Host (Archaeological AND Historical).—Thebread destined to receive Eucharistic Consecration is. commonly called the host, and though this term may likewise be applied to the bread and wine of the Sacrifice, it is more especially reserved to the bread.
According to Ovid the word comes from hostis, enemy: “Hostibus a domitis hostia nomen habet”, because: the ancients offered their vanquished enemies as victims to the gods. However, it is possible that hostia is derived from hostire, to strike, as found in Pacuvius. In the West the term became general chiefly because of the use made of it in the Vulgate and the Liturgy (Rom., xii, 1; Phil., iv, 18; Eph., v, 2; Heb., x, 12; Mabillon, ‘ Liturg. Gall. vetus”, pp. 235, 237, 257; “Missale Mozarab.”, ed. Leslie, p. 39; ‘“Missale Gothicum”, p. 253). It was applied to. Christ, the Immolated Victim, and, by way of anticipation, to the still unconsecrated bread destined to become Christ’s Body. In the Middle Ages it was also. known as “hoiste”, “oiste”, “oite”. In time the word acquired its actual special significance; by reason of its general liturgical use it no longer conveyed the original idea of victim. Many other names were given to the host, e. g. “bucelle”, “circuli”, ‘coronae”, “crustulae farracee”, “denaria”, “fermentum”, “formate”, “formule”; ‘panes altaris, eucharistici, divini, dominici, mysteriorum, nummularii, orbiculares, reticularii, sancti, sanctorum, tessellati, vitae”; “nummi”, “particule”, “placente”, “ylacentule orbiculares”, “portiones”, “rotulae”, ‘“sensibilia”, etc.
The Greeks call host ἄρτος (bread), δῶρα (gifts), μερίδια (particles), and προσφορά (oblations). After Consecration the particles take the name of μαργαρῖται (pearls). Prior to its Consecration the Copts call the host “baraco”; the Syrians “paristo” (bread), “burschan” (first-fruits), and “kourbano” (oblation); the Nestorians “xatha” (first-born) or “agnus” (lamb), and the Mingrelians “sabisquiri”. After Consecration the Copts call the Host “corban” (oblation); the Jacobites “tabho” (seals); the Syrians “gamouro” (burning coals), and, by anticipation, these names are sometimes applied to the bread even before its Consecration.
Material.—The valid material of the Eucharistic host is unadulterated wheat reduced to flour, diluted with natural water, and baked with fire. Some theologians have discussed the use of various flours, but if we except Paludanus, who considers as valid bread made with starch, and Cajetan, who allows bread made with any kind of grain and diluted with milk, we may say that theologians agree upon the rejection of buckwheat, barley, oats, etc. St. Thomas authorizes the use of siligo, but this term seems obscure. In Pliny and Celsus it signifies wheaten flour, but St. Thomas does not invest siligo with the same meaning, else why should there be question of tolerating it? Moreover, had he alluded to rye, he would have used the word secale. Perhaps by siligo he intended to designate an inferior kind of wheat grown in bad soil.
Elements.—The preparation of the host gave rise among certain Gnostic sects to abominable and shocking practices, of which there is a detailed account in the writings of St. Epiphanius. Sometimes the flesh of a foetus was ground and mixed with aromatics; sometimes flour was kneaded with the blood of a child, and there were other proceedings too obnoxious to mention. But these horrors were perpetrated only by a few degraded groups (Epiphanius, “Her.”, c. xxvi, 5; Augustinus, “Her.”, xxvi, xxvii). Less offensive were the Artotyrites and those who, like them, compounded a mixture of bread and cheese, or, after the fashion of the Barsanians, used a pinch of undiluted flour.
All the Oriental communions, with the exception of the Armenians and Maronites, use leavened bread. We know how seriously the Greeks have considered the question of unleavened bread (see AZYMES). But whether leavened or unleavened, bread is the element, and a large number of Greeks admit that both kinds constitute valid material for the sacrament. In the Western Church it is the uniform practice to use unleavened bread. Properly speaking, Lutherans attach but little importance to whether the bread is leavened or not, but generally they use it unleavened. The Calvinists use only common bread, although, when their sect was in its infancy, there was some indecision on this point. At Geneva leavened bread was used exclusively for several years and Theodore Beza maintained that any kind of bread, no matter what its origin, was suitable for the Eucharist.. The Anglican Liturgy of 1549 prescribes the use of unleavened bread. In the East the Syrian Jacobites and the Nestorians knead their altar-bread with a paste of oil and salt, a custom censured by the Egyptians. The Sabaites or Christians of St. John make their hosts out of flour, wine, and oil; the Copts and the Abyssinians consecrate with leavened bread except on Holy Thursday and the twelfth day of June, and the Mingrelians use all kinds of bread, their hosts being usually made of flour mixed with water and wine.
PREPARATION.—There is nothing to indicate that the first Christians thought of reproducing the appearance of the “loaves of proposition” of the Jewish Liturgy; they simply used the bread that served as food. It seems that the form differed but little from what it is in our day. The loaves discovered in the oven of a bakery at Pompeii weighed about a pound each. One of these, being perfectly preserved, measured about seven inches in diameter and was creased with seven ridges which facilitated the breaking of the loaf without the aid of a knife. Other loaves represented on bas-reliefs, chiefly in the Lateran museum, bore an incision in the form of two crossed lines and, for this reason, were called quadra. Loaves of this kind must have been preferred for the Eucharistic oblation because the sign of the cross was already traced on them; indeed, the most ancient Christian monuments show us loaves marked thus. Paintings in the catacombs and some very antique bas-reliefs represent loaves marked with this sign and others simply marked with a point. The ridges were intended to facilitate the breaking of the loaf and it is probable that their number was regulated by the size of the loaf in common use. A fresco in the cemetery of Lucina represents a fish, the symbol of Christ, and on its back a basket containing the Eucharistic wine and loaf, the latter marked with a point. A Modena marble shows five loaves marked with a cross.
Out of respect for the sacrament, some of the faithful would not consent to having the bread made by bakers, and took charge of it themselves. Several ancient examples are cited, notably that of Candida, the wife of one of Valerian’s generals, who “laboured all night kneading and moulding with her own hands the loaf of the oblation”. In the Rule of St. Pachomius, religious are recommended to devote themselves to meditation while kneading the sacrificial loaf. Queen Radegunde is mentioned for the reverence with which she attended to the preparation of the hosts intended to be consumed in her monastery of Poitiers and in many surrounding churches. Theodulph, Bishop of Orléans, commanded his priests either to make the altar-breads themselves or to have the young clerics do so in their presence. Many facts go to show the prevalence and extent of this custom. In monasteries hosts were made principally during the weeks preceding the feasts of Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, and the process assumed a very solemn character. At Cluny three priests or three deacons fasting and having recited the Office of Lauds, the seven penitential psalms, and the litanies, took one or two lay brothers as their assistants. Novices had picked, sorted, and ground the grains of wheat, and the flour thus obtained was placed on a rimmed table. It was then mixed with cold water, and a lay brother, whose hands were gloved, put this preparation in the iron used for making hosts and baked it at a large fire of vine branches. Two other operators took the hosts as they were baked, cut, and pared them, and, if necessary, rejected those that were either soiled or cracked.
In the Abbey of Saint-Denys those who made altar-breads were fasting. They took some of the best wheat, selected grain by grain, washed it, and turned it into a sack to be taken to the mill, the millstones being washed for the occasion. A religious then donned an alb and ground the wheat himself while two priests and two deacons, vested in albs and amices, kneaded the dough in cold water and baked the hosts. At Saint-Etienne de Caen the religious employed in this work dined together on that day, their table being served as was that of the abbot. Some monasteries cultivated the Eucharistic wheat in a special field which they called the field of the “Corpus Domini”. Du Cange mentions a charter dated 1406 by which it would seem that women, even nuns, were forbidden to make hosts; but it is doubtful whether this measure was ever generally enforced. St. Radegunde certainly had many imitators, despite the prejudice against the making of hosts by laymen or women, a prejudice so rooted that in the Middle Ages there were in the Diocese of Narbonne people who believed that hosts made by women were not qualified for transubstantiation.
An echo of this is found in official acts. The Council of Milan, 1576, prescribes the making of hosts in monasteries and forbids it to laymen. <A council of Cambrai in 1631 ordains that “in each city there shall be a person charged with making the altar-breads from the best and purest wheat and after the manner indicated to him. He must previously take an oath to discharge faithfully the duties of his office. He shall not be permitted to buy from others the bread to be used in the Holy Sacrifice.” As early as the fourteenth century the making of hosts had become a business. The confraternity of the oblayers (host-makers) had a special ecclesiastical authorization to carry on that work. The liturgist Claude de Vert mentions a sign used by them in the eighteenth century in the city of Puy: “Céans se font de belles hosties avec la permission de M. |’évéque du Puy.” Before the French Revolution, in many dioceses, each curé made the hosts used in his own church. At present many parishes apply to religious communities which make a specialty of altar-breads. This offers a guarantee against the falsifications always to be feared when recourse is had to the trade; unscrupulous makers have been guilty of adulterating the wheaten flour with alum, sulphates of zinc and copper, carbonates of ammonia, potassium, or magnesia, or else of substituting bean flour or the flour of rice or potatoes for wheaten flour.
In the Middle Ages, as stated, the baking of hosts took place at three or four principal feasts of the year. This practice was abandoned later on account of the possible chemical change in the substance of the bread when kept for so long a time. St. Charles Borromeo ordered all the priests of his diocese to use for the Holy Sacrifice only hosts made less than twenty days previously. The Congregation of Rites condemned the abuse of consecrating hosts which, in winter, had been made three months and in summer six months ahead of time.
Some prescriptions of the Oriental Churches are worthy of notice; moreover, some of them are still in use. The Constitutions ascribed to St. Cyril of Alexandria prescribe that the Eucharistic bread be baked in the church oven (Renaudot, “Liturg. orient. coll.”, I, 189); among the Copts, Syrians, Jacobites, Melchites, Nestorians, and Armenians the altar-breads must be baked on the very day of their consecration. In the “Canonical Collection” of Bar-Salibi there are prescriptions concerning the choice of wheat which differ but slightly from those of the West. In Ethiopia each church must have a special oven for the making of hosts. In Greece and Russia the altar-breads are prepared by priests, widows, the wives or daughters of priests, or by the so-called calogerae, i. e. nuns, whereas, in Abyssinia, women are excluded. The Nestorians of Malabar, after kneading the flour with leaven, are accustomed to work in some of the leaven left from the preceding baking. They believe that this practice dates from the earliest Christian times and that it preserves the leaven brought to Syria by Saints Thomas and Thaddeus, for, according to another Nestorian tradition, the Apostles, prior to their separation celebrated the Liturgy in common and each carried away a portion of the bread then consecrated.
Moulds For Hosts.—The moulds used for hosts are iron instruments similar to waffle-irons, composed of two palettes which come together with the aid of two bent handles acting as a lever. Abbé Corblet says that their existence is established as ehhh as the ninth century, although no specimen older than the twelfth century was known to exist in recent times. The discovery some time ago, however, of one of these moulds at Carthage carries us back probably to the sixth or seventh century, before the destruction of that city by the Arabs. On this mould around the monogram of Christ is the inscription: Hic EST FLOS CAMPI ET LILIUM (Delattre, “ Un pélerinage aux ruines de Carthage”, 31, 46). Unfortunately this precious relic of Christian antiquity is incomplete.
The lower plate of a mould for hosts is engraved with two, four, or six figures of hosts which, by means of pressure, are reproduced on the paste and fixed there by baking. From the ninth to the eleventh century the irons moulded very thick hosts about as large as the palm of the hand. Towards the end of the eleventh century the dimensions were considerably reduced so that, with the same instrument, four hosts, two large and two small, could be moulded. With a thirteenth-century iron preserved at Sainte-Croix de Poitiers, two large hosts and three small ones can be made simultaneously, and an iron at Naintré (Vienne) moulds five hosts at once, all varying in size. A certain number of host-irons bear the date of making, the initial of the engraver’s name, and the donor’s coat-of-arms. A fourteenth-century mould at Saint-Barban (Haute-Vienne) makes hosts of different types for Lent and Easter time. The larger ones measure 24 inches in diameter and the smaller ones 1+ inches; at the same period some large hosts had a diameter of 2? inches. A fifteenth-century iron at Béthine (Vienne) makes hosts bearing the figure of the triumphant Lamb, of the Holy Face surrounded with fleurs-de-lis, also of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection. In the sixteenth century at Lamenay (Niévre) hosts were made representing Jesus Christ seated on His throne and imparting His blessing, the background being studded with stars; at Montjean (Maine-et-Loire) they were stamped with the image of Christ Crucified and Christ Risen, delicately framed in lilies and roses and heraldic in aspect. At Rouez (Sarthe) is an iron that moulds two hosts; the one represents Christ carrying His cross and bears the inscription: QUI. VEULT. VENIRE. POST. ME. TOLLAT. CRUCEM. SUAM. ET. SEQUATUR. ME.; the other represents the Crucifixion and is thus inscribed: FODERUNT. MANUS. MEAS. ET. PEDES. MEOS. DINUMERAVERUNT. OMNIA. OSSA. MEA.
Seventeenth- and eighteenth-century host-irons have been preserved in large numbers, and are quite similar to those now in use, being stamped with the Lamb lying on the book, Christ upon the Cross, or the letters I H emitting rays and encircled with grapes and thorns. Among the remarkable host-irons that have escaped destruction we may mention those of Beddes, Azy, Chassy, and Vailly (Cher), all four belonging to the thirteenth century; those of Palluau (Indre) and of Crouzilles and Savigny (Indre-et-Loire), etc. Notable among the collections of the imprints of host-irons are those of M. Dumontet at Bourges, of M. Barbier de Montault at Limoges, of the Cluny museum, and of the Eucharistic museum of Paray-le-Monial. The Eastern Churches generally use a wooden mould. To make the hosts baked in the mould quite round they are cut with scissors, a punch, or a compass, one of the legs of which terminates in a knife.
Form and Dimensions.—The first mention of the form of hosts is found in St. Epiphanius in the fourth century when he says: “ hoe est enim rotundae forme”, but the fact had already been placed on record by catacomb paintings and by very ancient bas-reliefs. Unity of form and size was only slowly established, and different customs prevailed in different provinces. At an early date the councils attempted to introduce uniformity on this point; one held at Arles in 554 ordered all the bishops of that province to use hosts of the same form as those used in the church of Arles. According to Mabillon, as early as the sixth century hosts were as small and thin as now, and it is stated that from the eighth century it was customary to bless small hosts intended for the faithful, an advantageous measure which dispensed with breaking the host and consequently prevented the crumbling that ensued.
As late as the eleventh century we find some opposition to the custom, then growing general, of reserving a large host for the priest and a small one for each communicant. However, by the twelfth century the new custom prevailed in France, Switzerland, and Germany; Honorius of Autun states in a general way that the hosts were in the form of “denarii”. The monasteries held out for a longer time, and as late as the twelfth century the ancient system was still in force at Cluny. In 1516 the Missal of Rouen prescribed that the celebrant break the host into three parts, the first to be put into the chalice, the second to be received in Holy Communion by the celebrant and ministers and the third to be kept as Viaticum for the dying. The Carthusians reserved a very large host, a particle of which they broke off for each Viaticum. Eventually all hosts were made round and their dimensions varied but little. However, some very large ones were at times consecrated for monstrances, on occasion of the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. To-day in Rome the large hosts are nine centimetres in diameter and the small ones four centimetres. In other countries they are usually not so large. In 1865 Pius [IX authorized the priests exiled to Siberia to consecrate the Eucharist with wheaten bread that had not the form of a round host.
Figures.—From ancient monuments in painting, sculpture, and epigraphy we have seen the general usage of tracing a cross on the Eucharistic loaves which were thence called decussati (Lat. decussis, a coin marked X). For the early Greek-speaking Christians the cross (X), being the initial of the name of Christ (Xpicréds), was constantly in evidence; soon the idea was conceived of replacing the plain cross by the monogram, and finally there were added on either side the letters A and Q (Alpha and Omega, i. e. the beginning and the end) as on the Carthaginian moulds. In certain countries the plain cross continued to exist for a long time; in the Diocese of Arles no other sign was tolerated until the Revolution. Beginning with the twelfth century, however, the crucifix was almost universally substituted for the cross, though this iconographic form was never made obligatory. Besides the Crucifixion we find the Resurrection, Christ at the pillar, the angel holding a chalice, the Lamb either lying down or standing, Our Lady at Bethlehem, at Calvary, or being assumed into heaven, the Last Supper, the Ascension, the Holy Face, St. Martin dividing his cloak, St. Clare carrying the ciborium, the symbols of the Evangelists, etc.
Inscriptions.—The bread made by Roman bakers bore the maker’s name or initials, and it would seem that this practice extended even to Eucharistic bread, but on this subject our information is rather vague. We often read an inscription of a symbolical or mystical character such as that found on the host-moulds of Carthage. Here are some of the commonest examples: ‘I H” (Jesus); “I H S X P S” (i.e. Jesus Christus); “Hoc est corpus meum”; “Panis quem ego dabo caro mea est”; “ Ego sum panis vivus qui de coelo descendi”; “Si quis manducaverit ex hoc pane vivet in aeternum”; “Ego sum via veritas et vita”; “Higo sum resurrectio et vita”; “Plectentes coronam de spinis imposuerunt in capite ejus”; “Foderunt manus meas et pedes meos; dinumeraverunt omnia ossa mea”; “Et clamans Jesus voce magna emisit spiritum”; “Resurrectio Domini”; “In hoc signo vinces, Constantine”. Leavened Bread.—The leavened hosts of the Greeks are of a large size, sometimes round, triangular, or in the form of a cross, but oftener square. On the under side they have a quadrangular imprint divided into four equal parts by a Greek cross and bearing the inscription 1G XC NI KA (‘Inoots Xpioréds wka), 1. e. “ Jesus Christ is victor”.
The corban of the Copts is a white, round, leavened loaf, flat underneath, convex on the top, and as large as the palm of the hand. It stamped with twelve little squares each containing a cross in honour of the Twelve Apostles. In the centre a larger square isbodion is marked with a large cross divided by four small ones; it is the symbol of Christ. This central portion is used for the Communion of the celebrant, the other parts (“pearls”) being distributed among the faithful. The inscription reads: “ Agios, agios, agios Kurios”; or else “Kurios Sabaoth” or ‘“agios iskuros, agios athanatos, agios o theos”. The schismatic Armenians use an unleavened host about the size and thickness of a five-franc- or dollar-piece and bearing the stamp of a crucifix having on the right a chalice surmounted by a host and on the left a spear or a cross. The Mingrelians have a small, round host weighing a little over an ounce with a square stamp, the inscription signifying: ‘“Jesus . Christ is victor.” The Confession of Augsburg maintained the use of small round hosts which the Calvinists rejected under pretext that they were not bread. In Germany the Evangelical Churches use round, white breads eight centimetres in diameter by nine in thickness. Christian antiquity has transmitted to us pyxes or boxes intended to hold the Eucharist, but as these should be considered in connexion with sacred vessels, it is not necessary here to dwell upon them but simply upon the boxes in which the altar-breads are kept prior to consecration and which are generally very plain. In the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance these boxes were very rich, being made of silver, ivory, and enamel. Ancient host-boxes are very rare, but those now in use are of tin-plate or pasteboard, generally with some trimming.
Miraculous Hosts.—The Eucharist has been the object of a great many miracles often referred to in ecclesiastical history; not all, however, have been well enough authenticated to place them beyond doubt. In some of the miracles the host appears as transformed into a new substance; sometimes it has remained intact during a considerable period; sometimes blood has flowed from it, etc. In the third century St. Cyprian mentions that a man was preparing to Communicate in mortal sin; for this purpose he received the Eucharist in his hands when instantly the bread turned to ashes. Sozomen, a fifth-century historian, relates a miracle that took place at Constantinople where a heretic had undertaken to convert his. wife. Simulating a change of life she went to Communion, but had barely attempted to eat a piece of bread, which she had substituted for the Eucharist, when she perceived that the said piece had changed to stone. About the ninth century, when anti-Eucharistic heresies began to appear, accounts of miracles. multiplied in a way to convince even the most obstinate. John the Deacon ascribed a most extraordinary act to Gregory the Great when he related that, with the point of a knife, this pope had caused blood to issue a corporal. In the ninth century Paschasius. Radbertus, writing of the Body and Blood of the Saviour, recounts that a priest named Plegilus beheld, instead of the Host, Jesus Christ under the sensible of a child, and pressed Him to his heart. At his. request the Lord again veiled Himself under the ap-: pearance of wine. At Fécamp a legend dating back to the tenth century related that the priest of a little: chapel situated about three miles from the abbey found at the moment of Communion neither bread. nor wine but the Flesh and Blood of Christ. Appalled, he reported the fact at the abbey, the miracle was confirmed, and the chalice and paten, together with the species, were enclosed beneath the high altar: of the church.
Occasionally hosts have been preserved for a very long time. It is related that St. Norbert deposited in. the church of St. Michael at Antwerp hosts that had remained intact for fifteen years, notwithstanding the: fact that, through contempt, they had been left in damp places by partisans of the heretic Tanchelin. The feast called ‘“Saint-Sacrement du Miracle” was for centuries solemnly celebrated at Douai where, from Easter Tuesday, 14 April, 1254, until the time of the Revolution, an annual procession took place in commemoration of the host in which the people declared that they distinctly beheld the Body of the Lord. In 1792 the miraculous host disappeared; it was believed to have been found again in a bequest made by one of the faithful but, for want of certainty, no honour was afterwards paid it. The collegiate church of Sainte-Gudule at Brussels preserves miraculous hosts which, after the perpetration of many outrages by the Jews in 1370, were collected and, subsequently to 1529, became the occasion of an annual procession still celebrated.
It is said that, in the thirteenth century, miraculous blood issued from a Host and that for a long time afterwards it lasted without the slightest alteration. Miracles of bleeding Hosts are reported to have occurred in many places during the Middle Ages, and both the miracle and the sacrilege that occasioned it were sometimes commemorated by processions or monuments. In 1290 a Parisian Jew committed a series of outrages upon a Host and he was put to death. An expiatory chapel was erected over his house, and this sanctuary was successively named: “La maison ot Dieu fut bouilli’, “L’église du Sauveur bouillant”, “ La chapelle du miracle”, and finally “ L’église des billettes”. In 1444 this episode was dramatized, and in 1533, on the feast of Corpus Christi, “The Mystery of the Holy Host” was played at Laval. We might also mention the miraculous Host that bled when touched by profane hands and was carried, in 1317, to the Abbey of Herckenrode in the County of Loos, where it was venerated until the time of the Revolution, and the miracle of Blanot that occurred in 1331 in the Diocese of Autun (now the Diocese of Dijon), when a Host left a bloody impress upon a cloth.
In olden times many cities possessed a miraculous Host, but the French Revolution destroyed a certain number of them, especially the one at Dijon where each year a Mass of expiation is yet celebrated in the church of St. Michael. In other places the miraculous Hosts have disappeared, but their ancient feast is still ‘commemorated. In the seventeenth century the Benedictine abbey at Faverney (Haute-Saône) was the scene of a noted miracle. On the night of 23 May, 1608, while the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament was in progress, a fire consumed the tabernacle, the linens, and the entire altar; but the ostensorium remained stationary, being suspended in the air without any support. This prodigy lasted for thirty-three hours, was well authenticated by thousands of persons, and was made the object of an investigation, the documents of which have been preserved. The ostensorium contained two Hosts, so that the crucifix could be seen from both sides. One of the Hosts was given to the city of Dole, where it was destroyed in 1794, and the other is preserved in the parish church of Faverney, where the anniversary is celebrated annually on the Monday after Pentecost. These miracles have been selected from among a multitude of others, and we have not pretended to emphasize either the most authentic or the most marvellous. Moreover, the subject we have just treated is so vast that it would be easy to compile from the historical material a work of great theological interest, both conclusive and detailed.
The most complete work on this subject, in spite of a few gaps and occasionally weak criticism, is CORBLET, Histoire dogmatique et archéologique du sacrement de V Bucharistie (Paris, 1886) ; Vol. II, 556-88 gives a very exhaustive bibliography, to which might be added a few recent works: pp SARACHAGA, Les collections d'histoire et d’art du musée eucharistique de Paray-le-Monial (Lyons, 1866), containing a bibliography of the Monographie sur les hosties de miracles; ROHAULT DE Firury, La messe, études archéologiques, IV (Paris, 1887), 21-40.
H. Lecierca.
Host (Canonico-Lituraica).—The name host in liturgy is given to the bread used in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist—Panis ad sacrificiwm Eucharisticum destinatus (Du Cange, “Glossarium”). Christ at the Last Supper consecrated bread and wine, and prescribed their use in the Eucharistic Sacrifice for all future times. Hence bread (of wheat) and wine (of the grape) have always been considered in the Church the sole legitimate matter for the celebration of Mass. The Scholastics, especially St. Thomas (Summa Theol., IIT, Q. Ixxiv, art. 1) and Denys the Carthusian (IV, dist. xi, q. 3), point out the peculiar fitness of these elements which constitute the remote matter of the sacrament. Their use is universal, and hence they render the Eucharistic worship possible anywhere. Furthermore, there are reasons of analogy. As bread is the ordinary food of the body, so the Divine Victim is the nourishment of our souls; just as it is necessary that the wheat be ground, mixed with water, and subjected to fire in order to become bread, so the faithful, in order that they may be united to Christ and live by His spirit, must by mortification die to themselves. Bread is likewisea figure of the Church. The many grains of wheat converted Gam Hog into one loaf symbolize the various members united in one body. Alluding to this symbolism, so natural and expressive, the “Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” (ch. ix) places on the lips of the faithful the following words of thanksgiving before partaking of the Holy Eucharist: “ As this fragment (of bread) was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together, and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom”, and the “Constitutions of the Holy Apostles” (Book VII, n. 25) in the Eucharistic thanksgiving enjoins the faithful to say: “Do Thou, O Lord Almighty, everlasting God, so gather together Thy Church from the end of the earth into Thy kingdom, as this corn was once scattered, and is now become one loaf.”
Valid Matter.—It is required that the matter used for the Consecration be not only valid and as far as possible genuine, but also that it be licit and as far as possible perfect, i. e. new, fresh, and pure. Hence the Eucharistic host must be bread, made of fine wheaten flour, mixed with natural water and baked. It must be bread, as it was the typical food used by Christ (Matt., xxvi, 26—cf. Acts, ii, 42; I Cor., x, 16). The Fathers of the Church with one accord teach that bread is changed into the Body of Christ by the words of Consecration; and all the councils that treat of this subject define the same (Fourth Lateran, ch. “Firmiter”; Florence, “Deer. Unionis”; Trent, Sess. XIII, XXI, and XXII). It must be made of wheaten flour, because, according to sacred tradition, such was used by Christ at the institution of this sacrament. History attests that the Jews used only wheaten bread at the Passover, and in Palestine the word bread, without a qualifying term, signifies wheaten bread. Hence both the Eastern and Western Churches have always used this kind of bread. Some sectaries introduced at times foreign matter in its composition; thus, St. Augustine (Lib. de Heres., ce. xxvi) tells us that the Cataphrygians mixed with the wheaten flour the blood of infants, extracted from them through minute punctures made in their bodies. The Council of Florence (Deer. pro Armenis) says that the third sacrament is that of the Eucharist, whose matter is wheaten bread and wine of the grape. Moreover, in the rubrics of the Missal (De Defectibus, III, 3) we read: “If the bread is not wheaten, or if it is wheaten yet mixed with flour of another kind in such quantity that it is no longer considered wheaten bread, the sacrament is not effected.” Hence hosts made of the flour of barley, oats, rice, beans, millet, chestnuts, etc., are not permitted, because such flour differs specifically from wheaten flour. Authors differ in their opinion with regard to the use of siligo (St. Thomas, III, Q. lxxiv, art. 3, ad 2™) and spelt, which are inferior kinds of wheat. Asa rule these are considered doubtful matter, and their use is unlawful when there is question of administering sacraments which are not hic et nunc necessary for salvation. Scavini (III, n. 227), depending on the authority of Gobat, Laymann, and others, says that spelt is not only valid but also licit matter for this sacrament. Lehmkuhl (pt. II, lib. I, tr. iv, ec. ii, §1,n. 3) holds that in this matter the opinion of experts and that of the diocese and region should be followed. For the validity of the sacrament it is, moreover, necessary that natural water be used to temper the wheat flour, and that the dough be baked. The baking is usually done between heated irons which resemble a large forceps. If the flour is in a notable quantity mixed with eggs, butter, milk, honey, oil, or any liquor other than natural water, it becomes invalid matter, for it is then something really different from ordinary bread. Likewise flour fired in a pan, dried by the sun, stewed, or boiled, or a crude mass of dough, cannot be conseerated, because although physically it does not differ from ordinary bread, yet it is not such as is commonly used and as was consecrated by Christ at the Last Supper. The §. Congr. of the Holy Office (23 June, 1852) permitted the priests of the Diocese of Coimbatore, India, to make hosts out of broken grains of wheat, steeped in water, pressed so as to form a pulp, and then baked between two heated irons, but imposed upon the vicar Apostolic the obligation of introducing the custom of preparing the hosts in the customary manner.
LEAVENED AND UNLEAVENED Bread.—The question regarding the use of leavened and unleavened bread gave rise to much dispute among Catholics. From the very beginning both the Eastern and Western Churches looked upon this as a matter of discipline, and held that Consecration takes place under either kind. Michael Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople (1043), made it, however, a dogmatic issue. Ina letter to John, Bishop of Trani, Apulia, he accused the Roman Church of holding doctrines and adopting practices condemned by the rest of Christianity; in it among other reproaches he imputes it to her as a crime that she uses at the Lord’s Supper unleavened bread, which he held to be invalid matter, and consequently he maintained that the Church of Rome was heretical. Thus, after eleven centuries of undisputed tranquillity on this point in both Churches, Cerularius, to make the rupture between the two Churches as great as possible, first broached this accusation against the Church of Rome, despite the fact that many writers had before him searched traditional documents without finding even the slightest indication of a dogmatic error. Three different views prevail concerning the kind of bread used in the Western Church during the first ten centuries. Sirmond, S.J. (d. 1651, “Disq. de Azymo”), maintained that it consecrated exclusively leavened bead. Mabillon, O.S.B. (d. 1707, “ Diss. de Pane Eucharistico ”), asserted that unleavened bread was used from the time of the Apostles, but that the Apostles sometimes used leavened bread. Cardinal Bona, O.Cist. (d. 1674, “Rerum Liturg., lib. I, ec. xxiii), held it as probable that both kinds were used indiscriminately until late in the ninth century. The Council of Florence (1439) decided that either kind was sufficient for the validity of the sacrament, and that unleavened bread must, under grave precept, be used in the Western Church and leavened in the Eastern; but even at present in the East the Armenians, both Catholics and Eutychians, and the Maronites use unleavened bread. This precept is so strict that were a priest to consecrate in a rite not his own he would sin grievously. It would not be lawful to do so even if thereby sole opportunity were given to fulfil the precept of « hearing Mass on Sunday or of administering Holy Viaticum to the dying. The only exception to this rule that could occur would be if after the consecration the Sacred Host were to disappear, or the celebrant adverted to the fact that it had a substantial defect, and only bread peculiar to the other rite were at hand, in order thereby to complete the sacrifice. Even in places in which there are churches of both rites, a Greek cannot consecrate in unleavened bread or a Latin priest in leavened bread (Pius V, Bull “Providentia”, 1566; Benedict XIV, Const. “ Etsi pastoralis”). If, whilst travelling, a priest should be in a place in which there is no church of his own rite, he may celebrate according to the rite of the church which exists there, or preferably according to his own rite (S. Lig., “Mor. Theol.”, Lib. VI, n. 203; Lehmkuhl, vol. II, n. 121, 3). Ifa priest has a domicile ina place in which there is no church of his own rite, he may celebrate according to the rite of the church of his domicile, because he is then considered a member of Ned church (Hilarius a Sexten, pt. I, e. iii, $28, nN. 3d).
Kinds of Host.—In the early Latin Church the host used by the priest at Mass was larger than it is at present. The custom then prevailed of giving Communion to the laity with Particles of the priest’s Host. During the twelfth century small hosts for the laity were introduced and the priest’s host assumed the size it has at present (Benedict XIV, “De SS. Missxe Sacrif.”, sect. I, §xxxvii). When a large host is not at hand Mass may be celebrated in private with a small host. In cases.of necessity a small host may be used in public also, but, as liturgists remark, the faithful should be advised thereof in order to avoid scandal (De Herdt, II, n. 137). From the earliest days the hosts in the Latin Church were of a circular form. Pope St. Zephyrinus calls the host “corona sive oblata spheric figure”. This form was adopted both because the hosts could be more easily handled, and because the circle, being the most perfect figure and a symbol of infinity, most suitably represents the presence of Him who, by His eternity, immensity, love, and the merits of His sacrifice, is infinite. Asa rule since the middle of the twelfth century, the image of Christ Crucified is impressed on the large host, although the figure of the Sacred Heart or the monogram of the Holy Name may be used [see ALTAR (IN Liturgy), sub-title, Altar-Breads]. The sacrificial host of the Greeks is a square loaf to express mystically that by the Sacrifice of the Cross redemption is granted to the four quarters of the globe. Two lines divide the upper part of the loaf into four squares in which usually the following letters are impressed, reading from left to right in the upper portion: ICXC, and in the lower: NI-KA, i. e. “Jesus Christ conquers.” Like the host used by the priest at Mass, that which is exposed in the ostensorium, which is customarily as large as the former, and the small particles, must be thin wafers, round, not broken, fresh, and clean. All hosts should be free from little particles, which may be removed before carrying them to the altar by passing them lightly between the thumb and index finger.
Oblation.—For the valid Consecration of hosts it is necessary that they be morally and sensibly present to the consecrator and individually specified by him, so that the demonstrative pronoun hoc be verified at the Consecration. Ordinarily both the large host used for the Mass and the particles intended for distribution of Communion should be on the altar ∗ at the beginning of the Mass, or at least before the Offertory when they are placed on the corporal. If particles are brought to the altar after the Offertory, but before the beginning of the Preface, Mass is interrupted and the oblation of the particles is made either mentally or vocally, after which Mass is continued from the place at which it was interrupted. After the Preface has been begun, down to the Consecration, particles should not be brought to the altar to be consecrated unless there be special reasons, e. g. so as not to deprive of Communion a large number of people, or on special occasions, e. g. First Communion, general Communion at the end of a mission, during the paschal season to give persons a chance to fulfil their Haster duty (Benedict XIV, ‘“De SS. Miss. Sacr.”, sect. II, §clviii; Bernard, “Cours de lit. rom.”, I, 98). The sacrificial host is at present placed after its oblation on the corporal in front of the chalice, because it is the first element to be consecrated. Formerly it was placed at the left side of the chalice, as if the latter were to receive the blood which flowed from the right side of Christ hanging on the cross (Innocent III, “De Sacro Altaris Mysterio”, lib. II, c.lviii). If the particles be few, they are offered with the sacrificial host on the paten, and then placed on the corporal near the sacrificial host towards the Gospel side. If they be many, they may be placed on the corporal at the beginning of Mass towards the Gospel side, where they remain during the Mass; or they may, be put in a ciborium covered with its lid, but without its veil until after the Communion; or in a chalice covered with a pall. During Mass the ciborium or chalice containing the particles is placed behind, or, if space will not permit, on the left side of the sacrificial chalice. At the Offertory and Consecration it is uncovered. The large host used for Exposition may be offered on the paten and then placed on the corporal between the chalice and the sacrificial host, or near the latter towards the Gospel side, where it remains throughout the Mass. If it be prepared in the lunula the latter should be open at the Offertory and the Consecration.
Consecration.—At the Consecration all the hosts, or the vessel which contains them, should be on the corporal and if possible on the altar-stone. If by chance the vessel containing the particles is not uncovered at the Consecration, they are nevertheless validly consecrated (Benedict XIV, loc. cit., §clv). If the ciborium isnot on the corporal at the time of Consecration it is doubtful whether they were consecrated, unless the celebrant had distinctly the intention of consecrating the contents of the vessel before him, not adverting to the fact that it rests outside the corporal (D’Annibale, III, n. 388). Benedict XIV (loc. cit., §clix) holds that they should be consecrated absolutely during another Mass, but St. Liguori (lib. VI, n. 217) is of opinion that they should be consumed after the first ablution. The celebrant holds and looks at the sacrificial host only whilst he utters the words of Consecration and makes over it the sign of the cross, but directs his intention of consecrating to all the hosts on the corporal. Only the sacrificial Host is elevated for the adoration of the faithful, the consecrated particles remaining on the corporal.
Fraction of the Host.—Shortly before Communion the Host is broken into parts, a ceremony found in all liturgies and which was introduced by Christ at the Last Supper. The object of the breaking of the Host is to indicate by this symbolical action the partaking of Communion by which the faithful are to become one body with Christ. The breaking of bread, symbolizing the Communion, is in reality the preparation of the sacrifice for the sacrificial feast: “The bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread” (I Cor., x, 16, 17). Hence, “to break the bread” is to prepare it for food and to distribute it for participation. In the Western Church the Host is divided into three parts. The celebrant holds the Host over the chalice and breaks it in half, one half of which he lays with his right hand on the paten, then breaks from the other half from below (Pars inferior preecidi debet— S.R.C., 4 Aug., 1663) a particle which he afterwards drops into the chalice, and joins the other half in the left hand with that on the paten. Formerly one part was put into the chalice, another part was consumed by the celebrant, and the third part, which was the largest, was broken into particles for the Communion of the faithful who were present, and of the sick. Traces of this ancient usage are still found in the solemn Mass celebrated by the Roman pontiff; who divides the third part into two particles, with which he Communicates the deacon and subdeacon of his Mass. A similar practice is observed in the Mass of the consecration of a bishop, who receives in Communion the third part from the consecrator. The Greeks break the Host into four parts, one of which is received by the celebrant, another is distributed to the faithful, the third is reserved for the sick, and the fourth is put into the chalice. In the Mozarabic Liturgy the Host is broken into nine parts, each haying its special designation corresponding to a mystery in the life of Christ: (1) Incarnation; (2) Nativity; (3) Circumcision; (4) Apparition; (5) Passion; (6) Death; (7) Resurrection; (8) Glorification; (9) Kingdom. The first seven parts are placed in circles formed on the paten in the shape of a cross, the remaining two portions are placed on the right side at the foot of the cross outside the circles (Duchesne, “Christian Worship”, p. 219). The transverse beam is formed by nos. 2,6, and 7, which represent the principal mysteries: Birth, Death, and Resurrection. (See accompanying figure.) 1 In other Churches the Host was in former times divided in various ways. Thus in 6 2 7 Ireland it was divided in seven different man- 3 g ners, according to the rite of the Mass or the 4 ~ dignity of the festival: at ordinary Masses into 9 five particles; on the feasts of confessors and virgins into seven; on the festivals of martyrs into eight; on Sundays into nine; on the festivals of Apostles into eleven; on the feast of the Circumcision and on Maundy Thursday into twelve; on Low Sunday and the feast of the Ascension into thirteen; on Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost into sixty-five. They were arranged in the form of a cross with certain additional complications when they were numerous, and at the Communion each of the parts of the cross, or of its additions, was distributed to a special group of persons, that is, priests, monks, etc. (Duchesne, ibid., p. 220). The breaking of the Host is not an essential or even an integral part of the Mass, and was in former times occasioned by natural reasons and considerations, but it has high symbolical meanings. It symbolizes Christ’s violent death on the Cross, as it indicates the wounding and lacerating which caused the separation of His Soul from His Body. The breaking of the Bread over the chalice is to remind us that the Blood contained in the chalice proceeds from His wounded and mangled Body, although thereby also caution is taken that no loose particles be lost.
Mingling of the Eucharistic Species.—Probably down to the ninth century the Body and Blood of Christ were twice united in the chalice during Mass: the first time after the Pater Noster, when a previously consecrated Host, or a Host received from another place, was used; the second time at the Communion, for which a particle broken from the Host of the Mass that was being celebrated was used. When the custom of sending the Eucharist to other Churches as a sign of union ceased, the former was retained, except when the pope officiated, in which case the latter was used and the former omitted. This custom was retained down to the fifteenth century, when the rite of mingling only after the Pater Noster, even at the pope’s Mass, came into use. The celebrant, having broken the large Host into two equal parts, breaks a small particle from the part which he holds in his left hand. With this particle he makes three signs of the cross over the chalice, saying, “Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum”, and then drops it into the Precious Blood, saying: “ Hse commixtio et consecratio Corporis et Sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi fiat accipientibus nobis in vitam seternam. Amen.” Just as the fraction of the Host indicates the wounding which caused Christ’s death, so this mingling of the Eucharistic species symbolically expresses that on the altar the living Body of Christ is present. The fraction represents His bloody sacrificial Death, and the mingling His glorious Resurrection, in which His Body and Blood were again united and vivified. The threefold sign of the cross with the Particle over the chalice and the salutation of peace made between the fraction and mingling signify that Christ by His redeeming Death and glorious Resurrection has become the author and source of true peace, which was purchased and negotiated for us by the holy Cross and the Blood shed thereon (Gihr, “The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass”, II, 67, 2 and 3).
Communion.—-Although Communion is not an essential part of the Sacrifice, yet it belongs to its integrity, and for this reason the celebrant at least must partake in both species of the sacrifice which he is offering. An exception to this rule will be allowed if the celebrant should become so ill that he cannot consume the Species. In this case another priest must consume them, though he has already broken ~∗ his fast, if no other, still fasting, be present. In the Latin Rite at present the three parts of the sacrificial Host are consumed by the celebrant, who takes first the two larger pieces and then, together with the Precious Blood, the smaller piece dropped into the chalice. He is not permitted to keep the sacrificial Host of the Mass for Exposition and to consume in its stead the large Host reserved in the tabernacle. The latter may be consumed either together with the sacrificial Host or after the partaking of the Precious Blood. It should not, without necessity, be given to the faithful Communicating. For the latter use there are to be smaller Hosts, round in form, one of which is to be given to each communicant. In case of necessity it is lawful to divide the particles (S.R.C., 16 March, 1833). Newly consecrated particles may never be mixed with those consecrated previously, and the ciborium in which they are put should be thoroughly purified before the new particles are placed in
Defects AND ACCIDENTS.—Since the Host belongs to the essence of the Sacrifice of the Mass it is not surprising that the Church should have legislated for any defect or accident that may happen in regard to it. Hence at the beginning of the Roman Missal is found a chapter on the defects (De Defectibus) that may occur. If during the Mass the celebrant ascertains that the bread is defective, i. e. not of wheat, or not unleavened (in the Roman Rite), or corrupted, in order to complete the sacrifice the following is to be observed:
(1) Before the Consecration.—Mass is interrupted, the invalid or doubtful matter is put aside and replaced by matter certainly valid. - If the oblation of the invalid matter has already taken place, the celebrant places a valid host on the corporal and, folding his hands on his breast, offers it by reciting vocally or mentally the prayer “Suscipe sancte Pater”. He then continues the Mass from the point at which it was interrupted. The prayer “Qui pridie quam pateretur”, though he may have already said it, is to be repeated over the newhost. If the first host was defective because it was not of wheat, the celebrant consumes it after the ablutions; if it was corrupt, he throws it into the sacrarium.
(2) After the Consecration of the defective host—Mass is interrupted, the defective host is placed on the corporal, and a new host is offered above. After the oblation the celebrant holds the new host between the thumb and index finger of both hands and begins the consecration at the words “Qui pridie quam pateretur”. Then he places the Host on the corporal without genuflecting, or elevating it, and continues Mass from the point at which Mass was interrupted. But if the first host Has already been broken, the new Host, immediately after its consecration, is broken in half and both parts are placed on the paten. The dropping of a small particle of the larger Host in this instance is not of obligation; it may be done, but without words or ceremonies. The defective host may be either (1) consumed by the celebrant before the ablutions, or (2) given to another who is still fasting and in the state of grace, to beconsumed, or (3) put in a proper place until it is corrupt and then thrown into the sacrarium.
(3) After the consumption of the defective host.— Although the celebrant has already broken his fast, he offers and consecrates a new host, as above. Immediately after the Consecration he breaks it into two parts over the paten without pronouncing a word or performing any ceremony, and, having made the sign of the cross with it and said “Corpus Domini”, etc., he reverently consumes it, and continues the Mass as usual,
(4) After the consumption of the Precious Blood.—Mass is interrupted anda new host offered, asabove. Having placed the chalice on the corporal, the celebrant pours into it wine and a few drops of water, after having blessed the latter, unless it be in a requiem Mass. Joining his hands on his breast, he mentally or vocally recites the prayer “Offerimus tibi”. He then consecrates the Host, as above, beginning with the words “Qui pridie”. Having placed the Host on the corporal he consecrates the chalice in the customary manner, reciting the words “Simili modo” down to “Hee quotiescumque” inclusively, after which he places the chalice on the corporal without genuflecting, or elevating the chalice. He then breaks the Host into two parts, and reverently consumes it, as above. After a brief pause of meditation, the celebrant collects the fragments that may be on the corporal, drops them from the paten into the chalice, makes the sign of the cross with it, recites the prayer ∗‘Sanguis Domini”, etc., and reverently consumes the Precious Blood. Mass is then continued as usual.
(5) If the consecrated Host should disappear, either mysteriously or by a natural cause, the celebrant offers, mentally or vocally, a new host, and then consecrates it, beginning with the words “ Qui pridie”.
(6) In case where an essential defect is discovered in the host, and valid matter cannot be easily procured, the following rules are to be observed.—If the error isascertained (i) before the consecration, Mass is discontinued, or (ii) after the consecration, a delay of one hour or more may be made to procure, if possible, valid matter. If such be available, the order given above (2) is observed. If valid matter cannot be obtained Mass is continued, but the prayers and ceremonies that refer to the host are omitted.
(7) If by accident the Host falls into the chalice the dry part is broken off, the rest being left in the chalice, whilst the usual ceremonies are performed with the former. If the whole Host remains in the chalice, the signs and. ceremonies usually performed with the Host are omitted, but all the prayers are recited, and at Communion the Host and Precious Blood are consumed at the same time after having made the sign of the cross with the chalice, saying: “Corpus et Sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiant animam meam”, etc.
(8) If any object that has not been sanctified for the purpose of coming in contact with the consecrated Host: (altar, or communion-cloths, alb, etc.) touches it, this object must be washed three times with water, and the latter is afterwards poured into the sacrarium. If the Host falls to the floor, the celebrant lifts the sacred particle, covers the spot on which it fell with a pall or purificator, and after the service washes the spot with water, which he afterwards throws into the sacrarium. If the Host falls into the folds of a woman’s dress, she herself is to take it up and consume it; if it falls outside, the priest communicates her with it, without requiring that the dress be specially purified.
(9) If it should happen that the celebrant or communicant cannot retain the Host, it should be taken up and again consumed by himself, unless to do so would cause nausea. In the latter case it is put ina vase containing water and left therein, in a suitable place, until disintegration takes place, when the matter is thrown into the sacrarium. If the Host cannot be distinguished from the other matter, the whole mass 1s consumed by fire and the ashes are thrown into the sacrarium.
(10) If any poisonous substance should defile the consecrated Host another host is taken, and the order given above (2) is observed. The poisoned Host is then placed in the tabernacle and left there until it loses the species of bread, when it is thrown into the sacrarium.
(11) Before the oblation a broken host should be replaced by one that is whole and entire. If the break be noticed between the Oblation and Consecration, the broken host may be used for Mass, unless doing so would scandalize the people. In the latter case another host, whole and entire, is taken, Mass is interrupted, the host is offered mentally or vocally, and then Mass is continued from the point at which it was interrupted. The broken host is consumed at the same Mass after the ablution.
(12) If the celebrant becomes seriously ill after the Consecration another priest must supply his place and complete the sacrifice. In this case if the sick priest is able to receive Communion and there is no other consecrated particle beside the large Host of the Mass on the altar or in the tabernacle, one half of it is given to the sick priest at Communion.
Innocent [II, De Sacro Altaris Mysterio in P.L., CCXVII; Brenepicr XIV, De SS. Misse Sacrificio (Louvain, 1762); Cardinal Bona, Rerum Liturgicarum Libri (Turin, 1747); FAuisn, Liturgie Practice Compendium (Ratisbon, 1876); Bouvry, Expositio Rubricarum (Paris, 1859); Ambekger, Pastoraltheologie (Ratisbon, 1886); Sexten, Tractatus Pastoralis de Sacramentis (Mainz, 1895); Grur, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (St. Louis, 1903); Duchesne, Christian Worship (London, 1903); Filler, Manuale Liturgie Romane (Fribourg, 1894); Laprni, La Liturgia Studiata nelle sue Relazioni colle Scienze Sacre (Florence, 1895); Bernard, Cours de Liturgie Romaine (Paris, 1898); Urtinti, Corso di Scienza Liturgica (Bologna, 1904); VAN DER Srappen, Sacra Liturgia (Mechlin, 1902); Dez Herat, Sacre Liturgie Praxis (Louvain, 1894); Hartmann, Repertorium Rituum (Paderborn, 1908); Arrrnys, Compendium Liturgie Sacre (Tournai, 1906); O'Brien, History of the Mass (New York, 1887).
A. J. SCHULTE.