St Jerome and Achieving Good Order in Liturgical Offices

Simon Vouet, Saint Jerome and the Angel, c. 1622/1625 (source) 

Concluding our series, Fr José de Sigüenza ecstatically praises the Divine Office and then imagines how the early Christian worship developed into the Mass and Office as we now know it (Life of St. Jerome, Book IV, end of Discourse 2).

*          *          *

It has been fully shown that our great doctor served the Church in all these things, and that through his diligence and holy labours the divine office is resplendent with the beauty which we perceive at the present day. He introduced the song of Alleluia, the versicle Gloria Patri et Filio; the distinction of the ordinary week days by psalms; the epistles, the lessons, and the chant: all things of themselves so inspired by Heaven, that such as do not enjoy them here below will not enjoy them above: things which clearly manifest the great favours which the soul of the saint received from God, and moreover things which, without being in the company of angels, could not have been so well arranged.

And thus does John Cassian express himself in the second book of Institution of Monks and Monasteries, that this scheme of the work done by St. Jerome in arranging the divine offices was not a thing of human genius, but that it was communicated to him by means of the angels sent from heaven. And in truth this doctor speaks justly, forasmuch as there is something of majesty and glory, which lifts up the spirit of men so above themselves, renders them quite other men, that being filled with a supernatural spirit, they are raised above all human intercourse, and appear to be in another region, taken up from earth during the time they are celebrating the divine offices; and the angels do not disdain to mix themselves in this intercourse with men, and they come down with loving affection to the company of mortals. Oftentimes have the voices of these servants of God been heard mingling with ours, when, in the silent hours of the night, with joyful vigils and songs, at times glad, at others sad, they have awakened the Lord and Spouse of religious souls; and He, moved by such welcome sounds, communes and communicates Himself to these by gifts, and takes delight in those pure verses and canticles on earth better than in the dwellings of the heavens.

Oh! thou Jerominite Order! with good reason dost thou take pride in the divine office and love thy choirs! Thine do I call it, since it had its birth, so to say, in the house of thy Father, and it comes to thee, as to a daughter by inheritance, and in whatsoever day thou shouldst not follow this with the care which has been thine up to the present—do not ever again call thyself his daughter! Let the world style thee as it may, for we well know how deceived it ever is in assigning names to things. Let others spend the nights and the days in what may so please them; but thou, as is thy custom, holy mother, spend it in the divine praises: let them be found thus by the night, when the sun sets below the horizon and when it illumines those that are beneath our feet; and there also let it find thee when it comes forth in the morning! Thy inheritance is the choir and the song, the purity and cleanliness of the house of the Lord, the spotlessness and the adornment of His palaces on this earth! The same office will be thine to perform high up in the heavens, where no other occupation is known but that of singing the divine praises!

And in truth the choir is an angelic institution: it was not learned, as some appear to think, [1] from the vain pagans, who, placed in choirs and circles, as we now declare it, in a ring, sang and danced before the brutal and unclean altars of their abominable gods, holding each other’s hands or singly, beseeching in their songs that their sacrifices be accepted which were offered to them. A more ancient and nobler foundation has the Church in her holy rites, and one that she learned from better masters. The prophet Isaias beheld the seraphs placed in choirs, how they sang with alternate voices: “Holy! holy! holy!” to the Lord of armies, and celestial choirs. [2]
 

Close-up of seraph from the Basilica of Monreale (source)

Coor, in the language of the Scythians and Cimmerians, means multitude, who placed in a circle with pious ceremonies and chants, are singing in coor, which among them is interpreted as though we should say, fountain and circle of eternity; and this appertains to the angels before any other creatures. From this word, it is said, arose the Greek and Latin term chorus; while reversed, or the letters taken backwards, would form rooc, which in the same tongue means smoke; and a choir of such as praise God is in truth a smoke and most sweet perfume which touches the nostrils of God, and appeases Him, restrains His wrath, and mitigates it. The Book of Ecclesiasticus says: “The oblation of the just ennobles the altar and is a sweet odour in the worship of the Most High.”

From this is seen the reason for the holy ceremony used in the Church, that those who are in the choir singing and praising the Eternal Majesty of God in a circle, without beginning or end, are incensed with perfumes, in order to give them to understand that their songs and hymns are perfumes which touch the nostrils of God, and are to Him sweet-smelling, as were the sacrifices which Noe offered Him after leaving the ark, and the sacred Scriptures say God smelled them, and they rose up an odour of sweetness, which is a most lofty mystery to be treated on more leisurely. That smoke which comes forth from the censer is a symbol of the devotion and the spirit which burns within, and the smoke ascends to God; from whence it is concluded that the outward smoke would be idle, fruitless, unless it had the signification which corresponds to the interior. Because the spirit which rises to God in praises is a joyous choir, a spiritual smoke to the divine nostrils and ears. These two things must be close together: from the interior spirit burning and exhaling a sweet perfume which ascends towards God, must also rise the melody and song of the choir, because otherwise their voices will be dispersed and cast to the winds.

It was this that our saintly doctor essayed to plant in the Church, imitating the angels in choirs, so that our spirits, glowing with divine love, should rise in union with the voices until making music before God He is enveloped by a most sweet perfume. This Jerome did not learn from Isaias, but in those delightful moments when, raised above the earth, he himself has declared to us on oath that he found himself amid the choirs of angels, as we have already seen and remarked when writing his life in the wilderness.

In regard to the division of the lessons, I believe he adapted it from the practice in the Hebrew synagogue, because, as is proved in chapter xiii. of Apostolic Deeds or Practice of the Gospel, the Hebrews had apportioned the Books of the Prophets throughout all the weeks of the year, these said lessons containing all the more remarkable prophecies respecting the Messiah, Christ our Lord, in order that the Jews should not suffer ignorance and that they should understand. Thus speaks St. Paul when addressing the Jews in the synagogue of Antioch, that the Jews who dwelt in Jerusalem, and the princes among them, ignored the Messias (Acts xiii) formally and maliciously, as well as the voices of the prophets, which are read out and proclaimed during the course of the week.

In imitation of this plan, our doctor divided the whole of the sacred Scriptures which manifest Christ to us, through the entire course of the weeks of the year. The scheme of the epistles and gospels he took from apostolic tradition; and whereas he was so well informed in the antiquity and history of the Church, he was well qualified to arrange them with method and order.

After the descent of the Holy Ghost on the apostles, those heavenly men who had received the first-fruits of this treasure, in their deep gratefulness would meet together to celebrate the mysteries of the redemption of the world in the “communication and breaking of the Bread,” for with these words does St. Luke signify the Sacrament of the Eucharist. At the beginning the number was small and they were all together, they knew one another, all were perfect men, saintly, full of God. The Church grew, some few separated and went to dwell in various towns, some in Jerusalem, others in Antioch, others again in Rome, Corinth, and Ephesus; some of these were of the highest holiness; others were still imperfect, for under these two heads does the apostle divide them.

No longer could they be gathered together in one church, because poverty and the persecution of the Gentiles did not allow of large gatherings nor public ones. Secretly would they divide themselves as best they could, where there were many under divers names and titles—some were called of the band or brotherhood of John, others of Bartholomew, and so on.

On meeting together in this way, either each day or when they could, the first thing they did was to confess themselves as unworthy of so much good, and to accuse themselves humbly and in common of their defects; then they rose up and sang some hymns as best they thought. After this, if any letter had been received by that congregation or brotherhood, from the apostle St. Paul, or from any of their princes, it was read carefully in public, and each received what duties were ordered, what doctrine or mystery explained, the counsels, the reprehensions conveyed in that epistle. After the reading of this letter, which was done slowly, all being seated, and listened to with deep attention, a portion of the gospel was read, either such portion as had been declared in the letter or that came to the purpose. This ended, they all made a profession of the faith, either by the creed which the apostle had composed, or in the order which was most convenient.

And whilst the offering of bread and wine was being prepared which was to be consecrated, the members of that meeting contributed their alms for the necessitous brothers and the poor generally, whether present or absent. After this they joined in prayer to God for the whole world, for the princes of the Church, men apostles, or apostolic; then for the heads of the Republics, whether Christian or idolaters, so that He should be pleased to enlighten them, and guide in good ways the affairs of their Republic and government: this formed the preface. Then were celebrated the holy mysteries of the redemption of the world, consecrating the bread and the wine into the body and blood of our God and Lord Jesus Christ, as He had left it ordained it should be done in His memory and as He had willed.

Before communicating they said the Lord’s Prayer, calling God Father, and asking for all the benefits which from His hand can come to us, and, in particular, that He should give them that divine Bread, figured in other times by the manna, so that they should feel within them the promised Sabbath. They then received the Holy Communion, and those divine souls beheld the heavenly treasures and the Sacrament—hidden throughout the ages—manifested to them. They beheld God in themselves, and themselves within Him, and they communicated themselves to Him and He to them. They saw themselves all made one in that mystic Body, in spirit and in truth. They were absorbed, full of God, as though inebriated with the divine sweetness, and that new wine, that is not poured into old leathern bottles, which savour of the first bad manufacture.

Such was the Mass in that golden age, these were the divine offices celebrated: all this is gathered from the narrative of the Acts and apostolic practices, and from the Epistles of St. Paul, if with attention they be read and meditated upon.
 

Rembrandt van Rijn (and Workshop?), The Apostle Paul, c. 1657 (source)

Some remains of this still exist, though in a very much lower grade, in the brotherhoods or confraternities that are scattered throughout the world, known under the name of St. John, of St. Peter, and of Our Lady, and other saints, the members meeting together in the churches under these invocations for Mass, sermons, and other spiritual works. Would that they did not meet at meals, so that they should not become so inflamed! This evil, and abuse, commenced very early indeed. We have nothing to wonder at that such things should occur in these our times, when even in the time of the apostles, the text of the Epistle to the Corinthians, it was said in truth, “Alius quidem esurit, alius autem ebrius est.” “Perchance,” he adds then, “have you not houses where you can eat and drink? or do you despise the Church of God?” They had not well comprehended the doctrine which the holy apostle had given concerning the Supper of the Lord, and they fell into this abuse; for had it been performed with that order which we have described, it would be all full of charity, and for that reason does he repeat in chapter xi. of the Epistle, and declares to them this most sacred mystery, in order that they should know what it means to meet together in the church and to communicate in one Spirit.

He had also in chapter iii. of the same Epistle touched somewhat on this when he accuses them of being men who were yet carnal; and he gives the reason, saying that there existed among them a rivalry and a question as to which (so to say) was of a higher confraternity and had been baptized by the better hand. Some would say: We are better, for we are of Paul; others: Because we who are of Cephas, who is the head, have the advantage. No, indeed; but we who are of Apollo. All this was nothing more than the work of the enemy, who was sowing early harvests. In these gatherings and meetings, and other similar ones, began to be celebrated the divine offices simply and purely; and those masters, great as they were, began to teach and to enjoin the order of what in those times was permitted. And the apostle in chapter xv., after having instructed them in the essential, concluded by saying, “What is wanting, when I come to see you I will dispose, and order how it shall be done.”

Of all these things the report had come down from hand to hand together with the tradition, and many things were proved in the writings of the learned men of those times who succeeded the apostles, particularly in the oriental churches. Our doctor [Jerome] took advantage of all this, hence he set in order all things for the use of the Church, and with such wisdom and doctrine that this order and plan was preserved and followed during the course of the ages down to the present and for all time.

NOTES
[1] Scaligerus, de Arte Poet. lib. I, cap. 49.
[2] Gorop, Hermit. lib. 77.

Visit Dr. Kwasniewski’s Substack “Tradition & Sanity”; personal site; composer site; publishing house Os Justi Press and YouTube, SoundCloud, and Spotify pages.

St Jerome as Compiler of the “Comes” or Lectionary of the Ancient Roman Rite

St Jerome by Bernardo Strozzi (source)

Continuing our series, Fr José de Sigüenza here discusses (Life of St. Jerome, Book IV, Discourse 2) the opinion that makes St Jerome the editor of the sequence of readings in the Mass and the Divine Office.

Editor’s note: once again it must be pointed out that almost everything that Fra José says here is speculation, unsupported by any real evidence, and in some ways contradicted by evidence from well after St Jerome’s time. The oldest surviving lectionaries of the Roman Rite, such as the Würzburg lectionary of the mid-7th century, were complete unknown to him and the authors that he cites, such as his near contemporary Jacob Pamelius, and medieval authors like Walafrid Strabo; they would have come to a very different conclusion if they had known about these documents.

*          *          *

Respecting the order and arrangement of the divine office, there was composed a book called Comes, or otherwise known as Book of Lessons. In proof of what has been stated, and of its antiquity, I will here state what Jacobus Pamelius, a very erudite and pious man, says in the Prolegomena or Preambles which he wrote to the aforesaid book, and also what other grave authors declare: This work was printed anew after the reforms had been effected in the Missal and the Roman Breviary by Pius V. Thus does Pamelius speak in the Preface to the second volume:

Among the many other things which, at the desire and petition of St. Jerome, were ordained in the Church to be done by Pope Damasus of saintly memory, it is declared by such as have treated on the scheme of the order of the divine offices, was the arrangement of the lessons and the distribution of the gospels and epistles during the course of the year, this being due to St. Jerome. To prove this they quote frequently in their works the book called Comes, some adding the name of St. Jerome as the author, while others do so without giving the author’s name. Putting aside, in the first place, the parts I have quoted in the volume of the Liturgies, and of Alcuin (who alleges oftentimes these lessons), Amalarius, in his book iii. cap. 40, says that in ancient missals and in the Book of Lessons there is found written, Hebdomada quinta ante Natalem Domini, and as many lessons in the Book of Lessons and equal number of gospels from the time reckoned to the Nativity.

Farther on he adds:

The author of the Book of Lessons awakens our faith the more by representing to us the ages which preceded the coming of our Redeemer, symbolised by the weeks of Advent. He subsequently gives another reason for this in the lib. iv. Berna, Bishop of Augsburg, in the book of the Mass, treats upon two questions respecting the divergence existing between the Book of Lessons and the Antiphonary, or Book of Antiphons and book of the Sacraments. [1] The first question occurs in chapter iv.: “Why does the author of the Offices of the Mass set no more than four weeks (hebdomades) of Advent, whilst he who arranged the Book of Lessons places five?” The other question he treats upon in chapter vi.: “Why did the author of the Book of Offices set twenty-three offices from the octave of Pentecost to Advent, whilst the author of the Book of Lessons sets twenty-five lessons, apart from the lessons and gospels which are read during the octave of Pentecost?” And with the Fifth Sunday before the Nativity of our Lord and that of the Most Holy Trinity, these, together with the twenty-five, make the number of twenty-seven. In chapter v. this same Bishop Berno treats on the concordance of these three books and of their titles, which for brevity’s sake I omit. I will only confine myself to giving this testimony of his in regard to the authorship.

Similarly he says:

As we believe that St. Gregory composed the book of the Sacraments and of the Antiphons, so also do we believe that St. Jerome composed the Book of Lessons, as is made manifest by the preface at the beginning of the book he calls Comes.

Moreover, Micrologas (recte Micrologus), in the book Observationes Ecclesiasticae, chapter xxv., states St. Jerome to be the author of Comes by the following words: “Also in the book Comes or Book of Lessons, which St. Jerome composed, in the fasts of Pentecost he gives the lessons which appertain to the feasts of the Holy Ghost.” And in chapters xxviii. and xxx. he cites the lessons contained in the same book, where he also attributes the authorship of them to St. Jerome. The same does John Beleth, the theologian, allege in the Rationale of the Divine Offices, chapter lvii., where he says that St. Jerome, at the pleading of Pope Damasus, ordained that in all the churches should be read and followed what had been drawn up and arranged by St. Jerome for the seasons, drawn from the New and the Old Testament. Lastly, for the confirmation of this statement, it becomes very important to note that the ancient Fathers made a remembrance of the lessons that are read from both the Testaments, publicly and in common, and that the successors of St. Damasus

make particular mention of the apostolic and evangelical lessons, as appears from what we saw in the first volume, as, for instance, such saints as St. Ambrose of Milan, St. Augustine of Africa, St. Leo the Great (Pope), St. Silvanius and St. Cesarius of France, while the three last use the translation of St. Jerome.

All this is from Pamelius, in the above-quoted place of the second volume, where he purposely authorises the book called Comes or Book of Lessons, which begins from the vigil of the Nativity with the lessons of Isaias Prophet: “ Hac dicit Dominus, propter Sion non tacebo,” etc. And the Epistle of St. Paul, “Ad Romanos, Paulus serous Jesu Christi vocatus Apostolus.” And the Gospel “Secundum Matthaeum,” “Cum esset desponsata Mater Jesu Maria Joseph.” And following all the feasts of the Lord, and the Sundays of the year, marking the stations of the churches of Rome, setting the feasts of the apostles and martyrs, comes Advent, beginning with the Fifth Sunday, reckoning up to the vigil of the Nativity, assigning gospels, epistles, and lessons for the fourth and sixth days of the week. On completing the course of the year he adds also the Rites for the Dedication of Churches, the Ceremonial for the Ordination of Deacons, Priests, and Bishops, and finally he gives the Office for the Dead, thus ending the Book of Lessons.

From this is seen that the Missal and Breviary, which now, so divinely ordained, are in use, differ but little from venerable antiquity due to the arrangement of St. Jerome; a matter of great joy to the pious, who see how united the Church has always been, since even in this matter, where the field and liberty were so wide that she might have effected variety and change, she yet has not done so. Hence how much in the wrong are those, who understand so little, yet tell us that these things are of recent date; those who speak thus have not looked into the books of authors so ancient, grave, and learned and erudite, who received it as a thing established and worthy of the highest reverence.
 

Benediktuskirche, Freising: Hieronymus (source)

In the first volume the same Pamelius, treating on “What the holy Pontiff St. Damasus had ordained in the Church,” says as follows: “In the pontifical books, in the Life of St. Damasus, it is stated that he ordered the Psalms to be sung night and day throughout the Church. He ordered this to the bishops, the priests, and to the monasteries in nearly similar terms.” Wilfridus Strabo says the same thing in his book On the Offices of the Church, in chapter xxv. Marianus Scotus, in the second volume of his History, expresses himself in these words: “Damasus, the twenty-eighth pope after St. Peter, ordained that in the whole Church there should be sung day and night the Psalms.” This is confirmed by Venerable Bede, Haddo, and Usuardus in their “Martyrologies.” Sigisbert in his Chronicles affirms the same thing. [2] All these authors allude to the words of that epistle which was quoted of our saint, which stands in the first volume of the Councils of the Church.

This is confirmed, too, by Albinus Flaccus in his work De Officiis Divinis, where he says that the verse “Gloria Patri et Filio,” etc., which words St. Jerome composed at the petition of Damasus, divides the Psalms from one another, because formerly they were sung consecutively without division. That, not satisfied with this verse, considering it too small a pause between psalm and psalm, the same sovereign Pontiff again asked him to separate it further, whereupon St. Jerome added the other verse, “Sicut erat in principio et nunc et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.” Rudolphus Turgensis says that, the verse “Gloria Patri,” etc., was composed by the Nicene Council, and that Pope Damasus ordered it to be sung at the end of each psalm. The same was said by Martinus Polonus in the year 370.

Respecting the epistles and the gospels, Wilfridus Strabo, in the book already referred to, says thus:

It appears that in those times there were neither appointed nor read other lessons before the gospel but those from St. Paul; these were named only by the one who wrote the Deeds of the Pontiffs when he made a commemoration of the Antiphons, of which formerly they had none, and there was only read an epistle of the apostle, and the gospel, which statement is made by the pontiff Damasus, when writing to Jerome, in similar words.

Subsequently, after a careful examination of all points relating to this arrangement, there were set by Jerome other new lessons, not only taken from the New Testament, but even from the Old, according as the various feasts demanded. Rudolphus, in the aforesaid quotation, says that St. Jerome, cardinal priest, arranged and composed the order to be followed of the epistles and of the gospels, and this order is still adhered to at the present day in the Church, as is proved by the book called Comes. And writing to the Bishop Constantius, he says that Pope Damasus determined they should be thus read, as in use to this day. In order to manifest the antiquity and the genuineness of the book called Comes, which he was bringing forth to the light, and how ancient the originals were, he states in the Preface to the first volume as follows:

Of the Comes, or according to the moderns as it is now called, Book of the Lessons of the most blessed Saint Jerome, I declare that it was transcribed from the original which lies in the library and sacristy of our Cathedral Church of Bruges, and subsequently both Hitorpus and myself compared it with some ancient originals of Cologne, among which there was one in the Metropolitan Church of Saint Peter, over eight hundred years old, as was proved by the Catalogue of the same library.

St. Jerome and Pope Damasus, book illustration from "De excellentia et nobilitate delineationis" (source)

Further on Pamelius quotes other very ancient originals of some 600 years, by which is fully investigated the truth of the volume. The theologian John Beleth, in the aforesaid place quoted, says:

The offices of the Church were arranged by the blessed Saint Jerome, at the request of Pope Damasus, and all that is read of the Old and New Testament in the Church. St. Gregory was an author, and he composed some of the chants, and Gelasius some hymns and other things, because in the time of Theodosius the Greater, the Psalms being said without any appointed order, he besought Pope Damasus to make it his care to have the office of the Church arranged, which thing Damasus effected by means of the Blessed Saint Jerome.

And in chapter xix. he further says:

We have said in the first place, speaking in a general way, that no one thing must be sung or read which be not approved by the supreme Pontiff. In the primitive Church each one sung what he pleased, so long as what was sung appertained to the divine praises. Some things were common and followed by all, either because taught by Christ, such as the Lord’s Prayer, or by the apostles, as the Creed. Subsequently, when heresies and schisms sprang up in the Church and attacked her, the Emperor Theodosius, considering all things—for he himself had endeavoured to suppress and bring to naught the heresies of his time—conferred with Damasus the Pontiff, and besought him to summon some pious learned man to arrange and fix the divine offices, which thing Damasus did, entrusting this duty to St. Jerome, a man of great erudition and learning in the three principal languages, and as one whom he judged fully qualified to carry this out effectually, and thus set in order some at least of the offices of the Church. Jerome did so; and fixed as regards the Psalms, which, and how many, and on what days they should be sung; and the gospels and epistles and other offices, all which he arranged with much order. Thus from that time a particular office was defined for each day, and even many of the chants he composed; to which subsequently were added others by some of the doctors of the Church. When Pope Damasus examined the labours of St. Jerome, he commanded this arrangement to be kept and used in the Church.

All this is what John Beleth says.

I shall conclude this subject, which appears well proved, with the authority of Honorius of Augsburg in his book of Gemma Animae, and on the Concordance of the divine offices, where he says:

As anciently the divine office was said in the Church according as each one liked; but subsequently, when the crowd of heretics began to divide into a thousand sections the unity of the Church of Jesus Christ, and schismatics broke it up in their conventicles and assemblies, the Emperor Theodosius of glorious memory, earnestly and diligently strove that a Council should be convened in Constantinople, wherein all the heresies of that time were condemned, and he humbly asked the Synod to give orders as to the divine offices being fixed and arranged. This important affair Damasus, the Roman Pontiff, entrusted to Jerome, a priest, a most learned man in divine and human letters. The erudite doctor did this work when living in the small city of Bethlehem, where our Saviour was born. He distributed the Psalms among the hours of the night and of the day with great prudence in the form which the Church sings them even to the present day. For the office of the Mass he assigned lessons and gospels, taking them from the Old and New Testament, according as he deemed convenient to the time and to the seasons, because the Roman Church, when she seeks the succour of the saints, forms processions and makes stations to the different churches. When Damasus received the plan of the divine offices so wisely composed by St. Jerome, he summoned the College, and ordained that it should be thus sung and recited throughout the Church. Subsequently, St. Gregory and Gelasius made the prayers and chants which were appropriate to the lessons and the gospels according to the aforesaid plan, and now practised by the Church during the celebration of the divine offices.

As regards the statement made by the two authors, John Beleth and Honorius, that St. Jerome composed this plan when in Bethlehem, and even when St. Paula was already dwelling there, it is clearly a mistake, because without doubt St. Damasus was already dead when Jerome and Paula lived in Bethlehem, as we shall show farther on very clearly from the very epistles of the saint himself. It might have been the case that, as I have already said, all this affair was carried through before he came to Rome, when dwelling in Bethlehem. I consider it far more probable that he did not do so, but that it was effected when in Rome, despite that upon this question these letters were written; and I have a suspicion that the reason for being compelled to go to Rome by Imperial letters was the occasion of this affair.

NOTES
[1] The two last books mentioned he attributes to St. Gregory Pope, and the first to St. Jerome.
[2] Sigisbert, Cron. anno 382.

Author of the biography

Visit Dr. Kwasniewski’s Substack “Tradition & Sanity”; personal site; composer site; publishing house Os Justi Press and YouTube, SoundCloud, and Spotify pages.

St Jerome as Collaborator with Pope St Damasus in the Ordering of the Roman Rite

Benvenuto Tisi da Garofalo, Meditation of St. Jerome (c. 1520) (source)

We continue with our series of excerpts from Fr José de Sigüenza’s 1595 Life of St. Jerome, translated by Mariana Monteiro and published in London in 1907. The final three installments are from Book IV, Discourse 2 (pp. 271–91), which bears the description: St. Jerome prescribes the Offices of the Church, the formulary of the Prayers, and the Rite of Holy Mass.

Editor’s note: in this section in particular, it is important to bear in mind that almost everything that Fra José says here is speculation, unsupported by any real evidence, and in some ways contradicted by evidence from well after St Jerome’s time. The so-called Leonine Sacramentary, copied out roughly 130 years after his death, and the Würzburg lectionary of a century after that, clearly show that there was still a considerable amount of organizing left to do in the Roman Rite, and the assumption that the great doctor gave it a form and order similar to that of the later sacramentaries and missals is unjustified.

*          *          *

THERE is a doubt when and where St. Jerome performed these pious labours, of which we are about to treat. I state this in regard to ordering the Alleluia to be sung in the Church, and the rest which forms the subjects of this discourse.

I think there can be no difficulty in the belief that the glorious Pope St. Damasus had died ere his saintly friend departed from Rome, as we shall proceed farther on to prove. Therefore we must say one of two things, either that he undertook these works before his arrival in Rome when he quitted the wilderness, while staying alternately in Antioch, or in Bethlehem, or in Jerusalem, or in the solitudes of Palestine, at the earnest petition by letters of Damasus; or that during his sojourn in Rome, as we shall suppose, he occupied himself in these pious exercises during what leisure was left to him after his many other occupations had been discharged.

As regards the first theory we have a fact which favours it, in the existence of a letter written by St. Damasus to St. Jerome with the doctor’s reply attached, in which the pontiff desires him to undertake these great works and other affairs, and Jerome’s promise to put into execution what he was entrusted with. These letters are to be found among the works of our holy doctor in the first volume of the Councils now more recently collected together, and are also corroborated by many grave authors as being genuine. [1] Others again there are who will not admit them to be genuine, but strike them out as false and frauds. The style of the letters they maintain is a great argument, since they are far from the style of learned men, and despite that this argument carries much weight, yet it is not sufficient to outweigh the authority of so many clever men and to frustrate the general belief which holds true the tradition that this was their work. That this communication, however, passed between Jerome and Damasus by letter is certain, and it has been confirmed in earlier ages by common consent and handed down by unbroken tradition among lettered men.

Whether these letters be true ones or not, it is certain that St. Jerome, with the authority of Damasus, was most earnest in the adornment and care of the Church, whether when in Syria or when in Rome, or by correspondence and letters in carrying out what he had promised. Much in this respect is due to the piety and zeal of the holy pontiff, who as one vigilant and zealous for all appertaining to the Church, did not lose any opportunity, and who was also one who appreciated the talent of Jerome, perceiving that in him had descended the spirit of a Bezaleel, and thus employed him to adorn and embellish many things necessary in this tabernacle which God had planted and not man. 
 

Bezalel (or Bezaleel)

Damasus, considering with especial regard all that appertained to the divine worship, found many deficiencies in plan and harmony. The former holy pontiffs, preoccupied as they had been with the persecutions of idolaters, the work of erecting churches, the extirpation of heresies, the eradication of idolatry and other affairs requiring their immediate attention, had not had that peace and quietude in which to treat of other matters, zealous as they had been respecting the order to be followed in the offices of the Church, but had each in their turn done what best seemed to him good, according to the time and opportunity.

Beyond such things as had been agreed upon in the sacrifice of the altar since the time of the apostles, in all the essentials of the Sacrament, in the matter, in the form, in many parts, and the principal ones, of the sacred canon, the few details taught by St. Peter, St. James the Less, and other apostles were followed, forasmuch as they had seen them done by our Lord, or they themselves had used, or the pontiffs who had immediately succeeded the apostles had learned from them, as may be seen in the Liturgies which were printed by the diligence of Pamelius—in all else details were left to option. There was no harmony or order of epistles, gospels, or of introits; in a word, each one was free to use what he chose.

The same was the case in the recital of the divine office. The Psalms were indeed recited, but without having a set formulary of lessons, the distribution of prayer and praises for Matins, and the rest of the holy hours being left to the individual choice. No regular form had been established, and the Church, which in all things is one, in this matter had not had the time nor the peace to establish and agree upon the plan to be followed, pursuing the doctrine left to the faithful by the apostles in general, exhorting one another to a holy life, with hymns and psalms, singing in their hearts spiritual canticles which later on were to be uttered by the mouth.

In order to establish and arrange the method and plan of the divine liturgy, Pope Damasus besought Jerome to set in order the office of the Masses, and draw up the formulary of the prayers to be used. For the different masses he was to assign the gospels and the epistles which were to be said or sung throughout the year, taking into account the feasts of our redemption, of the divine Saviour, and other mysteries of holy faith, then the order to be followed on the feasts of the apostles and martyrs, and lastly the arrangements of the Psalter and the order of reciting the canonical hours. In the aforesaid letter of Pope Damasus to our doctor he expresses himself in this wise:

I ask of your charity that, according to what you learned of your Rector Alexander, our bishop, you will send us the manner of chant used in the Greek Church when singing the holy Psalms, because, so great is our simplicity, that it is only when Sunday recurs that an epistle of the apostles is read, and a chapter from the gospels; and we have neither experience nor the manner of singing the Psalms, nor is the beauty of the hymns pronounced by our mouth.

St Jerome becoming secretary to St Damasus

The holy doctor did as he was bidden. He arranged the whole of the office of the Church; he disposed the Psalms according to the plan which at the present day is in general use in all churches, which on this point do not vary from the Roman. He divided the Psalter among the ordinary days of the week. He allotted some of the Psalms for the feasts of the apostles, martyrs, and virgins. He assigned some for lauds, others for vespers, and others again for the remaining hours of the day. He furthermore persuaded the holy Pontiff, and obtained his sanction, to add at the end of each psalm that celestial versicle of confession and praise of the most holy Trinity, “Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto,” so that the faith of the holy Nicene Council, confessed and declared by the 318 Fathers, should resound always in the ears, and by the mouths, of the faithful! A favour truly vouchsafed from Heaven, inspired into the heart of this great doctor and father of the Church, and worthy of everlasting praise; for, had nothing else remained to us in the Church of St. Jerome’s labours, we should be under a very great obligation to him for this work alone.

He also apportioned the lessons which were to be said at Matins throughout the year, gathering from the sacred books such passages as were most appropriate to the various times in such a manner, that the whole of the sacred Scriptures should be gone through during the year, and thus knowledge be obtained in the ordinary course of prayer.

Later on he drew up the arrangement, in conformity with the above, [of] the gospels and epistles which were to be sung at Mass, on the various feasts in the course of the sacred cycle, touching upon the mystery of our redemption, setting their particular narratives; he also followed this plan in regard to feasts of certain saints, such as the apostles whose history is recorded in the sacred books, or such parts as appertained to the spirit and doctrines of each. All this was carried out with such method and harmony that it was clearly seen that he was divinely inspired and guided in this heavenly task. The epistles are full of a lofty art: they generally seem to be commentaries of the gospel selected; all is proportioned and to the point, whereby is seen the great knowledge that our holy doctor possessed of all the sacred books, and how well he penetrated divine secrets. In truth, I venture to say that for this work he had great assistance from the Holy Spirit, which directed his pen.

NOTE
[1] Erasmus in 4 vols.; Marianus in 9 vols.; Laurient. Surium, et Aliis.
Visit Dr. Kwasniewski’s Substack “Tradition & Sanity”; personal site; composer site; publishing house Os Justi Press and YouTube, SoundCloud, and Spotify pages.

St Jerome’s Introduction of the “Alleluia” and Its Mystical Signification

(source)

As mentioned on Monday, over the next couple of week we are sharing passages from a 1907 English edition of a Life of St. Jerome written by the monk Spanish Fr José de Sigüenza in 1595. Today we continue the First Discourse of Book IV, where Fr Sigüenza discusses the introduction of the Alleluia into the liturgy.

*          *          *

St. Jerome likewise set great diligence to improve and perfect the divine worship throughout the Roman Church, for which end he endeavoured to translate to her all the good usages and ceremonies which he had attentively observed in the Greek and oriental churches; and from an expression of his, it appears that the custom of holding lighted candles when the Gospel is chanted was introduced by him, for he says it was in use in the oriental church, but does not say it was in use in those of Rome, to which said use he gave a very lofty signification; and this custom, which has been brought down to our time, was no doubt his act.

He had also observed that in the churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and others the Alleluia was sung, and he therefore pleaded with the Pontiff Damasus that it should likewise be sung in Rome. St. Gregory the Great, in the Seventh Book of his Epistles, in the Epistle 65 to John, Bishop of Zaragoza (recte Siracusa), in Sicily, replying to the objections of some who deemed the manner of celebrating mass incorrect, on coming to the Alleluia, says: “The singing of the Alleluia is a custom taken from the church of Jerusalem, according to the tradition and teaching of St. Jerome, since the time of St. Damasus, Pope, for thus is it affirmed by all.” By these words St. Gregory manifested the great authority in which St. Jerome was held, and of what great value was the tradition which he had taught, and which had been handed down to his time.

The reason which moved the holy doctor to introduce the chant of the Alleluia into the Latin Church was, I believe, not so much the desire that it should be similar to that of Jerusalem, where it had been taught by the Apostle St. James, and appears in his liturgy, nor that the Hebrew and Greek words should resound in the Roman, as on account of the lofty mystery which he was well aware was enclosed in those two terms, a Hebrew name and verb Allelu-ia. A great deal was revealed concerning this word when he wrote to the noble matron Marcella, [1] who had asked him what meaning there was in some of the Hebrew words, such as Alleluia, Amen, Maranatha, Ephod. He tells her that allelu-ia is equal to praise be to God, because that last part, ia, is in Hebrew one of the ten divine names employed by those who speak the language.

In another Epistle to the same, [2] he declares Ia to be interpreted by the name of God. And when expounding those words of Isaiah, chapter xxvi., In Domino Deo forti in perpetuum, says that in Hebrew there are three names of God, the first is Ia, the second Jehovah, the third Zuria. He says that the first part of Allelu-ia signifies invisible, the second ineffable, the third means robust. And in an Epistle, which is found among his works, written to Damasus, a very good reason is given, which, despite that the Epistle does not seem his, yet the argument is like to the saint’s, that when we seek to praise God Incarnate with our voice, Alleluia is added to the Psalm; and forasmuch as our doctor [3] affords us so often occasion to declare his motives, it will not be foreign to this purpose to add here something concerning the mystery which is enclosed in the Alleluia.

That name so intimate and celebrated with the Hebrews of Jehovah, which through mystery and excellence is called by them Ineffable and nomen expositum, and among the Greeks tetragamaton, that is to say, of four letters, is called by them ineffable, not because, as some have said, they think that by it God is called as He is in Himself, because God has no name nor is there a symbol in all that is created, to embrace or comprehend what is a greatness without limits.

(Editor’s note: the Hebrew name of God is “Yahweh”;“Jehovah” is not actually a word at all. Because of the Jewish custom that the former was too holy to be said during the ordinary reading of the Scriptures, they would replace it with “Adonai – my Lord.” As a reminder to the cantors to not accidentally say the Divine Name, the Tetragrammaton YHWH (יהוה) was written with the vowels of Adonai, producing the nonsense word Jehovah. This fact was not generally understood by Christians in the sixteenth century, and Fra José has here reproduced a mistake common to the Tyndale, Geneva, and King James Bibles.)

It is true to say that all other names by which God is named He Himself has communicated to His creatures, angels and men; and that this one formed of the said four letters He has reserved for Himself; and this, not because it is so intimately His own, that it expresses what God is, but for other reasons. The simple reason of calling Himself Ineffable is because up to the present time it has not been written, nor can the manner of pronouncing it be properly written, nor is there a way in the divine letters, because the four with which it is written are not letters, which are pronounced singly among the Hebrews, but only by some differences of drawing the lips, to breathe in the air, and with the dots which were subsequently added, to breathe out the same—a thing which few of those who know Hebrew recognise.

From the observance of the holy Scriptures is gathered that when this name is met with in them it signifies God as a nature of eternal substance and essence, constant, invariable, of a most firm mercifulness, and that what He promises of good and salutary (to which He is most inclined by will) cannot even be deficient, nor be hindered by any circumstance whatever. This is what the ineffable name of Jehovah expresses, which name, although we may so pronounce it, is not its proper sound. It becomes opportune to say this here, in order that we should understand that God gave this name to the children of Israel as a military countersign, a token or symbol, as a watchword among them by which they should be known, like the word given as a password to the armies in their watches, because as it had been promised to that people, and declared to them His will, a thing He never had done to other nations; whensoever they called upon God under that name, they always named Him the God of the Promises, and whereas others have spoken of this, I come to my purpose.

Of this name the two first letters are i, a, and stand the last in the said word Alleluia; and when in the divine letters the name ia is placed in the praises of God, it gives us to understand not only God of the Promises but God who has fulfilled them, and carried them to due effect and the desired point; and not as God who fulfilled them with a people and nation to whom had been given the name as a countersign, but as God and Lord so magnificent and generous in fulfilling what He promises, that He has extended them to the whole world, to all peoples, and to all nations, and to all dwelling in the heavens and on the earth, so that all should praise and laud Him, acknowledge and glorify and adore Him.

Hence, when in church is said Alleluia, it is with extreme brevity to declare Praise the Lord, which is His name, essence, and being. He Who promised His salvation and His treasures of good to one only nation, and brought them to a most happy fulfilment, and extending all these for the benefit of all men, and of all creatures that exist in heaven and on earth. And praising God and man, as said our saint, is nothing else but to laud the One Who, having promised to become man for the good of mankind, filled all things with His divine gifts, fulfilling with excess what He had promised.

In order that it be seen how clearly this is manifest in the sacred writings, let it be recognised in the first place, that it will not be found in all the Books of Moses, unless I have not examined them aright, that this name Ia is once even mentioned, yet in the Psalms it is inserted many times; this was as though to tell us that what had been given to the people by Moses, as regards what related to law and ceremony, was not what God had promised man, nor what He had intended to give them, nor would it stop here. It was no more than a shadow of the body and reality of what was promised. But in the Psalms, forasmuch as they are prophesies which sing of things as seen and executed, constant and eternal, the word Ia is repeated.
 

Furthermore, let it be considered that when the name is set in the Psalms it always speaks to the multitude of nations and peoples, and not alone to the people of Israel. In the Psalm Laudate Dominum omnes gentes, laudate eum omnes populi, it ends with Allelu-ia; because it contains naught else in the whole argument but what we have said. The same occurs in Psalm cii., after having said: Scribantur haec in generatione altera, there is added and the people that shall be created, Alleluia. Observe also the Psalm cii., which commences, Laudate pueri Dominum, where in the epilogue is said He who maketh a barren woman to dwell in the house a Joyful mother of children, Allelu-ia, and in many more of its kind.

Hence, in view of the aforesaid, came truly from Heaven the inspiration and the motive our saint had for the Roman Church to sing what was so in keeping with herself, and from thence to spread throughout the world, as though from head to foot, the singing of this chant of joy, and not keep it enclosed solely in Jerusalem where the apostle had first ordered it should be sung. To that people and city was fulfilled the promise of God and man, and there the Ineffable fulfilled all that had been promised, His truth and intention complete in victory; thus was He there Ia, the God of the promises fulfilled.

And forasmuch as he came to His own house and heritage, as the great theologian says, and His own did not receive Him but one here and there, as though in vestiges, He passed on to communicate such great benefits to all the nations, who, on receiving Him were made sons of God, new Israelites, nay, out of stones sons of Abraham; for such as adored stocks and stones made themselves inferior to those very stones. Thus was Jerusalem extended, and its walls, according to the petition of David in Psalm 1. in his penitence, should be built up in order that such a great multitude should enter in and sing the Allelu-ia.

When St. Jerome persuaded Pope Damasus to have this new voice heard in Rome, and that it be thus sung in the Hebrew language, these and other greater secrets which we have not attained did he reveal, because for the saintly pontiff to order so extraordinary a thing (which no doubt must have caused some alteration), great secrets must he have necessarily disclosed to him. It is seen that even in the time of the Holy Father Gregory I this affair had not been so well received or established in all parts, through ignorance of the mystery which it enclosed within. All were not so careful as Damasus; they did not all heed or care to comprehend the divine mysteries. We have need always to lament this negligence; and even at the present day, at this period when so much light has been thrown over these things, there is smaller pleasure among the many in turning our eyes to study and investigation than the bats and owls have in turning their eyes to the rays of the sun.

But let us end here this discourse which would be lengthened to a great extent if we ventured to make it equal to the one which follows and similar to the foregone.

NOTES
[1] Epist. 137, ad Marcel.
[2] Epist. 136, ad Marcel.
[3] Apud Mar. 9, t. in tertia serie.
Visit Dr. Kwasniewski’s Substack “Tradition & Sanity”; personal site; composer site; publishing house Os Justi Press and YouTube, SoundCloud, and Spotify pages.

St. Jerome on Care for Churches and Reverence in Divine Worship

Fray José de Sigüenza (1544-1606)

In the run-up to the September 30th feast of the great Father and Doctor of the Church, St Jerome, it seems highly appropriate to share with a broad readership some fascinating material from a biography of the saint written in 1595 by Spanish monk Fray José de Sigüenza and published in English for the first time (it seems) in 1907 in London. A PDF of the entire book may be found here.

Book IV, discourses 1 and 2, speak of Jerome’s contributions to the Church’s liturgy. It must be born in mind that Fray José, like many authors of his era, simply assumes that customs which were universal in his time went back to the Patristic age. Thus he can speak of a chasuble which was believed to belong to the Saint, even though there were no such things as special vestments for the liturgy in his time. Likewise, there is no chain of custody to show the authenticity of his supposed chalice.Nonetheless, the rich quotations from Jerome’s works and the moral applications made by the learned author are certainly still relevant—at times, strikingly so, as when we read Jerome’s complaints about those who neglect the beauty of churches and the reverence that should be brought to divine worship.

I will publish these excerpts over the next couple of weeks. The notes are in the original text, but renumbered here for convenience.
 

The Life of St. Jerome
The Great Doctor of the Church
in Six Books

from the Original Spanish of The Reverend Father Fray José de Sigüenza
Professed Monk of the Royal Monastery of San Lorenzo, Madrid
1595

Translated by
Mariana Monteiro
London: Sands and Co., 1907

* * *

Book the Fourth.
Fifth Age—Manhood, Virility
Discourse the First
(pp. 259–70)

St. Jerome establishes the Order of Divine Worship in Rome, and draws up the Holy Ceremonies of the Church. He prescribes the “Alleluia” to be sung in the Roman Liturgy. [This part on the Alleluia will be published later this week. — PAK]

ALTHOUGH St. Jerome had so much occupation in Rome fulfilling the offices of cardinal and chancellor, nevertheless he so thoroughly discharged the duties relating to his sacred priesthood and ministry that it would seem he had naught else to attend to. I do not wish in this discourse to treat of those duties which related to him as Doctor of the Church, but only of those labours which, as a good priest, he fulfilled, leaving aside all others for future discourses. It seems impossible that one man could have attended to so much, and have done so many things with such thoroughness. I believe it was because, as his food was scanty, his allotted time for sleep so short, he had time for what would appear no time could be enough.

He said Mass very frequently, and with all the devotion and fervour which can be imagined in so saintly a soul. Our Lord during these performances gave him great lights for all things, and favoured him with many graces and favours, as His Divine Majesty is wont to do on behalf of such like servants of His, who, fully aware of what they are called to do, prepare first their soul, most earnestly awaiting the coming of so great a Bridegroom. And as the reverence for, and fear of, so much majesty absorbs their minds, turning their eyes to their own littleness and vileness, they empty themselves of all that they have within them, so that nothing should embarrass them, in order that such royal eyes be not offended and their capacity be not curtailed. Hence, when He enters these, He enriches them with His presence, and leaves them replete with His gifts. In this way do saints grow in grace; in this way are they made so great that, compared with them, the rest bear no proportion whatever; as the astrologers say that the earth bears no comparison with the heavens, similarly do these men of heaven bear an immeasurable advantage to worldly ones. This kept our saint in a continual guard in all things—custody of the eyes, great prudence and consideration in his words, his intercourse and conversation. He feared lest there should enter in by these windows, unless well guarded, what in the time of need would suffice to close the gates to the coming of God. Thus did he himself express it in the Epitaph of Marcella: “I proceeded with great modesty in my eyes, in order not to look on the Roman matrons.” [1]

It is a very difficult matter that the images of things seen which remain impressed in the soul, should not obstruct or intervene at the time when the priest needs to be gazing so closely upon Christ; and it is a great deceit and dangerous presumption to trust to one’s self, and make so little account of God, as to think that He will establish in them His dwelling, and work the effects which from His corporeal presence is assumed, they themselves doing nothing on their part to warrant such a hope; for they have thought it of small moment that the dwelling should be well guarded and prepared for His coming, nor even when He is within (which is worse) do they linger a moment to thank Him for His coming, nor to ask of Him those mercies which they might have obtained by some of these efforts.

And the truth of all this is apparent to many of us; for, after many years’ enjoyment of these great benefits, we find ourselves buried in the deepest poverty. Nor can I persuade myself that so great a treasure, if it were within, could possibly remain so concealed that it should of itself afford so few or no proofs of its dwelling there. It is impossible that a bright fire, so many times multiplied, should not warm and shed its radiance on all objects around—that so brilliant a light should not diffuse a reflection, for this is its principal effect, and the sun itself does not wish to be obscured, but that it should be seen by its works and effects, and glory be given to the Father of the light which is in the heavens, and be declared, “This is the chaste generation which the Lord has blessed.”

This was seen in St. Jerome, who came forth from that sacred banquet “like a lion darting gleams of fire from his mouth” (for thus does St. Chrysostom declare of good communicants), turning for the divine honour, appalling to devils, unbearable to the bad. [2] In memory of this and as most precious relics and of great esteem does the city of Rome preserve the chalice in which St. Jerome consecrated, and it is shown to the people with great reverence, together with the chasuble which he wore. Perchance this may be the same chasuble which was sent to him by his great friend Nepotian, nephew of Heliodorus, when at the point of death, as a precious legacy in proof of his friendship. The saint himself says in the epitaph which he subsequently wrote upon him, and dedicated to the said uncle:

Tears are coursing down my cheeks, and despite that I wish to resist them with the Spirit, I cannot disguise the sorrow I feel. Who would have thought that Nepotian, placed at the point of death, should have remembered my friendship? and that his soul, being in agony, should not have forgotten the sweetness of our desire? And taking the hand of his uncle, he said: ‘This chasuble which I used in the holy ministry of the altar of Christ, send it to my beloved, in age my father, and in office my brother, and by all the affection that you bear to your nephew, pass it on to him whom you love on an equality with me.’ Saying these words he swooned away, grasping the hand of his uncle and bearing me in his memory. [3]

He was in an extreme manner tender towards his friends; and it seemed as friend after friend departed, that he himself expired with each, and their memory was always present with him.
 

The chasuble said to have been St Jerome’s

He was skillful in handling all things that were under his care and that appertained to the divine worship, keeping them all scrupulously clean. He considered that the church was the palace of the most exalted of kings, and the table that of the greatest of lords. He well knew the respect described in the Old Testament for the holy of holies, which was no more than the shadow of these present things, and he judged that all diligence was all too little. He could not endure those who on this point were careless and without decorum, and therefore to the contrary he experienced great delight when he found anyone who excelled in these matters; he greatly admired this same priest Nepotian for this quality of circumspection and carefulness in his office.

In the same Epistle [4] he says, a little above:

In comparison to what we have said little can I add; but in small things is made manifest the inclination and the spirit. Because in the same manner as we judge the Creator admirable, not only in the heavens and on the earth, in the sun and in the ocean, in the elephant, camel, horses, buffaloes, tigers, bears, and lions, so also in the smaller form of the animal kingdom—such as the ant, the fly, the caterpillar, and insects and grubs, which we know better by their foms than by their names, and examining each we are struck with admiration and reverence at the skill of the Great Artificer, so also does the soul that is truly dedicated to Christ, careful of what is great and what is small, because it knows that even of one idle word it will have to give an account. Therefore he [Nepotian] was careful that the altar should be very clean, that there be no speck of dust on the walls, that the floor be well swept; the doorkeeper to assist at the doors and watch assiduously, that the tabernacle and sacristy be properly cleaned, the vessels thoroughly washed, and all the ceremonies performed with pious solicitude and diligence. He did not neglect either the greatest or the smallest office; and whenever you sought for him you would always find him in the church. The side chapels in the church, the sepulchres and altars of the martyrs, he would adorn with a variety of flowers, branches, the fresh green shoots of the vine, so that the whole was decorated with loving care and by the labour of his hands.

I have inserted this here, not only because in itself it breathes all that is fresh, beautiful, and comely, and that we may see what was the care and pious inclination our saint had towards all these things (which in truth was my purpose), but that in passing we should consider how impious are those [5] who reprehend all they see in the church of holy ceremonies and ornamentation, saying that all these things are novelties and of little fruit, whereas these have been in use from primitive ages, fostered and increased, and well established, and received, since the time of St. Jerome, down to the present time—even the smallest customs—a truth proved learnedly by those who have written treatises in defense of this truth against the monsters of these times [a reference to the Protestant ‘reformers’—PAK].

It is through St. Jerome being so particular and strict on the things appertaining to the Divine worship that it has resulted, as though by inheritance, that his Order and spiritual sons are distinguished by this same love of cleanliness and extreme care in the Divine service, and even so they consider themselves far behind what ought to be. It fosters devotion to witness the neatness and spotless cleanliness of the altars, sacristies, and temples of this Order; whilst it altogether destroys devotion to see the neglect of all these qualities in many places of worship, and in a matter where all care is insufficient; and it is a true inference what the interior life of the soul must be when the outside is thus neglected.

NOTES
[1] Epist. 16
[2] Marianus, in Vita D. Hieronymi.
[3] Epist. 3, c. 6, ad Heliod.
[4] Epist. 3, ch. 5.
[5] Fere omnes haeretici a Vigilantio usque ad impium Kemnicium.

Visit Dr. Kwasniewski’s Substack “Tradition & Sanity”; personal site; composer site; publishing house Os Justi Press and YouTube, SoundCloud, and Spotify pages.

St Pachomius of Egypt

On May 9th, the Coptic Church commemorates one of the great early monastic patriarchs, a native Egyptian called Pachom, whose name is Latinized as Pachomius. He was one of the most influential figures on the organization of monastic life in the 4th century; this is true even in the West, (where his feast has only been kept very rarely), since St Benedict adopted many of his ideas into his Rule.

Pachomius was born in 292 to a pagan family in the Thebaid, the Roman province which had formerly been the kingdom of Upper Egypt, with its capital at Thebes, the modern city of Luxor. At the age of twenty, he was conscripted into the Roman army, and sent up the Nile with other conscripts under miserable conditions. When the boat stopped at Latopolis (the modern Esnah), the local Christians came out to take care of them, and Pachomius was so impressed by their kindness that he determined to embrace their faith as soon as he was able. When his unit was disbanded, he returned to his native place, a village called Khenoboskion where there was a Christian church, was accepted as a catechumen, and baptized soon thereafter.

A fresco on the wall of the Trinity Chapel in Lublin, Poland, showing several of the early monastic Saints: Pachomius furthest to the left, with his Rule in hand, then Anthony, Macarius, Spyridon of Trimythous, and Daniel the Stylite. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Hans A Rosbach, CC BY-SA 3.0.)

He then chanced to hear of a man named Palaemon, a very holy and austere hermit living nearby in the desert, much like his contemporaries and fellow-countrymen, Ss Paul the First Hermit and Anthony the Great. Pachomius became his disciple, observing with him a life of strict fasting and abstinence, keeping long vigils, frequently reciting the entire Psalter at one go, and performing a good deal of manual labor. After several years, he visited a place called Tabennisi, about nine miles up the river, and heard a voice telling him to establish a monastery in that place. He is also said to have been visited by an angel, who confirmed this order, and gave him certain instructions as to how the monastic life was to be lived there. With his master’s encouragement, he built a cell at Tabennisi, and having settled there, soon began to attract many disciples, the first among them being his own elder brother. (Palaemon himself, however, withdrew back to his solitude.)

As with many of the early ascetics, Pachomius’ personal austerity was very astonishing, especially to our modern sensibilities. He is said to have gone fifteen years taking only brief rests, always sitting, never lying down, and never to have eaten a full meal. But he had a finely-honed sense of what others could bear, and turned no one away from joining his community, adjusting the discipline according to what was appropriate for each, as determined by his condition and temperament, both spiritual and physical. In due course, he established other monasteries, one of which, at a place called Pabau, grew to be even greater than its mother house, much as in the days of St Bernard, Clairvaux eclipsed Citeaux as the most important house of the Cistercian Order. When Pachomius died in 348, there were a total of three thousand monks in the nine houses he had founded. In the monastic tradition, both eastern and western, the Thebaid has long had a mythical role as a kind of early monastic Paradise. On the last Saturday before the beginning of Great Lent, the Byzantine Rite commemorates “All of the God-bearing Fathers and Mothers Who Shone Forth in the Ascetic Life,” singing the following hymn at Vespers.

“Rejoice, faithful Egypt; rejoice, holy Libya; rejoice, o chosen Thebaid; rejoice, every place, and city, and land that nourished the citizens of the kingdom of heaven, and raised them in self-discipline and toil, and showed them forth to God as men perfect in their desires. They were revealed as those who give light to our souls; these very same, by the glory of their miracles, and the wonders of their deeds, shone forth to our minds, unto every corner of the world. Let us cry out to them, ‘All-blessed fathers, pray that we may be saved!’ ”

Scenes from the Lives of the Desert Fathers, or “Thebaid”, by Blessed Fra Angelico, 1420; now in the Museum of Fine Arts in Budapest.

The lives of the first monks sometimes degenerated into a competition of asceticism, with men vying with each other to think up ever more bizarrely unpleasant ways of living; one Egyptian document even speaks of a “hermit” who lived like an animal in the midst of a herd of wild buffalo. St Pachomius had the wisdom to see that this made for strong temptations to pride, which were best checked by the living of a communal life under a rule and an authority. He is therefore credited as the founder of “cenobitic” monasticism, monasticism “of the common life.” (κοινὸς βίος)

St Jerome was a very small child when Pachomius died, but when he visited Egypt in the later decades of the fourth century, the communities which the latter had founded were still thriving. Jerome, who had a great deal of interest in and admiration for the monks, visited several of these communities, and, working through a Coptic-speaking translator, produced a Latin version of Pachomius’ rule. This Latin translation is considered to be the first and most faithful to the Coptic original, which is now lost, and it was through it that St Benedict came to know of Pachomius’ ideas about the monastic life. Scholars have rightly noted a great many references and even direct quotes of the Pachomian Rule in that of Benedict, who, not by coincidence, calls cenobites the best kind of monk. (cap. 1 in fine)

In his own prologue to this translation, St Jerome writes, “… while I was grieving over the death of the holy and venerable Paula… I received books sent to me by a man of God, the priest Silvanus, which he had gotten from Alexandria, so that he might send them on to be translated. For he told me that in the cenobia of the Thebaid, … there live very many Latins who do not know the Egyptian or Greek languages, in which the Rule of Pachomius, Theodore and Orosius were written. These men are the ones who first laid the foundation of the cenobia throughout the Thebaid and Egypt, according to the command of God, and of an angel who was sent to them for this very purpose. … and we have translated these letters as they are read among the Egyptians and Greeks, setting down the same elements that we found, and imitating the simplicity of the Egyptian language … lest learnèd speech should change (the readers’ impression of) those apostolic men, who were completely full of spiritual grace.”

St Jerome in the Desert, ca. 1476, by the Venetian painter Alvise Vivarini (1447 ca. – 1503/5)

St Paula of Rome

The Roman Martyrology notes today as the anniversary of the death of a Saint named Paula in the year 404. She was a disciple of St Jerome, and the principal source of information about her is one of the longest among his many letters (108), written to console her daughter Eustochium. It recounts a great deal of information which the daughter certainly already knew, but of course, Jerome wrote with the expectation that his letters would be widely copied and read. He therefore takes the opportunity to present Paula as a model Christian, and describes his work with the opening words of one of Horace’s odes (3.30): “Exegi monumentum aere perennius – I have raised up a memorial more lasting than bronze.”

The Madonna and Child with Ss Paula of Rome and Agatha, ca. 1500, by the Italian painter Michele Ciampanti (from Lucca in Tuscany), formerly known as the Stratonice Master. Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.

Paula was born in 347, a descendent of some of the wealthiest and most ancient families in Rome; at 16, she was married to a nobleman of similarly ancient lineage called Toxotius. They had four daughters, Blaesilla, Paulina, Eustochium, and Rufina, and a son named for his father. When she was thirty-two, her husband died, and after a period of extreme grief, she was encouraged by another widow, St Marcella, to devote herself to a kind of monastic life. This was not a formal enclosure in a religious house, solemnized by vows, a custom which barely existed in her time, but a life of great austerity, study and prayer, commonly shared with other women of similar station, and charitable works, for which the resources at her disposal were vast.

In 382, she was introduced to Jerome, who came from Bethlehem to the Eternal City in the company of two other Saints, Paulinus, the bishop of Antioch who had ordained him a priest, and Epiphanius of Salamis, the author of a well-known (but rather careless) treatise against heresies. Jerome became the spiritual director of the circle of devout women to which Paula belonged, a fact which invited a good deal of unpleasant and jealous gossip. This was also the period in which he undertook the first of his Biblical projects, at the behest of Pope St Damasus I, the revision of the Latin text of the Gospels.

Damasus died in 384, and Jerome, finding the atmosphere of Rome uncongenial (to say the least), returned to the Holy Land. Shortly thereafter, Blaesilla died, and Paula decided to leave Rome and join her spiritual father. Her second daughter Paulina was well married to another wealthy nobleman, Pammachius, also a friend of Jerome, and the builder of the Roman basilica of Ss John and Paul. Eustochium had always been much more inclined towards her mother’s way of life, and would be her constant companion for the rest of her life, but at the time of her departure, Rufina and Toxotius were still very young. Jerome describes in the aforementioned letter how she overcame her motherly affection to go where she knew Christ to be calling her. After visiting Epiphanius in his see on the island of Cyprus, they met Jerome at Antioch; from there, they proceeded to a pilgrimage of the major sites of the Holy Land, and visited the emergent monastic communities of Egypt and the Sinai desert.

St Paula Embarking on Her Journey at Ostia; after 1642, by the French painter Claude Lorrain (1604-82). Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.

After this pilgrimage, Paulina and Eustochium settled in Bethlehem, where Jerome had long been previously established, and lived as they had in Rome, with him as their spiritual director. She used her fortune to build two monasteries, one for men and one for women, governing the latter herself, as well as a hospice for pilgrims. Her financial support was also essential to Jerome in his great work of translating the Hebrew parts of the Old Testament, and she and her daughter helped him on a scholarly level as well, since they knew both Greek and Hebrew. Jerome’s prefaces to Esther, Isaiah, Daniel and the Twelve Prophets, and that of his second revision of the Psalms (the so-called Gallican Psalter, used in the Roman Breviary) are all addressed to Paula and Eustochium, as are his commentaries on some of the Pauline Epistles. The preface to Joshua, Judges and Ruth was written to Eustochium “after the death of St Paula.” An author of the ninth-century, St Paschasius Radbertus, successfully passed off a treatise of his own on the Assumption, known from its opening words as “Cogitis me”, as the work of St Jerome by pretending to address it to the same two women. A passage of it is still read to this day in the Divine Office on the feast of the Immaculate Conception under Jerome’s name, and indeed, it has proved to be far more influential than any of Paschasius’ works published under his own name.

The younger Toxotius married a woman called Laeta, the Christian daughter of a pagan priest, and from this union was born a girl named for her paternal grandmother. One of St Jerome’s most influential treatises is a letter addressed to Laeta concerning her daughter’s education, which is placed in his epistolarium right before the letter to Eustochium. It concludes with the advice that Rome may prove a less-than-ideal place for the child’s rearing, in which case, she should send her to her grandmother and aunt in Bethlehem once she was old enough, which did in fact happen.

After Paula’s death, Eustochium took over the administration of the monastery until her own death 15 years later, at which it passed to the younger Paula. She was buried with her mother, and when Jerome passed away a year and two days later, he was buried next to them.

The Holy Trinity, with Ss Jerome, Paula and Eustochium, ca. 1453, by Andrea del Castagno, in the Montauti chapel of the basilica of the Annunciation in Florence. Image from Wikimedia Commons by Sailko, CC BY 3.0)

Around the same time, a Greek named Palladius wrote a book about the lives of the early desert fathers known as the Lausiac History, which contains this very funny story about Paula and Jerome. “A certain Jerome, a priest, distinguished Latin writer and cultivated scholar as he was, showed qualities of temper so disastrous that they threw into the shade his splendid achievements. Posidonius, who had lived with him many days, said in my hearing, ‘The noble Paula, who looks after him, will die first and be freed from his bad temper…’ ”