 | This article incorporates unedited text from thepublic-domainCatholic Encyclopedia. It may be out of date, or may reflect the point of view of the Catholic Church as of 1913. It should be edited to reflectbroader and more recent perspectives.(August 2015) |
 |
| Part ofa series on the |
| Catholic Church |
|---|
 St. Peter's Basilica, Vatican City |
| Overview |
Miscellaneous |
Links and resources |
 Catholic Church portal |
TheGallican Rite is a historical form ofChristian liturgy and other ritual practices inWestern Christianity. It is not a singleliturgical rite but rather severalLatin liturgical rites that developed within theLatin Church, which comprised the majority use of most of Western Christianity for the greater part of the 1st millennium AD. The rites first developed in the early centuries as the Syriac-Greek rites ofJerusalem andAntioch and were first translated intoLatin in various parts of theWestern Roman EmpirePraetorian prefecture of Gaul. By the 5th century, it was well established in theRoman civil diocese ofGaul,which had a few early centers of Christianity in the south. Ireland is also known to have had a form of this Gallican Liturgy mixed with Celtic customs.
The Gallican Rite was used from before the 5th century, and likely prior to the Diocletian reform in AD 293Roman Gaul, until the middle or end of the 8th century. There is no information before the 5th century and very little then; and throughout the whole period there was, to judge by existing documents and descriptions, so much diversity that, though the general outlines of the rite were of the same pattern, the name must not be taken to imply more than a very moderate amount of homogeneity. The Rite ofIberia was used from the 5th century in Roman provinces within the Roman civil diocese ofHispania to the end of the 11th century, and lingered as an archaeological survival in chapels atToledo andSalamanca. It was so nearly allied to the Gallican Rite that the term Hispano-Gallican is often applied to the two. But the IberianMozarabic Rite has, like the alliedCeltic Rite, enough of an independent history to require separate treatment, so that though it will be necessary to allude to both by way of illustration, this article will be devoted primarily to the rite once used in what is now France. Of the origin of the Gallican Rite there are three principal theories, between two of which the controversy is not yet settled. These theories may be termed: the Ephesine, the Ambrosian, and the Roman.[1]
The Ephesine theory, first put forward byWilliam Palmer inOrigines Liturgicae, was once very popular among Anglican scholars. According to it the Gallican Rite went back to one brought toLyon fromEphesus bySt. Pothinus andIrenaeus, who had received it throughPolycarp fromJohn of Patmos. The idea originated partly in a statement in the 8th-century tract in amanuscript, which refers the Service of the Gauls (Cursus Gallorum) to such an origin, and partly in a statement ofColmán of Lindisfarne at theSynod of Whitby (664) respecting the Johannine origin of theQuartodecimanEaster. This theory "may be dismissed as practically disproved," according toHenry Jenner, inCatholic Encyclopedia.[1]
The second theory is that whichLouis Duchesne puts forward in place of the Ephesine. He holds thatMilan, notLugdunum (Lyon), was the principal centre of Gallican development. He lays great stress on the incontestable importance ofMediolanum (Milan) as the capital of the Western Roman Empire from 286 to 402 and of the Church of Milan in the late4th century, and conjectures that a liturgy of Oriental origin, introduced perhaps byAuxentius theArianbishop of Milan from 355 to 374, spread from thecapital city, Mediolanum, to the Roman provinces in Gaul, Hispania, andBritannia. Duchesne points out that "the Gallican Liturgy in the features which distinguish it from the Roman, betrays all the characteristics of the Eastern Orthodox liturgies," and that "some of its formularies are to be found word for word in the Greek Orthodox texts which were in use in the Churches of the Syro-Byzantine Rite either in the fourth century or somewhat later," and infers from this that, "the Gallican Liturgy is an Oriental liturgy, introduced into the West towards the middle of the fourth century." Duchesne does not, however, note that in certain other important peculiarities the Gallican Liturgy agrees with the Roman where the latter differs from the Oriental. Controverting the third or Roman theory of origin, he stresses thatPope Innocent I (416) in a letter toDecentius,bishop of Gubbio, spoke of usages which Duchesne recognizes as Gallican (e.g. the position of the Diptychs and thePax) as "foreign importations" and did not recognize in them the ancient usage of his own Church, and he thinks it hard to explain why the African Church should have accepted the Roman reforms, whileAmbrose himself a Roman, refused them. He assumes that theAmbrosian Rite is not really Roman, but Gallican, much Romanized at a later period, and that the Gubbio variations of which Innocent I complained were borrowed from Milan.[1]
The third theory is perhaps rather complicated to state without danger of misrepresentation, and has not been so definitely stated as the other two by any one writer. It is held in part by Milanese liturgists[who?] and by many others whose opinion is of weight. In order to state it clearly it will be necessary to point out first certain details in which all the Latin liturgical rites agree with one another in differing from the Eastern, and in this we speak only of the Mass, which is of far more importance than either thecanonical hours or the occasional services in determining origins.[1]
The Eastern Eucharists of whatever rite are marked by the invariability of the priest's part. There are, it is true, alternativeanaphoras which are used eitherad libitum, as in the Syro-Jacobite Rite, or on certain days, as in Byzantine and East Syrian, but they are complete in themselves and do not contain passages appropriate to the day. Thelections of course vary with the day in all rites, and varyingantiphons,troparia, etc., are sung by thechoir; but the priest's part remains fixed.[1]
In the Western rites – whether Hispano-Gallican, Ambrosian, or Roman – a very large proportion of the priest's part varies according to the day, and these variations are so numerous in the Gallican Rite that the fixed part, even of the Prayer of theConsecration, is strangely little. Certain varying prayers of the Hispano-Gallican Rite have a tendency to fall into couples, aBidding Prayer, or invitation to pray, sometimes of considerable length and often partaking of the nature of ahomily, addressed to the congregation, and acollect embodying the suggestions of the Bidding Prayer, addressed to God. These Bidding Prayers have survived in the Roman Rite in theGood Friday intercessory prayers, and they occur in a form borrowed later from the Gallican in the ordination services, but in general the invitation to prayer is reduced to its lowest terms in the wordOremus.[1]
Another Western peculiarity is in the form of theWords of Institution. The principal Eastern liturgies followPaul the Apostle's words in theFirst Epistle to the Corinthians (11:23–25) and date the Institution by the betrayal, and of the less important anaphoras, most either use the same expression or paraphrase it. The Western liturgies date from the Passion,Qui pridie quam pateretur, for which, though of course the fact is found there, there is no verbal Scriptural warrant. The Mozarabic of today uses the Pauline words, and no Gallican Recital of the Institution remains in full; but in both the prayer that follows is called (with alternative nomenclature in the Gallican) post-Pridie and the catchwords "Qui pridie" come at the end of the post-Sanctus in the Gallican Masses, so that it is clear that this form existed in both.[1]
These variations from the Eastern usages are of an early date, and it is inferred from them, and from other considerations more historical than liturgical, that a liturgy with these peculiarities was the common property of Gaul, Hispania, and Italy. Whether, as is most likely, it originated in Rome and spread thence to the countries under direct Roman influence, or whether it originated elsewhere and was adopted by Rome, there is no means of knowing. The adoption must have happened when liturgies were in rather a fluid state. The Gallicans may have carried to an extreme the changes begun at Rome, and may have retained some archaic features which had been later dropped by Rome. During the 4th century – it has been conjectured that it was in the papacy ofPope Damasus I (366–384) – liturgical reforms were made at Rome: the position of the Great Intercession and of the Pax were altered, the latter perhaps because the form of thedismissal of the catechumens was disused, and the distinction between the first part, theMass of the Catechumens, and second part, the Mass of the Faithful, was no longer needed, and therefore the want was felt of a position with some meaning to it for the sign of Christian unity. The long and diffuse prayers were made into the short and crisp collects of the Roman type. It was then that the variable post-Sanctus and post-Pridie were altered into a fixed Canon of a type similar to the Roman Canon of today, though perhaps this Canon began with the clause which now reads "Quam oblationem", but according to the pseudo-Ambrosian tractDe Sacramentis once read "Fac nobis hanc oblationem". This may have been introduced by a short, variable post-Sanctus. This reform, possibly through the influence of Ambrose, was adopted at Milan, but not in Gaul and Hispania. At a still later period, during the 5th and 6th centuries, changes were again made at Rome, principally attributed toPope Leo I,Pope Gelasius I, andPope Gregory I; these three popes are the eponyms of three varyingsacramentaries. These later reforms were not adopted at Milan which retained the books of the first reform, which are now known as Ambrosian.[1]
The Latin liturgical rites have been described as undergoing three phases, which may be called for want of better names the Gallican, the Ambrosian, and the Roman stages. The holders of the theory no doubt recognize that the demarcation between these stages is rather vague, and that the alterations were in many respects gradual. Of the three theories of origin, the Ephesine may be dismissed as practically disproved. To both of the other two the same objection may be urged, that they are largely founded on conjecture and on the critical examination of documents of a much later date than the periods to which the conjectures relate. But at present there is little else to go upon. It may be well to mention also a theory put forward by W. C. Bishop inChurch Quarterly for July 1908, to the effect that the Gallican Liturgy was not introduced into Gaul from anywhere but was the original liturgy of that country, apparently invented and developed there. He speaks of an original independence of Rome (of course liturgically only) followed by later borrowings. This does not seem to exclude the idea that Rome and the West may have had the germ of the Western Rite in common. Again the theory is conjectural and is only very slightly stated in the article.[1]
The later history of the Gallican rite is obscure and filled with liturgical anarchy. France had no clear capital; Toledo occasionally tried to impose liturgical law, but only over Visigothic areas, and without much success. The Councils ofVannes (465),Agde (506),Vaison (529),Tours (567),Auxerre (578), andMâcon (581, 623) made attempts at imposing liturgical consistency, but only at a local level. In the 7th century,Columbanus's missionaries likely introducedIrish elements to the rite.[1]
Throughout this period, there was a slow process of Romanization in the Gallican rite, accelerated in the 8th century byBoniface. Nearly all the Gallican books of the laterMerovingian period, which are all that are left, contain many Roman elements. The 1913Catholic Encyclopedia speculates that some of these represent originally Gallican liturgies with Roman elements introduced, while evaluating others, such as theGelasian Sacramentary and theMissale Francorum, as Roman liturgies with Gallican additions and adaptations.[1]
The Roman Liturgy was adopted atMetz in the time ofChrodegang (742–66). The Roman chant was introduced about 760, and by a decree ofPepin of Herstal,Mayor of the Palace, quoted inCharlemagne'sAdmonitio generalis in 789, the Gallican chant was abolished in its favour.Pope Hadrian I between 784 and 791 sent to Charlemagne at his own request a copy of what was considered to be the Gregorian Sacramentary, but which certainly represented the Roman use of the end of the 8th century. This book, which was far from complete, was edited and supplemented by the addition of a large amount of matter derived from the Gallican books and from the Roman book known as the Gelasian Sacramentary, which had been gradually supplanting the Gallican. It is probable that the editor wasAlcuin of York, Charlemagne's principal liturgical advisor. Copies were distributed throughout Charlemagne's empire, and this "composite liturgy", as Duchesne describes, "from its source in theImperial chapel spread throughout all the churches of the Frankish Empire and at length, finding its way to Rome gradually supplanted there the ancient use." More than half a century later, whenCharles the Bald wished to see what the ancient Gallican Rite had been like, it was necessary to import Hispanic priests to celebrate it in his presence.[1] Subsequently, with theNormans in theKingdom of Sicily, the Gallican rite was the official form of liturgy.
The nameGallican has also been applied to two other uses:
There are no manuscripts of the Gallican Rite earlier than the later part of the 7th century, though the descriptions in the letters ofGermain of Paris (555–76) take one back another century.[1] The known manuscripts are:
TheReichenau Fragments are described inLéopold Victor Delisle'sMémoire sur d'anciens Sacramentaires. They were discovered byFranz Mone in 1850 in apalimpsest manuscript from theAbbey of Reichenau, in the library ofKarlsruhe. The manuscript, which is late 7th century, had belonged toJohn II, Bishop of Constance [de] (760–781). It contains eleven Masses of purely Gallican type, one of which is a Mass for the feast ofGermanus of Auxerre, but the others do not specify any festival. One Mass is written entirely inhexameter verse, except for the post-Pridie which isprose.[1]
The Peyron, Mai, and Bunsen fragments are disjointed palimpsestleaves. Those fragments which areeponyms of CardinalAngelo Mai andAmedeo Peyron [it] were found in theBiblioteca Ambrosiana at Milan,[a] and those fragments which are an eponym ofChristian Charles Josias von Bunsen were found at theAbbey of Saint Gall.[b] The Peyron fragment contains part of what looks like a LentenContestatio (Preface) with other prayers of Gallican type. The Bunsen fragment contains part of a Mass for the Dead (post-Sanctus, post-Pridie) and several pairs of Bidding Prayers and Collects, the former having the title "Exhortatio" or "Exhortatio Matutina". The Mai fragments begin with part of a Bidding Prayer and contain a fragment of a Contestatio, with that title, and fragments of other prayers, two of which have the title "Post Nomina", and two others which seem to be prayersad Pacem.[1]
TheMissale Gallicanum Vetus (Gallicanum), described by Delisle, is a manuscript dating from the end of the 7th, or the early part of the 8th. Only a fragment, it begins with a Mass for the feast of Germanus of Auxerre, after which come prayers for the Blessing of Virgins and Widows, two Advent Masses, the Christmas Eve Mass, theexpositio symboli andtraditio symboli and other ceremonies preparatory toBaptism; also theMaundy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday ceremonies and the baptismal service, Masses for the Sundays after Easter up to theRogation Mass, where the manuscript breaks off. Masses, as inGothicum, are Gallican in order with many Roman prayers. The Good Friday prayers are, with a few verbal variations, exactly as those in the Roman Missal.[1]
Missale Gothicum (Gothicum), described by Delisle, is a manuscript dating from the end of the 7th century and once belonging to the Petau Library. The name is due to a 15th-century note at the beginning of the book, and hence it has been attributed by Tommasi andJean Mabillon toNarbonne, which was in theVisigothic Kingdom. Duchesne, judging by the inclusion of Masses for the feast ofSymphorian and the feast ofLeodegar (d. 680), attributes it toAutun. Masses are numbered, the manuscript beginning withChristmas Eve which is numbered III. Probably there were once twoAdvent Masses, as inGallicanum. There are eighty-one numbered sections, of which the last is the first prayer of "Missa Romensiſ cottidiana", with which the manuscript breaks off. The details of Masses in this book are given in the section of the present article on the liturgical year. Masses are all Gallican as to order, but many of the actual prayers are Roman.[1]
The LuxeuilLectionary (Luxeuil) is a 7th-century manuscript discovered by Mabillon in theAbbey of Luxeuil, but because among its very few saints' days it contains the feast ofSaint Genevieve,Germain Morin, it has been attributed to Paris. It contains the Prophetical Lessons, epistles, and Gospels for the year from Christmas Eve onwards. At the end are the lessons of a few special Masses, for the burial of a bishop, for thededication of a church, when a bishop preaches, "et plebs decimas reddat", when adeacon is ordained, when a priest is blessed, "in profectione itineris", and "lectiones cotidianae". This lectionary is purely Gallican with no apparent Roman influence. The manuscript has not been printed in its entirety, but Mabillon, inDe Liturgia Gallicana, gives references to all the lessons and the beginnings and endings of the text.[1]
The Letters of St. Germanus of Paris are from a manuscript at Autun. Duchesne says of the descriptions, on which the interpretations are based, that "We may reconstruct from the letters a kind ofOrdo Gallicanus".[1]
There now seems to be a scholarly consensus that these letters were written in the eighth to ninth centuries[4]
Much side light is thrown on the Gallican Rite by the Celtic books, especially by theStowe Missal andBobbio Missal. A comparison with theAmbrosian Liturgy and Rite may also be of service, while mostlacunae in our knowledge of the Gallican Rite may reasonably be conjecturally filled up from the Mozarabic books, which even in their present form are those of substantially the same rite. There are also liturgical allusions in certain 5th and 6th century writers:Hilary of Poitiers,Sulpicius Severus,Caesarius of Arles, and especiallyGregory of Tours, and some information may be gathered from the decrees of the Gallican councils mentioned above.[1]
The above are all that exist as directly Gallican sources, but much information may also be gleaned from the books of the transition period, which, though substantially Roman, were much edited with Germanic tendencies and contained a large amount which was of a Gallican rather than a Roman type. The principal of these are as follows.[1]
There are three extant manuscripts of the Gelasian Sacramentary, one atVatican City, one atZürich, and one at the Abbey of Saint Gall. The manuscripts are of the early 8th century. The groundwork is Roman, with Gallican additions and modifications. Evidence for the Gallican rites of ordination and some other matters is derived from this book.[1]
TheMissale Francorum (Vat. Reg. Lat. 257) is a fragment of a sacramentary similar to the Gelasian Sacramentary, though not identical with it.[1]
There are many manuscripts of the Gregorian Sacramentary. It represents the sacramentary sent by Adrian I to Charlemagne, after it had been rearranged and supplemented by Gelasian and Gallican editions in France.[1]
The Luxeuil Lectionary,Missale Gothicum andMissale Gallicum, and the Gallican adaptations of theMartyrologium Hieronymianum are the chief authorities on this point, and to these may be added some information to be gathered from the regulations of theCouncil of Agde (506),Fourth Council of Orléans (541),Council of Tours (567), andSecond Council of Mâcon (581), and from Gregory of Tours'Historia Francorum, as to the Gallican practice in the 6th century.[1]
It is probable that there were many variations in different times and places, and that the influence of theMartyrologium Hieronymianum brought about gradual assimilation to Rome. The year, as is usual, began withAdvent. The Council of Mâcon arranged threefasting days a week during Advent and mentionedSt. Martin's Day as the key-day for Advent Sunday, so that, as at present in the Mozarabic and Ambrosian Rites, there were six Sundays of Advent (but only two Advent Masses survive inGallicanum).Gothicum and the Luxeuil Lectionary both begin with Christmas Eve.[1][c]
Both books also have Commons ofMartyrs andConfessors, the Luxeuil has Commons of bishops and deacons for a number of other Masses, andGothicum has six Sunday Masses.Gallicanum has a Mass for the feast of Germanus of Auxerre before the two Advent Masses. In bothGothicum andGallicanum a large space is given to the services of the two days before Easter, and in the latter theexpositio symboli andtraditio symboli are given at great length. Themoveable feasts depended, of course, on Easter. When the Roman Church altered the Easter computation from the old 84-year-cycle to the newVictorius Aquitaine 532-year-cycle in 457, the Gallican Church, unlike the Celts, did the same; but when, in 525, the Roman Church adopted theDionysius Exiguus 19-year-cycle, the Gallican Church continued to use the 532-year-cycle, until the end of the 8th or beginning of the 9th century. Lent began with the first Sunday, not withAsh Wednesday. There is a not very intelligible passage in the canons of the Council of Tours to the effect that all through August there were "festivitates et missae sanctorum", but this is not borne out by the existing sacramentaries or the Lectionary.[1]
There is curiously little information on this point, and it is not possible to reconstruct the Gallican Divine Office from the scant allusions that exist. It seems probable that there was considerable diversity in various times and places, though councils, both in Gaul and Hispania, tried to bring about some uniformity. The principal authorities are the Councils of Agde (506) and Tours (567) and allusions in the writings of Gregory of Tours andCaesarius of Arles. The general arrangement and nomenclature were very similar to those of the Celtic Rite. There were two principal services,Matins andVespers; and four Lesser Hours,Prime, orad Secundum,Terce,Sext, andNone; and probably two night services,Complin, orad initium noctis, andNocturns.[1]
But the application of these names is sometimes obscure. It is not quite clear whether Nocturns and Lauds were not joined together as Matins; Caesarius speaks of Prima, whileGallicanum speaks ofad Secundum; Caesarius distinguishes betweenLucernarium andad Duodeciman, while Aurelian distinguishes betweenad Duodeciman andComplin;Gothicum speaks ofVespera Paschae andInitium Noctis Paschae, andGallicanum hasad Duodeciman Paschae. The distribution of the Psalter is not known. The Council of Tours orders sixpsalms at Sext and twelvead Duodecimam, with Alleluia (presumably as Antiphon). For Matins there is a curious arrangement which reminds one of that in theRule of St. Columbanus. Normally in summer (apparently from Easter to July) "sex antiphonae binis psalmis" are ordered. This evidently means twelve psalms, two under each antiphon. In August there seem to have been no psalms, because there were festivals and Masses of saints. "Toto Augusto manicationes fiant, quia festivitates sunt et missae sanctorum." The meaning of manicationes and of the whole statement is obscure. In September there were fourteen psalms, two under each antiphon; in October twenty-four psalms, three to each antiphon; and from December to Easter thirty psalms, three to each antiphon. Caesarius orders six psalms at Prime with the hymn "Fulgentis auctor aetheris", two lessons, one from the old and one from the New Testament, and acapitellum"; six psalms at Terce, Sext, and None, with an antiphon, a hymn, a lesson, and acapitellum; atLucernarium a "Psalmus Directaneus", whatever that may be (cf. "Psalmus Directus" of the Ambrosian Rite), two antiphons, a hymn, and acapitellum; andad Duodecimam, eighteen psalms, an antiphon, hymn, lesson, andcapitellum. From this it seems as though the office ofLucernarium andad Duodecimam made up Vespers, combining the twelfth hour of the Divine Office (that is, of the recitation of the Psalter with its accompaniments) with a service for what, without any intention of levity, one may call "lighting-up time". The Ambrosian and Mozarabic Vespers are constructed on this principle, and so is the Byzantine Hesperinos.[1]
Caesarius mentions a blessing given by the bishop at the end ofLucernarium, "cumque expleto Lucernario benedictionem populo dedisset". The rules of Caesarius and Aurelian both speak of two nocturns with lessons, which include on the feasts of martyrs lessons from their passions. They orderMagnificat to be sung at Lauds and during the Paschal days, andGloria in excelsis Deo sung on Sundays and greater festivals.[1]
There is a short passage which throws a little light upon the Lyon use of the end of the 5th century in an account of the Council of Lyon in 499. The council, assembled byGundobad,king of Burgundy, began on thefeast of Just. The vigil was kept at his tomb.[clarify] This began with a lesson from thePentateuch,Exodus 7:3. Then psalms were sung and a lesson was read from the prophets (Isaiah 6:9,), more psalms and a lesson from the Gospels,Matthew 11:21 orLuke 10:13, and a lesson from thePauline epistles,Romans 2:4.[1]
Agobard, in the 9th century, mentions that at Lyon there were no canticles except from the Psalms, no hymns written by poets, and no lessons except from Scripture. Mabillon says that though in his day Lyon agreed with Rome in many things, especially in the distribution of the Psalter, and admitted lessons from the Acts of the Saints, there were still no hymns except at Complin, and he mentions a similar rule as to hymns at Vienne. But the 767 Council of Tours canon 23 allowed the use of the Ambrosian hymns. Though the Psalter of the second recension ofJerome, now used in all the churches of the Roman Rite exceptSt. Peter's Basilica,Vatican City, is known as the "Gallican", while the older,[1]a revision of theVetus Itala now used in St. Peter's Basilica only,[citation needed] is known as the "Roman", it does not seem that the Gallican Psalter was used even in Gaul until a comparatively later date, though it spread thence over nearly all the West. At present the Mozarabic and Ambrosian Psalters are variants of the "Roman", with peculiarities of their own. Probably the decadence of the Gallican Divine Office was very gradual. In an 8th-century manuscript tract, theCursus Gallorum is distinguished from theCursus Romanorum, theCursus Scottorum and the Ambrosian, all of which seem to have been going on then. The unknown writer, though his opinion is of no value on the origin of thecursus, may well have known about some of these of his own knowledge; but through the 7th century there are indications of adoption of the Roman or the Monasticcursus instead of the Gallican, or to mix them up, a tendency which was resisted at times by provincial councils.[1]
The chief authorities for the Gallican Mass are the letters ofSaint Germanus of Paris (555–576), and by a comparison of these with the extant sacramentaries, not only of Gaul but of the Celtic Rite, with the Irish tracts on the Mass, with the books of the still existing Mozarabic Rite, and with the descriptions of the Hispanic Mass given byIsidore of Seville. One may arrive at a fairly clear and general idea of the service, though there exists no Gallican Ordinary of the Mass and no Antiphoner. Duchesne, inOrigines du Culte chrétien, gave a very full account constructed on this basis, though some will differ from him in his supplying certain details from Ambrosian books, and in his claiming the Bobbio Missal Sacramentary asAmbrosian rather than Celtic.[1][d]
Jenner's analysis shows that the Gallican Mass contained a very small number of fixed elements and that nearly the whole service was variable according to the day. The absence of anOrdinary of the Mass is, therefore, of less importance than it would be in, for instance, the Roman Mass or the Ambrosian Mass.[e] Thus the fixed parts of the service would only be: (a) the three Canticles, (b) theAjus andSanctus, etc., at the Gospel, (c) thePrex, (d) the Dismissal, (e) the priest's prayers at the Offertory, (f) the Great Intercession, (g) thePax formula, (h) theSursum corda dialogue, (i) theSanctus, (j) the Recital of the Institution, (k) theLord's Prayer. Possibly fixed would be theConfractorium,Trecanum, andCommunio. and probably fixed would be the priest's devotions at Communion. Most of these are very short and only the most important passage wanting is the one fixed passage in the Prayer of Consecration, theWords of Institution.[1]
The authorities for the Gallican Baptismal Service areGothicum andGallicanum, both of which are incomplete, along with a few details in the second Letter of Germanus of Paris. The forms given in the Stowe Missal and the Bobbio Missal are too much Romanized to well illustrate the Gallican Rite. The form given inGothicum is the least complete.[f]Gallicanum has a much fuller form with thetraditio symboli andexpositio symboli, etc.[1][g]
TheHoly Week ceremonies which are mixed with the Baptismal service in the two books are not very characteristic. The couplets of invitatory and collect which occur in the Roman Good Friday service are given with verbal variations inGothicum; in both, however, there are other prayers of a similar type and prayers for some of the Hours of Good Friday andEaster Vigil. The Blessing of thePaschal Candle consists of a Bidding Prayer and collect (inGothicum only), theExsultet and its Preface nearly exactly as in the Roman, aCollectio post benedictionem cerei, andCollectio post hymnum cerri. There is no blessing of the new fire in either.[1]
TheOrdination services of the Gallican Rite do not occur in any of the avowedly Gallican books. They are found in the Gelasian Sacramentary and theMissale Francorum. That is to say, a mixed form which does not agree with the more or less contemporary Roman form in the Leonine and Gregorian Sacramentaries, though it contains some Roman prayers, is found in these two books, and it may reasonably be inferred that the differences are of Gallican origin. Moreover, extracts relating to ceremonial are given with them from theStatuta Ecclesia Antiqua, formerly attributed to theFourth Council of Carthage, but now known to be a Gallican decree "promulgated in theprovince of Arles towards the end of the 5th century" (Duchesne).[1]
The ceremonial contained therein agrees with that described inDe Officiis Ecclesiasticis by Isidore of Seville. The forms ofminor orders, includingsubdeacon, were very short, and consisted simply of the delivery of the instruments: keys to the porters; books of lectors and exorcists; cruets toacolytes;chalice,paten, basin,ewer and towel to subdeacons. Bidding Prayers and all are in the Roman Pontifical of today. In the ordination of deacons there is a form which is found in theByzantine Rite but has not been adopted in the Roman Rite, the recognition by the people, after an address, with the cry ofDignus est! This is used for priests and bishops also, for example, theAxios acclamation in Byzantine ordinations. The Bidding Prayer and collect which follow are both in the present Roman Pontifical, though separated by much additional matter. The ordination of priests was of the same type as that of deacons, with the addition of the anointing of the hands. The address, with a varied end, and the collect (but not the Bidding Prayer), and the anointing of the hands with its formula are in the modern Roman Pontifical, but with very large additions. The consecration of bishops began, after an election, with a presentation and recognition, neither of which is in the modern Pontifical. Then followed a long Bidding Prayer, also not adopted in the Roman Rite, and the Consecration PrayerDeus omnium honorum, part of which is embodied in the Preface in the Leonine and Gregorian Sacramentaries, and in the present Pontifical. During this prayer two bishops held the Book of the Gospels over the candidate, and all the bishops laid their hands on his head. Then followed the anointing of the hands, but apparently not of the head as in the modern rite, with a formula which is not in the Roman books.[1]
TheConsecration of a church does not occur in the recognized Gallican books and from prayers in the Gelasian Sacramentary andMissale Francorum. Duchesne's analysis of both rites shows, inChristian worship, that at a time when theRoman Rite of Consecration was exclusively funerary and contained little else but the deposition of the relics, as shown in theOrdines Romani in theSaint-Amand Abbey manuscript,[h] the Gallican Rite resembled more closely that of the modernPontifical, which may be presumed to have borrowed from it. A 9th century commentary on the ritual of a dedication, attributed byEdmond Martène toRemigius of Auxerre, and the 8th or 9th centuryAngoulême Sacramentary manuscript are the other authorities from which Duchesne derives his details.[6] The order of theCeltic Consecration given in theAn Leabhar Breac is very similar.[1][i]
This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Jenner, Henry (1909). "The Gallican Rite". In Herbermann, Charles (ed.).Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 6. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain:Duchesne, Louis (1919) [1903].Christian worship: its origin and evolution : a study of the Latin liturgy up to the time of Charlemagne. Translated by M. L. McClure (5th ed.). London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.OCLC 844623358.| Sacraments | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eucharistic liturgies | |||||||||||
| Canonical hours, Liturgical hours | |||||||||||
| Other liturgical services | |||||||||||
| Liturgical literature | |||||||||||
| Liturgical language | |||||||||||
| Liturgical rites |
| ||||||||||
| Patriarchates (byorder of precedence) |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| History |
| ||||||
| Language | |||||||
| Liturgical rites Liturgical days |
| ||||||
| See also | |||||||
