TO HIS BELOVED SON JANUARIUS, AUGUSTIN SENDS contrary to the faith nor to sound morality, is to

any argument, to recommend us to give up fast- according to his belief, he conscientiously regards ing on Saturday, he followed me, and said: as his duty. For neither of them lightly esteems "When I visit Rome, I fast on Saturday; when the body and blood of the Lord; on the contrary, I am here, I do not fast. On the same principle, both are contending who shall most highly honour do you observe the custom prevailing in what- the sacrament fraught with blessing. There was ever Church you come to, if you desire neither no controversy between those two mentioned in to give offence by your conduct, nor to find cause the Gospel, Zaccheus and the Centurion; nor of offence in another's." When I reported this did either of them think himself better than the to my mother, she accepted it gladly; and for other, though, whereas the former received the myself, after frequently reconsidering his decision, Lord joyfully into his house,3 the latter said, “I I have always esteemed it as if I had received it am not worthy that Thou shouldest come under by an oracle from heaven. For often have I per- my roof,"4-both honouring the Saviour, though ceived, with extreme sorrow, many disquietudes in ways diverse and, as it were, mutually opposed; caused to weak brethren by the contentious both miserable through sin, and both obtaining pertinacity or superstitious vacillation of some the mercy they required. We may further borwho, in matters of this kind, which do not admit row an illustration here, from the fact that the of final decision by the authority of Holy Scrip- manna given to the ancient people of God tasted ture, or by the tradition of the universal Church, in each man's mouth as he desired that it might.5 or by their manifest good influence on manners, It is the same with this world-subduing sacraraise questions, it may be, from some crotchet ment in the heart of each Christian. For he of their own, or from attachment to the custom that dares not take it every day, and he who followed in one's own country, or from prefer- dares not omit it any day, are both alike moved ence for that which one has seen abroad, sup- by a desire to do it honour. That sacred food posing that wisdom is increased in proportion to will not submit to be despised, as the manna the distance to which men travel from home, and could not be loathed with impunity. Hence the agitate these questions with such keenness, that apostle says that it was unworthily partaken of they think all is wrong except what they do by those who did not distinguish between this themselves. and all other meats, by yielding to it the special veneration which was due; for to the words quoted already, "eateth and drinketh judgment to himself," he has added these, "not discerning the Lord's body;" and this is apparent from the whole of that passage in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, if it be carefully studied.

CHAP. III.-4. Some one may say, "The Eucharist ought not to be taken every day." You ask, "On what grounds?" He answers, "Because, in order that a man may approach worthily to so great a sacrament, he ought to choose those days upon which he lives in more special purity and self-restraint; for whosoever eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself.'" ' Another answers, 66 Certainly; if the wound inflicted by sin and the violence of the soul's distemper be such that the use of these remedies must be put off for a time, every man in this case should be, by the authority of the bishop, forbidden to approach the altar, and appointed to do penance, and should be afterwards restored to privileges by the same authority; for this would be partaking unworthily, if one should partake of it at a time when he ought to be doing penance; and it is not a matter to be left to one's own judgment to withdraw himself from the communion of the Church, or restore himself, as he pleases. If, however, his sins are not so great as to bring him justly under sentence of excommunication, he ought not to withdraw himself from the daily use of the Lord's body for the healing of his soul." Perhaps a third party interposes with a more just decision of the question, reminding them that the principal thing is to remain united in the peace of Christ, and that each should be free to do what,

1 1 Cor. xi. 29.

2 Agere pænitentiam.

CHAP. IV. 5. Suppose some foreigner visit a place in which during Lent it is customary to abstain from the use of the bath, and to continue fasting on Thursday. "I will not fast to-day," he says. The reason being asked, he says, "Such is not the custom in my own country.' Is not he, by such conduct, attempting to assert the superiority of his custom over theirs? For he cannot quote a decisive passage on the subject from the Book of God; nor can he prove his opinion to be right by the unanimous voice of the universal Church, wherever spread abroad; nor can he demonstrate that they act contrary to the faith, and he according to it, or that they are doing what is prejudicial to sound morality, and he is defending its interests. Those men injure their own tranquillity and peace by quarrelling on an unnecessary question. I would rather recommend that, in matters of this kind, each

3 Luke xix. 6.

4 Matt. viii. 8.

5 In his Retractations, b. ii, ch. xx., Augustin remarks on this statement: "I do not recollect any passage by which it could be substantiated, except from the book of Wisdom (ch. xvi. 21), which the Jews do not admit to be of canonical authority." He says, in the same place, that this peculiarity of the manna must have been enjoyed only by the pious in Israel, not by the murmurers who said, "Our soul loatheth this light bread" (Num. xxi. 5).

7. Let me add, that it would be a mistake to suppose that the custom prevalent in many places, of offering the sacrifice on that day after partaking of food, is to be traced to the words, "Likewise after supper," etc. For the Lord might give the name of supper to what they had received, in already partaking of His body, so that it was after this that they partook of the cup: as the apostle says in another place, “When ye come together into one place, this is not to eat? the Lord's Supper,"3 giving to the receiving of the Eucharist to that extent (i.e. the eating of the bread) the name of the Lord's Supper.

man should, when sojourning in a country in advantage, it does much harm by unprofitably which he finds a custom different from his own, disturbing the Church. consent to do as others do. If, on the other hand, a Christian, when travelling abroad in some region where the people of God are more numerous, and more easily assembled together, and more zealous in religion, has seen, e.g., the sacrifice twice offered, both morning and evening, on the Thursday of the last week in Lent, and therefore, on his coming back to his own country, where it is offered only at the close of the day, protests against this as wrong and unlawful, because he has himself seen another custom in another land, this would show a childish weakness of judgment against which we should guard ourselves, and which we must bear with in others, but correct in all who are under our influence.

CHAP. V.- 6. Observe now to which of these three classes the first question in your letter is to be referred. You ask, "What ought to be done on the Thursday of the last week of Lent? Ought we to offer the sacrifice in the morning, and again after supper, on account of the words in the Gospel, 'Likewise also . . . after supper'? Or ought we to fast and offer the sacrifice only after supper? Or ought we to fast until the offering has been made, and then take supper as we are accustomed to do?" I answer, therefore, that if the authority of Scripture has decided which of these methods is right, there is no room for doubting that we should do according to that which is written; and our discussion must be occupied with a question, not of duty, but of interpretation as to the meaning of the divine institution. In like manner, if the universal Church follows any one of these methods, there is no room for doubt as to our duty; for it would be the height of arrogant madness to discuss whether or not we should comply with it. But the question which you propose is not decided either by Scripture or by universal practice. It must therefore be referred to the third class-as pertaining, namely, to things which are different in different places and countries. Let every man, therefore, conform himself to the usage prevailing in the Church to which he may come. For none of these methods is contrary to the Christian faith or the interests of morality, as favoured by the adoption of one custom more than the other. If this were the case, that either the faith or sound morality were at stake, it would be necessary either to change what was done amiss, or to appoint the doing of what had been neglected. But mere change of custom, even though it may be of advantage in some respects, unsettles men by reason of the novelty: therefore, if it brings no

1 Luke xxii. 20.

CHAP. VI. — As to the question whether upon that day it is right to partake of food before either offering or partaking of the Eucharist, these words in the Gospel might go far to decide our minds, "As they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed it;" taken in connection with the words in the preceding context, "When the even was come, He sat down with the twelve: and as they did eat, He said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray Me." For it was after that that He instituted the sacrament; and it is clear that when the disciples first received the body and blood of the Lord, they had not been fasting.

8. Must we therefore censure the universal Church because the sacrament is everywhere partaken of by persons fasting? Nay, verily, for from that time it pleased the Holy Spirit to appoint, for the honour of so great a sacrament, that the body of the Lord should take the precedence of all other food entering the mouth of a Christian; and it is for this reason that the custom referred to is universally observed. For the fact that the Lord instituted the sacrament after other food had been partaken of, does not prove that brethren should come together to partake of that sacrament after having dined or supped, or imitate those whom the apostle reproved and corrected for not distinguishing between the Lord's Supper and an ordinary meal. The Saviour, indeed, in order to commend the depth of that mystery more affectingly to His disciples, was pleased to impress it on their hearts and memories by making its institution His last act before going from them to His Passion. And therefore He did not prescribe the order in which it was to be observed, reserving this to be done by the apostles, through whom He intended to arrange all things pertaining to the Churches. Had He appointed that the sacrament should be always partaken of after other food, I believe that no one would have departed from that practice. But when

2 Manducare.
31 Cor. xi. 20.

the apostle, speaking of this sacrament, says,
"Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come to-
gether to eat, tarry one for another and if any
man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come
not together unto condemnation," he immediately
adds, "and the rest will I set in order when I
come." I
Whence we are given to understand
that, since it was too much for him to prescribe
completely in an epistle the method observed by
the universal Church throughout the world, it was
one of the things set in order by him in person,
for we find its observance uniform amid all the
variety of other customs.

CHAP. VII.-9. There are, indeed, some to whom it has seemed right (and their view is not unreasonable), that it is lawful for the body and blood of the Lord to be offered and received after other food has been partaken of, on one fixed day of the year, the day on which the Lord instituted the Supper, in order to give special solemnity to the service on that anniversary. I think that, in this case, it would be more seemly to have it celebrated at such an hour as would leave it in the power of any who have fasted to attend the service before the repast which is customary at the ninth hour. Wherefore we neither compel nor do we dare to forbid any one to break his fast before the Lord's Supper on that day. I believe, however, that the real ground upon which this custom rests is, that many, nay, almost all, are accustomed in most places to use the bath on that day. And because some continue to fast, it is offered in the morning, for those who take food, because they cannot bear fasting and the use of the bath at the same time; and in the evening, for those who have fasted all day.

10. If you ask me whence originated the custom of using the bath on that day, nothing occurs to me, when I think of it, as more likely than that it was to avoid the offence to decency which must have been given at the baptismal font, if the bodies of those to whom that rite was to be administered were not washed on some preceding day from the uncleanness consequent upon their strict abstinence from ablutions during Lent; and that this particular day was chosen for the purpose because of its being the anniversary of the institution of the Supper. And this being granted to those who were about to receive baptism, many others desired to join them in the luxury of a bath, and in relaxation of their fast. Having discussed these questions to the best of my ability, I exhort you to observe, in so far as you may be able, what I have laid down, as becomes a wise and peace-loving son of the Church. The remainder of your questions I purpose, if the Lord will, to answer at another time.

LETTER LV.

Or Book II. of Replies to Questions of Januarius. (A.D. 400.)

CHAP. I. 1. Having read the letter in which you have put me in mind of my obligation to give answers to the remainder of those questions which you submitted to me a long time ago, I cannot bear to defer any longer the gratification of that desire for instruction which it gives me so much pleasure and comfort to see in you; and although encompassed by an accumulation of engagements, I have given the first place to the work of supplying you with the answers desired. I will make no further comment on the contents of your letter, lest my doing so should prevent me from paying at length what I owe.

2. You ask, "Wherefore does the anniversary on which we celebrate the Passion of the Lord not fall, like the day which tradition has handed down as the day of His birth, on the same day every year?" and you add, "If the reason of this is connected with the week and the month, what have we to do with the day of the week or the state of the moon in this solemnity?" The first thing which you must know and remember here is, that the observance of the Lord's natal day is not sacramental, but only commemorative of His birth, and that therefore no more was in this case necessary, than that the return of the day on which the event took place should be marked by an annual religious festival. The celebration of an event becomes sacramental in its nature, only when the commemoration of the event is so ordered that it is understood to be significant of something which is to be received with reverence as sacred.3 Therefore we observe Easter in such a manner as not only to recall the facts of the death and resurrection of Christ to remembrance, but also to find a place for all the other things which, in connection with these events, give evidence as to the import of the sacrament. For since, as the apostle wrote, "He was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification," 5 a certain transition from death to life has been consecrated in that Passion and Resurrection of the Lord. For the word Pascha itself is not, as is commonly thought, a Greek word: those who are acquainted with both languages affirm it to be a Hebrew word. It is not derived, therefore, from the Passion, because of the Greek word ráoxe, signifying to suffer, but it takes its name from the transition, of which I have spoken, from death to life; the meaning of the Hebrew word Pascha being, as those who are acquainted with

it assure us, a passing over or transition. To to wit, the redemption of the body: for we are this the Lord Himself designed to allude, when saved by hope." While we are in this hope, He said, "He that believeth in Me is passed from" the body indeed is dead because of sin, but the death to life." And the same evangelist who spirit is life because of righteousness." Now records that saying is to be understood as desir- mark what follows: "But if the Spirit of Him ing to give emphatic testimony to this, when, that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, speaking of the Lord as about to celebrate with He that raised up Christ from the dead shall His disciples the passover, at which He instituted also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit the sacramental supper, he says, "When Jesus that dwelleth in you." 14 The whole Church, knew that His hour was come, that He should therefore, while here in the conditions of pildepart 3 from this world unto the Father."4 This grimage and mortality, expects that to be accompassing over from this mortal life to the other, plished in her at the end of the world which has the immortal life, that is, from death to life, is been shown first in the body of our Lord Jesus set forth in the Passion and Resurrection of the Christ, who is "the first-begotten from the dead," Lord. seeing that the body of which He is the Head is none other than the Church, 15