ordo Cisterciensium (Cistercians) O.C.C. -- Ordo Carmelitarum Calceatorum (Carmelites) O.C.D. -- Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatorum (Discalced, or Barefoot, Carmelites) O.C.R. -- Ordo Reformatorum Cisterciensium (Cistercians, Trappists) O.F.M. -- Ordo Fratrum Minorum (Observant Franciscans) O.M. -- Ordo [Fratrum] Minimorum (Minims of St. Francis of Paul) O. Merced. -- Ordo Beatae Mariae Virginis de Redemptione Captivorum (Mercedarians, Nolaschi) O.M.C. -- Ordo Minorum Conventualium (Conventual Franciscans) O.M. Cap., O.F.M. Cap., O.M.C. -- Ordo Minorum Cappucinorum (Capuchins) O.M.I. -- Oblati Mariae Immaculatae (Oblate Fathers of Mary Immaculate) O.P., Ord Fratr. Praed. -- Ordo Praedicatorum (Dominicans) Ord. Praem. -- Ordo Praemonstratensium (Premonstratensians, Norbertines) O.S.A. -- Ordo [Eremitarum] Sancti Augustini (Augustinians) O.S.B. -- Ordo Sancti Benedicti (Benedictines) O.S.C. -- Oblati Sancti Caroli (Oblate Fathers of St. Charles) O.S.F.C. -- Ordinis Sancti Francisci Capuccini (Franciscan Capuchins) O.S.F.S. -- Oblati Sancti Francisci Salesii (Oblate Fathers of St. Francis of Sales) O.S.H. -- Ordo [Eremitarum] Sancti Hieronymi (Hieronymites) O.S.M. -- Ordo Servorum Mariae (Servites) O.SS.C. -- Oblati Sacratissimi Cordis ("Oblate Fathers of the Sacred Heart") O. Trinit. -- Ordo Sanctissimae Trinitatis (Trinitarians) P.O. -- Pr tres de l Oratoire, Presbyteri Oratorii (Oratorians) P.S.M. -- Pia Societas Missionum (Fathers of the Pious Society of Missions, Pallottini) P.S.S. -- Presbyteri Sancti Sulpicii, Pr tres de S. Sulpice (Sulpicians) S.C. -- Salesianorum Congregatio (Congregation of St. Francis of Sales -- Salesian Fathers) S.D.S. -- Societas Divini Salvatoris ("Society of the Divine Saviour") S.D.V. -- Societas Divini Verbi (Fathers of the Divine Word) S.J. -- Societas Jesu ("Society of Jesus", i.e. the Jesuits) S.M. -- Societas Mariae (Marists) S.P.M. -- Societas Patrum Misericordiae (Fathers of Mercy) S.S.S. -- Societas Sanctissimi Sacramenti (Fathers of the Blessed Sacrament) Most manuals of palaeography (Greek and Latin) contain lists of Abbreviations (ancient and medieval), some of which are yet of ecclesiastical interest, while others have long since become obsolete or rare, and concern only the reader of manuscripts. Some manuals of diplomatics, likewise, have useful lists of pontifical chancery abbreviations, e.g. QUANTIN, Dict. de diplomatique chrétienne (Paris, 1846). 26-42, and Prou (Paris, 1902). in the latter work may be seen the original script-forms of these Abbreviations. Facsimiles of abbreviated pontifical documents may be seen, e.g. in DENIFLE, Specimina Palaeographica ab Innoc. III ad Urban. V. (Rome, 1888) The Abbreviations in Greek manuscripts were first scientifically studied by the Benedictine MONTFAUCON in his famous Palaeographica Graeca (Paris, 1708); see the lntroductions to Greek Palaeography of GARDTHAUSEN and WATTENBACH The little work, Modus legendi abreviaturas in jure tam civili quam pontificio occurrentes (Venice, 1596), is one of the earliest attempts at a dictionary of medieval abbreviations. A very useful work for all Latin abbreviations is that of CAPELLI, Dizionario delle abbreviature latine ed italiane (Milan, 1900); it is written mostly in Latin and describes all the abbreviations ordinarily used in Latin and Italian documents, civil or ecclesiastical Other valuable works dealing specifically with abbreviations in pontifical documents are DE LA BRANA, Signos y Abreviaturas que se usan en los documentos pontificios (Leon, 1884); RODENBERG, Epistolae saec. XIII e regestis RR. PP. selectae (Berlin, 1883), I, 323. For an extensive list of the abbreviations in the epitaphs of the Catacombs see KRAUS, Real-Encycl. der Christi. Alterth. (Freiburg, 1886), I, 47-51. The chapters on abbreviations of medieval manuscripts in the palaeographical manuals of DE WAILLY (Paris, 1843), CHASSANT (Paris, 1885), PAOLI (Florence, 1891), REUSENS (Louvain, 1899), CARINI (Rome, 1889), and THOMPSON (London, 1903) are recommended, also the excellent Lateinische Paläographie of STEFFENS (Freiburg, Switzerland, 1903, 3 vols. fol. with many plates). See BATTANDIER, Abbréviations, in Ann. Pont. Cath. (Paris 1900), 527-538. THOMAS J. SHAHAN Abbreviators Abbreviators ( Abbreviare = "shorten", "curtail"). Abbreviators are those who make an abridgment or abstract of a long writing or discourse. This is accomplished by contracting the parts, i.e. the words and sentences; an abbreviated form of writing common among the Romans. Abbreviations were of two kinds, + the use of a single letter for a single word, + the use of a sign, note, or mark for a word or phrase. The Emperor Justinian forbade the use of abbreviations in the compilation of the "Digest" and afterwards extended his prohibition to all other writings. This prohibition was not universally obeyed. The abbreviators found it to their own convenience and interest to use the abbreviated form, and especially was this the case at Rome. The early Christians practised the abbreviated mode, no doubt as an easy and safe way of communicating with one another and safeguarding their secrets from enemies and false brethren. ECCLESIASTICAL ABBREVIATORS In course of time the Apostolic Chancery adopted this mode of writing as the curial style, still further abridging by omitting the diphthongs ae and oe, and likewise all lines and marks of punctuation. The ecclesiastical Abbreviators are officials of the Holy See, inasmuch as they are among the principal officials of the Apostolic Chancery, which is one of the oldest and most important offices in the Roman Curia. The scope of its labour, as well as the number of its officials, has varied with the times. Up to the twelfth or thirteenth century, the duty of the Apostolic, or Roman Chancery was to prepare and expedite the pontifical letters and writs for collation of church dignities and other matters of grave importance which were discussed and decided in Consistory. About the thirteenth or fourteenth century, the popes, whilst they lived at Avignon in France, began to reserve the collation of a great many benefices, so that all the benefices, especially the greater ones, were to be conferred through the Roman Curia (Lega, Praelectiones Jur. Can., I, ii, 287). As a consequence, the labour was immensely augmented, and the number of Abbreviators necessarily increased. To regulate the proper expedition of these reserved benefices, Pope John XXII instituted the rules of chancery to determine the competency and mode of procedure of the Chancery. Afterwards the establishment of the Dataria and the Secretariate of Briefs lightened the work of the Chancery and led to a reduction in the number of Abbreviators. According to Ciampini (Lib. de Abbreviatorum de parco majore etc., cap. i) the institution of abbreviators was very ancient, succeeding after the persecutions to the notaries who recorded the acts of the martyrs. Other authors reject this early institution and ascribe it to Pope John XXII (1316). It is certain that he uses the name Abbreviators, but speaks as if they had existed before his time, and had, by overtaxation for their labour, caused much complaint and protest He (Extravag. Joan. tit. xiii, "Cum ad Sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae") prescribes their work, determines how much they may charge for their labour, fixes a certain tax for an abstract or abridgment of twenty-five words, or their equivalent, 150 letters, forbids them to charge more, even though the abstract goes over twenty-five words but less than fifty words, enacts that the basis of the tax is the labour employed in writing, expediting, etc., the Bulls, and by no means the emoluments accruing to the recipient of the favour or benefice conferred by the Bull, and declares that whoever shall charge more than the tax fixed by him shall be suspended for six months from office, and upon a second violation of the law, shall be deprived of it altogether, and if the delinquent be an abbreviator, he shall be excommunicated. Should a large letter have to be rewritten, owing to the inexact copy of the abbreviator, the abbreviator and not the receiver of the Bull must pay the extra charge for the extra labour to the apostolic writer. Whatever may be the date of the institution of the office of abbreviator, it is certain that it became of greater importance and more highly privileged upon its erection into a college of prelates. Pope Martin V (Constit. 3 "In Apostolicae", ii and v) fixed the manner for their examination and approbation and also the tax they should demand for their labour and the punishment for overcharge. He also assigned to them certain emoluments. The Abbreviators of the lower, or lesser, were to be promoted to the higher, or greater, bar or presidency. Their offices were compatible with other offices, i.e. they can hold two benefices or offices at one and the same time, some conferred by the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor, others by the Holy Father. ERECTION OF THE OFFICE: INTO A COLLEGE OF PRELATES In the pontificate of Pius II, their number, which had been fixed at twenty-four, had overgrown to such an extent as to diminish considerably the individual remuneration, and, as a consequence, able and competent men no longer sought the office, and hence the old style of writing and expediting the Bulls was no longer used, to the great injury of justice, the interested parties, and the dignity of the Holy See. To remedy this evil and to restore the old established chancery style, the Pope selected out of the great number of the then living Abbreviators seventy, and formed them into a college of prelates, and decreed that their office should be perpetual, that certain emoluments should be attached to it, and granted certain privileges to the possessors of the same. He ordained further that some should be called "Abbreviators of the Upper Bar" ( de Parco Majori), the others of the Lower Bar ( de Parco Minori); that the former should sit upon a slightly raised portion of the chamber, separated from the rest of the hall or chamber by lattice work, assist the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor, subscribe the letters and have the principal part in examining, revising, and expediting the apostolic letters to be issued with the leaden seal; that the latter, however, should sit among the apostolic writers upon benches in the lower part of the chamber, and their duty was to carry the signed schedules or supplications to the prelates of the upper bar. Then one of the prelates of the upper bar made an abstract, and another prelate of the same bar revised it. Prelates of the upper bar formed a quasi- tribunal, in which as a college they decided all doubts that might arise about the form and quality of the letters, of the clauses and decrees to be adjoined to the apostolic letters, and sometimes about the payment of the emoluments and other contingencies. Their opinion about questions concerning chancery business was held in the highest estimation by all the Roman tribunals. Paul II suppressed this college; but Sixtus IV (Constitutio 16, "Divina") reestablished it. He appointed seventy-two abbreviators, of whom twelve were of the upper, or greater, and twenty-two of the lower, or lesser, presidency ( Parco), and thirty-eight examiners on first appearance of letters. They were bound to be in attendance on certain days under penalty of fine, and sign letters and diplomas. Ciampini mentions a decree of the Vice-Chancellor by which absentees were mulcted in the loss of their share of the emoluments of the following chancery session. The same Pope also granted many privileges to the College of Abbreviators, but especially to the members of the greater presidency. Pius VII suppressed many of the chancery offices, and so the Tribunal of Correctors and the Abbreviators of the lower presidency disappeared. Of the Tribunal of Correctors, a substitute-corrector alone remains. Bouix (Curia Romana, edit. 1859) chronicles the suppression of the lower presidency and puts the number of Abbreviators at that date at eleven. The present college consists of seventeen prelates, six substitutes, and one sub-substitute, all of whom, except the prelates, may be clerics or laymen. Although the duty of Abbreviators was originally to make abstracts and abridgments of the apostolic letters, diplomas, etc., using the legal abbreviations, clauses, and formularies, in course of time, as their office grew in importance they delegated that part of their office to their substitute and confined themselves to overseeing the proper expedition of the apostolic letters. Prior to the year 1878, all apostolic letters and briefs requiring for their validity the leaden seal were engrossed upon rough parchment and in Gothic characters (round letters, also called Gallicum and commonly Bollatico, but in Italy today Teutonic) without lines, or diphthongs, or marks of punctuation. Bulls engrossed on a different parchment, or in different characters with lines and punctuation marks, or without the accustomed abbreviations, clauses, and formularies, would be rejected as spurious. Pope Leo XIII (Constitutio Universae Eccles., 29 Dec., 1878) ordained that they should be written henceforth in ordinary Latin characters upon ordinary parchment, and that no abbreviations should be used except those easily understood. TITLES AND PRIVILEGES Many great privileges were conferred upon Abbreviators in the past. By decree of Leo X they were created nobles, Counts Palatine, familiars and members of the papal household, so that they might enjoy all the privileges of domestic prelates and of prelates in actual attendance on the Pope, as regards plurality of benefices as well as expectives. They and their clerics and their properties were exempt from all jurisdiction except the immediate jurisdiction of the Pope, and they were not subject to the judgments of the Auditor of Causes, or to the Cardinal Vicar. He also empowered them to confer (today within strict limitations) the degree of Doctor, with all university privileges, create notaries (now abrogated), legitimize children so as to make them eligible to receive benefices vacated by their fathers (now revoked), also to ennoble three persons and to make Knights of the Order of St. Sylvester ( Militiae Aureae), the same to enjoy and to wear the insignia of nobility. Pope Gregory XVI rescinded this privilege and reserved to the Pope the right of creation of such knights (Acta Pont. Greg. XVI, Vol. III, 178-179-180). Pope Paul V, who in early manhood was a member of the College (Const. 2, "Romani"), made them Referendaries of Favours, and after three years of service, Referendaries likewise of Justice, enjoying the privileges of Referendaries and permitting one to assist in the signatures before the Pope, giving all a right to a portion in the papal palace and exempting them from the registration of favours as required by Pius IV (Const., 98) with regard to matters pertaining to the Apostolic Chamber. They follow immediately after the twelve voting members of the Signature in capella. Abbreviators of the greater presidency are permitted to wear the purple cassock and cappa, as also rochet in capella. Abbreviators of the lower presidency before their suppression were simple clerics, and according to permission granted by Sixtus IV (loc. cit.) might be even married men. These offices becoming vacant by death of the Abbreviator, no matter where the death take place, are reserved in Curia. The prelates could resign their office in favour of others. Formerly these offices as well as those of the other chancery officers from the Regent down were occasions of venality, which many of the popes, especially Benedict XIV and Pius VII, laboured most strenuously to abolish. Leo XIII (Motu Proprio, 4 July, 1898) most solemnly decreed the abolition of all venality in the transfer or Collation of the said offices. As domestic prelates, prelates of the Roman Court, they have personal preeminence in every diocese of the world. They are addressed as "Reverendissimus", "Right Reverend", and "Monsignor". As prelates, and therefore possessing the legal dignity, they are competent to receive and execute papal commands. Benedict XIV (Const. 3, "Maximo") granted prelates of the greater presidency the privilege of wearing a hat with purple band, which right they hold even after they have ceased to be abbreviators. FERRARIS, Bibliotheca, s.v. Abbreviatores; ANDRE-WAGNER, Dict. de Droit Canon., s.v. Abreviateurs; VAN ESPEN, Jurist Eccles. Univ., Pt. I, tit. xxiii, Cap. i; BRANCATI DE LAUREA-PARAVICINA-POLYANTHEA, Sac. Can., s.v. Abbreviatores; RIGANTI, In Reg. Cancell., IV, Index; LEGA, Proelect. Jur. Can., Lib. I, vol. II, De Cancellaria Apostolica, p. 285; CIAMPINI, De Abbreviatorum de Parco Majori, etc.; DE LUCA, Relatio Romanae Curiae Forensis., Disc. x, n. 9; PETRA, Commentaria in Constit. Apostolicas, IV, 232-233; V. 302-303. P.M.J. ROCK Abdera Abdera A titular see in the province of Rhodope on the southern coast of Thrace, now called Bouloustra. It was founded about 656 B.C. Abdias Abdias (A Minor Prophet). This name is the Greek form of the Hebrew `Obhádhyah, which means "the servant [or worshipper] of Yahweh". The fourth and shortest of the minor prophetical books of the Old Testament (it contains only twenty-one verses) is ascribed to Abdias. In the title of the book it is usually regarded as a proper name. Some recent scholars, however, think that it should be treated as an appellative, for, on the one hand, Holy Writ often designates a true prophet under the appellative name of "the servant of Yahweh", and on the other, it nowhere gives any distinct information concerning the writer of the work ascribed to Abdias. It is true that in the absence of such authoritative information Jews and Christian traditions have been freely circulated to supply its place; but it remains none the less a fact that "nothing is known of Abdias; his family, station in life, place of birth, manner of death, are equally unknown to us" (Abbé Trochon, Les petits prophètes, 193). The only thing that may be inferred from the work concerning its author is that he belonged to the Kingdom of Juda. The short prophecy of Abdias deals almost exclusively with the fate of Edom as is stated in its opening words. God has summoned the nations against her. She trusts in her rocky fastnesses, but in vain. She would be utterly destroyed, not simply spoiled as by thieves (1-6). Her former friends and allies have turned against her (7), and her wisdom shall fail her in this extremity (8,9). She is justly punished for her unbrotherly conduct towards Juda when foreigners sacked Jerusalem and cast lots over it (10-11). She is bidden to desist from her unworthy conduct (12-14). The "day of Yahweh" is near upon "all the nations", in whose ruin Edom shall share under the united efforts of "the house of Jacob" and "the house of Joseph" (16-18). As for Israel, her borders will be enlarged in every direction; "Saviours" shall appear on Mount Sion to "judge" the Mount of Esau, and the rule of Yahweh shall be established (19-20). DATE OF THE PROPHECY OF ABDIAS Besides the shortness of the book of Abdias and its lack of a detailed title such as is usually prefixed to the prophetical writings of the Old Testament, there are various reasons, literary and exegetical, which prevents scholars from agreeing upon the date of its composition. Many among them (Keil, Orelli, Vigouroux, Trochon, Lesêtre, etc.) assign its composition to about the reign of Joram (ninth century B.C.).Their main ground for this position is derived from Abdias's reference (11-14) to a capture of Jerusalem which they identify with the sacking of the Holy City by the Philistines and the Arabians under Joram (II Paralip., xxi, 16,17). The only other seizure of Jerusalem to which Abdias (11-14) could be understood to refer would be that which occurred during the lifetime of the prophet Jeremias and was effected by Nabuchodonosor (588-587 B.C.). But such reference to this latter capture of the Jewish capital is ruled out, we are told, by the fact that Jeremias's description of this event (Jer., xlix, 7-22) is so worded as to betray its dependence on Abdias (11-14) as on an earlier writing. It is ruled out also by Abdias's silence concerning the destruction of the city or of the Temple which was carried out by Nabuchodonosor, and which, as far as we know, did not occur in the time of King Joram. A second argument for this early date of the prophecy is drawn from a comparison of its text with that of Amos and Joel. The resemblance is intimate and, when closely examined, shows, it is claimed, that Abdias was anterior to both Joel and Amos. In fact, in Joel, ii, 32 (Heb., iii, 5) "as the Lord hath said" introduces a quotation from Abdias (17). Hence it is inferred that the prophecy of Abdias originated between the reign of Joram and the time of Joel and Amos, that is, about the middle of the ninth century B.C. The inference is said also to be confirmed by the purity of style of Abdias's prophecy. Other scholars, among whom may be mentioned Meyrick, Jahn, Ackerman, Allioli, etc., refer the composition of the book to about the time of the Babylonian Captivity, some three centuries after King Joram. They think that the terms of Abdias (11-14) can be adequately understood only of the capture of Jerusalem by Nabuchodonosor; only this event could be spoken of as the day "when strangers carried away his [Juda's] army captive, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem"; as "the day of his [Juda's] leaving his country . . . . the day of their [the children of Juda's] destruction"; "the day of their ruin"; etc. They also admit that Abdias (20) contains an implicit reference to the writer as one of the captives in Babylon. Others again, ascribe the present book of Abdias to a still later date. They agree with the defenders of the second opinion in interpreting Abdias (11-14) as referring to the capture of Jerusalem by Nabuchodonosor, but differ from them in holding that (20) does not really prove that the author of the book lived during the Babylonian exile. They claim that a close study of Abdias (15-21), with its apocalyptic features (reference to the day of the Lord as being at hand upon all nations, to a restoration of all Israel, to the wonderful extent of territory and position in command which await the Jews in God's kingdom), connects necessarily the prophecy of Abdias with other works in Jewish literature [Joel, Daniel, Zacharias (ix-xiv)] which, as they think, belong to a date long after the return from Babylon. These, then are the three leading forms of opinion which prevail at the present day regarding the date of composition of the book of Abdias, none of which conflicts with the prophetical import of the work concerning the utter ruin of Edom at a later date and concerning the Messianic times. Phillippe, in Dict. de la Bible; Selbie, in Hast., Dict. of Bible, s.v. Obadiah. Recent Commentaries: Trochon (1883); Peters (1892); Perowne (1898); Nowack (1897). FRANCIS E. GIGOT Abdias of Babylon Abdias of Babylon An apocryphal writer, said to have been one of the seventy-two Disciples of Christ, and first Bishop of Babylon, consecrated by Sts. Simon and Jude. Very little is known about him, and the main reason for mentioning him is a work in ten books called Historia Certaminis Apostolici which is imputed to him. It tells of the labours and deaths of the Apostles. This compilation purports to have been translated from Hebrew into Greek by Eutropius, a disciple of Abdias, and, in the third century, from Greek into Latin by (Julius) Africanus, the friend of Origen. But it is really a Latin work, for in it are cited, with the Vulgate of St. Jerome, the Ecclesiastical History of Rufinus and his Latin translation of the "Recognitiones" of Clement. The interest of the work is due to what the author claims to have drawn from the ancient Acta of the Apostles, and to many ancient legends which have thus been brought down to us. The text of the pseudo-Abdias may be found in Fabricius, Codex Apocryphus Novi Testimenti (Hamburg, 1700), 402-742, though there are parallel texts of single books printed in the Acta Sanctorum. According to R.A. Lipsius, the work was compiled during the latter half of the sixth century, in some Frankish monastery, for the purpose of satisfying the natural curiosity of Western Christians. At the same time he used much older pseudo-Apostolic materials that he abridged or excerpted to suit his purpose, and often revised or expurgated in the sense of Catholic teaching, for not a few of the writings that he used were originally Gnostic compositions, and abounded in speeches and prayers destined to spread that heresy. BATIFFOL, in Dict. de la Bible, 24; LIPSIUS, Die Apokryphen Apostelgeschichten (Brunswick, 1883), 1, 177-178; BATIFFOL, in Dict. de th ol. cath., I, 23; LIPSIUS, in Dict. of Christ. Biogr., I, 1-4. JOHN J. A'BECKET Abdication Abdication Abdication, ecclesiastically considered, is the resignation of a benefice or clerical dignity. Every such honour or emolument, from the papal throne to the humblest chantry, may be resigned by the incumbent. The general ecclesiastical law concerning Such abdications (exclusive of a papal resignation) is that the benefice must be resigned into the hands of the proper ecclesiastical superior. Moreover, the resignation must be prompted by a just cause, be voluntary and free from contracts involving simony. Resignations, however, may be made with accompanying stipulations, such as that the resigned benefice be bestowed upon a designated person, or that the abdicating cleric be provided with another office. It is also required that the one who resigns his benefice, if in sacred orders, should have other certain means of support commensurate with his dignity. Resignations may be not only express but also tacit. The latter is presumed to have taken place when a cleric accepts an office or commits an act incompatible with the holding of an ecclesiastical dignity, such as solemn profession in a religious order, enrolment in the army, contracting marriage, and the like. No resignation takes effect until it is accepted by the proper authority. Hence, those who hold office from a bishop must resign into his hands and obtain his acquiescence. Bishops, in like manner, must resign into the hands of the Pope. Vicars-general cannot accept resignations unless they receive powers ad hoc from the bishop. When a bishop abdicates his see, he may renounce both the episcopal benefice and dignity or only the benefice. If he resigns both he cannot in future perform any episcopal functions, even with the consent of the ordinary of the diocese where he resides. If he resign, however, only the benefice, and not the dignity, he still remains capable of performing such episcopal functions as other bishops may request him to exercise. Of course, in the former case, if an abdicated bishop should nevertheless ordain candidates, such action would be valid, as his episcopal character is indelible, but it would be entirely illicit and entail grave consequences both for ordainer and ordained. A bishop's Abdication of his see goes into effect as soon as the Pope has accepted it in a papal consistory. The bishopric then becomes vacant, but the actions of the prelate retain their validity until he receives official notice of the acceptance of his resignation. Like every other ecclesiastical dignity, the papal throne may also be resigned. The reasons which make it lawful for a bishop to abdicate his see, such as the necessity or utility of his particular church, or the salvation of his own soul, apply in a stronger manner to the one who governs the universal church. It is true that the Roman Pontiff has no superior on earth into whose hands he can resign his dignity, yet he himself by the papal power can dissolve the spiritual marriage between himself and the Roman Church. A papal Abdication made without cause may be illicit, but it is unquestionably valid, since there is no one who can prohibit it ecclesiastically and it contravenes no divine law. The papacy does not, like the episcopacy, imprint an indelible character on the soul, and hence by his voluntary Abdication the Pope is entirely stripped of all jurisdiction, just as by his voluntary acceptance of the election to the primacy he acquired it. All doubt as to the legitimacy of papal abdications and all disputes among canonists were put an end to by the decree of Pope Boniface VIII which was received into the Corpus Juris Canonici (Cap. Quoniam I, de renun., in 6). The Pontiff says: Our predecessor, Pope Celestine V, whilst he governed the Church, constituted and decreed that the Roman Pontiff can freely resign. Therefore lest it happen that this statute should in the course of time fall into oblivion, or that doubt upon the subject should lead to further disputes, We have determined with the counsel of our brethren that it be placed among other constitutions for a perpetual memory of the same. Ferraris declares that the Pope should make his abdication into the hands of the College of Cardinals, as to that body alone pertains the election of his successor. For whilst it is true that the Cardinals did not bestow the papal jurisdiction upon him, yet they designated him as the successor of Peter, and they must be absolutely certain that he has renounced the dignity before they can validly proceed to the election of another pontiff. Church history furnishes a number of examples of papal abdications. Leaving aside the obscure case of Pope Marcellinus (296-308) adduced by Pezzani, and the still more doubtful resignation of Pope Liberius (352-366) which some historians have postulated in order to solve the perplexing position of Pope Felix II, we may proceed to unquestioned abdications. Pope Benedict IX (1033-44), who had long caused scandal to the Church by his disorderly life, freely renounced the pontificate and took the habit of a monk. He repented of his abdication and seized the papal throne again for a short time after the death of Pope Clement II, but he finally died in a private station. His immediate successor, Pope Gregory VI (1044-46) furnishes another example of papal Abdication. It was Gregory who had persuaded Benedict IX to resign the Chair of Peter, and to do so he had bestowed valuable possessions upon him. After Gregory had himself become Pope, this transaction was looked on by many as simoniacal; and although Gregory's intentions seem to have been of the best, yet it was deemed better that he too should abdicate the papal dignity, and he did so voluntarily. The classic example of the resignation of a Pope is that of St. Celestine V (1294). before his election to the pontificate, he had been a simple hermit, and his sudden elevation found him unprepared and unfit for his exalted position. After five months of pontificate, he issued a solemn decree in which he declared that it was permissible for the Pope to abdicate, and then made an equally solemn renunciation of the papacy into the hands of the cardinals. He lived two years after his abdication in the practice of virtues which afterwards procured his canonization. Owing to the troubles which evil minded persons caused his successor, Boniface VIII, by their theories about the impossibility of a valid Abdication of the papal throne, Boniface issued the above-cited decree to put the matter at rest for all time. The latest instance of a papal resignation is that of Pope Gregory XII (1406-15). It was at the time of the Great Schism of the West, when two pretenders to the Chair of Peter disputed Gregory's right, and rent the faithful into three so-called "obediences". To put an end to the strife, the legitimate Pope Gregory renounced the pontificate at the General Council of Constance in 1415. It is well known that Pope Pius VII (1800-23), before setting out for Paris to crown Napoleon in 1804, had signed an abdication of the papal throne to take effect in case he were imprisoned in France (De Montor). Finally, a valid Abdication of the Pope must be a free act, hence a forced resignation of the papacy would be null and void, as more than one ecclesiastical decree has declared. SMITH, Elem. of Eccl. Law (New York, 1895), I; DE LUCA, Praelect. Jur. Can. (Rome, 1897), II; CRAISSON, Manuale Jur. Can. (Paris, 1899), I. For Papal Abdication see FERRARIS, Bibl. Jur. Can., art. Papa (Rome, 1890); PEZZANI, Codex S.R.E. Ecclesiae (Rome, 1893), I: WERNZ, Jus Decretal, (Rome, 1899), II; DE MONTOR, Lives of Rom. Pont. (New York, 1866); HERGENRÖTHER, Handb. der allg. Kircheng. (Freiburg, 1886). WILLIAM H.W. FANNING Sts. Abdon and Sennan Sts. Abdon and Sennen (Variously written in early calendars and martyrologies Abdo, Abdus; Sennes, Sennis, Zennen.) Persian martyrs under Decius, about A.D. 250, and commemorated 30 July. The veneration paid them dates from as early as the third century, though their Acts, written for the most part prior to the ninth century, contain several fictitious statements about the cause and occasion of their coming to Rome and the nature of their torments. It is related in these Acts that their bodies were buried by a subdeacon, Quirinus, and transferred in the reign of Constantine to the Pontian cemetery on the road to Porto, near the gates of Rome. A fresco found on the sarcophagus supposed to contain their remains represents them receiving crowns from Christ. Accordin to Martigny, this fresco dates from the seventh century. Several cities, notably Florence and Soissons, claim possession of their bodies, but the Bollandists say that they rest in Rome. Acta SS., 30 July. MARTIGNY, Dict. des antiq. chret., 1; CHEETHAM, in Dict. Christ. Antiq,; BUTLER, Lives of the Saints, July 30. JOHN J. WYNNE Abduction Abduction Abduction may be considered as a public crime and a matrimonial diriment impediment. Viewed as a crime, it is a carrying off by force, physical or moral, of any virtuous woman, or even man, from a free and safe place to another place morally different and neither free nor safe from the captor's power, with intent to marry her or to gratify lust. Abduction considered as a matrimonial Impediment is a violent taking away of any woman whatsoever, chaste or unchaste, from a place free and safe to a morally different place, and there detaining her in the power of her abductor until he has coerced her into consenting to marry him. Abduction as a crime is of wider scope than is the impediment, inasmuch as the former includes man-captors and intent to gratify lust, both of which are excluded from the scope of the impediment. On the other hand, the impediment is of wider import than the crime in as far as it includes all women, chaste as well as unchaste, while the crime excludes the corrupt. This difference arises from the fact that the State aims to suppress the public crime as a menace to the safety of the commonwealth, while the Church cares, directly and immediately, for the freedom and the dignity of the Sacrament of Marriage. Abduction is often divided into Abduction by Violence ( Raptus Violentiae) and Abduction by Seduction, or Elopement ( Raptus Seductionis). The former is when (a) a woman evidently reluctant, and not consenting either to the flight or to the marriage, is forcibly transferred with a matrimonial intent from a secure and free place to a morally different one and there held under the abductor's influence by force, physical or moral, i.e. threats, great fear, or fraud equivalent to force, as it is a well-known axiom that "it is equal to be compelled to do a thing as to know that it is possible to be compelled to do it", (b) a woman enticed by fair words and fraud and deception consents to go with a man for other reason than matrimony from one place to another where he detains her by force or fraud equivalent to force, in order to coerce her into a marriage to which she objects; (e) a woman who, although she had already consented to a future marriage by act of betrothal, vet strenuously objects to abduction, is carried off violently by her betrothed or his agents from a free and safe place to another morally different and there detained until she consents to marry him. Some deny, however, that the raptor in this case is guilty of abduction, saying that he has a right to his betrothed. He has, indeed, a right to compel her to fulfil her engagement by public authority, not, however, by private authority. His carrying off of the woman against her will is the exercise of private authority, and therefore violence to her rights. Abduction by Seduction ( Raptus Seductionis), or Elopement, is the taking away from one place to another, by a man, of (1) a woman of age or under age who consents to both the flight and the marriage without consent of her parents or guardians; or (2) a woman who, although she refuses at first, finally, induced thereto by caresses, flattery, or any allurement, not however equivalent to force, physical or moral, consents to both flight and marriage without knowledge or consent of her parents or guardians. Abduction by seduction, as defined is held by Roman law to be abduction by violence inasmuch as violence can be offered to the woman and her parents simultaneously, or to the woman alone, or to the parents and guardians alone; and in the elopement, while no violence is done to the woman, violence is done to the parents or guardians. On the contrary, the Church does not consider violence done to parents, but the violence done only to the parties matrimonially interested. Hence, elopement, or abduction by seduction, does not induce an impediment diriment. Pius VII, in his letter to Napoleon I (26 June, 1805), pronounced this kind of abduction no abduction in the Tridentine sense. The Church considers it, indeed, a wrong against parental authority, but not a wrong to the abducted woman. The old Roman law ( Jus Vetus), mindful of the actual or imaginary "Rape of the Sabines", dealt leniently with woman-stealers. If the woman was willing, her marriage with her abductor was allowed and solemnized by the lictor leading her by the hand to the home of the raptor. Constantine the Great, to protect female virtue and safeguard the State, forbade (A.D. 320) such marriages. The law was neither universally received nor observed. The Emperor Justinian (A.D. 528, 533, and 548) forbade these marriages and fixed the punishment, for the principal and his accomplices in the crime, at death and confiscation of all their property. Legal right to avenge the crime was given to parents, relations, or guardians; to put to instant death the abductor caught in the act of Abduction. Appeal by the victim in behalf of her abductor, on the plea that she gave consent, was denied. The law awarded the confiscated property to the woman, if she had not consented to the abduction; to her parents, if they were ignorant of, or adverse to, it, and their daughter consented to the abduction; but if the woman and her parents consented to the carrying off, then all the property lapsed to the State, and the parents were banished (Codex Just., IX, Tit. xiii; Auth. Collat., IX, Tit. xxvi; Novell., 143; Auth. Collat., IX, Tit. xxxiii; Novell. 150). The Byzantine Emperor, Leo VI (886-912), called the Philosopher, approved (Constit. XXXV) the former laws in all particulars, with the exception that if swords or other deadly weapons were carried by the abductor and his accomplices during the abduction a much severer punishment was inflicted than if they were not carried. The old Spanish law condemned to death the abductor who also ravished the woman, but the abductor who did not ravish was let off with a money fine to be equally shared by the abducted and the State. If the woman had consented to the abduction, the whole fine reverted to the State. Athenian law commanded the abductor to marry the abducted, if she so willed, unless the woman or her parents or guardians had already received money instead. The earlier Byzantine law enjoined, but the later law forbade, the marriage. Among the Germanic nations the crime of abduction was compounded by pecuniary gifts to the parents or guardians. The Church did not accept the Roman law which declared all the marriages of the abductor with the abducted, without exception, entirely and perpetually null and void. She held as valid all marriages in which there was present true and real consent of the captured women. According to St. Basil (2 Canon. Epist. to St. Amphilochius, xxii, xxx, fixed date, an. 375, Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d series, VIII, Scribner's ed.), the Church issued no canons on abduction prior to his time. Such a crime was, doubtless, extremely rare among the early Christians. In the fourth century, as men grew more audacious, the number of wife-captors became exceedingly numerous. To check this, the Church in several particular councils, besides the punishment of service, confiscation of goods, and public penance, decreed sentence of excommunication (to be judicially pronounced) against laics, and deposition from ecclesiastical rank against clerics, who had violently carried off, or helped to carry off, women. Pope Gelasius (496) permitted the marriage of the abductor with his captive if she was willing, and they had been betrothed, or had mutually discussed their future marriage prior to the abduction. Antecedent to the ninth century, however, the canons make no mention of abduction ( raptus) as a matrimonial impediment, either diriment or impedient. In the Western Church, at least from the ninth century, the marriage of the captor with his captive, or any other woman, was perpetually prohibited. This was not, however, the universal church discipline, but rather the discipline peculiar to those nations among whom the absence of strict laws made abductions more numerous. The bishops of the Frankish nation felt the necessity of severe legislation to meet the evil, and therefore, in many particular Councils, e.g. Aix-la-Chapelle (817), Meaux (845), etc., issued stringent canons which continued as the peculiar law of the Franks until it was abolished by Innocent III. Furthermore, the impediment was impedient, not diriment (according to the most common opinion). Marriages celebrated in opposition to the prohibition were held to be valid, although illicit. The Council of Meaux (845) forbade the abductor ever to marry the rapt woman, but permitted his marriage with any other woman after he had performed the prescribed public penance. Gratian ("Decretum Caus.", XXXVI, quaest. ii, ad finem) inaugurated a milder discipline. He, relying upon the (supposed) authority of St. Jerome, taught that an abductor ought to be allowed to marry the abducted, provided she was willing to have him for a husband. After the publication of his decree in the twelfth century, this milder discipline was generally observed and met with the approval of many popes. Finally, Innocent III ("Decret. Greg.", lib. V, tit. xvii, cap. vii, "De Raptoribus") decreed for the universal Church (especially aiming at the perpetual prohibition by the particular councils) that such marriages might take place as often as a prior reluctance and dissent on the part of the woman should change to willingness and consent to the marriage, and this (according to the common interpretation) even if the woman was in the power of the captor at the time she consented. This decree practically did away with the impedient impediment of abduction, which was merged into the impediment of vis et metus. The Innocentian law continued to be the ecclesiastical discipline up to the sixteenth century. The Council of Trent introduced an entirely new discipline. To guard the liberty and dignity of marriage, to show its detestation of a horrible crime dangerous alike to the purity of morals and the peace and security of society, and to bar the criminal from gaining the result intended by his crime, the Fathers decreed: between the abductor and abducted there can be no marriage, as long as she remains in the power of the raptor; but if the abducted, having been separated from the abductor, and having been placed in a safe and free place, consents to have him for a husband, let her marry him; yet, notwithstanding, the abductor with all his advisers, accomplices and abettors, are by the law itself excommunicated and declared forever infamous, incapable of acquiring dignities, and, if they be clerics, deposed from their ecclesiastical rank. Furthermore, the abductor is bound, whether he marries the abducted or not, to dower her with a decent dowry at the discretion of the judge (Concil. Trid., Sess. XXIV, vi, "De Reform Matrim."). This law was to take immediate effect, requiring no promulgation in individual parishes. Such also is the law in the Oriental Churches (Synod. Mont. Liban., 1736, Collect. Lacens., II, 167; Synod. Sciarfien. Syror., 1888). The difference between this law and that of the Decretals (Innocent III) is evident. According to the Decretals, the woman's consent, given even while she was in the raptor s power, was deemed sufficient. The Council of Trent does not consider such consent of any avail, and requires consent given after the woman has been entirely separated from the control of the raptor and is dwelling in a place safe and free from his influence. Should she desire to marry him, the marriage may be celebrated, the priest having first obtained permission from the bishop (according to some) whose duty it is to testify to the cessation of the impediment and that the dowry prescribed by the Council has been made over and is subject to the sole use and discretion of the abducted. The general law of the Church does not require the aforesaid bishop's permission, but individual bishops can and do make laws to that effect. The Council of Trent by this law safeguarded the freedom of marriage (1) on the part of the man, by allowing him to marry the abducted woman, and (2) on the part of the woman, by protecting her from being coerced while in the abductor's power into a marriage against her free will and consent. This impediment of abduction ( raptus) is one entirely distinct from that of vis et metus. The latter entirely looks to the freedom of consent; the former, to the freedom of the place where true consent must be elicited. Of ecclesiastical origin, this impediment is temporary and public, and does not bind two unbaptized persons unless the civil law of their country invalidates such marriages. It does, however, govern the marriage of an unbaptized abductor with a Catholic abducted woman, and vice versa. Amidst the conflicting opinions of canonists and moralists as to whether abduction by seduction, abduction of a betrothed, abduction of a minor against the will of her parents, or the abduction of a man by a woman, induces the impediment or not, it is necessary to remember that this impediment is of Tridentine origin, and therefore the Council of Trent was sole judge of the necessary conditions; that the Roman or any other civil law or any prior ecclesiastical law had nothing to say in the matter; that the question under investigation was the impediment, not the crime, of abduction; and that in rebus odiosis, which this is, the words of the Council of Trent must be strictly adhered to and interpreted. Four elements are essential in an abduction in order to induce thereby the Tridentine diriment impediment, to wit: (1) a woman; (2) change of locality; (3) violence; (4) matrimonial intent. (1) Any woman, whether moral or immoral, maid or widow, betrothed or not, even a public woman, may be the object of a violent Abduction inducing the Tridentine impediment and punishment. Lessius, Avancini, and others hold that a man is not guilty of abduction who carries off his betrothed. The Council of Trent makes no exception, hence we should not. The abduction of a man by a woman is not included in the Tridentine law. the contrary opinion (De Justis and other earlier authors) is at variance with the language of the Council, which always speaks of the raptor, but nowhere of the raptrix. A woman can be guilty of the crime of raptus; but the question here is not about crime, but about the Tridentine impediment. She may be an agent or accomplice of the abductor and, as such, incur the penalties decreed by the Council; but it does not admit her as raptrix. (2) Change of Locality. -- Two places are necessary to an abduction -- one, the place from which, the other, the place to which, the reluctant woman is violently taken, and in which she is also violently detained. These two places must be morally (some say physically, some virtually) different -- the one, from which may be her own or her parents' home, where she is a free agent; the other, to which, must be subject to the power or influence of the abductor, where, though she is free in very many of her actions, she is not perfectly free in all. It is not necessary that the place to which be the house of the abductor; it suffices if it be under his control or influence. Two rooms or two stories in a small dwelling, the home of one family; a street and an adjoining house; a public highway and a nearby field, would not afford the necessary change of locality. Removal, though violent, from room to room as above, would not induce the impediment under consideration, though some hold the contrary opinion. In case of a large castle, or mansion, or tenement-house, where many families dwell, the violent transference of a reluctant woman from a part where her family dwells to another remote part where a different family lives would constitute sufficient change of locality. If a woman is violently seized, v.g. in a room, and is violently kept there without change to another room, or if she willingly, without any enticement on the part of the man, goes to a place and is there violently detained with matrimonial intent, she does not suffer abduction in the Tridentine sense. It is a mere sequestration, or detention. Some jurists, however, think otherwise, claiming virtual change (from state of freedom to that of subjection) to be sufficient to induce the Council's impediment. Physical transference from one place to another, however, is absolutely necessary to constitute raptus; virtual transference does not suffice. Should a woman be forcibly removed from a place to which she went willingly to another where she is detained against her will with matrimonial intent, it is abduction. (3) Violence. -- Abduction always presumes that the abducted dissents, and that her unwillingness is overcome either by physical force, i.e. laying hands upon her, or moral force, i.e. threats, great fear, and fraud equivalent to force. Mere importunities, fair words, sweet phrases, gifts, and promises are not sufficient to constitute the moral force requisite for abduction. It is immaterial whether the principal, of and by himself, or through his agents and accomplices, uses this force, moral or physical. Women as the agents of the principal, may exercise it, and not infrequently do so. (4) Matrimonial Intent. -- The intention or motive of the criminal act is all important. To induce the impediment the intent must be to marry the abducted woman. Were the motive other than marriage, e.g. vengeance, pecuniary gain, or gratification of lust, there would be no abduction, no impediment, no penalties (S. Cong. Cone., 23 Jan., 1585). This is evident also from the custom of the Roman Curia, which, in all dispensations given or faculties granted to ordinaries to dispense in eases of affinity, consanguinity, etc., prefixes "provided that the woman was not abducted on account of this [marriage]". This impediment exists only between the abducted and abductor who, of and by himself, or with the assistance of others, had carried her off with intent to marry her. No impediment arises between the abducted and the agent or abettors of the abduction. She could validly, therefore, marry one of the agents or accomplices while still under the control of the abductor. When the intention is doubtful, judgment is arrived at from consideration of the circumstances. Thus, if a man violently carries off his betrothed or a woman with whom he has had conversations looking to future marriage, it is presumed that his intention was marriage. If doubts still remain, the law presumes the motive to be matrimonial. Where it is abundantly evident that the initial motive of the abduction was lust, it is not abduction, but sequestration, or detention, although afterwards, during the captivity, the captor promise marriage in order to attain his lustful object. The contrary opinion, held by Rosset (De Matrimonio, II, 1354), Krimer, and others, is at variance with the principle of law, that in crimes the beginning, and not what happens accidentally is what the law considers. Were the intent twofold, v.g. lust and marriage, then the carrying off is abduction and induces the impediment. The abduction must be proved, not presumed. The mere word of the abducted woman, especially as against the oath of the so-called abductor and the absence of all rumour, does not establish the fact. The existence of the abduction once admitted, the burden of proof rests upon the abductor. He must conclusively prove that the abducted willingly consented to both abduction and marriage. If she admits consent to the flight, he must still prove conclusively that she gave willing consent also to the marriage; otherwise the impediment holds and the penalties are incurred. Should he claim (in order to exclude impediment) that his motive in the beginning of the transaction was not marriage, but lust, and that he proposed marriage in order to attain his initial purpose, then he must, by the most conclusive evidence, establish his assertion, since the law presumes that his motive was matrimonial. PUNISHMENTS The abductor and his advisers and abettors and accomplices in a complete (copula not required), not merely an attempted, abduction are, by the law itself (Tridentine), excommunicated (not reserved), and made perpetually infamous, incapable of acquiring dignities; if they be clerics, they also incur deposition from their ecclesiastical rank. The abductor is also bound, whether the woman marries him or not, to dower her with a decent dowry at the discretion of the bishop. The priest who celebrates the marriage while the woman is under restraint does not incur the excommunication nor any other penalty, unless he has advised the abductor that he would aid him in his abduction by his presence and ministry. The agents and the like, in an abduction of a woman validly and freely betrothed, but unwilling to be carried off, do not incur excommunication and other Tridentine punishments (S. C. Prop. Fid., 17 April, 1784). The vindictive punishments are incurred, at least in the ecclesiastical court, by a declaratory sentence. The abducted woman, not the abductor, has the right to challenge the validity of her marriage celebrated while under control of the abductor. No particular time is prescribed by law, but she should, however, unless prevented by reasonable cause, present her plea as soon as possible after her entire separation from the control of the abductor. DISPENSATION The Church as a rule does not dispense with this impediment. It even refuses to grant other dispensations, v.g. affinity, if the woman was abducted; indeed any dispensation granted, in which mention of the abduction has been omitted, is held as invalid. There are some cases in which the Church has dispensed when it is abundantly evident that the consent of the woman was really free, although circumstances prevented her entire separation from the control of the abductor. The late Instruction of the Congregation of the Inquisition (15 February, 1901, in the "Analecta Ecclesiastica," Rome, 1901, 98) to the bishops of Albania (where abduction is of very frequent occurrence) refused a general repeal of the law for their country, adding that the frequency mentioned, far from being a reason for relaxing, was rather a reason for insisting on the Tridentine law; yet, where it was abundantly evident that the consent of the woman under restraint was truly a free consent, and that there were reasons sufficient for the dispensation, recourse should be had to Rome in each single case. Further, in the extraordinary faculties given to bishops (20 February, 1888) for dispensing in public impediments persons in danger of death, the impediment of raptus is not excluded. The civil codes of today, as a rule, do not recognize abduction as an impediment diriment to civil marriage, but consider it as a species of vis et metus. The codes of Austria and Spain, however, still hold it as an impediment, and among the jurists of Austria there is an earnest endeavour to make it an impediment absolute and perpetual, so that the abducted woman, if still under control of her abductor, may not marry even a third party. RIGANTI, Comment. in Reg., in Reg. xlix, nn. 46 sq.; SCHMALZGRÜBER, V, xvii, De Rapt. Pers., nn. 1-54, GONSALEZ TELLEZ, Comment. Perpet., V, xvii; BERARDI, Comment. in Jus. Eccles., II, 81 sqq.; WERNZ, IV, Jus Matrim, 408 sqq.; ROSSET, De Sac. Matrim., II, 1344 sqq.; VECCHIOTTI, Instit. Can., III, 234 sqq.; SANTI-LEITNER, IV, 58-65; FEIJE, De Imped. et Dispens.; KUTSCHKER, Das Eherecht (1856), III, 456 sqq.; Analecta Ecclesiastica (Rome, April, 1903); HOWARD, Hist. of Matrimonial inst., I, 156 sq., s.v. Wife-Captor; Acta Sanctae Sedis, I, 15-24; 54 sq.; GASPARI, De Matrim., I, 364 sqq. P.M.J. ROCK Abecedaria Abecedaria Complete or partial lists of letters of the alphabet, chiefly Greek and Latin, inscribed on ancient monuments, Pagan and Christian. At, or near, the beginning of the Christian era, the Latin alphabet had already undergone its principal changes, and had become a fixed and definite system. The Greek alphabet, moreover, with certain slight modifications, was becoming closely assimilated to the Latin. Towards the eighth century of Rome, the letters assumed their artistic forms and lost their older, narrower ones. Nor have the three letters added by the Emperor Claudius ever been found in use in Christian inscriptions. The letters themselves, it may be said, fell into disuse at the death of the Emperor in question. The alphabet, however, employed for monumental inscriptions differed so completely from the cursive as to make it wholly impossible to mistake the one for the other. The uncial, occurring very rarely on sculptured monuments, and reserved for writing, did not make its appearance before the fourth century. The number of Christian objects bearing the Abecedaria, with the exception of two vases found at Carthage, is extremely limited. On the other hand, those of heathen origin are more plentiful, and include certain tablets used by stone-cutters apprentices while learning their trade. Stones have also been found in the catacombs, bearing the symbols A, B, C, etc. These are arranged, sometimes, in combinations which have puzzled the sagacity of scholars. One such, found in the cemetery of St. Alexander, in the Via Nomentana, is inscribed as follows: AXBVCTESDR . . . . . .BCCEECHI EQGPH. . . .M MNOPQ RSTVXYZ This represents, in all probability, a schoolboy's task, which may be compared with a denarius of L. Cassius Caecinianus, whereon the inscription runs thus: AX, BV, CT, DS, ER, FQ, GP, HO, IN, KM It is to St. Jerome that we owe an explanation of this curious trifle. He tells us that, in order to train the memory of young children, they were made to learn the alphabet in a double form, joining A to X, and so on with the other letters. A stone found at Rome in 1877, and dating from the sixth or seventh century, seems to have been used in a school, as a model for learning the alphabet, and, points, incidentally, to the long continuance of old methods of teaching. ( See CHRISTIAN USE OF THE ALPHABET.) H. LECLERCQ Abecedarians Abecedarians A sect of Anabaptists who affected an absolute disdain for all human knowledge, contending that God would enlighten His elect interiorly and give them knowledge of necessary truths by visions and ecstasies. They rejected every other means of instuction, and pretended that to be saved one must even be ignorant of the first letters of the alphabet; whence their name, A-B-C-darians. They also considered the study of theology as a species of idolatry, and regarded learned men who did any preaching as falsifiers of God's word. At Wittenberg, in 1522, Nicholas Storch (Pelargus) and the Illuminati of Zwickau began to preach this doctrine, mixing it up with other errors. Carlstadt allowed himself to be drawn away by these singular views, and to put them thoroughly into practice he abandoned his title of Doctor and became a street porter. He preached the new doctrine for some time to the people and to the students of Wittenberg. JOHN J. A'BECKET Abel (Son of Adam) Abel (From the Hebrew word for Vanity, "probably so called from the shortness of his life"--Gesenius; Gr., Abel, whence Eng. form). Abel was the second son of Adam. Vigouroux and Hummelauer contend that the Assyrian aplu or ablu, const. Abal, i.e. "son," is the same word, not a case of orthographic coincidence, especially as Hebrew and Assyrian are closely related tongues. Some, with Josephus (Ant., I, ii), think it means "Sorrow" or "Lamentation". Cheyne holds that "a right view of the story favours the meaning shepherd, or more generally herdsman"; Assyrian ibilu (Ency. Bib., s.v.) "ram, camel, ass, or wild sheep." Cain, the first-born, was a farmer. Abel owned the flocks that lived upon the soil. The two were, therefore, doubly brothers, by birth and by calling. Abel is not mentioned in the Old Testament except in Gen., iv. St. Augustine makes him a type of the regenerate, and Cain of the natural, man. "Cain founded a city on earth, but Abel as a stranger and pilgrim looked forward to the city of the saints which is in heaven" (De Civ. Dei, XV, i). The descendants of Cain were wicked, but, as nothing is said about those of Abel, it is supposed that he had none; or at least that no son was alive at the birth of Seth, "whom God has given me for Abel", as Eve expressed it (Gen., iv, 25). The Abelians, or Abelites, a sect in northern Africa mentioned by St. Augustine (de Haer., lxxxvii), pretended that they imitated Abel by marrying, yet condemned the use of marriage. They adopted children who also married and lived in the same manner as their foster-parents. The biblical account of the sacrifices of the brothers and of the murder of Abel states that Cain offered "of the fruits of the earth ", Abel "of the firstlings of his flock, and of their fat". Cain's offerings are not qualified, Abel's show that he gave with generosity and love, and therefore found favour with God. Josephus says (Ant., I, ii), "God was more delighted with the latter (Abel's) oblation, when He was honoured with what grew naturally of its own accord than He was with what was the invention of a covetous man, and gotten by forcing the ground." St. John gives the true reason why God rejected Cain's sacrifice and accepted that of Abel: "his own works were wicked; and his brother's just" (I John, iii, 12). God said later, "I will not receive a gift of your hand" (Mal., i, 10). The love of the heart must sanctify the lifting of the hands. Cain offered dans Deo aliquid suum, sibi autem seipsum (de Civ. Dei, XV, vii), but God says to all what St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "I seek not the things that are yours, but you" (II Cor., xii, 14). In Hebrew, Christian, and Arabic traditions and legends it is said that God showed his acceptance of Abel's sacrifice by sending fire to consume it, as in III Kings, xviii, 38. Cain thereupon resolved to kill his brother, thinking the latter would supplant him as Jacob did Esau later; or because he thought the seed of Abel would have the honour of crushing the serpent's head (Gen., iii, l5.-Hummelauer, Curs. Com. S. Sac.). St. Jerome (Com. in Ezech., VIII, xxvii, no. 316), following Jewish tradition, makes the plain of Damascus the scene of the murder, and interprets the name of the city sanguinem bibens (blood-drinking). A traveller quoted with approval by the Rev. S. Baring-Gould ( Legends of the Old-Testament Characters) places the scene half a mile from Hebron; but there is no such local tradition in the neighbourhood of Hebron. The Damascus referred to is certainly the Syrian city. The Koran (Sura v, 30, etc.) agrees with the Bible in the main facts about the sacrifices and murder, but adds the legend that God sent a raven which by scratching in the earth showed Cain how to bury his brother. According to Jewish tradition, Adam and Eve were taught by the raven how to bury their son, and God rewarded the raven by granting three things: (1) his young were to be inviolable,(2)abundance of food (3) his prayer for rain should be granted (Pirke Rab: Eliezer, XXI). In the New Testament Abel is often mentioned. His pastoral life, his sacrifice, his holiness, his tragic death made him a striking type of Our Divine Saviour. His just works are referred to in I John, iii, 12; he is canonized by Christ himself (Matt., xxiii, 34, 35) as the first of the long line of prophets martyred for justice' sake. He prophesied not by word, but by his sacrifice, of which he knew by revelation the typical meaning (Vigouroux); and also by his death (De Civ. Dei, XV, xviii). In Heb., xii, 24, his death is mentioned, and the contrast between his blood and that of Christ is shown. The latter calls not for vengeance, but for mercy and pardon. Abel, though dead, speaketh (Heb., xi, 4), Deo per merita, hominibus per exemplum (Piconjo), i.e. to God by his merits, to men by his example. For a rabbinic interpretation of the plural Hebrew word meaning "bloods", in Gen., iv, 10, see Mishna San., IV, 5, where it is said to refer to Abel and to his seed. The Fathers place him among the martyrs. Martyrium dedicavit (St. Aug., op. cit., VI, xxvii); he is associated with St. John the Baptist by St. Chrysostom (Adv. Judaeos, viii, 8); others speak in similar terms. In the Western Church, however, he is not found in the martyrologies before the tenth century (Encycl. théol., s.v.). In the canon of the Mass his sacrifice is mentioned with those of Melchisedech and Abraham, and his name is placed at the head of the list of saints invoked to aid the dying. The views of radical higher criticism may be summed up in the words of Cheyne: "The story of Cain and Abel is an early Israelitish legend retained by J as having a profitable tendency" (Encyci. bib., s.v.). The conservative interpretation of the narrative differs from that of the radical school of critics, because it accepts the story as history or as having at least a historic basis, while they regard it as only one of the legends of Genesis. Patristic references in P.G. and P.L.; GEIKIE, Hours with the Bible; ID., The Descendants of Adam; ID., Creation to Patriarchs (New York, 1890); HUMMELAUER, Cursus Scrip. Sac. (Paris 1895); PALIS in VIG., Dict. de la Bible. FOR LEGENDS SEE: The Bible, the Koran, and the Talmud, tr. from the Germ by WEIL (London, 1846), 23-27; STANLEY, Sinai and Palestine; Id., Legends about Cain and Abel, 404, sqq.; BARING-GOULD, Legends of the Old Testament Characters (Lon- don 1871) I, 6; GUNKEL, The Legends of Genesis (tr., Chicago, 1901). For a strong presentation of the HISTORICITY of the Old Test., against the claims of the critical school, consult ORR, The Problems of the Old Testament (New York, 1906); DRIVER, Genesis (1904). JOHN J. TIERNEY Abel (Place Name) Abel ("Meadow") Name of several places distinguished by additional words: (1) Abel-Beth-Maacha (meadow of the house, or family, of Maacha). In Vulgate also "Abeldomus and Maacha," "Abeldomus Mancha", "Abela and Maacha"; identical with Abel-Maim (meadow of water), II Par., xvi, 4. It was a, city in Upper Galilee, a little west of Dan.--II K., xx. 14-19; III K., xv, 20; IV K., xv, 29; II Par., xvi, 4. (2) Abel-Keramim (meadow of vineyards), a village of the Ammonites, about six miles from Philadelphia. Jud., xi, 33. (3) Abelmehula, Abelmeula (Abelmechola, "a meadow of the dance"), in the Jordan valley near Bethsan.--Jud., vii, 23; III K., iv, 12; xix, 16. (4) Abel-Misraim (Vulg. "the mourning of Egypt"), according to St. Jerome identical with the "threshing floor of Atad." Gen., 1, 10 sq. (5) Abelsatim, Settim, Setim, Hebr. abhel hashshittim (meadow of acacias) is a place in the plains of Moab. Num., xxv, 1; xxxiii, 49; xxxiv-xxxvi; Jos., ii, 1; iii, 1; Mich. vi, 5. (6) The great Abel in I K., vi, 18, is a misreading for the great ebhen (stone). Vigouroux, in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895) HAGEN, Lex. Bibl. (Paris, 1905); HOLZAMMER, in Kirchenlex. (Freiburg, 1882); CONDER, in Dict. of the Bible (New York, 1903). A.J. MAAS Peter Abelard Peter Abelard Dialectician, philosopher, and theologian, born 1079; died 1142. Peter Abelard (also spelled Abeillard, Abailard, etc., while the best manuscripts have Abaelardus) was born in the little village of Pallet, about ten miles east of Nantes in Brittany. His father, Berengar, was lord of the village, his mother's name was Lucia; both afterwards entered the monastic state. Peter, the oldest of their children, was intended for a military career, but, as he himself tells us, he abandoned Mars for Minerva, the profession of arms for that of learning. Accordingly, at an early age, he left his father's castle and sought instruction as a wandering scholar at the schools of the most renowned teachers of those days. Among these teachers was Roscelin the Nominalist, at whose school at Locmenach, near Vannes, Abelard certainly spent some time before he proceeded to Paris. Although the University of Paris did not exist as a corporate institution until more than half a century after Abelard's death, there flourished at Paris in his time the Cathedral School, the School of Ste. Geneviève, and that of St. Germain des Pré, the forerunners of the university schools of the following century. The Cathedral School was undoubtedly the most important of these, and thither the young Abelard directed his steps in order to study dialectic under the renowned master ( scholasticus) William of Champeaux. Soon, however, the youth from the province, for whom the prestige of a great name was far from awe-inspiring, not only ventured to object to the teaching of the Parisian master, but attempted to set up as a rival teacher. Finding that this was not an easy matter in Paris, he established his school first at Melun and later at Corbeil. This was, probably, in the year 1101. The next couple of years Abelard spent in his native place "almost cut off from France", as he says. The reason of this enforced retreat from the dialectical fray was failing health. On returning to Paris, he became once more a pupil of William of Champeaux for the purpose of studying rhetoric. When William retired to the monastery of St. Victor, Abelard, who meantime had resumed his teaching at Melun, hastened to Paris to secure the chair of the Cathedral School. Having failed in this, he set up his school in Mt. Ste. Genevieve (1108). There and at the Cathedral School, in which in 1113 he finally succeeded in obtaining a chair, he enjoyed the greatest renown as a teacher of rhetoric and dialectic. Before taking up the duty of teaching theology at the Cathedral School, he went to Laon where he presented himself to the venerable Anselm of Laon as a student of theology. Soon, however, his petulant restiveness under restraint once more asserted itself, and he was not content until he had as completely discomfited the teacher of theology at Laon as he had successfully harassed the teacher of rhetoric and dialectic at Paris. Taking Abelard's own account of the incident, it is impossible not to blame him for the temerity which made him such enemies as Alberic and Lotulph, pupils of Anselm, who, later on, appeared against Abelard. The "theological studies" pursued by Abelard at Laon were what we would nowadays call the study of exegesis. There can be no doubt that Abelard's career as a teacher at Paris, from 1108 to 1118, was an exceptionally brilliant one. In his "Story of My Calamities" ( Historia Calamitatum) he tells us how pupils flocked to him from every country in Europe, a statement which is more than corroborated by Ihe authority of his contemporaries. He was, In fact, the idol of Paris; eloquent, vivacious, handsome, possessed of an unusually rich voice, full of confidence in his own power to please, he had, as he tells us, the whole world at his feet. That Abelard was unduly conscious of these advantages is admitted by his most ardent admirers; indeed, in the "Story of My Calamities," he confesses that at that period of his life he was filled with vanity and pride. To these faults he attributes his downfall, which was as swift and tragic as was everything, seemingly, in his meteoric career. He tells us in graphic language the tale which has become part of the classic literature of the love-theme, how he fell in love with Heloise, niece of Canon Fulbert; he spares us none of the details of the story, recounts all the circumstances of its tragic ending, the brutal vengeance of the Canon, the flight of Heloise to Pallet, where their son, whom he named Astrolabius, was born, the secret wedding, the retirement of Heloise to the nunnery of Argenteuil, and his abandonment of his academic career. He was at the time a cleric in minor orders, and had naturally looked forward to a distinguished career as an ecclesiastical teacher. After his downfall, he retired to the Abbey of St. Denis, and, Heloise having taken the veil at Argenteuil, he assumed the habit of a Benedictine monk at the royal Abbey of St. Denis. He who had considered himself "the only surviving philosopher in the whole world" was willing to hide himself -- definitely, as he thought -- in monastic solitude. But whatever dreams he may have had of final peace in his monastic retreat were soon shattered. He quarrelled with the monks of St. Denis, the occasion being his irreverent criticism of the legend of their patron saint, and was sent to a branch institution, a priory or cella, where, once more, he soon attracted unfavourable attention by the spirit of the teaching which he gave in philosophy and theology. "More subtle and more learned than ever", as a contemporary (Otto of Freising) describes him, he took up the former quarrel with Anselm's pupils. Through their influence, his orthodoxy, especially on the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, was impeached, and he was summoned to appear before a council at Soissons, in 1121, presided over by the papal legate, Kuno, Bishop of Praneste. While it is not easy to determine exactly what took place at the Council, it is clear that there was no formal condemnation of Abelard's doctrines, but that he was nevertheless condemned to recite the Athanasian Creed, and to burn his book on the Trinity. Besides, he was sentenced to imprisonment in the Abbey of St. Médard, at the instance apparently, of the monks of St. Denis, whose enmity, especially that of their Abbot Adam, was unrelenting. In his despair, he fled to a desert place in the neighbourhood of Troyes. Thither pupils soon began to flock, huts and tents for their reception were built, and an oratory erected, under the title "The Paraclete", and there his former success as a teacher was renewed. After the death of Adam, Abbot of St. Denis, his successor, Suger, absolved Abelard from censure, and thus restored him to his rank as a monk. The Abbey of St. Gildas de Rhuys, near Vannes, on the coast of Brittany, having lost its Abbot in 1125, elected Abelard to fill his place. At the same time, the community of Argenteuil was dispersed, and Heloise gladly accepted the Oratory of the Paraclete, where she became Abbess. As Abbot of St. Gildas, Abelard had, according to his own account, a very troublesome time. The monks, considering him too strict, endeavoured in various ways to rid themselves of his rule, and even attempted to poison him. They finally drove him from the monastery. Retaining the title of Abbot, he resided for some time in the neighbourhood of Nantes and later (probably in 1136) resumed his career as teacher at Paris and revived, to some extent, the renown of the days when, twenty years earlier, he gathered "all Europe" to hear his lectures. Among his pupils at this time were Arnold of Brescia and John of Salisbury. Now begins the last act in the tragedy of Abelard's life, in which St. Bernard plays a conspicuous part. The monk of Clairvaux, the most powerful man in the Church in those days, was alarmed at the heterodoxy of Abelard's teaching, and questioned the Trinitarian doctrine contained in Abelard's writings. There were admonitions on the one side and defiances on the other; St. Bernard, having first warned Abelard in private, proceeded to denounce him to the bishops of France; Abelard, underestimating the ability and influence of his adversary, requested a meeting, or council, of bishops, before whom Bernard and he should discuss the points in dispute. Accordingly, a council was held at Sens (the metropolitan see to which Paris was then suffragan) in 1141. On the eve of the council a meeting of bishops was held, at which Bernard was present, but not Abelard, and in that meeting a number of propositions were selected from Abelard's writings, and condemned. When, on the following morning, these propositions were read in solemn council, Abelard, informed, so it seems, of the proceedings of the evening before, refused to defend himself, declaring that he appealed to Rome. Accordingly, the propositions were condemned, but Abelard was allowed his freedom. St. Bernard now wrote to the members of the Roman Curia, with the result that Abelard had proceeded only as far as Cluny on his way to Rome when the decree of Innocent II confirming the sentence of the Council of Sens reached him. The Venerable Peter of Cluny now took up his case, obtained from Rome a mitigation of the sentence reconciled him with St. Bernard, and gave him honourable and friendly hospitality at Cluny. There Abelard spent the last years of his life, and there at last he found the peace which he had elsewhere sought in vain. He donned the habit of the monks of Cluny and became a teacher in the school of the monastery. He died at Chalôn-sur-Saône in 1142, and was buried at the Paraclete. In 1817 his remains and those of Heloise were transferred to the cemetery of Père la Chaise, in Paris, where they now rest. For our knowledge of the life of Abelard we rely chiefly on the "Story of My Calamities", an autobiography written as a letter to a friend, and evidently intended for publication. To this may be added the letters of Abelard and Heloise, which were also intended for circulation among Abelard's friends. The "Story" was written about the year 1130, and the letters during the following five or six years. In both the personal element must of course, be taken into account. Besides these we have very scanty material; a letter from Roscelin to Abelard, a letter of Fulco of Deuil, the chronicle of Otto of Freising, the letters of St. Bernard, and a few allusions in the writings of John of Salisbury. Abelard's philosophical works are "Dialectica," a logical treatise consisting of four books (of which the first is missing); "Liber Divisionum et Definitionum" (edited by Cousin as a fifth book of the "Dialectica"); Glosses on Porphyry, Boëius, and the Aristotelian "Categories"; "Glossulae in Porphyrium" (hitherto unpublished except in a French paraphrase by Rémusat); the fragment "De Generibus et Speciebus", ascribed to Abelard by Cousin; a moral treatise "Scito Teipsum, seu Ethica", first published by Pez in "Thes. Anecd. Noviss". All of these, with the exception of the "Glossulae" and the "Ethica", are to be found in Cousin's "Ouvrages inédits d'Abélard" (Paris, 1836). Abelard's theological works (published by Cousin, "Petri Abselardi Opera", in 2 vols., Paris, 1849-59, also by Migne, "Patr. Lat.", CLXXVIII) include "Sic et Non", consisting of scriptural and patristic passages arranged for and against various theological opinions, without any attempt to decide whether the affirmative or the negative opinion is correct or orthodox; "Tractatus de Unitate et Trinitate Divinâ", which was condemned at the Council of Sens (discovered and edited by Stölzle, Freiburg, 1891); "Theologia Christiana," a second and enlarged edition of the "Tractatus" (first published by Durand and Martène "Thes. Nov.," 1717); "Introductio in Theologiam' (more correctly, "Theologia"), of which the first part was published by Duchesne in 1616; "Dialogus inter Philosophum, Judaeum, et Christianum"; "Sententiae Petri Abaelardi", otherwise called "Epitomi Theologiae Christianae", which is seemingly a compilation by Abelard's pupils (first published by Rheinwald, Berlin, 1535); and several exegetical works hymns, sequences, etc. In philosophy Abelard deserves consideration primarily as a dialectician. For him, as for all the scholastic philosophers before the thirteenth century, philosophical inquiry meant almost exclusively the discussion and elucidation of the problems suggested by the logical treatises of Aristotle and the commentaries thereon, chiefly the commentaries of Porphyry and Boëtius. Perhaps his most important contribution to philosophy and theology is the method which he developed in his "Sic et Non" (Yea and Nay), a method germinally contained in the teaching of his predecessors, and afterwards brought to more definite form by Alexander of Hales and St. Thomas Aquinas. It consisted in placing before the student the reasons pro and contra, on the principle that truth is to be attained only by a dialectical discussion of apparently contradictory arguments and authorities. In the problem of Universals, which occupied so much of the attention of dialecticians in those days, Abelard took a position of uncompromising hostility to the crude nominalism of Roscelin on the one side, and to the exaggerated realism of William of Champeaux on the other. What, precisely, was his own doctrine on the question is a matter which cannot with accuracy be determined. However, from the statements of his pupil, John of Salisbury, it is clear that Abelard's doctrine, while expressed in terms of a modified Nominalism, was very similar to the moderate Realism which began to be official in the schools about half a century after Abelard's death. In ethics Abelard laid such great stress on the morality of the intention as apparently to do away with the objective distinction between good and evil acts. It is not the physical action itself, he said, nor any imaginary injury to God, that constitutes sin, but rather the psychological element in the action, the intention of sinning, which is formal contempt of God. With regard to the relation between reason and revelation, between the sciences -- including philosophy -- and theology, Abelard incurred in his own day the censure of mystic theologians like St. Bernard, whose tendency was to disinherit reason in favour of contemplation and ecstatic vision. And it is true that if the principles "Reason aids Faith" and "Faith aids Reason" are to be taken as the inspiration of scholastic theology, Abelard was constitutionally inclined to emphasize the former, and not lay stress on the latter. Besides, he adopted a tone, and employed a phraseology, when speaking of sacred subjects, which gave offence, and rightly, to the more conservative of his contemporaries. Still, Abelard had good precedent for his use of dialectic in the elucidation of the mysteries of faith; he was by no means an innovator in this respect; and though the thirteenth century, the golden age of scholasticism, knew little of Abelard, it took up his method, and with fearlessness equal to his, though without any of his flippancy or irreverence, gave full scope to reason in the effort to expound and defend the mysteries of the Christian Faith. St. Bernard sums up the charges against Abelard when he writes (Ep. cxcii) "Cum de Trinitate loquitur, sapit Arium; cum do gratiâ, sapit Pelagium; cum de personâ Christi, sapit Nestorium", and there is no doubt that on these several heads Abelard wrote and said many things which were open to objection from the point of view of orthodoxy. That is to say, while combating the opposite errors, he fell inadvertently into mistakes which he himself did not recognize as Arianism, Pelagianism, and Nestorianism, and which even his enemies could characterize merely as savouring of Arianism, Pelagianism, and Nestorianism. Abelard's influence on his immediate successors was not very great, owing partly to his conflict with the ecclesiastical authorities, and partly to his personal defects, more especially his vanity and pride, which must have given the impression that he valued truth less than victory. His influence on the philosophers and theologians of the thirteenth century was, however, very great. It was exercised chiefly through Peter Lombard, his pupil, and other framers of the "Sentences." Indeed, while one must be careful to discount the exaggerated encomiums of Compayré, Cousin, and others, who represent Abelard as the first modern, the founder of the University of Paris, etc., one is justified in regarding him, in spite of his faults of character and mistakes of judgment, as an important contributor to scholastic method, an enlightened opponent of obscurantism, and a continuator of that revival of learning which occurred in the Carolingian age, and of which whatever there is of science, literature, and speculation in the early Middle Ages is the historical development. WILLIAM TURNER Louis Abelly Louis Abelly Louis Abelly (1603-91) was Vicar-General of Bayonne, a parish priest in Paris, and subsequently Bishop of Rodez in 1664, but in 1666 abdicated and attached himself to St. Vincent de Paul in the House of St. Lazare, Paris. His ascetical works reveal his deep and sincere piety. He was a bitter foe of the Jansenists, chiefly of St. Cyran, against whom he directed his Life of St. Vincent de Paul, a work which Hurter describes as "full of unction." His Medulla Theologica went through many editions, and is characterized by its "solidity, directness, and usefulness." According to St. Alphonsus, Abelly is "a classic in probabilism." His Défense de la hiérarchie de l'Eglise was directed against an anonymous Gallican writer. He wrote also two Enchiridions, one for bishops, another for priests; a treatise entitled De l'obéissance et soumission due au Pape; and another called Traité des Hérésies. Replying to a Jansenist work known as Monita Salutaria, he published his Sentiments des SS. Pères, touchant les excellences et les prérogatives de la T.S. Vierge. HURTER, Nomenclator, VII, 586. T.J. CAMPBELL Abenakis Abenakis A confederation of Algonquin tribes, comprising the Penobscots, Passamaquoddies, Norridgewocks, and others, formerly occupying what is now Maine, and southern New Brunswick. Their territory joined that of the Micmacs on the northeast, and that of the Penobscots on the southwest. Their speech is a dialect of the Micmac language of the North American Indians. They took sides with the French and maintained an increasing hostility against encroachments of the English. When their principal town, Norridgewock, was taken, and their missionary, Rasle, was killed (1724), the greater part of them removed to St. Francis, in the province of Quebec, Canada, whither other refugees from the New England tribes had preceded them. They are now represented by the Amalectites on the St. John River, New Brunswick, and Quebec (820); the Passamaquoddies, on the bay of that name, in Maine (300); the Penobscots, at Old Town, Maine (400), and the Abnakis at St. Francis and Becancourt, Quebec (430). There are a dozen variations of the name Abenakis, such as Abenaquiois, Abakivis, Quabenakionek, Wabenakies, etc. They are described in the "Jesuit Relations" as not cannibals, and as docile, ingenious, temperate in the use of liquor, and not profane. Their language has been preserved in the monumental dictionary of Sebastian Rasle. After the unsuccessful attempt of de la Saussaye, in 1613, to plant a colony as Mount Desert -- where the Jesuit Fathers Biard, Masse, and Quentin proposed to evangelize the Indians -- the Capuchins and the Recollects, aided by secular priests from the seminary of Quebec, undertook the work, but met with indifferent success. The Jesuit Druillettes was sent to them in 1646, but remained only a short time. Subsequently, other missionaries like Bigot, Thury, and de la Chasse laboured among them, but three years after the murder of Father Rasle, that is to say in 1727, when Fathers Syvesme and Lauverjat withdrew, there was no resident pastor in Maine, though the Indians were visited by priests from time to time. They remained unalterably attached to the Faith, and during the Revolution, when Washington sent to ask them to join with the colonies against England, they assented on condition that a Catholic priest should be sent to them. Some of the chaplains of the French fleet communicated with them, promising to comply with their request, but beyond that nothing was done. At the present time there are Indian missions for the remnants of the tribe at Calais, Eastport, and Old Town. Jesuit Relations, passim; Shea, Catholic Church in Colonial Days, 1521-1763 (New York, 1886); Maurault, Hist. des Abénakis depuis 1605 a nos jours (Quebec, 1866). T.J. CAMPBELL Abraham-Ben-Meir Aben-Ezra Abraham-ben-Méir Aben-Ezra (Or IBN 'EZRA). A celebrated Spanish Rabbi, born at Toledo in 1092; died on his Journey from Rome, or Rodez, to his native land, 23 January, 1167. He excelled in philosophy, astronomy, medicine, poetry, linguistics, and exegesis. He was called the Wise, the Great, the Admirable Doctor. Having to leave his native city on account of the vexations inflicted on the Jews, he travelled through a great part of Europe, through Egypt and Palestine. Rome, London, Narbonne, Mantua, Verona, and Rodez are some of the places he visited. His chief work is his commentary on the Sacred Books, which is nearly complete, the Books of Paralipomenon being the only ones missing. His commentary on the Pentateuch appeared in several revisions. In his commentary Aben-Ezra adheres to the literal sense of the Sacred Books, avoiding Rabbinic allegories and Cabbalistic extravagances, though he remains faithful to the Jewish traditions. This does not prevent him from exercising an independent criticism, which, according to some writers, even borders on rationalism. But in his other works he follows the Cabbalistic views. The Book of the Secrets of the Law, The Mystery of the Form of the Letters, The Enigma of the Quiescent Letters, The Book of the Name, The Book of the Balance of the Sacred Language, The Book of Purity [of the Language] are perhaps the most important of his works of this kind. They were written during his life of travel, and they reflect the unsteadiness of his outward circumstances. Taking Aben-Ezra's work as a whole, it consists rather in popularizing Rabbinic Andalusian ideas on Latin and Saxon soil than in producing original thought. LEVESQUE, in VIG., Dict. de la Bible (Paris 1895); WELTE, in Kirchenlex. (Freiburg, 1882); Jewish Encyclopedia, VI, 520 sq. (New York, 1904). A.J. MAAS Inscription of Abercius Inscription of Abercius A Greek hagiographical text, which has, however, undergone alterations, and a Greek inscription of the second century have made known to us a certain Abercius, Bishop of Hieropolis, in Phrygia, who, about the middle of the century in question, left his episcopal city and visited Rome. On his way home he travelled through Syria and Mesopotamia, and was received with great honours in various places. He died shortly after his return to Hieropolis, but not before he had composed his own epitaph, conveying a most vivid impression of all he had admired during his stay in Rome. This epitaph may well have inspired the Life of Abercius such as it has come down to us, since all its details may be explained by the hints contained in the inscription, or else belong to the common foundation of all legends of saints. The Life, as a matter of fact, includes a transcription of the epitaph. Tillemont was greatly struck by the ideas therein expressed, and Pitra endeavoured to prove its authenticity and its important bearing on Christian symbolism. Renan regarded both the Life and inscription as fanciful compositions, but in 1882 an English traveller, W. Ramsay, discovered at Kelendres, near Synnada, in Phrygia Salutaris (Asia Minor), a Christian stele (inscribed slab) bearing the date of the year 300 of the Phrygian era (A.D. 216). The inscription in question recalled the memory of a certain Alexander, son of Anthony. De Rossi and Duchesne at once recognized in it phrases similar to those in the epitaph of Abercius. On comparison it was found that the inscription in memory of Alexander corresponded, almost word for word, with the first and last verses of the epitaph of the Bishop of Hieropolis; all the middle part was missing. Mr. Ramsay, on a second visit to the site of Hieropolis, in 1883, discovered two new fragments covered with inscriptions, built into the masonry of the public baths. These fragments, which are now in the Vatican Christian Museum, filled out the middle part of the stele inscribed with the epitaph of Abercius. It now became possible, with the help of the text preserved in the Life, to restore the original text of the epitaph with practical certainty. Certain lacunae, letters effaced or cut off by breaks in the stone, have been the subject of profound discussions, resulting in a text which may henceforth be looked on as settled, and which it may be useful to give here. The capital letters at the beginning and end of the inscription represent the parts found on the inscription of Alexander, the son of Anthony, those of the middle part are the remaining fragments of the epitaph of Abercius, while the small letters give the reading according to the manuscripts of the Life: "The citizen of a chosen city, this [monument] I made [while] living, that there I might have in time a resting-place of my body, [I] being by name Abercius, the disciple of a holy shepherd who feeds flocks of sheep [both] on mountains and on plains, who has great eyes that see everywhere. For this [shepherd] taught me [that the] book [of life] is worthy of belief. And to Rome he sent me to contemplate majesty, and to see a queen golden-robed and golden-sandalled; there also I saw a people bearing a shining mark. And I saw the land of Syria and all [its] cities Nisibis [I saw] when I passed over Euphrates. But everywhere I had brethren. I had Paul. . . . Faith everywhere led me forward, and everywhere provided as my food a fish of exceeding great size, and perfect, which a holy virgin drew with her hands from a fountain and this it [faith] ever gives to its friends to eat, it having wine of great virtue, and giving it mingled with bread. These things I, Abercius, having been a witness [of them] told to be written here. Verily I was passing through my seventy-second year. He that discerneth these things, every fellow-believer [namely], let him pray for Abercius. And no one shall put another grave over my grave; but if he do, then shall he pay to the treasury of [the] Romans two thousand pieces of gold and to my good native city of Hieropolis one thousand pieces of gold." The interpretation of this inscription has stimulated ingenious efforts and very animated controversies. In 1894 G. Ficker, supported by O. Hirschfeld, strove to prove that Abercius was a priest of Cybele. In 1895 A. Harnack offered an explanation which was sufficiently obscure, making Abercius the representative of an ill-defined religious syncretism arbitrarily combined in such a fashion as to explain all portions of the inscription which were otherwise inexplicable. In 1896, Dieterich made Abercius a priest of Attis. These plausible theories have been refuted by several learned archaeologists, especially by De Rossi, Duchesne, and Cumont. Nor is there any further need to enter into the questions raised in one quarter or another; the following conclusions are indisputably historical. The epitaph of Abercius is generally, and with good reason, regarded as older than that of Alexander, the son of Anthony, i.e. prior to the year of Our Lord 216. The subject of it may be identified with a writer named Abercius Marcellus, author of a work against the Montanists, some fragments of which have been preserved by Eusebius. As the treatise in question was written about the year 193, the epitaph may be assigned to the last years of the second, or to the beginning of the third, century. The writer was bishop of a little town, the name of which is wrongly given in the Life, since he belongs to Hieropolis in Phrygia Salutaris, and not to Hierapolis in Phrygia Pacatiensis. The proof of this fact given by Duchesne is all that could be wished for. The text of the inscription itself is of the greatest possible importance in connection with the symbolism of the early Church. The poem of sixteen verses which forms the epitaph shows plainly that the language used is one not understood by all; Let the brother who shall understand this pray for Abercius. The bishop's journey to Rome is merely mentioned, but on his way home he gives us the principal stages of his itinerary. He passed along the Syrian coast and, possibly, came to Antioch, thence to Nisibis, after-having traversed the whole of Syria, while his return to Hieropolis may have been by way of Edessa. The allusion to St. Paul the Apostle, which a gap in the text renders indecipherable, may originally have told how the traveller followed on his way back to his country the stages of St. Paul's third missionary journey, namely: Issus, Tarsus, Derbe, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia, and Apamea Cibotus, which would bring him into the heart of Phrygia. The inscription bears witness of no slight value to the importance of the Church of Rome in the second century. A mere glance at the text allows us to note: (1) The evidence of baptism which marks the Christian people with its dazzling seal; (2) The spread of Christianity, whose members Abercius meets with everywhere; (3) The receiving of Jesus Christ, the Son of God and of Mary, in the Eucharist, (4) under the species of Bread and Wine. The liturgical cultus of Abercius presents no point of special interest; his name appears for the first time in the Greek menologies and synaxaries of the tenth century, but is not found in the Martyrology of St. Jerome. PITRA, in the Spicilegium Solesmense (Paris, 1855, III, 533; IV, 483); DUCHESNE, Abercius, eveque d'Hieropolis, in the Revue des questions historiques (1883), XXXIV, 533; LECLERCQ, in Dict. d arch ol. chr t. et de liturgie, I, 66- 87; LIGHTFOOT, Apostolic Fathers (London, 1889), II, i, 492-501. H. LECLERCQ. John Abercromby John Abercromby Died 1561. During the Scottish Reformation we know that the Catholic clergy were treated with great violence, but particulars of their misfortunes are hard to find. Thomas Dempster, a diligent writer of the next century, whose accuracy, however, cannot always be trusted, in his Historia Gentis Scotorum (Edinburgh, 1829), 28, names Abercromby as having lost his life from such violence. He adds that he thinks the sufferer was a Benedictine, and that he had written in behalf of the Faith. JOHN HUNGERFORD POLLEN Robert Abercromby Robert Abercromby (Sometimes known as Sanders and as Robertson). A Jesuit missionary in Scotland in the time of the persecutions, born 1532; died at Braunsberg, in Prussia, 27 April, 1613. He was brought into prominence chiefly by the fact that he converted the Queen of James I of England, when that monarch was as yet James IV of Scotland. The Queen was Anne of Denmark, and her father, an ardent Lutheran, has stipulated that she should have the right to practice her own religion in Scotland, and for that purpose sent with her a chaplain named John Lering who, however, shortly after his arrival, became a Calvinist. The Queen, who abhorred Calvinism, asked some of the Catholic nobles for advice, and it was suggested to call Father Abercromby, who, with some other Jesuits, was secretly working among the Scotch Catholics and winning many illustrious converts to the Church. Though brought up a Lutheran, Queen Anne had in her youth lived with a niece of the Emperor Charles V, and not only knew something of the Faith, but had frequently been present at Mass with her former friend. Abercromby was introduced into the palace, instructed the Queen in the Catholic religion, and received her into the Church. This was about the year 1600. As to the date there is some controversy. Andrew Lang, who merely quotes Mac Quhirrie as to the fact of the conversion, without mentioning Abercromby, puts it as occurring in 1598. Intelligence of it at last came to the ears of the King, who, instead of being angry, warned her to keep it secret, as her conversion might imperil his crown. He even went as far as to appoint Abercromby Superintendent of the Royal Falconry, in order that he might remain near the Queen. Up to the time that James succeeded to the crown of England, Father Abercromby remained at the Scottish Court, celebrating Mass in secret, and giving Holy Communion nine or ten times to his neophyte. When the King and Queen were crowned sovereigns of Great Britain, Anne gave proof of her sincerity by absolutely refusing to receive the Protestant sacrament, declaring that she preferred to forfeit her crown rather than take part in what she considered a sacrilegious profanation. Of this, Lang, in his "History of Scotland", says nothing. She made several ineffectual attempts to convert the King. Abercromby remained in Scotland for some time, but as a price of 10,000 crowns was put upon his head he came to England, only to find that the King's kindly dispositions toward him had undergone a change. The alleged discovery of a Gunpowder Plot in 1605, and the attempts made to implicate the Jesuits in the conspiracy had excited in the mind of the King feelings of bitter hostility to the Society. He ordered a strict search to be made for Abercromby, who consequently left the country and betook himself to Braunsberg, in Eastern Prussia, where he died, in his eighty-first year. Bellesheim, Hist, of the Cath. Church in Scotland, VIII, 346; Rostowski, Lituanic, S. J., Hist., 236; Abercromby's Narrative in the Biblioth. Nation., Paris, Fonds latins, 6051, fol. 50. T.J. CAMPBELL The Diocese of Aberdeen The Diocese of Aberdeen (Scotland). A see was founded in 1063 at Mortlach by Bl. Beyn. The earliest mention of the old See of Aberdeen is in the charter of the foundation, by the Earl of Buchan, of the Church of Deer (c. 1152), which is witnessed by Nectan, Bishop of Aberdeen. But the first authentic record of the see is in the Bull of Adrian IV (1157), confirming to Edward, Bishop of Aberdeen, the churches of Aberdeen and St. Machar, with the town of Old Aberdeen and other lands. The granite cathedral was built between 1272 and 1277. Bishop Thomas Spence founded a Franciscan house in 1480, and King's College was founded at Old Aberdeen by Bishop Elphinstone, for eight prebendaries, chapter, sacristan, organist, and six choristers, in 1505. The see was transferred to Old Aberdeen about 1125, and continued there until 1577, having had in that time a list of twenty-nine bishops. From 1653, when the Scottish clergy were incorporated into a missionary body by the Congregation of the Propaganda, until 1695, the Catholics of Scotland were governed by prefects-apostolic. Then followed vicars-apostolic until 4 March, 1878, when Leo XIII, in the first year of his pontificate, restored the hierarchy of Scotland by the Bull Ex supremo Apostolatus apice, and Vicar-Apostolic John MacDonald was translated to the restored See of Aberdeen as its first bishop. The Bull made Aberdeen one of the four suffragan sees of the Archbishopric of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, and defined as its territory "the counties of Aberdeen, Kincardine, Banff, Elgin or Moray, Nairn, Ross (except Lewis in the Hebrides), Cromarty, Sutherland, Caithness, the Orkney and Shetland Islands, and that portion of Inverness which lies to the north of a straight line drawn from the most northerly point of Loch Luing to the eastern boundary of the said county of Inverness, where the counties of Aberdeen and Banff join." In 1906, out of a population of over 800,000 there were nearly 4,000 Catholics; 48 secular priests; 24 regulars; 57 churches, chapels, and stations; 1 college; 1 industrial school for girls; 1 orphanage for boys; 1 orphanage for girls. There are also Benedictine nuns, Poor Sisters of Nazareth, Franciscan Sisters, Religious of the Sacred Heart, and Sisters of Mercy. There have been four Bishops of Aberdeen since the restoration, the present incumbent, the Rt. Rev. AEneas Chisholm, having been consecrated 24 February, 1899. There is a Benedictine Abbey at Fort Augustus, at which the restored hierarchy met in a Provincial Council, August, 1886, under the presidency of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, three hundred and twenty-six years after the downfall of the Faith in Scotland. The Provincial Council of 1 March, 1559, at Edinburgh, under Archbishop Hamilton, was the last council before this, and that had adjourned after appointing Septuagesima Sunday of 1560, for the next meeting of the synod. Fort Augustus was raised to the rank of an abbey, immediately subject to the Holy See, by a brief of Leo XIII, 12 December, 1882. The munificence of Lord Lovat and other liberal benefactors called it into being. The Catholic Directory (London, 1906); BELLESHEIM, History of the Catholic Church in Scotland (London, 1887, tr. HUNTERBLAIR), I, 239, 425, passim. JOHN J. A' BECKET. The University of Aberdeen The University of Aberdeen The founder of this, one of the three universities established in Scotland in Catholic times, was William Elphinstone, who was Bishop of Aberdeen from 1483 to 1514. Early in his episcopate a petition had been sent to Rome in the name of King James IV, but probably framed by Elphinstone himself, representing the ignorance which prevailed in the greater part of his diocese, and in the northern districts of the kingdom generally. The Papal Bull for the erection of Aberdeen University was issued 24 February, 1491 (1495 according to our modern way of reckoning). Bishop Elphinstone had been a professor at Paris and at Orleans for nine years, and it was on the University of Paris, both as to form and organization, and also in its wide scope of general mental training, that the new establishment was modelled by its founder. In 1495 Elphinstone procured a royal charter assigning to academic purposes certain ecclesiastical revenues and conceding to the new university all the privileges enjoyed by the universities of Paris, St. Andrews, and Glasgow. Hector Boece, professor of philosophy at Paris, was appointed first principal of the university, which was established in what is now known as Old Aberdeen, near the ancient Cathedral of St. Machar. In 1593, George Keith, fifth Earl Marshal of Scotland, founded a second university (hence called Marischal College) in the new town of Aberdeen, and granted to it the buildings of the dispossessed Black (Dominican), Grey (Franciscan), and White (Carmelite) Friars as endowment. The two universities were united for a time (from 1640 until after the Restoration), and many schemes for their permanent reunion were promulgated in the 18th century; but it was not until 1859 that their fusion was finally affected, after much local opposition. New professorships and lectureships have been recently founded, and at Marischal College, now the seat of the faculties of science, law, and medicine, a scheme of building extension on a great scale is at present (1905) being carried out. The number of students is about 700, and the number of professors 24. RASHDALE, History of Universities (1805) II, 309; INNES, Sketches of Early Scotch History (Edinburgh, 1871), 254. D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR Moritz von Aberle Moritz von Aberle Catholic theologian, b. at Rottum, near Biberach, in Swabia, 25 April, 1819; d. at Tübingen, 3 November, 1875. He became professor in the Obergymnasium, at Ehingen, in 1845; director of the Wilhelmstift, in 1848; professor of moral theology and New Testament exegesis in the university at Tübingen, in 1850, a position he retained till the day of his death. He had a considerable number of pupils in both branches, but he was especially devoted to Scriptural studies. He emphasized the activity of the human bearers of revelation, without changing it into a purely natural process. The results of his investigations he published in a series of articles contributed to the Tübingen theol. Quartalschrift, 1851-72, and to the Bonner theol. Lit.-Blatt. The main thoughts of these articles were collected and published under the title, Introduction to the New Testament, by Dr. Paul Schanz (Freiburg, 1877). Aberle's view that the Gospels and the Book of Acts are apologetic writings, meeting certain needs of the Apostolic times, cannot be sustained. He took also an active part in the struggle for ecclesiastical liberty in Würtemberg, and his strong newspaper articles forced the State to arrange Church matters on a tolerable basis. HIMPEL, Theologische Quartalschrift, 1876, 177-228; WERNER, Geschichte der neuzeitl. christlich-kirchl. Apologetik (Schaffhausen, 1867). A.J. MAAS The Legend of Abgar The Legend of Abgar The historian Eusebius records a tradition (H.E., I, xii), which he himself firmly believes, concerning a correspondence that took place between Our Lord and the local potentate at Edessa. Three documents relate to this correspondence: + the letter of Abgar to Our Lord; + Our Lord's answer; + a picture of Our Lord, painted from life. This legend enjoyed great popularity, both in the East and in the West, during the Middle Ages: Our Lord's letter was copied on parchment, marble, and metal, and used as a talisman or an amulet. In the age of Eusebius the original letters, written in Syriac, were thought to be kept in the archives of Edessa. At the present day we possess not only a Syriac text, but an Armenian translation as well, two independent Greek versions, shorter than the Syriac, and several inscriptions on stone, all of which are discussed in two articles in the "Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgies" cols. 88 sq. and 1807 sq. The only two works to be consulted in regard to this literary problem are the "Ecclesiastical History" of Eusebius, and the "Teaching of Addaï," which professes to belong to the Apostolic age. The legend, according to these two works, runs as follows: Abgar, king of Edessa, afflicted with an incurable sickness, has heard the fame of the power and miracles of Jesus and writes to Him, praying Him to come and heal him. Jesus declines, but promises to send a messenger, endowed with His power, namely Thaddeus (or Addaï), one of the seventy-two Disciples. The letters of Our Lord and of the king of Edessa vary in the version given in Eusebius and in that of the "Teaching of Addaï." That which follows is taken from the Teaching of Addaï," as being less accessible than the History of Eusebius: Abgar Ouchama to Jesus, the Good Physician Who has appeared in the country of Jerusalem, greeting: I have heard of Thee, and of Thy healing; that Thou dost not use medicines or roots, but by Thy word openest (the eyes) of the blind, makest the lame to walk, cleansest the lepers, makest the deaf to hear; how by Thy word (also) Thou healest (sick) spirits and those who are tormented with lunatic demons, and how, again, Thou raisest the dead to life. And , learning the wonders that Thou doest, it was borne in upon me that (of two things, one): either Thou hast come down from heaven, or else Thou art the Son of God, who bringest all these things to pass. Wherefore I write to Thee, and pray that thou wilt come to me, who adore Thee, and heal all the ill that I suffer, according to the faith I have in Thee. I also learn that the Jews murmur against Thee, and persecute Thee, that they seek to crucify Thee, and to destroy Thee. I possess but one small city, but it is beautiful, and large enough for us two to live in peace. When Jesus had received the letter, in the house of the high priest of the Jews, He said to Hannan, the secretary, "Go thou, and say to thy master, who hath sent thee to Me: 'Happy art thou who hast believed in Me, not having seen me, for it is written of me that those who shall see me shall not believe in Me, and that those who shall not see Me shall believe in Me. As to that which thou hast written, that I should come to thee, (behold) all that for which I was sent here below is finished, and I ascend again to My Father who sent Me, and when I shall have ascended to Him I will send thee one of My disciples, who shall heal all thy sufferings, and shall give (thee) health again, and shall convert all who are with thee unto life eternal. And thy city shall be blessed forever, and the enemy shall never overcome it.'" According to Eusebius, it was not Hannan who wrote answer, but Our Lord Himself. A curious legendary growth has sprung up from this imaginary occurrence. The nature of Abgar's sickness has been gravely discussed, to the credit of various writers' imaginations, so holding that it was gout, others leprosy; the former saying that it had lasted seven years, the latter discovering that the sufferer had contracted his disease during a stay in Persia. Other chroniclers, again, maintain that the letter was written on parchment, though some favour papyrus. The crucial passage in Our Lord's letter, however, is that which promises the city of Edessa victory over all enemies. It gave the little town a popularity which vanished on the day that it fell into the hands of conquerors. It was a rude shock to those who believed the legend; they were more ready to attribute the fall of the city to God's anger against the inhabitants than to admit the failure of a safeguard which was no less trusted to at that time than in the past. The fact related in the correspondence has long since ceased to be of any historical value. The text is borrowed in two places from that of the Gospel, which of itself is sufficient to disprove the authenticity of the letter. Moreover, the quotations are made not from the Gospels proper, but from the famous concordance of Tatian, compiled in the second century, and known as the "Diatessaron", thus fixing the date of the legend as approximately the middle of the third century. In addition, however, to the importance which it attained in the apocryphal cycle, the correspondence of King Abgar also gained a place in liturgy. The decree, "De libris non recipiendis", of the pseudo-Gelasius, places the letter among the apocrypha, which may, possibly, be an allusion to its having been interpolated among the officially sanctioned lessons of the liturgy. The Syrian liturgies commemorate the correspondence of Abgar during Lent. The Celtic liturgy appears to have attached importance to the legend; the "Liber Hymnorum", a manuscript preserved at Trinity College, Dublin (E. 4, 2), gives two collects on the lines of the letter to Abgar. Nor is it by any means impossible that this letter, followed by various prayers, may have formed a minor liturgical office in certain churches. The account given by Adda contains a detail which may here be briefly referred to. Hannan, who wrote at Our Lord's dictation, was archivist at Edessa and painter to King Abgar. He had been charged to paint a portrait of Our Lord, a task which he carried out, bringing back with him to Edessa a picture which came an object of general veneration, but which, after a while, was said to have been painted by Our Lord Himself. Like the letter, the portrait was destined be the nucleus of a legendary growth; the "Holy Face of Edessa" was chiefly famous in the Byzantine world. A bare indication, however, of this fact must suffice here, since the legend of the Edessa portrait forms part of the extremely difficult and obscure subject of the iconography of Christ, and of the pictures of miraculous origin called acheiropoietoe ("made without hands"). H. LECLERCQ Abiathar Abiathar (Hebrew ebhyathar, Father of plenty, or, the great one is father). Descendant of Achimelech, Achitob, Phinees, Heli, Ithamar, Aaron, a high priest who escaped from the slaughter at Nob, went to David in his banishment (I K., xxii, 20-23,; xxiii, 6) and assisted him with his advice (I K., xxiii, 9-14; xxx, 7). Together with the high priest Sadoc, he assisted at the transportation of the ark to Jerusalem (I Par., xv, 11, 12), and tried to follow David in his flight (II K., xv, 24), but instead aided him by counsel (II K., xv, 29-36; xvii, 15 sq.; xix, 11; I Par., xxvii, 34). He favoured Adonias (III K., i, 7, 19, 25, 42), and was banished by Solomon to Anathoth (III K., ii, 22-27), thus completing the ruin of the house of Ithamar (I K., ii, 30-36; iii, 10-14). As to II K., viii, 17, see Commentaries. A.J. MAAS Abila Abila A titular see of Phoenicia, in the region of Mt. Libanus, now Suk Wady Barada, near Damascus, and the capital and stronghold of Abilina (Luke 3:1). The Abbey of Abingdon The Abbey of Abingdon This abbey, located in the County of Berkshire, England, was founded A.D. 675, by Cyssa, Viceroy of Kinwine, King of the West Saxons, or by his nephew Heane, in honour of the Virgin Mary, for twelve Benedictine monks. Endowed by successive West Saxon kings, it grew in importance and wealth until its destruction by the Danes in the reign of King Alfred, and the sequestration of its estates by Alfred because the monks had not made him a sufficient requital for vanquishing their enemies. There is a collection of 136 charters granted to this Abbey by various Saxon Kings (Cottonian MSS. apud; Dugdale). Among its abbots were St. Ethelwold, afterwards Bishop of Winchester (954), and Richard de Hendred, for whose-appointment the King's consent was obtained in 1262. It is recorded of him that he wore both mitre and pontificals on the Feast of Holy Trinity in 1268. Hence Willis supposes that lie was the first abbot to possess the privilege; He was present at the (Council of Lyons in 1272; The last Abbot of Abingdon was Thomas Pentecost ( alias Rowland), who was among the first to acknowledge the Royal Supremacy. With the rest of his community he signed the surrender of his monastery in 1538, receiving the manor of Cumnor for life or until he had preferment to the extent of £223 per annum. The revenues of the Abbey (26 Hen. VIII) were valued at £1876, 10s, 9d. Chronicon Monasterii de Abingdon (ed. Stevenson); DUGDALE, Monasticon Anglicanum; LYSONS, Magna Brittania (Berkshire); COOPER-KING, History of Berkshire, s.v. FRANCIS AVELING Thomas Abington Thomas Abington (Or HABINGTON). An English antiquarian, b. 1560; d. 1647. His father, who was treasurer to Queen Elizabeth, had him educated at Oxford, Reims, and Paris. For six years he was imprisoned in the Tower, being accused, with his brother Edward, of having taken part in the plot of Babington to effect the escape of Mary Queen of Scots. On his release he retired to Hinlip Castle in Lancaster, where he gave asylum to the Jesuit Fathers, Henry Garnett and Oldcorne, accused of complicity in the Gunpowder Plot. For this he was condemned to death, but through the intervention of his son-in-law, Lord Monteagle, the sentence was commuted to exile. His "History of Edward IV" was published after his death and also an English translation of "Gildas" (London, 1638). He also left in manuscript a "History of the Cathedral of Worcester" and "Researches into the Antiquities of Worcester". GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. English Catholics, s.v. THOMAS WALSH Abipones Abipones This Indian tribe, linguistically of Guaycuru stock, formerly roaming the east side of the Paraná river, was finally concentrated between the Rio Bermejo on the north, the Rio Salado on the south, and the Parana on the east, on the soil of the present Argentine Republic. Their customs appear to have been the same of those of South American tribes in general; clanship, an elaborate animism, or fetishism, complete sway of the medicine-men over private and tribal matters; chiefs eligible, or imposed through the impression created by casual achievements combined with wiles of the Shamans. Their weapons were lances, bows, and arrows, though the lance was preferred. They had most of the customs of the Guaycuru, including the couvade. In 1641 the Abipones had already obtained the horse from the Spanish settlers. At that time they were, according to tradition, still north of the Rio Bermejo, whence it is likely they were driven south by the Tobas, a warlike tribe of their own linguistic stock. Their horses, thriving on the grassy plains, soon made the Abipones very dangerous to Spanish colonization by means of raids on the settlements, by which they increased their own stocks of horses and cattle. In the first half of the eighteenth century, the Jesuits undertook the task of taming these unruly centaurs of the "Grand Chaco". With great difficulty, Fathers Casado, Sanchez, and especially Father Martin Dobrizhoffer, who was for eighteen years a missionary in Paraguay, succeeded in forming several settlements of Christianized Abipones near the Parana. These colonies were maintained in spit of the turbulent spirit of the neophytes, which caused incessant trouble with Spanish settlers, and above all, in spite of the murderous onslaughts made by the Tobas and Moobobis, strong and warlike tribes, upon the missions, when these showed signs of material prosperity. The expulsion of the Jesuits from Paraguay in 1768 and 1769 was the deathknell of the Abipones. The Tobas and Moobobis destroyed them in the course of less than half a century. It is to the work of Father Martin Dobrizhoffer, S.J., that we know most of our knowledge of the Abipones. Dobrizhoffer, Historia de Abiponibus, equestri, bellicosaque Paraguariae natione, etc. (Vienna, 1784; German version, 1784; English tr. 1822). References to the language are found in Hervas, Origine, Formazione, Mecanismo, ed Armonia degli Idiomi (Cesena, 1785); Id., Vocabulario poliglotto (1787); Saggio practico delle Lingue etc. (1787); Adrian Balbi, Atlas ethnographique du globe (Paris, 1826); Alcide d'Orbrigny, L'Homme americain (Paris, 1839); Brinton, The American Race. AD. F. BANDELIER Abisai Abisai ( Abhishay, abhshay; Sept. Abessa, Abisai). Son of David's sister Sarvia, and brother of Joab, a most valiant warrior (II K. xxiii, 18, 19; I Par., xi, 20, 21), and a faithful friend of David in his struggles against Saul (I K. xxvi, 6-9; II K. ii, 24; iii, 30), against the Ammonites, Syrians, and Edomites (II K., viii, 13; x, 9-14; I Par., xviii, 12; xix, 11-15), against Absalom (II K. xvi, 9, 10; xix, 21, 22; xviii, 2), Seba (II K., xx, 6), and the Philistines (II K., xxi, 15-17). HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); PALIS in VIG., Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); WHITE in HAST., Dict. of the Bible (New York, 1903). A.J. MAAS Abjuration Abjuration A denial, disavowal, or renunciation under oath. In common ecclesiastical language this term is restricted to the renunciation of heresy made by the penitent heretic on the occasion of his reconciliation with the Church. The Church has always demanded such renunciation, accompanied by appropriate penance. In some cases the abjuration was the only ceremony required; in others abjuration was followed by the imposition of hands or by unction, or both by the laying on of hands and by unction. St. Gregory the Great (A.D. 590-604) in a letter (Epistolae, lib. XI, Ep. lxvii, P.L., Tom. LXXVII, Col. 1204-08; Decret. Gratiani, Pars III, Dist. iv, c. xliv) to Quiricus and the Bishops of Iberia concerning the reconciliation of Nestorians, sets forth the practice of the ancient Church in this matter. According to this testimony of St. Gregory, in cases where the heretical baptism was invalid, as with the Paulinists, Montanists, or Cataphrygians (Conc. Nicaen., can. xix, P.L., II, 666; Decret. Gratiani, Pars II Causa I, Q. i, c. xlii), Eunomians (Anomoeans), and others, the rule was that the penitent should be baptized ( cum ad sanctam Ecclesiam veniunt, baptizantur); but where the heretical baptism was considered valid converts were admitted into the Church either by anointing with chrism, or by the imposition of hands or by a profession of faith ( aut unctione chrismatis, aut impositione manus, aut professione fidei ad sinum matris Ecclesiae revocantur). Applying this rule, St. Gregory declares that Arians were received into the Church in the West by the imposition of hands, in the East by unction ( Arianos per impositionem manus Occidens, per unctionem vero sancti chrismatis . . . Oriens, reformat), while the Monophysites, who separated from the Church in the fifth and sixth centuries, were treated with less severity, being admitted, with some others, upon a mere profession of the orthodox faith [ sola vera confessione recipit (Ecclesia)]. St. Gregory's statement applies to the Roman Church and to Italy (Siricius, Epist., i, c. i; Epist., iv, c. viii; Innoc. I, Epist. ii, c. viii; Epist. xxii, c. iv), but not to the whole Western Church, since in Gaul and Spain the rite of unction was also in use [Second Coun. of Arles, can. xvii; Coun. of Orange (A.D. 529), can. ii; Coun. of Epaon, can. xxi; Greg. of Tours, Historia, lib. II, c. xxxi; lib. IV, cc. xxvii, xxviii; lib. V, c. xxxix; lib. IX, c. xv]. As to the Eastern Church, St. Gregory's phrase entirely agrees with the rule laid down in the seventh canon of Constantinople, which, though not emanating from the Ecumenical Council of 381 bears Witness nevertheless to the practice of the Church of Constantinople in the fifth century [Duchesne, Christian Worship (London, 1904), 339, 340]. This canon, which was inserted in the Trullan or Quinisext Synod (canon xcv), and thus found a place in Byzantine canon law, distinguishes between sects whose baptism, but not confirmation, was accepted and those whose baptism and confirmation were rejected. With the Arians, consequently, are classed the Macedonians, Novatians (Conc. Nicaen., I, can. ix; Nicaen., II, can. ii), Sabellians, Apollinarists, and others, who were to be received by the anointing with chrism on the forehead, eyes, nostrils, mouth, and ears. Some identify this ceremony of the laying on of hands with the rite of confirmation, and not merely an imposition of hands unto penance. A similar discussion prevails in regard to the anointing with chrism. I. Imposition of Hands The imposition of hands, as a sign that due penance had been done, and in token of reconciliation (Pope Vigilius, P.L., CXXX, 1076), was prescribed first for those who had been baptized in the Church and who had later fallen into heresy. St. Cyprian in a letter to Quintus (epist. lxxi, in P.L., IV, 408-411) is witness of this practice, as is also St. Augustine (De baptismo contra Donatistas, lib. III, c. xi, in P.L., XLIII, 208). This rite was prescribed, secondly, for those who had been baptized in heresy. Regarding Pope Eusebius (A.D. 309 or 310) we read in the Liber Pontificalis (edit. Duchesne, I, 167): Hic hereticos invenit in Urbe Roma, quos ad manum impositionis [sic] reconciliavit. The same work (I, 216) declares of Pope Siricius (A.D. 384-399): Hic constituit hereticum sub manum impositionis reconciliari, prsesente cuncta ecclesia. [This latter was doubtless copied from the first chapter of the decretals of Pope Siricius, writing to Himerius, Bishop of Tarragona in Spain (P.L., XIII, 1133, 1134; Duchesne, Liber Pontif;, I, 132, 133).] Pope St. Stephen declares this rite to be sufficient (see St. Cyprian, Epist. lxxiv, in P.L., IV, 412, 413; Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., VII, iii, in P.G., XX, 641). The first Council of Arles (A.D. 314), can. viii [Labbe, Concilia (Paris, 1671), I, 1428; P.L., CXXX, 376] inculcates the same law. (See also St. Leo, Epist. clix, c. vii; Epist. clxvi, c. ii; Epist. clxvii, Inquis. 18; P.L., LIV.) II. Unction The unction alone or together with the imposition of hands was also in vogue. The Council of Laodicea (A.D. 373) in canon vii (Labbe, Concilia, I, 1497) confirms this usage in the abjuration of Novatians, Photinians, and Quartodecimans. The second Council of Arles (A.D. 451) in canon xvii (Labbe, IV, 1013) extends the discipline to adherents of Bonosius, adversaries of the virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary ( Bonosianos . . . cum chrismate, et manus impositione in Ecclesia recipi sufficit). The Council of Epaon (A.D. 517), canon xvi (Labbe, IV, 1578), allows the same rite ( Presbyteros, . . . si conversionem subitam petant, chrismate subvenire permittimus). III. Profession of Faith Especially after the birth of Nestorianism and Eutychianism, to abjuration of heresy was added a solemn profession of faith. It was thus the bishops who, in the Second Council of Ephesus, had espoused the cause of Eutyches and Dioscurus were reconciled to the Church. St. Cyril of Alexandria (Epist. xlviii, ad Donat. Epis. Nicopol., P.G., LXXII, 252) received a like profession from Paul of Emesa, who was thought to be affected with Nestorianism. St. Leo (Epist. i, Ad Episc. Aquilens. c. ii, in P.L., LIV, 594) required the same from the votaries of Pelagianism, as did also a council, held at Aachen in 799, from Felix, Bishop of Urgel [Alzog, Universal Church Hist. (tr. Cincinnati, 1899), II, 181]. It is to be noted that as clerics, unless degraded or reduced to the lay state, were not submitted to the humiliation of public penance, so, consequently, their admission into the Church involved no imposition of hands or other ceremony except a profession of faith (Fratres Ballerini, in Epist. S. Leon., n. 1594, P.L., LIV, 1492). In all cases there was demanded the presentation of a libellus, or form of abjuration, in which the convert renounced and anathematized his former tenets. After declaring his abjuration to be free from compulsion, fear, or other unworthy motive, he proceeded to anathematize all heresies in general and in particular that sect to which he had belonged, together with its heresiarchs, past, present, and future. He then enumerated the tenets accepted by said sect, and, having repudiated them singly and generally, he ended with a profession of his belief in the true Faith. Sometimes there was added, under pain of punishment, a promise to remain in the Church. Accidental differences only are found in the ancient formulas of abjuration extant. Later, in the countries especially where the Inquisition was established, three sorts of abjuration were practised: + Abjuration de formali (of formal heresy), made by a notorious heretic or apostate; + de vehementi (of strong suspicion of heresy), made by a Catholic strongly suspected of heresy; + de levi (of slight suspicion of heresy), made by a Catholic slightly suspected of heresy. The abjuration demanded of converts in the present discipline of the Church is essentially the same as the above. A convert to the Church who has never been baptized is not obliged to abjure heresy. A convert, whose baptism is considered valid, or who, at most, on his reception into the Church is rebaptized conditionally, is required to make a profession of faith, which contains an abjuration of heresy. A salutary penance also is imposed (S. Cong. S. Off., Nov., 1875. See Appendix Conc. Plen. Balt., II, 277, 278; American edit. Roman Ritual, 1, 2, 3). No abjuration is required from converts under the age of fourteen (S. Cong. S. Off., Mar. 8, 1882, in Collectanea S. Cong. de Propag. Fid., n. 1680, ed. 1903). ERMONI, in Dictionnaire d arch ologie chr tienne et de liturgie (Paris, 1903); DESHAYES, in Dict. de th ol. cath. (Paris, 1899), I, 75; MAUREL, Guide pratique de la liturgie romaine (Paris, 1878), Par. I, 2, 104, art. 6; BENEDICT XIV, de Synodo Dioecesana, V, ix, n. 10, lib. IX, e. iv, n. 3; Gelasian Sacramentary, I, 85, 86; BUTLER, in Dict. of Christ. Antiq. (London, 1893) MARTENE AND DURAND, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, II, lib. CXI, e. vi; FERRARIS, Prompta Bibliotheca, I, 32 sqq. ANDREW B. MEEHAN Abner Abner A son of Ner, a cousin of Saul, and commander-in-chief of Saul's army (I Kings xiv, 50: xvii, 55; xxvi, 5, 7, 14). After Saul with three of his sons had fallen at Mount Gelboe, Abner made Isboseth, the fourth son of Saul, king over the whole land of Israel excepting Judea, which adhered to David. For seven years and a half Abner fought for the throne of Isboseth. After his defeat near Gabaon, he was hotly pursued by Asael, brother of Joab, who was David's commander-in-chief, and in self-defense he reluctantly slew his enemy (II Kings ii, 12 sq.). This embittered the hostility between the two factions, since Joab considered himself the avenger ofhis brother Asael. Abner now married Respha, a concubine f Saul, and thus incurred the suspicion of aspiring to the throne. Isboseth remonstrated with the warrior, and the latter became so angry that he made advances to David. David demanded that Abner should first restore to him his wife Michol, daughter of Saul, who had been given to Phaltiel. Abner complied with this condition, and came to a full understanding with David. After his departure Joab, David's commander-in-chief, sent for him, and killed him at the city gate. David bewailed Abner, made Joab walk in mourning-garb before Abner's bier, and on his death-bed enjoined on Solomon to avenge Abner's murder. Palis in Vig., Dict. de la Bible, s.v. A.J. MAAS The Abomination of Desolation The Abomination of Desolation The importance of this Scriptural expression is chiefly derived from the fact that in St. Matthew, xxiv, 15, and St. Mark, xiii, 14, the appearance of the "abomination of desolation" standing in the Holy Place" (Matt.), or where "it ought not" (Mark), is given by Our Lord to His disciples as the signal for their flight from Judea, at the time of the approaching ruin of Jerusalem (Luke, xxi, 20). The expression itself is confessedly obscure. To determine its meaning, interpreters have naturally betaken themselves to the original Hebrew of the book of Daniel; for our first Evangelist distinctly says that "the abomination of desolation" he has in view "was spoken of by Daniel the prophet"; and further, the expression he makes use of, in common with St. Mark, is simply the Greek phrase whereby the Septuagint translators rendered literally the Hebrew words shíqqûç shômem found in Daniel, xii, 11; ix, 27; xi, 31. Unfortunately, despite all their efforts to explain these Hebrew terms, Biblical scholars are still at variance about their precise meaning. While most commentators regard the first "shíqqûç", usually rendered by "abomination", as designating anything (statue, altar, etc.) that pertains to idolatrous worship, others take it to be a contemptuous designation of a heathen god or idol. Again, while most commentators render the second "shômem" by the abstract word "desolation", others treat it as a concrete form referring to a person, "a ravager", or even as a participial known meaning "that maketh desolate". The most recent interpretation which has been suggested of these Hebrew words is to the following effect: The phrase shíqqûç shômem stands for the original expression bá` ál shámáyîm (Baal of heaven), a title found in Phoenician and Aramaic inscriptions, and the semitic equivalent of the Greek Zeus, Jupiter, but modified in Daniel through Jewish aversion for the name of a Pagan deity. While thus disagreeing as to the precise sense of the Hebrew phrase usually rendered by "the abomination of desolation", Christian scholars are practically at one with regard to its general meaning. They commonly admit, and indeed rightly, that the Hebrew expression must needs be understood of some idolatrous emblem, the setting up of which would entail the ultimate desolation of the Temple of Jerusalem (I Mach. i, 57; iv, 38). And with this general meaning in view, they proceed to determine the historical event between Our Lord's prediction and the ruin of the Temple (A. D. 70), which should be regarded as "the abomination of desolation" spoken of in St. Matthew, xxiv, 15, and St. Mark, xiii, 14. But here they are again divided. Many scholars have thought, and still think, that the introduction of the Roman standards into the Holy Land, and more particularly into the Holy City, shortly before the destruction of the Temple, is the event foretold by Our Lord to His disciples as the signal for their flight from Judea. It is true that the standards were worshipped by the Roman soldiers and abhorred by the Jews as the emblem of Roman idolatry. Yet they can hardly be considered as the "the abomination of desolation" referred to in St. Matthew, xxiv, 15. The Evangelist says that this "abomination" is to stand in the "holy place", whereby is naturally meant the Temple (see also Daniel, ix, 27, where the Vulgate reads: "there shall be in the Temple the abomination of the desolation"), and the Roman standards were actually introduced into the Temple only after it had been entered by Titus, that, too late to serve as a warning for the Christians of Judea. Other scholars are of the mind that the desecration of the Temple by the Zealots who seized it and made it their stronghold shortly before Jerusalem was invested by Titus, is the even foretold by Our Lord. But this view is commonly rejected for the simples reason that "the abomination of desolation" spoken of by Daniel and referred to in St. Matthew's Gospel, was certainly something connected with idolatrous worship. Others, finally, interpret Our Lord's warning to His disciples in the light of the history of attempt to have his own statue set up and worshipped in the Temple of Jerusalem. The following are the principal facts of that history. About A. D. 40, Caius Caligula issued a peremptory decree ordering the erection and worship of his statute in the Temple of God. He also appointed to the government of Syria, bidding him carry out that decree even at the cost of a war against the rebellious Jews. Whereupon the Jews in tens of thousands protested to the governor that they were willing to be slaughtered rather than to be condemned to witness that idolatrous profanation of their holy Temple. Soon afterwards Petronius asked Caligula to revoke his order, and Agrippa I, who than lived at Rome, prevailed upon the Emperor not to enforce his decree. It seems, however, that Caligula soon repented of the concession, and that but for his untimely death (A. D. 41) he would have had his statue set up in Jerusalem (E. Schurer, History of the Jewish People in the Time of Christ, I Div. II, 95-105; tr.). In view of these facts it is affirmed by many scholars that the early Christians could easily regard the forthcoming erection of statue in the Temple as the act of idolatrous Abomination which, according to the prophet Daniel, ix, 27, portended the ruin of the House of God, and therefore see in it the actual sign given by Christ for their flight from Judea. This last interpretation of the phrase "the abomination of desolation" is not without its own difficulties. Yet it seems preferable to the others that have been set for by commentators at large. FRANCIS E. GIGOT Abortion Abortion Abortion (from the Latin word aboriri, "to perish") may be briefly defined as "the loss of a fetal life." In it the fetus dies while yet within the generative organs of the mother, or it is ejected or extracted from them before it is viable; that is, before it is sufficiently developed to continue its life by itself. The term abortion is also applied, though less properly, to cases in which the child is become viable, but does not survive the delivery. In this article we shall take the word in its widest meaning, and treat of abortion as occurring at any time between conception and safe delivery. The word miscarriage is taken in the same wide sense. Yet medical writers often use these words in special meanings, restricting abortion to the time when the embryo has not yet assumed specific features, that is, in the human embryo, before the third month of gestation; miscarriage occurs later, but before viability; while the birth of a viable child before the completed term of nine months is styled premature birth. Viability may exist in the seventh month of gestation, but it cannot safely be presumed before the eighth month. If the child survives its premature birth, there is no abortion -- for this word always denotes the loss of fetal life. It was long debated among the learned at what period of gestation the human embryo begins to be animated by the rational, spiritual soul, which elevates man above all other species of the animal creation and survives the body to live forever. The keenest mind among the ancient philosophers, Aristotle, had conjectured that the future child was endowed at conception with a principle of only vegetative life, which was exchanged after a few days for an animal soul, and was not succeeded by a rational soul till later; his followers said on the fortieth day for a male, and the eightieth for a female, child. The authority of his great name and the want of definite knowledge to the contrary caused this theory to be generally accepted up to recent times. Yet, as early as the fourth century of the Christian era, St. Gregory of Nyssa had advocated the view which modern science has confirmed almost to a certainty, namely, that the same life principle quickens the organism from the first moment of its individual existence until its death (Eschbach, Disp. Phys., Disp., iii). Now it is at the very time of conception, or fecundation, that the embryo begins to live a distinct individual life. For life does not result from an organism when it has been built up, but the vital principle builds up the organism of its own body. In virtue of the one eternal act of the Will of the Creator, Who is of course ever present at every portion of His creation, the soul of every new human being begins to exist when the cell which generation has provided is ready to receive it as its principle of life. In the normal course of nature the living embryo carries on its work of, self-evolution within the maternal womb, deriving its nourishment from the placenta through the vital cord, till, on reaching maturity, it is by the contraction of the uterus issued to lead its separate life. Abortion is a fatal termination of this process. It may result from various causes, which may be classed under two heads, accidental and intentional. Accidental causes may be of many different kinds. Sometimes the embryo, instead of developing in the uterus, remains in one of the ovaries, or gets lodged in one of the Fallopian tubes, or is precipitated into the abdomen, resulting, in any of these cases, in an ectopic, or extra-uterine gestation. This almost invariably brings on the death of the fetus, and is besides often fraught with serious danger to the mother. Even if an ectopic child should live to maturity, it cannot be born by the natural channel -- but, once it has become viable, it may be saved by a surgical operation. Most commonly the embryo develops in the uterus; but there, too, it is exposed to a great variety of dangers, especially during the first months of its existence. There may be remote predispositions in the mother to contract diseases fatal to her offspring. Heredity, malformation, syphilis, advanced age, excessive weakness, effects of former sicknesses, etc. may be causes of danger; even the climate may exercise an unfavorable influence. More immediate causes of abortion may be found in cruel treatment of the mother by her husband or in starvation, or any kind of hardship. Her own indiscretion is often to blame; as when she undertakes excessive labours or uses intoxicating drinks too freely. Anything in fact that causes a severe shock to the bodily frame or the nervous system of the mother may be fatal to the child in her womb. On the part of the father, syphilis, alcoholism, old age, and physical weakness may act unfavourably on the offspring at any time of its existence. The frequency of accidental abortions is no doubt very great; it must differ considerably according to the circumstances, so that the proportion between successful and unsuccessful conceptions is beyond the calculation of the learned. Intentional abortions are distinguished by medical writers into two classes. + When they are brought about for social reasons, they are called criminal abortions; and they are rightly condemned under any circumstances whatsoever. "Often, very often," said Dr. Hodge, of the University of Pennsylvania, "must all the eloquence and all the authority of the practitioner be employed; often he must, as it were, grasp the conscience of his weak and erring patient, and let her know, in language not to be misunderstood, that she is responsible to the Creator for the life of the being within her" (Wharton and Stille's Med. Jurispr., Vol. on Abortion, 11). + The name of obstetrical abortion is given by physicians to such as is performed to save the life of the mother. Whether this practice is ever morally lawful we shall consider below. It is evident that the determination of what is right or wrong in human conduct belongs to the science of ethics and the teaching of religious authority. Both of these declare the Divine law, "Thou shalt not kill". The embryonic child, as seen above, has a human soul; and therefore is a man from the time of its conception; therefore it has an equal right to its life with its mother; therefore neither the mother, nor medical practitioner, nor any human being whatever can lawfully take that life away. The State cannot give such right to the physician; for it has not itself the right to put an innocent person to death. No matter how desirable it might seem to be at times to save the life of the mother, common sense teaches and all nations accept the maxim, that "evil is never to be done that good may come of it"; or, which is the same thing, that "a good end cannot justify a bad means". Now it is an evil means to destroy the life of an innocent child. The plea cannot be made that the child is an unjust aggressor. It is simply where nature and its own parents have put it. Therefore, Natural Law forbids any attempt at destroying fetal life. The teachings of the Catholic Church admit of no doubt on the subject. Such moral questions, when they are submitted, are decided by the Tribunal of the Holy Office. Now this authority decreed, 28 May, 1884, and again, 18 August, 1889, that "it cannot be safely taught in Catholic schools that it is lawful to perform . . . any surgical operation which is directly destructive of the life of the fetus or the mother." Abortion was condemned by name, 24 July, 1895, in answer to the question whether when the mother is in immediate danger of death and there is no other means of saving her life, a physician can with a safe conscience cause abortion not by destroying the child in the womb (which was explicitly condemned in the former decree), but by giving it a chance to be born alive, though not being yet viable, it would soon expire. The answer was that he cannot. After these and other similar decisions had been given, some moralists thought they saw reasons to doubt whether an exception might not be allowed in the case of ectopic gestations. Therefore the question was submitted: "Is it ever allowed to extract from the body of the mother ectopic embryos still immature, before the sixth month after conception is completed?" The answer given, 20 March, 1902, was: "No; according to the decree of 4 May, 1898; according to which, as far as possible, earnest and opportune provision is to be made to safeguard the life of the child and of the mother. As to the time, let the questioner remember that no acceleration of birth is licit unless it be done at a time, and in ways in which, according to the usual course of things, the life of the mother and the child be provided for". Ethics, then, and the Church agree in teaching that no action is lawful which directly destroys fetal life. It is also clear that extracting the living fetus before it is viable, is destroying its life as directly as it would be killing a grown man directly to plunge him into a medium in which he cannot live, and hold him there till he expires. However, if medical treatment or surgical operation, necessary to save a mother's life, is applied to her organism (though the child's death would, or at least might, follow as a regretted but unavoidable consequence), it should not be maintained that the fetal life is thereby directly attacked. Moralists agree that we are not always prohibited from doing what is lawful in itself, though evil consequences may follow which we do not desire. The good effects of our acts are then directly intended, and the regretted evil consequences are reluctantly permitted to follow because we cannot avoid them. The evil thus permitted is said to be indirectly intended. It is not imputed to us provided four conditions are verified, namely: + That we do not wish the evil effects, but make all reasonable efforts to avoid them; + That the immediate effect be good in itself; + That the evil is not made a means to obtain the good effect; for this would be to do evil that Good might come of it -- a procedure never allowed; + That the good effect be as important at least as the evil effect. All four conditions may be verified in treating or operating on a woman with child. The death of the child is not intended, and every reasonable precaution is taken to save its life; the immediate effect intended, the mother's life, is good -- no harm is done to the child in order to save the mother -- the saving of the mother's life is in itself as good as the saving of the child's life. Of course provision must be made for the child's spiritual as well as for its physical life, and if by the treatment or operation in question the child were to be deprived of Baptism, which it could receive if the operation were not performed, then the evil would be greater than the good consequences of the operation. In this case the operation could not lawfully be performed. Whenever it is possible to baptize an embryonic child before it expires, Christian charity requires that it be done, either before or after delivery; and it may be done by any one, even though he be not a Christian. History contains no mention of criminal abortions antecedent to the period of decadent morality in classic Greece. The crime seems not to have prevailed in the time of Moses, either among the Jews or among the surrounding nations; else that great legislator would certainly have spoken in condemnation of it. No mention of it occurs in the long enumeration of sins laid to the charge of the Canaanites. The first reference to it is found in the books attributed to Hippocrates, who required physicians to bind themselves by oath not to give to women drinks fatal to the child in the womb. At that period voluptuousness had corrupted the morals of the Greeks, and Aspasia was teaching ways of procuring abortion. In later times the Romans became still more depraved, and bolder in such practices; for Ovid wrote concerning the upper classes of his countrymen: Nunc uterum vitiat quae vult formosa videri, Raraque, in hoc aevo, est quae velit esse parens. Three centuries later we meet with the first record of laws enacted by the State to check this crime. Exile was decreed against mothers guilty of it; while those who administered the potion to procure it were if nobles, sent to certain islands, if plebeians, condemned to work in the metal mines. Still the Romans in their legislation appear to have aimed at punishing the wrong done by abortion to the father or the mother, rather than the wrong done to the unborn child. The early Christians are the first on record as having pronounced abortion to be the murder of human beings, for their public apologists, Athenagoras, Tertullian, and Minutius Felix (Eschbach, "Disp. Phys.", Disp. iii), to refute the slander that a child was slain, and its flesh eaten, by the guests at the Agapae, appealed to their laws as forbidding all manner of murder, even that of children in the womb. The Fathers of the Church unanimously maintained the same doctrine. In the fourth century the Council of Eliberis decreed that Holy Communion should be refused all the rest of her life, even on her deathbed, to an adulteress who had procured the abortion of her child. The Sixth Ecumenical Council determined for the whole Church that anyone who procured abortion should bear all the punishments inflicted on murderers. In all these teachings and enactments no distinction is made between the earlier and the later stages of gestation. For, though the opinion of Aristotle, or similar speculations, regarding the time when the rational soul is infused into the embryo, were practically accepted for many centuries still it was always held by the Church that he who destroyed what was to be a man was guilty of destroying a human life. The great prevalence of criminal abortion ceased wherever Christianity became established. It was a crime of comparatively rare occurrence in the Middle Ages. Like its companion crime, divorce, it did not again become a danger to society till of late years. Except at times and in places influenced by Catholic principles, what medical writers call "obstetric" abortion, as distinct from "criminal" (though both are indefensible on moral grounds), has always been a common practice. It was usually performed by means of craniotomy, or the crushing of the child's head to save the mother's life. Hippocrates, Celsus, Avicenna, and the Arabian school generally invented a number of vulnerating instruments to enter and crush the child's cranium. In more recent times, with the advance of the obsteric science, more conservative measures have gradually prevailed. By use of the forceps, by skill acquired in version, by procuring premature labour, and especially by asepticism in the Caesarean section and other equivalent operations, medical science has found much improved means of saving both the child and its mother. Of late years such progress has been made in this matter, that craniotomy on the living child has passed out of reputable practice. But abortion proper, before the fetus is viable, is still often employed, especially in ectopic gestation; and there are many men and women who may be called professional abortionists. In former times civil laws against all kinds of abortion were very severe among Christian nations. Among the Visigoths, the penalty was death, or privation of sight, for the mother who allowed it and for the father who consented to it, and death for the abortionist. In Spain, the woman guilty of it was buried alive. An edict of the French King Henry II in 1555, renewed by Louis XIV in 1708, inflicted capital punishment for adultery and abortion combined. Later French law (i.e., early twentieth century) punished the abortionist with imprisonment, and physicians, surgeons, and pharmacists, who prescribe or furnish the means, with the penalty of forced labour. For England, Blackstone stated the law as follows: Life is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual; and it begins, in contemplation of law, as soon as an infant is able to stir in its mother's womb. For if a woman is quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her womb, or if any one beat her, whereby the child dieth, and she is delivered of a dead child; this, though not murder, was by the ancient law homicide or manslaughter. But the modern law does not look upon this offence in so atrocious a light, but merely as a heinous misdemeanour. In the United States, legislation in this matter is neither strict nor uniform, nor are convictions of frequent occurrence. In some of the States any medical practitioner is allowed to procure abortion whenever he judges it necessary to save the mother's life. The Catholic Church has not relaxed her strict prohibition of all abortion; but, as we have seen above, she has made it more definite. As to the penalties she inflicts upon the guilty parties, her present legislation was fixed by the Bull of Pius IX "Apostolicae Sedis". It decrees excommunication -- that is, deprivation of the Sacraments and of the Prayers of the Church in the case of any of her members, and other privations besides in the case of clergymen -- against all who seek to procure abortion, if their action produces the effect. Penalties must always be strictly interpreted. Therefore, while anyone who voluntarily aids in procuring abortion, in any way whatever, does morally wrong, only those incur the excommunication who themselves actually and efficaciously procure the abortion. And the abortion here meant is that which is strictly so called, namely, that performed before the child is viable. For no one but the lawgiver has the right to extend the law beyond the terms in which it is expressed. On the other hand, no one can restrict its meaning by private authority, so as to make it less than the received terms of Church language really signify. Now Gregory XIV had enacted the penalty of excommunication for abortion of a "quickened" child but the present law makes no such distinction, and therefore it must be differently understood. That distinction, however, applies to another effect which may result from the procuring of abortion; namely, he who does so for a child after quickening incurs an irregularity, or hindrance to his receiving or exercising Orders in the Church. But he would not incur such irregularity if the embryo were not yet quickened. The terms "quickened" and "animation" in present usage are applied to the child after the mother can percieve its motion, which usually happens about the one hundred and sixteenth day after conception. But in the old canon law, which established the irregularity here referred to the "animation" of the embryo was supposed to occur on the fortieth day for a male child, and on the eightieth day for a female child. In such matters of canon law, just as in civil law, many technicalities and intricacies occur, which it often takes the professional student to understand fully. In regard to the decisions of the Roman tribunal quoted above it is proper to remark that while they claim the respect and loyal adhesion of Catholics, they are not irreformable, since they are not definitive judgments, nor do they proceed directly from the Supreme Pontiff, who alone has the prerogative of infallibility. If ever reasons should arise, which is most improbable, to change these pronouncements those reasons would receive due consideration. C. COPPENS Physical Effects of Abortion The Physical Effects of Abortion Definition. The expulsion of the human ovum occurring during the first three months of pregnancy, and occurring from any cause whatsoever, is called abortion. In the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh months -- i.e., from the formation of the placenta to the period of viability -- the occurrence is called immature delivery, or miscarriage, and a delivery occurring from the twenty-eighth week (the earliest period of viability) to the thirty-eighth week is called premature. Causes of abortion. To understand the physical effects of abortion we must know something of the causes, which are in the main the same as the causes of miscarriage and premature delivery. Abortion may be due to pathological changes in the ovum, the uterus, or its adnexa one or both -- to the physical or nervous condition of the woman, to diseases either inherited or acquired (syphilis, tuberculosis, rheumatism); to any infectious, contagious, or inflammatory disease; to shock, injury, or accident. It may be induced knowingly, willingly, and criminally by the pregnant person herself, or by someone else, with the aid of drugs, or instruments, or both. Physical effects of abortion. Naturally, therefore, the physical effects of abortion will depend in direct ratio on the causation thereof, and the comparative malignity or benignity of such causation. In any case, abortion is fraught with serious consequences, direct and indirect -- and is a sad miscarriage of nature's plan, greatly to be deplored, and earnestly, strenuously, and conscientiously to be avoided. Of course, when brought about with criminal intent, abortion is nothing less than murder in the first degree; and if the law of the land does not discover and punish the criminal, the higher law of the God of Nature and of Nature's inexorable reprisals for interference with, or destruction of her beneficent designs, will sooner or later most certainly do so. When abortion is due to pathological causes it is usually preceded by the death of the fetus; so that the causes of abortion are really the causes producing the death of the fetus. The abortion may be complete or partial. If complete, the danger is principally from shock and haemorrhage; if incomplete and any debris remains, there is danger of septicaemia, uraemia, endometritis, perimetritis, diseases of the tubes, ovaries, bladder, cervix uteri, vaginal canal, and rectum; together with catarrhal discharges from one or more of these parts, displacements, impoverished blood supply, various neuroses, and usually a long and expensive convalescence. The retention of the dead fetus is not always so dangerous. Even if decomposition or putrefaction occur, Nature frequently -- possibly more often than we are willing to give her credit for -- eliminates the offending foreign mass without the aid of the obstetrician. But it is not wise to advocate the waiting for such happy and spontaneous events. However while it is true that with proper medical care and attention most cases of abortion (excluding criminal cases and those complicated with other morbid conditions) present a modicum of danger, yet we must not forget that reports and statistics on this subject are very unreliable. First, there may be a false diagnosis; and secondly, concealment on the part of the patient, attendants, and all concerned is exceedingly common today. Obstetrical science has made many and important advances; but abortions from one cause or another (especially criminal abortion) continue in abundance; and their results have been and are still crowding the medical offices. To tear out the living products of conception by the roots is, in most cases, to give the pregnant woman gratuitous transportation for eternity. Even in spontaneous cases, as we have seen, death may occur from various causes. How much greater the danger, then, when the vandal hand of the professional abortionist adds wounds and injuries to complete his diabolical work. Conclusion. Since so many people today have ceased to look on abortion as a calamity at all times, and as a moral monstrosity in its criminal aspect, they should be deterred from committing it by the fear of physical consequences, if they are not moved by the love of morality and righteousness. J.N. BUTLER Charles Francois d'Abra de Raconis Charles François d'Abra de Raconis A French bishop, born at the Château de Raconis in 1580 of a Calvinistic family; died 1646. In 1592, this family was converted to the Catholic faith, of which Charles then twelve sears of age, was to become an earnest defender. He taught philosophy at the College of Plessis, in 1609; theology at the College of Navarre, in 1615, and three years later was appointed court preacher and royal almoner. At this epoch he took an active part in religious polemics and wrote works of controversy. In 1637, he was appointed Bishop of Lavaur, but was not consecrated until 1639. In 1643 he was back in Paris, and controversies with the Jansenists engaged him up to his death. St. Vincent de Paul spurred him on and encouraged him. Two years before his death he published his "Examen et jugement du livre de la fréquente communion fait contre la fréquente communion et publié sous le nom du sieur Arnauld" (Paris, 1644). The following year he published a rejoinder to the reply to this. Arnauld affected great contempt for him, and declared that his works were "despised by all respectable persons". Raconis also wrote against the heresy of "two heads of the Church [Sts. Peter and Paul]," formulated by Martin de Barcos. The bishop's "Primauté et Souveraineté singulière de saint Pierre" (1645) roused the wrath of his opponents. Towards the close of 1645, the report was circulated in Paris that he had written to the Pope, denouncing the dangerous teachings in the "Fréquente Communion", and telling the Pope that some French bishops tolerated and approved of these impieties The Bishop of Grasse informed a general assembly of the clergy of this fact. This aroused their animosity, all the more since some of them had recommended Arnauld's work. They entered a complaint with the Nuncio, and then compelled Raconis to say whether he had written the Setter or not. Although he denied having done so, they drew up a common protestation against the accusations of which they were the objects and sent it to Innocent X. JOHN J. A' BECKET Don Isaac Abrabanel Don Isaac Abrabanel (Also: Abravanel, Abarbanel). Jewish statesman, apologist and exegete, born in Lisbon 1437; died in Venice, 1508, buried in Padua. From his early youth, he was carefully instructed in the Talmudlc and Rabbinic literatures, and mastered the various branches of secular learning. His keen intellect and, above all, a great business ability drew to him the attention of Alfonso V of Portugal, who made him his treasurer, a position that he held until 1481. The favour shown by a Catholic prince to a Jew shocked the public opinion of those times, and under John II Abrabanel was accused of conspiring with the Duke of Braganza, and barely saved his life by fleeing to Castile, 1483. Soon afterwards he entered the service of Ferdinand and Isabella, 1484-92. After the fall of Granada, he shared the fate of his race, and was banished from Spain in 1492. He repaired to Naples and, owing to various vicissitudes went successively to Messina, Corfu, Monopoli, and finally to Venice. Most of Abrabanel's works date from the last years of his life, when, on account of his misfortunes, he found more leisure for collecting and ordering his thoughts. Abrabanel knew Plato and Aristotle, and is often ranked among the Jewish philosophers. His philosophy, however, was intended by him simply as a means of defending his religious convictions. He can hardly be said to have written any work professedly philosophical, with the possible exception of a juvenile treatise on the form of the natural elements; his views in this respect must be gathered from his various theological and exegetical treatises. As a theologian and apologist Abrabanel shows himself a champion of the most rigid Jewish orthodoxy, and does not hesitate to oppose even Maimonides when the latter seems to depart from the traditional belief. In the field of Biblical exegesis, Abrabanel has the merit of having anticipated much of what has been advanced as new by modern investigators, and of having considered systematically not only the letter of the sacred text, but also the persons of its authors, their aim and surroundings. Each commentary is furnished with a preface in which these preliminary questions are treated. His familiarity with Christian authors his acquaintance with court life and customs, a keen sense of his misfortunes, joined with a very extensive knowledge and a great power of observation, fitted him eminently for the task of a Biblical interpreter. We have from him a commentary on Deuteronomy; on the first four books of the Pentateuch; on the earlier and on the later Prophets. They have been warmly lauded both by Jews and by Christians, have passed through several editions, and many of them have been, in whole or in part, translated into Latin. Of his other works we may mention "The Crown of the Ancients", "The Pinnacle of Faith", "The Sources of Salvation", in the form of a commentary on Daniel, "The Salvation of His Anointed" "The Herald of Salvation", in which are collected and explained all the Messianic texts. His works the titles of which are here rendered in English were written in a clear, refined, but occasionally diffuse modern Hebrew. ROMAIN BUTIN Abraham Abraham The original form of the name, Abram, is apparently the Assyrian Abu-ramu. It is doubtful if the usual meaning attached to that word "lofty father", is correct. The meaning given to Abraham in Genesis 17:5 is popular word play, and the real meaning is unknown. The Assyriologist, Hommel suggests that in the Minnean dialect, the Hebrew letter Hê ("h") is written for long a. Perhaps here we may have the real derivation of the word, and Abraham may be only a dialectical form of Abram. The story of Abraham is contained in the Book of Genesis, 11:26 to 25:18. We shall first give a brief outline of the Patriarch's life, as told in that portion of Genesis, then we shall in succession discuss the subject of Abraham from the viewpoints of the Old Testament, New Testament, profane history, and legend. A BRIEF OUTLINE OF ABRAHAM'S LIFE Thare had three sons, Abram, Nachor, and Aran. Abram married Sarai. Thare took Abram and his wife, Sarai, and Lot, the son of Aran, who was dead, and leaving Ur of the Chaldees, came to Haran and dwelt there till he died. Then, at the call of God, Abram, with his wife, Sarai, and Lot, and the rest of his belongings, went into the Land of Chanaan, amongst other places to Sichem and Bethel, where he built altars to the Lord: A famine breaking out in Chanaan, Abram journeyed southward to Egypt, and when he had entered the land, fearing that he would be killed on account of his wife, Sarai, he bade her say she was his sister. The report of Sarai's beauty was brought to the Pharao, and he took her into his harem, and honoured Abram on account of her. Later, however finding out that she was Abram's wife, he sent her away unharmed, and, upbraiding Abram for what he had done, he dismissed him from Egypt. From Egypt Abram came with Lot towards Bethel, and there, finding that their herds and flocks had grown to be very large, he proposed that they should separate and go their own ways. So Lot chose the country about the Jordan, whilst Abram dwelt in Chanaan, and came and dwelt in the vale of Mambre in Hebron. Now, on account of a revolt of the Kings of Sodom and Gomorrha and other kings from Chodorlahomor King of Elam, after they had served him twelve years, he in the fourteenth year made war upon them with his allies, Thadal king of nations, Amraphel Kin& of Senaar, and Arioch King of Pontus. The King of Elam was victorious, and had already reached Dan with Lot a prisoner and laden with spoil, when he was overtaken by Abram. With 318 men the patri arch surprises, attacks, and defeats him, he retakes Lot and the spoil, and returns in triumph. On his way home, he is met by Melchisedech, king of Salem who brings forth bread and wine, and blesses him And Abram gives him tithes of all he has; but for] himself he reserves nothing. God promises Abram that his seed shall be as the stars of heaven, and he shall possess the land of Chanaan. But Abram does not see how this is to be, for he has already grown old. Then the promise is guaranteed by a sacrifice between God and Abram, and by a vision and a supernatural intervention in the night. Sarai, who was far advanced in years and had given up the idea of bearing children, persuaded Abram to take to himself her hand-maid, Agar. He does so, and Agar being with child despises the barren Sarai. For this Sarai afflicts her so that she flies into the desert, but is persuaded to return by an angel who comforts her with promises of the greatness of the son she is about to bear. She returns and brings forth Ismael. Thirteen years later God appears to Abram and promises him a son by Sarai, and that his posterity will be a great nation. As a sign, he changes Abram's name to Abraham, Sarai's to Sara, and ordains the rite of circumcision. One day later, as Abraham is sitting by his tent, in the vale of Mambre, Jehovah with two angels appears to him in human form. He shows them hospitality. Then again the promise of a son named Isaac is renewed to Abraham. The aged Sarah hears incredulously and laughs. Abraham is then told of the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha for their sins but obtains from Jehovah the promise that he will not destroy them if he finds ten just men therein. Then follows a description of the destruction of the two cities and the escape of Lot. Next morning Abraham, looking from his tent towards Sodom, sees the smoke of destruction ascending to heaven. After this, Abraham moves south to Gerara, and again fearing for his life says of his wife, "she is my sister". The king of Gerara, Abimelech, sends and takes her, but learning in a dream that she is Abraham's wife he restores her to him untouched, and rebukes him and gives him gifts. In her old age Sarah bears a son, lsaac, to Abraham, and he is circumcised on the eighth day. Whilst he is still young, Sarah is jealous, seeing Ismael playing with the child Isaac, so she procures that Agar and her son shall be cast out. Then Agar would have allowed Ismael to perish in the wilderness, had not an angel encouraged her by telling her of the boy's future. Abraham is next related to have had a dispute with Abimelech over a well at Bersabee, which ends in a covenant being made between them. It was after this that the great trial of the faith of Abraham takes place. God commands him to sacrifice his only son Isaac. When Abraham has his arm raised and is in the very act of striking, an angel from heaven stays his hand and makes the most wonderful promises to him of the greatness of his posterity because of his complete trust in God. Sarah dies at the age of 127, and Abraham, having purchased from Ephron the Hethite the cave in Machpelah near Mambre, buries her there. His own career is not yet quite ended for first of all he takes a wife for his son Isaac, Rebecca from the city of Nachor in Mesopotamia. Then he marries Cetura, old though he is, and has by her six children. Finally, leaving all his possessions to Isaac, he dies at age 170, and is buried by Isaac and Ismael in the cave of Machpelah. VIEWPOINT OF OLD TESTAMENT Abraham may be looked upon as the starting-point or source of Old Testament religion. So that from the days of Abraham men were wont to speak of God as the God of Abraham, whilst we do not find Abraham referring in the same way to anyone before him. So we have Abraham's servant speaking of "the God of my father Abraham" (Gen. xxiv, 12). Jehovah, in an apparition to Isaac, speaks of himself as the God of Abraham (Gen. xxvi, 24), and to Jacob he is "the God of my father Abraham" (Gen. xxxi, 42). So, too, showing that the religion of Israel does not begin with Moses, God says to Moses: "I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham" etc. (Ex. iii, 6). The same expression is used in the Psalms (xlvi, 10) and is common in the Old Testament. Abraham is thus selected as the first beginning or source of the religion of the children of Israel and the origin of its close connection with Jehovah, because of his faith, trust, and obedience to and in Jehovah and because of Jehovah's promises to him and to his seed. So, in Genesis, xv, 6, it is said: "Abram believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice." This trust in God was shown by him when he left Haran and journeyed with his family into the unknown country of Chanaan. It was shown principally when he was willing to sacrifice his only son Isaac, in obedience to a command from God. It was on that occasion that God said: "Because thou hast not spared thy only begotten son for my sake I will bless thee" etc. (Gen., xxii, 16, 17). It is to this and other promises made so often by God to Israel that the writers of the Old Testament refer over and over again in confirmation of their privileges as the chosen people. These promises, which are recorded to have been made no less than eight times, are that God will give the land of Chanaan to Abraham and his seed (Gen., xii, 7) that his seed shall increase and multiply as the stars of heaven; that he himself shall be blessed and that in him "all the kindred of the earth shall be blessed" (xii, 3). Accordingly the traditional view of the life of Abraham, as recorded in Genesis, is that it is history in the strict sense of the word. Thus Father von Hummelauer, S.J., in his commentary on Genesis in the "Cursus Scripturae Sacrae" (30), in answer to the question from what author the section on Abraham first proceeded, replies, from Abraham as the first source. Indeed he even says that it is all in one style, as a proof of its origin, and that the Passage, xxv, 5-ll, concerning the goods, death, and burial of Abraham comes from Isaac. It must, however, be added that it is doubtful if Father von Hummelauer still adheres to these views, written before 1895, since he has much modified his position in the volume on Deuteronomy. Quite a different view on the section of Genesis treating of Abraham, and indeed of the whole of Genesis, is taken by modern critical scholars. They almost unanimously hold that the narrative of the patriarch's life is composed practically in its entirety of three writings or writers called respectively the Jahvist, the Elohist, and the priestly writer, and denoted by the letters J, E, and P. J and E consisted of collections of stories relating to the patriarch, some of older, some of later, origin. Perhaps the stories of J show a greater antiquity than those of E. Still the two authors are very much alike, and it is not always easy to distinguish one from the other in the combined narrative of J and E. From what we can observe, neither the Jahvist nor the Elohist was a personal author. Both are rather schools, and represent the collections of many years. Both collections were closed before the time of the prophets; J some time in the ninth century B.C., and E early in the eighth century, the former probably in the South Kingdom, the latter in the North. Then towards the end of the kingdom, perhaps owing to the inconvenience of having two rival accounts of the stories of the patriarchs etc. going about, a redactor R.JE (?) combined the two collections in one, keeping as much as possible to the words of his sources, making as few changes as possible so as to fit them into one another, and perhaps mostly following J in the account of Abraham. Then in the fifth century a writer who evidently belonged to the sacerdotal caste wrote down again an account of primitive and patriarchal history from the priestly point of view. He attached great importance to clearness and exactness; his accounts of things are often cast into the shape of formulas (cf. Genesis, i); he is very particular about genealogies, also as to chronological notes. The vividness and colour of the older patriarchal narratives, J and E, are wanting in the later one, which in the main is as formal as a legal document, though at times it is not wanting in dignity and even grandeur, as is the case in the first chapter of Genesis. Finally, the moral to be drawn from the various events narrated is more clearly set forth in this third writing and, according to the critics the moral standpoint is that of the fifth century B.C. Lastly, after the time of Ezra, this last history, P was worked up into one with the already combined narrative J.E. by a second redactor R. JEP, the result being the present history of Abraham, and indeed the present book of Genesis; though in all probability insertions were made at even a later date. VIEWPOINT OF NEW TESTAMENT The generation of Jesus Christ is traced back to Abraham by St. Matthew, and though in Our Lord's genealogy, according to St. Luke, he is shown to be descended according to the flesh not only from Abraham but also from Adam, still St. Luke shows his appreciation of the fruits of descent from Abraham by attributing all the blessings of God on Israel to the promises made to Abraham. This he does in the Magnificat, iii, 55, and in the Benedictus, iii, 73. Moreover, as the New Testament traces the descent of Jesus Christ from Abraham, so it does of all the Jews; though as a rule, when this is done, it is accompanied with a note of warning, lest the Jews should imagine that they are entitled to place confidence in the fact of their carnal descent from Abraham, without anything further. Thus (Luke, iii, 8) John the Baptist says: "Do not begin to say: We have Abraham for our father, for I say to you God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham." In Luke, xix, 9 our Saviour calls the sinner Zacheus a son of Abraham, as he likewise calls a woman whom he had healed a daughter of Abraham (Luke, xiii, 16); but in these and many similar cases, is it not merely another way of calling them Jews or Israelites, just as at times he refers to the Psalms under the general name of David, without implying that David wrote all the Psalms, and as he calls the Pentateuch the Books of Moses, without pretending to settle the question of the authorship of that work? It is not carnal descent from Abraham to which importance is attached; rather, it is to practising the virtues attributed to Abraham in Genesis. Thus in John, viii, the Jews, to whom Our Lord was speaking, boast (33): "We are the seed of Abraham", and Jesus replies (39): "If ye be the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham". St. Paul, too, shows that he is a son of Abraham and glories in that fact as in II Cor., xi, 22, when he exclaims: "They are the seed of Abraham, so am I". And again (Rom., xi, l): "I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham", and he addresses the Jews of Antioch in Pisidia (Acts, xiii, 26) as "sons of the race of Abraham". But, following the teaching of Jesus Christ St. Paul does not attach too much importance to carnal descent from Abraham; for he says (Gal., iii 29): "If you be Christ's, then you are the seed of Abraham", and again (Rom., lx, 6): "All are not Israelites who are of Israel; neither are all they who are the seed of Abraham, children". So, too, we can observe in all the New Testament the importance attached to the promises made to Abraham. In the Acts of the Apostles, iii, 25, St. Peter reminds the Jews of the promise, "in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed". So does St. Stephen in his speech before the Council (Acts, vii), and St. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews, vi, 13. Nor was the faith of the ancient patriarch less highly thought of by the New Testament writers. The passage of Genesis which was most prominently before them was xv, 6: "Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice." In Romans, iv, St. Paul argues strongly for the supremacy of faith, which he says justified Abraham; ' for if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God." The same idea is inculcated in the Epistle to the Galatians, iii, where the question is discussed: "Did you receive the spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" St. Paul decides that it is by faith, and says: "Therefore they that are of faith shall be justified with faithful Abraham". It is clear that this language, taken by itself, and apart from the absolute necessity of good works upheld by St. Paul, is liable to mislead and actually has misled many in the history of the Church. Hence, in order to appreciate to the full the Catholic doctrine of faith, we must supplement St. Paul by St. James. In ii, 17-22, of the Catholic Epistle we read: "So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself. But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works, show me thy faith without works, and I will show thee by works my faith. Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well; the devils also believe and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, and by works faith was made perfect?" In the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Paul enters into a long discussion concerning the eternal priesthood of Jesus Christ. He recalls the words of the 109th psalm more than once, in which it is said: "Thou art a Driest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." He recalls the fact that Melchisedech is etymologically the king of justice and also king of peace; and moreover that he is not only king, but also priest of the Most High God. Then, calling to mind that there is no account of his father, mother, or genealogy, nor any record of his heirs, he likens him to Christ king and priest; no Levite nor according to the order of Aaron, but a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech. IN THE LIGHT OF PROFANE HISTORY One is inclined to ask, when considering the light which profane history may shed on the life of Abraham: Is not the life of the patriarch incredible? That question may be, and is, answered in different ways, according to the point of view of the questioner. Perhaps it will not be without interest to quote the answer of Professor Driver, an able and representative exponent of moderate critical views: Do the patriarchal narratives contain intrinsic historical improbabilities? Or, in other words, is there anything intrinsically improbable in the lives of the several patriarchs, and the vicissitudes through which they severally pass? In considering this question a distinction must be drawn between the different sources of which these narratives are composed. Though particular details in them may be improbable, and though the representation may in parts be coloured by the religious and other associations of the age in which they were written, it cannot be said that the biographies of the first three patriarchs, as told in J and E, are, generally speaking, historically improbable; the movements and general lives of Abraham Isaac, and Jacob are, taken on the whole, credible ( Genesis, p. xlvi). Such is the moderate view; the advanced attitude is somewhat different." The view taken by the patient reconstructive criticism of our day is that, not only religiously, but even, in a qualified sense, historically also, the narratives of Abraham have a claim on our attention" (Cheyne, Encyc. Bib., 26). Coming now to look at the light thrown by profane history upon the stories of Abraham's life as given in Genesis, we have, first of all, the narratives of ancient historians, as Nicholas of Damascus, Berosus, Hecateus, and the like. Nicholas of Damascus tells how Abraham, when he left Chaldea lived for some years in Damascus. In fact in Josephus he is said to have been the fourth king of that city. But then there is no practical doubt that this story is based on the words of Genesis, xiv, 15, in which the town of Damascus is mentioned. As to the great man whom Josephus mentions as spoken of by Berosus, there is nothing to show that that great man was Abraham. In the "Praeparatio Evang." of Eusebius there are extracts recorded from numerous ancient writers, but no historical value can be attached to them. In fact, as far as ancient historians are concerned, we may say that all we know about Abraham is contained in the book of Genesis. A much more important and interesting question is the amount of value to be attached to the recent archaeological discoveries of Biblical and other explorers in the East. Archaeologists like Hommel, and more especially Sayce, are disposed to attach very great significance to them. They say, in fact, that these discoveries throw a serious element of doubt over many of the conclusions of the higher critics. On the other hand, critics, both advanced as Cheyne and moderate as Driver, do not hold the deductions drawn by these archaeologists from the evidence of the monuments in very high esteem, but regard them as exaggerations. To put the matter more precisely, we quote the following from Professor Sayce, to enable the reader to see for himself what he thinks (Early Hist. of the Hebrews, 8):" Cuneiform tablets have been found relating to Chodorlahomor and the other kings of the East mentioned in the 14th chapter of Genesis, while in the Tel-el-Amarna correspondence the king of Jerusalem declares that he had been raised to the throne by the 'arm' of his God, and was therefore, like Melchisedech, a Driest-king. But Chodorlahomor and Melchisedech had long ago been banished to mythland and criticism could not admit that archaeological discovery had restored them to actual history. Writers, accordingly, in complacent ignorance of the cuneiform texts, told the Assyriologists that their translations and interpretations were alike erroneous." That passage will make it clear how much the critics and archaeologists are at variance. But no one can deny that Assyriology has thrown some light on the stories of Abraham and the other patriarchs. Thus the name of Abraham was known in those ancient times; for amongst other Canaanitish or Amorite names found in deeds of sale of that period are those of Abi-ramu, or Abram, Jacob-el (Ya'qub-il), and Josephel (Yasub-il). So, too, of the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, which relates the war of Chodorlahomor and his allies in Palestine, it is not so long ago that the advanced critics relegated it to the region of fable, under the conviction that Babylonians and Elamites at that early date in Palestine and the surrounding country was a gross anachronism. But now Professor Pinches has deciphered certain inscriptions relating to Babylonia in which the five kings, Amraphel King of Senaar, Arioch King of Pontus, Chodorlahomor King of the Elamites, and Thadal King of nations, are identified with Hammurabi King. of Babylon, Eri-aku, Kudur-laghghamar, and Tuduchula, son of Gazza, and which tells of a campaign of these monarchs in Palestine. So that no one can any longer assert that the war spoken of in Genesis, xiv, can only be a late reflection of the wars of Sennacherib and others in the times of the kings. From the Tel-el-Amarna tab]ets we know that Babylonian influence was predominant in Palestine in those days. Moreover, we have light thrown by the cuneiform inscriptions upon the incident of Melchisedech. In Genesis, xiv, 18, it is said: "Melchisedech, the King of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was the priest of the Most High God, blessed him." Amongst the Tel-el-Amarna letters is one from Ebed-Tob, King of Jerusalem (the city is Ursalim, i. e. city of Salim, and it is spoken of as Salem). He is priest appointed by Salem, the god of Peace, and is hence both king and priest. In the same manner Melchisedech is priest and king, and naturally comes to greet Abraham returning in peace; and hence, too, Abraham offers to him as to a priest a tithe of the spoils. On the other hand, it must be stated that Professor Driver will not admit Sayce's deductions from the inscriptions as to EbedTob, and will not recognize any analogy between Salem and the Most High God. Taking archaeology as a whole, it cannot be doubted that no definite results have been attained as to Abraham. What has come to light is susceptible of different interpretations. But there is no doubt that archaeology is putting an end to the idea that the patriarchal legends are mere myth. They are shown to be more than that. A state of things is being disclosed in patriarchal times quite consistent with much that is related in Genesis, and at times even apparently confirming the facts of the Bible. VIEWPOINT OF LEGEND We come now to the question: how far legend plays a part in the life of Abraham as recorded in Genesis. It is a practical and important question, because it is so much discussed by modern critics and they all believe in it. In setting forth the critical view on the subject, I must not be taken as giving my own views also. Hermann Gunkel, in the Introduction to his Commentary on Genesis (3) writes: "There is no denying that there are legends in the Old Testament, consider for instance the stories of Samson and Jonah. Accordingly it is not a matter of belief or scepticism, but merely a matter of obtaining better knowledge, to examine whether the narratives of Genesis are history or legend." And again: "In a people with such a highly developed poetical faculty as Israel there must have been a place for saga too. The senseless confusion of ' legend ' with ' Iying ' has caused good people to hesitate to concede that there are legends in the Old Testament. But legends are not lies; on the contrary, they are a particular form of poetry." These passages give a very good idea of the present position of the Higher Criticism relative to the legends of Genesis, and of Abraham in particular. The first principle enunciated by the critics is that the accounts of the primitive ages and of the patriarchal times originated amongst people who did not practise the art of writing. Amongst all peoples, they say, poetry and saga were the first beginning of history; so it was in Greece and Rome, so it was in Israel. These legends were circulated, and handed down by oral tradition, and contained, no doubt, a kernel of truth. Very often, where individual names are used these names in reality refer not to individuals but to tribes, as in Genesis, x, and the names of the twelve Patriarchs, whose migrations are those of the tribes they represent. It is not of course to be supposed that these legends are no older than the collections J, E, and P, in which they occur. They were in circulation ages before, and for long periods of time, those of earlier origin being shorter, those of later origin longer, often rather romances than legends, as that of Joseph. Nor were they all of Israelitish origin; some were Babylonian, some Egyptian. As to how the legends arose, this came about, they say, in many ways. At times the cause was etymological, to explain the meaning of a name, as when it is said that Isaac received his name because his mother laughed (cahaq); sometimes they were ethnological, to explain the geographical position, the adversity, or prosperity, of a certain tribe; sometimes historical, sometimes ceremonial, as the account explaining the covenant of circumcision; sometimes geological, as the explanation of the appearance of the Dead Sea and its surroundings. AEtiological legends of this kind form one class of those to be found in the lives of the patriarchs and elsewhere in Genesis. But there are others besides which do not concern us here. When we try to discover the age of the formation of the patriarchal legends, we are confronted with a question of great complexity. For it is not merely a matter of the formation of the simple legends separately, but also of the amalgamation of these into more complex legends. Criticism teaches us that that period would have ended about the year 1200 B.C. Then would have followed the period of remodeling the legends, so that by 900 B.C. they would have assumed substantially the form they now have. After that date, whilst the legends kept in substance to the form they had received, they were modified in many ways so as to bring them into conformity with the moral standard of the day, still not so completely that the older and less conventional ideas of a more primitive age did not from time to time show through them. At this time, too, many collections of the ancient legends appear to have been made, much in the same way as St. Luke tells us in the beginning of his Gospel that many had written accounts of Our Saviour's life on their own authority. Amongst other collections were those of J in the South and E in the North. Whilst others perished these two survived, and were supplemented towards the end of the captivity by the collection of P, which originated amidst priestly surroundings and was written from the ceremonial standpoint. Those that hold these views maintain that it is the fusion of these three collections of legends which has led to confusion in some incidents in the life of Abraham as for instance in the case of Sarai in Egypt, where her age seems inconsistent with her adventure with the Pharao. Hermann Gunkel writes (148): "It is not strange that the chronology of P displays everywhere the most absurd oddities when injected into the old legends, as a result, Sarah is still at sixty-five a beautiful woman whom the Egyptians seek to capture, and Ishmael is carried on his mother's shoulders after he is a youth of sixteen." The collection of P was intended to take the place of the old combined collection of J and E. But the old narrative had a firm hold of the popular imagination and heart. And so the more recent collection was combined with the other two, being used as the groundwork of the whole, especially in chronology. It is that combined narrative which we now possess. J. A. HOWLETT Abraham (In Liturgy) Abraham (in Liturgy) While of peculiar interest to the liturgiologist (especially in the classification of the liturgies of the East and of the West, as is noted below under MISSAL), the inclusion of noted names of the Old Testament in the liturgies of Christian Churches must be a subject of sufficiently general interest to warrant some brief notice here. Of all the names thus used, a special prominence accrues to those of Abel, Melchisedech, Abraham through their association with the idea of sacrifice and their employment in this connection in the most solemn part of the Canon of the Mass in the Roman rite. The inclusion in the Litany for the Dying (Roman Ritual) of only two (Abel and Abraham) out of all the great names of the Old Testament must give these a special prominence in the eyes of the faithful, but of these two, again, the name of Abraham occurs so often and in such a variety of connections, as to make his position in the liturgy one of very decided pre-eminence. Of first interest will be the present use of the word Abraham in the Roman liturgy: Martyrology (9th October) "Eodem die memoria S. Abrahae Patriarchae et omnium credentium Patris" (The same day, the memory of S. Abraham Patriarch and Father of all believers). Ritual (a) In the Ordo commendationis animae (Recommendation of a soul departing), the brief litany includes but two names from the Old Testament, that of the Baptist belonging to the New Testament: Holy Mary, pray for him. All ye holy Angels and Archangels, pray for him. Holy Abel, pray for him. All ye choirs of the just, pray for him. Holy Abraham, pray for him. St. John Baptist, pray for him. St. Joseph, pray for him. In the Libera (Deliver, etc.), which follows shortly after, many names of the Old Testament are mentioned, including Abraham, but omitting Abel: "Deliver . . . as thou didst deliver Abraham from Ur of the Chaldeans". (b) Benedictio peregrinorum (Blessing of pilgrims etc.). The second prayer reads: "O God, who didst guide Abraham safely through all the ways of his journey from Ur of the Chaldeans.... Breviary (a) On Septuagesima Sunday the lessons from Scripture begin with the first verse of Genesis, and the formal narrative of Abraham begins with Quinquagesima Sunday, the lessons ending on Shrove Tuesday with the sacrifice of Melchisedech. (b) The antiphon to the Magnificat on Passion Sunday is: "Abraham your father rejoiced . . ." (John, viii, 56). Again, the first antiphon of the second nocturn of the Common of Apostles reads: "The princes of the people are gathered together with the God of Abraham". The occurrence of the name in the last verse of the Maynificat itself: "As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham and his seed forever" and in the Benedictus (sixth verse): "The oath which he swore to Abraham our father . . ." make the name of daily occurrence in the Divine Office, as these two Canticles are sung daily the former at Vespers, the latter at Lauds. In the Psaltery, also, recited during every week, the name occurs in Pss., xlvi, 10; civ, 9, 42. See also the third strophe of the hymn Quicumque Christum quaeritis (Vespers of Transfiguration D. N. J. C. and various Lessons in the Nocturns, e.g. Feria 3a infra Hebd. vi p. Pent., Feria 3a infra oct. Corp. Christi, 2d nocturn). Missal (a) The third of the twelve lessons called " Prophecies" read on Holy Saturday between the lighting of the Paschal Candle and the Blessing of the Font deals wholly with the sacrifice of Isaac imposed upon Abraham. The lesson (Gen., xxii, 1-19) is, like the others, not only read quietly by the priest at the altar, but also chanted in a loud voice simultaneously by a cleric. The dramatic incidents thus rehearsed must have impressed the catechumens deeply, as is evidenced by the reproduction of the incidents on the walls of catacombs and on sarcophagi. The lesson is followed by a prayer: "O God, the supreme Father of the faithful, who throughout the world didst multiply the children of thy promise . . . and by the paschal mystery dost make Abraham thy servant the father of all nations...." (b) Again, in the prayer after the fourth lesson: "O God, grant that the fulness of the whole world may pass over to the children of Abraham...." (c) The Epistle of the thirteenth Sun day after Pentecost: "To Abraham were the promises made.... But God gave it to Abraham by promise...." (Gal., iii, 16-22). (d) Offertory of the Mass for the Dead: "O Lord . . . may the holy standard-bearer Michael introduce them to the holy light which Thou didst promise of old to Abraham...." (e) In the Nuptial Mass, the blessing reads: "May the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, be with you . . ." (f) Of greater interest than anything thus far cited is the prayer in the Canon of the Mass, when the priest extends his hands over the Consecrated Species: "Upon which do Thou vouchsafe to look . . . and accept them, as Thou didst vouchsafe to accept the gift of Thy just servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham...." Here the Canon insists on the idea of sacrifice, a fact common to Western liturgies, while those of the East, except the Maronite, omit in their epicleses all reference to the typic sacrifices of the Old Testament, and appear concerned with impressing the faithful with the idea rather of sacrament and communion. This is esteemed a fact of capital importance towards a classification of the liturgies. (g) In the Sequence of Corpus Christi while Abraham is not named, his sacrifice (unbloody, like that of the altar) is commemorated in the lines In figuris praesignatur, Cum Isaac immolatur.... Pontifical In one of the Prefaces of the Consecration of an altar we read: "May it have as much grace with Thee as that which Abraham, the father of faith, built when about to sacrifice his son as a figure of our redemption . . ." Again, in the Blessing of a Cemetery (third Prayer) and in connection with Isaac and Jacob (sixth Prayer). Finally, in two of the Prayers for the Blessing and Coronation of a King. The exalted position of Abraham in Sacred History, and the frequent use of his name in invocations etc. in the Old Testament (e. g. Gen. xxviii, 13; xxxii, 9; xlviii, 15,16; Exod., iii, 6,15,16, iv, 5; Tob., vii, 15 etc.), and the continued use thereof by the early Christians (Acts, iii, 13; vii, 32) made his name of frequent occurrence in prayers, exorcisms and even amongst Pagans, ignorant of the significance of the formula "God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob" etc., in magical rites and incantations, as Origen testifies. H.T. HENRY The Bosom of Abraham The Bosom of Abraham In the Holy Bible, the expression "the Bosom of Abraham" is found only in two verses of St. Luke's Gospel (xvi, 22, 23). It occurs in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus the imagery of which is plainly drawn from the popular representations of the unseen world of the dead which were current in Our Lord's time. According to the Jewish conceptions of that day, the souls of the dead were gathered into a general tarrying-place the Sheol of the Old Testament literature, and the Hades of the New Testament writings (cf. Luke, xvi, 22 in the Gr. xvi, 23). A local discrimination, however, existed among them, according to their deeds during their mortal life. In the unseen world of the dead the souls of the righteous occupied an abode or compartment of their own which was distinctly separated by a wall or a chasm from the abode or compartment to which the souls of the wicked were consigned. The latter was a place of torments usually spoken of as Gehenna (cf. Matt., v, 29, 30; xviii, 9- Mark, ix, 42 sqq. in the Latin Vulgate)- the other, a place of bliss and security known under the names of "Paradise" (cf. Luke, xxiii, 43) and "the Bosom of Abraham" (Luke, xvi, 22 23). And it is in harmony with these Jewish conceptions that Our Lord pictured the terrible fate of the selfish Rich Man, and on the contrary, the glorious reward of the patient Lazarus. In the next life Dives found himself in Gehenna, condemned to the most exeruciating tor ments, whereas Lazarus was carried by the angels into "the Bosom of Abraham", where the righteous dead shared in the repose and felicity of Abraham "the father of the faithful". But while commentators generally agree upon the meaning of the figurative expression "the Bosom of Abraham", as designating the blissful abode of the righteous souls after death, they are at variance with regard to the manner in which the phrase itself originated. Up to the time of Maldonatus (A.D. 1583), its origin was traced back to the universal custom of parents to take up into their arms, or place upon their knees, their children when they are fatigued, or return home, and to make them rest by their side during the night (cf. II Kings, xii, 2; III Kings, iii, 20; xvii, 19; Luke, xi, 7 sqq.), thus causing them to enjoy rest and security in the bosom of a loving parent. After the same manner was Abraham supposed to act towards his children after the fatigues and troubles of the present life, hence the metaphorical expression "to be in Abraham's Bosom" as meaning to be in repose and happiness with him. But according to Maldonatus (In Lucam, xvi, 22), whose theory has since been accepted by many scholars, the metaphor "to be in Abraham's Bosom" is derived from the custom of reclining on couches at table which prevailed among the Jews during and before the time of Christ. As at a feast each guest leaned on his left elbow so as to leave his right arm at liberty, and as two or more lay on the same couch, the head of one man was near the breast of the man who lay behind, and he was therefore said "to lie in the bosom" of the other. It was also considered by the Jews of old a mark of special honour and favour for one to be allowed to lie in the bosom of the master of the feast (cf. John 13:23). And it is by this illustration that they pictured the next world. They conceived of the reward of the righteous dead as a sharing in a banquet given by Abraham, "the father of the faithful" (cf. Matt., viii, 11 sqq.), and of the highest form of that reward as lying in "Abraham's Bosom". Since the coming of Our Lord, "the Bosom of Abraham" gradually ceased to designate a place of imperfect happiness, and it has become synonymous with Heaven itself. In their writings the Fathers of the Church mean by that expression sometimes the abode of the righteous dead before they were admitted to the Beatific Vision after the death of the Saviour, sometimes Heaven, into which the just of the New Law are immediately introduced upon their demise. When in her liturgy the Church solemnly prays that the angels may carry the soul of one of her departed children to "Abraham's Bosom", she employs the expression to designate Heaven and its endless bliss in company with the faithful of both Testaments, and in particular with Abraham, the father of them all. This passage of the expression "the Bosom of Abraham" from an imperfect and limited sense to one higher and fuller is a most natural one, and is in full harmony with the general character of the New Testament dispensation as a complement and fulfilment of the Old Testament revelation. FRANCIS E. GIGOT Abraham a Sancta Clara Abraham a Sancta Clara A Discalced Augustinian friar, preacher, and author of popular books of devotion, b. at Messkirch, Baden, 1644; d. 1 December, 1709. The eighth of nine children born to Matthew Megerlin, or Megerle, a well-to-do serf who kept a tavern in Kreenheinstetten, he received in Baptism the name John Ulrich. At the age of six he attended the village school in his native place, and about three years later he began his Latin studies in Messkirch. During the years 1656-59, he passed successively through the three classes of the Jesuit untergymnasium in Ingolstadt. At his father's death, which occurred about this time, the boy was adopted by his uncle, Abraham von Megerlin, canon of Altötting, who removed him to the Benedictine school in Salzburg. In the fall of 1662, at the age of 18, John joined the Discalced Augustinians at the age Vienna, choosing the name Abraham doubtless out of respect to his uncle with the addition a Sancta Clara. He made his novitiate and completed his theological studies at Mariabrunn, not far from Vienna. On his ordination in Vienna (1666) he was sent, after a brief preparation, as preacher to the shrine of Taxa, near Augsburg, but after about three years he was recalled to Vienna, a centre of greater activity. On 28 April, 1677, he was appointed imperial court preacher by Leopold I, and while holding this office experienced the terrors of the year of the plague, 1679. After a rest of five months as chaplain to the Land marshal of Lower Austria, he once more ascended the pulpit. For the year 1680 he is recorded as being prior of the convent at Vienna, while two years later we find him chaplain to the monastic church of his order in Gratz, where he remained three years as Sunday preacher, and later as prior. It was in this capacity that he went to Rome in 1687. In 1690 he is mentioned once more by the house chronicle of the Vienna monastery as court preacher, and the following year as having the rank of provincial. In this capacity he undertook his second journey to Rome (1692), where he took part in the general chapter of his order. Upon his return he took up his customary duties, besides filling the office of definitor. He eventually became the definitor provinciae. These manifold sustained exertions, however, had gradually undermined his strength, still further impaired by years of suffering from gout, and finally resulted in his death. Abraham had at his command an amazingly large amount of information which, with an abundant wit in keeping with the taste of his time, made him an effective preacher. His peculiar talent lay in his faculty for presenting religious truths, even the most bitter, with such graphic charm that every listener, both high and low, found pleasure in his discourse, even though certain of his contemporaries expressed themselves with great virulence against "the buffoon, the newsmonger, and the harlequin of the pulpit." Even in his character of author, he stands as it were in the pulpit, and speaks to his readers by means of his pen. His works are numerous. His first occasion for literary work was furnished by the plague, on which he wrote three treatises. Merk's, Wien! or a detailed description of destructive death (Vienna, 1680), shows how death spares neither priests, nor women, nor learned men, nor married people, nor soldiers. The second tract, Lösch Wien (Vienna, 1680), which is less powerful, exhorts the survivors of the plague to extinguish with their good works the torments of Purgatory for those who had fallen victims. Die grosse Totenbruderschaft (1681) enumerates the people of prominence who died in 1679-80, in order to illustrate forcibly, and almost rudely, the reflection "that after death the prince royal is as frightfully noisome as the newborn child of the peasant." Similarly based on a critical event of history was the little book entitled Auf, auf, ihr Christen (Vienna, 1683), a stirring exhortation to Christians in arms against the Turk. This has become chiefly celebrated as the original of the sermon in the Wallenstein's Lager of Schiller. A collection of sermons which had been actually preached appeared in Salzburg in 1684 under the title of Reim dich, oder ich lis dich. In the following year a little pilgrimage book was printed for the monastery of Taxa entitled Gaik, Gaik, Gaik a Ga einer wunderseltsamen Hennen. This grotesque title arose from the story of the origin of the monastery, according to which a picture of the Blessed Virgin was seen imprinted on a hen's egg. Abraham's masterpiece, the fruit of ten years' labour, is Judas der Erzschelm ( Judas, the archknave, Salzburg, 1686-95). This treats of the apocryphal life of the traitor Judas, and is varied with many moral reflections. While still at work upon this extensive book, he published a compendium of Catholic moral teaching, Grammatica religiosa (Salzburg, 1691), consisting of fifty-five lessons, and embracing the themes of thirty-three sermons. This appeared in a German translation (Cologne, 1699). The remaining works of the celebrated barefoot preacher are for the most part a confused mixture of verses, reflections, and sermons. Thus: Etwas für alle ( Something for All Persons; Würzburg, 1699); Sterben und Erben (Death and Inheritance; Amsterdam, 1702); Neu eröffnete Welt-Galleria (Newly-Opened World-Gallery; Nürnberg, 1703); Heilsames Gemisch-Gemasch (A Salutary Mix-Mash; Würzburg, 1704); Huy! und Pfuy der Welt (Ho! And Fie on the World; Würzburg, 1707). All these treatises showed the influence of Sebastian Brant's Narrenschiff (Ship of Fools), which was even more apparent in the two following works: Centifolium stultorum in Quarto (A Hundred excellent fools in Quarto; Vienna, 1709), and Wunderwürdiger Traum von einem grossen Narrenest (Wonderful Dream of a Great Nest of Fools, Salzburg, 1710; also printed during the lifetime of Abraham). A year after his death there appeared Geistliche Kramerladen (Spiritual Haberdasher's Shop); Wohl angefüllter Weinkeller (A Well-filled Wine-cellar; Würzburg); and Besonders meublirt und gezierte Toten-Kapelle (A Strangely Furnished and Adorned Mortuary Chapel; Nürnberg). Five quarto volumes of his literary remains were published posthumously: Abrahamisches Bescheidessen (Abraham's Honour Feasts; Vienna, Br nn, 1717); Abrahamische Lauberhutt (Abraham's Leafclad Arbour; Vienna and Nürnberg, 1721-23); Abrahamisches Gehab dich wohl! (Abraham's Farewell; Nürnberg, 1729). A collective edition of his works appeared (Passau, 1835-46) in nineteen octavo volumes. Schiller, a Swabian compatriot of Abraham, has passed this interesting judgment on the literary monk in a letter to Göthe: "This Father Abraham is a man of wonderful originality, whom we must respect, and it would be an interesting, though not at all an easy, task to approach or surpass him in mad wit and cleverness." Moreover, Schiller was greatly influenced by Abraham; even more were Jean Paul Richter and other lesser minds. Even to the most recent times Abraham's influence is chiefly noticeable in the literature of the pulpit, though but little to its advantage. To honour the memory of Abraham the city of Vienna has begun a new edition of his works. VON KARAJAN, Abraham a Sancta Clara (Vienna, 1867) (still the best work on the celebrated monk); SCHERER, Vortrage und Aufsatze zur Geschichte des geistlichen Lebens in Deutschland und osterreich (Berlin, 1874); ID., MARETA, on Abraham in the Allgemeine deutsche Biographie; MARETA uber Judas den Erzschelm, in Programm des Schottengymnasium (Vienna, 1875); BOBERTAG, Abraham a Sancta Clara, Judas der Erzschelm, in KURSCHNER'S Deutsche National literatur; BLANlKENBURG, Studien uber die Sprache Abrahams a Sancta Clara (Halle, 1897); NAGL, Die erziehische Einwirkung Abrahams a Sancta Clara auf das osterreicherische Volk in DITTES Paedagogium (1891); NAGL AND ZEIDLER, Deutsch-sterreichische Literatur Geschichte (Vienna, 1899) 621-651. N. SCHEID Abraham Ecchelensis Abraham Ecchelensis A learned Maronite, born in Hekel, or Ecchel (hence his surname), a village on Mount Lebanon, in 1600; died 1664 in Rome. He studied at the Maronite College in Rome, published a Syriac grammar (1628), and taught Syriac and Arabic at the College of the Propaganda. In 1630 he began to teach the same languages in the Royal College Paris, and to assist in editing Le Jay's "Polyglot Bible", working with Gabriel Sionita on the Syriac and Arabic texts and their Latin translation. He contributed III Mach. in Arabic, and Ruth in Syriac and Arabic, with a Latin translation. Abraham and Gabriel soon quarrelled, and the former wrote three letters explaining this difference, and defending his work against its depreciators, especially Valerian Flavigny. In 1642 he resumed his teaching in Rome, but returned to Paris in 1645; after eight years he again went to Rome, where he remained until his death. Among his many works we may mention: a "Synopsis of Arab Philosophy" (Paris, 1641); some disciplinary canons of the Council of Nice, according to Eastern attribution, though unknown to the Latin and Greek churches (Paris, 1641) "Abr. Ecchellensis et Leon. Allatii Concordantia Nationum Christianarum Orientalium in Fidei Catholicae Dogmate" (Mainz, 1655); "De Origine nominis Papae, necnon de illius Proprietate in Romano Pontifice, adeoque de ejus Primatu contra Joannem Seldenum Anglum" (Rome, 1660); "Epistola ad J. Morinum de variis Graecorum et Orientalium ritibus"; "Chronicon Orientale nunc primum Latinitate donatum, cui Accessit Supplementum Historiae orientalis (Paris, 1653); "Catalogus librorum Chaldaeorum tam Eccl. quam profanor., Auctore Hebed-Jesu Latinitate Donatus et Notis Illustratus" (Rome,1653); a "Life of St. Anthony"; a Latin translation of Abulfath's "Paraphrase of Apollonius' Conic Sections, 5, 6, and 7." A.J. MAAS Abrahamites Abrahamites (1) Syrian heretics of the ninth century. They were called Brachiniah by the Arabs, from the name of their head, Ibrahim, or Abraham of Antioch. They denied the Divinity of Christ, and were looked on by some as allied to the Paulicians. (2) A sect of Bohemian Deists. They claimed that they held what had been Abraham's religion before his circumcision. They believed in one God, but rejected the Trinity, original sin, and the perpetuity of punishment for sin, and accepted nothing of the Bible save only the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer. On their refusal to adopt some one of the religions tolerated in Bohemia, Joseph II banished them to Transylvania in 1783. Some became converted later on to the Catholic Faith. There are still found in Bohemia some whose religious belief suggests that of the Abrahamites. (3) Martyrs in the time of the Byzantine Emperor Theophilus, when a persecution of Catholics took place on account of the revival of the heresy of the Iconoclasts. At this time there was a monastery of monks in Constantinople called St. Abraham's. When the Emperor called on them to renounce the cult of holy images they defended the practice with great zeal, and were consequently subjected (832) to martyrdom. Kirchenlex., I, 119, 120. JOHN J. A' BECKET Nicholas Abram Nicholas Abram Jesuit theologian, born in 1589, at Xaronval, in Lorraine; died 7 September, 1655. He taught rhetoric at Pont-à-Mousson, then engaged in missionary work, and finally taught theology at Pont-à-Mousson for seventeen years. His principal works are: + "Nonni Panopolitani Paraphrasis Sancti secundum Joannem Evangelii. Accesserunt Notae P.N.A., Soc. Jes." (Paris, 1623); + "Commentarii in P. Virgilii Maronis Bucolica et Georgica. Accessit diatriba de quatuor fluviis et loco paradisi" (Pont-à-Mousson, 1633-35); + "Pharus Veteris Testamenti, sive sacrarum quaestionum libri XV. Quibus accesserunt ejusdem auctoris de veritate et mendacio libri IV" (Paris, 1648). This is the principal exegetical work of Father N. Abram. His other works may he found in Sommervogel "Bibliothèque de la compagnie de Jésus" (Brussels, 1890). A.J. MAAS Abrasax Abrasax The study of Abrasax is, at first sight, as discouraging as it is possible to imagine. The name has been given to a class of ancient stone articles, of small dimensions, inscribed with outlandish figures and formulas, sometimes wholly indecipherable, specimens of which are to be found in almost every museum and private collection. These, for the most part, have hitherto resisted all attempts at interpretation, though it would be rash to conclude that a fuller knowledge may not solve enigmas which remain closed to us. The true name, moreover, is Abrasax, and not, as incorrectly written, Abraxas, a reading due to the confusion made by the Latins between Sigma and Xi. Among the early Gnostics, Abrasax appears to have had various meanings. Basilides gave this title to Almighty God, and claimed that the numerical value of its letters gave the sum of 365, because the Abrasax is enclosed in the solar cycle. Sometimes the number 365 signifies the series of the heavens. In view of such imaginings, it is easy to guess at the course taken by an untrammelled Gnostic fancy, whereby its adherents strove to discover the meaning of the mysterious word. It is, however, an error to give the name Abrasax to all stones of Gnostic origin, as has been done up to the present day. It is not the name which applies to talismans, any more than the names of Jupiter and Venus apply to all ancient statues indiscriminately. Abrasax is the name given by the Gnostics to the Supreme Deity, and it is quite possible that we shall find a clue to its etymological meaning in the influences of numbers. The subject is one which has exercised the ingenuity of many savants, but it may be said that all the engraved stones to which the name is commonly given fall into three classes: (1) Abrasax, or stones of Basilidian origin; (2) Abrasaxtes, or stones originating in ancient forms of worship, and adapted by the Gnostics to their peculiar opinions; (3) Abraxoïdes, or stones absolutely unconnected with the doctrine of Basilides. Bellermann, following Montfaucon, made a tentative classification of Gnostic stones, which, however, is nowadays looked upon as wholly inadequate. His mistake consisted in wishing, as it were, to make a frontal attack on Gnosticism. Kopp, endowed with greater skill and patience, seems to have realized in some measure how wide the problem actually is. Ad. Franck and, quite lately, Moses Schwab have made diligent researches in the direction of the Cabbala. "The demonology devised by the Cabbalists"; according to the former writer, "was nothing more than a carefully thought out personification of the different degrees of life and intelligence which they perceived in external nature. All natural growths, forces, and phenomena are thus typified." The outline here furnished needs only to be extended indefinitely in order to take in quite easily the countless generations of Gnosticism. The whole moral and physical world, analyzed and classified with an inconceivable minuteness, will find place in it. Thence, also, will issue the bewildering catalogues of Gnostic personalities. The chief difficulty, however, arises from the nomenclature of Gnosticism, and here the "Sepher Raziel" supplies a first and valuable hint. "To succeed in the operations of divination", it says, "it is necessary to pronounce the mystic names of the planets or of the earth." In fact, stones of Gnostic origin often show designs made up out of the initial letters of the planets. Another parallel is still more suggestive. The Jews, as is well known, would never pronounce the Ineffable Name, Jehovah, but substituted either another name or a paraphrase; a rule which applied, not only to the Ineffable Name and its derivatives, but to others as well, ending, in order to evade the difficulty which arose, in a series of fantastic sounds which at first seem simply the outcome of a hopeless confusion. It became necessary to resort to permutations, to the use of other letters, to numerical and formal equivalents. The result was an outlandish vocabulary, only partially accounted for, yet one which nevertheless reveals in Gnosticism the existence of something more than mere incoherences. Very many secrets of Gnosticism remain unexplained, but it may be hoped that they will not always be shrouded in mystery. KING, The Gnostics and their Remains (London, 1887); BELLERMANN, Versuch uber die Gemmen der Alten mit dem Abraxas-Bilde (Berlin, 1817-19); DIETERICH, Die Abraxas (Leipzig, 1892); LECLERCQ, in Dict. d'archeol. chret. et de liturgie, I, 127 sq.; MATTER, Hist. du gnosticisme (Paris, 1843); MONTFAUCON, L'antiquite expliquee (Paris, 1722), II, 2, 353. H. LECLERCQ Absalom Absalom ( Abhshalom in Hebrew; Abessalom, Apsalomos in Greek). The name of several distinguished persons mentioned in the Old Testament (Kings, Par., Mach.), interpreted "The Father of Peace." (1) Absalom, Son of David He is third in the order mentioned by the chronicler (II Kings, iii, 2, 3) of the sons born at Hebron during the first turbulent years of David's reign over Judah, when Isboseth, son of Saul, still claimed by right of inheritance to rule over Israel. His mother was Maacha, daughter of Tholmai, King of Gessur. The sacred writer who sketches for us the career of Absalom (II Kings, xiii-xviii) lays stress upon the faultless beauty of the youth's appearance, and mentions in particular the luxurious wealth of his hair, which, when shorn, weighed over ten ounces. The significance of this latter note becomes apparent when we remember the important part which the culture of the hair played in the devotions of the Eastern people (note even at this day the ceremonial prayers of the Dervishes). As shaving the head was a sign of mourning, so offering a comely growth of hair to the priest was a token of personal sacrifice akin to the annual offering of the first fruits in the sanctuary. Probably the chronicler had also in mind that it was this gift of nature which became the occasion of Absalom's fatal death. To a pleasing exterior the youth Absalom joined a temperament which, whilst fond of display, was nevertheless reserved, bold, and thoughtful. These qualifications were calculated to nourish a natural desire to be one day the representative of that magnificent power created by his father, from the prospective enjoyment of which his minority of birth alone seemed to debar him. Despite his ambition, there appears to have been in the youth that generous instinct of honour which inspires noble impulses where these do not clash with the more inviting prospects of self-interest. Under such circumstances it is not strange that Absalom, idolized by those around him, whilst his natural sense of gratitude and filial duty became gradually dulled, was led to cultivate that species of egotism which grows cruel in proportion as it counts upon the blind affection of its friends. There were other causes which alienated Absalom from his father. David's eldest son, Amnon, born of a Jezrahelite mother, and prospective heir to the throne by reason of his seniority, had conceived a violent passion for Thamar, Absalom's beautiful sister. Unable to control his affection, yet prevented from gaining access to her by the conventionalities of the royal court, which separated the King's wives and kept Thamar in her mother's household, Amnon, on the advice of his cousin Jonadab, feigns illness, and upon being visited by the King, his father, requests that Thamar be permitted to nurse him. It was thus that Amnon found opportunity to wrong the innocence of his stepsister. Having injured the object of his passion, he forthwith begins to hate her, and sends from him the aggrieved maiden, who must be to him a constant reminder of his wrongdoing. Thamar, departing in the bitterness of her sorrow, is met by Absalom, who forces from her the secret of Amnon's violence to her. David is informed, but, apparently unwilling to let the disgrace of his prospective heir become public, fails to punish the crime. This gives Absalom the pretext for avenging his sister's wrong, for which now not only Amnon, the heir to the throne, but also David appears responsible to him. He takes Thamar into his house and quietly but determinedly lays his plan. The sacred writer states that Absalom never spoke to Amnon, neither good words nor evil, but he hated him with a hatred unto death. For two years Absalom thus carried his resentment in silence, when at length he found occasion to act openly. From the days of the patriarchs it had been customary among the shepherd princes of Israel to celebrate as a public festival of thanksgiving the annual sheep-shearing. The first clip of the flocks was ordained for the priests (Deut., xviii, 4), and the sacredness of the feast made it difficult for any member of the tribal family to absent himself. The sacred writer does not state that there was in the mind of David a secret suspicion that Absalom meditated mischief, but to one whose in sight into past and future events was so clear as that of the Royal Seer, it might easily have occurred that there had been in the days of his forefather, Jacob, another Thamar (Gen., xxxviii, 6) who figured at a sheep-shearing, and who found means of avenging a similar wrong against herself, though in a less bloody way than that contemplated by Absalom on the present occasion. Although David excuses himself from attending the great sheep-shearing, he eventually yields to Absalom's entreaty to send Amnon there to represent him. The festive reunion of the royal household takes place at Baalhasor, in a valley east of the road that leads to Sichem, near Ephraim. When the banquet is at its height, and Amnon has fairly given himself over to the pleasures of wine, he is suddenly overpowered by the trusted servants of Absalom, and slain. The rest of the company flee. Absalom himself escapes the inevitable anger of his father by seeking refuge in the home of his maternal grandfather at Gessur. Here he hopes to remain until, the grief of his father having died out, he might be forgiven and recalled to the royal court. But David does not relent so quickly. After three years of banishment, Absalom, through the intervention of Joab, David's nephew and trusted general is allowed to return to the city, without, however, being permitted to enter the King's presence. In this condition Absalom lives for two years, seeking all the while to regain through the instrumentality of Joab the favour of his father. Joab himself is reluctant to press the matter, until Absalom, by setting fire to the crops of his kinsman, forces Joab to come to him with a view of seeking redress for the injury. Absalom turns the opportunity of this altercation with Joab to good account by pleading his own neglected and humiliated condition: I would rather die ignominiously, he argues, than have this rancour of the King against me all the days of my life. As a result Absalom is received by the King. Restored to his former princely dignity and the apparent confidence of his father, Absalom now enters upon that course of secret plotting to which his ambition and his opportunity seemed to urge him, and which has stamped his name as a synonym of unnatural revolt. By ingratiating himself in the good will of the people, and at the same time fostering discontent with the conditions of his father's reign, he succeeds in preparing the minds of the disaffected for a general uprising. After four years [the Septuagint has "forty", which is evidently a misreading, as appears from the Hebrew ( Keri), Syriac, and Arabic versions] of energetic secret activity, Absalom asks leave of the King to repair to Hebron, that he might fulfil a self-imposed vow made while in captivity at Gessur. Preparations had already been consummated for a simultaneous uprising of the secret adherents of Absalom in different parts of the country, and emissaries were ready to proclaim the new king. Achitophel, one of David's oldest counsellors, had joined the conspirators, and by his design a strong current was being directed against David. When, amid the sound of trumpets and the shouts of the military, the proclamation of the new king reaches David, he quickly assembles his trusted followers and flies towards Mount Olivet, hoping to cross the Jordan in time to escape the ambitious fury of his son. On the way he meets his faithful officer Chusai, whom he advises to join Absalom. "You will be of no use to me if you go with us. But if you join Absalom, and say to him: I am thy follower, O King, as once I was thy father's, he will receive thee, and thou wilt have it in thy power to frustrate the designs of Achitophel who has betrayed me." Chusai acts on the advice, and succeeds in gaining the confidence of Absalom. So skilfully does he play his role as adherent of the rebel party that his suggestion, pretending the uselessness of pursuing David, prevails against the urgent counsel of Achitophel, who urges Absalom to attack the King, lest he gain time to organize his bodyguard, lately strengthened by the accession of six hundred Gethaean soldiers. The event proves the accuracy of Achitophel's foresight. David is secretly informed of Absalom's delay, and forthwith sends his three generals, Joab, Abisai, and Ethai, to attack the rebel hosts from the eastern side of the hill. Shielded by a forest, David's men proceed and meet Absalom's unguarded forces on the edge of the woods which fringe the circular plain at a point marked by the present site (presumably) of Mukaah. A frightful slaughter ensues, and the disorganized rebel party is quickly routed. Absalom madly flies. Suddenly he finds himself stunned by a blow while his head is caught in the fork of the low hanging branches of a terebinth tree. At the same time his long loose hair becomes entangled in the thick foliage, whilst the frightened animal beneath him rushes on, leaving him suspended above the ground. Before he is able to extricate himself he is espied by one of the soldiers, who, mindful of the King's words, "Spare me the life of Absalom", directs Joab's attention to the plight of the hapless youth. The old general, less scrupulous, and eager to rid his master of so dangerous a foe, thrice pierces the body of Absalom with his javelin. When the news of Absalom's death is brought to David, he is inconsolable. "My son Absalom, Absalom my son: would to God that I might die for thee, Absalom my son, my son Absalom." The sacred text states that Absalom was buried under a great heap of stones (II Kings, xviii, 17) near the scene of his disaster. The traveller today is shown a tomb in Graeco-Jewish style, east of the Kidron, which is designated as the sepulchre of Absalom, but which is evidently of much later construction and probably belongs to one of the Jewish kings of the Asmonean period (Josephus, De Bello Jud., V, xii, 2). Absalom had three sons, who died before him. He left a daughter Maacha (Thamar), who was afterwards married to Roboam, son of Solomon (II Par., xi, 20), although there is some doubt as to the identity of this name mentioned in the Book of Kings and in Paralipomenon. (2) Absalom, father of Mathathias (I Mach., xi, 70). Perhaps identical with Absalom, father of Jonathan (I Mach., xiii, 11). (3) Absalom, father of Jonathan One of the two ambassadors whom Judas Machabeus sent to Lysias, procurator of Antiochus (II Mach., xi, 17), identical with the foregoing. H.J. HEUSER Absalon of Lund Absalon of Lund Also known as AXEL, a famous Danish prelate, b. in 1128, at Finnestoë in Seeland; d. 21 March, 1201, in the Benedictine monastery of Soröe (Sora) founded by his father. He was a graduate of the University of Paris, and taught for a while in the school of Ste. Geneviève. In 1158 he was made Bishop of Roskilde, and in 1178 Archbishop of Lund, Primate of Denmark and Sweden, and eventually Papal Legate. In this capacity he labored zealously for the final extirpation of paganism in the Scandinavian world, notably on the Isle of Rügen, its last stronghold. He exercised great political influence under King Waldemar I (1155-81) and Canute VI. It was at his request that Saxo Grammaticus composed his "Historiæ Danicæ Libri XVI". A tribute to Absalon is found in the fourteenth book of that work. HEFELE, in Kirchenlex., art. Axel , 1, 1708; monographs by ESTRUP-MOHNIKE (Leipzig, 1832), and HAMMERICH (Copenhagen, 1863). THOMAS J. SHAHAN Absinthe Absinthe (Hebrew la'anah.) Wormwood, known for its repulsive bitterness (Jer., ix, 15; xxiii, 15; Deut., xxix, 18; Lam., iii, 19; Prov., V, 4). Figuratively it stands for a curse or calamity (Lam., iii, 15), or also for injustice (Amos, V, 7; vi, 13). In Apoc., viii, 11, the Greek equivalent ho apsinthos is given as a proper name to the star which fell into the waters and made them bitter. The Vulgate renders the Hebrew expression by absinithium, except in Deut., xxix, 18, where it translates it amaritudo. It seems that the biblical absinthe is identical with the Artemisia monosperma (Delile), or the Artemisia herba-alba (ASSO); or, again, the Artemisia juidaica Linné. (See PLANTS IN BIBLE.) HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); VIGOUROUX, in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); TRISTAM, Natural History of the Bible (London, 1889). A.J. MAAS The Absolute The Absolute A term employed in modern philosophy with various meanings, but applied generally speaking to the Supreme Being. It signifies (1) that which is complete and perfect; (2) that which exists by its own nature and is consequently independent of everything else; (3) that which is related to no other being; (4) the sum of all being, actual and potential (Hegel). In the first and the second of these significations the Absolute is a name for God which Christian philosophy may readily accept. Though the term was not current in the Middle Ages, equivalent expressions were used by the Scholastic writers in speaking, e.g. of God as Pure Actuality ( Actus Purus), as uncaused Being, or as containing pre-eminently every perfection. St. Thomas, in particular, emphasizes the absoluteness of God by, showing that he cannot be classed under any genus or species, and that His esseuce is identical with His existence. Aquinas also anticipates the difficulties which arise from the use of the term Absolute in the sense of unrelated being, and which are brought out quite clearly in modern discussions, notably in that between Mill, as critic of Sir William Hamilton's philosophy, and Mansel as its defender. It was urged that the Absolute could not consistently be thought of or spoken of as First Cause, for the reason that causation implies relation, and the Absolute is outside of all relation; it cannot, therefore, be conceived as producing effects. St. Thomas, however, offered a solution. He holds that God and created things are related, but that the relation is real in the effects only. It implies no conditioning or modification of the Divine Being; it is in its application to, God merely conceptual. The fashion of our thought obliges us to conceive God as one term of a relation, but not to infer that the relation affects Him as it affects the created thing which is the other term. This distinction, moreover, is based on experience. The process of knowledge involves a relation between the known object and, the knowing subject, but the character of the relation is not the same in both terms. In the mind it is real because perception and thought imply the exercise of mental faciilties, and consequently a modification of the mind itself. No such modification, however, reaches the object; this is the same whether we perceive it or not. Now it is just here that a more serious difficulty arises. It is claimed that the Absolute can neither be known nor conceived. "To think is to condition"; and as the Absolute is by its very nature unconditioned, no effort of thought can reach it. To say that God is the Absolute is equivalent to saying that He is unknowable. -- This view, expressed by Hamilton and Mansel, and endorsed by Spencer in his "First Principles", affords an apparently strong support to Agnosticism, while it assails both the reasonableness and the possibility of religion. It is only a partial reply to state that God, though incomprehensible, is nevertheless knowable according to the manner and capacity of our intelligence. The Agnostic contends that God, precisely because He is the Absolute, is beyond the range of any knowledge whatever on our part. Agnosticism, in other words, insists that we must believe in the existence of an absolute and infinite Being and at the same time warns us that we can have no idea of that Being. Our belief must express itself in terms that are meaningless. To avoid this conclusion one may reject altogether a term out of which all significance has evaporated; or (and this seems a wiser course) one may retrace the genesis of the term and bold fast to the items of knowledge, however imperfect and however in need of criticism, which that genesis involves. In proving the existence of God as First Cause, or as Absolute Being, we take as our starting-point facts that are knowable and known. So far as, in reasoning upon these facts, we are led beyond them to the concept of an Absolute, some remnant of the knowableness which facts present must be found in that whichis the ultimate explanation of the facts. If, as Spencer affirms, "every one of the arguments by which the relativity of our knowledge is demonstrated distinctly postulates the positive existence of something beyond the relative", it follows that by getting clearly before our thought the meaning of those arguments and their force for distinctly postulating we must obtain some knowledge of the Being whose existence is thus established. Spencer, indeed, does not realize the full import of the words "positive existence", "ultimate reality", and "incomprehensible power", which he uses so freely. Otherwise he could not consistently declare that the Being to which these various predicates apply is unknowable. It is in fact remarkable that so much knowledge of the Absolute is displayed in the attempt to prove that the Absolute cannot be known. Careful analysis of a concept like that of First Cause certainly shows that it contains a wealth of meaning which forbids its identification with the Unknowable, even supposing that the positive existence of the Unknowable could be logically demonstrated. Such an analysis is furnished by St. Thomas and by other representatives of Christian philosophy. The method which St. Thomas formulated, and which his successors adopted, keeps steadily in view the requirements of critical thinking, and especially the danger of applying the forms of our human knowledge, without due refinement, to the Divine Being. The warning against our anthropomorphic tendency was clearly given before the Absolute had taken its actual place in philosophic speculation, or had yielded that place to the Unknowable. While this warning is always needful, especially in the interest of religion, nothing can be gained by the attempt to form a concept of God which offers a mere negation to thought and to worship. It is of course equally futile to propose an unknowable Absolute as the basis of reconciliation between religion and science. The failure of Spencer's philosophy in this respect is the more disastrous because, while it allows full scope to science in investigating the manifestations of the Absolute, it sets aside the claim of religion to learn anything of the power which is thus manifested. (See AGNOSTICISM, ASEITY, ANALOGY, GOD, KNOWLEDGE, THEOLOGY. For Hegel's conception of the Absolute, see HEGELIANISM, IDEAISM, PANTHEISM.) SCHUMACHER, The Knowableness of God (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1905), contains good bibliography; ST. THOMAS, Summa, I, Q. xiii; Contra Gentes, II, 12, 13; HAMILTON, Discussions (New York, 1860); MILL, An Examination of Sir W. Hamilton's Philosophy (Boston, 1865); MANSEL, The Philosophy of the Conditioned (London, 1866); CAIRD, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion (Glasgow, 1901); ROYCE, The World and the Individual (New York, 1900); FLINT, Agnosticism (New York, 1903). E.A. PACE Absolution Absolution ( Ab = from; solvere = to free) Absolution is the remission of sin, or of the punishment due to sin, granted by the Church. (For remission of punishment due to sin, see CENSURE, EXCOMMUNICATION, INDULGENCE.) Absolution proper is that act of the priest whereby, in the Sacrament of Penance, he frees man from sin. It presupposes on the part of the penitent, contrition, confession, and promise at least of satisfaction; on the part of the minister, valid reception of the Order of Priesthood and jurisdiction, granted by competent authority, over the person receiving the sacrament. That there is in the Church power to absolve sins committed after baptism the Council of Trent thus declares: "But the Lord then principally instituted the Sacrament of Penance, when, being raised from the dead, He breathed upon His disciples saying, 'Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.' By which action so signal, and words so clear the consent of all the Fathers has ever understood that the power of forgiving and retaining sins was communicated to the Apostles, and to their lawful successors for the reconciling of the faithful who have fallen after baptism" (Sess. XIV, i). Nor is there lacking in divine revelation proof of such power; the classical texts are those found in Matthew, xvi, 19; xviii, 18, and in John, xx, 21-23. To Peter are given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Sin is the great obstacle to entrance into the kingdom, and over sin Peter is supreme. To Peter and to all the Apostles is given the power to bind and to loose, and this again implies supreme power both legislative and judicial: power to forgive sins, power to free from sin's penalties. This interpretation becomes more clear in studying the rabbinical literature, especially of Our Lord's time, in which the phrase to bind and to loose was in common use. (Lightfoot, Horæ Hebraicæ; Buxtorf, Lexicon Chald.; Knabenbauer, Commentary on Matthew, II, 66; particularly Maas, St. Matthew, 183, 184.) The granting of the power to absolve is put with unmistakable clearness in St. John's Gospel: "He breathed upon them and said, 'Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins ye shall forgive they are forgiven them; and whose sins ye shall retain, they are retained'" (xx, 22, 23). It were foolish to assert that the power here granted by Christ was simply a power to announce the Gospel (Council of Trent, Sess. XIX, Can. iii), and quite as unwise to contend that here is contained no power other than the power to remit sin in the Sacrament of Baptism (Ibid., Sess. XIV); for the very context is against such an interpretation, and the words of the text imply a strictly judicial act, while the power to retain sins becomes simply incomprehensible when applied to baptism alone, and not to an action involving discretionary judgment. But it is one thing to assert that the power of absolution was granted to the Church, and another to say that a full realization of the grant was in the consciousness of the Church from the beginning. Baptism was the first, the great sacrament, the sacrament of initiation into the kingdom of Christ. Through baptism was obtained not only plenary pardon for sin, but also for temporal punishment due to sin. Man once born anew, the Christian ideal forbade even the thought of his return to sin. Of a consequence, early Christian discipline was loath to grant even once a restoration to grace through the ministry of reconciliation vested in the Church. This severity was in keeping with St. Paul's declaration in his Epistle to the Hebrews: "For it is impossible for those who were once illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, have moreover tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come and are fallen away, to be renewed again to penance" etc. (vi, 4-6). The persistence of this Christian ideal is very clear in the "Pastor" of Hermas, where the author contends against a rigorist school, that at least one opportunity for penance must be given by the Church (III Sim., viii, 11). He grants only one such chance, but this is sufficient to establish a belief in the power of the Church to forgive sins committed after baptism. St. Ignatius in the first days of the second century seemingly asserts the power to forgive sins when he declares in his letter to the Philadelphians that the bishop presides over penance. This tradition was continued in the Syrian Church, as is evident from passages found in Aphraates and Ephrem, and St. John Chrysostom voices this same Syrian tradition when he writes "De Sacerdotio" (Migne P. G., LXVII, 643), that "Christ has given to his priests a power he would not grant to the angels, for he has not said to them, 'Whatsoever ye bind, will be bound,'" etc.; and further down he adds, "The Father hath given all judgment into the hands of his Son, and the Son in turn has granted this power to his priests." Clement of Alexandria, who perhaps received his inspiration from the "Pastor" of Hermas, tells the story of the young bandit whom St. John went after and brought back to God, and in the story he speaks of the "Angel of Penance", meaning the bishop or priest who presided over the public penance. Following Clement in the Catechetical school of Alexandria was Origen (230). In the commentary on the words of the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our trespasses", he alludes to the practice of penance in the Church, recalling the text of John, xx, 21. He asserts that this text is proof of the power to pardon sin conferred by Christ upon His Apostles and upon their successors. True it is that in writing of the extent of the power conferred, he makes exception for the sins of idolatry and adultery, which he terms irremissible, although Dionysius of Corinth (170) years before held that no sin was excepted from the power of the keys granted by Christ to His Church (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., iv, xxiii). In the Alexandrian Church we have also the testimony of Athanasius, who in a fragment against the Novatians pointedly asserts: "He who confesses his sins, receives from the priest pardon for his fault, in virtue of the grace of Christ (just as he who is baptized)." Asia Minor is at an early date witness of this power to absolve. St. Firmihan, in his famous letter to St. Cyprian, asserts that the power to forgive sins was given to the Apostles and to their successors (Epp. Cyp., LXXV), and this tradition is more clearly expressed both in Basil and Gregory Nazianzen (P. G., XXXI, 1284; XXXVI, 356, 357). The Roman tradition is clear in the "Pastor" of Hermas, where the power to forgive sins committed after baptism is defended (Sim., viii, 6, 5; ibid., ix, 19). This same tradition is manifest in the Canons of Hippolytus, wherein the prelate consecrating a bishop is directed to pray: "Grant him, O Lord, the power to forgive sins" (xxii). This is still more clearly expressed in the "Constitutiones Apostolicæ" (P. G., I, 1073): "Grant him, O Lord Almighty, by Thy Christ the fulness of Thy spirit, that he may have the power to pardon sin, in accordance with Thy command, that he may loose every bond which binds the sinner, by reason of that power which Thou hast granted Thy Apostles." (See also Duchesne, "Christian Worship", 439, 440.) True, this power seems to Hermas to be strangely limited, while Origen, Tertullian, and the followers of Novatian principles were unwilling to grant that the Church had a right to absolve from such sins as apostasy, murder, and adultery. However, Calixtus settled the question for all time when he declared that in virtue of the power of the keys, he would grant pardon to all who did penance -- Ego . . . delicta poenitentiâ functis dimitto, or again, Habet potestatem ecclesia delicta donandi (De Pud., xxi). In this matter, see Tertullian, "De Pudicitiâ", which is simply a vehement protest against the action of the Pope, whom Tertullian accuses of presumption in daring to forgive sins, and especially the greater crimes of murder, idolatry, etc. -- " Idcirco præsumis et ad te derivasse solvendi et alligandi potestatem, id est, ad omnem Ecclesiam Petri propinquam." Tertullian himself, before becoming a Montanist, asserts in the clearest terms that the power to forgive sins is in the Church. "Collocavit Deus in vestibulo poenitentiam januam secundam, quæ pulsantibus patefaciat [januam]; sed jam semel, quia jam secundo, sed amplius nunquam, quia proxime frustra" (De Poenitentiâ, vii, 9, 10). Although Tertullian limits the exercise of this power, he stoutly asserts its existence, and clearly states that the pardon thus obtained reconciles the sinner not only with the Church, but with God (Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, I, note 3, 407). The whole Montanist controversy is a proof of the position taken by the Church and the Bishops of Rome; and the great Doctors of the West affirmed in the strongest terms the power to absolve granted to the priests of the Church by Christ. (Leo the Great, P. L., LIV, 1011-1013; Gregory the Great, P. L., LXVI, 1200; Ambrose, P. L., XV, 1639; XVI, 468, 477, etc.; Augustine, P. L., XXXIX, 1549-59.) From the days, therefore, of Calixtus the power to absolve sins committed after baptism is recognized as vested in the priests of the Church in virtue of the command of Christ to bind and loose, and of the power of the keys. At first this power is timidly asserted against the rigorist party; afterwards stoutly maintained. At first the sinner is given one opportunity for pardon, and gradually this indulgence is extended; true, some doctors thought certain sins unpardonable, save by God alone, but this was because they considered that the existing discipline marked the limits of the power granted by Christ. After the middle of the fourth century, the universal practice of public penance precludes any denial of a belief in the Church's power to pardon the sinner, though the doctrine and the practice of penance were destined to have a still further expansion. LATER PATRISTIC AGE Following the golden age of the Fathers, the assertion of the right to absolve and the extension of the power of the keys are even more marked. The ancient sacramentaries -- Leonine, Gelasian, Gregorian, the "Missale Francorum" -- witness this especially in the ordination service; then the bishop prays that "whatever they bind, shall be bound" etc. (Duchesne, Christian Worship, 360, 361). The missionaries sent from Rome to England in the seventh century did not establish a public form of penance, but the affirmation of the priest's power is clear from the "Poenitentiale Theodori", and from the legislation on the Continent, which was enacted by the monks who came from England and Ireland (Council of Reims, can. xxxi, Harduin). The false decretals (about 850) accentuated the right of absolution; and in a sermon of the same century, attributed perhaps wrongly to St. Eligius, a fully developed doctrine is found. The Saint is speaking of the reconciliation of penitents and warns them to be sure of their dispositions, their sorrow, their purpose of amendment; for "we are powerless," he says, "to grant pardon, unless you put off the old man; but if by sincere repentance you put off the old man with his works, then know that you are reconciled to God by Christ, yea and by us, to whom He gave the ministry of reconciliation." And this ministry of reconciliation which he claims for the priesthood is that ministry and that power granted to the Apostles by Christ when He said, "Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound in heaven" (P. L., LXXXVII, 609, 610). The theologians of the medieval period, from Alcuin to St. Bernard, insist that the right to absolve from sin was given to the bishops and priests who succeeded to the apostolic office (Alcuin, P. L., CI, 652-656; Benedict Levita, P. L., C, 357; Jonas of Orléans, P. L., CVI, 152; Pseudo-Egbert, P. L., LXXXIX, 415; Haymo of Halberstadt, P. L., CXVIII, 762 sqq.). Following the theologians, the canonists, such as Regino of Prüm, Burchard of Worms, Ivo of Chartres, furnish us with fuller proofs of the same power, and Harduin (Councils, VI, i, 544) cites the fifteenth canon of the Council of Troslé (909), which states expressly that penance through the ministry of Christ's priests is "fruitful unto the remission of sins". This epoch closes with St. Bernard, who takes Peter Abelard to task for daring to assert that Christ gave the power to forgive sins only to His disciples, and consequently that the successors of the Apostles do not enjoy the same privileges (P. L., CLXXXII, 1054). But while Bernard insists that the power of the keys given to the Apostles is lodged in the bishop and in the priests, he with equal stress insists that such power be not exercised unless the penitent make a full confession of wrong committed (ibid., 938). When the great scholastic epoch began, the doctrine which obtained was a power to absolve sins and this power distinctly recognized, in virtue of the power granted by Christ to His Apostles. On the part of the penitent, sorrow and a promise of better life were necessary, and also a declaration of sin made to him whom Christ had appointed judge. SCHOLASTIC AGE At the beginning of the scholastic age, special stress is laid upon the power of contrition to secure pardon. St. Anselm of Canterbury, in a commentary upon Luke xvii, 14, likens this power to that possessed of old by the Jewish priest in the case of leprosy (P. L., CLVIII, 662; ibid., 361-430). At first sight, the doctrine of St. Anselm seemed to annul the power to absolve which antiquity had granted to the priesthood, and to reduce the office of reconciliation to a mere declaration that sin had been forgiven. Hugo of St. Victor (1097-1141) took ground against Anselm, not because Anselm insisted on contrition, but because he seemingly left no place for the power of the keys. But how admit the one and not the other? Hugo says the sinner is "bound down by obduracy of soul, and by the penalty of future damnation"; the grace of God frees man from the darkness brought on by sin, while the absolution of the priest delivers him from the penalty which sin imposes -- "The malice of sin is best described as obduracy of heart, which is first broken by sorrow, that later, in confession, the sin itself, i.e. the penalty of damnation, be remitted." There is some obscurity in the text, but Hugo seems inclined to hold that the priest absolves from the punishment due to sin, rather than from sin itself. The Master of the Sentences, Peter Lombard, took issue with Hugo, and asserted in clear terms that charity not only blotted out the stain of sin, but also freed the sinner from punishment due to sin. Not understanding, however, that penance as a sacrament is a moral unit, Peter Lombard in turn used language which is far from exact. He seems to hold that contrition takes away sin and its consequences, and when questioned concerning the power granted to the priest, he seems to recur to the opinion of Anselm that it is declarative. "They remit or retain sins when they judge and declare them remitted or retained by God" (P. L., CXCII, 888). He also grants to the priest certain power in reference to the temporal punishment due to sin (ibid.). Richard of St. Victor, though he speaks of the opinion of Peter Lombard as frivolous, in reality differs but little from the Master of the Sentences. Peter's opinion indeed exercised great influence over the minds both of his contemporaries and of the following generation. With William of Auvergne (who taught up to 1228, when he became Archbishop of Paris) comes the distinction between contrition and attrition in the Sacrament of Penance. Contrition takes away all stain of guilt, while attrition prepares the way for the real remission of sin in the sacrament. Theologians had recognized the distinction between contrition and attrition even before William of Paris, but neither Alexander of Hales nor Albert, the master of Aquinas, advanced much beyond the teaching of Peter Lombard. Both seemingly insisted on real contrition before absolution, and both also held that such contrition in reality took away mortal sin. They did not, however, deny the office of the minister, for they both held that contrition involved a promise of confession [Alb. Mag., IV Sent., Dist. xvi-xvii (Paris, 1894), XXIX, 559, 660, 666, 670, 700]. St. Bonaventure (IV, Dist. xvii) also admits the distinction between contrition and attrition; he asserts the power of contrition to take away all sin, even without the priest's absolution, confession being necessary only when possible. As regards the priest's power to pardon sin, he not only admits it, not only asserts that absolution forgives sin and its eternal consequences, but calls it the forma sacramenti. He even goes so far as to say that attrition is sufficient for pardon if accompanied by absolution (ibid., Dist. xviii). When questioned as to the manner in which absolution produces its sacramental effect, he distinguishes between two forms of absolution employed by the priest: the one deprecatory, "Misereatur tui" etc., and the other indicative, "Ego te absolvo". In the former the priest intercedes for the sinner, and this intercession changes his attrition into real contrition and secures pardon for sin committed. In the latter, which is indicative and personal, the priest exercises the power of the keys, but remits only a temporal punishment due still on account of sin. This after all is but a new way of putting the theory of Peter Lombard (ibid., Dist. xviii). St. Thomas Aquinas treats this subject in his Commentary on the Master of the Sentences (IV, Dist. xvii, xviii, xix; Summa Theologica III, QQ. lxxxiv-xc; Supplement, QQ. i-xx; Opuscula, Do Formâ Absolutionis). Taking the many distracted theories of the schoolmen with this partial truth, he fused them into a united whole. In the commentary on the "Libri Sententiarum" he shows clearly that the ministry of the priest is directly instrumental in the forgiveness of sin; for "if the keys had not been ordained for the remission of sin, but only for release from the penalty (which was the opinion of the elder scholastics), there would be no need of the intention to obtain the effect of the keys for the remission of sin"; and in the same place he clearly states: "Hence if before absolution one had not been perfectly disposed to receive grace, one would receive it in sacramental confession and absolution, if no obstacle be put in the way" (Dist. xvii, 2, I, art. 3, Quæstiuncula iv). He sees clearly that God alone can pardon sin, but God uses the instrumentality of absolution which, with confession, contrition, and satisfaction, concurs in obtaining forgiveness, in blotting out the stain, in opening the kingdom of heaven, by cancelling the sentence of eternal punishment. This doctrine is expressed again with equal clearness in the "Summa" and in the "Supplement". In the "Summa", Q. lxxxiv, art. 3, he states that the absolution of the priest is the forma sacramenti, and consequently confession, contrition, and satisfaction must constitute "in some way, the matter of the sacrament". When asked whether perfect contrition secured pardon for sin even outside the Sacrament of Penance, St. Thomas answers in the affirmative; but then contrition is no longer an integral part of the sacrament; it secures pardon because forgiveness comes from perfect charity, independently of the instrumentality of the sacramental rite (Supplement, Q. v, a. 1). Duns Scotus not only grants the power of a solution in the forgiveness of sin, but goes a step farther and asserts that the sacrament consists principally in the absolution of the priest, because confession, contrition, and satisfaction are not integral parts or units in the sacrament, but only necessary previous dispositions to the reception of divine grace and forgiveness. "There is no similarity, therefore, between the priest of the Law in regard to leprosy and the priest of the Gospel in regard to sin", and he adds that the priest of the New Law, "exercet actum qui est signum prognosticum, efficax mundationis sequentis" etc. (edit. Vivès, XVIII, 649, 650, in Dist. XIX; ibid., 420, 421). Some think this opinion of Scotus more in conformity with the Council of Treat, which calls contrition, confession, and satisfaction not "the matter", but quasi materia, "as if the matter", of the sacrament; others doubt whether the Council thus meant to class contrition, confession, and satisfaction as mere necessary dispositions. This doctrine, as taught by St. Thomas and Scotus finds its echo in the Council of Florence, in the decree of Eugene IV, as it does in the Council of Trent, which defines (Sess. XIV, chap. iii), "That the form of the Sacrament of Penance, wherein its force principally consists, is placed in those words of the priest: 'I absolve thee' etc., but the acts of the penitent himself are quasi materia of this Sacrament." MINISTER In the closing years of the first century, Ignatius of Antioch asserts that Penance is in the hands of the bishop; soon the same power is recognized in the priests, and in St. Cyprian, the deacon on extraordinary occasions performed the office of reconciliation (Batiffol, Théol. pos., 145 sqq.). The deacon's power is recognized later on in Alcuin, in a council held at York, 1194, and in the Council of London, 1200 (cap. iii). TIME The ceremonial rite connected with the sacrament of reconciliation has also varied with the changing discipline of the Church. The earliest tradition hints at a public penance -- vide tradition supra -- but very soon there appears the Presbyter Poenitentiarius; certainly as early as 309 Pope Marcellus divided Rome into twenty-five districts propter baptismum et poenitentiam, and Innocent I (416) mentions the "priest whose office it was to judge anent sin, to receive the confession of the penitent, to watch over his satisfaction, and to present him for reconciliation at the proper time". The case of Nectarius who abolished the Presbyter Poenitentiarius is classical (381-98). This reconciliation generally took place on Holy Thursday, and the bishop presided. Surely absolution was pronounced on Maundy Thursday. This all the sacramentaries attest (Duchesne, Christian Worship, 439, 440); but the practice of public penance has given rise to the important and difficult question, whether or not the absolution granted at the public function of Holy Thursday was really the sacramental absolution. Theologians have questioned this, many preferring to believe that the sacramental absolution was really imparted by the Presbyter Poenitentiarius at the early stage of public penance, even before the satisfaction was complete. They allege as their reasons the long delay which otherwise would have been necessary and the fact that the bishop absolved on Holy Thursday, while the confession had been heard previously by the Presbyter Poenitentiarius (Palmieri, De poenit., App. II, nn. 8, 9). But there are many others who think the traditional truth concerning the Sacrament of Penance cannot be safeguarded unless it is admitted that, ordinarily speaking, sacramental absolution was given only after the completion of the penance imposed and in the public session of Holy Thursday. What was done, they ask, before the institution of the Presbyter Poenitentiarius, or where there was no such functionary? And they answer the objections brought forward above by saying that there is no evidence in early history that a first absolution was imparted by the priests who determined the necessity of undergoing public satisfaction, nor are we permitted a priori to judge of ancient ways in the light of our modern practice (Boudinhon, Revue d'histoire de littérature relig., II, sec. iii, 329, 330, etc.; Batiffol, Théolog. posit., Les origines de la pénitence, IV, 145 sqq.). Moreover, there is full evidence of a reconciliation on Holy Thursday; there are canons as late as the sixth century forbidding priests to reconcile penitents, inconsulto episcopo (Batiffol, ibid. 192, 193), and even as late as the ninth century there is clear testimony that absolution was not given until after the imposed penance had been completed (Benedict Levita, P. L., XCVII, 715; Rabanus Maurus, P. L., CVII, 342; Harduin, Councils, V, 342); and when absolution was granted before Holy Thursday it was after the fashion of an exception (Pseudo Alcuin, CI, 1192): "Denique admonendi sunt ut ad coenam Domini redeant ad reconciliationem: si vero interest causa itineris . . . reconciliet eum statim" etc. This exception gradually became the rule, especially after the Scholastics of the Middle Age period began to distinguish clearly the different parts which make up the Sacrament of Penance. FORM It is the teaching of the Council of Treat that the form of the Sacrament of Penance, wherein its force principally consists, is placed in these words of the minister, "I absolve thee"; to which words certain prayers are, according to the custom of Holy Church, laudably added etc. (Sess. XIV, iii). That the public penance was concluded with some sort of prayer for pardon, is the doctrine of antiquity, particularly as contained in the earliest sacramentaries (Duchesne, Christian Worship, 440, 441). Leo the Great (450) does not hesitate to assert that pardon is impossible without the prayer of the priest ("ut indulgentia nisi supplicationibus sacerdotum nequeat obtineri"). In the early Church these forms certainly varied (Duchesne, loc. cit.). Surely all the sacramentaries assert that the form was deprecatory, and it is only in the eleventh century that we find a tendency to pass to indicative and personal formulæ (Duchesne, loc. cit.). Some of the forms used at the transition period are interesting: "May God absolve thee from all thy sins, and through the penance imposed mayst thou be absolved by the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, by the Angels, by the Saints, and by me, a wretched sinner" (Garofali, Ordo ad dandam poenitentiam, 15). Then come really indicative and personal formulæ, often preceded by the supplicatory prayer, "Misereatur tui" etc. These forms, while much the same in substance, vary in wording not a little (Vacant, Dict. de théol. 167). It was not until the scholastic doctrine of "matter and form" in the sacraments reached its full development that the formula of absolution became fixed as we have it at present. The form in use in the Roman Church to-day has not changed since long before the Council of Florence. It is divided into four parts as follows: -- + (1) Deprecatory prayer. "May the Almighty God have mercy on you, and forgiving your sins, bring you to life everlasting. Amen." Thea, lifting his right hand towards the penitent, the priest continues: "May the Almighty and Merciful God grant you pardon, absolution, and remission of your sins". + (2) "May Our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you, and I, by His authority, absolve you from every bond of excommunication [suspension, in the case of a cleric only] and interdict as far as I can and you may need." + (3) "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." (While repeating the names of the Trinity, the priest makes the sign of the cross over the penitent.) + (4) "May the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the Saints, what good you have done or what evil you have suffered be to you for the remission of (your) sins, growth in grace and the reward of everlasting life. Amen." In the decree "Pro Armenis", 1439, Eugene IV teaches that the "form" of the Sacrament is really in those words of the priest: "Ego absolvo te a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris" etc., and theologians teach that absolution would be valid should the priest use, "Absolvo te", "Absolvo to a peccatis tuis", or words that are the exact equivalent (Suarez, Disp., XIX, i, n. 24; Lugo, Disp., XIII, i, nn. 17, 18; Lehmkuhl, de Poenit., 9th ed., 199). In the Oriental churches the present forms are deprecatory, though they by no means exclude the idea of a judicial pronouncement on the part of the minister. Such are the forms of absolution among (a) Greeks, (b) Russians, (c) Syrians, (d) Armenians, (e) Copts. Is the indicative form necessary? Many learned Catholics seem to hold that the indicative form as used at present in the Roman Church is necessary even for the validity of the Sacrament of Penance. The great Doctor of the Sacrament, St. Alphonsus (De Sac. Poenit., n. 430), declares that no matter what may be the verdict from the point of view of history, it is of faith since the Council of Treat that the indicative form is essential. St. Thomas and Suarez also declare that the indicative form is necessary. Others equally learned, and perhaps better versed in history, hold that in the light of the Divine institution the deprecative form must not be excluded, and that the Council of Trent in its decree did not intend to make final pronouncement in the premises. They point out with Morinus (De Poenit., Lib. VIII) that up to the twelfth century the deprecatory form was employed both in the East and in the West: that it is still in use among the Greeks and among Orientals generally. In the light, therefore, of history and of theological opinion it is perfectly safe to conclude that the deprecatory form is certainly not invalid, if it exclude not the idea of judicial pronouncement (Palmieri, Parergon, 127; Hurter, de Poenit.; Duchesne, loc. cit.; Soto, Vasquez, Estius, et al.). Theologians, however, have questioned whether or not the deprecatory form would be valid to-day in the Latin Church, and they point out that Clement VIII and Benedict XIV have prescribed that Greek priests should use the indicative form whensoever they absolve penitents belonging to the Latin Rite. But this is merely a matter of discipline, and such decrees do not give final decision to the theological question, for in matters of administration of the Sacraments those in authority simply follow the safest and most conservative opinions. Morinus is followed by Tournely in asserting that only the indicative form is to-day valid in the Latin Church (Morinus, De poenit., Lib. VIII; Tournely, ibid., do absolutionis formâ); but many hold that if the deprecatory form exclude not the judicial pronouncement of the priest, and consequently be really equivalent to the ego te absolvo, it is surely not invalid, though all are agreed that it would be illicit as contravening the present law and discipline of the Roman Church. Some, not pronouncing judgment on the real merits of the case, think that the Holy See has withdrawn faculties from those who do not use the indicative form, but in the absence of positive ordinance this is by no means certain. CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION Antiquity makes no mention of conditional absolution. Benedict XIV alludes in "De Synodo" (Bk. VII, c. xv) to a passage of Gandavensis (d. 1293), but it is doubtful whether the learned pontiff caught the meaning of the theologian of Ghent. Gerson in the fifteenth century, both in "De schismate tollendo" and "De unitate ecclesiæ", stands as sponsor for conditional absolution, although Cajetan, a century later, calls Gerson's position mere superstition. But Gerson's position gradually obtained, and in our day all theologians grant that under certain circumstances such absolution is not only valid but also legitimate (Lehmkuhl-Gury, De poenit., absol. sub conditione); valid, because judicial pronouncements are often rendered under certain conditions, and the Sacrament of Penance is essentially a judicial act (Counc. of Trent, Sees. XIV); also, because God absolves in heaven when certain conditions are fulfilled here below. The fulfilment may escape man's judgment, but God no man may deceive. This very doubt makes conditional absolution possible. Conditions are either (a) present, (b) past, or (c) future. Following a general law, whensoever the condition leaves in suspense the effect intended by the Sacrament, the Sacrament itself is null and void. If the condition does not suspend the sacramental efficacy, the Sacrament may be valid. As a consequence, all future conditions render absolution invalid: "I absolve you if you die to-day." This is not true of conditions past or present, and absolution given, for example, on condition that the subject has been baptized, or is still alive, would certainly not invalidate the Sacrament. What is in itself valid may not be legitimate, and in this important matter reverence due the holy Sacrament must ever be kept in mind, and also the spiritual need of the penitent. The doctrine commonly received is that whenever conditional absolution will safeguard the holiness and dignity of the Sacrament it may be employed, or whenever the spiritual need of the penitent is clear, but at the same time dispositions necessary for the valid reception of the Sacrament are in doubt, then it would be a mercy to impart absolution even if under condition. INDIRECT ABSOLUTION Closely allied to conditional is the absolution termed indirect. It obtains whenever absolution is granted for a fault that has not been submitted to the judgment of the minister in the tribunal of penance. Forgetfulness on the part of the penitent is responsible for most cases of indirect absolution, though sometimes reservation (see RESERVED CASES) may be. GRANTING OF ABSOLUTION In virtue of Christ's dispensation, the bishops and priests are made judges in the Sacrament of Penance. The power to bind as well as the power to loose has been given by Christ. The minister therefore must have in mind not only his own powers, viz., order and jurisdiction, but he must also keep in mind the dispositions of the penitent. If + (a) the penitent is well-disposed, he must absolve; + (b) if the penitent lack the requisite dispositions, he must endeavour to create the proper frame of mind, for he cannot and may not absolve one indisposed; + (c) when dispositions remain doubtful, he employs the privilege given above in conditional absolution. When the minister sees fit to grant absolution, then he pronounces the words of the form ( supra) over the penitent. It is commonly taught that the penitent must be physically present; consequently, absolution by telegraph has been declared invalid, and when questioned in regard to absolution by the telephone the Sacred Congregation (1 July, 1884) answered Nihil respondendum. ABSOLUTION OUTSIDE THE LATIN CHURCH (I) In the Greek Church The belief of the ancient Greek Church has been set forth above. That the Greeks have always believed that the Church has power to forgive sin, that they believe it at present, is clear from the formulæ of absolution in vogue among all branches of the Church; also from the decrees of synods which since the Reformation have again and again expressed this belief (Alzog on Cyril Lucaris III, 465; Synod of Constantinople, 1638; Synod of Jassy, 1642; Synod of Jerusalem, 1672). In the Synod of Jerusalem the Church reiterates its belief in Seven Sacraments, among them Penance, which the Lord established when He said: "Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain they are retained." The formulæ of absolution are generally deprecatory, and if now and then the indicative form appears, it may be traced to Latin sources. (II) Russian Church The belief of the Greek Church is naturally also that of the Russian. Russian theologians all hold that the Church possesses the power to forgive sins, where there is true repentance and sincere confession. The form in use at present is as follows: "My child, N. N., may our Lord and God Christ Jesus by the mercy of His love absolve thee from thy sins; and I, His unworthy priest, in virtue of the authority committed to me, absolve thee and declare thee absolved of thy sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen." (III) Armenians Denzinger, in his "Ritus Orientalium "(1863), gives us a full translation of the penitential ritual used by the Armenians. The present version is from the ninth century. The form of absolution is declarative, though it is preceded by a prayer for mercy and for pardon. It is as follows: "May the merciful Lord have pity on thee and forgive thee thy faults; in virtue of my priestly power, by the authority and command of God expressed in these words, 'whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be hound in heaven', I absolve thee from thy sins, I absolve thee from thy thoughts, from thy words, from thy deeds, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and I restore thee to the Sacrament of the Holy Church. May all thy good works be for thee an increase of merit, may they be for the glory of life everlasting, Amen." (IV) Copts Dr. Hyvernat asserts that the liturgical books of the Copts have no penitential formulæ, nor is this surprising, for they inscribe in the ritual only those things not found in other rituals. Father du Bernat, writing to Père Fleurian (Lettres édifiantes), says, in reference to the Sacrament of Penance among the Copts, that the Copts believe themselves bound to a full confession of their sins. This finished, the priest recites over them the prayer said at the beginning of the Mass, the prayer asking pardon and forgiveness from God; to this is added the so-called "Benediction", which Father Bernat says is like the prayer said in the Latin Church after absolution has been imparted. Dr. Hyvernat, however, asserts that Father Bernat is mistaken when he likens the Benediction to our Passio Domini, for it is like the Latin prayer only inasmuch as it is recited after absolution. (V) Jacobites (For the earliest tradition in the Syrian Church see above, Absolution in Patristic age.) The Syrians who are united with the Roman See now use the declarative form in imparting absolution. This formula is, however, of recent date. The present Jacobite Church not only holds and has held the power to absolve from sin, but its ritual is expressive of this same power. Denzinger (Ritus Orientalium) has preserved for us a twelfth-century document which gives in full the order of absolution. (VI) Nestorians The Nestorians have at all times believed in the power to absolve in the Sacrament of Penance. Assemani, Renaudot, Badger (Nestorians and their Rituals), also Denzinger, have the fullest information on this point. It is noticeable that their formula of absolution is deprecatory, not indicative. (VII) Protestants The earliest Reformers attacked virulently the penitential practice of the Catholic Church, particularly the confession of sins to a priest. Their opinions expressed in their later theological works do not differ as markedly from the old position as one might suppose. The Lutheran tenet of justification by faith alone would make all absolution merely declarative, and reduce the pardon granted by the Church to the merest announcement of the Gospel, especially of remission of sins through Christ. Zwingli held that God alone pardoned sin, and he saw nothing but idolatry in the practice of hoping for pardon from a mere creature. If confession had aught of good it was merely as direction. Calvin denied all idea of sacrament when there was question of Penance; but he held that the pardon expressed by the minister of the Church gave to the penitent a greater guarantee of forgiveness. The Confession styled "Helvetian" contents itself with denying the necessity of confession to a priest, but holds that the power granted by Christ to absolve is simply the power to preach to the people the Gospel of Jesus, and as a consequence the remission of sins: "Rite itaque et efficaciter ministri absolvunt dum evangelium Christi et in hoc remissionem peccatorum prædicant." (VIII) Anglican Church In the "Book of Common Prayer" there is a formula of Absolution in Matins, at the communion service, and in the visitation of the sick. The first two are general, akin to the liturgical absolution in use in the Roman Church; the third is individual by the very nature of the case. Of the third absolution the rubric speaks as follows: "Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special confession of his sins if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter. After which confession, the priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and heartily desire it) after this sort: Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee thine offences and by His authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." This is the form generally employed by the Anglican clergymen when they absolve after having heard private confessions. These formulæ, even the last, are indeed vague, and in the light of Anglican interpretation (always excepting the advanced Ritualists) mean little more than the power to declare sins forgiven. (Convocation, 1873; Lambeth Conference, 1877; Liddon's "Life of Pusey"). The Ritualists, since the Pusey sermon of 1846, have held with more or less variance that Christ has granted to His priests the power to forgive sins. They have also held that this power should be exercised after confession has been made to the minister of the Church. Among Ritualists themselves some have insisted that confession to the priest was necessary either in re or in voto, others have not gone to such lengths. On the discussion in the year 1898, Dr. Temple wrote a Pastoral. One may consult with profit Mashell's "Enquiry upon the Doctrine of the Anglican Church on Absolution"; Boyd's "Confession, Absolution and Real Presence"; Father Gallwey's "Twelve Lectures on Ritualism" (London, 1879). EDWARD J. HANNA. Abstemii Abstemii An abstemius is one who cannot take wine without risk of vomiting. As, therefore, the consecration at Mass must be effected in both species, of bread and wine, an abstemius is consequently irregular. St. Alphonsus, following the opinion of Suarez, teaches that such irregularity is de jure divino; and that, therefore, the Pope cannot dispense from it. The term is also applied to one who has a strong distaste for wine, though able to take a small quantity. A distaste of this nature does not constitute irregularity, but a papal dispensation is required, in order to excuse from the use of wine at the purification of the chalice and the ablution of the priest's fingers at the end of Mass. In these cases the use of wine is an ecclesiastical law from whose observance the Church has power to dispense. A decree of Propaganda, dated 13 January, 1665, grants a dispensation in this sense to missionaries in China, on account of the scarcity of wine; various similar rulings are to be found in the collection of the decrees of the Congregation of Rites. Abstention from the use of wine has, occasionally, been declared obligatory by heretics. It was one of the tenets of Gnosticism in the second century. Tatian, the founder of the sect known as the Encratites, forbade the use of wine, and his adherents refused to make use of it even in the Sacrament of the Altar; in its place they used water. These heretics, mentioned by St. Irenæus (Adv. Hær., I, xxx), are known as Hydroparastes, Aquarians, and Encratites. The great Manichean heresy followed a few years later. These heretics, in their turn, professed the greatest possible aversion to wine, as one of the sources of sin. St. Augustine, in his book against heresies, ch. xlvi, says of them, "Vinum non bibunt, dicentes esse fel principum tenebrarum" -- " They drink no wine, for they say it is the gall of the princes of darkness." They made use of water in celebrating Mass. At the beginning of the Reformation, one of the grievances alleged against the Church was that she did not allow the faithful to communicate under both kinds. "We excuse the Church", so runs the Augsburg Confession, "which has suffered the injustice of only receiving under one kind, not being able to have both; but we do not excuse the authors of this injustice, who maintain that it was right to forbid the administering of the complete Sacrament." How, then, were those to be admitted to the Lord's Table, who were unable to communicate under the species of wine? A decree of the Synod of Poitiers, in 1560, reads: "The Bread of the Lord's Supper shall be administered to those who cannot drink the wine, on condition that they shall declare that they do not abstain out of contempt." Other Protestant synods also lay down the rule that persons unable to take wine shall be admitted to the Lord's Table on condition that they shall at least touch with their lips the cup which holds the species of wine; Jurieu, on the other hand, starting from the principle that Christ has founded the essence of the Eucharist on the two species, held that an abstemius does not receive the Sacrament, because it consists of two parts, and he receives only one. A great controversy ensued among the Protestants themselves on this point. Bossuet held that communion under both kinds could not be of divine obligation, since many would thereby be deprived of the Sacrament owing to a natural weakness. BENEDICTO OJECTI, Synopsis Rerum Moralium et Juris Pontificii (1904); Theologia Moralis Sti. Alphonsi, Lib. VII, 409; Collectanea S. Congregationis de Propagandâ Fide, N. 798; BOSSUET, La Tradition défendue sur la matière de la communion sous une espèce, VI; JEROME in Dict. de théol. cath., s.v.; Abstème; CORBLET, Hist. du Sacrement de l'Eucharistie (Paris, 1886). JOS. N. GIGNAC Abstinence Abstinence Inasmuch as abstinence signifies abstaining from food, the Bible narrative points to the first instance wherein such a course of conduct was imposed by law (Gen., ii, l6, 17). The obvious purpose of this mandate was to lead the moral head of the human race to recognize the necessary dependence of creature upon Creator. The hour which witnessed the transgression of this law marked an increase in the debt which the creature owed the Creator. Adam's disobedience rendered all men criminal, and liable to the necessity of appeasing God's justice. To meet this new exigency nature dictated the necessity of penance; positive legislation determined the ways and means whereby this natural obligation would best be concreted. The chief results of this determination are positive statutes concerning fasting and abstinence. Laws relating to fasting are principally intended to define what pertains to the quantity of food allowed on days of fasting, while those regulating abstinence, what refers to the quality of viands. In some instances both obligations coincide; thus, the Fridays of Lent are days of fasting and abstinence. In other instances the law of abstinence alone binds the faithful; thus ordinary Fridays are simply days of abstinence. The purpose of this article is to trace the history of ecclesiastical legislation regarding the law of abstinence, as well as to examine the motives which underlie this legislation. THE BIBLE: ABSTINENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT Fasting implying abstinence was ordained by law for the Day of Atonement (Lev., xvi, 29 sq.). The ceremony incident to this feast was observed by the Jews on the fifth day before the feast of Tabernacles. >From evening of the ninth until evening of the tenth day labour and eating were strictly prohibited. Besides this passage the sacred narrative contains many others which show how adversity moved the Jews to assume the burden of fasting and abstinence in a spirit of penance (Judges, xx, 26; Judith, vi, 20; Joel, l, 14; ii, 15). Moreover, the Jews abstained on the ninth day of the fourth month, because on that day Nabuchodonosor captured Jerusalem (Jer., lii, 6); on the tenth day of the fifth month, because on that day the temple was burned (Jer., lii, 12 sq.); on the third day of the seventh month, because on that day Godolias had been murdered (Jer., xli, 2); and on the tenth day of the tenth month, because on that day the Chaldees commenced the siege of Jerusalem (IV Kings, xxv, 1 sq.). They were told that fidelity to these regulations would bring joy, gladness, and great solemnities to the house of Juda (Zach., viii, 19). During the month of new corn they were obliged to spend seven days without leaven, and to eat the bread of affliction in memory of their delivery from Egypt (Deut., xvi, 3). In addition to those indications concerning the seasons of abstinence amongst the Jews, the sacred text contains passages regarding the ways and means whereby the law of abstinence assumed more definite shape amongst them. After the deluge God said to Noe: "Everything that moveth upon the earth shall be a meat for you, saving that flesh with blood you shall not eat" (Gen., ix, 3, 4; similar passages are contained in Lev., vii, 26 sq.; xvii, 14 sq.; Deut., xii, 15,16). A prohibition whereby corn, oil, wine, and the first-born of herds and cattle are forbidden in towns is set forth in Deut., xii, 17. Priests were forbidden to drink any intoxicant lest they die (Lev., x, 9). The eleventh chapter of Leviticus contains a detailed enumeration of the various beasts, birds, and fish that fall under the ban. Such were reputed unclean. Abstinence from things legally unclean was intended to train the Israelites in the pursuit of spiritual cleanness. The Old Testament furnishes several instances of celebrated personages who betook themselves to this chastisement of the flesh. David kept fast on account of the child born of the wife of Urias (II Kings, xii, 16); Esther humbled her body with fasts (Esth., xiv, 2); Judith fasted all the days of her life (Jud., viii, 6); Daniel ate neither bread nor flesh till the days of three weeks were accomplished (Dan., x, 3), and Judas Machabeus and all the people craved mercy in tears and fasting (II Mach., xiii, 12). Moreover, Esdras commanded a fast by the river Ahava (I Esd., viii, 21). The King of Ninive proclaimed a fast in Ninive whereby neither man nor beasts should taste anything, whether of food or drink (Jonas, iii, 7). Moses (Ex., xxxiv, 28) and Elias (III Kings, xix, 8) spent forty days in abstinence and fasting. Finally, the Pharisee in the Temple declared that he fasted "twice in a week" (Luke, xviii, 12). Apropos of this passage Duchesne says that Monday and Thursday were days of fasting among the pious Jews ("Christian Worship", London, 1903, 228). THE NEW TESTAMENT In the first portion of his Gospel St. Matthew relates how Christ passed forty days in the desert, during which time neither food nor drink passed his lips. No doubt this penance of the God-man was not only expiatory, but also exemplary. True, Christ did not explicitly define the days nor the weeks wherein his followers would be obliged to fast and abstain. At the same time his example, coupled with his reply to the disciples of the Baptist, is an evidence that the future would find his followers subjected to regulations whereby they would fast "after the bridegroom had been taken away". The only piece of clearly defined legislation concerning abstinence embodied in the New Testament was framed by the Council of Jerusalem, prescribing "abstinence from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled" (Acts, xv, 29). Nevertheless the Acts of the Apostles give evidence of a tendency on the part of the Church, as an organized body, to prepare the way for important events by abstinence and fasting (Acts, xiii, 3; xiv; 22). In fine, St. Paul sets forth the necessity of abstinence when he says that "everyone striving for the mastery must abstain from all things (I Cor., ix, 25); and "let us exhibit ourselves as the ministers of Christ in labours, watchings, and fastings " (II Cor., vi, 5), which he had often practiced (II Cor., xi, 27). THE LATIN CHURCH: SUBJECTS UNDER, AND MATERIAL ELEMENT OF, THE LAW Throughout the Latin Church the law of abstinence prohibits all responsible subjects from indulging in meat diet on duly appointed days. Meat diet comprises the flesh, blood, or marrow of such animals and birds as constitute flesh meat according to the appreciation of intelligent and law-abiding Christians. For this reason the use of fish, vegetables, mollusks, crabs, turtles, frogs, and such-like cold-blooded creatures is not at variance with the law of abstinence. Amphibians are relegated to the category whereunto they bear most striking resemblance. This classification can scarcely preclude all doubt regarding viands prohibited by the law of abstinence. Local usage, together with the practice of intelligent and conscientious Christians, generally holds a key for the solution of mooted points in such matters, otherwise the decision rests with ecclesiastical authority. Furthermore, on many fasting days during the year the law of abstinence bars the use of such viands as bear some identity of origin with flesh meat. For this reason eggs, milk, butter, cheese, and lard are interdicted (St. Thomas, Summa, II-II, Q. cvii, art. ult., ad 3). The Church enjoins the ways and means whereby her subjects must satisfy the obligation of doing penance inculcated by natural law. Many of the Fathers allude to the exercise of ecclesiastical authority in reference to the obligation of abstinence. The disciplinary canons of various councils bear witness to the actual exercise of authority in the same direction. Texts of theology and catechisms of Christian doctrine indicate that the obligation of abstaining forms an element in one of the Commandments of the Church. Satisfaction for sin is an item of primary import in the moral order. Naturally enough, abstinence contributes no small share towards the realization of this end. As a consequence, the law of abstinence embodies a serious obligation whose transgression, objectively considered, ordinarily involves a mortal sin. The unanimous verdict of theologians, the constant practice of the faithful, and the mind of the Church place this point beyond cavil. They who would fain minimize the character of this obligation so as to relegate all transgressions, save such as originate in contempt, to the category of venial sin are anathematized by Alexander VII [Cf. Prop. 23, ap. Bucceroni, Enchiridion Morale, 145 (Rome, 1905)]. In fine, the Trullan synod (can. 58, ap. Hefele, "History of the Councils of the Church", V, 231, Edinburgh, 1896) inflicts deposition on clerics and excommunication on laymen who violate this law. Furthermore, theologians claim that a grievous sin is committed as often as flesh meat is consumed in any quantity on abstinence days (Sporer, Theologia Moralis super Decalogum, I, De observ. jejunii, # 2, assert. II), because the law is negative, and binds semper et pro semper. In other words, the prohibition of the Church in this matter is absolute. At times, however, the quantity of prohibited material may be so small that the law suffers no substantial violation. From an objective standpoint such transgressions carry the guilt of venial sin. Moralists are by no means unanimous in deciding where the material element of such minor disorders passes into a material disorder of major importance. Some think that an ounce of flesh meat suffices to constitute a serious breach of this law, whereas others claim that nothing short of two ounces involves infringement of this obligation. Ordinarily, the actual observance of the law is confined to such circumstances as carry no insupportable burden. This is why the sick, the infirm, mendicants, labourers, and such as find difficulty in procuring fish diet are not bound to observe the law as long as such conditions prevail. DAYS OF ABSTINENCE (1) Friday From the dawn of Christianity, Friday has been signalized as an abstinence day, in order to do homage to the memory of Christ suffering and dying on that day of the week. The "Teaching of the Apostles" (viii), Clement of Alexandria (Strom., VI, 75), and Tertullian (De jejun., xiv) make explicit mention of this practice. Pope Nicholas I (858-867) declares that abstinence from flesh meat is enjoined on Fridays. There is every reason to conjecture that Innocent III (1198-1216) had the existence of this law in mind when he said that this obligation is suppressed as often as Christmas Day falls on Friday (De observ. jejunii, ult. cap. Ap. Layman, Theologia Moralis, I, iv, tract. viii, ii). Moreover, the way in which the custom of abstaining on Saturday originated in the Roman Church is a striking evidence of the early institution of Friday as an abstinence day. (2) Saturday As early as the time of Tertullian, some churches occasionally prolonged the Friday abstinence and fast so as to embrace Saturday. Tertullian (De jejunio, xiv) calls this practice continuare jejunium -- an expression subsequently superseded by superponere jejunium. Such prolongations were quite common at the end of the third century. The Council of Elvira (can. xxvi, ap. Hefele, op. cit., I, 147) enjoins the observance of one such fast and abstinence every month, except during July and August. At the same time the fathers of Elvira abrogated the "superposition" which had up to that time been obligatory on all Saturdays (Duchesne, op. cit., 231). Moreover, Gregory VII (1073-85) speaks in no uncertain terms of the obligation to abstain on Saturdays, when he declares that all Christians are bound to abstain from flesh meat on Saturday as often as no major solemnity (e. g. Christmas) occurs on Saturday, or no infirmity serves to cancel the obligation (cap. Quia dies, d. 5, de consecrat., ap. Joannes, Azor. Inst. Moral. I, Bk. VII, c. xii). Various authors have assigned different reasons to account for the extension of the obligation so as to bind the faithful to abstain not only on Fridays, but also on Saturdays. Some hold that this practice was inaugurated to commemorate the burial of Christ Jesus; others that it was instituted to imitate the Apostles and Disciples of Christ, who, together with the Holy Women, mourned the death of Christ even on the seventh day; while others claim that it owes its origin to the conduct of St. Peter, who passed Saturday in prayer, abstinence, and fasting, to prepare to meet Simon Magus on the following day (Acts, viii, 18 sq.; cf. Migne, P. L. XLIX, coll. 147, 148). Though the Roman Pontiffs have constantly refused to abrogate the law of abstaining on Saturday, special indults dispensing with the obligation have been granted to the faithful in many parts of the world. (3) Lent In point of duration, as well as in point of penitential practices, Lent has been the subject of many vicissitudes. In the days of St. Irenaeus (177-202) the season of penance preceding Easter was of rather short duration. Some fasted and therefore abstained from flesh meat etc. for one day, others for two days, and others again for a greater number of days. No distinct traces of the quadragesimal observance are discernible until the fourth century. The decrees of the Council of Nicaea in 325 (can. v, ap. Hefele, op. cit., I, 387) contain the earliest mention of Lent. Thenceforward ecclesiastical history contains numerous allusions to those forty days. Nevertheless, the earliest references to the quadragesimal season indicate that it was then usually considered a time of preparation for baptism, or for the absolution of penitents, or a season of retreat and recollection for people living in the world. True, fasting and abstinence formed part of the duties characterizing this season, but there was little or no uniformity in the manner of observance. On the contrary, different countries adopted a different regime. At Rome it was customary to spend but three weeks, immediately before Easter, in abstinence, fasting, and praying (Socrates, H. E., V, 22). Many attempts were made to include Holy Week in Quadragesima. The attempt succeeded at Rome, so that thenceforward the Lenten season consisted of six weeks. During these six weeks Sundays were the only days not reached by the law of fasting, but the obligation to abstain was not withdrawn from Sundays. As a consequence, the Lenten season numbered no more than thirty-six days. Hence St. Ambrose (Serm. xxxiv, de Quadrag.) notes that the beginning of Lent and the first Sunday of Lent were simultaneous prior to the reign of Gregory I. In the seventh century four days were added. Some claim that this change was the work of Gregory I; others ascribe it to Gregory II (Layman, loc. cit.). Duchesne (op. cit., 244) says that it is impossible to tell who added four days to the thirty-six previously comprised in the Lenten season. It is likely, at all events, that the change was made so as to have forty days in which to commemorate Christ's forty days in the desert. Be this as it may, the Church has never deviated from the ordinance of the seventh century whereby the Lenten season comprises forty days over and above Sundays. (4) Ember Days The beginning of the four seasons of the year is marked by Ember Week, during which Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday are days of fasting and abstinence. Ember Week occurs after the first Sunday of Lent, after Pentecost, after the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, and after the third Sunday in Advent. According to some writers the Ember Days in December were introduced by the Apostles as a preparation for the ordinations which occurred during that month (Layman, loc. cit.). The scriptural basis for this practice is to be found in Acts, xiii, 2 sq. The summer Ember Days were observed during the octave of Pentecost (St. Leo I, Sermo ii, de Pentecost.), and the autumn Ember Days in September (Idem, Sermo viii, De jejunio septimi mensis). In the False Decretals (c. 840-50) Pope Callistus (217-22) is made to add a fourth week. We decree, he says, that the fast which you have learned to keep three times yearly, shall henceforward be made four times a year (Epist., Decr. lxxvi, cap., i; Migne, P. G., X, 121). St. Jerome, in his commentary on the eighth chapter of Zachary, believes that the Ember Days were instituted after the example of the Jews, who fasted and abstained four times during the year, as noted in the preceding paragraph. St. Leo I (Sermo vii, De jej. sept. mensis) considers that the purpose of penance during Ember Week is to urge the faithful to special efforts in the cause of continency. The two views are entirely compatible. (5) Advent Radulphus de Rivo (Kalendarium eccles. seu de observations canonum, Prop. xvi) and Innocent III (De observ. jej., cap. ii) testify that the Roman Church appointed a period of fasting and abstinence as a preparation for the solemnization of Christmas. Traces of this custom are still to be found in the Roman Breviary indicating the recitation of ferial prayers during Advent just as on days of fasting and abstinence. Radulphus de Rivo (loc. cit.) remarks that the Roman Church appointed the first Sunday after St. Catharine's feast as the beginning of Advent. 6. Vigils In former times the clergy assembled in church, on the eves of great festivals, and chanted the divine office. In like manner the laity also repaired to their churches and passed the time in watching and praying. Hence the term vigil. Innocent III (op. cit., i) mentions the vigils of Christmas, the Assumption, and the Apostles (28 June). It is likely that the obligation of abstaining on the vigils of Pentecost, St. John Baptist, St. Lawrence, and All Saints was introduced by custom (cf. Azor., op. cit., VII, xiii), for, according to Duchesne (op. cit., 287), the element of antiquity is not the fasting, but the vigil. Formerly, the obligation of abstaining on vigils was anticipated as often as a vigil fell on Sunday. This practice is still in vogue. (7) Rogation Days These days occur on the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday preceding the Ascension. Mamertus, Bishop of Vienne, introduced (some time before 474) the custom of reciting the Litanies on these days. He also prescribed fasting and abstinence thereon. This practice was extended to the whole of Frankish Gaul in 511 by the first Council of Orléans (can. xxvii). About the beginning of the ninth century Leo III introduced the Rogation Days into Rome (Duchesne op. cit., 289). An almost similar observance characterizes the feast of St. Mark, and dates from about the year 589 (Duchesne, op. cit., 288). APPLICATION OF THE LAW IN THE UNITED STATES Diversity in customs, in climate, and in prices of food have gradually paved the way for modifications of the law of abstinence. Throughout the United States the ordinary Saturday is no longer a day of abstinence. During Lent, in virtue of an indult, the faithful are allowed to eat meat at their principal meal on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, the second and last Saturdays excepted. The use of meat on such days is not restricted to the principal meal for such as are exempt from fasting by reason of ill health, age, or laborious occupations. Eggs, milk, butter, and cheese, formerly prohibited, are now permitted without restriction as far as the day of the week is concerned The use of lard or dripping in preparing fish and vegetables at all meals and on all days is allowed by an indult issued 3 August, 1887. It is never lawful to take fish with flesh, at the same meal, during Lent, Sundays included (Benedict XIV, Litt. ad Archiep. Compostel., 10 June, 1745, ap. Bucceroni, Enchiridion Morale, 147). At other times this is not prohibited (Bucceroni, ib.). On Wednesdays and Fridays, as well as on the second and last Saturdays of Lent, flesh meat is not permitted. Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays during Ember Week are still days of abstinence and fasting. The vigils of Christmas, Pentecost, Assumption, and All Saints are also days of abstinence and fasting. In virtue of faculties granted by the Holy See, workingmen, and their families as well, may use flesh meat once a day on all abstinence days throughout the year except Fridays, Ash Wednesday, Holy Saturday, and the vigil of Christmas. This indult was issued for ten years, 15 March 1895, and renewed for another decade on 25 February, 1905. (See "Exposition of Christian Doctrine", Philadelphia, 1899, II, 528-529 Spirago-Clarke, "The Catechism Explained", New York, 1900; Diocesan Regulations for Lent.) In Great Britain and Ireland, Fridays during the year, Wednesdays during Advent, weekdays during Lent, Ember Days, the vigils of Christmas, Pentecost, the Assumption, All Saints, Sts. Peter and Paul, and St. Andrew (in Scotland only) are days of abstinence. Meat is allowed by indult at the principal meal on all days during Lent except Wednesdays, Fridays, Holy Thursday, and the second and last Saturdays. Eggs are allowed at the principal meal during Lent except on Ash Wednesday and the last three days of Lent. Milk, butter, and cheese are allowed at the principal meal, and at the collation during Lent, except on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Lard and drippings are allowed at the chief meal and at the collation, except on Good Friday. Suet is prohibited whenever meat is not allowed. Fish and flesh are never allowed at the same meal on any fast day during the year (Catholic Directory, London, 1906). In Australia, Fridays during the year, Wednesdays and Saturdays during Lent, Holy Thursday, Wednesdays during Advent, Ember Days, the vigils of Christmas, Pentecost, the Assumption, Sts. Peter and Paul, and All Saints are days of abstinence. There is a somewhat general practice whereby the use of meat is allowed at the chief meal on ordinary Saturdays throughout the year. For the rest, the application of the law of abstinence is much the same as in Ireland (The Year Book of Australia, Sydney, 1892). In Canada, Fridays during the year, Wednesdays during Lent and Advent, Ember Days, the vigils of Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, the Assumption, Sts. Peter and Paul, and All Saints are days of abstinence. The abstinence incident to the feasts of Sts. Peter and Paul and the Assumption is transferred to the eve of the transferred solemnity. Milk, butter, cheese, and eggs are allowed during Lent even at the collation; lard and drippings as in the United States. (See "Expos. of Christian Doctrine", Philadelphia, 1899, II, 528, 529.) THE GREEK CHURCH In the Greek Church the law of abstinence is designated by the term xerophagy in contradistinction to monophagy, signifying the law of fasting. In its strictest sense xerophagy bars all viands except bread, salt, water, fruits, and vegetables (St. Epiphanius, Expositio Fidei, xxii; Migne, P.G., XLII, col. 828; Apost. Const., V, xviii, ap. Migne, P.G., I, col. 889). On days of abstinence meat, fish, eggs, milk, cheese, oil, and wine' are rigorously interdicted. This traditional custom of rigorous abstinence still binds the Greeks on all Wednesdays and Fridays, on all days of their Major Lent, including Saturdays and Sundays, except Palm Sunday, on which day oil, wine, and fish are now permitted, and on the vigils of Christmas and Epiphany. Xerophagy seems to have been obligatory only on these days. Another less severe form of abstinence, still common among the Greeks, prohibits the use of meat, eggs, milk, and sometimes fish on certain occasions. According to their present regime, the Greeks observe this mitigated form of abstinence during their Lent of the Apostles (i.e. from Monday after the feast of All Saints, celebrated on the first Sunday after Pentecost, until 29 June); during Mary's Lent (1-14 August); during Christmas Lent, or Advent (also called St. Philip's Lent, 15 November to 24 December); 29 August (commemoration of the Beheading of St. John Baptist) and on 14 September (feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross). The canonical regulations determining obligatory abstinence have suffered no substantial alteration during the lapse of many centuries. In its general outlines this legislation is the same for the Greek Church Uniat and non-Uniat. The Uniat Greek Church is not allowed to father any innovation without explicit authorization from the Holy See (Benedict XIV, Decret. Demandatam, # vi, in his Bullarium, I, 128, Venice ed., 1778). Though usage and dispensations have led the way to certain modifications, the canons covering this matter remain unchanged. Custom has made the use of vine and oil legitimate on xerophagy days. In many places fish is likewise allowed, except during the first and last week of their Major Lent. Goar (Euchologium, Venice, 1730, 175) says that the Greeks of his day were allowed by an unwritten law to eat fish, eggs, snails, and such-like viands on xerophagy days. Innovations in the duration of the Greek penitential seasons have originated in usage. Thus arose their practice of spending the week preceding their Major Lent in minor abstinence, as a prelude to the more rigorous observance of the Lenten season (Nilles, Kalendarium, II, 36, Innsbruck, 1885; Vacant, Dict. de théol. cath., I, 264). This custom lapsed into desuetude, but the decrees of the Synod of Zamosc, 1720 (tit. xvi, Collect. Lacensis, II), show that the Ruthenians had again adopted it. The Melchites have reduced their xerophagy during Christmas Lent to fifteen days. The same tendency to minimize is found amongst the Ruthenians (Synod of Zamosc, loc. cit.). The Apostles' Lent counts no more than twelve days for the Melchites. Goar says that their Christmas Lent is reduced to seven days. Other alterations in these seasons have been made at various times in different places. The Greeks enjoy some relaxation of this obligation on a certain number of days during the year. Accordingly, when feasts solemnized in the Greek Church fall on ordinary Wednesdays and Fridays, or on days during their various Lenten seasons (Wednesdays and Fridays excepted), a complete or partial suspension of xerophagy takes place. The obligation of abstaining from flesh is withdrawn on Wednesdays and Fridays between Christmas and 4 January; whenever Epiphany falls on Wednesday or Friday; Wednesday and Friday during the week preceding the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross; during the octaves of Easter and Pentecost. Some of the Greeks, especially the Melchites, hold that xerophagy does not bind from Easter to Pentecost [cf. Pilgrimage of Etheria (Peregrinatio Sylviae) ap. Duchesne, op. cit. 569]. In their partial suspension of the xerophagy the Greeks maintain the obligation of abstaining from flesh meat, but they countenance the use of such other viands as are ordinarily prohibited when the law is in full force. This mitigation finds application as often as the following festivals fall on Wednesdays or Fridays not included in their Lenten seasons, or any day (Wednesdays and Fridays excepted) during their Lenten seasons: 24 November, Feast of St. Philip; 21 November, Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 7 January, Commemoration of St. John Baptist; 2 February; Presentation of Christ in the Temple; 25 March, Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 29 June, The Apostles; 6 August, Transfiguration, 15 August Assumption; and Palm Sunday. St. Basil's rule in followed by all monks and nuns in the Greek Church. Xerophagy is their general rule for penitential practices. The law of abstaining from meat admits no relaxation. The greater solemnities entitle them to use fish, eggs, milk, oil, and wine. Feasts of minor solemnity, falling on days other than Wednesday or Friday, admit fish, eggs, milk, oil, and wine, otherwise wine and oil only. Finally, simple feasts admit the use of oil and wine. The obligation of xerophagy on Wednesdays and Fridays dates its origin to apostolic tradition (cf. Teaching of the Apostles, viii, I; Clement of Alexandria, Strom. VI, lxxv; Tertullian, De jejunio, xiv). The xerophagy of Major Lent is likewise of ancient growth. There is strong reason to think that the question was mooted in the second century, when the Easter controversy waxed strong. Writings of the fourth century afford frequent references to this season. According to the Pilgrimage of Etheria (Duchesne, op. cit., 555), the end of the fourth century witnessed Jerusalem devoting forty days (a period of eight weeks) to fasting and abstinence. The season comprised eight weeks because Orientals keep both Saturday (save Holy Saturday) and Sunday as days of rejoicing, and not of penance. There are several noteworthy evidences of those forty days thus appointed by the Greeks for abstinence and fasting (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Procatech., no. 4, and Catech., iv, 3, ap. Migne, P. G., XXXIII, 341, 347; Eusebius, De solemnitate pascuali, no. 4, Migne, P. G., XXIV, 697; Apostolic Canons, can. lxviii, ap. Hefele, op. cit., I, 485). The canons of Greek councils show no traces of legislation regarding their Christmas Lent etc. prior to the eighth century. No doubt the practice of keeping xerophagy during these seasons originated in monasteries and thence passed to the laity. In the beginning of the ninth century St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, states that all are obliged to observe xerophagy during those seasons (Pitra, Juris Ecclesiastici Graeci Historia et Monumenta, Rome, 1868, II, 327). It is scarcely necessary to note here that the Greek Church has legislated nearly half of the year into days of fasting or abstinence or both. Nevertheless, many Oriental writers protest against a lessening of this number. In point of fact, however, many Greeks claim that many days of this kind scarcely win proper recognition from the faithful. THE RUSSIAN CHURCH The legislation of the Russian church relating to abstinence consists of an elaborate program specifying days of penance whereon various sorts of food are forbidden, and indicating several festivals whereon the rigor of the law is tempered to a greater or lesser degree according to the grade of solemnity characterizing the fast. Good Friday is signalized by their most severe form of exterior penance, namely complete abstinence. During their Major Lent cold, dried fare is prescribed for Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays, as well as for the first three days of Holy Week. On Saturdays and Sundays during this period fish is prohibited, and crustaceans are allowed. On Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year, as well as on the vigil of Christmas, baked fare and fruit are enjoined. Oil is prohibited, and wine allowed, on Holy Saturday, on Thursday of the Major Canon (Thursday of the fifth week in Lent), and on Good Friday, whenever the Annunciation coincides therewith. Fish is interdicted, but fish eggs are permitted on the Saturday preceding Palm Sunday, and on the feast of St. Lazarus. Wine and oil are allowed on Holy Thursday. During their Christmas Lent, Mary's Lent, and the Apostles' Lent meat is prohibited, but wine and oil are allowed on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays. The same regulation applies to 14 September, 29 August, and 5 January. During Mary's Lent milk diet is interdicted; fish diet is permitted on Saturdays and Sundays. During the other two minor Lents the same injunction holds on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and Sundays. The same regulation binds on Palm Sunday, as well as on Wednesdays and Fridays of Paschaltide. Finally, the feasts of the Transfiguration, Mary's Nativity, Annunciation, Purification, Presentation, and Assumption, the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, Sts. Peter and Paul, and the Commemoration of St. John the Baptist, 7 January, occurring during Lent, or on Wednesday or Friday, are marked by this same degree of abstinence. Meat diet is under the ban, except during the whole of carnival week. Russian monks are obliged to observe this part of the program during the whole year. The Russian Church suspends the obligation of abstinence during Christmastide (25 December to 6 January, minus the vigil of Epiphany), during Eastertide, and during the octave of Pentecost. SYRIAN CHURCH All branches of the Syrian Church abstain on Wednesdays and Fridays and during Lent, in keeping with the Apostolic Canons (Can. lxviii, Hefele, loc. cit). The Council of Laodicea (can. 1), recognized by all Syrians, enjoins xerophagy for Lent (Hefele, op. cit., II, 320). Nevertheless, changes and abuses have been gradually introduced into various portions of the Syrian Church. JACOBITES (a) Among the laity all adults are obliged to abstain on all Wednesdays and Fridays. On those days eggs, milk, and cheese are interdicted. During Lent their rigorous regime excludes the use of eggs, milk, butter, cheese, fish, and wine. The Apostles' Lent is observed from Pentecost to 29 June. Abstinence is then recommended, not imposed. Mary's Lent lasts fifteen days. The Christmas Lent is kept by monks forty days longer than by laics. During these periods a less rigorous regime is in vogue. Finally, their ninivitic, or rogation, abstinence continues for three days. (b) Following the example of James of Edessa, the Jacobite monks and nuns observe alternately seven weeks of fasting and abstinence, with seven other weeks wherein such obligations apply on Wednesdays and Fridays only. Some eat no meat during the entire Year. Sozomen (Hist. Eccl., VI; Migne, P.G., LXVII, col. 393) speaks of Syrian anchorites who live on herbs without eating even so much as bread, or drinking wine. Rabulas, Bishop of Edessa (d. 435), and the Council of Seleucia-Ctesiphon (420) (Hefele, op. cit., II, 449 sq.) forbade monks and nuns to eat meat. NESTORIANS As a general rule, the laity follow the same regime as the Jacobites. With them Lent begins on Quinquagesima Sunday. Contrary to their ancient discipline, they abstain on Saturdays and Sundays. They observe the same minor penitential seasons as the Jacobites. Their ninivitic, or rogation, season is kept on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of the third week before Lent. The canonical regulations for monks and nuns prescribe fasting and abstinence as observed in other branches of the Syrian Church. Nevertheless, at various periods, innovations and relaxations have found their way into Nestorian communities of men and women (Vacant, op. cit., I, 268). MARONITES Lent for the laity commences on Monday of Quinquagesima week and continues until Holy Saturday. Saturdays and Sundays (Holy Saturday excepted), together with obligatory feasts occurring during Lent, are not fasting days, but even then meat and milk diet are strictly forbidden. Their Christmas Lent begins on 5 December and ends on 24 December. Mary's Lent begins on 1 August and ends on 14 August; 6 August is not included therein. The Apostles' Lent begins 15 June and ends 28 June, although 24 June is not therein included. Meat, eggs, and milk diet are interdicted on all Wednesdays and Fridays except such as occur during Christmastide, Eastertide, or the octave of Pentecost. This mitigation takes place during the week preceding their Major Lent and on the feasts of the Transfiguration, St. John the Baptist, and Sts. Peter and Paul. Their legislation for monks and nuns is simple and austere. They are forbidden to eat flesh meat under penalty of grievous sin, unless a physician should order it for them in case of illness. When obliged to make long journeys, they must have recourse to the bishop or their own local superior for permission to eat meat during the journey (Vacant, op. cit., I, 269). ARMENIANS Vartan, whom the Armenians regard as the leading: exponent of their ecclesiastical traditions, held that they were bound not only to abide by the legislation framed in the Council of Jerusalem, but also to adhere to the Mosaic law regarding unclean animals (Vacant, op. cit., I, 269). The Council of Florence condemned this rigorism and decided that the decrees enacted in the Council of Jerusalem concerning this matter, as well as the Mosaic regulations regarding unclean animals, have no longer the binding force of law. The Armenians recognize the sixty-eighth canon of the Apostles, which prescribes abstinence on Wednesdays and Fridays, and on all days of Major Lent. The Greek canonists Zonaras and Balsamon liken the abstinence of Wednesdays and Fridays to that of Lent. During Lent nothing save bread, salt, herbs, and wine is allowed the laity. Meat, fish, milk, cheese, butter, eggs, and oil are under the ban. Nevertheless, with time there become visible traces of innovation in this discipline. At present the Armenians observe the law of abstinence on Wednesdays and Fridays, except during the octave of Epiphany and during Eastertide, i.e. from Easter Sunday to Ascension Day. Their Major Lent begins on Monday of Quinquagesima week and terminates on Holy Saturday. From Ash Wednesday until Easter Day they keep xerophagy except on Saturdays and Sundays, when milk diet is allowed. Besides, they devote the week preceding the feasts of the Transfiguration, the Assumption, the Holy Cross, and St. Gregory to abstinence and fasting. They are likewise obliged to abstain for one week during Advent, one week preceding the feast of St. James, and another immediately before the Epiphany. The Armenian monks and nuns never eat meat. With them the law of abstinence is quite rigorous. They may eat fish whenever the laity are allowed to eat meat. COPTS Lay people are obliged to abstain from flesh meat, eggs, and milk diet during all the penitential seasons. Such are Major Lent, Mary's Lent, Christmas Lent, and the Apostles' Lent. They are bound by the law of abstinence on all Wednesdays and Fridays, except during the interval between Easter and Pentecost, and whenever Christmas or Epiphany falls on Wednesday or Friday. The law of abstinence extends to Saturdays and Sundays during their penitential seasons. During Major Lent and Holy Week fish is prohibited. At other times its use is lawful. Some time has elapsed since the rigor peculiar to seasons of penance in the Orient was mitigated amongst the Copts. It was then restricted to the observance of abstinence during all seasons except Major Lent. Nevertheless, a goodly number of Copts continue to keep Mary's Lent with pristine rigor. While residing in their monasteries, the Coptic monks and nuns are bound to abstain from meat, eggs, and milk diet throughout the year. Whenever they dwell outside the monastery they may conform to the regulations binding the laity. MOTIVES OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAWS PERTAINING TO ABSTINENCE According to the vagaries of the Manicheans, Montanists. and Encratites, flesh meat is intrinsically evil and merits the most rigorous kind of prohibition. Keenly sensible of this heterodoxy, the Church of Christ has not based her ordinances enjoining abstinence on any such unwarranted assumption. As the exponent of revelation, the Church knows and teaches that every creature in the visible universe is equally a work of the divine wisdom, power, and goodness, which defy all limitations. This is why the first pages of the inspired text indicate that the Creator "saw all the things that he had made and they were very good" (Gen., i, 31). St. Paul is, if anything, still more explicit in condemning the folly of those sectaries, though they originated after his day. "Now, the Spirit manifestly says that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils . . . forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by them that know the truth. For, every creature is good, and nothing to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving" (I Tim, iv, 1, 2, 3). Neither is the Church, in her legislation on abstinence, animated by any such gross superstition as influences the adherents of Brahmanism or Buddhism. Moved by their theories regarding the transmigration of souls, they are logically induced to abstain from eating the flesh of animals, lest they should unconsciously consume their parents or friends. In consequence of those notions their diet is vegetarian. So rigorous is the law prescribing this diet that transgressions are visited with social and domestic ostracism. At the same time this ultra conservatism has not been espoused by all who share the doctrine regarding the transmigration of souls. Many of them have not hesitated to temper their belief in this creed with a mitigated form of abstinence from flesh meat. Eagerness to harmonize her disciplinary regime with the exigencies of the Mosaic legislation did not prompt the Church in shaping the measures which she set before her children in regard to abstinence. Though the Law of Moses embodies a detailed catalogue of forbidden viands, Christ abrogated those prohibitions when the Law was fulfilled. The Apostles, assembled in the Council of Jerusalem, gave definite shape to their convictions concerning the passing of the Old Law, as well as to their divinely founded right to shape and mould the tenor of ecclesiastical legislation so as best to meet the spiritual needs of those entrusted to their charge (Acts, xv, 28, 29). Nevertheless, legislation alone is well-nigh powerless in attempting to change abruptly the current of traditions and prejudices, when they are so deeply rooted in national institutions as to form an important factor in the growth and development of a nation. This was precisely the sort of problem that confronted the missionary enterprises of the Apostles. Their converts were recruited from Paganism and Judaism. Though Jews and Gentiles were doubtless sincere in their conversion to the new religion, previous habits of thought and action had left more than superficial traces in their character. As a consequence, many Jewish converts were unwilling to forego the Mosaic law concerning unclean meats, while Gentile converts could see no reason whatsoever for adopting the tenets of Judaism. This diversity of sentiment paved the way to misunderstanding, and all but open rupture, in various communities of the early Church. This is why St. Paul speaks so unequivocally regarding the lawfulness of all meats, but recommends due consideration for those Christians whose conscience will not brook this liberty (Rom., xiv; Gal., iii, 28; Rom., ii). Centuries of Christian life have so greatly simplified this matter that it is now well-nigh impossible to realize how there could then have been anything more than a passing controversy. At the same time it is well to bear in mind that in the beginning of the present era the Apostles were called upon to deal amicably with those who based their conservatism on the traditions of two thousand years of adhesion to the Mosaic legislation. Daily experience testifies that the phenomena circumscribing the evolution of life in the material world are rooted in laws involving a process of transition from death unto life. "The struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest" is simply the dictum of science admitting the presence of this law in the animal kingdom. This law, so widespread in the material order. has been embodied in that economy wherein they who would imitate Christ must deny themselves, take up the cross, and follow Him. Hence, in molding her penitential discipline, the Church is inspired by the maxims and example of her Divine Founder. As a consequence, she is not the author of arbitrary measures in this matter; she simply frames her laws of abstinence to meet the exigencies of fallen nature. Darkness in the understanding, weakness in the will, and turbulence in the passions must ever remain to reveal the ravages: of sin in fallen man. Though the passions are destined to satisfy the legitimate cravings of human nature, and enable man to develop his being according to the dictates of reason, still they give unquestionable evidence of a vicious propensity to invade the domain of reason and usurp her sovereignty. In order to check this lawless invasion of the passions, and to subordinate their movements to the empire of reason, man is obliged to labor unceasingly; else he is sure to become the slave of unbridled passion. This is what St. Paul means when he says: "The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh" etc. (Gal., v, 17). The substance of certain viands, especially meat, renders inestimable service to man in his efforts to gain and retain the desired supremacy. This is what St. Jerome means when, quoting Terence, he says: Sine Cerere et Baccho, friget Venus (Cont. Jov., II, 6), or, to use the words of St. Thomas (II-II, q. cxlvii, art. 1), "the ardor of lust is dampened by abstinence from food and drink." Besides, abstinence exercises a salutary influence in leading man to suprasensible pursuits. For, according to St. Augustine (De oratione et jejunio, sermo ccxxx, de temp.), abstinence purifies the soul, elevates the mind, subordinates the flesh to the spirit, begets a humble and contrite heart, scatters the clouds of concupiscence, extinguishes the fire of lust, and enkindles the true light of chastity. This is summarized in the official message of the Church found in the Mass-preface used during Lent: "Who by bodily fasting suppresses vice, ennobles the mind, grants virtue and rewards." It is no exaggeration, therefore, to maintain that Christians must find in abstinence an efficacious means to repair the losses of the spirit and augment its gains. Inspired by such motives, the Church wisely prohibits the use of flesh meat at duly appointed times. Seemingly harsh, the law of abstinence, in its last analysis, serves to promote bodily and spiritual well-being. The mechanism of the body stamps man as an omnivorous animal. Hence, all nations have adopted a mixed diet. Nay. more, a priori and a posteriori reasons prove that the occasional interruption of meat diet conduces to bodily and spiritual health. In case of less rugged constitutions, the Church tempers the rigors of her legislation with the mildness of her dispensations. Finally, the experience of nineteen centuries proves that transgression of this law neither promotes health nor prolongs life. Hence, consummate wisdom and prudence, seeking to safeguard the welfare of soul and body, inspire the Church in her laws pertaining to abstinence. (See ADVENT; LENT) TERTULLIAN, De Jejunio, P.L., II, ST. LEO I, Sermones, P. L., LIV; HERMAS Pastor, in Ante-Nicene Fathers (New York), II; CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, ibid., II; Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, ibid., VII, DUCHESNE, Christian Worship: Its origin and evolution (tr. London, 1904); Pilgrimage of Etheria (Sylviae), in DUCHESNE, op. cit., 547-577; HEFELE , A History of the Councils of the Church (tr . Edinburgh, 1896), I, II, V; ST. THOMAS, Summa, II-II, QQ. cxivii, cxlvii THOMASSIN, Traité des jeùnes d' I'Egise (Paris, 16800; LAYMAN, Theologia Moralis (Padua, 1733); SPORER, Theologia Moralis super Decalogum (Venice, 1761), I; VACANT, Dict. de théol. cath (Paris, 1899), I, 262-277. JAMES D. O'NEILL Physical Effects of Abstinence Physical Effects of Abstinence The effects on the human system of abstinence from flesh meats divide themselves naturally and logically into two parts: + Effects due to total abstinence (in other words vegetarianism); + Effects due to partial or periodic abstinence, such as is enjoined by the Catholic Church. These abstinences comprise the fish observance of Fridays, the fasts before feasts, the forty days of Lent, and the ember days. It is the partial, or Catholic, phase of the subject with which we have to deal. Physiologically, man is an omnivorous animal, as evidenced by the structure and consequent nomenclature of the teeth; and a mixed diet into which meat or flesh food largely enters, would seem to be the natural requirement for such a complex physio-anatomical entity. Additional corroboration of this view is afforded by researches of physiological chemistry, and the discovery of elements produced at various points along the digestive tract, whose function it is to peptonize milk foods, emulsify fats and oils, destroy the insulation of muscular fiber, and prepare the nucleines for absorption and nutrition. Granting, therefore, that flesh food in some form is necessary for the human race as a whole, what are the physical effects of partial Abstinence therefrom? These effects are as numerous and divergent as the causes. We have first, the family history of the individual (diseases or tendencies inherited or acquired); second, age; third, personal history of the individual (diseases or tendencies inherited or acquired), natural or artificial infantile feeding; fourth, education and environment; fifth, climatic conditions, sixth, occupation and its effects on the physical and mental state of the individual, seventh, status præsens, and last -- but really the most important of all -- that indefinable but very tangible element which we may call the personal equation in each individual, the observer as well as the observed. Additional facts to be remembered are: + That women bear Abstinence better than men, because as a rule the former have greater development of fatty and less development of muscular tissue; + that mature age bears deprivation of customary food better than youth or old age; + that a very damp atmosphere, extremes of heat and gold, un-hygienic surroundings (tenements, prisons, workhouses, etc.), insufficient, improper, and unwholesome food, the state of pregnancy, alcoholism, and the premature physical and mental decadence, due to the stress and strain in the modern battle of life, are all to be considered as important matters for investigation in any case that has to do with the question of Abstinence. The Church has so wisely, and with a foreknowledge of scientific investigation and present proof so accurate as to be almost supernatural, taken all the above mentioned conditions into consideration, in framing her laws regarding. Abstinence, that there is not the slightest danger of any physical ills accruing to those to whom these laws apply. On the contrary, it is abundantly demonstrated by the highest scientific authority that temporary. Abstinence from solid food - particularly flesh food, in which there is a great proportion of waste material, and consequently, increased wear and tear on the organs of excretion, such as the lungs, liver, and kidneys - is greatly to be desired in all persons, but particularly in those suffering from acute infectious and inflammatory diseases. Those who lead a physically active life, like the manual laborer, seem to need animal food more continuously and feel its temporary withdrawal more acutely than the sedentary or brain worker. Here, also, the important element is the personal equation. The history of mankind seems to show that while the meat eating nations of the earth have been the most powerful, aggressive, and sanguinary (growing, in other words, like the things they feed on), yet they have been and continue to be conservative forces in civilization, prolific and enduring contributors to the arts and sciences, and, in the final analysis, strenuous upholders of civil and religious liberty and morality. The dietetic question raised by some as the result of the late Russo-Japanese War means nothing as a basis of comparison. It is a well known feet that battles have been fought, and lost, and won, alike by men suffering from too much, too little, or no food at all. Wars and their eventualities depend, not so much on foods as on civil, religious, and politico-economical conditions. The medical and scientific world of today seems to be well satisfied: + that while man, by structure and development, is omnivorous, there is too much animal food consumed by the average individual, particularly in large centers of population. + That owing to this large consumption of food, which has an amount of waste out of proportion to its nutritive value, the vital organs are overtaxed in their excretory functions, and that consequently, human life and usefulness is very frequently curtailed. + That this over ingestion of animal food is in some way -- as yet undetermined -- closely associated with the rapid increase of diseases like cancer. + That over-feeding -- particularly with strong, meaty foods -- together with leek of proper muscular exercise have much to do with the question of so-called "race suicide". This last suggestion arises from the well known analogy between the reproductive processes in human and brute animals. Too much and too rich food combined with physical inactivity has a tendency to replace (by a process of degeneration) the muscular fibers of the reproductive organs by fat cells, and hence render such organs either sterile or incapable of carrying a pregnancy to term. YARRELL in HARVEY, The Sea Side Book (1857), Chapter on Fish and Fish Diet; LICHTENFELT, Ueber die chemische Zusammensetzung einiger Fischarten, etc. (Archw. Physiol. de Menschen, Bonn. 1904); LATHAM, Milbank Penitentiary (]823); SLOANE, Med. Gaz., XVII, 389, MCNAUGHTON, Am. Jour. of Med. Sci. VI, 543, FRENCH ACADEMY, Archives génér. de médecine, XXVII, 130, s. v. Pestilence and Famine in Ireland, 1847 Human Foods (U.S. Agricultural Dep't Year Book, 1894), 547-558; (1895), 573580; (1897), 676682; DENS-MORE, How Nature Cures; The Natural Food of Man (London, 1892), X, 61-413; KALLE, Nutrition Tables (1892); THOMPSON, Diet (London, 1902), Annales d'hygiène publique (1902); Nutrition Investigations, U.S. Gov. (1894-1904); CASPARI, Physiologische Studien über Vegetarismus Archiv. f.d. gesammte Physiol. (Bonn, 1905), CIX, 475-595. J.N. BUTLER Abstraction Abstraction (Lat. abs, from trahere, to draw). Abstraction is a process (or a faculty) by which the mind selects for consideration some one of the attributes of a thing to the exclusion of the rest. With some writers, including the Scholastics, the attributes selected for attention are said to be abstracted; with others, as Kant and Hamilton, the term is applied to the exclusion of the attributes which are ignored; the process, however, is the same in both cases. The simplest-seeming things are complex, i.e. they have various attributes; and the process of abstraction begins with sensation, as sight perceives certain qualities; taste, others; etc. From the dawn of intelligence the activity progresses rapidly, as all of our generalizations depend upon the abstraction from different objects of some phase, or phases, which they have in common. A further and most important step is taken when the mind reaches the stage where it can handle its abstractions such as extension, motion, species, being, cause, as a basis for science and philosophy, in which, to a certain extent at least, the abstracted concepts are manipulated like the symbols in algebra, without immediate reference to the concrete. This process is not without its dangers of fallacy, but human knowledge would not progress far without it. It is, therefore, evident that methods of leading the mind from the concrete to the abstract, as well as the development of a power of handling abstract ideas, are matters of great importance in the science of education. With this account of the place of abstraction in the process of knowledge, most philosophers -- and all who base knowledge on experience -- are in substantial agreement. But they differ widely concerning the nature and validity of abstract concepts themselves. A widely prevalent view, best represented by the Associationist school, is that general ideas are formed by the blending or fusing of individual impressions. The most eminent Scholastics, however, following Aristotle, ascribe to the mind in its higher aspect a power (called the Active Intellect) which abstracts from the representations of concrete things or qualities the typical, ideal, essential elements, leaving behind those that are material and particular. The concepts thus formed may be very limited in content, and they vary in number and definiteness with the knowledge of particulars; but the activity of the faculty is always spontaneous and immediate; it is never a process of blending the particular representations into a composite idea, much less a mere grouping of similar things or attributes under a common name. The concept thus obtained represents an element that is universally realized in all members of the class, but it is recognized formally as a universal only by means of further observation and comparison. The arguments for the existence of such a faculty are not drawn from a study of its actual operation, which eludes our powers of introspection, but from an analysis of its results. Its defenders rely mainly on the fact that we possess definite universal concepts, as of a triangle, which transcend the vague floating images that represent the fusion of our individual representations; and also on the element of universality and necessity in our judgments. It is in connection with this latter point that the question is of most importance, as systems of philosophy which reject this power of direct abstraction of the universal idea are naturally more or less sceptical about the objective validity of our universal judgments. Porter, The Human Intellect (New York, 1869), 377-430; Maher, Psychology (London and New York, 1900), 294, 307, 310; Spencer, Psychology (New York, 1898), I, viii; Mill, Logic (London and New York, 1898), I, ii; IV, ii; Mivart, The Origin of Human Reason (London, 1889), ii; Van Becelaere, The Philos. Rev., Nov., 1903; Newman, Grammar of Assent (London 1898), viii; Bowne, Theory of Thought and Knowledge (New York, 1897), xi; Bain, Education as a Science (New York, 1879), vii; Sully, Teacher's Psychology (New York, 1887), xii, xiii. F.P. DUFFY Abthain Abthain (Or ABTHANE). An English or Lowland Scotch form of the middle-Latin word abthania (Gaelic, abdhaine), meaning abbacy. The exact sense of the word being lost, it was presumed to denote some ancient dignity, the holder of which was called abthanus or abthane. Dr. W.F. Skene (Historians of Scotland, IV; Fordun, II, 413) holds that the correct meaning of abthain (or abthane) is not "abbot" or "over-thane", but "abbey" or "monastery." The word has special reference to the territories of the churches and monasteries founded by the old Celtic or Columban monks, mostly between the mountain chain of the Mounth and the Firth of Forth. Dr. Skene recommends the use of the word abthany or abthanry. Many of these abthains passed into the hands of laymen, and were transmitted from father to son: They paid certain ecclesiastical tributes, and seem to have closely resembled the termon lands of the early Irish Church. SKENE, Celtic Scotland (Edinburgh, l887), III, 83, 261, 283; A New English Dictionary (Oxford, 1888). THOMAS WALSH Theodore Abucara Theodore Abucara A bishop of Caria in Syria; d., probably, in 770. In his anti-heretical dialogues (P.G., XCVII, 1461-1609) he claimed frequently to reproduce the identical words of the great Eastern theologian, St. John of Damascus, whose disciple he was. St. John addressed to him three famous discourses in defence of the sacred images. There are attempts to identify him with a Bishop Theodore of Caria who attended the Eighth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (869). MARIN, in Dict. th ol. cath., I, 287. THOMAS WALSH Abundius Abundius An Italian bishop, b. at Thessalonica early in the fifth century; d. 469. He was the fourth Bishop of Como, in Italy, was present at the Council of Constantinople in 450, and took an active part against the Eutychian heresy at Chalcedon (451), where he was the representative of Pope Leo the Great. In 452 he also took part in the Council of Milan, convened to refute the same heresy. Abundius is one of those to whom the authorship of the Te Deum is occasionally attributed. WESTCOTT, in Dict. of Christ. Biogr., I, 10; TILLEMONT, M m., X, 962. THOMAS WALSH Abydus Abydus (ABYDOS). A titular see of Troas in Asia Minor, suffragan of Cyzicus in the Hellespontic province. It was situated at the narrowest point of the Hellespont, and was famous as the legendary spot where Leander swam over to Sestus to visit his mistress, Hero. Here, too, Xerxes built the famous bridge of boats (480 s.c.) on which he crossed with his troops to a promontory on the opposite European shore. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr. (London, 1878), I, 7 8; MAS LATRIE, Trésor de chronologie, etc. (Paris, 1887); I, 1978; LEQUIEN, Oriens Christianus, III, 1115-16. Abyss Abyss (Greek abyssos). Abyss is primarily and classically an adjective, meaning deep, very deep (Wisd., x, 19; Job, xxxviii, 16). Elsewhere in the Bible, and once in Diog. Laert., it is a substantive. Some thirty times in the Septuagint it is the equivalent of the Hebrew tehom, Assyrian tihamtu, and once each of the Hebrew meculah, "sea-deep", culah, "deep flood", and rachabh, "spacious place". Hence the meanings: (1) primeval waters; (2) the waters beneath the earth; (3) the upper seas and rivers; (4) the abode of the dead, limbo; (5) the abode of the evil spirits, hell. The last two meanings are the only ones found in the New Testament. A.J. MAAS Abyssinia Abyssinia Geography Abyssinia, extending from the sixth to the fifteenth degree of north latitude, and situated to the south of Nubia, is, by reason of its peculiar contour, unique among the countries of the African continent, It has been compared, indeed, to a vast fortress, towering above the plains of eastern Africa. It is, in fact, a huge, granitic, basaltic mass, forming a great mountainous oval, with its main ridge toward the east. A chain runs for over 650 miles from north to south; seen from the shores of the Red Sea, it looks like a vast wall, some 8,000 feet high near Kasen, opposite Massowah; over 10,300 at Mount Souwaira; 11,000 at the plateau of Angolala, and more than 10,000 in Shoa. The Abyssinian chain, however, is mountainous only on the eastern side. On the other, it consists of plateaux of varying altitudes, broken up by mountains shattered by volcanic forces, the summits of which are over 6,500 feet high in Tigré, and from 13,000 to 16,000 in Simien. A comparative depression, that of Lake Tana, hollows out the highlands to the southwest. The lake itself is at an elevation of some five thousand feet, and the neighboring plateaux, from that height to six thousand. The volcanic mass of Gojam, on the south, attains a height of more than 13,000 feet, while the peaks of Kaffa arise to an altitude of some 12,000 feet. The remarkable elevation of Abyssinia gives it a peculiar climate, and savants have classified its territory into three chief zones. That of the low valleys, or kollas, is a district having the Sudanese climate, great heat, and a heavy summer rainfall. The soil is sandy, dry, and stony; the crops, maize, sugar cane, and cotton. Various kinds of acacias and mimosas form the sole vegetations of these arid, unhealthy regions, whose rushing torrents of the rainy season are but stony beds during the dry. The rocks and caverns are the haunts of lions and leopards; the trees swarm with monkeys. The scattered inhabitants of these burning plains are small, withered, nervous, irritable, and quarrelsome, devoid of the dignity which marks those who live in the high lands. The middle zone, or Voina-dega, with an elevation of from 6,000 to 8,000 feet, is by far the largest part of Abyssinia, with an equable heat little greater than that of the Mediterranean. Thus Gondar (6,000 feet) has a mean annual temperature of 19° C. (66.2°F), with 16°C (60.8°F) as the minimum of the coldest month. This is a temperature slightly higher than that of Southern Spain, Italy, and Greece, but as, in Abyssinia, the summer is the rainy season, the heat is by no means so unbearable as the summer months of the South of Europe. The lands of this region form a series of vast plateaux, covered with rich pasturage, the grazing ground of great herds of sheep and cattle. The air is pure and dry, the temperature moderate, water plentiful and of good quality; vines, olives, lemons, and pomegranates thrive there. Nearly the whole population of Abyssinia lives in this region. Here, too, are the cities, which are seldom found elsewhere, as the natural divisions of the country are such as keep the inhabitants in a state of patriarchal feudalism. The climate is very healthy, and sickness very infrequent. The cold zone, or dega, at an altitude of more than 8,000 feet, is marked by a variable temperature, and by chilly nights. The British army at a height of 10,400 feet met with four degrees of frost on 28 March. On the heights are found the rhododendrons, mosses, and lichens of the Alps. Ethnology Few eastern or African nations exhibit such various aspects as the aborigines. Descendants of Cush are locally known as Agas, or "Freemen", and still form the basis of the Abyssinian nation. On the west, they have intermarried with the ancient Berbers, and with the blacks of the Soudan, who must not be confused with the Niger, Congo, and Zambesi tribes. On the east, Semitic peoples, Arabs and Himyarites, having crossed the Red Sea in the fourth century B.C., conquered the whole eastern coast of Africa, and settled chiefly in the province called, after them, Amhara. The invasion of the Galla tribes, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, spread through all this region, and especially towards the south. These invasions and mingling of races in all ages have resulted in such diversity of type that the neighboring Arab tribes never speak of the country but as Habech (from which the name Abyssinia is derived), which means "a crowd" or "heap of sweepings". Abyssinia answers to the Upper, or Eastern, Ethiopia of the ancients, and comprises four provinces: Tigré, Amhara, Goggiam, and Shoa, four small kingdoms entrusted to as many Ras, or Negus, whence the title, negus-se-néghest, i.e., "King of Kings", assumed by the emperor of Abyssinia. The whole empire contains some 4,000,000 inhabitants. According to the vague traditional legend of the "Glorious memories of the Empire", or Kébrè-néghest, the dynasty of the Ethiopian kings goes back to King Solomon and Makkeda, Queen of Sheba; and by it the worship of the true God and the Mosaic law were brought to Ethiopia. Whatever truth may be in the legend, it is certain that ancient Ethiopia was evangelized in Apostolic times by the eunuch of Queen Candace, baptized by Philip the deacon, but was not wholly converted to the faith until the year 341, when St. Frumentius ( Keddous Faramanatos), who was tutor to the emperor's two young sons, won his pupils to Christianity. It was they who made both the capital and the empire Christian. Nor could St. Athanasius, patriarch of Alexandria, find one whom he thought better fitted to rule this infant Church, than its first apostle, Frumentius. Christianity The whole great Ethiopian empire did not, however, become Christian at that period; since, at the very gates of Gondar, the aboriginal tribes of the Komant are pagans to-day, as they have been for fourteen centuries. Moreover, even the converted provinces retain, despite their Christian faith and Christian morality, many traces of pagan and Judaic atavism. Even in the nineteenth century, idolatrous superstitions, fetishism, serpent-worship, and the cult of various jinns, Jewish practices, rest on the Sabbath, and the custom of vowing children to the keeping of certain religious observances till the age of puberty are still active almost everywhere. In the sixteenth century, King Ghelaodieos found them so deeply rooted in the national habits that he tried to justify these in the eyes of the Church as purely civil customs in no way contrary to the laws of Christianity. So long as Christian Abyssinia could remain in touch with the Catholic Patriarch of Alexandria, it was preserved from the taint of Arianism, victorious almost everywhere else, as well as the errors of Macedonius and Nestorius. In the seventh century, however, the Caliph Omar, after his conquest of Egypt, came to an understanding with the Jacobite Patriarch Benjamin, whereby the Copts and the Abyssinians were forbidden all intercourse with the Roman Pontiff, but were promised toleration on that condition. Still, the Ethiopian Church, even after the ruin of the Alexandrian Church and of the Byzantine Empire in Egypt, resisted more or less successfully for nearly three centuries the heresies which infected all other churches of the East. Moreover, during the times of schism, and of Byzantine or Muslim persecution, it became the refuge of the proscribed Catholics. Many monuments of the tenth and eleventh centuries, due to the Egyptian refugees, bear witness to this fact by their Latin character, and it is also borne out by the manuscripts of Lalibéla. Modern Missions Communication between Rome and Abyssinia became more difficult, and from the end of the eleventh to the beginning of the thirteenth century one could see no bond existing between Abyssinia and the centre of Catholicism. The Sovereign Pontiffs, nevertheless, have bestowed a constant solicitude on the Christians of Ethiopia. The first missionaries sent to their aid were the Dominicans, whose success, however, roused the fanaticism of the Monophysites against them, and caused their martyrdom. For more than a hundred years silence enfolded the ruins of this Church. At a later period, the fame of the Crusades having spread, pilgrim monks, on their return from Jerusalem, wakened once more, by what they told in the Ethiopian court, the wish to be reunited to the Church. The Acts of the Council of Florence tell of the embassy sent by the Emperor Zéra-Jacob with the object of obtaining this result (1452). The union was brought about; but on their home journey, the messengers, while passing through Egypt, were given up to the schismatic Copts, and to the Caliph, and put to death before they could bring the good news to their native land. More than a hundred years later, in 1557, the Jesuit Father Oviedo penetrated into Ethiopia. One of his successors, Father Paëz, succeeded in converting the Emperor Socinios himself. On 11 December, 1624, the Church of Abyssinia, abjuring the heresy of Eutyches and the schism of Dioscorus, was reunited to the true Church, a union which, unfortunately, proved to be only temporary. In 1632, the Negus Basilides mounted the throne. Addicted as he was to polygamy and to every vice, he showed himself the relentless enemy of Catholicism, and of its moral law. The Jesuits were handed over to the axe of the executioner, and Abyssinia remained closed to the missionaries until 1702. In that year, three Franciscans got as far as Gondar, the capital, where they converted several princes. The Negus wrote with his own hand to Clement XI, professing his submission to His Holiness. Once more the hope proved futile. A palace revolution overthrew the Negus, and heresy again assumed the reigns of power. From then until the middle of the nineteenth century, a silence as of death lay on the Church of Abyssinia. In 1846, the Holy See divided Ethiopia into two Apostolic vicariates: that of Abyssinia, trusted to the Lazarists, and that of Galla, given to the Capuchins. In the former, the labors and successes of M. de Jacobus awakened the jealousy of the schismatic clergy. An ex-Emir of Cairo, who had become Abouna of Ethiopia, and a man of low birth named Kassa, who had been anointed Negus under the name of Theodoros, joined forces to persecute the Catholics, drive out the missionaries, and put them to death. The Negus Johannes IV, who succeeded Theodoros, followed in his predecessor's footsteps. His reign of twenty years was a time of trouble and suffering for the Catholics of Abyssinia. At last, however, Menelik, the king of Shoa, who became Negus and was crowned in March, 1889, restored tranquility to the missions. Under his rule Catholic priests rest assured of justice and protection throughout the whole Empire of Abyssinia. Church Constitution Abyssinia is a province of the Patriarchate of Alexandria, the Church of Abyssinia is a daughter of the Egyptian Church, and there is nothing to show that the daughter ever really tried to withdraw herself from the maternal jurisdiction. Today the Abyssinians are governed as they were in the time of St. Athanasius. by a special delegate, who is practically the vicar of the Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria, and is locally known as Abouna, or Abou-Salama, "Father of Peace." He has the sole right, throughout Ethiopia and in perpetuity, of anointing the Negus "King of Kings"; of consecrating bishops, or ordaining priests and deacons, of blessing altar-stones, of superintending theological instruction, and of settling, as a last court of appeal, disputed or difficult questions of dogma, morals, and discipline. The law of Ethiopia demands that the Abouna shall always be a foreigner, an Egyptian, whom the Negus obtains, or rather buys, from the Khedive and the Coptic Patriarch of Cairo, the alleged successor to St. Mark in the See of Alexandria. Immediately after obtaining his episcopal consecration, and his primatial jurisdiction, the Abouna sets out for Ethiopia, with no hope of return; but lands and large revenues ensure him a comfortable existence there. The Itchagué, or Ethiopian Archbishop, is the second religious personage in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian primate is forbidden by the Patriarch of Alexandria to consecrate more than seven bishops, but there are a considerable number of secular and religious clergy, recruited with little discretion, and deplorably ignorant. The Ethiopian Church has, in addition to the priests and monks, an intermediate class, the Deftaras, or literati, who duty it is to preserve, interpret, and apply the written law, a vast collection of ordinances of the Lower Empire, modified and altered by the Copts in order to ensure the supremacy of the See of Alexandria over the whole of Ethiopia. The liturgical language is the Gheez, a mixture of Greek and Arabic. Since the settlement of the Italians at Massowah and on the shores of the Red Sea, where they have founded the colony of Erythraea, Abyssinia has been divided into three missionary divisions. The vicariate of Abyssinia, entrusted to the Lazarists, and comprising Tigré, Amhara, and Gondar, contained, in 1904, 4,000 Catholics, two churches, two chapels, six Lazarist priests, and four native secular priests, with more than sixty seminarians studying Gheez at Altiniena. The Prefecture of Erythraea, in the charge of the Capuchins, comprises the entire colony of that name, and contains 14,000 Catholics, thirty-three churches, and fifty-one priests, nine of whom are Capuchins. The vicariate of the Gallas, in the kingdom of Shoa, and among several tribes independent of the Negus, contains 18,000 Catholics and twenty churches. It is administered by twenty Capuchins, French for the most part, and eight secular priests. There are in Abyssinia, 200,000 Mussulmans, with much influence in the country, and filling the most important positions at court; 100,000 Pagans, and 50,000 Jews. The only Protestants who have succeeded in gaining a foothold in Abyssinia during the nineteenth century are the missionaries of the Swedish National Society, who, however, may only labour in Erythraea, where they have two principal centers, at Mancullo, near Massowah, and at Geleb, as well as certain stations in Cunana land and in the province of Hamasen. Their statistics give them 380 church members. The Catholic apostolate in Abyssinia must always exercise a courageous discretion and an unfailing mildness. The missionaries will have to contend for many years against the Eutychian fanaticism of the monks, and the quarrelsome nature of the inhabitants. Moreover, the frequent political revolutions of the past give little hope of settled peace and continued security. Political Revolutions, Wars The Galla, or Oromo race in the south has been the terror of Abyssinia ever since the sixteenth century. The importation of European rifles, as well as the dissensions among the Galla tribes gave an opportunity (1870) to Menelik, King of Shoa, to undertaken the conquest of all the colonies of the Oromo nation as far as Lake Victoria-Nyanza and Uganda. This conquest was not achieved until more than thirty years after the time it was undertaken. In 1846, Gregory XVI appointed as vicar apostolic to the Galla missions Father William Massaia, an Italian Capuchin, formerly tutor to King Humbert. The new prelate belonged to the Order of St. Francis, which was the only one that succeeded (1636-1752) in introducing Catholic priests into Abyssinia. The few apostles who braved the schismatics, however, were all martyred. The first Franciscan missionaries were beheaded at Suakin, and Blessed Agathange of Vendome and Cassianus of Nantes were ignominiously hanged (1638). More than a century later (1752), three other were stoned to death in a public square of Gondar. From this time, Abyssinia, as if barred from the rest of the world by a wall of iron, was an impenetrable region for the Church, and it was almost a century later that Mgr. Massaia landed at Massowah to undertake to reanimate the old faith of the Ethiopians. In the disguise of a merchant, under the constant espionage of the mercenaries of the Abouna-Salama and Theodoros, now welcomed by certain chiefs, again attacked by a frenzied crowd, often bound and condemned to death, he always contrived to escape. He left Abyssinia to go to France and England, where he conferred with Napoleon III and Queen Victoria. Having received from them important help in his work, he returned to his mission, in September, 1853. On his arrival, he compiled a Galla dictionary, translated the Bible, converted a prince of Lagamara, vaccinated a hundred people daily during smallpox epidemic, and once more fell into the hands of Theodoros, who put him in chains. Mocked and flouted by the populace, he was thrown into a hut open to the four winds of heaven. His patience, however, won the esteem of Theodoros, who released him. Having been summoned by Menelik, the young King of Shoa, he gained his affection and aroused in him an admiration of the Catholic religion. "You have saints," said the king to the bishop, "and that is a wonder which neither my priests nor my deptera [doctors] can accomplish." After a fruitful apostolic mission of thirty-five years among the Galla tribes, Mgr. Massaia was created a Cardinal by Leo XIII, and died in 1889, leaving 10,000 Christians in the country. The British Counsel, Walter Plowden, a hardy adventurer, frequently gave the Negus Theodoros such timely assistance as led to his success in several wars. Plowden was assassinated, however, and his successor, Captain Charles Duncan Cameron, failed to establish a good understanding with the African emperor. Suspected of having had an understanding with the Musselmans of Egypt, who had just defeated Theodoros at Gédaril in the Sudan, he was imprisoned (July, 1863) with some German missionaries accused of having spoken ill of the Negus. After various promises to release the prisoners, Theodoros wound up by brutally consigning the British Consul and the members of his suite, together with some other Europeans, tied together in pairs, to the fortress of Magdala, which he had chosen as his capital. On hearing of this outrageous infringement of international law, the patience of the British gave way, and they declared war (July, 1867). Sir Robert Napier, who had already made a name by his victories in India, was placed in command of the troops assigned to this expedition. Colonel Merewether, whose activities in this campaign did much to win for him the rank of general, having previously reconnoitered the ground, suggested that the landing be made at Adulis in Annesley Bay. The British army comprised 16,000 combatants, an equal number of servants, forty-five elephants, and a great many pack mules. Napier, on landing in Abyssinia, (3 January, 1868), issued a proclamation to the Ethiopians to the effect that the sole object of the invasion was to deliver the captives, and that he had nothing but friendly feelings except for those who should seek to interfere with his progress. With this, the army boldly began its march through the steep defiles of the "great African citadel". After marching about fifty-three miles, the vanguard reached the plateau of Senafé, where they found a delightful climate, a temperature of 30° to 40°F, and a most fertile country. Word reached them that several Ras and governors of the provinces, discontented with the suspicious Theodoros, stood ready to replenish their commissary and to supply them with horses. Napier made this plateau his base of operations. He was obliged to cover his line of march by three entrenched camps, the first at Senafé, the second at Addizerat, the third at Antolo. At last, on 10 April, the troops reached the slopes of Silassia without having encountered a single hostile soldier, when suddenly a cannon was fired on the heights, and 6,000 Abyssinians hurled themselves down upon the 16,000 British. The Snider rifles, however, which the British used for the first time in this engagement, quickly brought the assailants to a halt, and disabled the greater number. By 13 April, the British were beneath the walls of Magdala, which surrendered after a two hours' siege. As soon as Theodoros saw the British soldiers entering the city, feeling himself abandoned by all, and conquered, he put a pistol to his mouth, and killed himself. The victorious army then released the prisoners, whom they had hardly hoped to find alive. On 17 April, Napier, henceforth Lord Napier of Magdala, ordered the inhabitants to evacuate the city, after which the walls were demolished and the public buildings given to the flames. It was necessary to hasten the return of the troops to the sea, as the rains had already made the passage difficult. The troops embarked as they arrived at the Red Sea, on descending from the heights of Senafé. This prompt and lucky campaign of the English was to inspire the Italians twenty-eight years later to make a like bold attempt. Their ambition designs, however, roused the whole country against them, and the bloody battle of Adua (March, 1896), in which almost 20,000 were killed, put an end to their rash undertaking. In 1897, Mr. Rodd, first secretary of the British Ligation at Cairo, was entrusted with a mission to the Negus. A treaty was signed 14 May, and Menelik proclaimed the Mahdists enemies of his empire. He also asked for the adjustment of the frontiers between Harrar and Somaliland. Lastly, a Franco-Anglo-Italian agreement was concluded which guaranteed the independence of Ethiopia and assured to the three Powers bordering on the kingdom their respective rights and interests. The Abyssinian Church The chief distinction between the Abyssinian Church and the Catholic Church is the erroneous doctrine that there is but one nature in Christ, the divine nature and the human nature being in some manner unified by a species of fusion. It was in Mary's womb according to some, or at the baptism of Christ according to others, that the Holy Ghost effected this union. Then assuming that the two natures in Christ, human and divine, form but one, Mary is the mother of the divine as well as the human nature of her Son, and becomes by that very fact, almost equal to God the Father. To these, so to speak, original errors of the Monophysites, the Ethiopian Church added some of its own: e.g., the belief that the faith of the parents suffices to save their children that die unbaptized; the wholesale repudiation of all Ecumenical Councils held since the council of Ephesus, and the belief in traducianism as an explanation of the soul's origin. Moreover, they still retain in full force various practices of the primitive Church which have long since fallen into desuetude elsewhere: e.g., abstinence from the flesh and blood of animals that have been strangled; Baptism by immersion; the custom of administering Communion to little children under the species of wine; resting from work on the Sabbath, and the celebration of the Agape. It may be added that no church has kept to this very day a more visible imprint of the Jewish religion. Children of both sexes are circumcised by women two weeks after birth. They are then baptized, girls on the eightieth and boys on the fortieth day. As in Judaism, they distinguish by the term "Nazarenes" children dedicated by their parents to the observance of certain practices or prohibitions, such as drinking hydromel and shaving the head. The canon of Scripture admitted by the Ethiopians comprises, besides the books accepted by Catholics, certain apocryphal works, such as the "Book of Enoch", the "Ascension of Isaiah", etc. The oldest translation of the Bible into Ethiopian dates from the fourth century, having been made in Gheez. Pell, Platt, and Dillman have edited some of the manuscripts in London and Leipzig, but the majority remain untouched, in convents of Abyssinian monks. The present clergy are buried in a state of deplorable ignorance. Little is required of secular priests beyond the ability to read and to recite the Nicene creed, and a knowledge of the most necessary liturgical rites. The monks in their numerous convents receive an education somewhat more complete, and occasionally there are found among them men versed in sacred hermenuetics, who can recite by heart the entire Bible. Piolet. Missions catholiques francaises au XIXe siecle (Paris, 1900), I, 1-44; Ludolf, historia Aitheopiae (Frankfurt, 1681); Arnaud d'Abbadie, Douze ans en Ethiope (1838-50) (Paris); Massaia, I miei trenta cinque anni nel l'ata Etiopia (Rome. Propaganda, 1895); Holland and Hozier, Record of the Expedition to Abyssinia (London, 1870); Tellez, historia de Ethiopia aita (Coimbra, 1660); Wansleb, Biographie de Pierre Heyling, missionnaire protestant en Abyssinie, 1635; Etudes historiques sur l'Ethiopie [Text of the imperial chronicles (incomplete) and translation with notes by Basset (Paris)]. JEAN-BAPTISTE PIOLET Acacia Acacia (In Hebrew shíttah, plural shíttîm; Theod. pyxos; Vulgate, spina, thorn). The Hebrew shíttah is probably a contraction of Shinttah, and thus identical with the Egyptian shent; the Coptic shonte, thorn; the Arabic sunt. Hence the Greek name akantha, thorn, the Latin, acanthus for the Egyptian acacia. Acacia wood is designated, "incorruptible wood", in the Septuagint, and lignum setim, "setim-wood" in the Vulgate. The Biblical Acacia belongs to the genus Mimosa, and is no doubt identical with the Acacia seyal (Del.) or the Acacia tortilis (Hayne); both are called seyyal, or torrent trees, sayl meaning torrent. They grow in the desert wadis, or torrent valleys, of Sinai. The wood is light, hard, and durable, and grows almost as black as ebony with age. The ark of the covenant, the table of the loaves of proposition, the altar of holocausts, the altar of incense, the wooden parts of the tabernacle, were made of setim-wood (Ex. xxv, 5). (See PLANTS OF THE BIBLE.) VIGOUROUX, in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); CHAPMAN in HASTINGS, Dictionary of the Bible, art. Shittah Tree (New York, 1902). A.J. MAAS The Acacians The Acacians Known also as the HOMOEANS, an Arian sect which first emerged into distinctness as an ecclesiastical party some time before the convocation of the joint Synods of Ariminum (Rimini) and Seleucia in 359. The sect owed its name as well as its political importance to Acacius, Bishop of Caesarea, oi peri Akakion, whose theory of adherence to scriptural phraseology it adopted and endeavoured to summarize in its various catch words: homoios, homoios kata panta, k.t.l. In order to understand the theological significance of Acacianism as a critical episode, if only an episode, in the logical, as well as in the historical progress of Arianism, it is needful to recall that the great definition of the Homo usion, promulgated at Nicaea in 325, so far from putting an end to further discussion, became rather the occasion for keener debate and for still more distressing confusion of statement in the formulation of theories on the relationship of Our Lord to His Father, in so far as that relationship constituted a distinct tenet of orthodox belief. Events had already begun to ripen towards a fresh crisis shortly after the advent of Constantius to sole power, on the death of his brother Constans in the year 350. The new Augustus was a man of vacillating character with an unfortunate susceptibility to flattery and a turn for theological debate (Ammianus, XXI, xvi) that soon made him a mere puppet in the hands of the Eusebian faction. Roughly speaking there were at this period but three parties in the Church: the Orthodox or Nicaean party, who sympathized for the most part with Athanasius and his supporters and who insisted on making his cause their own; the Eusebian or Court party and their bewildered Semi-Arian followers; and, last of all, and not least logical in their demands, the Anomoean party which owed its origin to A tius. In the summer of 357, Ursacius and Valens, the astute, but not always consistent advocates of this latter group of dissidents in the West, through the influence which they were enabled to bring to bear upon the Emperor by means of his second wife, Aurelia Eusebia (Panegyr. Jul. Orat., iii; Ammianus, XX, vi, 4), succeeded in bringing about a conference of bishops at Sirmium. In the Latin creed put forth at this meeting there was inserted a statement of views drawn up by Potamius of Lisbon and the venerable Hosius of Cordova, which, under the name of the Sirmian Manifesto, as it afterwards came to be known, roused the whole of the Western Church and threw the temporizers of the East into disorder. In this statement the assembled prelates, while declaring their confession in "One God, the Father Almighty, and in His only-begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, generated from Him before the ages," recommended the disuse of the terms ousia (essence or substance), homoousion (identical in essence, or substance), and homoiousion (similar in essence, or substance), "by which the minds of many are perturbed"; and they held that there "ought to be no mention of any of them at all, nor any exposition of them in the Church, and for this reason and for this consideration that there is nothing written about them in divine Scripture and that they are above men's knowledge and above men's understanding" (Athan., De Syn., xxviii; Soz., ii, xxx; Hil., De Syn., xi). The effect of these propositions upon conservative opinion was like that of the proverbial spark in a barrel of gunpowder. As we look back from the standpoint of modern Catholicism upon the circumstances of this publication, it is impossible not to see that they occasioned the crisis upon which the whole subsequent history of Arianism turned. In spite of the scriptural disclaimer against the employment of inscrutable terms, nearly all parties instinctively perceived that the Manifesto was nothing else but a subtly Anomoean document. The situation was assuredly rich in possibilities. Men began to group themselves along new lines. In the East, the Anomoeans turned almost as a matter of course to Acacius of Caesarea, whose influence was growing stronger at court and who was felt to be a shrewd and not too scrupulous temporizer. In the West, bishops like Ursacius and Valens began to carry on a like policy; and everywhere it was felt that the time called once more for concerted action on the part of the Church. This was precisely. what the party in favour with the Emperor Constantius were eager to bring about; but not in the way in which the Nicaeans and Moderates expected. A single council might not be easily controlled; but two separate synods, sitting, one in the East and the other in the West, could be kept better in hand. After a number of preliminary conferences accompanying an inevitable campaign of pamphleteering in which Hilary of Poitiers took part, the bishops of the Western portion of the Empire met at Ariminum towards the end of May, and those of the East at Seleucia in the month of September, 359. The theological complexion of both Synods was identical, at least in this, that the party of compromise, represented at Seleucia by Acacius and at Ariminum by Ursacius and Valens, was politically, though not numerically, in the ascendant and could exercise a subtle influence which depended almost as much on the argumentative ability of their leaders as on their curial prestige. In both councils, as the result of dishonest intrigue and an unscrupulous use of intimidation, the Homoean formula associated with the name of Acacius ultimately prevailed. The Homo usion, for which so much had been endured by saintly champions of orthodoxy for over half a century was given up and the Son was declared to be merely similar to -- no longer identical in essence with -- the Father. St. Jerome's characterization of the issue still affords the best commentary, not only on what had come to pass, but on the means employed to obtain it. The whole world groaned in wonderment to find itself Arian -- ingemuit totus orbis et Arianum se esse miratus est. It was Acacius and his followers who had skilfully managed the whole proceeding from the outset. By coming forward as advocates of temporizing methods they had inspired the Eusebian or Semi-Arian party with the idea of throwing over A tius and his Anomoeans. They thus found themselves thrust into a position of importance to which neither their numbers nor their theological acumen entitled them. As they had proved themselves in practice all through the course of the unlooked-for movement that brought them to the front, so were they now, in theory, the exponents of the Via Media of their day. They separated themselves from the orthodox by the rejection of the word homoousios; from the Semi-Arians by their surrender of the homoiousios; and from the Aetians by their insistence upon the term homoios. They retained their influence as a distinct party just so long as their spokesman and leader Acacius enjoyed the favour of Constantius. Under Julian the Apostate, A tius, who had been exiled as the result of the proceedings at Seleucia, was allowed to regain his influence. The Acacians seized the occasion to make common cause with his ideas, but the alliance was only political; they threw him over once more at the Synod of Antioch held under Jovian in 363. In 365 the Semi-Arian Synod of Lampsacus condemned Acacius. He was deposed from his see; and with that event the history of the party to which he had given his name practically came to an end. ATHANASIUS, De Syn., XII, XXIX, XL, in P.G., XXVI, 701, 745, 766; ST. HILARIUS, Contra Constant., xii-xv, in P.L. X; ST. EPIPHANIUS, Haer., lxxiii, 23-27, in P.G., XLII; SOCRATES AND SOZOMEN, in P.G., LXVII; THEODORET, in P.G., LXXXII; TILLEMONT, M moires, VI (ed. 1704); HEFELE, Hist. Ch. Counc. (tr. CLARK), II; NEWMAN, Ar. IV Cent., 4th ed.; GWATKIN, Studies in Arianism, 2d ed. (Cambridge, 1900). CORNELIUS CLIFFORD Acacius (Bishop of Beroea) Acacius Bishop of Beroea. Born in Syria c. 322; died c. 432. While still very young he became a monk in the famous community of solitaries, presided over by Asterius, at a place just outside Antioch. He seems to have been an ardent champion of orthodoxy during the Arian troubles, and suffered greatly for his courage and constancy. After Eusebius of Samosata returned from exile on the death of Valens in 378, he gave public recognition to the great services of Acacius and ordained him to the See of Beroea. We next hear of Acacius in Rome, apparently as a deputy on the part of Meletius and the Fathers of the Antiochene Synod, when the questions connected with the heresy of Apollinaris came up for discussion before Pope Damasus. While fulfilling this difficult embassy he attended the meeting of the prelates summoned to decide upon the errors of Apollinaris, and subscribed the profession of faith in the Two Natures. It was thus largely due to his efforts that the various schismatical movements at Antioch were ended. A little later we find him at Constantinople whither he had gone to take part in the second General Council convened in 381 to reemphasize the Nicene definitions and to put down the errors of the Macedonians or Pneumatomachians. Meletius of Antioch died in the same year and Acacius, unfortunately, took part in the illegitimate consecration of Flavian. For this constructively schismatical proceeding -- schismatical in the sense that it was an explicit violation of the agreement entered into between Paulinus and Meletius and tended unhappily to keep the Eustathian party in power -- Acacius fell under the displeasure of Pope Damasus, who refused to hold communion with him and his supporters. This Roman excommunication lasted some ten or eleven years until the Council of Capua readmitted him to unity in 391 or 392 (Labbe, Conc., II, 1072). In 398 Acacius, who was now in his seventy-sixth year, was charged once more with a delicate mission to the Roman Church. Having been selected by Isidore of Alexandria to convey to Pope Siricius the news of St. John Chrysostom's election to the See of Constantinople, he was especially exhorted by the Egyptian metropolitan to do all in his power to remove the prejudice which still existed in the West against Flavian and his party. In this, as in the previous embassy, he displayed a tactfulness that disarmed all opposition. The reader will find in the pages of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret an estimate of the high value which the entire Oriental episcopate put upon the services of Acacius who is described as "famous throughout the world" (Theod., V, xxiii). We now come to the two incidents in the career of this remarkable man which throw so perplexing a light upon the problem of his real character that he may be called one of the enigmas of ecclesiastical history. We refer to his sustained hostility towards St. John Chrysostom and to his curious treatment of Cyril of Alexandria during the Nestorian controversy. Acacius was always an avowed rigorist in conduct and enjoyed great repute for piety. Sozomen (VII, xxviii) tells us that he was "rigid in observing all the regulations of the ascetic life" and that when raised to the episcopate his life was lived practically and austerely "in the open." Theodoret is consistent in his admiration for his many episcopal qualities and calls him "an athlete of virtue" (V, iv). Early in the episcopate of St. John Chrysostom, in the year 398, Acacius came to Constantinople, where he was treated with less distinction than he had apparently looked for. Whatever may have been the nature of the slight put upon him, he seems to have felt it keenly; for Palladius, St. John's biographer, records a most unepiscopal saying of the injured prelate to the effect that he would one day give his brother of Constantinople a taste of his own hospitality -- ego auto artouo chytran (Pallad., Vita Chrys., VI, viii in P.G., XLVII, 22-29). It is certain, at any rate, that from this time forth, Acacius showed himself indefatigable in working for the great orator-bishop's removal and was not the least active of those who took part in the disgraceful "Synod of the Oak" in the year 403. Indeed, he was one of the notorious "four" whom the Saint particularly named as men at whose hands he could not expect to obtain common justice. In every one of the various synods convened for the Saint's undoing, the restless old man of Beroea took a leading and almost acrimonious part, and even made a laborious, but happily futile, effort to win over Pope Innocent to his uncharitable view. He was excommunicated for his pains and remained under ban until 414. Nor was his implacability quenched either by his great antagonist's death or by the lapse of time. Fourteen years after St. John had died in exile, Acacius is found writing to Atticus of Constantinople, in 421, to apologize for the conduct of Theodotus of Antioch, who had, in spite of his better judgment, placed the Saint's name upon the diptychs. The same perplexing inconsistency of character, considering his advanced years, his profession, and the wide repute for sanctity he enjoyed, may be seen also in the attitude which Acacius maintained towards Nestorius. When his violent plea for leniency towards the heresiarch failed to produce its effect, he worked adroitly to have Cyril hoist with his own petard and charged with Apollinarianism at Ephesus. Acacius spent the last years of his life in trying, with edifying inconsistency, to pour the water of his charity upon the smouldering embers of the feuds which Nestorianism had left in its train. His letters to Cyril and to Pope Celestine make curious reading on this score; and he has the amazing distinction of having inspired St. Epiphanius to write his "History of Heresies" (Haer., i, 2, in P.G., XLI, 176). He died at the extraordinary age of one hundred and ten years. The ecclesiastical historians SOCRATES, in P.G., LXVII; SOZOMEN, in P.G., LXVII; THEODORET, in P.G., LXXXII; PALLADIUS, Vita Chrys., VI, viii, in P.G., XLVII; BARONIUS, Ann. Eccl. (PAGI, Crit.); TILLEMONT, M moires; NEWMAN, Ar. IV Cent. (4th ed.); GWATKIN, Studies in Arianism (2d ed.); HEFELE, Hist. Ch. Counc. (tr. CLARK; ed. OXENHAM), II. CORNELIUS CLIFFORD Acacius (Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine) Acacius Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, disciple and biographer of Eusebius, the historian, whose successor in the See of Caesarea he became in 340. Nothing is known of the date or country of his birth, but he was probably a Syrian; and throughout his life bore the nickname of monophthalmos (one-eyed); no doubt from a personal defect (S. Hier. Viri III., XCVIII), but possibly with a maliciously figurative reference, also, to his general shiftiness of conduct and his rare skill in ambiguous statement. He was a prelate of great learning, a patron of studies (S. Hier., Epist. ad. Marcellam, 141), and was the author of a treatise on Ecclesiastes. He also wrote six books of miscellanies ( symmikta zetemata) or essays on various subjects which have come down to us only in fragments. The student may consult these fragments in detail in Fabricius, "Bibliotheca Graeca", vii, 336, and ix, 254 sqq. (ed. Harless). He is remembered chiefly for his bitter opposition to St. Cyril of Jerusalem and for the part he was afterwards enabled to play in the more acute stages of the Arian controversy. There is a significant passage in the famous twenty-first oration of St. Gregory Nazianzen, in which that champion of orthodoxy speaks of "the tongue of the Arians" (Orat., xxi, 21) in dubiously complimentary terms. If, as seems probable, it is Acacius who is there referred to, it can only be said that the story of his career fully justifies the implication so darkly made. He was one of those imperial prelates so effectively described by Newman (Arians 4th Cent., 4th ed., 274) as "practised in the gymnastics of the Aristotelic school"; and his readiness in debate and genius for intrigue, joined to the prestige he already possessed as the friend and successor of the great Church historian of Caesarea, naturally singled him out as the likeliest spokesman and guiding spirit of the Court faction, even before their first great leader, Eusebius of Nicomedia, had passed away. He was one of the notorious "ninety" who signed the ambiguous creeds at Antioch, in the presence of Constantius in 341 (Sozomen, III, v), on the occasion of the dedication of the Golden Basilica. For his part in this transaction and for his open advocacy of a policy of reticence towards the Nicaean formula, we find his name mentioned in the list of those who were deposed by the Council of Sardica in 347 (Athanasius, Hist. Ar., XVII; Epist. ad. Ægypt., VII). Refusing to acquiesce in the sentence passed upon him, he withdrew with the other bishops of the Court faction to Philippopolis, where he in turn helped to secure a sentence of excommunication and deposition against his judges and also against Pope Julius, the patron and defender of St. Athanasius, and against Hosius of Cordova (Soc., II, xvi; Soz., III, xiv; Theod., II, xxvi; Labbe, Conc., II, 625-629). These penalties which were inflicted on him at the hands of the orthodox did nothing, of course, to diminish his prestige. If we may trust the testimony of St. Jerome, his credit with Constantius was so great during all these years that when Pope Liberius was deposed and driven into exile, in 355 or 357, Acacius was able to secure the intrusion of Felix the Antipope in his place. The year 358 marks the culmination of his acrimonious and undignified quarrel with Cyril of Jerusalem. The misunderstanding, which dated. back to a period not long after Cyril's installation, had arisen ostensibly. over a question of canonical precedence, but was most probably rooted in the chagrin that Acacius characteristically felt at being unable to sway Cyril's policy entirely to his own liking. Charges and counter-charges of heresy followed for some years, until Acacius managed to secure the deposition of Cyril, through the assistance of the Palestinian bishops, whom he had induced to examine a wholly ridiculous charge of contumacy. Cyril went into exile, but was restored to his church within two years by a decision of the famous Council of Seleucia. But the extraordinary credit enjoyed by Acacius with the weak-minded Constantius was able to undo this act of ordinary justice, and, in 360, Cyril was condemned once more -- this time through the influence which Acacius was able to exercise at the Synod of Constantinople. Cyril was forced to yield. He left his see and remained in exile until the accession of Julian, in 361. The fact, however, that Acacius received a temporary check in the reinstatement of Cyril, at the hands of the Synod of Seleucia, must not blind the reader to the real weight of his influence either in the Council itself or in the ecclesiastical politics of the time. He was among the foremost of the Arianizing prelates who succeeded in carrying through the idea of a divided Synod to solve the problems created by the Sirmian manifesto. In this sense he may be charged with the bulk of the mischief created by the definitions of Ariminum and Seleucia. The turbulent and unscrupulous faction which rallied to the support of his ideas in both gatherings was entirely his creation and rightly bore his name -- oi peri Akakion. The detailed account of his activities at Seleucia belongs rather to the history of that gathering than to the present sketch of his life; but some notice of his mode of procedure will not be out of place here. The number of bishops present has been variously estimated as somewhere between one hundred and fifty and one hundred and sixty (Gwatkin, Studies in Arianism, V, note G, where the original authorities are ably discussed). The Semi-Arians were in a large majority; and Acacius had a well-disciplined following, which, with the Anomoeans whom he had won to his side, by holding out hopes of a compromise, amounted to some forty in all. The first critical stage of events was soon marked by the re-adoption of the Semi-Arian Creed of Antioch, known popularly as the "Creed of the Encaenia", or "Creed of the Dedication" ( he en tois egkainiois) which was a negatively unsatisfactory profession of faith -- the only distinct character about it being that it was Anti-Nicene in scope and had been framed by men who had deliberately confirmed the deposition of St. Athanasius. The next stage of events was more significant still; for it gave Acacius and his followers the opportunity to reveal their strength. Silvanus of Tarsus proposed to confirm the famous Lucianic Creed, when Acacius and his party arose and left the assembly, by way of protest. In spite of this move the Creed was signed the next morning with closed doors; a proceeding which Acacius promptly characterized as a "deed of darkness." On Wednesday Basil of Ancyra and Macedonius of Constantinople arrived with Hilary of Poitiers, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Eustathius. Cyril was already under censure; and Acacius refused to bring his followers back to the synod until he and some other accused bishops who were present had withdrawn. After a stormy debate his plan was agreed to and Leonas, the Comes, or representative of Constantius at the deliberation, rose and read a copy of a new Creed which Acacius had put into his hands. While not expressly repudiating the Lucianic formulas, it nevertheless objected to the terms homoousion and homoiousion as being alike unscriptural. This led to a very heated discussion, and on Thursday Acacius found himself bluntly attacked by Eleusius, the ex-soldier and Semi-Arian Bishop of Cyzicus. On Friday Acacius refused once more to take part in any further deliberations and Leonas joined with him, on the plea, as he averred, that the Emperor had not sent him to preside over a council of bishops who could not agree among themselves. The majority thereupon convened without them and deposed Acacius and some fifteen other prelates. That astute leader, however, did not wait for the formal vote of deposition against him, but set out immediately, with eight others, for Constantinople. On arriving there he discovered that his object had already been secured by the advent of a number of disaffected deputies from Ariminum. The famous conference of Niké (near Hadrianople) had taken place and the homoios, without the supposed safeguard of the kata panta, had been adopted. This led to a fresh synod held at the suggestion of Constantius in the imperial city itself. It meant the complete triumph of the indefatigable Acacius. Homoean ideas were established at Constantinople; and, although their influence never lasted very long in the West, they enjoyed a fluctuating but disquieting supremacy in the East for nearly twenty years longer. Acacius returned to his see in 361 and spent the next two years of his life in filling the vacant sees of Palestine with men who were thought to sympathize with his policy of theological vagueness and Anti-Nicenism. With characteristic adroitness he consented to a complete change of front and made a public profession of adherence to the Nicaean formularies on the accession of Jovian in 363. When the Arian Valens was proclaimed Augustus in 364, however, Acacius once more reconsidered his views and took sides with Eudoxius; but his versatility this time served him to little purpose. When the Macedonian bishops met at Lampsacus, the sentence previously passed against him was confirmed and he is heard of no more in authentic history. Baronius gives the date of his death as 366. For bibliography see ACACIANS. CORNELIUS CLIFFORD Acacius (Patriarch of Constantinople) Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople; Schismatic; d. 489. When Acacius first appears in authentic history it is as the orphanotrophos, or dignitary entrusted with the care of the orphans, in the Church of Constantinople. He thus filled an ecclesiastical post that conferred upon its possessor high rank as well as curial influence; and, if we may borrow a hint as to his real character from the phrases in which Suidas has attempted to describe his undoubtedly striking personality, he early made the most of his opportunities. He seems to have affected an engaging magnificence of manner; was openhanded; suave, yet noble, in demeanour; courtly in speech, and fond of a certain ecclesiastical display. On the death of the Patriarch Gennadius, in 471, he was chosen to succeed him, and for the first five or six years of his episcopate his life was uneventful enough. But there came a change when the usurping Emperor Basiliscus allowed himself to be won over to Eutychian teaching by Timotheus Ælurus, the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria, who chanced at that time to be a guest in the imperial capital. Timotheus, who had been recalled from exile only a short time previously, was bent on creating an effective opposition to the decrees of Chalcedon; and he succeeded so well at court that Basiliscus was induced to put forth an encyclical or imperial proclamation ( egkyklios) in which the teaching of the Council was rejected. Acacius himself seems to have hesitated at first about adding his name to the list of the Asiatic bishops who had already signed the encyclical; but, warned by a letter from Pope Simplicius, who had learned of his questionable attitude from the ever-vigilant monastic party, he reconsidered his position and threw himself violently into the debate. This sudden change of front redeemed him in popular estimation, and he won the regard of the orthodox, particularly among the various monastic communities throughout the East, by his now ostentatious concern for sound doctrine. The fame of his awakened zeal even travelled to the West, and Pope Simplicius wrote him a letter of commendation. The chief circumstance to which he owed this sudden wave of popularity was the adroitness with which he succeeded in putting himself at the head of the particular movement of which Daniel the Stylite was both the coryphaeus and the true inspirer. The agitation was, of course, a spontaneous one on the part of its monastic promoters and of the populace at large, who sincerely detested Eutychian theories of the Incarnation; but it may be doubted whether Acacius, either in orthodox opposition now, or in unorthodox efforts at compromise later on, was anything profounder than a politician seeking to compass his own personal ends. Of theological principles he seems never to have had a consistent grasp. He had the soul of a gamester, and he played only for influence. Basiliscus was beaten. He withdrew his offensive encyclical by a counter-proclamation, but his surrender did not save him. His rival Zeno, who had been a fugitive up to the time of the Acacian opposition, drew near the capital. Basiliscus, deserted on all sides, sought sanctuary in the cathedral church and was given up to his enemies, tradition says, by the time-serving Patriarch. For a brief space there was complete accord between Acacius, the Roman Pontiff, and the dominant party of Zeno, on the necessity for taking stringent methods to enforce the authority of the Fathers of Chalcedon; but trouble broke out once more when the Monophysite party of Alexandria attempted to force the notorious Peter Mongus into that see against the more orthodox claims of John Talaia in the year 482. This time events took on a more critical aspect, for they gave Acacius the opportunity he seems to have been waiting for all along of exalting the authority of his see and claiming for it a primacy of honour and jurisdiction over the entire East, which would emancipate the bishops of the capital not only from all responsibility to the sees of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, but to the Roman Pontiff as well. Acacius, who had now fully ingratiated himself with Zeno, induced that emperor to take sides with Mongus. Pope Simplicius made a vehement but ineffectual protest, and Acacius replied by coming forward as the apostle of reunion for all the East. It was a specious and far-reaching scheme, but it laid bare eventually the ambitions of the Patriarch of Constantinople and revealed him, to use Cardinal Hergenr ther's illuminating phrase, as "the forerunner of Photius." The first effective measure which Acacius adopted in his new role was to draw up a document, or series of articles, which constituted at once both a creed and an instrument of reunion. This creed, known to students of theological history as the Henoticon, was originally directed to the irreconcilable factions in Egypt. It was a plea for reunion on a basis of reticence and compromise. And under this aspect it suggests a significant comparison with another and better known set of "articles" composed nearly eleven centuries later, when the leaders of the Anglican schism were thridding a careful way between the extremes of Roman teaching on the one side and of Lutheran and Calvinistic negations on the other. The Henoticon affirmed the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (i.e. the Creed of Nicaea completed at Constantinople) as affording a common symbol or expression of faith in which all parties could unite. All other symbola or mathemata were excluded; Eutyches and Nestorius were unmistakably condemned, while the anathemas of Cyril were accepted. The teaching of Chalcedon was not so much repudiated as passed over in silence; Jesus Christ was described as the "only-begotten Son of God . . . one and not two" ( homologoumen ton monogene tou theou ena tygchanein kai ou duo . . . k.t.l.) and there was no explicit reference to the two Natures. Mongus naturally accepted this accomodatingly vague teaching. Talaia refused to subscribe to it and set out for Rome, where his cause was taken up with great vigour by Pope Simplicius. The controversy dragged on under Felix II (or III) who sent two legatine bishops, Vitalis and Misenus, to Constantinople, to summon Acacius before the Roman See for trial. Never was the masterfulness of Acacius so strikingly illustrated as in the ascendancy he acquired over this luckless pair of bishops. He induced them to communicate publicly with him and sent them back stultified to Rome, where they were promptly condemned by an indignant synod which reviewed their conduct. Acacius was branded by Pope Felix as one who had sinned against the Holy Ghost and apostolic authority ( Habe ergo cum his . . . portionem S. Spiritus judicio et apostolica auctoritate damnatus); and he was declared to be perpetually excommunicate -- nunquamque anathematis vinculis exuendus. Another envoy, inappropriately named Tutus, was sent to carry the decree of this double excommunication to Acacius in person: and he, too, like his hapless predecessors, fell under the strange charm of the courtly prelate, who enticed him from his allegiance. Acacius refused to accept the documents brought by Tutus and showed his sense of the authority of the Roman See, and of the synod which had condemned him, by erasing the name of Pope Felix from the diptychs. Talaia equivalently gave up the fight by consenting to become Bishop of Nola, and Acacius began by a brutal policy of violence and persecution, directed chiefly against his old opponents the monks, to work with Zeno for the general adoption of the Henoticon throughout the East. He thus managed to secure a political semblance of the prize for which he had worked from the beginning. He was practically the first prelate throughout Eastern Christendom until his death in 489. His schism outlived him some thirty years, and was ended only by the return of the Emperor Justin to unity, under Pope Hormisdas in 519. MANSI, Coll. Concil., (Florence, 1742) VII, 976 1176; Epp. Simplicii, Papae, in P.L., LVIII, 4160; Epp. Felicis, Papae, ibid., 893 967; THEODORET, Hist. Eccl.; EVAGRIUS, Hist. Eccl.; SUIDAS, s. v.; TILLEMONT, Mémoires, XVI; HERGENRÖTHER, Photius, Patr. von Constant. (Ratisbon, 1867) I; MARIN, Les moines de Constantinople (Paris, 1897). CORNELIUS CLIFFORD St. Acacius St. Acacius Bishop of Melitene in the third century. The Greeks venerate him on different days, but especially on 31 March. He lived in the time of the persecution of Decius, and although it is certain that he was cited before the tribunal of Marcian to give an account of his faith, it is not sure that he died for it. He was indeed condemned to death, but the Emperor released him from prison after he had undergone considerable suffering. He was famous both for the splendour of his doctrinal teaching and the miracles he wrought. There was a younger Acacius, who was also Bishop of Melitene, and who was conspicuous in the Council of Ephesus, but it is not certain that he is ranked among the saints. Acta SS., March 3. T.J. CAMPBELL Roman Academies Roman Academies The Italian Renaissance at its apogee [from the close of the Western Schism (1418) to the middle of the sixteenth century] found two intellectual centres, Florence and Rome. Scientific, literary, and artistic culture attained in them a development as intense as it was multiform, and the earlier Roman and Florentine academies were typical examples of this variety. We shall restrict our attention to the Roman academies, beginning with a general survey of them, and adding historical and bibliographical notes concerning the more important of these associations of learned men, for the Italian "Academies" were that and not institutes for instruction. The Middle Ages did not bequeath to Rome any institutions that could be called scientific or literary academies. As a rule, there was slight inclination for such institutions. The Academy of Charlemagne and the Floral Academy at Toulouse were princely courts at which literary meetings were held. A special reason why literature did not get a stronger footing at Rome is to be found in the constant politico-religious disturbances of the Middle Ages. Owing to the oppression of the papacy under the Hohenstaufen emperors, to the struggles for ecclesiastical liberty begun by Gregory VII, to the epic conflict between Guelph and Ghibelline, to the intrusion of a French domination which gave birth to papal Avignon and the Western Schism, medieval Rome was certainly no place for learned academies. But when papal unity was restored, and the popes returned to Rome, the Renaissance was at its height, and the city welcomed and encouraged every kind of intellectual culture. At this favourable moment begins the history of the Roman academies. At Rome, as at Florence, the academies reproduced to a considerable extent the traditions of the Academy of Plato; i.e. they were centres for the cultivation of philosophy in that larger sense dear to Greek and Roman antiquity, according to which it meant the broadest kind of culture. From the earliest days of the Renaissance the Church was the highest type of such an academy and the most prolific source of culture. The neo-Platonic movement was an extremely powerful factor in the Renaissance, implying as it did, a return to classical thought and a reaction against the decadent (Aristotelean) Scholasticism of that age. At the head of this movement in the above named "capitals of thought" were two Greeks, Gemistus Plethon at Florence, and Cardinal Bessarion (d. 1472) at Rome. About 1450 the house of the latter was the centre of a flourishing Academy of Platonic philosophy and of a varied intellectual culture. His valuable library (which he bequeathed to the city of Venice) was at the disposal of the academicians, among whom were the most intellectual Italians and foreigners resident in Rome. This Platonic propaganda (directed vigorously against the "peripatetic" restoration and the anti-Platonic attacks of the neo-Aristotelean school) had an echo in a small Latin folio of Bessarion, "Against the Calumniators of Plato" (Rome, 1469). Bessarion, in the latter years of his life, retired from Rome to Ravenna, but he left behind him ardent adherents of the classic philosophy. Unfortunately, in Rome the Renaissance took on more and more of a pagan character, and fell into the hands of humanists without faith and without morals. This imparted to the academic movement a tendency to pagan humanism, one evidence of which is found in the celebrated Roman Academy of Pomponio Leto. Giulio, the natural son of a nobleman of the Sanseverino family, born in Calabria in 1425, and known by his academic name of "Pomponius Laetus", came to Rome, where he devoted his energies to the enthusiastic study of classical antiquity, and attracted a great number of disciples and admirers. He was a worshipper not merely of the literary and artistic form, but also of the ideas and spirit of classic paganism, and therefore a contemner of Christianity and an enemy of the Church. The initial step of his programme was the foundation of the Roman Academy in which every member assumed a classical name. Its principal members were humanists, and nearly all of them were known for their irreligious and epicurean lives, e.g. Bartolomeo Platina and Filippo Buonaccorsi. Moreover, in their audacity, these neo-Pagans compromised themselves politically, at a time when Rome was full of conspiracies fomented by the Roman barons and the neighbouring princes. Paul II (1464-71) caused Pomponio and the leaders of the Academy to be arrested on charges of irreligion, immorality, and conspiracy against the Pope. The prisoners begged so earnestly for mercy, and with such protestations of repentance, that they were pardoned. The Academy, however, collapsed (Pastor, History of the Popes, II, ii, 2). The sixteenth century saw at Rome a great increase of literary and aesthetic academies, more or less inspired by the Renaissance, all of which assumed, as was the fashion, odd and fantastic names. We learn from various sources the names of many such institutes; as a rule, they soon perished and left no trace. At the beginning of the sixteenth century came the "Accademia degl' Intronati", for the encouragement of theatrical representations. There were also the Academy of the "Vignaiuoli", or "Vinegrowers" (1530), and the Academy "della Virtù" (1538), founded by Claudio Tolomei under the patronage of Cardinal Ippolito de' Medici. These were followed by a new Academy in the "Orti" or Farnese gardens. There were also the Academies of the "Intrepidi" (1560), the "Animosi" (1576), and the "Illuminati" (1598); this last, founded by the Marchesa Isabella Aldobrandini Pallavicino. Towards the middle of the sixteenth century there were also the Academy of the "Notti Vaticane", or "Vatican Nights", founded by St. Charles Borromeo; an "Accademia di Diritto civile e canonico", and another of the university scholars and students of philosophy (Accademia Eustachiana). In the seventeenth century we meet with similar academies; the "Umoristi" (1611), the "Fantastici (1625), and the "Ordinati", founded by Cardinal Dati and Giulio Strozzi. About 1700 were founded the academies of the "Infecondi", the "Occulti", the "Deboli", the "Aborigini", the "Immobili", the "Accademia Esquilina", and others. As a rule these academies, all very much alike, were merely circles of friends or clients gathered around a learned man or wealthy patron, and were dedicated to literary pastimes rather than methodical study. They fitted in, nevertheless, with the general situation and were in their own way one element of the historical development. Despite their empirical and fugitive character, they helped to keep up the general esteem for literary and other studies. Cardinals, prelates, and the clergy in general were most favourable to this movement, and assisted it by patronage and collaboration. With the seventeenth century, and while the Roman Academy, in its older form, still survived, there began a new epoch. The Academy was constituted as a public body, i.e. it was no longer confined to a small circle of friends. It set itself a fixed and permanent scope in the field of science, letters, and arts, often of a polemic or apologetic character. Naturally this higher definitive form of the new or remodelled Roman academies was closely allied with the general academic movement of Italy and of foreign countries, whose typical instance was the French Academy founded by Richelieu. It was then that academies became practical and efficacious instruments of culture, with a direct influence on public opinion; in this way, too, they claimed the special attention of the heads of the State. This was especially the case at Rome, where the papacy kept up its traditional patronage of the most varied ecclesiastical and general scholarship. In this period the first Roman academies that call for mention are the "Accademia dei Lincei" (Lynxes), founded in 1603, and the "Arcadia", founded in 1656. Ecclesiastical academies, whose scope was fixed by the counter-Reformation, were the "Accademia Liturgica", founded by Benedict XIV, and the "Accademia Theologica", founded in 1695. All of these are still extant; we shall treat of them in detail farther on. After the French Revolution and the restoration to Rome of the papal government, the new conditions suggested the adoption of the "Academy" as a link between the old and the new, and as a means of invigorating ecclesiastical culture and of promoting the defence of the Church. In this way there sprang up new academies, while old ones were revived. Under Pius VII (1800-23) were founded the "Accademia di Religione Cattolica", and the "Accademia Tiberina"; in 1835 that of the "Immacolata Concezione". The "Accademia Liturgica" was reestablished in 1840, and in 1847 the "Accademia dei (Nuovi) Lincei". Apart from this group we have to chronicle the appearance in 1821 of the "Accademia Filarmonica". After the Italian occupation of Rome (1870), new Catholic academies were founded to encourage learning and apologetics; such were the "Accademia di Conferenze Storico-Giuridiche" and the "Accademia di San Tommaso", founded by Leo XIII, to which must be added, though not called an Academy, the "Società di Conferenze di Archeologia Sacra", founded in 1875. In 1870 the Italian government resuscitated, or better, founded anew, the "Accademia dei Lincei", and in 1875 the "Accademia Medica". We shall now deal in closer detail with these various academies. Accademia dei Lincei and dei Nuovi Lincei (1603) The Roman prince, Federigo Cesi (1585-1630), a distinguished scholar and patron of letters, assembled in his palace (in which he had a magnificent library, a botanical garden, and a museum of antiquities) a number of scholarly persons, and with them founded (17 August, 1603) the "Accademia dei Lincei", so called because they took for their emblem the lynx, as denoting the keenness of their study of nature. According to the usage of the time, the Academy, though dedicated to physical, mathematical, and philosophical studies, made way also for literary pursuits. This intellectual circle was worthy of high praise, for it promoted the physico-mathematical studies, then little cultivated, and offset the prevalent tendency to purely literary studies. In the end it devoted itself particularly to the study of the exact sciences, of which it became the chief academic centre in Italy. It was not until 1657 that its Tuscan rival arose in the ducal "Accademia del Cimento". The Cesi library, to which was added that of Virginio Cesarini, became a powerful aid to scientific labours. Several of the academicians, during the lifetime and under the patronage of Cesi, prepared for publication the great unedited work of Francesco Hernandez on the natural history of Mexico (Rome, 1651). An abridgment of it in ten books by Nardo Antonio Recchi was never published. They contributed also to the issue of the posthumous botanical work of the prince "Tavole Filosofiche". Other colleagues of Cesi, in the foundation of the Academy, were Fabio Colonna, the author of "Fitobasano" (a history of rare plants), and of other scientific works, and Francesco Stelluti, procurator-general of the Academy in 1612, author of the treatise on "Legno Fossile Minerale" (Rome, 1635) and also of some literary works. The Academy gained great renown through its famous Italian members, such as Galileo Galilei, and through such foreign members as Johann Faber of Bamberg, Marcus Velser of Augsburg, and many others. After the death of Prince Cesi, the Academy met in the house of its new and distinguished president, Cassiano dal Pozzo. But notwithstanding all his efforts the association began to decline, insomuch that after the above-mentioned publication of the works of Hernandez in 1651, the "Accademia dei Lincei" fell into oblivion. Its fame, however, had not perished, and when at the beginning of his pontificate Pius IX sought to provide an academic centre for physico-mathematical studies, he resuscitated Cesi's society, and on 3 July, 1847, founded the "Pontificia Accademia dei Nuovi Lincei", inaugurating it personally in the following November, and endowing it with an annual income from the pontifical treasury. Its members were divided into four classes. honorary, ordinary, corresponding, and associate; the last were young men who, on the completion of their studies, showed special aptitude for physico-mathematical sciences. The Academy was directed by a president, a secretary, an assistant secretary, a librarian-archivist, and an astronomer. Its headquarters were in the Campidoglio. Its "Proceedings" from 1847 to 1(970 fill twenty-three volumes. In 1870 some of the members withdrew from the Academy, which insisted on retaining its papal character. Desirous at the same time of a traditional connection with the past, they reassumed the original name, and thus arose the "Regia Accademia dei Lincei". It was approved and subsidized by the Italian government in 1875, and began its career with an enlarged programme of studies, divided into two classes, the first of which includes physical, mathematical, and natural sciences, and the second, those of a moral, historical, and philological character. It publishes annually its "Proceedings", and is located in the Corsini Palace, whose library, at the disposal of the Academy, is very rich in manuscripts, printed works, and periodicals. It numbers today about one hundred members, besides correspondents and many foreigners. Its members have published important works on the exact sciences, also in the province of philology. Among the latter are the Oriental texts and dissertations of Professor Ignazio Guidi, many of which are of great value for the ecclesiastical sciences. Since 1870 the "Pontificia Accademia dei Nuovi Lincei" has continued its labours and the publication of its annual "Proceedings" bearing upon the physico-mathematical sciences. It has quarters in the palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica, and has a cardinal-patron. On the original "Accademia dei Lincei" see the work of its historian, Giano Planco (Giovanni Bianchi di Rimini), published in the second edition of the above-described work of Fabio Colonna (II Fitobasano, Florence, 1744). The "Statuto" or constitution of the "Lincei" was published in Latin at Rome in 1624. For other information on the two academies, pontifical and royal, see their "Proceedings". Pontificia Accademia degli Arcadi (1690) The origins of this famous literary academy were not different from those of similar societies of the same period. A number of literary dilettanti, accustomed to those occasional meetings in villas and gardens that were so pronounced a feature of social life during the eighteenth century, conceived the idea of a better organization of their literary entertainments. In this manner arose the academy to which, in accordance with contemporary taste, they gave the poetical name of "Arcadia". The members called themselves "shepherds", and assumed classical names. All this has been narrated more or less sarcastically by various critics and encyclopaedias, with undisguised contempt for such "pastoral follies". In their easy contempt, however, they fail to explain how such trivial beginnings and puerile aims succeeded in giving to the "Arcadia" its great vigour and repute, even though merely relative. The true reason of its fame lies in the fact that in addition to the usual "pastoral" literature, then and thereafter the peculiar occupation of so many academies, the "Arcadia" carried out an artistic and literary programme of its own, that was then; speaking generally, both opportune and important. It was the era of triumph of that bombastic, meaningless, and paradoxical style known as the "seicentismo" from the century (1600-1700) in which it flourished, and that bore in England the name of "euphuism". In Italy, this "seicentesco" style had ruined literature and art. It was the time when Achillini wrote a sonnet to say that the cannon of Charles V used the world for a ball, and begged fire to sweat in order properly to fuse the various metals needed for the artillery of Caesar. This detestable taste, which tended to lower not only letters and arts, but also the dignity and gravity of society, found in the "Arcadia" an organized opposition. There is no doubt that in general the "Arcadia" and "Arcadianism" often fell into the contrary extreme and, in opposition to an artificial literature, conceited and bombastic, produced another literature whose simplicity was equally artificial, and for the laboured conceits of sonnets a bomba, such as the aforementioned one of Achillini, substituted only too many in which swains and sheep bleated in unison their farfetched idylls. In spite of these extremes the attitude of the "Arcadia" was beneficial. It called for a return to the simplicity of nature. So imperative was this recall to nature that in various ways it made itself heard elsewhere in Europe. It is well known that precisely at this time in France, the art of Greuze and of Watteau, and the "pastoral" literature, heralded at once and stimulated that cult of simplicity and nature (in itself an art product) which sprang up in letters and art, and even in the court, at the time of Rousseau and Marie Antoinette. This is why the "Arcadia" endured and acquired such high repute that it counted among its members the principal literary men of the time, e.g. Menzini, Sergardi, Redi, Metastasio, Rolli, Filicaia, Guidi, Maggi, and others, some of whose names are still honoured in the history of Italian literature. The beginnings of the "Arcadia" date back to February, 1656, when it arose under the auspices of the celebrated Queen Christina of Sweden, but it did not take on its definite form and official name until after the death of its patroness (1689). The "Arcadia" chose as its emblem the pipe of Pan with its seven unequal reeds. The fourteen founders selected as first "Custode di Arcadia", or president of the Academy, the somewhat mediocre writer, but enthusiastic votary of letters, Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni (Alfesibeo Cario), b. in Macerata, 1663, d. at Rome, 1728, author of a history of Italian poetry and of various literary works. The first solemn gathering of the "Arcadi was held on the Gianicolo, in a wood belonging to the Reformed Minorites (Franciscans), 5 October, 1690. In 1692, the meetings were transferred to the Esquiline in the gardens of Duke Orsini; in 1696, to the Farnese gardens on the Palatine. Finally, the generosity of John V, King of Portugal, one of its members, under the name of Arete Melleo, enabled the society to secure (1773) on the Gianicolo a site known as the "Bosco Parrasio". Here they held their meetings on fine summer days, meeting for their winter séances at the "Teatro degli Arcadi", in the Salviati Palace. While the "Arcadia" was yet on the Palatine, its "Statuto" (constitution) was drawn up. Owing to an exaggerated admiration of antiquity, ever the organic defect of this academy, this constitution (the work of Gravina) was modelled on the ancient Roman laws of the "Twelve Tables", and was engraved on marble. Unfortunately, differences soon arose between Gravina and the president, Crescimbeni, one of those petty enmities injurious to the society. Nevertheless, "Arcadia" retained its vigour. Soon all the principal cities of Italy had imitated it, and this confirms our previous statement that, apart from its "pastorellerie", or affected sylvan note, the Arcadian movement marked a positive advance in the reformation of literature. Noblemen, ecclesiastics, and laymen, men famous in every walk of life, held membership in it as an honour; very soon it numbered 1,300. But its very numbers were its undoing. Not a few of them were henceforth mediocre or even dull, and in this way an institution called into being for the improvement of letters became itself a menace thereto. The arrogant rococo style in art and letters had, indeed, merited the attacks made upon it by the "Arcadia", and for this reason the latter received, directly and indirectly, a large measure of endorsement. But "Arcadianism", with its own exaggerations and one-sidedness, soon developed into a genuine peril for literature and art. It even reflected on the public intelligence, since the mob of "Arcadia", while pretending to simplicity and naturalness, frequently hid a great poverty of thought beneath a superficial literary air. Its principal members, moreover, often sounded the depths of bad taste. Among these may be specified one Bettinelli, notorious for his disparagement of Dante. The violence of the anti-Arcadian reaction was owing to its chief leaders, Baretti and Parini, and to the fact that, consciously or not, this reaction gave vent to the new spirit now dominant on the eve of the French Revolution. Arcadianism fell, the, last and unsuccessful tentative, literary and artistic, of the ancient regime. This explains why, in certain quarters, since the Revolution, the Arcadia, both as an academy and as a symbol, has been the object of much contempt, exaggerated at the best when it is not absolutely unjust. Nevertheless, when the first onslaught of the Revolution had lapsed, "Arcadia" strove to renew itself in accord with the spirit of the times, without sacrificing its traditional system of sylvan associations and pastoral names. The academy no longer represented a literary school, but merely a general tendency towards the classic style. Dante came to be greatly honoured by its members, and even to this day its conferences on the great poet are extremely interesting. Furthermore, the academic field was enlarged so as to include all branches of study, in consequence of which history, archaeology, etc. attracted, and continue to attract, assiduous students. The new Arcadian revival was marked by the foundation (1819) of the Giornale Arcadico, through the efforts of the distinguished scholars, Perticari, Biondi, Odescalchi, and Borghesi. Its fifth series closed in 1904. The current (sixth) series began in 1906 as a monthly magazine of science, letters, and arts. On account of its frankly Catholic character the Arcadia has provoked opposition on the part of anti-Catholic critics, who affect to belittle it in the eyes of a thoughtless public, as if even today its "shepherds" did nothing but indite madrigals to Phyllis and Chloe. Nevertheless, its scientific, literary, and artistic conferences, always given by scholars of note, are largely attended. Since 1870 there have been established four sections of philology (Oriental, Greek, Latin, and Italian), one of philosophy, and one of history. The Pope. foremost of the members, promotes its scientific and literary development. Its present location is near San Carlo al Corso, 437 Corso Umberto I. Cf. Crescimbeni, "Storia della volgar Poesia" (Rome 1698) Bk. VI, and "La Storia d' Arcadia" (Rome, 1709). For its history in recent times see the files of the Giornale Arcadico. Pontificia Accademia Teologica Like its sister societies at Rome, this academy was of private origin. In 1695, a number of friends gathered in the house of the priest, Raffaele Cosma Girolami, for lectures and discussions on theological matters. These meetings soon took on the character of an academy. In 1707 it was united to the Accademia Ecclesiastica. Clement XII gave it formal recognition in 1718 and assigned it a hall in the Sapienza (University of Rome), thereby making it a source of encouragement for young students of theology. The academy disposed of a fund of eighteen thousand scudi ($18,000), the income of which was devoted to prizes for the most proficient students of theology. Among the patrons were several cardinals, and the professors in the theological faculty in the University acted as censors. The successors of Clement XII continued to encourage the academy. In 1720 Clement XIII ordered that among its members twenty indigent secular priests should receive for six years from the papal treasury an annual allowance of fifty scudi and, other things being equal, should have the preference in competitive examinations. It is on these lines, substantially, that its work is carried on at present. The Academy is located in the Roman Seminary. Pontificia Accademia Liturgica This academy was the one result of the notable movement in liturgical studies which owed so much to the great theologian and liturgist, Benedict XIV (1745-8). Disbanded in the time of the Revolution, the Academy was reorganized by the Lazarists, under Gregory XV (1840), and received a cardinal-protector. It continues its work under the direction of the Lazarists, and holds frequent conferences in which liturgical and cognate subjects are treated from the historical and the practical point of view. It is located in the Lazarist house, and its proceedings are, since 1886, published in the Lazarist monthly known as "Ephemerides Liturgicae" (Liturgical Diary). Pontificia Accademia di Religione Cattolica The urgent need of organizing Catholic apologetics with a view to the anti-Christian polemics of the "Encyclopédie" and the Revolution gave rise to this academy. The Roman priest Giovanni Fortunato Zamboni founded it in 1801, with the avowed aim of defending the dogmatic and moral teaching of the Church. It was formally recognized by Pius VII, and succeeding popes have continued to give it their support. It holds monthly meetings for the discussion of various points in dogmatic and moral theology, in philosophy, history, etc. Its conferences are generally published in some periodical, and a special edition is printed for the Academy. A number of these dissertations have been printed, and form a collection of several volumes entitled "Dissertazioni lette nella Pontificia Accademia Romana di Religione Cattolica". The Academy has for honorary censors a number of cardinals. The president of the Academy is also a cardinal. It includes promoters, censors, resident members, and corresponding members. It awards an annual prize for the members most assiduous at the meetings, and is located in the palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica. Pontificia Accademia Tiberina In 1809 the well-known archaeologist, A. Nibby, founded the short-lived "Accademia Ellenica". In 1813 many of its members withdrew to found the "Accademia Tiberina". One of the members, A. Coppi, drew up its first rules, according to which the Academy was to devote itself to the study of Latin and Italian literature, hold a weekly meeting, and a public session monthly. Great scientific or literary events were to be signalized by extraordinary meetings. It was also agreed that the Academy should undertake the history of Rome from Odoacer to Clement XIV, as well as the literary history from the time of that pontiff. The historiographer of the Academy was to edit its history and to collect the biographies of famous men, Romans or residents in Rome, who had died since the foundation of the "Tiberina". For this latter purpose there was established a special "Necrologio Tiberiano". The Academy began in 1816 the annual coinage of commemorative medals. When Leo XII ordered (1825) that all the scientific associations in Rome should be approved by the Sacred Congregation of Studies, the "Tiberina received official recognition; its field was enlarged, so as to include research in art, commerce, and especially in agriculture. Pius VII had done much for the promotion of agriculture in the States of the Church, and Leo XII was desirous of continuing the good work of his predecessor. Under Gregory XVI, in 1831, a year of grave disorders and political plottings, the Academy was closed, but it was soon reopened by the same pontiff, who desired the "Tiberina" to devote itself to general culture, science, and letters, Roman history and archaeology, and to agriculture. The meetings were to be monthly, and it was to print annual reports, or Rendiconti. The Academy was thus enabled to establish important relations with foreign scientists. Its members, resident, corresponding, and honorary, were 2,000. The "Tiberina" is at present somewhat decadent; its proceedings are no longer printed. Its last protector was Cardinal Parocchi. Like several other Roman Academies, it is located in the Palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica. Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia A revival of archaeological study, due as much to love of art as to documentary researches in the interest of history, occurred in Rome towards the end of the seventeenth century, especially after the famous work of Antonio Bosio on the Catacombs had drawn the attention of archaeologists to a world forgotten until then. This revival culminated in an academical organization, in the time of Benedict XIV, under whose learned patronage was formed an association of students of Roman archaeology. In a quiet way this association kept up its activity until the beginning of the nineteenth century, when the renaissance of classical art due, in Italy, to Canova gave a flesh impulse to the study of antiquity. In 1816 Pius VII, on the recommendation of Cardinal Consalvi, and of Canova himself, gave official recognition to the "Accademia Romana di Archeologia" already established under the Napoleonic regime. The Academy became a most important international centre of archaeological study, the more so as there had not yet been established at Rome the various national institutes of history and archaeology. Among the illustrious foreign members and lecturers of whom the Academy could then boast may be named Niebuhr, Akerblad, Thorwaldsen, and Nibby. Popes and sovereigns wished to be inscribed among its members, or to testify in other ways to the esteem in which they held it. Among these were Frederick William IV of Prussia, Charles Albert of Sardinia, and others. Among its distinguished Italian members were Canova, Fea, Piali, and Canina. Prizes were established for the best essays on Roman antiquity, many of which were awarded to learned foreigners (Ruperti, Herzen, etc.). Among the merits of the Academy we must reckon its defence of the rights of art and history in the city of Rome, where, side by side with princely patronage, survived from the old Roman law a certain absolutism of private-property rights which often caused or perpetuated serious damages to the monuments, or inconvenience in their study. Thus, after a long conflict with the owners of hovels that backed upon the Pantheon, the Academy succeeded in obtaining from Pius IX a decree for the demolition of the houses on the left side of the Rotonda (Pantheon), and also protested efficaciously against the digging of new holes in the walls of this famous document in stone. Similarly, the Academy prevented certain profanations projected by bureaucrats or by unscrupulous engineers. When, in 1833, an attempt was made to remove the tomb of Raphael, the earnest protest of the Academy was heeded by Gregory XVI as the expression of a competent judgment. Through one of its members, Giovanni Azzurri, it advocated the restoration of the Tabularium on the Capitoline Hill. Through another member, Pietro Visconti, it succeeded in abolishing the purely commercial administration of the excavations at Ostia, and placed them on a scientific basis. For this purpose it obtained from Pius IX a decree ordaining that all excavations should be kept open, be carefully guarded, and be made accessible to students. In 1824, Campanari, a member of the Academy, proposed the establishment of an Etruscan Museum. The Academy furthered this excellent idea until it was finally realized in the Vatican by Gregory XVI. In 1858, Alibrandi advocated the use of epigraphical monuments in the study of law, and so anticipated the establishment of chairs for this special purpose in many European universities. By these and many other useful services the Academy won in a special degree the good will of the popes. Pius VIII gave it the title of "Pontifical Academy". On the revival of archaeological studies at Rome, Gregory XVI and Pius IX took the Academy under their special protection, particularly when its guiding spirit was the immortal Giambattista De Rossi. Leo XIII awarded a gold medal for the best dissertation presented at the annual competition of the Academy, on which occasion there are always offered two subjects, one in classical and the other in Christian archaeology, either of which the competitors are free to choose. The seal of the Academy represents the ruins of a classical temple, with the motto: In apricum proferet (It will bring to light). The last revision of its constitution and bylaws was published 28 December, 1894. In 1821 was begun the publication of the "Dissertazioni della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia" which reached in 1864 its sixteenth volume. The Cardinal Camerlengo is its protector. It has a steady membership of one hundred, thirty of whom are ordinary members; the others are honorary, corresponding, and associate, members. The Academy met at first in Campidoglio; under Gregory XVI, at the University. At present its meetings are held in the palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica. See "Leggi della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia" (Rome, 1894); "Omaggio al II Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cristiana in Roma" (Rome, 1900); "Bullettino di Archeologia Cristiana" of Giovanni Battista De Rossi (to the end of 1894) passim; "Il Nuovo Bullettino di Archeologia Cristiana" (Rome, 1894-1906). Accademia Filarmonica It was founded in 1821 for the study and practice of music. It has 200 members, and is located at 225, Piazza San Marcello. Pontificia Accademia della Immacolata Concezione This academy was founded in 1835 by young students of Sant' Apollinare (Roman Seminary) and of the Gregorian University. Among its founders Monsignor Vincenzo Anivitti deserves special mention. Its purpose was the encouragement of serious study among the youth of Rome. Hence, two-thirds of the members must be young students. Its title was assumed at a later date. It was approved in 1847 by the Sacred Congregation of Studies. The work is divided into five sections: theology; philology and history; philosophy; physics, ethics and economics. Its meetings are held weekly, and in 1873 it began to publish bimonthly reports of its proceedings under the title "Memorie per gli Atti della Pont. Accademia della Immacolata Concezione". Twenty-one numbers were issued. Since 1875 the Academy has published many of the lectures read before its members. The most flourishing period of this academy was from 1873 to 1882. Among its most illustrious deceased members may be mentioned Father Secchi, S.J., Monsignor Balan, and Michele Stefano De Rossi. The Academy, now in its decline, is attached to the Church of the Santi Apostoli. Regia Accademia Medica It was founded in 1875 for the study of medical and cognate sciences, has fifty ordinary members, and is located in the University. Pontificia Accademia di Conferenze Storico-Giuridiche This academy was founded in 1878 to encourage among Catholics the study of history, archaeology, and jurisprudence. In 1880 it began to publish a quarterly entitled "Studi e Documenti di Storia e di Diritto", highly esteemed for its learned articles and for its publication of important documents with apposite commentaries. After an existence of twenty-five years this review ceased to appear at the end of 1905. The president of the Academy is a cardinal, and it holds its meetings in the Roman Seminary. Pontificia Accademia Romana di San Tommaso di Aquino When Leo XIII at the beginning of his pontificate undertook the restoration of scholastic philosophy and theology, this academy was founded (1880) for the diffusion of Thomistic doctrine. Its president is a cardinal, and its meetings are held in the Roman Seminary. Academic Schools of Rome The following is a brief account of the several academic schools mentioned above. One is ecclesiastical, the others are devoted to the fine arts. Some are Roman, and others are foreign: Pontificia Accademia dei Nobili Ecclesiastici It was founded in 1701 by Clement XI, to prepare for the diplomatic service of the Holy See a body of men trained in the juridical sciences and in other requisite branches of learning. At the time, European diplomacy was usually confided to the nobility; hence the Academy was instituted and maintained for noble ecclesiastics. However, later, it opened its doors more freely to the sons of families in some way distinguished and in comfortable circumstances. Occasionally this academy languished, especially in the first half of the nineteenth century, but since then it has recovered and has steadily improved. Of late it has become a school of higher ecclesiastical education, with an eye to a diplomatic career for its students. This, however, does not imply that all its students, or even a majority of them, are destined for that career; indeed, the school tends constantly to set aside its earlier limitation. The academic course includes ecclesiastical diplomacy, political economy, diplomatic forms ( stile diplomatico), the principal foreign languages, and, in addition, a practical course (after the manner of apprenticeship) at the bureaux of various congregations for such students as wish to prepare themselves for an office in any of these bodies. As a rule, Romans are not admitted to this academy, it having been expressly designed for those who, not being Romans, would have no other opportunity to acquire such a peculiar education and training. Its students pay a monthly fee. It has a cardinal-protector and a Roman prelate for president (rector). It owns and occupies its own palace (70, Piazza della Minerva). The Roman Academies in the service of the fine arts are the following: Regia Accademia Romana di San Luca (Accademia delle Belle Arti). This academy exhibits the evolution of the Roman corporation of artist-painters, reformed under Sixtus V (1577) by Federigo Zuccari and Girolamo Muziano. It took then the title of academy, and had for its purpose the teaching of the fine arts, the reward of artistic merit, and the preservation and illustration of the historic and artistic monuments of Rome. In respect of all these it enjoyed papal approval and encouragement. It rendered great services and counted among its members illustrious masters and pupils. In 1870 it passed under the control of the new government, and is now under the patronage of the King. It possesses a gallery of paintings and an excellent library, open to the public (44, Via Bonella). Regia Accademia di Santa Cecilia (Accademia di Musica). Pierluigi da Palestrina and G.M. Nanini founded in 1570 a school of music that was later (1583) canonically erected into a confraternity, or congregation, by Gregory XIII. The popes encouraged this association as an ideal instrument for the dissemination of good taste and the promotion of musical science. Urban VIII decreed that no musical works should be published without the permission of the censors of this congregation, and that no school of music or of singing should be opened in any church without the written permission of its deputies. This very rigorous ordinance provoked numerous complaints from interested parties, and its restrictions were soon much neglected. In 1684 Innocent XI conceded to the congregation the right to admit even foreign members, and in 1774 women were admitted as members. Owing to the political troubles of the period, the congregation was suspended from 1799 to 1803, and again from 1809 to 1822. Among its members have been illustrious musicians. We may mention, besides the above-named founders, Carissimi; Frescobaldi, the organist; Giuseppe Tartini, violinist and author of a new system of harmony; the brothers Fede, celebrated singers; and Muzio Clementi, pianist. From 1868 John Sgambati and Ettore Finelli taught gratuitously in this academy. Since 1870 the congregation of St. Cecilia has been transformed into a Royal Academy. In 1876 the "Liceo di Musica" was added to it, with a substantial appropriation from the funds of the province and city of Rome. In 1874 the statutes of this school were remodelled. It is greatly esteemed and is much frequented (18, Via dei Greci). Accademia di Raffaele Sanzio This is a school of modern foundation, with daily and evening courses for the study of art (504, Corso Umberto I). There are several foreign academies of a scholastic kind. The American Academy, founded in 1896, is located in the Villa del' Aurora (42, Via Lombardi). The Académie de France was founded by Louis XIV in 1666. This illustrious school has given many great artists to France. Its competitive prize ( Prix de Rome) is very celebrated: It owns and occupies its own palace, the Villa Medici on the Pincio. The English Academy was founded in 1821, and possesses a notable library (53, B Via Margutta). The Accademia di Spagna was founded in 1881 (32, B Piazza San Pietro in Montorio). Finally, it should be noted that, as formerly, there are now in Rome various associations which are true academies and may be classed as such, though they do not bear that name. Societá di Conferenze di Sacra Archeologia (Founded in 1875 by Giambattista De Rossi). Its name is well merited, expressing as it does the active contributions of its members. In each conference are announced or illustrated new discoveries and important studies are presented. The meetings are held monthly, from November to March and are open to the public. This excellent association has done much to popularize the study of Christian archaeology, especially the study of the Roman catacombs. Its proceedings are published annually in the "Nuovo Bulletino di Sacra Archeologia". Its sessions are held in the palace of the Cancelleria Apostolica. Circolo Giuridico di Roma It was founded in 1899, and offers a meeting-ground for students and professors of legal and sociological lore, and sciences, through lectures, discussions, etc. Attached to it is the "Istituto di Diritto Romano" founded in 1887 for the promotion of the study of Roman law (307, Corso Umberto I). The British and American Archaeological Society Founded in 1865 to promote among English-speaking people, through discussions and lectures (for which latter it possesses a convenient library), a broader and more general culture in all that pertains to Rome (72, Via San Nicola da Tolentino). The general bibliography of the Roman Academies is very deficient, as is that of the greater part of the individual Academies. Besides the best guides and monographs on Rome, the following works may be consulted: JARKINS, specimen historiae Academiarum Italiae (Leipzig, 1725); GISBERTI, Storia delle Accademie d Italia (Venice, 1747); CANTU, Memorie delle Moderne Accademie d Italia, in Annali Universali di Statistica (Milan, 1841). In several of the principal French and Italian encyclopaedias there are noteworthy articles on the Arcadia, the Lincei, the Acad mie de France, etc. U. BENIGNI The French Academy The French Academy The French Academy was founded by Cardinal de Richelieu in 1635. For several years a number of learned gentlemen, such as Godeau, de Gombeaud, Giry, Chaplain, Habert, de Serizay, and the Abbé Cerisy de Malleville, had met once a week at Conrart's house for the purpose of discussing literary subjects. Through the Abbé de Boisrobert the existence of this society became known to Cardinal de Richelieu, who conceived the idea of making it a national institution. In 1635 the French Academy was formally established by royal letters-patent. The number of its members was fixed at forty, and statutes were drawn up which have suffered scarcely any change since that time. At the head of the Academy were three officers: a director, to preside at its meetings; a chancellor, to have the custody of its archives and the seal; a perpetual secretary, to prepare its work and keep its records. The perpetual secretary was appointed by lot for life with a salary of 6,000 francs a year. The director and the chancellor were at first appointed by lot for two months only. At present they are elected by vote for the term of three months. They are simply primi inter pares, and receive, like all the other members, an annual salary of 1,500 francs. The manner of electing members has been changed several times since 1635. At present, when an Academician dies, candidates who think themselves eligible present themselves to fill the vacancy. The new member is elected by the majority of the entire body. About a year later his public reception takes place. In the early years of the Academy all its members were Catholics. Among the distinguished men who held seats in it are the following: Corneille, Racine, Boileau, La Bruyère, d'Aguesseau, Bossuet, Fénelon, Fléchier, Mabillon, Lamoignon, Séguier, Fleury, Delille, Chateaubriand, Lamartine, de Barante, de Tocqueville, Berryer, Lacordaire, Dupanloup, de Falloux, Gratry Montalembert, Ampère, Pasteur, de Bornier, Cardinal Perraud, all of them faithful sons of the Church. Among other Catholic members of the French Academy we shall mention: Brunetière, Coppée, de Mun, Lamy, Mézières, Duc de Broglie, René Bazin, Comte d'Haussonville, and Thureau-Dangin. The entire number of members of the French Academy from 1634 to 1906 has been 500. Of these fourteen were cardinals, nine archbishops, and twenty-five bishops; three belonged to reigning families: Comte de Clermont, Lucien Bonaparte and Duc d'Aumale: one member, A. Thiers, was President of the French Republic; fifteen were prime ministers; forty-nine, ministers; thirty-six, ambassadors; twenty, dukes and peers; six, grandees of Spain; thirty-nine, knights of the orders of the King, of the Holy Ghost, or of St. Louis, eleven, Knights of the Golden Fleece; and thirty, grand cross of the Legion of Honour. Twenty-four members were elected to the French Academy before they were twenty-three years of age; twenty-three were at least seventy years of age before their reception took place; fifteen died before reaching the age of forty-five; eighteen were about ninety years old when they died and two lived to be almost centenarians. The Dictionary The object for which the Academy was founded as set forth in its statutes, was the purification of the French language. To attain this end it proposed to compile a dictionary, a grammar, a treatise on rhetoric, and a treatise on poetics. Only the dictionary has been carried out. From 1694 to 1878 seven editions of this work were published. The office of the Academy is not to create but to register words approved by the authority of the best writers and by good society. The dictionary is prepared by six members named for life, who are assisted by the perpetual secretary. Each word is submitted by the chairman of this committee to the Academy for approval. Besides this dictionary, the French Academy, at the suggestion of Voltaire, in 1778, began an "Historical Dictionary of the French Language", which, however, never progressed beyond the letter A. This undertaking was abandoned some twenty years ago. Every year the Academy awards a number of prizes. Previous to 1780 only two prizes were distributed. Since that period legacies and donations have provided an annual sum of more than 200,000 francs for the "Prix de Vertu", and the literary prizes. Some prizes for prose and poetry are given after competition. The "Prix Monthyon" (for literature, 19,000 francs), the "Prix Thérouanne" (for historical works, 4,000 francs), the "Prix Marcellin Guérin" (for literary works, 5,000 francs), and the "Prix Gobert" (for French history, 10,000 francs), are the most important. The "Prix de Vertu", of which the first was established by M. de Monthyon in 1784, are given to poor persons who have accomplished some remarkable act of charity or courage. Many of these have gone to missionaries and sisters belonging to various religious orders. History At first the Academicians held their sessions at the house of Conrart, then at that of S guier, after whose death Louis XIV placed a large room at their disposal, with ample provision for clerks, copyists, and servants. In 1793 the Convention suppressed the French Academy, also the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres the Academy of Sciences, the Academy of Painting and Sculpture, and the Academy of Architecture. They were reestablished in 1795, under the name of a National Institute, composed of three sections: the first comprising the sciences of physics and mathematics; the second, the moral and political sciences; the third, literature and the fine arts. From that period dates the uniform which is still worn by the members of the institute at public ceremonials and other solemn functions. It consists of a long coat, the collar and the lapels of which are embroidered in green, a cocked hat trimmed with black feathers, and adorned with a tricoloured cockade, and dress sword with a hilt of mother-of-pearl and gold. Bonaparte, after his election as First Consul, gave a new organization to the Institute, which henceforth was to be composed of four sections, the first being a section of sciences, corresponding to the former Academy of Science; the second that of French Language and Literature, corresponding to the former French Academy; the third, that of History and Ancient Literature, corresponding to the Academy of Inscriptions; and the fourth, that of Fine Arts, corresponding to the former Academy of Fine Arts. In 1806 Napoleon I granted to the Institute the College of the Four Nations. Here the Academy holds its sessions, and here are its offices and library. This building received the name of Palace of the Institute. Louis XVIII officially reestablished the name of Academy. Louis Philippe added a fifth section to the Institute under the name of Academy of Moral and Political Sciences. Since then no modifications have been made in the organization of the Institute. It therefore includes at present: (1) The French Academy; (2) The Academy of Fine Arts; (3) The Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres; (4) The Academy of Sciences; (.5) The Academy of Moral and Political Sciences. What has been the influence of the French Academy? Some critics have reproached it with a tendency to hamper and crush originality. But it is the general opinion of scholars that it has corrected the judgment, purified the taste, and formed the language of French writers. Matthew Arnold, in his essay on "The Literary Influence of the Academies", praised it as a high court of letters and a rallying point for educated opinion. To it he ascribed the most, striking characteristics of the French language, its purity, delicacy, and flexibility. Academy of Fine Arts The Academy of Fine Arts replaced, in 1795, the Academy of Painting and Sculpture founded by Louis XIV in 1648, and the Academy of Architecture founded in 1675. It was reorganized 23 January, 1803, and again 21 March, 1816. It is now composed of forty members: fourteen painters, eight sculptors, eight architects, four engravers, and six musical composers. There are, besides, ten honorary members, forty corresponding members, and ten honorary corresponding members. From among the members are chosen the Directors of the "Ecole des Beaux Arts", and of the Villa Medici, the Art Academy of France at Rome, founded by Colbert in 1666, for young painters, sculptors, architects, and musicians who, having been chosen by competition, are sent to Italy for four years to complete their studies at the expense of the Government. Academy of Inscriptions and Belle-Lettres In 1663, at the suggestion of Colbert, Louis XIV appointed a committee of four members of the French Academy charged with the duty of furnishing legends and inscriptions for medals. This was the origin of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres, founded in 1701. It was composed of ten honorary members, ten pensionnaires, ten associates, and ten pupils. The Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres deals with the history, geography, and antiquities of France, with Oriental, Greek, and Latin antiquities, the history of science among the ancients, and comparative philology. Academy of Sciences The Academy of Sciences was founded in 1666, at the suggestion of Colbert. At first it dealt only with geometry, astronomy, mechanics, anatomy, chemistry, and botany. At present it numbers sixty-six members, divided into eleven sections of six members each: geometry, mechanics, physics, astronomy, geography and navigation, chemistry, mineralogy, botany, agriculture, anatomy and zoology, medicine and surgery. There are, besides, two perpetual secretaries, ten honorary members, eight foreign members, eight foreign associates, and one hundred French and foreign corresponding members. Academy of Moral and Political Sciences The Academy of Moral and Political Sciences was founded in 1795. Suppressed by Napoleon in 1803, it was reestablished by Louis Philippe in 1832. It was then composed of thirty members divided into five sections: philosophy; morals; legislation, public law, and Jurisprudence; political economy; general and philosophic history. Another section was added in 1855: politics, administration, and finances. In 1872 the number of the members was fixed at forty, besides ten honorary members, six associates, and from thirty to forty corresponding members. Every year on 5 October, the five sections of the Institute hold a general public session, when prizes awarded by the several Academies are distributed. In 1877, the Duc d'Aumale left to the Institute of France by his will the château of Chantilly with its art collections. HOUSSAYE, The Forum, February, 1876; VINCENT, The French Academy (Boston, 1901); FUNCK-BRENTANO, Richelieu et l'Académie (Paris, 1904); FABRE, Chapelain et nos deux premières Academies (Paris, 1890); TASTET, Histoire des guarante fauteuils de l'Académie française depuis sa fondation jusqu'-à nos jours (Paris, 1855); PELISSON-OLIVET, ed. LIVET, Histoire de l'Académie française (Paris, 1858); JEANROY-FÉLIX, Fauteuils contemporains de l'Académie française (Paris, 1900); FAGUET, Histoire de la littérature française (Paris, 1900), II; PETIT DE JULLEVILLE, Histoire de la langue et de la littérature française (Paris, 1897), IV. JEAN LE BARS Acadia Acadia The precise location and extent of Acadia was a subject of constant dispute and consequent warfare between the French and English colonists of America for more than one hundred and fifty years. When Henry IV of France granted to the Sieur de Monts the territory of "La Cadie", as it was called, it was "to cultivate, to cause to be peopled, and to search for gold and silver mines from the 46th to the 40th degree N. lat. "The Marquise de Guercheville, who purchased the claim from de Monts, fancied she owned from Florida to the St. Lawrence. Subsequently it was considered to be the present peninsula of Nova Scotia, and now is usually regarded as the small district on the south shore of the Bay of Fundy from Annapolis to the Basin of Minas. De Monts received his concession 8 November, 1603. Claims had previously been laid to the territory by Cartier's nephews; and de la Roche, Chauvin, and de Chastes had made attempts to found a colony there; but it had all resulted in nothing. De Monts was a Calvinist, but Henry enjoined on him to teach Catholicity to the tribe of Micmacs who inhabited those regions. With de Monts, on his journey out were Champlain, who was averse to the settlement, as being too near the English; and also Pontgravé, the Baron of Poutrincourt. After wandering: about the coast of Maine, and attempting a settlement on an island which they called Sainte Croix, they entered the harbour to which Champlain gave the name of Port Royal, now Annapolis. De Monts' charter was revoked the following year, and, on withdrawing to France, he made over Port Royal and surroundings to Poutrincourt. The colony had great difficulty to maintain itself. Mme. de Guercheville attempted the work, but, disgusted with her ill-success, ordered La Saussaye, whom she sent over, to go somewhere else. Touching at Port Royal, he found its number of colonists very inconsiderable, and, taking the two Jesuit priests Biard and Massé, who were there, he with some new settlers established the colony of St. Sauveur at what is now Bar Harbor in Maine. Hardly was the work begun when the notorious pirate Argal of Virginia descended upon it and carried off the priests and some others, intending to hang them in Virginia, bidding the rest to withdraw, as they were in what he declared to be English territory. Returning with three vessels he utterly destroyed the colony, and then sailing across to Port Royal destroyed it also. This was in 1613. Haliburton attributes this raid to the "indigestible malice" of Father Biard, but the testimony of Champlain to the contrary refutes this accusation. Poutrincourt returned to France and died in battle. His son, commonly known as Biencourt, remained with some associates, among whom was Charles de la Tour, subsequently famous in Acadian history, and lived with the Indians as coureurs de bois, waiting for better times. As it was now considered by the English to be their territory beyond dispute, a grant of it was made in 1627 to Sir William Alexander, who, though he never established a colony there, gave the country the name, which it still retains, of Nova Scotia. Sir William also received other grants of the most extravagant extent elsewhere. Meantime, de la Tour's father, Claude, who had left Acadia and turned traitor to his country, came over in a vessel furnished by England, having promised the government to induce his son to yield up the entire territory. This, however, the son refused to do. Both the de la Tours were Huguenots, though the younger is said to have later on become a Catholic. In virtue of the treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye, Acadia became French territory again in 1632, and Isaac de Razilly was sent over as Governor. Associated with him were his kinsman Charnisay, young de la Tour, and Denys, each controlling certain assigned portions of the country. On the death of Razilly in 1636, these three lieutenants began a fierce war for possession of the land, and later on a fourth claimant, in the person of Le Borgne, appeared, with the pretence that the territory of Charnisay had been mortgaged to him. The struggle was fought chiefly between de la Tour and Charnisay, both of whom treacherously appealed to the Puritans of Boston for assistance. This shameful strife ended in the English again entering into possession. Oliver Cromwell then ruled England, and de la Tour crossed the ocean and obtained a commission from the Protector to govern the colony, one of the stipulations being that no Catholics should be allowed to settle there. With him were associated two Englishmen, Crowne and Temple. In 1667 it was again restored to France by the treaty of Breda, and Grandfontaine, the new Governor, reported that there were only 400 souls in Acadia, more than three-fourths of whom lived in and around Port Royal; but it is probable that many had married Indians and were coureurs de bois. In 1687 the population had grown to 800. The census of 1714 gives 2,100; of 1737, 7,598; of 1747, about 12,500. After eighty years it had grown to 18,000, though there was little or no immigration. From 1671 the inhabitants began to attach themselves to the soil; agriculture was an almost universal Occupation, and where the population was remote from Port Royal and unmolested it developed into a peaceful, prosperous, and moral people. But from the time of the treaty of Breda till 1712, Port Royal had been besieged no less than five times. In 1690 it was taken and sacked by Admiral Phips, Governor de Menneval and his garrison being carried off as prisoners to Boston; but as Phips was preoccupied with his projected expedition to Qu bec, he took no steps to secure the fort and it soon fell into the hands of the French. This whole period of twenty years was one series of pillage, murder, and devastation. Finally a supreme effort was made to dislodge the French. Four expeditions were sent against Port Royal by the English, under Church, March, Wainwright, and Nicholson. On the French side were Subercase and de Saint-Castin. Nicholson finally entered Port Royal, 12 October, 1710, after a siege of nineteen days. Since then it is known as Annapolis. Finally, by the treaty of Utrecht 13 April, 1713, all Acadia was ceded to England, The French inhabitants then determined to leave the country, and their kindred at Cape Breton and Prince Edward's Island endeavoured to have them migrate in their direction. This the English Governor opposed, although Queen Anne had commanded him to let them withdraw; but, as she died shortly afterwards, Nicholson had his way, and the Acadians took the oath of allegiance to King George, with the clause, however, that they should not be bound to take arms against the French or their Indian allies. In 1720, General Philipps, then Governor, ordered them to take the oath without reserve, or to withdraw inside of four months; whereupon they prepared to emigrate with their property, but were again prevented. Now began the plot to deport them. The purpose was not to permit them to go to Canada or elsewhere among the French, but to colonize them among the English, "in order to make them true Englishmen", and get them to change their faith, as is evident from a letter of Craggs, the Secretary of State, to the Governor. The deportation was already settled for that spring, but it did not take place till long years afterwards. During forty years they refused to be cajoled or threatened into taking the complete oath of allegiance. They admitted only an oath of fealty, and were known as the "French Neutrals". So loyal were they that, when in 1742 the French under Duvivier invaded Acadia, they gave him no assistance, continuing the same course of action during four successive years, even when the French troops under de Ramesay were at the walls of Annapolis, all of which is proved by State documents. In 1745-46 Governor Shirley did his utmost to make them apostatize, and proposed "to drive all Romish priests out of the Province and introduce English schools and French Protestant ministers". In 1749 an oath without restriction was exacted by Cornwallis, but refused by the whole population, and in 1750 they asked again to quit the country. Finally, when the French made their last stand at Fort Beauséjour, north of the Bay of Fundy, the Acadians gave them no assistance, except 300 who were forced under threat of death. Beauséjour surrendered 16 June, 1755. After the fall of Beauséjour, which was due to the treachery of its French occupants, began the famous deportation of these peaceful peasants, who for forty years had been faithful to the English Government. It is the subject of Longfellow's "Evangeline". They were torn from their homes, in what Bancroft calls "the appalling cold of December", and rudely thrust without money or provisions into the holds of ships; parents separated from their children, husbands from their wives, and cast everywhere along the coast from Massachusetts to Georgia, some wandering over to their compatriots in Louisiana, some to Guianas and the West Indies, and others reaching France. As to the number of victims, some writers put it as low as 8,000, others, who are very reliable, rating it at 18,000. The mortality attending this act of cruelty was very great, particularly among the children. All the farms, cattle, and houses were confiscated and handed over to the English colonists who took their place. After a while many of the Acadians wandered back to their old homes, and finally came in such numbers that on 10 September, 1855, they celebrated in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Cape Breton, and Prince Edward's Island the centenary of their dispersion. According to Richard in his "Acadia" (II, 342), there are no fewer than 270,000 descendants of the Acadians living today; 130,000 in the Maritime Provinces, 100,000 in French Canada, and 40,000 in Louisiana. Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1896 1901); ROCHEMONTEIX, Les J suites et la nouvelle France au XVII si cle; MURDOCH, History of Nova Scotia (1867); RICHARD, Acadia (1894); HALIBURTON, History of Nova Scotia (Halifax, 1862); PARKMAN, Montcalm and Wolfe (Boston, 1889, 1902). T.J. CAMPBELL Acanthus (Titular See) Acanthus A titular see of Macedonia, on the Strymonic Gulf, now known as Erisso. Its inhabitants were praised by Xerxes for their zeal in his cause (Herodotus VII, cxxv). There were still extant earlier in the nineteenth century the ruins of a large curving mole built far into the sea. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr. (London, 1887) I, 8; LEAKE, Travels in Northern Greece (London, 1835), III, 147. Acanthus (Plant) Acanthus A plant, indigenous to middle Europe, the leaf of which has served in all ages as an ornament, or for ornamentation. There are two varieties, one wild and thorny, and one with soft branches without spines. The acanthus appears for the first time in the arts in ancient Greece. It was chosen for decorative purposes because of the beauty of its leaves, as well as for its abundance on Greek soil. At first it was taken directly from nature. Greek sculpture rendered it with truthful expression, whether of the soft or the spiky variety, showing the character, texture, and model of the leaf. During the fifth century B.C. the acanthus ornament took an important place especially in architecture, and was the principal ornament of the Corinthian capital. From the conquest of Alexander in the East can be traced the transformation of the acanthus that is found in later Eastern art. THOMAS H. POOLE Acathistus (Akathistos) Acathistus (Greek akathistos; a privative, kathizo "sit"; i.e. not sitting; standing). The title of a certain hymn -- or, better, an Office in the Greek Liturgy -- in honour of the Mother of God. The title is one of eminence; since, while in other similar hymns the people are permitted to sit during part of the time, this hymn is partly read, partly sung, all standing (or, perhaps, standing all night). The word is employed sometimes to indicate the day on which the hymn is said (i.e. the Saturday of the fifth week of Lent), as on that day it must be said by clergy and laity alike, "none ceasing from the divine praises", as the long historical Lesson of the Office remarks. It is proper to note in this connection that, while the whole Office is to be said on this day, portions of it are distributed over the first four Saturdays of Lent. When recited entire, it is divided into four parts or stations, between which various Psalms and Canticles may be sung sitting. Francis Junius wrongly interpreted Acathistus as one who neither sits nor rests, but journeys with child; as for instance when the Blessed Virgin was brought by Joseph to Bethlehem. Gretser [Commentarius in Codin. Curop. (Bonn, 1839), 321] easily refutes the interpretation by citing from the Lesson in the Triodion. The origin of the feast is assigned by the Lesson to the year 626, when Constantinople, in the reign of Heraclius, was attacked by the Persians and Scythians but saved through the intervention of the Mother of God. A sudden hurricane dispersed the fleet of the enemy, casting the vessels on the shore near the great church of the Deipara (Mother of God) at Blachernae, a quarter of Constantinople near the Golden Horn. The people spent the whole night, says the Lesson, thanking her for the unexpected deliverance. "From that time, therefore, the Church, in memory of so great and so divine a miracle, desired this day to be a feast in honour of the Mother of God . . . and called it Acathistus" (Lesson). This origin is disputed by Sophocles (Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods, s. v.) on the ground that the hymn could not have been composed in one day, while on the other hand its twenty-four oikoi contain no allusion to such an event and therefore could scarcely have been originally composed to commemorate it. Perhaps the kontakion, which might seem to be allusive, was originally composed for the celebration on the night of the victory. However the feast may have originated, the Lesson commemorates two other victories, under Leo the Isaurian, and Constantine Pogonatus, similarly ascribed to the intervention of the Deipara. No certain ascription of its authorship can be made. It has been attributed to Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople, whose pious activities the Lesson commemorates in great detail. Quercius (P.G., XCII, 1333 sqq.) assigns it to Georgios Pisides, deacon, archivist, and sacristan of Saint-Sophia whose poems find an echo both in style and in theme in the Acathistus; the elegance, antithetic and balanced style, the vividness of the narrative, the flowers of poetic imagery being all very suggestive of his work. His position as sacristan would naturally suggest such a tribute to Our Lady, as the hymn only gives more elaborately the sentiments condensed into two epigrams of Pisides found in her church at Blachernae. Quercius also argues that words, phrases, and sentences of the hymn are to be found in the poetry of Pisides. Leclercq (in Cabrol, Dict. d'archéol. chrét. et de liturgie, s.v. "Acathistus") finds nothing absolutely demonstrative in such a comparison and offers a suggestion which may possibly help to a solution of the problem. In addition to several Latin versions, it has been translated into Italian, Ruthenian, Rumanian, Arabic, German, and Russian. Its very great length precludes anything more than the briefest summary here. It is prefaced by a troparion, followed by a kontakion (a short hymnodal summary of the character of the feast), which is repeated at intervals throughout the hymn. As this kontakion is the only part of the hymn which may clearly refer to the victory commemorated, and may have been the only original text (with repetitions interspersed with psalms, hymns, etc., already well known to the populace) composed for the night-celebration, it is translated here: To thee, O Mother of God, unconquered Empress, do I, thy City freed from evils, offer thanks for the victories achieved; but do thou, by thy invincible power, deliver me from every kind of danger; that I may cry to thee, Hail, maiden Spouse! The Hymn proper comprises twenty-four oikoi (a word which Gretser interprets as referring to various churches or temples; but the Triodion itself indicates its meaning in the rubric, "The first six oikoi are read, and we stand during their reading" -- oikos thus clearly referring to a division of the hymn) or stanzas (which may fairly translate the word -- stanza, like oikos, having an architectural value). These oikoi are alternately longer and shorter, and their initial letters form a Greek abecedary. The last (a shorter) one, beginning with the letter omega, reads: O Mother, worthy of all hymn-tributes, who didst bring forth the Word, Most Holy of all the holy, accept the present offering, deliver all from every evil, and save from future suffering all who cry to thee. Alleluia. This Alleluia follows each one of the shorter stanzas. The longer ones begin with a sentence of about the same length, which skilfully leads up to a series of salutations beginning with "Hail." All of these longer stanzas, except the first (which has fourteen) comprise thirteen such sentences, including the last, which, as a sort of refrain, is always "Hail, maiden Spouse!" The first stanza narrates the mission of Gabriel to Mary; and his astonishment at the condescension of the Almighty is so great that he bursts forth into: Hail, through whom joy shall shine forth! Hail, through whom evil shall end! Hail, restorer of fallen Adam! Hail, redemption of Eve's tears! etc. The second stanza gives the questioning of Mary; the third continues it and gives the answer of Gabriel; the fourth narrates the Incarnation; the fifth the visit to Elizabeth, with a series of "Hails" prettily conceived as being translations into words of the joyful leapings of the Baptist; the sixth, Joseph's trouble of mind; the seventh, the coming of the shepherds, who begin their "Hail" very appropriately: Hail, Mother of the Lamb and of the Shepherd! Hail, Sheepfold of rational sheep! In the ninth stanza the Magi, startled, cry out in joy: Hail, Mother of the unwestering Star! Hail, Splendour of the mystic Day! In the tenth the Magi return home to announce Alleluia; the eleventh has appropriate allusions to the Flight into Egypt: Hail, Sea that didst overwhelm the wise Pharaoh! Hail, Rock that gavest life to the thirsty! -- with other references to the cloud, the pillar of fire, the manna, etc. The twelfth and thirteenth deal with Simeon; the fourteenth and twenty-second are more general in character; the twenty-third perhaps consciously borrows imagery from the Blachernian Church of the Deipara and perhaps also alludes distantly to the victory (or to the three victories) commemorated in the Lesson: Hail, Tabernacle of God and the Word! Hail, unshaken Tower of the Church! Hail, inexpugnable Wall! Hail, through whom trophies are lifted up! Hail, through whom enemies fall down! Hail, healing of my body! Hail, safety of my soul! P.G., XCII, has the works of Pisides and the Acathistus with much comment; SOPHOCLES, Greek Lexicon, etc., has an interesting note; LECLERCQ, in Dict. d arch ol. chr t. et de lit., gives an extensive bibliography. H.T. HENRY St. Acca St. Acca Bishop of Hexham, and patron of learning (c. 660-742). Acca was a Northumbrian by birth and began life in the household of a certain Bosa, who afterwards became Bishop of York. After a few years, however, Acca attached himself to St. Wilfrid and remained his devoted disciple and companion in all his troubles. He may have joined Wilfrid as early as 678, and he certainly was with him at the time of his second journey to Rome in 692. On their return to England, when Wilfrid was reinstated at Hexham, he made Acca abbot of St. Andrew's monastery there; and after Wilfrid's death (709) Acca succeeded him as bishop. The work of completing and adorning the churches left unfinished by St. Wilfrid was energetically carried on by his successor. In ruling the diocese and in conducting the services of the Church, Acca was equally zealous. He brought to the North a famous cantor named Maban, who had learned in Kent the Roman traditions of psalmody handed down from St. Gregory the Great through St. Augustine. He was famed also for his theological learning, and for his encouragement of students by every means in his power. It was at Acca's instigation that Eddius undertook the Life of St. Wilfrid, and above all, it was to the same kind friend and patron that Bede dedicated several of his most important works, especially those dealing with Holy Scripture. For some unexplained reason Acca was driven from his diocese in 732. He is believed to have retired to Withern in Galloway, but he returned to Hexham before his death in 742, when he was at once revered as a Saint. Two crosses of exquisite workmanship, one of which is still preserved in a fragmentary state, were erected at the head and foot of his grave. When the body of the Saint was translated, the vestments were found entire, and the accounts of his miracles were drawn up by St. AElred and by Simeon of Durham. Of any true liturgical cultus there is little trace, but his feast is said to have been kept on 20 October. There is also mention of 19 February, which may have been the date of some translation of his relics. The only writing of Acca's which we possess is a letter addressed to St. Bede and printed in his works. This document, together with much other material relating to Acca, has also been printed in RAINE'S Priory of Hexham (London, 1864), Surtees Society, 1864. Our knowledge of Acca's life is derived primarily from BEDE, EDDIUS, SIMEON OF DURHAM, RICHARD OF DURHAM, and AELRED. Adequate accounts may be also found in STANTON'S English Menology (London, 1892), 507; Dict. of Nat. Biog,; Dict. of Christ. Biog. For some archaeological sidelights, cf. BROWNE (Anglican Bishop), Theodore and Wilfrith (London, 1897). HERBERT THURSTON Accaron Accaron ( Ekron). The most northern of the five principal Philistine cities (Jos. xiii, 3; xv, 11, 46). We do not know whether it was founded by the Philistines or the Hevites. It was first given to the tribe of Juda (Jos., xv, 11, 45) and then to Dan (Jos., xix, 43). Juda conquered it for a time (Judg., i, 18), but it fell again into the hands of the Philistines, who brought here the captive ark of the covenant after it had passed through Azotus and Geth (I K., v, 10). It came near being reconquered by Israel after the defeat of Goliath (I K., vii, 14). The city possessed a famous sanctuary of Beelzebub (IV Ii., i, 2, 3, 6 16), and was often denounced by the prophets (Jer., xxv, 20; Am., i, 8; Soph., ii, 4; Zach., ix, 5). King Alexander Bales gave the city to Jonathan Machabeus (I Mach., x, 89). Robinson identified it with the village Akir, a station on the railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem. HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); GUERIN in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895). A.J. MAAS Accentus Ecclesiasticus Accentus Ecclesiasticus The counterpart of concentus. In the ancient Church music all that portion of the liturgical song which was performed by the entire choir, or by sections of it, say two or three singers, was called concentus. Thus hymns, psalms, and alleluias were, generally speaking, included under the term concentus. On the other hand. such parts of the liturgy as the priest, or the deacon, or subdeacon, or the acolyte sang alone were called accentus; such were the Collects, the Epistle and Gospel, the Preface, in short anything which was recited chiefly on one tone, rather than sung, by the priest or one of his assistants. The accentus should never be accompanied by harmonies, whether of voices or of instruments, although the concentus may receive an accompaniment. The words Gloria in excelsis Deo and Credo in Unum Deum, being assigned to the celebrant, should not be repeated by the choir or accompanied by the organ or other musical instrument. J.A. VÖLKER Acceptance Acceptance Acceptance, in canon law, the act by which one receives a thing with approbation or satisfaction. The collation of a benefice is not complete till it has been accepted by him on whom it has been conferred. Acceptance is the link between the benefice and the benefited. It is therefore necessary to accept the benefice, to have jus in re; till the acceptance, there is at most a jus ad rem. (See RIGHT.) Acceptance is needed for the validity of an election. If the person chosen be absent, a specified time may be given for acceptance, and a further time may be allowed to obtain the confirmation of the election to an office. Acceptance is of the essence of a gift, which, in law, means a gratuitous transfer of property. Delivery of personal property with words of gift suffices; if delivery is not made, a deed or writing under seal should be executed and delivered. For the transfer of real property, a deed is generally necessary. In all cases acceptance is necessary to make the transfer binding in law. Acceptance of a law is not necessary to impose the obligation of submission. Even in a democracy, where the organized people may, or should, take part in the preparation and making of the laws, it may not refuse to accept and to obey the laws when made and promulgated. Otherwise the legislative authority would be a mockery, and all governmental power would vanish. We are not now posing the question whether an unjust law is binding; nor are we discussing how far either custom or desuetude may take away the binding force of a law; both may imply the assent of the lawmaking power. Acceptance by the faithful is not required for the binding force of ecclesiastical laws. The Apostles received from Christ the power of binding and loosing, and the hierarchy (i.e. the Pope, bishops and other prelates) have inherited this power, as has always been recognized in the Church. In the Catholic Church the lawmaking power established by Christ will ever have the authority to make laws previous to, and independent of, the acceptance of the faithful. If bishops or other prelates should enact a law contrary to the canons, there is the remedy or an appeal to the highest authority of the Church for its annulment. Wyclif attacked this authority when he proclaimed, in the fifteenth thesis condemned by the Council of Constance and Martin V, that "no one was a temporal prince, or prelate, or bishop, who was in mortal sin." Huss (ibid., Prop. 30) declared that "ecclesiastical obedience was an invention of the priests of the Church, and outside the authority of Scripture." Luther, in the proposition condemned (1521) by the University of Paris, taught that neither pope nor bishop nor any one among men has the right to impose on a Christian a single syllable without his full acceptance; anything otherwise done is in the spirit of tyranny. The Jansenists favoured the theory that the authority of the bishops and Pope was representative of the will of the whole body of the Church; hence Clement Xl, in 1713, condemned the 90th proposition of Quesnel: "The Church has the power to excommunicate, to be used by the chief pastor, with the (at least presumed) consent of the whole body." Against a natural or divine law, no custom or desuetude can avail for the cessation of obligation. From a merely ecclesiastical law either custom or desuetude may withdraw the obligation, wherever they may properly imply the assent of the lawmaking power in the Church. (See LAW, CUSTOM.) D'AVINO, Enc. dell' Ecclesiastico (Turin, 1878); ANDRE-WAGNER, Dict. de droit can. (3d ed., Paris, 1901); DIDIOT in Dict. de theol. cath. (Paris, 1903), s.v. R.L. BURTSELL Acceptants Acceptants Those Jansenists who accepted without any reserve or mental restriction the Bull Unigenitus, issued in 1713 against the Jansenist doctrines as set forth in the Réflexions morales sur le Nouveau Testament of the Oratorian, Pasquier Quesnel. As is well known, the error of Jansenius gave rise to two conflicts in the Church: the first, early in the second half of the seventeenth century, centred about his book Augustinus, and ceased with the Pax Clementina, also called the paix fourrée or False Peace (l669); the second, which began with the eighteenth century, was waged around the above-mentioned work of Quesnel. The peace too hastily granted by Clement IX was favourable to Jansenism. The doctrine took deep root in the French Parliaments and affected several religious orders, Benedictines, Fathers of Christian Doctrine, Genevievans, and especially Oratorians. Attention was called to the spread of the heresy by the success of the Réflexions morales. This work, published as a small volume in 1671 with the approval of Vialart, Bishop of Châlons-sur-Marne, had been steadily enlarged in succeeding editions until, in 1693, it numbered four compact volumes bearing always the approbation of Vialart, who died in 1680. De Noailles, the new Bishop of Châlons, sanctioned the work in 1695, but the following year, as Archbishop of Paris, he condemned it. The edition of 1699 was published without the changes demanded by Bossuet, without the preface which he composed for it, and without the approval of the diocesan bishop. The following year (2 July, 1700) the anonymous work Problème ecclésiastique, etc., and the controversies to which it gave rise, again drew attention to the peril of Jansenism. At the Assembly of the French Clergy, in the same year, Bossuet brought about the condemnation of four Jansenist propositions and of 127 others of lax morality. After the death of Bossuet (1704), Fénelon led the contest against Jansenism and especially against the distinction between "fact" and "right" ( fait et droit). Finally, at the request of Louis XIV, and following the example of his predecessors, Clement XI condemned in the Bull Vineam Domini (17()5) the Jansenist evasion known as silentium obsequiosum, or respectful silence, and proscribed (1708) the Réflexions morales. Shortly afterwards, the King caused the Jansenist establishment of Port-Royal to be demolished (1710). Jansenism, however, had not yet been overthrown. Louis XIV then urged the Pope (November, 1711) to publish another Bull, and promised to have it accepted with due respect by the French bishops. On this assurance Clement XI established a special congregation to draw up the new constitution. After eighteen months of careful study, the famous Bull Unigenitus, destined soon to provoke an outburst of wrath on the part of the Jansenists, was promulgated in Rome (8 September, 1713). In it the Pope condemned 101 propositions from Quesnel's book as "false, misleading, scandalous, suspected and savouring of heresy, bordering upon heresy, frequently condemned; what is more, as being heretical and reviving various propositions of Jansenius, in the very sense for which they were first proscribed." Noailles at first submitted, but later, in an assembly of forty-nine bishops, who met at the instance of Fénelon in the archiepiscopal palace in Paris, he recalled his submission and with eight of his colleagues ranged himself among the appelants. The forty others voted to accept. The Parliament of Paris registered the Bull (15 February, 1714), and the Sorbonne did the same, albeit under pressure of royal authority. The French Episcopate, with the exception of twenty hesitating or stubborn members, submitted forthwith. To make an end of the matter, Louis XIV, at Fénelon's suggestion, conceived the idea of holding a national council as a means of restoring unity; but his death prevented this and deferred the hour of final pacification. The Regent, Philip of Orléans, a man without religious or moral convictions, a "vicious braggart", as Louis XIV styled him} attempted to hold the balance between the two parties. The Jansenists profited by his neutrality. Noailles was put at the head of a "conseil de conscience pour les affaires ecclésiastiques", and four doctors of the Sorbonne who had been exiled because of their violent opposition to the Bull were recalled. The Sorbonne, which had accepted the Bull Unigenitus by a mere majority, now cancelled its acceptance (1716). The Pope through a Brief punished the Sorbonne by depriving it of all its privileges. The Parliament of Paris sided with the Faculty and suppressed the Brief, while the Sorbonne itself contested the right of the Sovereign Pontiff to withdraw lawfully granted privileges. The following year four bishops, Soanen of Senez, Colbert of Montpellier, de la Broue of Mirepoix, and de Langle of Boulogne, appealed from the Bull Unigenitus to a future general council. Their example was followed by sixteen bishops, ninety- seven doctors of the Sorbonne, a number of cures of Paris, Oratorians, Genevievans, Benedictines of Saint-Maur, Dominicans, members of female religious orders, and even lay people. This movement extended to the provinces, but not to the universities, all of which, with the exception of Nantes and Reims, supported the Papal Bull. Of the 100,000 priests then in France, hardly 3,000 were among the appelants, and 700 of these were in Paris. The great majority voted for acceptance and counted on their side more than 100 bishops. The appelants had only 20 bishops. Clement XI knew that he must act vigorously. He had used every means of persuasion and had written to the Archbishop of Paris beseeching him to set the example of submission. He even consented to a delay. But the opposition was unyielding. It was then that the Pope published the Bull Pastoralis Officii (28 August, 1718), in which he pronounced excommunication upon all who opposed the Bull Unigenitus. The same year, 2 October, Noailles and his party appealed from this second Bull, and the Faculties of the University of Paris, headed by the famous Rollin, endorsed the appeal. The Regent thought it time to intervene. He was indifferent to the question of doctrine, but was politic enough to see that censorious people like the appelants were no less dangerous to the State than to the Church. Moreover, his old teacher, the Abbé Dubois, now his Prime Minister, with an eye perhaps to the cardinal's hat, was in favour of peace. He caused to be composed a Corps de Doctrine (1720) explaining the Bull Unigenitus, and about one hundred prelates gave their adhesion to it. Noailles then accepted the Bull (19 November, 1720), "following the explanations which have been approved of by a great number of French bishops." This ambiguous and uncertain submission did not satisfy Clement XI; he died, however, without having obtained anything more definite. Louis XV and his aged minister, the Cardinal de Fleury, opposed the sect with vigour. Authorized by them, De Tencin, Archbishop of Embrun, convoked a provincial council (1727) to examine Soanen, the aged Bishop of Senez, who in a pastoral instruction had gone to extremes. Many bishops took part in this council, notably De Belzunce, famous for the zeal he displayed during the plague of Marseilles. Although supported by twelve bishops and fifty advocates, Soanen was suspended and sent to the monastery of Chaise-Dieu where he died, insubordinate, at the age of ninety-three. After numerous evasions, ending in submission, Noailles died in 1729. The only appelants left were the Bishops Colbert of Montpellier, Caylus of Auxerre, and Bossuet of Troyes, a nephew of the great Bishop of Meaux. At the same time 700 doctors of the Sorbonne, of whom thirty-nine were bishops, ratified the earlier (1714) acceptance of the Bull Unigenitus. It was a triumph for the acceptants, that is to say, for the authority of the Pope and of the Church. LAFITAU, Histoire de la Constitution Unigenitus (Avignon, 1757); SAINT-SIMON, Memoires (prejudiced and untrustworthy); JAGER, Hist. de l'Eglise catholique en France (1862-68); SCHILL, Die Konstitution Unigenitus (Freiburg, 1876); BOWER, History of the Roman Popes, XC, 233 sqq.; BARTHELEMY, Le Cardinal de Noailles (Paris, 1888); LE ROY, La France et Rome de 1700 a 1715 (Paris, 1892); DE CROUSAZ-CASTET, L'Eglise et l'Etat au XVIIIe siecle (Paris 1893); THUILIER, La seconde phase du Jansenisme (Paris 1901), BLIARD, Dubois, cardinal et ministre (Paris, 1902); THENON, L'Eglise au XVIIIe siecle, in LAVISSE AND RAMBAUD, L'Histoire de France (Paris, 1893 97); DE LACOMBE, L'opposition religieuse au debut du XVIIIe siecle, in Le Correspondant, 10 April, 1904. A. FOURNET Accession Accession (From Lat. accedere, to go to; hence, to be added to). Accession is a method of acquiring ownership of a thing arising from the fact that it is in some way added to, or is the fruit of something already belonging to oneself. This may happen in three ways: (1) naturally; (2) artificially; (3) from the combined operation of nature and industry. (1) Natural The increase of an animal, the yield of fields, the rent of a house, etc., belong to the owner of the animal fields, and house, respectively. Thus, the offspring of a female animal is the property of her owner, even though it be the result of intercourse with a male belonging to someone else. The axiom applies in the case that partus sequitur ventrem. The Louisiana Code, in accordance with the Roman law, provided that the issue of slaves though born during the temporary use or hiring of their mothers, belonged not to the hirer but to the permanent owner. But the offspring of a slave born during a tenancy for life belonged to the tenant for life. In the same division is the species of accession due to alluvion. This is an addition to one's land made by the action of water, as by the current of a river. If this increase is gradual and imperceptible, the augmentation belongs to the owner of the land. If it has been sudden and in large quantity, by the common law it belongs to the State. (2) Artificial This sort occurs (a) by specification, when one's labour or artistic talent is employed upon materials owned by another, so that a new substance or thing is produced. Where this is done in good faith, the product belongs to the artist or labourer with the obligation on his part of indemnifying the owner of the materials. (b) By adjunction, when one's labour and material have been so united with the property of another that they cannot be separated. The resultant then belongs to him who has contributed the more important component. (c) By blending, when materials of equal value appertaining to different owners, are mixed together. The thing or its price is then to be divided according to natural equity between the original possessors, if the mixture has been made in good faith; otherwise the weight of law is thrown in his favour whose right has been violated. (3) Mixed An example of the third kind of accession is the building of a house on another's ground, or the planting of trees or sowing of vegetables in another s field. The house, trees, etc., belong to the master of the soil after making suitable compensation to the builder, planter, etc. BOUVIER, Law Dictionary; SABETTI, Theol. Moralis. JOSEPH F. DELANY Accessus Accessus A term applied to the voting in conclave for the election of a pope, by which a cardinal changes his vote and accedes to some other candidate. When the votes of the cardinals have been counted after the first balloting and the two-thirds majority has fallen to none of those voted for, at the following vote opportunity is granted for a cardinal to change his vote, by writing, Accedo domino Cardinali, mentioning some one of those who have been voted for, but not the cardinal for whom he has already voted. If he should not wish to change his vote, the cardinal can vote Nemini, i.e. for no one. If these supplementary votes of accession, added to those a candidate has received, equal two-thirds of the total vote, then there is an election. If not, the ballots are burned, and the usual ballot takes place the next day. ( See CONCLAVE.) LUCIUS LECTOR, Le Conclave, origine, histoire, etc. (Paris, 1894); LAURENTIUS, inst. Jur. Eccl. (Freiburg, 1905) n. 126. JOHN J. A' BECKET Acciajuoli Acciajuoli Name of three cardinals belonging to an illustrious Florentine family of this name. ANGELO, noted for his learning, experience, and integrity, b. 1349; d. at Pisa, 31 May, 1408. He was made Archbishop of Florence in 1383, and Cardinal in 1385 by Pope Urban VI. He resisted all endeavours that were made to bring him over to the antipope, Clement VII, and defended by word and deed the regularity of the election of Urban VI. After this Pope's death, half the votes in the succeeding conclave were for Acciajuoli; but to end the schism, he directed the election towards Boniface IX. The new Pope made him Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, and sent him to Germany, Slavonia, and Bulgaria to settle difficulties there. He afterwards became Governor of Naples, and guardian of the young King Ladislaus, whom he brought to Naples, and some time later accompanied on his march into Hungary. On his return he reconciled the Pope with the Orsini, and reformed the Benedictine monastery of St. Paul in Rome. He died on his way to Pisa, and was buried in Florence, at the Certosa, a monastic foundation of his family. NICCOLÒ, b. at Florence, 1630; d. in Rome, 23 February, 1719, as Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, in his eighty-ninth year. FILIPPO, b. in Rome, 12 March, 1700. He was nuncio in Portugal, but was expelled with military force by Pombal (August, 1760) because of his interference in behalf of the Jesuits. Clement XIII made him Cardinal in 1759; he died at Ancona, as Bishop of that see, 4 July, 1766 (Duhr, Pombal, 1891, 121 sqq.). JOHN J. A' BECKET Accident Accident [Latin accidere, to happen what happens to be in a subject; any contingent, or nonessential attribute]. I. The obvious division of things into the stable and the unstable, the more or less independently subsistent and the dependent, or essentially inherent, appears beset with obscurity and difficulty as soon as it is brought under reflective consideration. In their endeavour to solve the problem, philosophers have followed two extreme tendencies. Some have denied the objectivity of the substantial or noumenal element, and attributed it wholly or in part to the mind; others have made the phenomenal or accidental element subjective, and accorded objectivity to substance alone. These two extreme tendencies are represented among the ancient Greek materialists and atomists on the one hand and the Eleatic pantheists on the other. Aristotle and his medieval followers steer a middle course. They hold to the objectivity both of substance and of accident, though they recognize the subjective factor in the mode of perception. They use the term accident to designate any contingent (i.e. nonessential) relation between an attribute and its subject. As such it is a merely logical denomination, one of the five predicables or universals, modes of systematic classification genus, difference, species, property, accident. In this sense it is called predicable, as distinguished from predicamental, accident, the latter term standing for a real objective form or status of things, and denoting a being whose essential nature it is to inhere in another as in a subject. Accident thus implies inexistence in substance i.e. not as the contained in the container, not as part in the whole, not as a being in time or place, not as effect in cause, not as the known in the knower; but as an inherent entity or mode in a subject which it determines. Accidents modify or denominate their subject in various ways, and to these correspond the nine "Categories": + quantity, in virtue whereof material substance has integrant, positional parts, divisibility, location, impenetrability, etc.; + quality, which modifies substance immediately and intrinsically, either statically or dynamically, and includes such inherents of substance as habit, faculty, sense-stimuli, and figure or shape; + relation, the bearing of one substance on another (e.g. paternity). These three groups are called intrinsic accidents, to distinguish them from the remaining six groups -- action, passion, location, duration, position, habiliment -- which, as their names sufficiently suggest, are simply extrinsic denominations accruing to a substance because of its bearings on some other substance. Quantity and quality, and, in a restricted sense. relation are said to be absolute accidents, because they are held to superadd some special form of being to the substance wherein they reside. For this reason a real, and not a merely conceptual, distinction between them and their subject is maintained. Arguments for the physical reality of this distinction are drawn from experience + internal-consciousness attesting that the permanent, substantial self is subject to constantly-shifting accidental states -- and + external experience, which witnesses to a like permanence of things beneath the incessantly varying phenomena of nature. The supernatural order also furnishes an argument in the theology of the infused virtues which are habits supervening on, and hence really distinct from, the substance of the natural mind. II. With the reaction against scholasticism, led on by Descartes, a new theory of the accident is devised, or rather the two extreme views of the Greeks referred to above are revived. Descartes, making quantity the very essence of matter, and thought the essence of spirit, denies all real distinction between substance and accident. While teaching an extreme dualism in psychology, his definition of substance, as independent being, gave occasion to Spinoza's monism, and accidents became still more deeply buried in substance. On the other hand substance seems at last to disappear with Locke, the world is resolved into a congeries of qualities ( primary, or extension, and secondary, or sensible properties). The primary qualities, however, still retain a foundation in the objective order, but with Berkeley they become entirely subjectified; only the soul is allowed a substantial element as the support of psychical accidents. This element is likewise dissolved in the philosophy of Hume and the Associationists. Kant considered accidents to be simply subjective categories of sense and intellect, forms according to which the mind apprehends and judges of things -- which things are, and must remain, unknowable. Spencer retains Kant's unknowable noumenon but admits phenomena to be its objective aspects or modifications. III. Several other classifications of accidents are found in the pertinent treatises. It should be noted that while accidents by inhesion modify substance, they are witnesses to its nature, being the medium whereby the mind, through a process of abstraction and inference, builds its analogical concepts of the constitution of substances. From this point of view material accidents are classed as + proper sensibles -- the excitants of the individual senses, colour for sight, sound for hearing, etc. -- and + common sensibles -- extension and its modes, size, distance, etc. -- which stimulate two or more senses, especially touch and sight. Through these two groups of accidents, and concomitantly with their perception, the underlying subject is apperceived. Substance in its concrete existence, not in its abstract essence, is said to be an accidental object of sense. IV. The modern views of accident, so far as they accord to it any objectivity, are based on the physical theory that all, at least material, phenomena (light, colour, heat, sound, etc.) are simply varying forms of motion. In part, the kinetic element in such phenomena was known to Aristotle and the Scholastics (cf. St. Thomas, De Anima, III, Lect. ii); but it is only in recent times that physical experimentation has thrown light on the correlation of material phenomena as conditioned by degrees of motion. While all Neo-Scholastic philosophers maintain that motion alone will not explain the objectivity of extension, some (e.g. Gutberlet) admit that it accounts for the sensible qualities (colour, sound, etc.). Haan (Philos. Nat.) frees the theory of motion from an extreme idealism, but holds that the theory of the real, formal objectivity of those qualities affords a more satisfactory explanation of sense-perception. The majority of Neo-Scholastic writers favour this latter view. (Pesch, Phil. Nat.) V. The teaching of Catholic philosophy on the distinct reality of certain absolute, not purely modal, accidents was occasioned by the doctrine of the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, though the arguments for the theory are deduced from natural experience. The same doctrine, however, suggests the further question, whether such accidents may not be separable from substance. Reason alone offers no positive arguments for such separability. The most it can do is to show that separability involves no inherent contradiction, and hence no absolute impossibility; the Omnipotence that endows substance with the power of supporting accidents can, it is claimed, supply some other means of support. Nor would the accidents thus separated, and supernaturally supported, lose their character as accidents, since they would still retain their essential property, i.e. natural exigence of inhesion. Of course the intrinsic possibility of such separation depends solely on the supernatural interference of God, nor may it extend to all classes of accidents. Thus, e.g., it is absolutely impossible for vital faculties, or acts, to exist outside their natural subjects, or principles. Theorists who, like the Cartesians, deny the objective, distinct entity of all accidents have been obliged to reconcile this negation with their belief in the Real Presence by maintaining that the species, or accidents, of bread and wine do not really remain in the Eucharist, but that after Consecration God produces on our senses the impressions corresponding to the natural phenomena. This theory obviously demands a seemingly unnecessary multiplication of miracles and has at present few if any serious advocates. (See EUCHARIST.) JOHN RICKABY, General Metaphysics (New York, 1900); MIVART, On Truth (London, 1899); McCosh, First Truths (New York, 1894); MERCIER, Ontologie; NYS, Cosmologie (I.ouvain, 1903), GUTBERLET, Naturphilosophie, and Ontologie (Munster, 1894); PESCH, Philosophia Naturalis (Freiburg, 1897). F.P. SIEGFRIED Acclamation Acclamation (Lat. ad, to, clamare, to cry out). IN CIVIC LIFE The word acclamatio (in the plural, acclamationes) was used in the classical Latin of Republican Rome as a general term for any manifestation of popular feeling expressed by a shout. At weddings, funerals, triumphs, etc., these acclamations were generally limited to certain stereotyped forms. For example, when the bride was being conducted to her husband's house the spectators cried: Io Hymen, Hymenaee, or Talasse, or Talassio. At a triumph there was a general shout of Io Triumphe. An orator who gained the approbation of his hearers was interrupted with cries of belle et festive, bene et praeclare, non potest melius, and the like where we should say "Hear, hear!" Under the Empire these acclamations took a remarkable development, more particularly in the circus and in the theatre. At the entrance of the emperor the audience rose and greeted him with shouts, which in the time of Nero were reduced to certain prescribed forms and were sung in rhythm. Moreover, like the guns of a royal salute, these cries were also prolonged and repeated for a definite and carefully recorded number of times. The same custom invaded the senate, and under the later Antonines it would seem that such collective expressions of feeling as would nowadays be incorporated in an address of congratulation or a vote of censure, then took the form of acclamations which must have been carefully drafted beforehand and were apparently shouted in chorus by the whole assembly. A long specimen of denunciatory acclamations which indeed might better be called imprecations, chanted in the Senate after the assassination of the Emperor Commodus (192), is preserved by Lampridius. The original occupies several pages; a few clauses may suffice here: On every side are statues of the enemy (i.e. Commodus); on every side statues of the parricide; on every side statues of the gladiator. Down with the statues of this gladiator and parricide. Let the slayer of his fellow-citizens be dragged in the dust; let the statues of the gladiator be dragged at the cart's tail. More to our present purpose, however, are the favourable acclamations of the Senate, such as those recorded by Lampridius at the election of Alexander Severus: "Alexander Augustus, may the gods keep thee. For thy modesty; for thy prudence; for thy guilelessness; for thy chastity. From this we understand what sort of a ruler thou wilt be. For this we welcome thee. Thou wilt make it appear that the senate chooses its rulers well. Thou wilt prove that the senate's judgment is of the highest worth. Alexander Augustus, may the gods keep thee. Let Alexander Augustus dedicate the temples of the Antonines. Our Caesar, our Augustus, our Imperator, may the Gods keep thee. Mayest thou live, mayest thou thrive, mayest thou rule for many years." It is only from an examination of the few examples preserved to us that one can arrive at an understanding of the influence which this institution of acclamations shouted in unison was likely to exercise upon the early developments of the Christian liturgy. The general resemblance with certain primitive forms of litany or ektene is sufficiently striking, but the subject is obscure and we may content ourselves primarily here with the acclamations, more properly so called, which had and still have a recognized place in the ceremonial of consecration of popes, emperors, kings, bishops, etc., and those also which are recorded in the acts of certain early councils. GROWTH OF LITURGICAL ACCLAMATIONS It seems highly probable that the practices observed in the election of the Pagan emperors were the prototype of most of the liturgical acclamations now known to us. In the long account given by Vopiscus of the election of the Emperor Tacitus (283) we are told that when Tacitus at first declined the honour in the senate on the score of his advanced age, these were the acclamations of the senators, 'Trajan, too, acceded to the Empire as an old man!' (ten times); 'and Hadrian acceded to the Empire in his old age' (ten times). . . 'Do you give orders, let the soldiers fight' (thirty times); 'Severus said: It is the head that reigns not the feet' (thirty times); 'It is your mind, not your body, we are electing' (twenty times); 'Tacitus Augustus, may the Gods keep you.' Then Tacitus was taken out to the Campus Martius to be presented to the soldiers and the people. Whereupon the people acclaimed: 'Most happily may the gods keep thee, Tacitus', and the rest which it is customary to say. The slender records which we possess of the ceremonial in other cases of the election of an emperor make it clear that these popular acclamations were never discontinued even after the coronation assumed an ecclesiastical character and was carried out in church. Thus the official rituals we possess, one of which dates back to the close of the eighth century, explain how when the crown has been imposed the people shout, 'Holy, holy, holy', and 'Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace', thrice. And if there is a prince to be crowned as consort of the Empire, the Patriarch takes the second crown and hands it to the Emperor, and he imposes it, and the two choirs shout 'Worthy.' After this followed the imperial acta ( aktologein is the technical term in Greek for the shouting of these acclamations) or laudes, as they were called in the West. A sort of litany consisting of more than a score of verses was chanted by heralds, while the people repeated each verse once or thrice after the leaders. In this we find such passages as, "Many, many, many; R. "Many years, for many years, "Long years to you, N. and N., autocrats of the Romans, R. "Many years to you. "Long years to you, Servants of the Lord, R. "Many years to you." etc. Almost contemporary with these are the acclamations found in our English Egbert Pontifical (probably compiled before 769) which with other English MSS. has preserved to us the earliest detailed account of a coronation in the West. The text is a little uncertain, but probably should read as follows: Then let the whole people say three times along with the bishops and the priests; 'May our King, N., live for ever' ( Vivat Rex N. in sempiternum). And he shall be confirmed upon the throne of the kingdom with the blessing of all the people while the great Lords kiss him, saying: 'For ever. Amen, amen, amen.' There is also in the Egbertine ritual a sort of litany closely resembling the imperial acclamations just referred to, and this may be compared with the elaborate set of laudes, technically so called, which belong to the time of Charlemagne and have been printed by Duchesne in his edition of the Liber Pontificalis, II, 37. In these imperial laudes the words Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat (Christ conquers, Christ reigns, Christ commands), nearly always find a place. It should be added that these acclamations or some similar feature have been retained to this day in the Eastern coronation rituals and in a few of Western origin, amongst others in that of England. Thus for the coronation of King Edward VII in 1902 the official ceremonial gave the following direction: When the Homage is ended, the drums beat and the trumpets sound, and all the people shout, crying out: 'God save King Edward!' 'Long live King Edward!' 'May the King live for ever!' FOR POPES AND BISHOPS It was natural that the practice of acclaiming should not be confined to the person of the sovereign or to the occasion of his election. Just as we read of the king "wearing his crown" upon great feasts in certain favoured cities, a ceremony which seems to have amounted to a sort of secondary coronation, so the elaborate laudes in honour of the emperor were often repeated on festivals, especially at the papal Mass. But more than this the practice of acclaiming the emperor at his election was also extended to the Pope and in some cases to simple bishops. In the case of the Pope our testimonies are not very ancient, but the "Liber Pontificalis" in the eighth century frequently alludes to the practice, associating the words acclamationes and laudes in many combinations; while at a somewhat later date we have the explicit testimony of the "Ordines Romani." In the case of the coronation of Leo (probably the fourth pope of that name), we learn that the leaders of the people from each district acclaimed him with the words: "The Lord Leo Pope, whom St. Peter has chosen to sit in his see for many years." At the present day after the Gloria and the Collect of the Mass of the Coronation, the senior Cardinal Deacon, standing before the Pope enthroned, chants the words, "Exaudi, Christe" (Hear, O Christ); to which all present reply "Long life to our Lord Pius who has been appointed Supreme Pontiff and Universal Pope." This is repeated three times with some other invocations, and it then expands into a short litany in which the repetition of each title is answered by the prayer tu illum adjuva (Do thou help him). This last feature closely reproduces the laudes of the Middle Ages, chanted at the coronation of kings. Similar acclamations seem to have been familiar from very early times at the election of bishops, though it would probably be going much too far to represent them as regularly forming part of the ritual. The classical instance is that recorded by St. Augustine, who proposed Heraclius to the people of Hippo as his successor. Thereupon, he says, The people shouted: 'Thanks be to God, Praised be Christ.' This was said twenty-three times. 'Hear, O Christ; long live Augustine, sixteen times.' 'Thee for our Father, Thee for our Bishop', twenty times, 'Well deserving, truly worthy', five times; and so on (St. Aug., Epist., 212; P.L., XXXIII, 966). In this, however, there was clearly nothing liturgical, though that character may perhaps be better recognized in the cries of, "He is worthy, he is worthy, he is worthy; for many years", etc., which the people in certain ancient rituals were directed to make when the bishop-elect was presented to them before his consecration. COUNCILS Other acclamations meet us in the acts of some of the early councils. They seem in most cases to have taken the form of compliments to the emperors, and may often perhaps be no more significant than a toast to the king and royal family at a modern banquet. But we read of other cries, for instance, that at the first session of the Council of Chalcedon (October, 451) the Fathers shouted, regarding Dioscurus: "The scoffer always runs away. Christ has deposed Dioscurus, Christ has deposed the murderer"; or again: "This is a just verdict; This is a just council"; or again, "God has avenged His Martyrs". Upon the other meanings which have been attached to the word acclamation some of them rather strained it does not seem necessary to speak at length. (1) The applause of the congregation which often in ancient times interrupted the sermons of favourite preachers. (2) The prayers and good wishes found upon sepulchral monuments, etc., to which the name acclamations is sometimes given. (3) The brief liturgical formulae, such as Dominus vobiscum, Kyrie Eleison, Deo gratias, etc. (4) For election by acclamation, see ELECTION, CONCLAVE, and ACCLAMATION IN PAPAL ELECTIONS. CABROL in Dict. d archeol. chret., 240-265. This article includes a discussion of inscriptions, liturgical formulae, and other miscellaneous matters. For the subject of Acclamations in classical times, cf. DAREMBERG AND SAGLIO, Dict. des Antiq., s.v.; PAULY-WISSOWA, Real-Encyclopedie der classischen Alterthumswissenschaft; MOMMSEN, Rom. Staatsrecht, III, 951, 349; PETER, Die Scriptores Hist. August. (Leipzig, 1892), 221 sqq.; HEER, in Philologus (supplementary vol.), IX (1904), 187 sqq. For CORONATIONS IMPERIAL AND PAPAL, see Le Laudes nell' Incoronazione del Som. Pontifice, in La Civilta Cattolica, 15 Aug., 1903, 387-404; BRIGHTMAN, Byzantine Imperial Coronations, in Journ. of Theol. Studies, April, 1901; GRISAR, Analecta Romana (Rome, 1899), 229 sqq.; MARTENE, De Ant. Eccl. Rit. (1737), II, 578, 851-852; DIEMAND, Das Ceremoniell der Kaiserkronungen (Munich, 1894), 82; MASKELL, Monumenta Ritualia (2d ed., Oxford, 1882), II, 85; LEGG, English Coronation Records (London, 1901). HERBERT THURSTON Acclamation (In Papal Elections) Acclamation (in Papal Elections) One of the forms of papal election. The method of electing the Roman Pontiff is contained in the constitutions of Gregory XV, "Æterni Patris Filius" and "Decet Romanum Pontificem." Urban VIII's constitution, "Ad Romani Pontificis Providentiam", is confirmatory of the preceding. According to these documents, three methods of election alone are valid; namely, by scrutiny, by compromise, and by acclamation, or "quasi-inspiration." This last form of election consists in all the cardinals present unanimously proclaiming one of the candidates Supreme Pontiff, without the formality of casting votes. As this must be done without previous consultation or negotiation it is looked on as proceeding from the Holy Ghost and hence is also designated "quasi-inspiration". An example of this mode of election in more recent times is found in the case of Clement X (1670-76), formerly Cardinal Altieri, whose election is said to have been determined by the sudden cry of the people outside the conclave, "Altieri Papa", which was confirmed by the cardinals (Keller). Innocent XI (1676-89) is another example. The cardinals surrounded him in the chapel of the conclave and in spite of his resistance every one of them kissed his hand, proclaiming him Pope (De Montor). FERRARIS, Bibliotheca, art. Papa (Rome, 1890); WERNZ, Jus Decret. (Rome, 1899), II, tit. 30; DE MONTOR, Lives of Rom. Pont. (News York), 1866); KELLER, Life of Leo XIII (News York, 1888); LECTOR, Le Conclave (Paris, 1898). WILLIAM H.W. FANNING Biblical Accommodation Biblical Accommodation We shall consider (1) what is meant by biblical accommodation; (2) its use in Sacred Scripture; (3) the rules which ought to regulate its use. (1) What is Biblical Accommodation? By accommodation is understood the adaptation of words or sentences from Sacred Scripture to signify ideas different from those expressed by the sacred author. Thus, if a sinner excuses his fault by saying, "The serpent deceived me", he applies the scriptural words of Eve (Gen., iii, 13) to express an idea which the sentence does not convey in the Bible. Similarly, a blind person might use the words of Tob., v, 12, "What manner of joy shall be to me, who sit in darkness, and see not the light of heaven". Here, again, the words would have a meaning which they do not bear in Sacred Scripture. This accommodation is sometimes incorrectly styled the accommodated, or accommodative, sense of Scripture. From the definition it is clear that it is not a sense of Scripture at all. The possibility of such accommodation may arise, first, from some similarity between the ideas in the sacred text and the subject to which the passage is accommodated; secondly, from the fact that the words of Scripture may be understood in two different senses. The first is called extensive accommodation. Examples of it are found in the Church's offices, both in the Breviary and the Missal, when the praises bestowed by the Holy Ghost on Noe, Isaac, and Moses are applied to other saints. Thus the words of Ecclus., xxxii, 1, 5: "Have they made thee ruler? . . . hinder not music" are sometimes applied to College presidents assuming the burden of their office; we need not say that the words of Sacred Scripture have quite a different meaning. The second species of accommodation, called allusive, is often a mere play on words and at times seems due to a misunderstanding of the original meaning. The Vulgate text, Mirabilis Deus in sanctis suis (Ps., lxvii, 36) means, in the mouth of the Psalmist, that God is wonderful in His sanctuary ( sancta, -orum). The Latin words may also be translated "God is wonderful in his saints" ( sancti, -orum), and they are employed in this sense in the Missal. As this second signification was not intended by the inspired writer, the English rendering of the text in the Douay version is a mistranslation. (2) The Use of Accommodation in the Bible It is generally held by Catholic authors that certain passages from the Old Testament have been used over again in the New Testament with a change of meaning. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (xiii, 5) the words spoken to Josue, "I will not leave thee, nor forsake thee" (Jos., i, 5), are applied to all Christians. Other examples of accommodation are the use of Exod., xvi, 18 in II Cor., viii, 15; Zach., iv, 14 in Apoc., xi, 4; Ps., vi, 9 in Matt., vii, 2, 3; Mich., vii, 6 in Matt, x, 36. Evidently, the new meaning attached to the words is also inspired. Rationalistic writers have maintained that similar accommodations are to be found in every case where the Evangelists quote the prophecies of the Old Testament. Some few Catholic writers have been willing to grant this explanation for a few passages, but the words in which the Evangelists assert that events in Our Lord's life took place "in order that" the prophecies might be fulfilled are incompatible with the theory that their wished to indicate only a resemblance between the event and the prophet's words. It is probable that no prophecy is used in the Gospels merely by accommodation. (3) Rules for Accommodation The use of accommodation in the Liturgy and by the Fathers of the Church is sufficient to show that it is legitimate. Hence texts have been, and are frequently, accommodated by preachers and ascetical authors. Many of the sermons of St. Bernard are mosaics of Scripture phrases and owe much of their peculiar unction to his happy use of the sacred words. Latin writers and preachers have not been so reverent and careful in their accommodation, and this was one of the abuses condemned by the Council of Trent when it forbade the wresting of Scripture to profane uses (Sess. IV, Decret. "De editione et usu Sacrorum Librorum "). Interpreters are wont to give the following rules for guidance in the accommodation of Scripture: + Accommodated texts should never be used as arguments drawn from revelation; for the words are not employed in the sense, either literal or typical, intended by the Holy Ghost. Violations of this rule are not rare, either in sermons or in pious literature. + Accommodation should not be farfetched. Allusive accommodations in many cases are mere distortions of the sacred text. + Accommodations should be reverent. Holy words should be employed for purposes of edification, not to excite laughter, much less to cloak errors. Cornely, Introductio Generalis,, nn. 206-208; Patrizi, De Interpretatione Bibliorum (Rome, 1862), 273 sq.; Vasquez in S. Thom., I, Q. i, a. 7, dist. 14; Serarius, Prolegomena Biblica, 21, 14; Acosta, De vera Scripturas tractandi ratione, III, v-viii; Vigouroux, Manuel biblique, I; Longhaye, La predication (Paris, 1888), 295-301; Bainvel, Les contresens biblioques; Mangenot in Vig. Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Accommodation; cf. works on biblical hermeneutics, and also many of the introductions to Sacred Scripture. JOHN CORBETT Accomplice Accomplice A term generally employed to designate a partner in some form of evildoing. An accomplice is one who cooperates in some way in the wrongful activity of another who is accounted the principal. From the viewpoint of the moral theologian not every such species of association is straightway to be adjudged unlawful. It is necessary to distinguish first of all between formal and material cooperation. To formally cooperate in the sin of another is to be associated with him in the performance of a bad deed in so far forth as it is bad, that is, to share in the perverse frame of mind of that other. On the contrary, to materially cooperate in another's crime is to participate in the action so far as its physical entity is concerned, but not in so far as it is motived by the malice of the principal in the case. For example, to persuade another to absent himself without reason from Mass on Sunday would be an instance of formal cooperation. To sell a person in an ordinary business transaction a revolver which he presently uses to kill himself is a case of material cooperation. Then it must be borne in mind that the cooperation may be described as proximate or remote in proportion to the closeness of relation between the action of the principal and that of his helper. The teaching with regard to this subject-matter is very plain, and may be stated in this wise: Formal co operation is never lawful, since it presupposes a manifestly sinful attitude on the part of the will of the accomplice. Material complicity is held to be justified when it is brought about by an action which is in itself either morally good or at any rate indifferent, and when there is a sufficient reason for permitting on the part of another the sin which is a consequence of the action. The reason for this assertion is patent; for the action of the accomplice is assumed to be unexceptionable, his intention is already bespoken to be proper, and he cannot be burdened with the sin of the principal agent, since there is supposed to be a commensurately weighty reason for not preventing it. Practically, however, it is often difficult to apply these principles, because it is hard to determine whether the cooperation is formal or only material, and also whether the reason alleged for a case of material cooperation bears due proportion to the grievousness of the sin committed by the principal, and the intimacy of the association with him. It is especially the last-named factor which is a fruitful source of perplexity. In general, however, the following considerations will be of value in discerning whether in an instance of material cooperation the reason avowed is valid or not. The necessity for a more and more powerful reason is accentuated in proportion as there is + a greater likelihood that the sin would not be committed without the act of material cooperation; + a closer relationship between the two; and + a greater heinousness in the sin, especially in regard to harm done either to the common weal or some unoffending third party. It is to be observed that, when damage has been done to a third person, the question is raised not only of the lawfulness of the cooperation, but also of restitution to be made for the violation of a strict right. Whether in that case the accomplice has shared in the perpetration of the injustice physically or morally (i.e. by giving a command, by persuasion, etc.) whether positively or negatively (i.e. by failing to prevent it) the obligation of restitution is determined in accordance with the following principle. All are bound to reparation who in any way are accounted to be the actual efficient causes of the injury wrought, or who, being obliged by contract, express or implied, to prevent it, have not done so. There are circumstances in which fellowship in the working of damage to another makes the accomplice liable to restitution in solidum; that is, he is then responsible for the entire loss in so far as his partners have failed to make good for their share. Finally, mention must be made of the Constitution of Benedict XIV, Sacramentum Poenitentiae , governing a particular case of complicity. It provides that a priest who has been the accomplice of any person in a sin against the Sixth Commandment is rendered incapable of absolving validly that person from that sin, except in danger of death, and then only if there be no other priest obtainable. GENICOT, Theol. Moralis (Louvain, 1898). JOSEPH F. DELANY Francesco Accursius Francesco Accursius (Italian Accorso). (1)FRANCESCO ACCURSIUS (1182-1260) A celebrated Italian jurisconsult of the Middle Ages, b. at Florence, 1182; d. at Bologna, 1260. After applying himself to various studies until he was twenty-eight, or according to other statements, thirty-seven years old, he took up the law and became one of its most distinguished exponents. He taught at Bologna, and then devoted himself to compiling a glossary or commentary on the whole body of law, which took precedence of any work then extant. Accorso, or Accursius, was not proficient in the classics, but he was called "the Idol of the Jurisconsults". (2) FRANCESCO ACCURSIUS (1225-1293) Son of the preceding, and also a lawyer, b. at Bologna, 1225; d. 1293. The two are often confounded. Francesco was more distinguished for his tact than for his wisdom. Edward I of England, returning from the Holy Land, brought him with him to England. He returned to Bologna in 1282, and practiced law there until his death. His two sons, Cervottus and Guglielmo, and a daughter studied law with him and also practiced in Bologna. Dante places Francesco Accursius in Hell (Inf. XV, 110). The tomb of his father and himself in Bologna bears the inscription: "Sepulchrum Accursii, glossatoris legum, et Francisci, ejus filii." Giraud, Bibl., Sac. JOHN J. A' BECKET Acephali Acephali A term applied to the Eutychians who withdrew from Peter Mongus, the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria, in 482. With the apparent purpose of bringing the orthodox and heretics into unity, Peter Mongus and Acacius of Constantinople had elaborated a new creed in which they condemned expressly Nestorius and Eutyches, but at the same time affected to pass over the decisions of the Council of Chalcedon and rejected them hypocritically. This ambiguous formula, though approved by the Emperor Zeno and imposed by him in his edict of union, or Henoticon, could only satisfy the indifferent. The condemnation of Eutyches irritated the rigid Monophysites; the equivocal attitude taken towards the Council of Chalcedon appeared to them insufficient, and many of them, especially the monks, deserted Peter Mongus, preferring to be without a head ( akephaloi), rather than remain in communion with him. Later, they joined the partisans of the Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch, Severus. The Deacon Liberatus (Breviarium, P.L., LVIII, 988) supposes the name Acephali (Headless) to have been given to those at the Council of Ephesus who followed neither Cyril of Alexandria nor John of Antioch. LEONT. BYZANT., De Sectis, in P.G., LXXXII 1230; BARONlUS, Annales, an. 482; HEFELE, Hist. of Councils, II; BARDENHEWER in Kirchenlex. (Freiburg, 1882), I. JOHN J. A'BECKET The Archdiocese of Acerenza The Archdiocese of Acerenza (ACHERONTIA.) This archdiocese, in the provinces of Lecce and Potenza, Italy, has been united since 1203 with the Diocese of Matera. It lays claim to a very early, even Apostolic, origin. Acerenza was certainly an episcopal see in the course of the fifth century, for in 499 we meet with the name of its first known bishop, Justus, in the Acts of the Roman Synod of that year. The town is situated on an elevated ridge of the Apennines whence the eye dominates both the Adriatic and the Mediterranean; it was known in antiquity as the high nest of Acherontia (Hor., Odes, III, iv, 14). The cathedral is one of the oldest and most beautiful in Italy, and has lately become quite famous for a bust long supposed to be that of St. Canus or Canius (Ascanius?) patron of the city, but now judged to be a portrait-bust of Julian the Apostate, though others maintain that it is a bust of the Emperor Frederick II, after the manner of the sculptors of the Antonine age. Acerenza was in early imperial times a populous and important town, and a bulwark of the territory of Lucania and Apulia. In the Gothic and Lombard period it fell into decay, but was restored by Grimwald, Duke of Beneventum (687-689). An Archbishop of Acerenza (Giraldus) appears in 1063 in an act of donation of Robert Guiscard to the monastery of the Holy Trinity in Venosa. For a few years after 968 Acerenza was forced to adopt the Greek Rite in consequence of a tyrannical order of the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus Phocas (963-969), whereby it was made one of five suffragans of Otranto, and compelled to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople (Moroni, Dizionario, L, 63). Pope Urban VI (1378-89, Bartolommeo Prignano), was once Archbishop of Acerenza. Matera is said to have been created a see by the Greeks. Its cathedral dates from the year 1000, and is likewise a richly ornamented specimen of contemporary ecclesiastical architecture in Southern Italy. The Archdiocese of Acerenza contains 22 parishes, 308 secular priests, and a few priests of religious orders. The population numbers 147,900. The present bishop is Monsignor Raffaele Rossi, successor (1899) of Monsignor Diomede Falconio, now Apostolic Delegate to the United States. UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice, 1722), VII, 5; CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1866), XX, 420-431; LENORMANT, A travers l'Apulie et la Lucanie (Paris, 1874), I, 271; VOLPE, Memorie storiche, profane e religiose sulla città di Matera (Naples, 1813). ERNESTO BUONAIUTI Achab Achab ( 'A'h'abh, Achaab in Jer., xxix, 22, 'Ehabh, Achiab) Son of Amri and King of Israel, 918-897 B.C., according to III K., xvi, 29, but 875-854 according to the Assyrian documents. The original reading of III K., xvi, 29, may have been changed. The King was married to Jezabel, a Sidonian princess, and was misled by her into idolatry (III K., xvi, 31 sqq.) the persecution of the prophets (III K., xviii, 13 sqq.), and a most grievious injustice against Naboth (III K., xxi). He was twice victorious in his wars against Syria (III K., xx, 1328), and made an alliance with the Syrian King Benadad in spite of prophetic warning (III K., xx, 33). In the sixth year of Salmanassar II the allies were overcome by the Assyrians near Karkar, and their compact ceased. Achab now allied himself with Josaphat, King of Juda, and they began war against Syria in order to conquer Ramoth Galaad (III K., xxii, 3 sqq.). The false prophets foretold victory, while Micheas predicted defeat. The battle was begun in spite of this warning, and an arrow wounded Achab between the lungs and the stomach (III K., xxii, 34). He died in the evening, and when his chariot was washed in the pool of Samaria, the dogs licked up his blood (III K., xxii, 38). MECHINEAU in VIG., Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); WELTE in Kirchenlex. A.J. MAAS Achaia Achaia (Ægialeia). The name, before the Roman conquest in 146 B.C., of a strip of land between the gulf of Corinth in the north and Elis and Arcadia in the south, embracing twelve cities leagued together. The Achaean League was prominent in the struggle of the Greeks against Roman domination; It is probably due to this fact that the name was afterwards extended to the whole country south of Macedonia and Illyricum, corresponding approximately to modern Greece. During the Roman period Achaia was usually governed as a senatorial province. The Governor was an ex-Praetor of Rome, and bore the title of Proconsul. Corinth was the capital. When St. Paul came into Achaia (Acts 18), Gallio, a brother of Seneca, was proconsul. His refusal to interfere in the religious affairs of the Jews and the tolerance of his administration favoured the spread of Christianity. In Corinth the Apostle founded a flourishing church. In his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, he salutes Christians "in all Achaia" (i, 1) and commends their charity (ix, 2). RAMSAY in HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible; MOMMSEN, Provinces of the Roman Empire (Rom. Gesch.), V, vii. W.S. REILLY Achaicus Achaicus A Corinthian Christian, who, together with Fortunatus and Stephanas, carried a letter from the Corinthians to St. Paul, and from St. Paul to the Corinthians (I Corinthians 16:17; cf. also 16:15). A.J. MAAS Achaz Achaz (AHAZ). King of Juda, placed variously, 741-726 B.C., 744-728, 748-727, 724-709, 734- 728. It seems to be certain that Theglathphalasar's first expedition against Damascus mentioned in the life of Achaz fell in 733 B.C., and the second in 731. Owing to his idolatry (IV K., xvi, 3, 4, II Par., xxviii, 24), Achaz was conquered first by Rasin, King of Syria, and then by Phacee, King of Israel (II Par., xxviii, 5; IV K., xvi, 6). Now, Rasin and Phacee made an alliance in order to dethrone the house of David in Juda, and to make the son of Tabeel king (Is., vii, 26). The prophet Isaias offers to Achaz God's aid with the promise of safety in case of belief, but with the threat of punishment in case of unbelief (Is., vii, 1221). Achaz is unbelieving, seeks help from Theglathphalasar, offering at the same time rich presents from the temple treasury (IV K., xvi, 7, 8). The king of the Assyrians takes Damascus, afflicts Israel (IV K., xv, 29; xvi, 9), but reduces Juda to the necessity of buying its freedom (IV K., xvi, 17; II Par., xxviii, 20). Achaz was not improved by this affliction, but he introduced into the temple an altar modelled after that at Damascus (IV K., xvi, 14 sq.; II Par., xxviii, 2225). On account of the king's sin Juda was also oppressed by the Edomites and the Philistines (II Par., xxviii, 17 sq.). RENARD in VIG, Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895); PEAKE in HASTINGS, Dist. of the Bible (New York, 1903); HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905). A.J. MAAS Lucas d'Achery Lucas d'Achéry French Benedictine (Maurist), born 1609 at Saint Quentin in Picardy; died in the monastery of St. Germain des Prés at Paris, 29 April, 1685. He was a profound student of medieval historical and theological materials, mostly in original manuscripts, to the collection, elucidation, and printing of which he devoted his whole life. He entered the Order of St. Benedict at an early age, was professed at the Abbey of the Blessed Trinity, Vendôme, 4 October, 1632, but his health soon obliged him to remove to Paris. He became a member (1637) of the monastery of St. Germain des Pré, and in his long sojourn of nearly fifty years scarcely ever quitted its walls. As librarian of the monastery he was soon acquainted with its rich treasures of medieval history and theology, and by a continuous correspondence with other monasteries, both in and out of France, he soon made himself a bibliographical authority of the first rank, especially in all that pertained to the unedited or forgotten writings of medieval scholars. His first important work was an edition (Paris, 1645) of the "Epistle of Barnabas", whose Greek text had been prepared for the press, before his death, by the Maurist Hugo Ménard. D'Achéry's "Asceticorum vulgo spiritualium opusculorum Indiculus" (Paris, 1645) served as a guide to his confrè, Claude Chantelou, in the preparation of the five volumes of his "Bibliotheca Patrum ascetica" (Paris, 1661). In 1648 he published all the works of Blessed Lanfrac of Canterbury (P. L., CL, 9). He published and edited for the first time the works of Abbot Guibert of Nogent (Paris, 1661) with an appendix of minor writings of an ecclesiastical character. In 1656 he edited the "Regula Solitaria" of the ninth century priest Grimlaicus (Grimlaic), a spiritual guide for hermits. His principal work, however, is the famous "Spicilegium, sive Collectio veterum aliquot scriptorum qui in Galliae bibliothecis, maxime Benedictinorum, latuerunt" (Paris, 1655-77), continued by Baluze and Martène, to whom we owe and enlarged and improved edition (Paris, 1723). D'Achéry collected the historical materials for the great work known as "Acta Ordinis S. Benedicti" but Mabillon added so much to it in the way of prefaces, notes, and "excursus" that it is justly accounted as his work. D'Achéry was the soul of the noble Maurist movement, and a type of the medieval Benedictine, humble and self-sacrificing, virtuous and learned. Despite continued illness he was foremost in all the labours of the French Benedictines of St. Maur, and was the master of many of the most illustrious among them, e. g. Mabillon. His valuable correspondence is preserved in the Bibliothéque Nationale at Paris. THOMAS J. SHAHAN Achiacharus Achiacharus Achiacharus is mentioned only once in the Vulgate version of Tobias (xi, 20, under the form Achior), but the name occurs four times in the Greek versions. He is represented as a nephew of Tobias, and an influential minister of the Assyrian King Esarhaddon (681-668 B.C.). On the relation, supposed by some critics, of this personage to Ahiakar the Wise, of eastern legend, see E. Cosquin, in Revue biblique Internationale, 1899, 50 sq. W.S. REILLY Achimaas Achimaas (1) Father of Achinoam, wife of Saul (I Kings 14:50). (2) Son of Sadoc, the priest. He was a swift-footed messenger in the service of David during the rebellion of Absalom. He brought from Jerusalem news of the enemy's movements, and, after the battle in which Absalom was slain, he was the first to reach the King with the news of victory. He was "a good man", according to David (II Kings 15:35-36; 17:17 sq.; 18:19 sq.). This Achimaas is perhaps the same as one of Solomon's prefects, the governor of Nephtali, and son-in-law of the King (III Kings 4:15). W.S. REILLY Achimelech Achimelech (1) The priest of Nobe who extended hospitality to David during his flight from the court of Saul. For this he was put to death, together with all the priests of Nobe, except Abiathar, his son, who escaped and joined David (I Kings 21-22). (2) A Hethite, companion of the outlawed David (I Kings 26:6). (3) There is an Achimelech spoken of (II Kings 8:17, and I Paralipomenon 18:16; 24:3, 6, 31), as a "son of Abiathar" and an associate of Sadoc in the priesthood. As this position is usually attributed to "Abiathar, son of Achimelech" it is thought that the reading "Achimelech, son of Abiathar" is due to an accidental transposition of the text of Kings, and that this transposition has affected the text of Paralipomenon. (4) Name given to Achis, King of Geth, in the title of Psalm 33. Some texts have Abimelech. W.S. REILLY Achitopel Achitopel Achitopel was an able and honoured counsellor of David, who joined the rebellion of Absalom. The King was much affected by this desertion. Hearing that the man on whose word he had been wont to rely as "on an oracle of God" was giving his advice to the enemy, he prayed the Lord to "infatuate the counsel of Achitopel." Some have seen in Psalms 54:13-15 and 40:10, reflections of David on this faithless friend. It was on the advice of Achitopel that Absalom took possession of his father's harem, thus cutting off all hope of reconciliation. Understanding the need of energetic measures, he urged that 12,000 men be sent from Jerusalem in pursuit of the King. He offered to lead them himself. Chusai, a secret friend of David, defeated his purpose. Thereupon he proudly withdrew to his town of Gilo, put his house in order, and strangled himself. (See II Kings, xv, 12; xvii, 23; I Par., xxvii, 33.) It would seem from a conjunction of II Kings, xxiii, 34, and xi, 3, that Achitopel was the grandfather of Bethsabee, and it has been suggested, as an explanation of his conduct towards David, that he had kept a secret grudge against the King for the way he had treated Bethsabee, and her first husband, the unfortunate Urias. This, or some motive of ambition, would be in keeping with the haughty character of Achitopel. Dryden has used this name in the title of his famous satire against the Protestant Party, "Absalom and Achitophel." W.S. REILLY The Diocese of Achonry The Diocese of Achonry (Gaelic, Achadh-Chonnaire, Connary's Field). In Ireland, suffragan to the Archdiocese of Tuam. The village of Achonry occupies a very picturesque situation in the south of the County Sligo. Here St. Finian, who died in 552, established a church and monastery on some land given him by the prince of the Clann Chonnaire. Over this he placed Nathi O Hara, who had been his pupil in the famous school of Clonard and is always spoken of in the annals as Cruimthir-Nathi, i.e. the Priest Nathi. In a short time the monastery and its head acquired a remarkable reputation, and a diocese was formed (c. 560) of which Nathi is reputed to have been the first bishop, though he may have been only the abbot-superior, according to the Irish system of ecclesiastical organization from the sixth to the twelfth century, which permitted in monastic government such peculiar subordination. He is the patron of the diocese, and his feast is celebrated on 9 August. His successors made use of his monastery-church as their cathedral, and traces of it may still be seen. The diocese was formerly sometimes called Leyney from one of its largest and most important baronies, or perhaps because it was coextensive with what is still known as the barony of Leyney. Additions were made to it at different periods until its boundaries were finally fixed in the twelfth century. It now includes some of Roscommon, a considerable part of Mayo, and the greater part of Sligo. At the important Synod of Kells, held in March, 1152, presided over by Cardinal Paparo, and attended by the Bishop of Lismore, then Apostolic Delegate, by twenty other bishops, and by many inferior clergy, the Diocese of Achonry was represented by its bishop, Melruan O'Ruadhan. Its diocesan limits were then fixed, and it was made suffragan to Tuam. From that date the catalogue of its bishops is less fragmentary. Of the three Irish bishops who were members of the Council of Trent, one was Eugene O'Hart, Bishop of Achonry. He is described in the records of the Council as a "professor of Theology and a learned and distinguished ecclesiastic", and had been a Dominican of Sligo Abbey. He took a prominent part in its deliberations, and left on all its members a deep impression of his zeal and learning. From the death of Dr. O'Hart in 1603, except for a brief interval of four years (1641-45), there was no bishop until 1707, and the diocese was governed by vicars-apostolic. Achonry is one of the most Catholic dioceses in the world. The total population, according to the latest census (1901) is 82,795, of which 2,242 are non-Catholics, so that 97.3 percent of the whole are Catholics. Achonry has twenty-two parishes, twenty of which have parish priests with full canonical rights; the remaining two are mensal parishes of the bishop. There are 51 priests in the diocese, and though at one period of its history Achonry was studded with religious houses, it has at the present time no regular clergy. There are 7 congregations of religious sisters: 3 of the Irish Sisters of Charity, 2 of the Sisters of Mercy, 1 of the Sisters of St. Louis, and 1 of the Marist Sisters. The Christian Brothers have a house in Ballaghaderreen and the Marist Brothers one in Swineford. Full provision is made for the education of the young. In addition to the episcopal seminary with five professors there are day schools under the nuns and brothers and 201 schools under lay teachers. There is besides a boarding-school for young ladies conducted by the Sisters of St. Louis. There are also under the charge of the nuns 2 industrial and 7 technical schools. Since the accession of Dr. M. Nicholas in 1818, the bishop resides in Ballaghaderreen. The cathedral, a very fine Gothic building, erected at great expense by Dr. Durcan, has been completed by the present bishop, Dr. Lyster, by the addition of a magnificent tower and spire. Within the last fifty years many new churches, some very beautiful, have been built, old ones renovated, houses supplied for the clergy, convents established. and schools provided. GAMS, Series episcop. Eccl. cath. (1873), I, 204, 234 (1886), II, 64; BRADY, Episcopal Succession in England, Scotland, and Ireland (Rome, 1876); LANIGAN, Eccl. Hist. of Ireland (Dublin, 1829), I, 345; LEWIS, Topographical Hist. of Ireland (London, 1837), 6; BURKE, History of the Archbishops of Tuam (Dublin, 1882); Annals of the Four Masters (ed. O'DONOVAN, Dublin, 1658), VII, s. v., Achadh Chonnaire. E.H. CONINGTON Achor Valley Achor Valley The scene of the death of the "troubler" Achan, with whom its name is associated (Jos., vii, 26). Osee foretells the time when this gloomy, ill-omened valley will be for an "opening of hope" to the returning exiles of Israel (Os., ii, 15); another prophet pictures it, in the same glorious future, transformed into a "place for the herds to lie down in" (Is., lxv, 10). It was on the north boundary of Juda, leading past Jericho to the Jordan (Jos., xv, 7).It is commonly identified with the modern Wady-el-Kelt and is usually written Akor. W.S. REILLY Achrida Achrida A titular see in Upper Albania, the famous metropolis and capital of the medieval kingdom of Bulgaria, now the little village of Ochrida, on the Lake of Ochrida, the ancient Lacus Lychnitis, whose blue and exceedingly transparent waters in remote antiquity gave to the lake its Greek name. The city was known in antiquity as Lychnidus and was so called occasionally in the Middle Ages. In the conflicts of the Illyrian tribes with Rome it served the former as a frontier outpost and was later one of the principal points on the great Roman highway known as the via Egnatiana. Its first known bishop was Zosimus (c. 344). In the sixth century it was destroyed by an earthquake (Procop., Hist. Arcana, xv), but was rebuilt by Justinian (527-565), who was born in the vicinity, and is said to have been called by him Justiniana Prima, i.e. the most important of the several new cities that bore his name. Duchesne, however, says that this honour belongs to Scupi (Uskub), another frontier town of Illyria (Les églises séparées, Paris, 1856, 240). The new city was made the capital of the prefecture, or department, of Illyria, and for the sake of political convenience it was made also the ecclesiastical capital of the Illyrian or Southern Danubian parts of the empire (Southern Hungary, Bosnia, Servia, Transylvania, Rumania). Justinian was unable to obtain immediately for this step a satisfactory approbation from Pope Agapetus or Pope Silverius. The Emperor's act, besides being a usurpation of ecclesiastical authority, was a detriment to the ancient rights of Thessalonica as representative of the Apostolic See in the Illyrian regions. Nevertheless, the new diocese claimed, and obtained in fact, the privilege of autocephalia, or independence, and through its long and chequered history retained, or struggled to retain, this character. Pope Vigilius, under pressure from Justinian, recognized the exercise of patriarchal rights by the Metropolitan of Justiniana Prima within the broad limits of its civil territory, but Gregory the Great treated him as no less subject than other Illyrian bishops to the Apostolic See (Duchesne, op. cit., 233-237). The inroads of the Avars and Slavs in the seventh century brought about the ruin of this ancient Illyrian centre of religion and civilization, and for two centuries its metropolitan character was in abeyance. But after the conversion of the new Bulgarian masters of Illyria (864) the see rose again to great prominence, this time under the name of Achrida (Achris). Though Greek missionaries were the first to preach the Christian Faith in this region, the first archbishop was sent by Rome. It was thence also that the Bulgarians drew their first official instruction and counsel in matters of Christian faith and discipline, a monument of which may be seen in the Responsa ad Consulta Bulgarorum of Nicholas I (858-867), one of the most influential of medieval canonical documents (Mansi, xv, 401; Hefele, Concilieng., iv, 346 sq.). However, the Bulgarian King (Car) Bogaris was soon won over by Greek influence. In the Eighth General Council held at Constantinople (869) Bulgaria was incorporated with the Byzantine patriarchate, and in 870 the Latin missionaries were expelled. Henceforth Greek metropolitans preside in Achrida; it was made the political capital of the Bulgarian kingdom and profited by the tenth- century conquests of its warlike rulers so that it became the metropolitan of several Greek dioceses in the newly conquered territories in Macedonia, Thessaly, and Thrace. Bulgaria fell unavoidably within the range of the Photian schism, and so, from the end of the ninth century, the diocese of Achrida was lost to Western and papal influences. The overthrow of the independent Bulgarian kingdom in the early part of the eleventh century by Basil the Macedonian brought Achrida into closer touch with Constantinople. At a later date some of the great Byzantine families (e.g. the Ducas and the Comneni) claimed descent from the Kings, or Cars, of Bulgaria. In 1053 the metropolitan Leo of Achrida signed with Michael Caerularius the latter's circular letter to John of Trani (Apulia in Italy) against the Latin Church. Theophylactus of Achrida (1078) was one of the most famous of the medieval Greek exegetes; in his correspondence (Ep., 27) he maintains the traditional independence of the Diocese of Achrida. The Bishop of Constantinople, he says, has no right of ordination in Bulgaria, whose bishop is independent. In reality Achrida was during this period seldom in communion with either Constantinople or Rome. Towards the latter see, however, its sentiments were less than friendly, for in the fourteenth century we find the metropolitan Anthimus of Achrida writing against the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son ( see TRINITY). Latin missionaries, however, appear in Achrida in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, mostly Franciscan monks, to whom the preservation of the Roman obedience in these regions is largely owing (see ALBANIA). The Latin bishops of Achrida in the seventeenth century are probably, like those of our of own time, titular bishops. The ecclesiastical independence of Achrida seeming in modern times to leave an opening for Roman Catholic influence in Bulgaria, Arsenius, the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, had it finally abolished in 1767 by an order of Sultan Mustapha. At the height of its authority, Achrida could count as subject to its authority ten metropolitan and six episcopal dioceses. FARLATI, Illyr. Sacr., VIII, 18, 158; LEQUIEN, Oriens Chrtstianus, II, 282-300; III, 953-954; DUCHESNE, Les glises autoc phales. in Les églises séparées (Paris, 1896); GELZER, Das Patriarchat von Akrida (1902); KRUMBACHER, Gesch. d. byzant. Litt. (2d ed., Munich, 1897), 994 sqq.; NEHER, in Kirchenlex., I, 165-167. THOMAS J. SHAHAN. Johann Heinrich Achterfeldt Johann Heinrich Achterfeldt Theologian, b. at Wesel, 17 June, 1788; d. at Bonn, 11 May, 1877. He was appointed professor of theology at Bonn in 1826 and in 1832 he founded with his colleague, J.W.J. Braun (d. 1863), the "Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Katholische Theologie" (1832-52), the chief purpose of which was to defend the teachings of Hermes. He also published under the title "Christkatholische Dogmatik" (Münster, 1834-36) the theological writings which Hermes (d. 1831) had left in MSS. This publication was followed by sharp controversy, and eventually by the condemnation of the works of Hermes, which Pope Gregory XVI placed upon the Index, 26 September, 1835. In 1843, Achterfeldt incurred suspension from his professorial chair rather than sign the declaration of faith required by the Coadjutor Archbishop von Geissel of Cologne. Though Hermesianism lost ground and finally disappeared during the revolution of 1848, Achterfeldt clung to his views. In 1862, however, he was reinstated as professor, and in 1873, having made his submission to ecclesiastical authority, he was freed from suspension. MÜLLER, in Dict. de théol. catholique, s. v.; HERGENR THER, Handbuch d. allg. Kirchengesch. (Freiburg, 1886), III, 969. E.A. PACE Theodore William Achtermann Theodore William Achtermann A German sculptor, was born in 1799, at Munster in Westphalia, of poor parents. After working on a farm he became a cabinetmaker. His carving was so clever and graceful that it attracted attention, and procured him the good will of some art patrons, who sent him to Berlin (1831), where he studied under the direction of Rauch, Tieck, and Schadow, then the foremost sculptors of Germany. Achtermann, however, being of a profoundly religious character, was drawn irresistibly to Rome, where he arrived in 1839 and remained till the end of his life. The first prominent product of his Roman studies was a Pietà which was secured for the Cathedral of Münster and which has often been copied. In 1858 the same cathedral acquired a group of seven life-size figures representing the descent from the Cross which is regarded as one of its chief art treasures. His last great work, finished when the artist had passed his seventieth year, was a Gothic altar with three reliefs representing scenes from the life of Our Saviour. This was set up in the cathedral at Prague in the year 1873. He died at Rome in 1889. Achtermann's art is characterized by deep religious feeling and great imaginative power, though, on account of his having taken to an artistic career when somewhat advanced in life, he did not attain the technical mastery which he might otherwise have acquired. HERTKENS, Wilhelm Achtermann (Trier, 1895). CHARLES G. HERBERMANN Valens Acidalius Valens Acidalius (German, Havekenthal). Philologist, Latin poet, and convert to the Catholic Church, b. 1567 at Wittstock in the Mark of Brandenburg; d. 25 May, 1595, at Neisse. After his education at the universities of Rost ck, Greifswald, and Helmstädt, he began the study of medicine, but later devoted most of his time to the Latin classics, spending three years in the universities of Padua and Bologna and travelling through the chief Italian cities. After taking his degree of Doctor of Medicine at Bologna, he devoted himself entirely to Latin literature. Returning to Germany in 1593 in feebler health, he found a patron in Johann Matthäus Wacke von Wackenfels, also a convert, and chancellor to the Bishop of Breslau, Andreas von Jerin. In 1595 he became a Catholic, and, about the same time, Rector of the Breslau Gymnasium. He died a few weeks later. Before his death appeared Animadversiones in Q. Curtium (Frankfurt, 1594) and Plautinae divinationes et interpretationes (Frankfurt, 1595). A posthumous work is Notae in Taciti opera, in Panegyricos veteres. Lipsius spoke of him as a "pearl of Germany", and Ritschl, as having a "remarkable critical faculty." BINDER in Kirchenlex.; RÄSS, Convertiten. F.M. RUDGE The Diocese of Aci-Reale The Diocese of Aci-Reale (JACA REGALIS). Located in the island of Sicily; includes fourteen communes in the civil province of Catania, immediately subject to Rome. It was created by Gregory XVI, in 1844, though no bishop was appointed until 1872. The episcopal city is picturesquely situated at the foot of Mt. Etna, amid rich gardens of oranges and almonds. There are 18 parishes, 305 churches, 330 secular priests, 70 regulars, and 150,219 inhabitants. Its first bishop was Monsignor Gerlando Maria Genuardi, of the Oratory. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1866), XXI, 569; GAMS, Series episcoporum ecclesiae catholicae (Ratisbon, 1873), 955; VIGO, Notizie storiche della citta d'Acireale (Palermo, 1836); PIRRI, Sicilia Sacra (Palermo, 1733), continued by MARZO-FERRO (ibid., 1860). For the controversy concerning the cultus of St. Expedite, see Civilta Cattolica, 2, and 16 Dec. 1905, also Analecta Bolland. (1906), I. Leopold Ackermann Leopold Ackermann A Catholic professor of exegesis, b. in Vienna, 17 November, 1771; d. in the same city, 9 September, 1831. He entered the canons regular of St. Augustine, taking, in religion, the name of Peter Fourrier. He taught Oriental languages and archaeology, and in 1806 became professor of exegesis of the Old Testament in the University of Vienna, succeeding Jahn there. He filled this chair for twenty-five years with success. Two works of his, "Introductio in libros Veteris Foederis usibus academicis accomodata" (Vienna, 1825) and "Archaeologia biblica" (Vienna, 1826), have new and corrected editions by Jahn, third and fourth respectively. The latter was reprinted by Migne (Cursus Scripturae Sacrae, II, 1840, col. 823-1068).He also wrote "Prophetae Minores perpetua annotatione illustrata" (Vienna, 1830), in which he gives nothing new but collects whatever is best in older works, and supplies philological observations upon it. He reproduces the original Hebrew text and comments on it, briefly but excellently. SEBACK, P.F. Ackermann, biographische Skizze (Vienna, 1832); VIGOROUX in Dict. de la Bible (Paris, 1895), I, 149, 150. JOHN J. A'BECKET Acmonia Acmonia A titular see of Phrygia Pacatiana, in Asia Minor, now known as Ahat-Keui. It is mentioned by Cicero (Pro Flacco, 15) and was a point on the road between Dorylaeum and Philadelphia. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr. (London, 1878), I, 21; MAS LATRIE, Tr sor de chronologie, etc. (Paris, 1887), 1979. Acoemetae Acoemetae (Greek akoimetai, from privative a and koiman, to rest). Sometimes, an appellation common to all Eastern ascetics known by the rigour of their vigils; but usually, the name of a special order of Greek or Basilian monks devoting themselves to prayer and praise without intermission, day and night. That order was founded, about the year 400, by a certain Alexander, a man of noble birth, who fled from the court of Byzantium to the desert, both from love of solitude and fear of episcopal honours. When he returned to Constantinople, there to establish the laus perennis, he brought with him the experience of a first foundation on the Euphrates and three hundred monks. The enterprise, however, proved difficult, owing to the hostility of Patriarch Nestorius and Emperor Theodosius. Driven from the monastery of St. Mennas which he had reared in the city, and thrown with his monks on the hospitality of St. Hypathius, Abbot of Rufiniana, he finally succeeded in building at the mouth of the Black Sea the monastery of Gomon, where he died, about 440. His successor, Abbot John, founded on the eastern shore of the Bosphorus, opposite Sostenium or Istenia, the Irenaion, always referred to in ancient documents as the "great monastery" or motherhouse of the Acoemetae. Under the third abbot, St. Marcellus, when the hostility of Patriarch and Emperor had somewhat subsided, Studius, a former Consul, founded in the city the famous "Studium" which later, chiefly under Abbot Theodore (759-826), became a centre of learning as well as piety, and brought to a culmination the glory of the order. On the other hand, the very glamour of the new "Studites" gradually cast into the shade the old Acoemetae. The feature that distinguished the Acoemetae from the other Basilian monks was the uninterrupted service of God. Their monasteries, which numbered hundreds of inmates and sometimes went into the thousand, were distributed in national groups, Latins, Greeks, Syrians, Egyptians; and each group into as many choirs as the membership permitted and the service required: With them the divine office was the literal carrying out of Psalm cxviii, 164: "Seven times a day have I given praise to Thee," consisting as it did of seven hours: orthrinon, trite, ekte, enate, lychnikon, prothypnion, mesonyktion, which through St. Benedict of Nursia passed into the Western Church under the equivalent names of prime, tierce, sext, none, vespers, compline, matins (nocturns) and lauds. The influence of the Acoemetae on Christian life was considerable. The splendour of their religious services largely contributed to shape the liturgy. Their idea of the laus perennis and similar institutions, passed into the Western Church with St. Maurice of Agaune and St. Denys. Our modern perpetual adoration is a remnant of it. Even before the time of the Studites, the copying of manuscripts was in honour among the Acoemetae, and the library of the "Great Monastery," consulted even by the Roman Pontiffs, is the first mentioned by the historians of Byzantium. The Acoemetae took a prominent part -- and always in the sense of orthodoxy -- in the Christological discussions raised by Nestorius and Eutyches, and later, in the controversies of the Icons. They proved strong supporters of the Apostolic See in the schism of Acacius, as did the Studites in that of Photius. The only flaw which marred the purity of their doctrine and their loyalty to Rome, occurred in the sixth century, when, the better to combat the Eutychian tendencies of the Scythian monks, they themselves fell into the Nestorian error and had to be excommunicated by Pope John II. But it was the error of a few ( quibusdam paucis monachis, says a contemporary document), and it could not seriously detract from the praise given their order by the Roman Synod of 484: "Thanks to your true piety towards God, to your zeal ever on the watch, and to a special gift of the Holy Ghost, you discern the just from the impious, the faithful from the miscreants, the Catholics from the heretics." HELYOT, Histoire des ordres monastiques (Paris, 1714); HEIMBUCHER, Orden u. Kongregationen (Paderborn, 1896); MARIN, Les moines de Constantinople De Studio, Coenobio Constantinopolitano (Paris, 1897); GARDNER, Theodore of Studium (London, 1905). J.F. SOLLIER Acolouthia Acolouthia (From the Greek akoloutheo, to follow.) In ecclesiastical terminology signifies the order or arrangement of the Divine Office (perhaps because the parts are closely connected and follow in order) and also, in a wide sense, the Office itself. The Acolouthia is composed of musical and rhetorical elements, the first usually given in the musical mode or tone ( Echos), according to which the liturgical compositions are chanted. There are eight modes, four primary and four secondary. As the Greeks rarely used texts set to musical notation, they learned by heart the words and music of some standard hymn or canticle, and this served as a model for other hymns of the same rhythm. A strophe or stanza of a standard hymn which indicates the melody of a composition, is known as a hirmos ( eirmos). Some believe that a hirmos placed at the end of a hymn should be called a catabasia ( katabasia) while others hold that the catabasia is a short hymn sung by the choir, who descend from their seats into the church for the purpose. The fundamental element of the Acolouthia is the troparion, which is a short hymn, or one of the stanzas of a hymn. The contakion ( kontakion) is a troparion which explains briefly the character of the feast celebrated in the day's Office. The oikos is a somewhat longer troparion, which in concise style glorifies the virtues and merits of the subject of the feast. The apolytikion is a troparion which is proper to the day, and is said just before the prayer of dismissal. The ode was originally one of the nine inspired canticles sung in the morning Office, but later the name was also given to uninspired compositions, consisting of a varying number of poetical troparia and modelled after the Scriptural odes. Such odes are often combined to form a canon ( kanon) which is usually composed of nine, but sometimes of a smaller number of odes. Finally, the stichos is a short verse taken from the Psalms or some other book of Holy Scripture, while the sticheron is a short verse of ecclesiastical composition modelled after the stichos. The parts of the Office are the Little Vespers, the Greater Vespers, the Orthros (dawn), the four little Hours, and the Apodeipnon (compline). The Little Vespers, which are recited before sunset, consist of the invitatory versicles, Psalms 103 and 140, several stichoi and similar stichera, a short hymn, and a psalm, some similar stichera and stichoi, the Nunc dimittis, the trisagion, and the apolytikion. Greater Vespers, which are said after sunset, begin with the invitatory, Psalm 103 and the greater litany, and then the priest says the prayers of the Lychnic. The choir recites the first cathisma (division of the psalter), and after the deacon has said the litany it chants Psalm 140, and several versicles during the incensation. After changing his vestments in the sacristy, the priest says the prayer for the entrance, the deacon after some versicles recites the litanies, and the priest says the prayer of benediction. During the procession to the narthex, stichera proper to the feast are recited, and then the priest recites a series of prayers, to which the choir answers Kyrie Eleison many times, and the priest blesses all present. Next the stichera proper to the feast are said by the choir with the Nunc dimittis, the trisagion, a prayer to the Trinity, the Lord's Prayer, and the apolytikion, and Vespers are concluded with lessons from the Scriptures. The first part of the Orthros, or midnight office, consists of twelve prayers, the greater litany, two stichera followed by Psalms 134 and 135, a third sticheron followed by the gradual psalms, an antiphon with the prokeimenon, the reading of the Gospel, many acclamations and three canons of odes, while the second part of the Orthros, corresponding to Lauds in the Roman Office, is composed of Psalms 148, 149, 150, several similar stichera, the greater doxology, a benediction, and the prayer for the dismissal. Each little Hour is followed by a supplementary hour, called a Mesorion. Prime begins with the recitation of three psalms followed by a doxology, two stichoi, a doxology, a troparion in honour of the Theotokos (the Birthgiver of God, i.e. the Blessed Virgin), the trisagion, several variable troparia, the doxology and dismissal, while its supplementary Hour is composed of a troparion, doxology, troparion of the Theotokos, Kyrie Eleison repeated forty times, a prayer, and a doxology. Terce, Sext, and None each contain the invitatory versicles, three psalms, a doxology, two stichoi, a doxology, the troparion of the Theotokos, the trisagion, doxology, another troparion of the Blessed Virgin, and the Kyrie Eleison repeated forty times, and their Mesoria have the invitatory versicles, three psalms, a doxology, troparion, doxology, troparion of the Theotokos, Kyrie Eleison repeated forty times, and a proper prayer. Before or after None, an office called Ta typika is recited, which consists ordinarily of the invitatory versicles, Psalms 102 and 145, and a troparion, but in the seasons of fasting this Office is regulated by different rubrics. The last part of the Office is called the Apodeipnon and corresponds to the Roman Compline. The greater Apodeipnon is said during Lent, the little Apodeipnon during the rest of the year. The latter is composed of a doxology, troparion, the trisagion, the Lord's Prayer, the Kyrie Eleison repeated twelve times, and invitatory versicles, and Psalms 50, 69, and 162, which are followed by the greater doxology, the Creed, the trisagion, the Lord's Prayer, the troparion proper to the feast, the Kyrie Eleison repeated forty times, several invocations, and the long prayers of dismissal. RAYAEUS, Tractatus de Acolouthia, etc., in Acta SS., June II, 13; LECLERCQ in Dict. d'archéol. chrét., II., 340; NEALE, History of the Holy Eastern Church (London, 1850). J.F. GOGGIN Acolyte Acolyte (Gr. akolouthos; Lat. sequens, comes, a follower, an attendant). An acolyte is a cleric promoted to the fourth and highest minor order in the Latin Church, ranking next to a subdeacon. The chief offices of an acolyte are to light the candles on the altar, to carry them in procession, and during the solemn singing of the Gospel; to prepare wine and water for the sacrifice of the Mass; and to assist the sacred ministers at the Mass, and other public services of the Church. In the ordination of an acolyte the bishop presents him with a candle, extinguished, and an empty cruet, using appropriate words expressive of these duties. Altar boys are often designated as acolytes and perform the duties of such. The duties of the acolyte in Catholic liturgical services are fully described in the manuals of liturgy, e.g. Pio Matinucci, "Manuale Sacrarum Caeremoniarum" (Rome, 1880), VI, 625; and De Herdt, "Sacrae Liturgiae Praxis" (Louvain, 1889), II, 28-39. It is just possible that the obscure passage in the life of Victor I (189-199), erroneously attributed by Ferraris (I, 101) to Pius I (140-155), concerning sequentes may really mean acolytes (Duchesne, Lib. Pont., I, 137; cf. I, 161). Be this as it may, the first authentic document extant in which mention is made of acolytes is a letter (Eus., Hist. Eccl., VI, xliii), written in 251, by Pope Cornelius to Fabius, Bishop of Antioch, and in which we possess a definite enumeration of the Roman clergy. There existed at that time in Rome forty-six priests, seven deacons, seven sub-deacons, forty-two acolytes, and fifty-two exorcists, lectors, and doorkeepers. It is worthy of note that two hundred and fifty years later the "Constitutum Silvestri," a document of about 501 (Mansi, "Coll. Conc.," II, 626; cf. "Lib. Pont.," ed. Duchesne, Introd., 138), gives forty-five acolytes as the number in Rome. Pope Fabian (236-250), the immediate predecessor of Cornelius, had divided Rome into seven ecclesiastical districts or regions, setting a deacon over each one. A redistribution of the clergy of the city soon followed according to these seven divisions. The Roman acolytes were subject to the deacon of the region, or, in case of his absence or death, to the archdeacon. In each region there was a deacon, a subdeacon, and according to the numeration above, probably six acolytes. Ancient ecclesiastical monuments and documents lead us to believe that a subdeacon was a sort of head-acolyte or arch-acolyte, holding the same relation to the acolytes as the archdeacon to deacons, with this difference, however, that there was only one archdeacon, while there was a deacon for each region. As late as the first half of the tenth century we meet with the term arch-acolyte in Luitprand of Cremona ("Antapodosis", VI, 6; Muratori, "SS. Rer. Ital.", II, 1, 473), where it stands for a "dignity" (q.v.) in the metropolitan church of Capua. We may therefore regard the ministry of the subdeacon and acolyte as a development of that of the deacon. Moreover, these three categories of clerics differ from the lower orders in this, that they are all attached to the service of the altar, while the others are not. The letters of St. Cyprian (7, 28, 34, 52, 59, 78, 79) give ample proof of the fact that at Carthage also, in the middle of the third century, acolytes existed. Eusebius (De Vita Constant., III, 8) mentions the acolytes present at the Council of Nice (325), not as designated for the service of the altar, but as persons attached to the retinue of bishops. The "Statuta Ecclesiae Antiqua", often referred to as the decrees of the so-called Fourth Synod of Carthage (398), but really belonging to the end of the fifth, or the early part of the sixth, century (Duchesne, "Christian Worship", 332, 350), prove that this order was then known in the ecclesiastical province of Arles in Gaul, where these decrees were enacted. It would seem, however, that all the churches in the West, and more especially the smaller churches, did not have acolytes. We might conclude that at Reims, in the fifth century, there were no acolytes, if we could attach credence to the will of Bishop Bennadius, predecessor of St. Remigius. He gives all the categories of clerics except this one (Flodoard, Hist. Rem. Eccl., I, ix, in P.L., LXXXV, 43). In the Christian epigraphy of Gaul mention is made, as far as is known, of only one acolyte, viz., at Lyons in 517 (La Blant, "Inser. chrét. de la Gaule," I, 36), and, in general, very few epigraphs of acolytes are found in the first five centuries. In the Irish Collection of Canons (Collectio Canonum Hibernensis, ed. Wasserschleben, Giessen, 1874, 32) the arch-acolyte is not mentioned among the seven ecclesiastical degrees, but placed with the psalmist and cantor outside the ordinary hierarchy. In the sixth canon of the aforementioned "Statuta" the duties of acolytes are specified, as they are by a contemporary writer, John the Deacon, in his letter to Senarius (P.L., LIX, 404). Specific information concerning the place and duties of acolytes in the Roman Church between the fifth and ninth centuries is drawn from a series of ancient directions known as the "Ordines Romani" (q.v.-Duchesne, op. Cit., 146 and passim). According to them there were in Rome (perhaps also in Carthage, and other large Western cities) three classes of acolytes, all of whom, nevertheless, had their duties in relation to the liturgical synaxes or assemblies: (1) those of the palace ( palatini), who served the Pope (or bishop) in his palace, and in the Lateran Basilica; (2) those of the region ( regionarii), who assisted the deacons in their duties in the different parts of the city; (3) those of the station ( stationarii), who served in church; these last were not a distinct body, but belonged to the regional acolytes. Regional acolytes were also termed titular ( titulares) from the church to which they were attached (Mabillon, "Comm. in Ord. Rom.", in his "Musaeum Italicum," II, 20; for an old epigraph in Aringhius, 156, see Ferraris, I, 100; Magani, "Antica Lit. Rom.", Milan, 1899, III, 61 - see also ROME, CITY OF). Acolytes of the palace were destined in a particular manner to the service of the Pope, assisting him not only in church functions, but also as ablegates, messengers of the papal court, in distributing alms, carrying pontifical documents and notices, and performing other duties of like character. These offices, however, acolytes shared with readers and subdeacons, or arch-acolytes. At Rome they carried not only the eulogia (q.v.), or blessed bread, when occasion required, but also the Blessed Eucharist from the Pope's Mass to that of the priests whose duty it was to celebrate in the churches (tituli). This is evident from the letter of Innocent I (401-417) to Decentius, Bishop of Gubbio, in Italy (P.L., XX, 556). They also carried the sacred species to the absent, especially to confessors of the faith detained in prison (see TARSICIUS). This office of carrying the Blessed Eucharist, St. Justin, who suffered martyrdom about 165 or 166, had previously assigned to deacons (Apolog., I, 67), which would indicate that at that time acolytes did not exist. We learn still further from the "Ordines Romani" that when the Pope was to pontificate in a designated district all the acolytes of that region went to the Lateran Palace to receive and accompany him. In the sixth or seventh century, perhaps a little earlier, the chief acolyte of the stational church, carrying the sacred chrism covered with a veil, and, directing the procession, preceded on foot the horse on which the Pope rode. The other acolytes followed, carrying the Gospel-book, burses, and other articles used in the holy sacrifice. They accompanied the Pope to the secretarium or sacristy (see BASILICA). One of them solemnly placed the book of Gospels upon the altar. They carried seven lighted candles before the pontiff entering the sanctuary. With lighted candles, two acolytes accompanied the deacon to the ambo (q.v.) for the singing of the Gospel. After the Gospel, another acolyte received the book, which, placed in a case and sealed, was later returned to the Lateran by the head acolyte. An acolyte carried to the deacon at the altar, the chalice and pall; acolytes received, and cared for, the offerings gathered by the Pope; an acolyte held the paten, covered with a veil, from the beginning to the middle of the canon. In due time acolytes bore, in linen bags, or burses suspended from their necks, the oblata, or consecrated loaves from the altar to the bishops and priests in the sanctuary; that they might break the sacred species (see FRACTIO PANIS). It will be seen from these, and other duties devolving upon acolytes, that they were in a large measure responsible for the successful carrying out of pontifical and stational ceremonies. This was particularly true after the foundation of the Schola Cantorum (q.v.) at Rome, of which there is clear evidence from the seventh century onward. Being then the only ones in minor orders engaged in active ministry, acolytes acquired a much greater importance than they had hitherto enjoyed. Cardinal priests had no other assistants in their titular churches. During Lent, and at the solemnization of baptism, acolytes fulfilled all the functions which hitherto had devolved upon the exorcists, just as the subdeacon had absorbed those of the lector or reader. Alexander VII (1655-67) abolished the medieval college of acolytes described above and substituted in their place (26 October, 1655) the twelve voting prelates of the Signature of Justice. As evidence of their origin these prelates still retain, at papal functions, many of the offices or duties described above. According to the ancient discipline of the Roman Church the order of acolyte was conferred as the candidate approached adolescence, about the age of twenty, as the decree of Pope Siricius (385) to Himerius, Bishop of Tarragona, in Spain, was interpreted (P.L., XIII, 1142). Five years were to elapse before an acolyte could receive subdeaconship. Pope Zosimus reduced (418) this term to four years. The Council of Trent leaves to the judgment of bishops to determine what space should elapse between the conferring of the acolythate and subdeaconship; it is also interesting to note, with Dr. Probst (Kirchenlex., I, 385), that the Council's desire (Sess. XXIII, c. 17, de ref.) concerning the performance of ministerial services exclusively by minor-order clerics was never fulfilled. In ancient ecclesiastical Rome there was no solemn ordination of acolytes. At communion-time in any ordinary Mass, even when it was not stational, the candidate approached the Pope, or in his absence, one of the bishops of the pontifical court. At an earlier moment of the Mass he had been vested with the stole and the chasuble. Holding in his arms a linen bag ( porrigitur in ulnas ejus sacculus super planetam; a symbol of the highest function of these clerics, that of carrying, as stated above, the consecrated hosts) he prostrated himself while the Pontiff pronounced over him a simple blessing (Mabillon, op. Cit., II, 85, ed. Paris, 1724). It may be well to mention here the two prayers of the ancient Roman Mass-book known as the "Sacramentarium Gregorianum" (Mabillon, Lit. Rom. Vetus, II, 407), said by the Pontiff over the acolyte, and the first of which is identical with that of the actual Roman Pontifical "Domine, sancte Pater, aeterne Deus, qui ad Moysen et Aaron locutus es," etc. According to the aforementioned "Statuta Ecclesiae Antiqua," which give us the ritual usage of the most important churches in Gaul about the year 500, the candidate for acolyte was first instructed by the bishop in the duties of his office, and then a candlestick, with a candle extinguished, was placed in his hand by the archdeacon, as a sign that the lights of the church would be in his care; moreover, an empty cruet was given him, symbolical of his office of presenting wine and water at the altar for the holy sacrifice. A short blessing followed. (See MINOR ORDERS; FRACTIO PANIS; EUCHARIST; MASS.) ANDREW B. MEEHAN Joaquin Acosta Joaquín Acosta A native of Colombia in South America, who served in the Colombian army and in 1834 attempted a scientific survey of the country between Socorro and the Magdalena River. Seven years later he explored western Colombia from Antioquia to Ancerma studying its topography, its natural history and the traces of its aboriginal inhabitants. In 1845 he went to Spain to examine such documentary material concerning Colombia and its colonial history as was then accessible, and three years later he published his "Compendio", a work on the discovery and colonization of New Granada (Colombia). The map accompanying this work, now out of date, was very fair for the time, and the work itself is still valuable for its abundant bibliographic references and biographic notes. What he says in it of the writings of Quesada the conqueror of New Granada, is very incomplete and in many ways erroneous, but his biographies of the the ecclesiastics to whom, following upon Quesada, our knowledge of the country, its colonization, is due, remain a guide to the student of Spanish-American history. Without him, we might yet be ignorant of the fundamental works of Zamora, Fresle, and of the linguistic labours of Lugo. One year after the "Compendio", the "Semenario" appeared at Paris, embodying the botanical papers of Caldas. AD. F. BANDELIER Jose de Acosta José de Acosta The son of well-to-do and respected parents, born at Medina del Campo in Spain, 1540; died at Salamanca, 15 February, 1600. He became a novice in the Society of Jesus at the age of thirteen at the place of his birth. Four of his brothers successively joined the same order. Before leaving Spain, he was lecturer in theology at Ocana, and in April, 1569, was sent to Lima, Peru, where the Jesuits had been established in the proceeding year. At Lima, Acosta again occupied the chair of theology. his fame as an orator had proceeded him. In 1571 he went to Cuzco as a visitor of the college of the Jesuits then recently founded. Returning to Lima three years later, to again fill the chair of theology, he was elected provincial in 1576. He founded a number of colleges, among them those of Arequipa, Potose, Chuquisaca, Panama, and La Paz, but met with considerable opposition from the viceroy, Francisco de Toledo. He official duties obliged him to investigate personally a very extensive range of territory, so that he acquired a practical knowledge of the vast province, and of its aboriginal inhabitants. At the provincial, council of 1582, at Lima, Acosta played a very important part. Called to Spain by the King in 1585, he was detained in Mexico, where he dedicated himself to studies of the country and people. returning to Europe, he filled the chair of theology at the Roman college in 1594, as well as other important positions. At the time of his death, he was rector of the college at Salamanca. Few members of the Society of Jesus in the sixteenth century have been so uniformly eulogized as Father Acosta. Independently of his private character, his learning and the philosophic spirit pervading his works attracted the widest attention in learned circles. Translations of his works exist in many languages of Europe, while the naturalists of the eighteenth century praise his knowledge of the flora of western South America. Aside from his publication of the proceedings of the provincial councils of 1567 and 1583, and several works of exclusively theological import, Acosta is best known as writer through the "De Natura Novi Orbis." "De promulgatione Evangelii apud Barbaros, sive De Procuranda Indorum salute", and above all, the "Historia natural y moral de las Indias." The first two appeared at Salamanca in 1588, the last at Seville in 1590, and was soon after its publication translated into various languages. It is chiefly the "Historia natural y moral" that has established the reputation of Acosta. In a form more concise than that employed by his predecessors, Gomara and Oviedo, he treats the natural and philosophic history of the New World from a broader point of view. Much of what he says is of necessity erroneous, because it is influenced by the standard of knowledge of his time; but his criticisms are remarkable, while always dignified. He reflects the scientific errors of the period in which he lived, but with hints of a more advanced understanding. As far as the work of the Church among the Indians is concerned, the "De procurandâ Indorum salute" is perhaps more valuable than the "Historia," because it shows the standpoint from which efforts at civilizing the aborigines should be undertaken. That standpoint indicates no common perception of the true nature of the Indian, and of the methods of approaching him for his own benefit. De Backer, Bibliotheque des equivains de la Cie. de Jesus. Among earlier sources, Father Eusebius Nieremberg, Anella Oliva, Historia del Peru y de los Verones insignes de la Compagnia de Jesus (1639) deserves mention, as well as Nicholas Antonio, Biblioteca Vetustisima and the Bibliography of Beristain de Souza; writers on Spanish-American literature generally mention Acosta. A good Bibliography, and a short Biography of Acosta, are found in Enrique Torres Saldanando, Los antiquos Jesuitas del Peru (Lima, 1882). See also: Mendiburu, Diccionaria historico-biografica del Peru, I (1874). AD. F. BANDELIER Acquapendente Acquapendente A diocese in Italy under the immediate jurisdiction of the Holy See, comprising seven towns of the Province of Rome. Acquapendente was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Orvieto until 1649. That year, in consequence of a conspiracy, Cristoforo Girarda, a Barnabite of Novara, Bishop of Castro, was assassinated. In punishment of this crime, Innocent X ordered Castro to be destroyed, and raised Acquapendente to the dignity of an episcopal city (Bull, 13 September, 1649). Its bishops, however, retain the appellation "post Castrenses." The first incumbent of the new See was the Hieronymite ( il gerosolimitano) Pompeo Mignucci of Offida, who had been Archbishop of Ragusa. He took possession 10 January, 1650. This diocese contains 13 parishes; 80 churches, chapels, and oratories; 47 secular clergy; 35 seminarians; 15 regular priests; 49 religious (women); 30 confraternities. Population, 19,350. UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice, 1722), I, 583; CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d Italia (Venice, 1866), V, 549; GAMS, Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae (Ratisbon, 1873), 660; RHANGIASI, Bibliografia istorica della città e luoghi dello Stato Pontificio (Rome, 1772). ERNESTO BUONAIUTI Acquaviva (Cardinals) Acquaviva Name of several Italian cardinals. FRANCESCO, b. 1665 at Naples, of the family of the Dukes of Atri. He filled various offices under Innocent XI, Alexander VIII, Innocent XII, and Clement XI. The latter created him Cardinal, and Bishop of Sabina. He died in 1723, and was buried at Rome in the Church of Santa Cecilia. GIOVANNI VINCENZO, Bishop of Melfi and Rapolla (1537), Cardinal-priest of Sylvester and Martin (1542), d. in 1566. GIULIO, b. at Naples, 1546; d. 1574. Nuncio of St. Pius V to Philip II of Spain, made Cardinal by the same pope, whom he assisted on his deathbed. OTTAVIO (the elder), b. at Naples, 1560; d. 1612; filled various offices under Sixtus V, Gregory XIV, and Clement VIII, was Cardinal-legate in the Campagna and at Avignon, and was instrumental in the conversion of Henri IV. Leo XI made him Archbishop of Naples (1605). OTTAVIO (the younger), of the family of the dukes of Atri, b. at Naples, 1608; d. at Rome, 1674. He was made Cardinal in 1654 by Innocent IX, and legate at Viterbo and in Romagna, where he checked the ravages of the banditti. He is buried at Rome in the church of Santa Cecilia. TROIANO, b. 1694 at Naples, of the same ducal family; d. at Rome in 1747. He was employed by Benedict XIII in the administration of the Papal States, made Cardinal by Clement XII in 1732. He represented in the Curia the Kings of Spain, Philip V and Charles III, and at the former's request was made Archbishop of Toledo, whence he was transferred to Montereale. He was influential in the conclave that elected (17 August, 1740) Benedict XIV. He is buried at Rome in the Church of Santa Cecilia. PASQUALE, of Avignon, b. 1719 at Naples; d. 1788. He was made Cardinal by Clement XIV in 1773. STAHL in Kirchenlex., I, 1177-78. THOMAS J. SHAHAN Claudius Acquaviva Claudius Acquaviva Fifth General of the Society of Jesus, born October, 1543; died 31 January, 1615. He was the son of Prince Giovanni Antonio Acquaviva, Duke of Atri, in the Abruzzi, and, at twenty-five, when high in favor at the papal court, renounced his brilliant worldly prospects, and entered the Society. After being Provincial both of Naples and Rome, he was elected General of the Society, 19 February, 1581. He was the youngest who ever occupied that post. His election coincided with the first accusation of ambition ever made against a great official of the Order. Manareus had been named Vicar by Father Mercurian, and it was alleged that he aspired to the generalship. His warm defender was Acquaviva, but to dispel the slightest suspicion, Manareus renounced his right to be elected. Acquaviva was chosen by a strong majority. His subsequent career justified the wisdom of the choice, which was very much doubted at the time by the Pope himself. During his generalship, the persecution in England, wither he had once asked to go as a missionary, was raging; the Huguenot troubles in France were at their height; Christianity was being crushed in Japan; the Society was expelled from Venice, and was oppressed elsewhere; a schism within the Society was immanent; the pope, the Inquisition, and Philip II were hostile. Acquaviva was denounced to the Pope, even by men like Toletus (q.v.), yet such was his prudence, his skill, his courage, and his success, that he is regarded as the greatest administrator, after St. Ignatius, the Society ever had. Even those who were jealous of him admitted his merit, when, to satisfy them, the fifth and sixth Congregations ordered an investigation to be made of his method of government. The greatest difficulty he had to face was the schism organized in Spain by Vasquez (q.v.). The King and Pope had been won over by the dissidents. Open demands for quasi-independence for Spain had been made in the Congregations of the Society. No Jesuit was allowed to leave Spain without royal permission. Episcopal visitation of the houses had been asked for and granted. But finally, through the mediation of the English Jesuit, Robert Parsons (q.v.), who was highly esteemed by Philip, the King was persuaded of the impolicy of the measures, while Acquaviva convinced the Pope that the schism would be disastrous for the Church. Deprived of these supports the rebellion collapsed. Simultaneously the Inquisition was doing its best to destroy the Society. It listened to defamatory accusations, threw the Provincial of Castille into prison, demanded the surrender of the Constitutions for examination, until Acquaviva succeeded in inducing the Pope to call the case to his own tribunal, and revoke the powers which had been given to the Inquisition, or which it claimed. Finally, Pope Sixtus V, who had always been unfriendly to the Society, determined to change it completely. The Emperor Ferdinand implored him not to act; the College of Cardinals resisted; but the Pope was obstinate. The bull was prepared, and Acquaviva himself was compelled to send in a personal request to have even the name changed, when the death of the pontiff saved the situation--a coincidence which gave rise to accusations against the Society. His successor, Gregory XIV, hastened to renew all the former privileges of the Order, and to confirm its previous approbations. During Acquaviva's administration, the protracted controversy on Grace, between the Dominicans and the Jesuits, took place, and was carried on with some interruptions for nearly nine years, without either party drawing any decision from the Church, the contestants being ultimately ordered to discontinue the discussion. It was Acquaviva who ordered the scheme of Jesuit studies, known as the "Ratio Studiorum" (q.v.), to be drawn up which, with some modifications, has been followed to the present day. Six of the most learned and experienced scholars of the Society were summoned to Rome, who laid out the entire plan of studies, beginning with theology, philosophy and their cognate branches, and going down to the smallest details of grammar. When finished, it was sent to the different Provinces for suggestions, but was not imposed until 1592, and then with the proviso that the Society would determine what charge was to be to made, which was done in the General Congregation of 1593. The period of his generalship was the most notable in the history of the Society for the men it produced, and the work it accomplished. The names of Suarez, Toletus, Bellarmine, Maldontus, Clavius, Lessius, Ripalda, Ricci, Parsons, Southwell, Campion, Aloysius Gonzaga, and a host of others are identified with it. Royal and pontifical missions to France, Russia, Poland, Constantinople, and Japan were entrusted to men like Possevin, and Bellarmine, and Vallignani. Houses were multiplied all over the world with an astonishing rapidity. The colleges were educating some of the most brilliant statesmen, princes, and warriors of Europe. The Reductions of Paraguay were organized; the heroic work of the missions of Canada were begun; South America was being traversed in all directions; China had been penetrated, and the Jesuits were the emperor's official astronomers; martyrs in great numbers were sacrificing their lives in England, America, India, Japan, and elsewhere; and the great struggle organized by Canisius and Nadal to check the Reformation in Germany had been brought to a successful conclusion. The guiding spirit of all these great achievements, and many more besides, was Claudius Acquaviva. He died at the age of seventy-one, 31 January, 1615. Jouvency says the longer he lived the more glorious the Society became; and Cordarius speaks of his election as an inspiration. Besides the "Ratio Studiorum," of which he is substantially the author, as it was under his initiative and supervision that the plan was conceived and carried out, we have also the "Directorium Exercitiorum Spiritualium S.P.N. Ignatii," or "Guide to the Spiritual Exercises" which was also suggested and revised by him. This work has been inserted in the "Corpus Instituti S.J." More directly his are the "Industriae ad Curandos Aninme Morbos." As General, he wrote many encyclical letters, and he is author of nearly all the "Ordinationes Generalium" which were printed in 1595, with the Approbation of the Fifth General Congregation. Many other documents and letters, relating chiefly to matters of government. are still extant. Jouvency, Epitome Hist. Soc. Jesu, IV; Crétineau-Joly, Historie de la Comp de Jesus III; Varones Ilustres, V, 79; Menologium S. J., 31 January. T.J. CAMPELL Acqui Acqui A diocese suffragan of Turin, Italy, which contains ninety-three towns in the Province of Alexandria, twenty-three in the Province of Genoa, and one in the Province of Cuneo. The first indubitable Bishop of Acqui is Ditarius. A tablet found in 1753 in the church of St. Peter, informs us that Ditarius, the bishop, died on the 25th of January, 488, in the Consulate of Dinamias and Syphidius. Popular tradition gives Deusdedit, Andreas Severus Masimus, and, earliest of all, Majorinus, as bishops prior to him. Calculating the time that these bishops, Roman certainly in name, governed this see, Majorinus probably lived either at the end of the fourth, or in the beginning of the fifth, century. It is very probable that the diocese of Acqui was erected at the end of the fourth century, about the same time, it would appear, as the dioceses of Novara, Turin, Ivrea, Aosta and perhaps, Asti and Alba: Presupposing the fact that the erection of dioceses in the provinces of the Roman Empire, after Constantine, was not done without previous agreement between the Church and the emperors, it is safe to say that the most propitious time for such organization in Northern Italy was the seven years of the reign of Honorius (395-402), when a complete reorganization of the Provinces of Northern Italy and Southern Gaul was effected. Other arguments could be advanced to confirm the existence and episcopate of St. Majorinus. The name was very common in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries. St. Augustine (De Haer., I, 69) speaks of two bishops of this name; two others appear as signers of the Letter of the Synod of Carthage to Pope Innocent the First (401-417) against Pelagius (Ep. St. Aug., II, 90). Veneration was offered to the saint from time immemorial by the church in Acqui, shown by his statues and relics. This veneration, however, has ceased since a decree of the Congregation of Rites (8 April, 1628) prohibited the veneration of saints whose sanctity had not been declared by the Holy See. In the list of the bishops of Acqui, St. Guido (1034-70) is worthy of note. He was of the Counts of Acquasana under whose government the cathedral was erected, and is the patron saint of Acqui. The bishopric contains 122 parishes; 456 churches, chapels, and oratories; 317 secular priests; 180 seminarians; 42 regular priests; 20 lay-brothers; 75 religious (women); 60 confraternities; 3 boys schools (168 pupils); 4 girls' schools (231 pupils). Population, 18,120. UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice, 1722), IV, 326; CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d Italia (Venice, 1866), XIV, 134; GAMS, Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae (Ratisbon, 1873), 808; SAVIO, Gli antichi vescovi d Italia dalle origini al 1300 descritti per regioni, I Piemonte (Turin, 1899), 948; PEDROCCA, Solatia chronologica sacrosanctae Aquensis Ecclesiae (manuscript in the Curia of Acqui, 1628); MORIUNDUS, Monumenta Aquensia adjectae sunt plures Alexandriae ac finitimarum Pedemontanae ditionis provinciarum, Chartae et Chronica (Turin, 1790); BIORCI, Antichità e prerogative d' Acqui Staziella sua istoria profana-ecclesiastica (Tortona, 1818); MAMIO, Bibliografia provvisoria acquese, in preparazione alla bibliografia storica degli stati della monarchia di Savoia (Turin, 1885). ERNESTO BUONAIUTI Acre Acre (SAINT-JEAN-D'ACRE). In Hebrew Accho, in the Books of Machabees Ptolemais, in Greek writers Ake ( Arke), in Latin writers Ace or Acce, in Assyrian inscriptions Ak-ku-u, in modern Arabic Akka. Acre is a Syrian seaport on the Mediterranean, in a plain with Mount Carmel on the south, and the mountains of Galilee on the east. Though choked up with sand, it is one of the best harbours on the Syrian coast. The city was built by the Chanaanites, and given to the tribe of Aser (Judges, i, 31), but not conquered (Jos., xix, 24-31). It is mentioned in Mich., i, 10. It was taken by Sennacherib the Assyrian (704-680 B.C.), passed into the power of Tyre, of the Seleucid kings of Syria, and the Romans. At the time of the Macchabees it belonged for a short time to the sanctuary in Jerusalem by gift of Demetrius Soter (I Mach., x, 112, xiii). The Emperor Claudius granted Roman municipal rights to the town; hence it received the name "Colonia Claudii Caesaris." St. Paul visited its early Christian community (Acts, xxi, 7). The city was taken by the Moslems A.D. 638, by the Crusaders A.D. 1104, again by the Moslems A.D. 1187, by the Crusaders again A.D. 1191 and finally by the Moslems A.D. 1291. Though Napoleon could not conquer it in 1799, it was taken by the Viceroy of Egypt in 1832, but reconquered by the Sultan in 1840. Till about 1400 it was the see of a Latin bishop; it has also been the residence of a few Jacobite bishops, and has now a Melchite bishop who is subject to the Patriarch of Antioch. HAGEN, Lexicon Biblicum (Paris, 1905); NEHER in Kirchenlex., LEGENDRE in VIG., Dict. de la bible (Paris, 1895); EWING in HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible (New York, 1903). A.J. MAAS Acrostic Acrostic ( Akros stichos, "at the end of a verse".) A poem the initial or final letters (syllables or words) of whose verses form certain words or sentences. Its invention is attributed to Epicharmus. The most remarkable example of such a poem is attributed by Lactantius and Eusebius to the Erythræan sibyl, the initial letters forming the words Iesous Christos Theou houios soter (stauros), "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour (cross)". Omitting the doubtful parenthesis, these words form a minor acrostic: Ichthys, fish, the mystical symbol of our Lord. The acrostic is supposed to have been quite popular among the early Christians. In a wider sense the name acrostic is applied to alphabetical or "abecedarian" poems. In this kind of poetry the successive verses or stanzas begin with the successive letters of the alphabet. We see this exemplified is Pss. cxi, cxii, cxix (Vulg. cx, cxi, cxviii); Prov., xxxi, 10-31; Lam., i, ii, iii, iv; and in a less regular manner, in Pss. x, xxv, xxxv, cxlv (Vulg. ix, xxiv, xxxiv, xxxvi, cxliv); Ecclus., li, 18-38. (See HEBREW POETRY, PARALLELISM, PSALMS). LECLERCQ in Dict. d'achéol. chrét. et de lit. (Paris, 1903); VIGOUROUX in Dict. de la bible, s.v. Alphabétique (Poème) (Paris, 1895). A.J. MAAS Acta Pilati Acta Pilati (Or the Gospel of Nicodemus.) This work does not assume to have written by Pilate, but to have been derived from the official acts preserved in the praetorium at Jerusalem. The alleged Hebrew original is attributed to Nicodemus. The title "Gospel of Nicodemus" is of medieval origin. The apocryphon gained wide credit in the Middle Ages, and has considerably affected the legends of our Saviour's Passion. Its popularity is attested by the number of languages in which it exists, each of these being represented by two or more recensions. We possess a text in Greek, the original language; a Coptic, an Armenian and a Latin, besides modern translations. The Latin versions were naturally its most current form and were printed several times in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. One class of the Latin manuscripts contain as an appendix or continuation, the "Cura Sanitatis Tiberii", the oldest form of the Veronica legend. The "Acta" consist of three sections, which reveal inequalities of style. The first (i-xi) contains the trial of Jesus based upon Luke, xxiii. The second part comprises xii-xvi; it regards the Resurrection. An appendix, detailing the Descensus ad Infernos, forms the third section, This does not exist in the Greek text and is a later addition. Leucius and Charinus, the two souls raised from the dead after the Crucifixion, relate to the Sanhedrin the circumstances of Our Lord's descent to Limbo. The well-informed Eusebius (325), although he mentions the Acta Pilati referred to by Justin and Tertullian and heathen pseudo-Acts of this kind, shows no acquaintance with this work. We are forced to admit that is of later origin, and scholars agree in assigning it to the middle of the fourth century. There is no internal relation between the "Acta" and the feigned letter found in the Acts of Peter and Paul. Epiphanius refers to the Acta Pilati similar to our own, as early as 376, but there are indications that the current Greek text, the earliest extant form, is a revision of the original one. The "Acta" are of orthodox composition and free from Gnostic taint. The book aimed at gratifying the desire for extra-evangelical details concerning Our Lord, and at the same time, to strengthen faith in the Resurrection of Christ, and at general edification. The writers (for the work we have is a composite) could not have expected their production to be seriously accepted by unbelievers. (See Apocryha, under Pilate Literature.) The best Greek and Latin edition of the text, with notes, is that of THILO, Codex Apocryphorum Nove Testamenti, I (Leipzig, 1832; TISCHENDORF, Evangelica Apocrypha (Leipzig, 1853, 1876), is uncritical in this regard. For dissertations: LIPSIUS, Die Pilatus Akten kritisch untersucht (Kiel 1871); WÜLCKER, Das Evangelium Nicodemi in der abendlandischer Litteratur (Paderborn, 1872); DOBSCHÜTZ, art. Gospel of Nicodemus in Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, extra volume; LIPSIUS, art. Apocryphal Gospel, in Dict. of Christ. Biog., II, 707-709. The Acta Pilati receives due notice in the histories of ancient Christian literature by BARDENHEWER, ZAHN, HARNACK and PREUSCHEN. GEORGE J. REID Acta Sanctae Sedis Acta Sanctæ Sedis A Roman monthly publication containing the principal public documents issued by the Pope, directly or through the Roman Congregations. It was begun in 1865, under the title of "Acta Sanctæ Sedis in compendium redacta etc.", and was declared, 23 May, 1904, an organ of the Holy See to the extent that all documents printed in its are "authentic and official". Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae The abbreviated title of a celebrated work on the Irish saints by the Franciscan, John Colgan (Louvain, 1645). The full title runs as follows: "Acta Sanctorum veteris et majoris Scotiae, seu Hiberniae, Sanctorum Insulae, partim ex variis per Europam MSS. codd. exscripta, partim ex antiquis monumentis et probatis authoribus eruta et congesta; omnia notis et appendicibus illustrata, per R.P.F. Joannem Colganum, in conventu F.F. Minor. Hibern. Scrictioris Observ., Lovanii, S. Theologiae Lectorem Jubilatum. Nunc primum de eisdem actis juxta ordinem mensium et dierum prodit tomus primus, qui de sacris Hiberniae antiquitatibus est tertius, Januarium, Februarium, et Martium complectens." Colgan was an ardent Irishman, of the Mac Colgan sept, b. in the County Derry, 1592. He entered the Irish House of Franciscans, at Louvain, in 1612, and was ordained priest in 1618. Aided by Father Hugh Ward, O.F.M., Father Stephen White, S.J., and Brother Michael O'Cleary, O.F.M., Colgan sedulously collected enormous material for the Lives of the Irish Saints, and at length, after thirty years of sifting and digesting his materials, put to press his "Acta Sanctorum Hiberniae," a portion of the expense of which was defrayed by Archbishop O'Reilly of Armagh. The first volume, covering the lives of Irish saints for the months of January, February, and March, was intended to be the third volume of the "Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Ireland," but only one volume was printed at Louvain in 1645. To students of Irish ecclesiastical history Colgan's noble volume is simply invaluable. W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Acta Triadis Thaumaturgae Acta Triadis Thaumaturgæ (THE ACTS OF A WONDER-WORKING TRIAD) The lives of St. Patrick, St. Brigid, and St. Columba; published at Louvain, in 1647, by John Colgan, O.F.M., mainly at the expense of Thomas Fleming, Archbishop of Dublin. The full title runs as follows: "Triadis Thaumaturgæ, seu divorum Patricii, Columbæ, et Brigidæ, trium veteris et majoris Scotiæ, seu Hiberniæ, Sanctorum insulæ, communium patronorum acta, a variis, iisque pervetustis ac Sanctis, authoribus Scripta, ac studio R.P.F. Joannis Colgani, in conventu F.F. Minor. Hibernor, Stritior, Observ., Lovanii, S. Theologiæ Lectoris Jubilati, ex variis bibliothecis collecta, scholiis et commentariis illustrata, et pluribus appendicibus aucta; complectitur tomus secundus sacrarum ejusdem insulæ antiquitatum, nunc primum in lucem prodiens". Want of funds alone prevented the publication of all the priceless material which Colgan had transcribed and prepared for press, and from the catalogue of the manuscripts found in his cell after his death, it is evident that the great Irish hagiologist had given a detailed account of the labours of Irish missionaries in England, Scotland, Belgium, Alsace, Lorraine, Burgundy, Germany, and Italy. A small remnant of these unpublished volumes is now in the Franciscan Library, Merchants'' Quay, Dublin. In 1652 Colgan begged his superiors to relieve him of the duties of guardian and professor, and he died at St. Anthony''s, Louvain, 15 January, 1658, aged66. W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Act of Settlement (Irish) Act of Settlement (Irish) In 1662 an act was passed by the Irish Parliament, the privileges of which were restored on the return of Charles II, entitled "an act for the better execution of his majesty's gracious declaration for the Settlement of his Kingdom of Ireland, and the satisfaction of the several interests of adventurers, soldiers, and other his subjects there". To understand the provisions of this complicated Act, and the Act of Explanation of it (1664), it is necessary to recall that during the time of Cromwell English adventurers, as they were styled, advanced money for the war, and the soldiers engaged in it had large sums due to them for arrears of pay. To meet these demands, extirpate Papacy, and establish a Protestant interest in Ireland, almost all the land in Munster, Leinster, and Ulster was confiscated under the Cromwellian Settlement. The confiscations were arranged under different categories in such a way that scarcely any Catholic, or even Old Protestant, could escape. All persons who had taken part in the rebellion, before 10 November, 1642, or who had assisted the rebels in any way before that date, and also about 100 named persons, including Ormond, Bishop Bramhall, and a great part of the aristocracy of Ireland, were condemned to death, and their estates declared forfeit. All other landowners who had at any period borne arms against the Parliament, either for the rebels or for the King, were deprived of their estates, but were promised land of a third of the value in Connaught. Catholics who during the whole of the war had never borne arms against the Parliament, but who had not manifested "a constant good affection" towards it, were to be deprived of their estates, but were to receive two-thirds of their value in Connaught. Such a confiscation was practically universal (Lecky, I, 106). The Puritan made no distinction between the rebel and the royalist, and did not, of course, consider himself bound by the Articles of Peace (17 January, 1649). By these Charles I, through Ormond, had engaged that, with the exception of murderers, etc., all Catholics who submitted to the articles should "be restored to their respective possessions and hereditaments", and that all treason etc., committed since the beginning of the rebellion, should be covered by an "Act of Oblivion" (Articles of Peace, 1649, § 4). And Charles II, in a letter from Jersey, dated 2 February, 1649-50, to Ormond, ratifies and confirms this Peace (Carte, III, 524-590, ed. 1851). Many of the Catholic proprietors had never taken arms against the King, and the rest who had done so, when the English Parliament announced its intention to extirpate the Catholic religion in Ireland, with few exceptions submitted under the Articles of Peace, and supported his cause to the end. All these had a clear title to restoration, but the adventurers and soldiers were in the actual possession of the lands, and were allowed to vote as freeholders at the elections, though they had no legal status, their titles resting on an act of Cromwell's London Parliament, and an entry and ouster of the old proprietors under it. The Catholics who were legally the true freeholders had, of course, no votes. When the new Parliament met, the Puritan adventurers and soldiers had an enormous majority, while the Catholics were almost unrepresented in the House of Commons (1662). The king had previously issued a Declaration, in November, 1660, which was made the basis of the Act of Settlement. The Irish Parliament, under Poyning's Act, could not entertain a Bill that had not previously been sanctioned by the Privy Council in England. He confirmed to the adventurers all the lands possessed by them on 7 May, 1659, allotted to them under the Cromwellian settlement. He did the same as regards the soldiers with a few exceptions. Protestants, however, whose estates had been given to adventurers or soldiers, were to be at once restored, unless they had been in rebellion before the cessation (truce) of 1643, or had taken out orders for lands in Connaught or Clare, and the adventurers or soldiers displaced were to be reprised, i.e. get other lands instead. The Catholics were divided into "innocent" and "nocent". No one was to be esteemed "innocent" + who, before the cessation of 15 September, 1643, was of the rebels' party, or who enjoyed his estate in the rebels' quarters, except in Cork and Youghal, where the inhabitants were driven into them by force; or + who had entered into the Roman Catholic Confederacy before the Peace of 1648; or + who had at any time adhered to the nuncio's party; or + who had inherited his property from anyone who had been guilty of those crimes; or + who had sat in any of the confederate assemblies or councils, or acted on any commissions or powers derived from them. Those who established their claims as "innocents", if they had taken lands in Connaught were to be restored to their estates by 2 May, 1661, but if they had sold their lands they were to indemnify the purchaser, and the adventurers and soldiers dispossessed were to be at once reprised. The "nocent" Catholics who had been in the rebellion, but who had submitted and constantly adhered to the Peace of 1648, if they had taken lands in Connaught, were to be bound by that arrangement, and not restored to their former estates. If they had served under his Majesty abroad, and not taken lands in Connaught or Clare, they were to be restored after reprisals made to the adventurers and soldiers. If all this was to be accomplished, "there must" said Ormond, "be new discoveries of a new Ireland, for the old will not serve to satisfy these engagements. It remains, then, to determine which party must suffer in the default of means to satisfy all." The result was not doubtful. The Protestant interest was resolute and armed, and threatened to use force, if necessary, to defend their possessions. The Catholics were poor, broken, and friendless. "All the other competing interests in Ireland were united in their implacable malice to the Irish and in their desire that they might gain nothing by the King's return." The King yielded to the pressure of the Protestants, the vast majority of whom were accessory, before or after the fact, to the execution of his father. He declared that he was for the establishment of an English interest in Ireland. All attempts to carry out his father's and his own engagements were abandoned. A commission was appointed consisting of thirty-six persons, all Protestants, and they proceeded to appoint from amongst their body a court of claims to hear cases and decide without a jury. Four thousand Catholics claimed to be restored to their former estates. About 600 claims were heard, and in the great majority of cases the claimants proved "innocency". A loud outcry arose from the Puritan and Protestant interest. The mutterings of an intended insurrection were heard. The anger and panic of the Cromwellians knew no bounds. A formidable plot was discovered. A small outbreak took place (Lord E. Fitzmaurice, "Life of Petty", p. 131). A new Bill of Settlement, or, as it was called, of Explanation, was then approved in England, and brought in and passed in Ireland (1665). It provided that the adventurers and soldiers should give up one-third of their grants under the Cromwellian settlement, to be applied for the purpose of increasing the fund for reprisals. Protestant adventurers and soldiers serving before 1649, and Protestant purchasers in Connaught or Clare before 1663, removable from restorable lands, were to receive, before the lands were restored, two-thirds equivalent in other lands. Protestant purchasers from transplanted persons in Connaught or Clare before 1 September, 1663, were confirmed in two-thirds of their purchase. Every clause in this and the preceding act was to be construed most liberally and beneficially for protecting and settling the estates and persons of Protestants, whom the Act was principally intended to settle and secure (§ 73). The clause in the first act, empowering the King to restore innocent Catholics to their houses within Corporations, was repealed (§ 221). The Anglican Church regained its estates, including its large revenue of tithes, and its hierarchy was replaced in its former position. Finally (and this is the most important and iniquitous provision in the Act) it was declared "that no person who by the qualifications of the former Act hath not been adjudged innocent, shall at any time hereafter be reputed innocent, so as to obtain any lands or tenements", etc. This excluded the whole body of the 4,000 innocent claimants, except the 600 already disposed of "without a trial from the inheritance of their fathers, an act of the grossest and most cruel injustice" (Lecky, I 115). After these acts the Protestants possessed, according to Petty, more than two-thirds of the good land, and of the Protestant landowners in 1689, according to Archbishop King, two-thirds held their estates under the Acts of Settlement and Explanation. ARTHUR UA CLERIGH Acton, Charles Januarius Charles Januarius Acton An English cardinal, born at Naples, 6 March, 1803; died at Naples, 23 June, 1847. He was the second son of Sir John Francis Acton, Bart. The family, a cadet branch of the Actons of Aldenham Hall, near Bridgnorth, in Shropshire, had settled in Naples some time before his birth. His father was engaged in the Neapolitan trade when he succeeded to the family estate and title through the death of his cousin, Sir Richard Acton, Bart. The Cardinal's education was English, as he and his elder brother were sent to England on their father's death in 1811, to a school near London kept by the Abbé Auéqué. they were then sent to Westminster School, with the understanding that their religion was not to be interfered with. Yet, they not only were sent to this Protestant school, but they had a Protestant clergyman as tutor. In 1819 they went to Magdalen College, Cambridge, where they finished their education. After this strange schooling for a future cardinal, Charles went to Rome when he was twenty and entered the Academia Ecclesiastica, where ecclesiastics intending to be candidates for public offices receive a special training. An essay of his attracted the attention of the Secretary of State, della Somaglia, and Leo XII made him a chamberlain and attaché to the Paris Nunciature, where he had the best opportunity to become acquainted with diplomacy. Pius VIII recalled him and named him vice-legate, granting him choice of any of the four legations over which cardinals presided. He chose Bologna, as affording most opportunity for improvement. He left there at the close of Pius VIII's brief pontificate, and went to England, in 1829, to marry his sister to Sir Richard Throckmorton. Gregory XVI made him assistant judge in the Civil Court of Rome. In 1837 he was made Auditor to the Apostolic Chamber, the highest Roman dignity after the cardinalate. Probably this was the first time it was even offered to a foreigner. Acton declined it, but was commanded to retain it. He was proclaimed Cardinal-Priest, with the title of Santa Maria della Pace, in 1842; having been created nearly three years previously. His strength, never very great, began to decline, and a sever attack of ague made him seek rest and recuperation, first at Palermo and then at Naples. But without avail, for he died in the latter city. His sterling worth was little known through his modesty and humility. In his youth his musical talent and genial with supplied much innocent gaiety, but the pressure of serious responsibilities and the adoption of a spiritual life somewhat subdued its exercise. His judgment and legal ability were such that advocates of the first rank said that could they know his view of a case they could tell how it would be decided. When he communicated anything in writing, Pope Gregory used to say he never had occasion to read it more than once. He was selected as interpreter in the interview which the Pope had with the Czar of Russia. The Cardinal never said anything about this except that when he had interpreted the Pope's first sentence the Czar said: "It will be agreeable to me, if your Eminence will act as my interpreter, also." After the conference Cardinal Acton, by request of the Pope, wrote out a minute account of it; but he never permitted it to be seen. The King of Naples urged him earnestly to become Archbishop of Naples, but he inexorably refused. His charities were unbounded. He once wrote from Naples that he actually tasted the distress which he sought to solace. He may be said to have departed this life in all the wealth of a willing poverty. JOHN J. A'BECKET John Acton John Acton An English canonist, after 1329 canon of Lincoln; born 1350. His name is spelled variously, Achjedune, de Athona, Aton, Eaton; Maitland ( Roman Canon Law in the Church of England: London, 1898) and Stubbs write Ayton. He was a pupil of John Stratford (afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury), and is declared by Maitland (p. 98) to be "one of the three English canonists who after the earliest years of the thirteenth century wrote books that met with any success". He is best known as a glossator of the legatine "Constitutions" of Cardinals Otho and Ottobone, papal legates to England in the thirteenth century, and contemporary lawyers must have found his notes both full and learned, for many manuscript copies of them are said by Maitland to be still extant at Oxford. They were first printed by Wynkyn de Worde in his edition of William Lyndewood's "Provinciale" (1496) and partly translated in Johnson's "Collection of Ecclesiastical Laws" (London, 1720: cf. the English translation of Otho's "Ecclesiastical Laws", by J. W. White, 1844). The printed copies must be received with caution, for they contain references to books that were not written until after the death of Acton. His canonical doctrine lends no support to the thesis of a medieval Anglican independence of the papal decretal legislation. "I have been unable", says Dr. F. W. Maitland in the work quoted below (p. 8), "to find any passage in which either John of Ayton or Lyndewood denies, disputes, or debates the binding force of any decretal" (cf. ib., pp. 11-14) Of Acton the same writer says (pp. 7, 8) that he was "a little too human to be strictly scientific. His gloss often becomes a growl against the bad world in which he lives, the greedy prelates, the hypocritical friars, the rapacious officials." THOMAS J. SHAHAN Lord Acton John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, Baron Acton Baron Acton, Professor of Modern History at Cambridge, 1895-1902, born at Naples, 10 January, 1834, Where his father, Sir Richard Acton, held an important diplomatic appointment; died at Tegernsee, Bavaria, 19 June, 1902. His mother was the heiress of a distinguished Bavarian family, the Dalbergs. The Actons, though of an old English Catholic stock, had long been naturalized in Naples, where Lord Acton's grandfather had been prime minister. The future historian was thus in an extraordinary degree cosmopolitan, and much of his exceptional mastery of historical literature may be ascribed to the fact that the principal languages of Europe were as familiar to him as his native tongue. In 1843 the boy was sent to Oscott College, Birmingham, were Doctor, afterwards Cardinal, Nicholas Wiseman was then president. After five years spent at Oscott, Acton complete his education at Munich, as the pupil of the celebrated historian Döllinger. With Döllinger he visited France, and both there and in Germany lived on terms of intimacy with the most eminent historical scholars of the day. Returning to England, however, in 1859, to settle upon the family estate of Aldenham in Shropshire, he entered parliament as member for an Irish constituency, and retained his seat for six years, voting with the Liberals, but taking little part in the debates. In the meantime he devoted himself to literary work, and upon Newman's retirement, in 1859, succeeded him in the editorship of a Catholic periodical called "The Rambler", which, after 1862, was transformed into a quarterly under the title of "The Home and Foreign Review". The ultra liberal tone of this journal gave offence to ecclesiastical authorities, and Acton eventually judged it necessary to discontinue its publication, in April, 1864, when he wrote, concerning certain tenets of his which had been disapproved of, that "the principles had not ceased to be true, nor the authority which censured them to be legitimate, because the two were in contradiction." The publication of the "Syllabus" by Pius IX in 1864 tended to alienate Acton still further from Ultramontane counsels. He had in the meantime become very intimate with Mr. Gladstone, by whom he was recommended for a peerage in 1869, and at the time of the Vatican Council Lord Acton went to Rome with the express object of organizing a party of resistance to the proposed definition of papal infallibility. The decree, when it came, seems to have had the effect of permanently embittering Acton's feelings towards Roman authority, but he did not, like his friend Döllinger, formally sever his connection with the Church. Indeed in his later years at Cambridge he regularly attended Mass, and he received the last sacraments, at Tegernsee, on his death-bed. The Cambridge Professorship of Modern History was offered to him by Lord Roseberry in 1895, and, besides the lectures which he delivered there, he conceived and partly organized the "Cambridge Modern History", the first volume of which was only to see the light after his death. Lord Acton never produced anything which deserves to be called a book, but he wrote a good many reviews and occasionally an article or a lecture. As an historian he was probably more remarkable for knowledge of detail than for judgment or intuition. The "Letters of Quirinus," published in the Allgemeine Zeitung", at the time of the Vatican Council, and attributed to Lord Acton, as well as other letters addressed to the "Times", in November, 1874, show a mind much warped against the Roman system. The "Letters to Mrs. Drew" (Mr. Gladstone's daughter), which we printed by Mr. Herbert Paul in 1903, are brilliant but often bitter. A pleasanter impression is given by another collection of Lord Acton's private letters (published 1906) under the editorship of Abbot Gasquet. Some of Acton's best work was contributed to the "English Historical Review". His article on "German Schools of History", in the first volume, and on "Döllinger's Historical Work", in the fifth, deserve particular mention. HERBERT THURSTON Acton, John Francis Edward John Francis Edward Acton Sixth Baronet of the name, son of a Shropshire physician, born at Besançon, 3 June, 1736; died at Palermo, 12 August, 1811. He entered the military service of the Duke of Tuscany, and distinguished himself in the Algerine war in 1775, during which he rescued 4,000 Spaniards from the Corsairs. Since 1779 he was engaged in the reorganization of the Neapolitan navy. He became a favourite of Queen Caroline and was made successively minister of the marine, of finance, and prime minister of the kingdom to which he rendered notable services. When the Parthenopeian Republic was established by the French at Naples in 1798, Acton fled. After the restoration of the Bourbons he was temporarily reinstated, but was removed in 1806, and retired to Palermo. THOMAS J. SHAHAN Canonical Acts Canonical Acts According to the old Roman jurisprudence, acts are the registers ( acta) in which were recorded the official documents, the decisions and sentences of the judges. Acts designate in law whatever serves to prove or justify a thing. Records, decrees, reports, certificates, etc. are called acts. Canonical acts derive their name from connection with ecclesiastical procedure. Acts may be public or private, civil or ecclesiastical. Public acts are those certified by a public notary or other person holding a public office or position These acts may be judicial, or a part of court-procedure, or voluntary. In contentious trials to secure justice, the acts should be judicial; extra judicial acts are not contentious but voluntary. Both civil and canon law recognize as public acts those that occur before witnesses, if these acknowledge them before the court, otherwise they are private. Public acts include any action taken by the judge, the authorities he may quote, the proceedings in the court, documents drawn from the public archives. An original document of a community, bishop, or public officer, with the official seal, or a copy of these sent by these persons with due authentication, is a public act. Public acts are determinative against anyone, though at times they may not impose personal obligation on those not participating in them. In old public acts, the presumption is in favour of their being rightly done; to upset their value, the burden of proof is upon him who attacks them or argues that they were not executed with due formalities. Ecclesiastically, an exception is made for alienation of Church property, where, for the validity of a deed, a further requisite may be exacted, such as a clear proof of the authorisation of a bishop, or the consent of the chapter. For these presumption does not suffice. Private acts are those of one or more individuals they tell against those who executed them, not against absent parties not participating in them. While public acts have force from the day of their date, private acts, whose date is not authenticated, have force only from the day of their public registry. When authenticated, fraud alone can upset them. If the authenticating official overstepped his competency, the act would only be a private act, but yet of private value, unless the law requires for its validity the authentication of an official. Thus, a deed transferring real estate, even signed by the parties, becomes valid for public purposes when authenticated by the official designated by law, though the private agreement may be a basis for redress. It is not easy to draw precise limits between civil and ecclesiastical acts. While civil acts are mainly of the laity, about secular things, and ecclesiastical acts mainly of ecclesiastics, in connection with spiritual things, yet both easily overlap each other. Acts are civil or ecclesiastical by their relations with the State or the Church, by their emanation from either, by touching upon matters belonging to either, or by affecting the dealings of persons with either. The same individuals are subject to both authorities. Thus ecclesiastics do not cease to be citizens, and all Christian citizens are subject to the authority of the Church as well as of the State. Many things, even linked with spiritual affairs, do not lose their natural character of temporalities. Many acts passing between ecclesiastics are purely civil. An ecclesiastic, though a minister of the Church, is also a citizen; his actions as a citizen are purely civil; those emanating from him as a clergyman are ecclesiastical. If the acts are such as could be properly performed by a layman, they would belong to the civil order; if their performance required the clerical state, they are ecclesiastical. Yet a layman's spiritual duties and exercises are ecclesiastical, coming under the authority of the Church; an ecclesiastic's money matters come under the authority of the State as far as those of other citizens. This is the basis of the distinction between the civil and ecclesiastical forum. The Church by divine right has inalienable control of strictly spiritual things; the State of strictly temporal things. By the goodwill of peoples and governments the Church obtained many privileges for its forum, respecting the temporalities of ecclesiastics, and even of the laity in matters connected with spiritual things. In other matters assigned to her by Divine Law she cannot yield her authority, though for peace sake she may tolerate aggressions upon it. She may yield (and in concordats and in other ways does yield) those privileges which had for centuries become part of her forum. Acts also designate certain general formalities for the validity of documents, often essential requisites, such as the date, the signature, the qualifications of persons, the accurate names of witnesses, and other similar conditions which may be demanded by civil or ecclesiastical laws or by the custom of a country. Acts of a council are the definitions of faith, decrees, canons, and official declarations of the council, whose sphere of action is more or less extended according as it is oecumenical, national, provincial, etc. Acts of the Martyrs are the documents, narrations, and testimonies of the arrest, interrogatories, answers, torments, and heroic deaths of the Christians who sealed their faith by the shedding of their blood in the times of persecution. The documents of the Congregation of Rites connected with the beatification and canonisation of saints are designated as Acts of the Saints. This is also the title given by the Bollandists to their monumental account of the lives of the saints (Acta Sanctorum). Acts-Capitular are the official discussions of the assembled members of the chapter, the name given to the canons of the cathedral who form a corporation established to aid the bishop in the government of the diocese, and to supply his place when the see is vacant. WAGNER, Dictionnaire de droit eccles., v. Actes (Paris, 1901); SANTI, Pray. iur. can., II, Lib. XXII, De Fide Instrum. (New York); SMITHY Eccles. Law, II, v, Judicial Proofs; D AVINO, Enciclopedia dell Ecclesiastico (Turin, 1878) v. Atti; CROW ON, Man. tot. iur. can., IV, iii, art. 3, De Instrum. (Poitiers, 1880) PIHRING, Sac. Can. Doctrines II, Lib. XXII, De Fide Instrum (Rome, Propaganda, 1859). R.L. BURTSELL Human Acts Human Acts Acts are termed human when they are proper to man as man; when, on the contrary, they are elicited by man, but not proper to him as a rational agent, they are called acts of man. NATURE St. Thomas and the scholastics in general regard only the free and deliberate acts of the will as human. Their view is grounded on psychological analysis. A free act is voluntary, that is, it proceeds from the will with the apprehension of the end sought, or, in other words, is put forth by the will solicited by the goodness of the object as presented to it by the understanding. Free acts, moreover, proceed from the will's own determination, without necessitation, intrinsic or extrinsic. For they are those acts which the will can elicit or abstain from eliciting, even though all the requisites of volition are present. They, consequently, are acts to which the will is determined neither by the object nor by its own natural dispositions and habits, but to which it determines itself. The will alone is capable of self-determination or freedom; the other faculties, as the understanding, the senses, the power of motion, are not free; but some of their acts are controlled by the will and so far share its freedom indirectly. The active indeterminateness of the will, its mastery over its own actions, is consequent upon the deliberation of reason. For the intellect discerns in a given object both perfection and imperfection, both good and evil, and therefore presents it to the will as desirable in one respect and undesirable in another. But when an object is thus proposed, the will, on account of its unlimited scope, may love or hate, embrace or reject it. The resultant state of the will is indifference, in which it has the power to determine itself to either alternative. Hence, whenever there is deliberation in the understanding, there is freedom in the will, and the consequent act is free; vice versa, whenever an act proceeds from the will without deliberation, it is not free, but necessary. Wherefore, as deliberate and free actions, so indeliberate and necessary actions are identical. The free act of the will thus analysed is evidently the act proper to man as a rational agent. For it is man who is its determining cause; whereas his necessary actions are unavoidably determined by his nature and environment. He is the master of the former, while the latter are not under his dominion and cannot be withheld by him. These, therefore, are properly styled acts of man, because elicited, but not determined, by him. The human act admits of increment and decrement. Its voluntariness can be diminished or increased. Ignorance, as far as it goes, renders an act involuntary, since what is unknown cannot be willed; passions intensify the inclination of the will, and thus increase voluntariness, but lessen deliberation and consequently also freedom. PROPERTIES Human acts are imputable to man so as to involve his responsibility, for the very reason that he puts them forth deliberatively and with self-determination. They are, moreover, not subject to physical laws which necessitate the agent, but to a law which lays the will under obligation without interfering with his freedom of choice. Besides, they are moral. For a moral act is one that is freely elicited with the knowledge of its conformity with or difformity from, the law of practical reason proximately and the law of God ultimately. But whenever an act is elicited with full deliberation, its relationship to the law of reason is adverted to. Hence human acts are either morally good or morally bad, and their goodness or badness is imputed to man. And as, in consequence, they are worthy of praise or blame, so man, who elicits them, is regarded as virtuous or wicked, innocent or guilty, deserving of reward or punishment. Upon the freedom of the human act, therefore, rest imputability and morality, man's moral character, his ability to pursue his ultimate end not of necessity and compulsion, but of his own will and choice; in a word, his entire dignity and preeminence in this visible universe. RECENT VIEWS Recent philosophic speculation discards free will conceived as capability of self-determination. The main reason advanced against it is its apparent incompatibility with the law of causation. Instead of indeterminism, determinism is now most widely accepted. According to the latter, every act of the will is of necessity determined by the character of the agent and the motives which render the action desirable. Character, consisting of individual dispositions and habits, is either inherited from ancestors or acquired by past activity; motives arise from the pleasurableness or unpleasurableness of the action and its object, or from the external environment. Many determinists drop freedom, imputability, and responsibility, as inconsistent with their theory. To them, therefore, the human act cannot be anything else than the voluntary act. But there are other determinists who still admit the freedom of will. In their opinion a free action is that which "flows from the universe of the character of the agent." And as "character is the constitution of Self as a whole", they define freedom as "the control proceeding from the Self as a whole, and determining the Self as a whole." We find freedom also defined as a state in which man wills only in conformity with his true, unchanged) and untrammelled personality. In like manner Kant, though in his "Critique of Pure Reason" he advocates determinism, nevertheless in his "Fundamental Metaphysics of Morals" admits the freedom of the will, conceiving it as independence of external causes. The will, he maintains, is a causality proper to rational beings, and freedom is its endowment enabling it to act without being determined from without, just as natural necessity is the need proper to irrational creatures of being determined to action by external influence. He adds, however, in explanation, that the will must act according to unchangeable laws, as else it would be an absurdity. Free acts thus characterised are termed human by these determinists, because they proceed from man's reason and personality. But plainly they are not human in the scholastic acceptation, nor in the full and proper sense. They are not such, because they are not under the dominion of man. True freedom, which makes man master of his actions, must be conceived as immunity from all necessitation to act. So it was understood by the scholastics. They defined it as immunity from both intrinsic and extrinsic necessitation. Not so the determinists. According to them it involves immunity from extrinsic, but not from intrinsic, necessitation. Human acts, therefore, as also imputability and responsibility, are not the same thing in the old and in the new schools. So it comes to pass, that, while nowadays in ethics and law the very same scientific terms are employed as in former ages, they no longer have the same meaning as in the past nor the same in Catholic as in non-Catholic literature. MASER, Psychology (4th ed., New York, 1900); LADD, Psychology, xxvi (4th ed., New York, 1903); MACKENZIE, Manual of Ethics (4th ed., New York, 1901); SUAREZ, Tract de Voluntario; OFFNER, Willensfreiheit, Zurechnung, und Verantwortung (Leipzig, 1904). JOHN J. MING Indifferent Acts Indifferent Acts A human act may be considered in the abstract ( in specie) or in the concrete ( in individuo). Taken in the former sense it is clear the morality of a human act will be determined by its object only, as this may be of a kind that is neither conformable to a moral norm nor contrary to it, we may have an act that can be said to be neither good nor bad, but indifferent. But can this character of indifference be predicated of the act we are discussing, considered not as an abstraction of the mind, but in the concrete, as it is exercised by the individual in particular circumstances, and for a certain end? To this question St. Bonaventure (in 2, dist. 41, a. 1, q. 3, where, however, it will be observed, the Seraphic Doctor speaks directly of merit only) answers in the affirmative, and with him Scotus (in 2, dist. 40-41, et quodl. 18), and all the Scotist school. So also Sporer (Theol. Moral., 1, III, § v); Elbel (Theol. Moral., tom. I, n. 86); Vasquez (in 1-2, disp. 52); Arriaga (De Act. Hum., disp. 21); and in our own day Archbishop Walsh (De Act. Hum., n. 588 sq.). St. Thomas (In 2, dist. 40., a. 5; De Malo, q. 2, a. 4 et 5; 1-2, q. 18, a. 9), and his commentators hold the opposite opinion. So too do Suarez (De. Bon. Et Mal., disp. Ix); Billuart (diss. IV, a. 5 et 6); St. Alphonsus (L. 2, n. XLIV); Bouquillon (Theol. Moral. Fund., n. 371); Lehmkuhl (Theol. Moral., L. I, tract. I, III); and Noldin (Sum. Theol. Moral., I, 85 sq.). It must be noted that the Thomists, no less than the Scotists, recognize as morally indifferent acts done without deliberation, such, for instance, as the stroking of one's beard or the rubbing of one's hands together, as these ordinarily take place. Admittedly indifferent, too, will those acts be in which there is but a physical deliberation, as it is called, such as is realized when, for instance, we deliberately read or write, without any thought of the moral order. The question here is of those acts only that are performed with advertence to a moral rule. Again, most of the Thomists will allow that an act would be indifferent in the case where an agent would judge it to be neither good nor bad after he had formed his conscience, according to the opinion of Scotists, to which, it must be conceded, a solid probability is attached. Finally, it must be remarked that no controversy is raised regarding the indifference of acts with reference to supernatural merit. The doctrine that all the works of infidels are evil has been formally condemned. Yet clearly, while the deeds of those without grace may be morally good, and thus in the supernatural order escape all demerit, they cannot, at the same time, lay claim to any merit. Both the Thomists and Scotists will declare that, to be morally good, an act must be in conformity with the exigencies and dignity of our rational nature. But the question is, what is to be reckoned as conformable to the exigencies and dignity of our rational nature? According to the Scotists, the deliberate act of a rational being, to be morally good, must be referred to a positively good end. Hence those acts in which the agent adverts to no end, and which have for their object nothing that is either conformable to our rational nature, nor yet contrary to it, such as eating, drinking, taking recreation, and the like, cannot be accounted morally good. Since, however, these discover no deviation from the moral norm, they cannot be characterized as evil, and so therefore, it is said, must be considered as indifferent. According to the opinion of St. Thomas, which is the more common one among theologians, it is not necessary, in order to be morally good, that an act should be referred to a positively good end. It is enough that the end is seen to be not evil, and that in the performance of the act the bounds set by right reason be not transgressed. Thus the acts of eating, drinking, taking recreation, and the like, while, in the abstract, they are neither conformable nor contrary to our rational nature, in the concrete, by reason of the circumstance of their being done in the manner and the measure prescribed by reason, become fully in accord with our rational nature, and hence morally good. It will be observed from the foregoing that the Thomists hold as morally good the acts which the Scotists maintain to be only morally indifferent. According to a third class of theologians, a deliberate act which is not referred to a positively good end must be reputed as morally evil. Hence that which we have described as good in the doctrine of St. Thomas, and as indifferent to the mind of Scotus, must according to these theologians, be deemed nothing else than bad. Wrongly styled Thomists, the advocates of this opinion are one with the Angelic Doctor only in declaring that there are no indifferent deliberate acts. They differ from him radically in the unwarrantable rigour, and their teaching is condemned by the sense and practice of even the most delicately conscientious persons. JOHN WEBSTER MELODY Acts of the Apostles Acts of the Apostles In the accepted order of the books of the New Testament the fifth book is called The Acts of the Apostles ( praxeis Apostolon). Some have thought that the title of the book was affixed by the author himself. This is the opinion of Cornely in his "Introduction to the Books of the New Testament" (second edition, page 315). It seems far more probable, however, that the name was subsequently attached to the book just as the headings of the several Gospels were affixed to them. In fact, the name, Acts of the Apostles, does not precisely convey the idea of the contents of the book; and such a title would scarcely be given to the work by the author himself. CONTENT The book does not contain the Acts of all the Apostles, neither does it contain all the acts of any Apostle. It opens with a brief notice of the forty days succeeding the Resurrection of Christ during which He appeared to the Apostles, "speaking the things concerning the Kingdom of God". The promise of the Holy Ghost and the Ascension of Christ are then briefly recorded. St. Peter advises that a successor be chosen in the place of Judas Iscariot, and Matthias is chosen by lot. On Pentecost the Holy Ghost descends on the Apostles, and confers on them the gift of tongues. To the wondering witnesses St. Peter explains the great miracle, proving that it is the power of Jesus Christ that is operating. By that great discourse many were converted to the religion of Christ and were baptized, "and there were added unto them in that day about three thousand souls". This was the beginning of the Judeo-Christian Church. "And the Lord added to them day by day those that were being saved." Peter and John heal a man, lame from his mother's womb, at the door of the Temple which is called Beautiful. The people are filled with wonder and amazement at the miracle and run together unto Peter and John in the portico that was called Solomon's. Peter again preaches Jesus Christ, asserting that by faith in the name of Jesus the lame man had been made strong. "And many of them that heard the word believed", and the number of the men came to be about five thousand. But now "the priests, and the prefect of the Temple and the Sadducees came upon them, being sorely troubled because they taught the people, and proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them, and put them in prison unto the morrow." On the morrow Peter and John are summoned before rulers, elders, and scribes, among whom were present Annas, the High-Priest, Caiphas, and as many as were of the kindred of the High-Priest. And when they had set Peter and John in the midst they inquired: "By what power, or in want name have ye done this?" Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, answering gave utterance to one of the most sublime professions of the Christian faith ever made by man: "Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, in this name doth this man stand here before you whole. He [Jesus] is the stone which was set at naught by you the builders, which was made the head of the corner [Isaias, xxviii, 16; Matt., xxi, 42]. And in no other is there salvation: For neither is there any other name under Heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved." The members of the council were brought face to face with the most positive evidence of the truth of the Christian religion. They command the two Apostles to go aside out of the council, and then they confer among themselves, saying "What shall we do with these men? For that indeed a notable miracle hath been wrought through them, is manifest to all that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it". Here is one of the splendid instances of that great cumulus of evidence upon which the certitude of the Christian Faith rests. A bitterly hostile council of the chief Jews of Jerusalem is obliged to declare that a notable miracle had been wrought, which it cannot deny, and which is manifest to all that dwell in Jerusalem. With dreadful malice the council attempts to restrain the great movement of Christianity. They threaten the Apostles, and charge them not to speak at all or teach in the name of Jesus; Peter and John contemn the threat, calling upon the council to judge whether it be right to hearken unto the council rather than unto God. The members of the council could not inflict punishment upon the two Apostles, on account of the people, who glorified God on account of the great miracle. Peter and John, being freed from custody, return to the other Apostles. They all give glory to God and pray for boldness to speak the word of God. After the prayer the place shakes, and they are filled with the Holy Ghost. The fervour of the Christians at that epoch was very great. They were of one heart and soul; they had all things in common. As many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and delivered the price to the Apostles, and this money was distributed as anyone had need. But a certain Ananias, with Saphira his wife, sold a possession and kept back part of the price, the wife being accessory to the deed. St. Peter is inspired by the Holy Ghost to know the deception, and rebukes Ananias for the lie to the Holy Ghost. At the rebuke the man falls dead. Saphira, coming up afterwards, and knowing nothing of the death of her husband, is interrogated by St. Peter regarding the transaction. She also keeps back a part of the price, and lyingly asserts that the full price has been brought to the Apostles. St. Peter rebukes her, and she also falls dead at his words. The multitude saw in the death of Ananias and Saphira God's punishment, and great fear came upon all. This miracle of God's punishment of sin also confirmed the faith of those that believed and drew disciples to them. At this stage of the life of the Church miracles were necessary to attest the truth of her teaching, and the power of miracles was abundantly bestowed upon the Apostles. These miracles are not reviewed in detail in Acts, but it is stated: "And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people" (Acts. v, 12). Multitudes both of men and women were added to the Christian community. The people of Jerusalem carried out the sick and laid them on beds and couches in the streets that the shadow of St. Peter might fall on them. They brought the sick from the cities round about Jerusalem, and every one was healed. The most powerful sect among the Jews at this epoch were the Sadducees. They were especially opposed to the Christian religion on account of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. The cardinal truth of the Apostles' teaching was: Life Everlasting through Jesus, Who was crucified for our sins, and Who is risen from the dead. The High-Priest Annas favored the Sadducees, and his son Ananus. who afterwards became High-Priest, was a Sadducee (Josephus, Antiq., XX, viii). These fierce sectaries made with Annas and Caiphas common cause against the Apostles of Christ, and cast them again into prison. The Acts leaves us in no doubt as to the motive that inspired the High-Priest and the sectaries: "They were filled with jealousy". The religious leaders of the Old Law saw their influence with the people waning before the power which worked in the Apostles of Christ. An angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought the Apostles out, and bade them go and preach in the Temple. The council of the Jews, not finding Peter and John in the prison, and learning of their miraculous deliverance, are much perplexed. On information that they are teaching In the Temple, they send and take them, but without violence fearing the people. It is evident throughout that the common people are disposed to follow the Apostles; the opposition comes from the priests and the classes, most of the latter being Sadducees. The council accuses the Apostles that, contrary to its former injunction not to teach in Christ's name, they had filled Jerusalem with Christ's teaching. Peter's defence is that they must obey God rather than men. He then boldly reiterates the doctrine of the Redemption and of the Resurrection. The council is minded to kill the Apostles. At this point Gamaliel, a Pharisee, a doctor of the Jewish law, held in honour of all the people, arises in the council in defence of the Apostles. He cites precedents to prove that, if the New Teaching be of men, it will be overthrown; and if it be of God, it will be impossible to overthrow it. Gamaliel's counsel prevails, and the council calls the Apostles, beats them, and lets them go, charging them not to speak in the name of Jesus. But the Apostles departed, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonour for the Name. And every day, in the Temple and privately they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus the Christ. A murmuring having arisen of the Grecian Jews, that their widows were neglected in the daily ministration, the Apostles, deeming it unworthy that they should forsake the word of God and serve tables, appoint seven deacons to minister. Chief among the deacons was Stephen, a man full of the Holy Spirit. He wrought great signs and wonders among the people. The anti-Christian Jews endeavour to resist him, but are not able to withstand the wisdom and the spirit by which he speaks. They suborn witnesses to testify that he has spoken against Moses and the Temple. Stephen is seized and brought into the council. False witnesses testify that they have heard Stephen say that "this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered to us". All who sat in the council saw Stephen's face, as it had been the face of an angel. He makes a defence, in which he reviews the chief events in the first covenant, and its relation to the New Law. They rush upon Stephen, drag him out of the city, and stone him to death. And he kneels down and prays: "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge", and dies. Beginning with the martyrdom of Stephen, a great persecution arose against the Church at Jerusalem; all were scattered abroad throughout Judea and Samaria, except the Apostles. The leader of the persecution was Saul, afterwards to become the great St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles. The deacon Philip first preaches in Samaria with great fruit. Like all the preachers of the first days of the Church, Philip confirms his preaching by great miracles. Peter and John go up to Samaria and confirm the converts whom Philip had made. Philip, commanded by an angel, goes down the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, and on the way converts and baptizes the eunuch of Candace Queen of Ethiopia. Philip is thence transported by Divine power to Azotus and preaches to all the coast cities until be comes to Cæsarea. Saul, breathing threatening and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, sets out for Damascus to apprehend any Christians whom he may find there. As he draws near to Damascus, the Lord Jesus speaks to him out of the heavens and converts him. St. Paul is baptized by Ananias at Damascus, and straightway for some days abides there, preaching in the synagogues that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He withdraws into Arabia; again returns to Damascus; and after three years be goes up to Jerusalem. At Jerusalem Paul is at first distrusted by the disciples of Jesus; but after Barnabas narrates to them Paul's marvellous conversion, they receive Paul, and he preaches boldly in the name of Jesus, disputing especially against the Grecian Jews. They plot to kill him; but the Christians bring Paul down to Cæsarea, and send him forth to Tarsus, his native city. At this epoch Acts describes the Church in Judea, Samaria, and Galilee as "at peace, being builded up, and walking in the fear of the Lord, and by the strength of the Holy Ghost it was multiplied". Peter now goes throughout all parts comforting the faithful. At Lydda he heals the palsied Æneas; and at Joppa he raises the pious widow Tabitha (Greek, Dorcas) from the dead. These miracles still more confirm the faith in Jesus Christ. At Joppa Peter has the great vision of the sheet let down from Heaven containing all manner of animals, of which he, being in a trance, is commanded to kill and eat. Peter refuses, on the ground that he cannot eat that which is common and unclean. Whereupon it is made known to him from God, that God has cleansed what was before to the Jew unclean. This great vision, revealed three times, was the manifestation of the will of Heaven that the ritual law of the Jews should cease; and that henceforth salvation should be offered without distinction to Jew and Gentile. The meaning of the vision is unfolded to Peter, when he is commanded by an angel to go to Cæsarea, to the Gentile centurion Cornelius, whose messengers were even then come to fetch him. He goes, and hears from Cornelius also the centurion's own vision. He preaches to him and to all assembled; the Holy Ghost descends upon them, and Peter commands that they be baptized. Returning to Jerusalem, the Jews contend with Peter that he has gone in to men uncircumcised, and eaten with them. He expounds to them his vision at Joppa, and also the vision of Cornelius, wherein the latter was commanded by an angel to send and fetch Peter from Joppa, that he might receive from Peter the Gospel. The Jews acquiesce, glorifying God, and declaring that "unto the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto life". Those who had been scattered abroad from Jerusalem at the time of Stephen's martyrdom had travailed as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch preaching Christ; but they preached to none save the Jews. The calling of the Gentiles was not yet understood by them. But now some converts from Cyprus and Cyrene come up to Antioch, and preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. A great number believe, and turn to the Lord. The report of the work at Antioch comes to the ears of the Church in Jerusalem; and they send Barnabas, "a good man full of the Holy Ghost and of faith", to them. He takes Paul from Tarsus, and they both dwell at Antioch a whole year, and teach many people. The disciples of Christ are called Christians first at Antioch. The rest of Acts narrates the persecution of the Christians by Herod Agrippa; the mission of Paul and Barnabas from Antioch by the Holy Ghost, to preach to the Gentile nations; the labours of Paul and Barnabas in Cyprus and in Asia Minor, their return to Antioch; the dissension at Antioch concerning circumcision; the journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, the decision of the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, the separation of Paul from Barnabas, in whose stead he takes Silas, or Silvanus; Paul's visit to his Asiatic Churches, his foundation of the Church at Philippi; Paul's sufferings for Jesus Christ; Paul's visit to Athens, his foundation of the churches of Corinth and of Ephesus; Paul's return to Jerusalem, his persecution by the Jews; Paul's imprisonment at Cæsarea; Paul's appeal to Cæsar, his voyage to Rome; the shipwreck; Paul's arrival at Rome, and the manner of his life there. We see therefore that a more proper title of this book would be "The Beginnings of the Christian Religion". It is an artistic whole, the fullest history which we possess of the manner in which the Church developed. THE ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH In Acts we see the fulfilment of Christ's promises. In Acts, i, 8, Jesus had declared that the Apostles should receive power when the Holy Ghost should come upon them, and should be His witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth. In John, xiv, 12, Jesus had declared: "He that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do, and greater works than these shall he do. Because I go to the Father". In these passages is found the key-note of the origin of the Church. The Church developed according to the plan conceived by Christ. There is, assuredly, in the narration evidence of the working out of a great plan; for the reason that the writer records the working out of the great design of Christ, conceived in infinite wisdom, and executed by omnipotent power. There is throughout a well-defined, systematic order of narration, an exactness and fullness of detail. After the calling of the first twelve Apostles, there is no event in the history of the Church so important as Paul's conversion and commission to teach in Christ's name. Up to Paul's conversion, the inspired historian of the Acts has given us a condensed statement of the growth of the Church among the Jews. Peter and John are prominent in the work. But the great message is now to issue forth from the confines of Judaism; all flesh is to see the salvation of God; and St. Paul is to be the great instrument in preaching Christ to the Gentiles. In the development of the Christian Church Paul wrought more than all the other Apostles; and therefore in Acts St. Paul stands forth, the prominent agent of God in the conversion of the world. His appointment as the Apostle of the Gentiles does not prevent him from preaching to the Jews, but his richest fruits are gathered from the Gentiles. He fills proconsular Asia, Macedonia, Greece, and Rome with the Gospel of Christ; and the greater part of Acts is devoted exclusively to recording his work. DIVISION OF BOOK In the Acts there are no divisions of the narration contemplated by the author. It is open to us to divide the work as we deem fit. The nature of the history therein recorded easily suggests a greater division of Acts into two parts: + The beginning and propagation of the Christian religion among the Jews (1-9); + The beginning and propagation of the Christian religion among the Gentiles (10-28). St. Peter plays the chief role in the first part; St. Paul, in the second part. OBJECT The Acts of the Apostles must not be believed to be an isolated writing, but rather an integral part in a well-ordered series. Acts presupposes its readers to know the Gospels; it continues the Gospel narrative. The Four Evangelists close with the account of the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus Christ. St. Mark is the only one who essays to give any of the subsequent history, and he condenses his account into one brief sentence: "And they went forth and preached everywhere: the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed" (Mark, xvi, 20). Now the Acts of the Apostles takes up the narrative here and records succinctly the mighty events which were wrought by the Holy Ghost through chosen human agents. It is a condensed record of the fulfilment of the promises of Jesus Christ. The Evangelists record Christ's promises which He made to the disciples, regarding the establishment of the Church and its mission (Matt., xvi, 15-20); the gift of the Holy Ghost (Luke, xxiv, 49; John, xiv, 16, 17); the calling of the gentiles (Matt., xxviii, 18-20; Luke, xxiv, 46, 47). Acts records the fulfilment. The history begins at Jerusalem and ends at Rome. With divine simplicity Acts shows us the growth of the religion of Christ among the nations. The distinction between Jew and Gentile is abolished by the revelation to St. Peter; Paul is called to devote himself specially to the Gentile ministry, the Holy Ghost works signs in confirmation of the doctrines of Christ; men suffer and die, but the Church grows; and thus the whole world sees the Salvation of God. Nowhere in Holy Writ is the action of the Holy Ghost in the Church so forcibly set forth as in the Acts. He fills the Apostles with knowledge and power on Pentecost; they speak as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak; the Holy Ghost bids Philip the deacon go to the eunuch of Candace; the same Spirit catches up Philip, after the baptism of the eunuch, and brings him to Azotus; the Holy Ghost tells Peter to go to Cornelius; when Peter preaches to Cornelius and his family the Holy Ghost falls on them all; the Holy Ghost directly commands that Paul and Barnabas be set apart for the Gentile ministry; the Holy Ghost forbids Paul and Silas to preach in Asia; constantly, by the laying on of the Apostles' hands, the Holy Ghost comes upon the faithful; Paul is directed by the Holy Ghost in everything; the Holy Ghost foretells to him that bonds and afflictions await him in every city; when Agabus prophesies Paul's martyrdom, he says: "Thus saith the Holy Ghost: 'So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles' ". Acts declares that on the Gentiles the grace of the Holy Ghost is poured out; in the splendid description of St. Stephen's martyrdom he is declared full of the Holy Ghost; when Peter makes his defense before rulers, elders, and scribes, he is filled with the Holy Ghost; often it is declared that the Apostles are filled with the Holy Ghost; Philip is chosen as a deacon because be is full of faith and the Holy Ghost; when Ananias is sent to Paul at Damascus he declares that he is sent that Paul may receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost; Jesus Christ is declared to be anointed with the Holy Ghost; Barnabas is declared to be full of the Holy Ghost; the men of Samaria receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of the hands of Peter and John. This history shows the real nature of the Christian religion; its members are baptized in the Holy Ghost, and are upheld by His power. The source in the Church of infallible truth in teaching, of grace, and of the power that resists the gates of Hell is the Holy Ghost. By the power of the Spirit the Apostles established the Church in the great centres of the world: Jerusalem, Antioch Cyprus, Antioch of Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Philippi, Thessalonica, Beræa, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus, and Rome. From these centres the message went to the surrounding lands. We see in the Acts the realization of Christ's promises just before his Ascension: "But ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth". In the New Testament Acts forms a necessary connecting-link between the Gospels and the Epistles of St. Paul. It gives the necessary information concerning the conversion of St. Paul and his apostolate, and also concerning the formation of the great Churches to which St. Paul wrote his Epistles. AUTHENTICITY The authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles is proved be intrinsic evidence; it is attested by the concordant voice of tradition. The unity of style of Acts and its artistic completeness compel us to receive the book as the work of one author. Such an effect could never arise from the piecing together bits of writings of different authors. The writer writes as an eyewitness and compaction of Paul. The passages xvi, 10 - 17; xx, 5-15; xxi, 1-18; xxvii, 1; xxviii, 16 are called the We passages. In these the writer uniformly employs the first person plural, closely identifying himself with St. Paul. This excludes the theory that Acts is the work of a redactor. As Renan has well said, such use of the pronoun is incompatible with any theory of redaction. We know from many proofs that Luke was the companion and fellow-labourer of Paul. Writing to the Colossians, in his salutation Paul associates with himself, "Luke, the beloved physician" (iv, 14). In II Tim., iv, 11 Paul declares: "Only Luke is with me". To Philemon (24) Paul calls Luke his fellow-worker. Now in this article, we may suppose the Lucan authorship of the third Gospel as proved. The writer of Acts in his opening sentence implicitly declares himself to be the author of the third Gospel. He addresses his work to Theophilus, the addressee of the third Gospel; he mentions his former work and in substance makes known his intention of continuing the history which, in his former treatise, he had brought up to the day when the Lord Jesus was received up. There is an identity of style between Acts and the third Gospel. An examination of the original Greek texts of the third Gospel and of the Acts reveals that there is in them a remarkable identity of manner of thinking and of writing. There is in both the same tender regard for the Gentiles, the same respect for the Roman Empire, the same treatment of the Jewish rites, the same broad conception that the Gospel is for all men. In forms of expression the third Gospel and the Acts reveal an identity of authorship. Many of the expressions usual in both works occur but rarely in the rest of the New Testament; other expressions are found nowhere else save in the third Gospel and in the Acts. If one will compare the following expressions in the Greek, he will be persuaded that both works are of the same author: + Luke, i, 1-Acts, xv, 24-25; + Luke, xv, 13-Acts, i, 5, xxvii, 14, xix, 11; + Luke, i, 20, 80-Acts, i, 2, 22, ii, 29, vii, 45; + Luke, iv, 34-Acts, ii, 27, iv, 27, 30; + Luke, xxiii, 5-Acts, x, 37; + Luke, i, 9-Acts, I, 17; + Luke, xii, 56, xxi, 35-Acts xvii, 26. The last-cited parallel expression, to prosopon tes ges, is employed only in the third Gospel and in Acts. The evidence of the Lucan authorship of Acts is cumulative. The intrinsic evidence is corroborated by the testimonies of many witnesses. It must be granted that in the Apostolic Fathers we find but faint allusions to the Acts of the Apostles. The Fathers of that age wrote but little; and the injury of time has robbed us of much of what was written. The Gospels were more prominent in the teachings of that day and they consequently have a more abundant witness. The canon of Muratori contains the canon of Scriptures of the Church of Rome in the second century. Of Acts it declares: "But the Acts of all the Apostles are written in one book, which for the excellent Theophilus Luke wrote, because he was an eyewitness of all". In "'The Doctrine of Addai", which contains the ancient tradition of the Church of Edessa, the Acts of the Apostles are declared to be a part of the Holy Scriptures (Doctrine of Addai, ed. Phillips, 1876, 46). The twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth chapters of St. Irenæus's third book "Against Heresies" are based upon the Acts of the Apostles. Irenæus convincingly defends the Lucan authorship of the third Gospel and Acts, declaring: "But that this Luke was inseparable from Paul, and was his fellow-labourer in the Gospel, he himself clearly evinces, not as a matter of boasting, but as bound to do so, by the truth itself. . . And all the remaining facts of his courses with Paul, he recounts. . . As Luke was present at all these occurrences, he carefully noted them down in writing, so that he cannot be convicted of falsehood or boastfulness, etc." Irenæus unites in himself the witness of the Christian Church of the East and the West of the