¹ Inge, William Ralph: Vale. (London, Longmans, Green, 1934), p. 34Google Scholar.

² Cf. what Dr. Carlyle says of Gregory Magnus and of “the extremely deferential, sometimes almost servile, tone which we find, at least occasionally, in his letters to the Emperors.” — R. W., and Carlyle, A. J. A.: A History of Mediaeval Political Theory in the West. (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1903), 1Google Scholar; pp. 153–154.

³ Cf. Romans, 13. For a compendious statement of the foundation of Paul's theory of the institution of government, see R. W. and A. J. A. Carlyle: op. cit., 1; pp. 89 sqq.

⁴ Thus, in contrast to such writers as the Ambrosiaster, St. Optatus, St. Gregory himself, Eusebius of Cesarea, or Cathulfus, or Sedulius Scotus, might be set statements of Rufinus of Aquileia, Hosius of Cordova, or Lucifer of Caligari. In respect to any attempt to erect an ideal political theory and to lend countenance to it by recogcitations from authorities, especially when we “lift” them from the past, it is well to bear in mind the wise conclusion of Cardinal Alfred Baudrillart in his Quatre Cents Ans de Concordat (Paris, 1904) that we should not here feel ourselves concerned with the application of geometric principles. And P. Max Pribilla, S.J., pointedly observes: “Es ist daher scharf zu unterscheiden, was in den Aufstellungen der Theologen für immer verbindliche Lehre der katholischen Kirche und was nur der theoretische Nachklang einer zeitgeschichtlichen Lage ist, von deren Einwirkung sich auch bedeutende Theologen nur mühsam ablösen können; denn auch die Theologen sind Kinder ihrer Zeit.” — Pribilla, M.: “Dogmatische Intoleranz und bürgerliche Toleranz”; Stimmen der Zeit, 144 (April, 1949), p. 31Google Scholar.

See below, p. 262; and cf. a forthcoming paper by the present writer, “The Holy Church and the Sanctified State: aspects of kingship according to Roman, French, and English Liturgies.”

⁵ It is interesting to note how important this theme becomes again in the thought of a number of Victorian divines like F. D. Maurice, R. W. Church, and A. P. Stanley.

⁶ Cf. Hocart, Arthur M.: Kingship. (London, Oxford University Press, 1927), pp. 15–16Google Scholar.

⁷ Tyrrell, George: “From heaven or of men?”; Through Scylla and Charybdis. (London, Longmans, Green, 1907), p. 359Google Scholar. The Rev. Professor Langmead Casserley has lately remarked on “the Anglican tendency to see authority in the Church as sociology sees political authority in the Community.” — J. V. Langmead Casserley, in a lecture, “Anglican Theology”; no. 3 in a series, “The Genius of Anglicanism,” given at Cathedral House, New York, 18 October 1953. This type of thought may also be discerned in the writings of the mid-nineteenth century American, Orestes Brownson; e.g.: “It is vain in our times to attempt to preserve … loyalty to the church by the force of simple external authority, or even by … reverence for the prelates whom the Holy Ghost has placed over [the Church]. Both for those within and for those without [the Church], authority must vindicate itself, — must show that it is not merely a positive and arbitrary authority, but that it is authority in the reason and nature of things, intrinsic as well as extrinsic. Minds in our day are to be governed by respecting their freedom, not by restraining it, and men in authority must be more ready to convince than to command.” — Brownson, Orestes: “Catholic Polemics” (1861)Google Scholar; cited by Ryan, Alvan S., ed.: The Brownson Reader. (New York, P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1955); pp. 336–337Google Scholar.

⁸ M. G. H. Ep. iv Variorum Carolo Magno regnante Scriptae, 7; apud Carlyle: op. cit.; 1; 215. Cf., also, as a demonstration of the same idea, expressed about three centuries later, the notions analyzed in the able essay of Kantorowicz, Ernst H. of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton, under the title “Deus per naturam; Deus per gratiam: a note on mediaeval political theory”; Harvard Theological Review, XLV (October, 1952); pp. 253–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹ This investiture is thus described in the Imperial Coronation Office of the Romanus Ordo de consuetudinibus et observantiis …, long ascribed to Pope Honorius III (Cardinal Cencio Savelli): “… venit Electus … et induunt cum amicti et alba et cingulo, et sic deducunt eum ad dominum Papam in secretarium, ibique facit eum clericum, [hinc Imperatores Sigismundus in Constantia dalmatica indutus, Fridericus tertius Romae stola ornatus, evangelium cantaverunt in missa pontificali], et concedit ei tunicam et dalmaticam, et pluvialem, et mitram, caligas et sandalia, quibus utatur in coronatione sua, et sic indutus stat ante dominum Papam.” — Ordo ad Coronandum Imperatorem (E Spicilegio Romano; p. 288); apud Horoy: Med. Aevii Bibl. Patristica. (Paris: Impr. de la Bibliothèque Ecclésiastique, 1879); vol. 1; col. 424. (The passage in square brackets is a note of M. l'Abbé Horoy, the editor.)

On the authorship of this Ordo, cf. the remarks of Bishop, Edmund in his Liturgica Historica (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1918)Google Scholar; p. 310, where the conclusion is reached, following M. Duchesne (Le Liber Censuum de l'Église Romaine, éd. par P. Fabre et L. Duchesne, in Bibliothèque des écoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, sér. 2, t. 6. [Paris, Albert Fontmoing, 1905–10]; vol. 1; avis), that “there is nothing to show that the Ordo in Censius's original manuscript of 1192 (Vat. 8486) was an Ordo compiled by himself”; but that it rather evidences the then current usage of the Roman Court. The inference which will immediately suggest itself is pertinent in regard to the sacred and ecclesiastical character of the anointed Sovereign. In some sense, those who are disposed to exalt that character might well consider that the support which words in this Ordo lend to their position is more weighty than could be the case in respect to a merely private composition of Cardinal Cencio Savelli (Pope Honorius III, 1217; died 1227). Cf. p. 244, infra. In any event, it would seem evident that the Emperor is made a cleric that he may publicly proclaim the Gospel, liturgically as well as in the ordinary discharge of his own sacred office. The importance of the praedicatio Evangelii is something of fundamental significance: the liturgical right to engage in it ratione officii is a mark of those whom the Christian Church has historically regarded as being, in some special sense, representatives of Christ, and hence the public reading of the Gospel has always been thought of as one of the chiefest and most important points in liturgical worship: it has a sense and purpose that is distinctly sacramental. The introduction into the English Rite of Coronation, in the seventeenth century, of The Tradition of the Bible to the new Sovereign really harks back then, if it be viewed in the proper light, to very old liturgical ideas. Despite the objection which some modern liturgists, Protestant as well as Catholic, have made to this presentation of the Sacred Book having a place in the service, I am convinced that it is so much in character in its place that it would be a deplorable mistake to abandon it. At the Coronation of H. M. Queen Elizabeth in 1953, an important rôle was assigned to the Moderator of the Presbyterian (i.e. the Established) Church of Scotland at this point in the rite; and the “innovation” cannot but be applauded when justly considered in its proper terms of reference.

¹⁰ An interesting exemplification of this state of mind is provided by a curious old print in the Rhetorica Christiana of Fra Didacus Valades. At the summit of a tree-like plant is seen the figure of the Pope, wearing the tiara and seated upon a throne. On either side of him, but at the ends of slightly lower branches stemming from that atop which he sits, are the cardinals and the patriarchs. Immediately underneath the Pope, at a lower level than cardinals and patriarchs, are two kneeling figures: one, Imperator; the other, Rex. Inasmuch as archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, and other representatives of the spiritual arm are relegated to yet lower positions, it evidently was the intent of the artist to exalt the curial (or what an ultramontane would term the apostolic), rather than the spiritual power, as against imperial and regal authority. Valades is described on the title-page of his book as having been “sometime Procurator General of the Friars Minor of the Regular Observance, at the Roman Curia”: he was, therefore in a position to know with some certainty what would be appreciated in that place. See Valades, D.: Rhetorica Christiana. (Perugia, apud Petrumiacobum Petrutium, 1579), p. 172Google Scholar.

¹¹ Cf. Bryce, James: The Holy Roman Empire. (New York, Macmillan, 1880), 8th edition; pp. 106–107Google Scholar; 108; 389–390.

¹² Inge, W. R.: Christian Ethics and Modern Problems. (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1930); p. 144Google Scholar.

¹³ Breitenfeld, W. C.: “In cujus manu sunt omnium potestates et omnium jura regnorum”; Dublin Review, no. 432 (January 1945), p. 17Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Loc. cit.; p. 24.

¹⁵ Evenett, H. Outram: “The Reformation”; Studies in Comparative Religion, ed. by Messenger, E. C.. (London, Catholic Truth Society, 1952)Google Scholar; no. R.127; p. 26.

¹⁶ Inge, W. R.: Liberty and Natural Rights; the Herbert Spencer lecture, 1934. (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1934), p. 26Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Correspondence of Charles, First Marquis Cornwallis; ed., with notes by Charles Ross, Esq. (London, John Murray, 1859), 2nd ed.; vol. 2, p. 340.

¹⁸ Cf., for example, de Maillane, Durand: Dictionnaire du Droit Canonique et de Pratique Bénéficiale conferé avec les maximes et la jurisprudence de France. (Paris, Bauche, 1761), t. 2; p. 759Google Scholar; s.v. “Souverain.”

¹⁹ As a modern Roman Catholic scholar expresses a concept akin to this: “Christian theologians and philosophers, following S. Paul, regard the monarch as God's minister, and hold that the authority of the ruler comes directly from God, even where, as in modern democracies, the subject of that authority is chosen by the people.” — Messenger, E. C.: “An introduction to Comparative Religion”; Studies in Comparative Religion, ed. by Messenger, E. C.. (London, Catholic Truth Society, 1952), no. R101; p. 13Google Scholar.

²⁰ For a view of Jewish kingship as analyzed from the standpoint of Christian theology, see the interesting and curious old work of Scacchus, Fr. Fortunatus: Sacrorum Elaeochrismatôn Myrothecia Tria. (Amsterdam, F. Halma, 1701)Google Scholar. I have not seen the recently published work of Professor Johnson; Johnson, Aubrey R.: Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel (Cardiff, University of Wales, 1955)Google Scholar.

²¹ In respect to these liturgical formularies, see the remarks of Dr. Breitenfeld in his essay already referred to; cf. note 13, supra. Until the present year these prayers (although no longer generally used) stood unchanged in the modern Roman Liturgy for Good Friday. However, the Missale Romanum has now (according to the terms of the “Decretum generale quo liturgicus hebdomadae sanctae Ordo instauratur,” 16 Novbr. 1955, of the Roman Congregation of Rites), been superseded, for the two week period extending from Passion Sunday to Easter Day, by the newly revised Ordo Hebdomadae Sanctae Instaurata in which these prayers have been modified. Similar action had already been taken by the same Congregation of Rites in respect to the prayer for the Emperor which has, for centuries, been one of the concluding clauses of the Praeconium Paschale or Laus Cerei, “Exultet jam angelica turba caelorum,” sung by the deacon of the Mass during the Holy Saturday service. According to the revised version of that service (the Easter Vigil — first given authorization by the Holy See in 1951, for optative use and now incorporated into the new Ordo, use of which becomes compulsory in 1956), this prayer was modified and made into a prayer in rather general terms for all constituted civil authority, suitable indeed for use under any form of government. In the new text we read: “… Respice etiam ad eos qui nos in potestate regunt, et ineffabili pietatis et misericordiae tuae munere, dirige cogitationes eorum ad justitiam et pacem, ut de terrena operositate ad caelestem patriam perveniant cum omni populo tuo…” — Ordo Sabbati Sancti quando Vigilia Paschalis instaurata peragitur. (Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1951), p. 19. This replaces the older form: “… Respice etiam ad devotissimum Imperatorem nostrum N … cujus tu, Deus, desiderii vota praenoscens, ineffabili pietatis, et misericordiae tuae munere, tranquillum perpetuae pads accomoda: et caelestem victoriam cum omni populo suo…” — Missale Romanum; Benedictio cerei in Sabbato Sancto.

This traditional form still standing in the pages of the Roman Missal has not quite passed into the limbo of things forgotten, although the imposition of the new Ordo as being of preceptive, rather than of merely optative, use seems to ensure that it shall be no longer used. As a matter of fact, of course, in modern times this clause has very generally been omitted save in the territories of the old Austrian Empire, where it continued in use well into the present century. The new clause has this advantage over the older one, that its less exact phraseology admits of its being used anywhere; but, on the other hand, from the viewpoint of the upholders of ancient traditions, it suffers the disadvantage of being a sort of liturgical equivalent to the political attitude of Leo XIII to the Third French Republic, an attitude so deeply resented by many in France during the closing years of the nineteenth century. Under the ancien régime, where diocesan variants of the Roman Rite were employed (that of Paris, for instance, remained in use until as recently as 1873), the terms of this clause had been so altered as to refer directly to the King of France. In the Paris Missal published in 1738 (of which there were about fourteen printings in the succeeding one hundred years), we find that this prayer is, as it were, telescoped into the preceding clause, with perhaps the intention of emphasizing the spiritual nature of the jurisdiction which, in the thought of the divines and canonists of the old France, properly appertained to the Crown. Thus we read: “… Precamur ergo te, Domine, ut nos famulos tuos, omnemque Clerum, et devotissimum populum, una cum beatissimo Papa nostro N … et Antistite nostro N … necnon et gloriosissimo Rege nostro N … quiete temporum concessa, in his paschalibus gaudiis, assidua protectione regere, gubernare, et conservare digneris…” — Missale Parisiense. (Paris, A. Le Clere, 1830).

I cite the edition of the Paris Missal published under Msgr. Hyacinthe de Quélen in 1830; it is here in agreement with that originally brought out by Msgr. Ch.-G. de Vintimille du Luc in 1738. At Lyon, the word “gloriosissimo” and the five words between “gaudiis” and “conservare” were omitted (cf. Missale sanctae Lugdunensis ecclesiae [Lyon, A. de la Roche, 1771]). These latter five words are also wanting in the form of the Praeconium Pasckale used at Fréjus, where the word “Christianissimo,” so long associated with the titular style of the Sovereigns of France, is most happily and appropriately substituted for “gloriosissimo” (cf. Missale Forojuliense. [Paris, Cl. Simon, 1786]). And Msgr. Duchesne has noted the existence of other variants of this clause, found in Exuhet rolls preserved in parts of Italy where the custom, introduced originally from Gallican sources, of thus solemnly blessing the Paschal Candle became so popular that the Popes were obliged, as he says, to permit its usage in “the suburbicarian diocese” as early as the sixth century, although they did not then consent to its adoption in their own church. See Duchesne, L. M. O.: Christian Worship: its origin and evolution; tr. by McClure, M. L.. (London, S.P.C.K., 5th ed., 1949); p. 252Google Scholar; p. 256; p. 539. Cf. the original, French, Origines du culte Chrétien. (Paris, Ernest Thorin, 1889), pp. 241–242Google Scholar.

²² Breitenfeld, W. C.: “In cujus manu sunt omnium potestates et omnium jura regnorum”; Dublin Review, no. 432 (January 1945), p. 22Google Scholar.

²³ Cf. his Summa Theologica, la 2dae., q. 91; a. 2.

²⁴ John, 19. M. Albert Camus has beautifully evoked the concept which saw the anointed king as a figure of Our Lord, the true Christus Domini, in a moving passage on what he very properly terms the passion of the priest-king: “… Louis XVI semble avoir, parfois, douté de son droit divin, quoi qu'il ait refusé systématiquement tous les projets de loi qui portaient atteinte à sa foi. Mais á partir du moment où il soupçonne ou connaît son sort, il semble s'identifier, son langage le montre, à sa mission divine, pour qu'il soit bien dit que l'attentat contre sa personne vise le roi-christ, l'incarnation divine, et non le chair effrayé de l'homme. Son livret de chevet, au Temple, est l'Imitation. La douceur, la perfection que cet homme, de sensibilité pourtant moyenne, apporte à ses derniers moments, ses remarques indifférentes sur tout ce qui est du monde extérieur et pour finir sa brave défaillance sur l'echafaud solitaire, devant ce terrible tambour qui couvrit sa voix, si loin de ce peuple dont il espérait se faire entendre, tout cela laisse imaginer que ce n'est pas Capet qui meurt, mais Louis de droit divin, et avec lui d'une certaine manière, la chrétienté temporelle. Pour mieux affirmer encore ce lien sacré son confesseur le soutient dans sa défaillance en lui rappelant sa ‘ressemblance’ avec le dieu de douleur. Et Louis XVI alors se reprend, en reprenant le langage de ce dieu: ‘Je boirai, dit il, le calice, jusqu'a la lie.’ Puis il se laisse aller, frémissant, aux mains ignobles du bourreau.” — Camus, A.: L'homme revolté. (Paris: Gallimard, 1951); pp. 153–154Google Scholar. It must remain a matter of astonishment to every observer that the Roman Church has not yet canonized this most faithful son and Christian martyr; for the essentially devout and dedicated motivations of Louis XVI cannot seriously be called into question, any more than reasonable doubt can be entertained that those who encompassed his death were purposively and radically dominated by ideals inherently inimical to Christianity. The compilers of the old Breviary of Versailles appear to have thought the king's canonization to be only a matter of time, for we read in one of the lessons for Matins on the Octave Day of St. Louis IX: “… Dum vero solemni apparatu Gallia principibus illis publicos honores persolvit quos Ecclesia inter sanctos retulit, sunt et alii pulrimi quibus aeternam laudem comparavere, sive integerrima vitae innocentia, sive amor in Deum ferventissimus, seu denique infracta in adversis animi fortitudo, aut mira ac pene divina in hostes iniquissimos et crudelissimos caritas. Hos quidem, antequam in beatorum numerum rite adscribantur, solemnibus votis non licet prosequi; at pietatem juvat interea ipsos corde memori recolere, et jam coelo receptos tacita spe ominari.” — Lectio vi ad officium nocturnum in Ludovici, Octava S. et Sanctorum, Festo et Sanctarutn e Regia Galliarum Stirpe Principum, apud Breviarium Versaliense … pars aestiva, die la Septembris. (Versailles, Angé, 1828); p. 636Google Scholar.

²⁵ Collect proper to First Vespers of the Feast of Christmas in Breviarium Versaliense, 1828.

²⁶ The strange notion, expressed by the first Abbot of Solcsmes, that the concept evoked by this prayer would make the Infant Savior a distasteful figure is but one of the many exaggerated strictures he offers upon the work of the French liturgical reformers of the ancien regime throughout the course of that great storehouse of polemical fireworks which he entitled Les Institutions Liturgiques. (Paris-Bruxelles: Société générate de Librairie Catholique; 2ème. éd., 1878–1885). I have endeavored in my forthcoming study of the French liturgical reform of the eighteenth century in its relations to Marian theology (of which an abstract, “Our Lady as intercessor for the departed: a glance at liturgical life in France under the ancien régime” has been published in Theological Studies, XV (September 1954); pp. 416–430), to subject certain of these strictures to detailed examination and evaluation along the lines suggested in the pages of the tenth volume of the Histoire littéraire du sentiment religieux en France, wherein the Abbé Henri Brémond has worked out valuable principles of interpretation in respect to the work of the great Latin hymnodists who flourished in seventeenth and eighteenth century France and whose work formed so notable a part of the liturgical renovation of their age. As a matter of fact, even after the time — some seventy years ago — when the last examples of the diocesan liturgies were unfortunately suffered to pass out of use in order to make way for the modern recension of the Curial form of the Latin Rite, specimens of these wondrously beautiful Latin hymns, which M. Brémond cites, have survived in local propria appended to the presently authorized Roman liturgy. Cardinal John Henry Newman has paid tribute to these hymns; cf. his Hymni Ecclesiae. (London, Macmillan, 1865); p. xiii. Nor has their influence and use been confined to Roman Catholic circles: a recent work — most unfortunately disfigured by a mountain of misprints — discusses in very interesting fashion the place which French Office Hymns of the reformed Breviaries play in the Hymnody of the Anglican Church to-day. See Pocknee, Cyril E.: The French Diocesan Hymns and their Melodies (London: The Faith Press; New York: Morehouse-Gorham, 1954)Google Scholar. It is reviewed by the present writer in Theological Studies 17 (June 1956); pp. 266–268.

²⁷ Missale Romanum; in vigilia Nativitatis Domini, ad Missam: Oratio.

²⁸ Tyrrell, George: Through Scylla and Charybdis. (London, Longmans, Green, 1907); p. 359Google Scholar.

²⁹ W. C. Breitenfeld: art. cit.; p. 19.

³⁰ Cf. note (45), infra.

³¹ Matth. 20.

³² Dawson, Christopher: The Making of Europe. (London, Sheed & Ward, 1932); p. 21Google Scholar. Cf. also the advice of Aristotle to the great Alexander “ut cogitaret imperium sibi contigisse ad benefaciendum toti generi humano.” — A. Ales: Omnes disputationes … de tota epistola ad Romanos. (s.L, 1553). We find, too, in the admonition addressed to a king before his Sacring according to the rite of the modern Pontificale Romanum, these words: “Et ita te geres, ut non ad tuam, sed Montotius populi utilitatem regnare.” Cf. Pont. Rom.; pars la: “De benedictione et coronatione regis.”

³³ Dawson, Christopher: Mediaeval Religion; the Forwood lectures, 1934. (New York, Sheed & Ward, 1934); p. 18Google Scholar. Cf. also de Coulanges, Numa-Denis Fustel: La Monarchie Franque. (Paris: Hachette, 1888); p. 545Google Scholar; p. 558; p. 562. Cherel, M. Albert has touched upon the problem of the continuity of the French monarchical tradition in his interesting study of La Pensée de Machiavel en France. (Paris, L'artisan du livre, 1935)Google Scholar. Whatever may have been the permutations that tradition underwent, it seems that Dr. Dawson has expressed himself with more than allowable exaggeration when, in writing of “The Tradition of Christian Monarchy,” he speaks of the “neo-pagan cultus of the Roi Soleil.” After all factors are taken into consideration, is it justifiably to be assumed that the concept exemplified by Louisle-Grand differs radically from that traditional to Western Christendom? See C. Dawson: art. cit.; The Month, n.s.9 [vol. cxcv], (May 1953); pp. 261–266. This same distinguished historian, writing more recently of ideas of the kingship propounded by Bossuet (in this matter an admittedly good exponent of the concept held in honor in his own time) contrasts them with “modern political ideas”; and he remarks that “such conceptions [i.e., those of Bossuet] have more in common with the ancient Oriental and Byzantine ideal of a sacred Monarchy…” — Dawson, C.: “The European Tradition”; The Catholic World, 179 (May 1954); p. 93Google Scholar. Despite what deprecatory connotations it may convey — whether designedly or not — to modern ears, such a comparison serves, surely, principally to emphasize the estrangement of “modern political ideas” from those inhering in the received Christian tradition; and, value judgments aside, introduces us subtily to the point at which a question may be raised as to which shows the better compatibility with the Gospel and the Liturgy. This is a difficulty I will not attempt here to resolve, taking refuge, once again, in the wise apophthegm of the late Dean Inge, already quoted, that “we have no right to assume that our political friends alone have the mind of Christ.” Cf. note (1), supra.

³⁴ Cited by Inge, W. R.: Christian Ethics and Modern Problems. (New York; Putnam, 1930); p. 140Google Scholar.

³⁵ Acton, J. E. D.: “Inaugural lecture on the study of history”; Lectures in Modern History; ed. Figgis, & Laurence, . (London, Macmillan, 1906); p. 3Google Scholar.

³⁶ Bloch, Marc: Les Rois Thaumaturges: étude sur le caractere surnaturel attribué à la puissance royale particulièrement en France et en Angleterre. Publication de la Faculté des Lettres de l'Université de Strasbourg; fascicule 19. (Strasbourg, Librairie Istra, 1924); p. 187, note 2Google Scholar.

³⁷ For suggestive analogy, cf. the treatment “de causalitate sacramentorum” of Cardinal Louis Billot in his De Ecclesiae Sacramentis. (Rome, 1924.)

³⁸ S. Aurelii Augustini Hipponensis Episcopi contra litteras Petiliani Donatistae Cirtensis episcopi libri tres; II; xlviii; apud Migne: Patr. Lat.; xl.

³⁹ A recent work, which I have not yet found an opportunity to consult carefully, is said to contain “a detailed examination of the meaning of the words sacramentum and mysterium in the writings of S. Augustine.” We are told by Mr. C. F. Kelley in The Downside Review of Autumn 1953, that M. Couturier has indexed all the uses of these terms in the great Doctor's writings, wherein they occur as we are informed no less than 2279 times; and has “classified them according to rite, symbol, or mystery, and tried to point out their underlying conformity.” See Kelley, C. F.: review of Études Augustiniennes, par H. Rondet. M. LeLandais, A. Lauras, Ch. Couturier (Paris: Aubier, 1953)Google Scholar, in The Downside Review 71 (1953); pp. 425–429. And on the very wide sense in which the term sacrament was used in the fourth century and made to include mysteries of the faith as well, see the illuminating paper by Professor Nock in Mnemosyne, 1952.

⁴⁰ Is it a desire to deny — or at least to ignore — this sameness which has led certain modern commentators to write as though the Christian ecclesia owed nothing to the worship of the ancient Temple or was not, in any sense, serving as the inspired continuator of the Hebraic tradition in the setting apart of the personage in the community who occupies so unique a place and discharges so awesome a function as does the deputy anointed of the Lord? The mere fact of interruption in the chronology of usage is not sufficiently demonstrative of an opposed origin for each of these solemnities; and it is, no doubt, to go too far along the path of those who are anxious to repudiate entirely the Tridentine claim that the sacerdotium Veteris Testamenti was translatum into the new Christian Economy — where it appeared as the Catholic priesthood — to think that the anointings of rulers at which Christian succeeded as officiants to Hebrew priests are absolutely unconnected and disassociated, particularly in view of the plain fact that the doings of the latter were so much read about by the former.

⁴¹ Apud Migne: Patr. Lat. lxxxix; 278.

⁴² See note (9), supra.

⁴³ James Bryce: op. cit.; p. 39.

⁴⁴ Cited by SirMarriott, John A. R.: Dictatorship and Democracy. (Oxford, 1935); p. 74Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Lord Bryce's enthusiasm for Prussia and his antipathy toward Austria have, to-day, a touch of tragi-comedy about them; in any case they crop up repeatedly in his great study of the Holy Empire. Nevertheless, one must wonder if it was mere dislike of the headship of Austria which led him to declare that “there is a sense in which France represents, and has always represented, the imperialist spirit of Rome more truly than those whom the Middle Ages recognized as the legitimate heirs of her name and dominion.” (Op. cit.; p. 379.) What he adds of the French, to the effect that “in their political character, whether it be the result of the five centuries of Roman rule in Gaul, or [be] rather due to the original instincts of the Gallic race, there may be found a claim, better founded than any which Napoleon put forward, to be the Romans of the modern world,” would seem to indicate some accord with the conclusions of the Abbé Dubos (cf. his Histoire de l'Établissement de la Monarchie. [Paris, Nyon, 1742]), and of M. Fustel de Coulanges, that is to say, with the view which sees the tale of Roman Gaul as narrating not the progress of a conquest, but rather the gradual establishment of institutions deeply representative of the character of both peoples.

⁴⁶ See the formulary “Accipe coronam regni” in the French Coronation Order. — Cérémonial du Sacre des Rois de France. (La Rochelle: Ch. Millon, 1931); p. 81Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ Durand de Maillane: op. cit.; tome II; pp. 759–760. Cf. also Charles Dewick: The Coronation Book of Charles V of France. HBS pub. no. xvi. (London, Harrison for the HBS, 1899), col. 85, citing Godefroy's edition of the Archbishop's Histoire de Charles VI. (Paris, 1653), annotations, p. 628.

⁴⁸ See the prayer, “Benedic, Domine, quaesumus, hunc Principem nostrum …”; Cérémonial du Sacre des Rois de France, cit. sup.; p. 57.

⁴⁹ Thurston, Herbert S.J.: “The Coronation”: Dublin Review, no. 149 (July 1911); p. 22Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Cérémonial du Sacre des Rois de France. (La Rochelle: Ch. Millon, 1931)Google Scholar; préface, p. 10. Cf. “La royauté devenait ainsi une sorte de sacrement imprimant caractère, un ordre à part.” — Renan, E.: Questions contemporains. (Paris: Michel Lévy [1868); p. 434Google Scholar.

⁵¹ Besse, J. M. O.S.B.: La tradition religieuse et nationale: Église et Monarchie. (Paris, Jouve, 1910)Google Scholar, cited in the 1931 edition of the Cérémonial. (La Rochelle, Ch. Millon); préface, pp. 10–11.

⁵² Marc Bloch: loc. cit. I have here slightly paraphrased his words, while following the sense closely. Recent opinion appears to coincide with what is here suggested. It was not until after I had written this passage, however, that I noted several indications that re-enforce the judgment that Fr. Thurston “had gone somewhat too far” in deprecating the sacred and ecclesiastical character of the kingship. Cf., for example, the essay by Smith, D. Cuthbert O.S.B.: “The Origin and development of the Coronation Liturgy”; The Clergy Review, ns 38 (April 1953); pp. 193–202Google Scholar, as well as some remarks by Mr. Finberg, H. P. R. in his study of “Changes in the Coronation Office”; The Tablet, London, 201 (9 May 1953); p. 388Google Scholar. In a subsequent issue of the latter journal (13 June 1953; p. 522), Fr. J. H. Crehan, S.J., of Heythrop College, Chipping Norton, Oxon., argues in favor of the Thurston thesis; but see the following number (20 June 1953), wherein Mr. Finberg ably defends his criticisms of its underlying ideas.

⁵³ See St. Peter Damian's text in Migne: Patr. Lat.; cxliv; col. 897c, seq.

⁵⁴ Damian thought that there were twelve. Tanquerey, M. Adolphe, in his Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae Specialis (Tournai, Desclée, 1914)Google Scholar; vol. 2dum. de Sacramentis … ed. xiva; pp. 193–197, offers a summary discussion of various opinions concerning their number. Students who have grown accustomed to a certain rigidity of approach to this question among modern Roman Catholic writers were no doubt surprised to read in a recent issue of a review published by the Dominicans of the English Province a citation, approvingly drawn, from Père Holstein, S.J., who writes in Éitudes of April, 1954: “It would be to restrain the priestly office if we were to limit it to the simple administration of the sacraments and acts of worship. Since the Middle Ages theological language in making the word ‘sacrament’ more precise has reserved it for the seven sanctifying acts…

But if we are to give its fulness to the word which was used so generously by St. Augustine to indicate the riches of the Christian mystery, where the visible and the human are the way of access to the invisible and of the transmission of grace, we could say that the priests are the ministers of this great and principal ‘sacrament’ of life which is the Church, the body of Christ.” Cf. The Life of the Spirit, VIII (June 1954), p. 579, under the heading “Extracts.” In the same connection, reference may also be made to an editorial [by Fr. Conrad Pepler, o.p.] in the same periodical, IX (June 1955); esp. pp. 543–544; and of course considerable light is thrown on the whole question by Professor Nock's article, referred to above, in footnote 39.

⁵⁵ Doctrine in the Church of England: the report of the Commission on Christian Doctrine appointed by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in 1922. (New York, The Macmillan Co. [1938]); p. 128. This report is less an authoritative expression of the doctrine of the Church of England than a statement of agreement and disagreement actually existing within the Church; but there does not seem any reason to doubt that the delineation it affords of contemporary Anglican theological thought is a reliable one.

⁵⁶ Ad. Tanquerey: op. cit.; p. 198; par. 271.

⁵⁷ Williams, N. P.: “The Origins of the Sacraments”; Essays Catholic and Critical by members of the Anglican Communion; ed. by Selwyn, Edward Gordon. (New York, The Macmillan Co., 1926); pp. 374–377Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Edmonds, D. Columba O.S.B.: “Coronation Rites”; The Dublin Review, no. 130 (April 1902); p. 243.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Cf. Ad. Tanquerey: op. cit.; pp. 182SS and pp. 256–258.

⁶⁰ Cf. the fact of the Emperor at his Coronation ministering in the place of the Deacon at the Papal Mass — see note (9), supra; and also Maskell, Wm.: Monumenta Ritualia Ecclesiae Anglicanae. (London, Pickering, 1847)Google Scholar; vol. 3; p. xiv, note 25; also Pontificale Romanum (Venice, apud Juntas, 1561); fol. 82. In an old description of the French Rite it is stated: “Et la le Roy fut vestu des draps de l'Église, comme un Diacre.” — Froissart, cited by Hope, W. H. St. John: “The King's Coronation Ornaments,” [part i]; The Ancestor, 1 (April 1902), p. 154Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Of the royal vestments in France the official Proès-verbal of later years said: “ces Vêtemens … représentent les habits de trois ordres de sous-diacre, de diacre, et de prêtre.” — Leber, M. C.: Les Cérémonies du Sacre. (Paris: Frémeau, 1825); p. 499Google Scholar.

⁶² The opinion, common to England and France, which saw in the Coronation vestments an indication of the Sovereign's possession of the three orders of ecclesiastical rank (the plenitude of which possession bishops of the Roman Rite, as many liturgists say, indicate to this day by wearing at Solemn Mass the vestments of the three orders imposed one upon an other), expressed itself frequently, as in a description of the Coronation of Henry VI, of whom it was said that after his Sacring, he was “dyspoyld of all his bysshoppes gere.” — Cott. MS. Nero C. IX; cited by Taylor, Arthur: The Glory of Regality. (London: R. & A. Taylor, 1820); p. 264Google Scholar. Charlemagne was often called “episcopus episcoporum,” and while all that is implied by that title seems not to have upset writers of the stripe of D. Guéranger in respect to the great representative of the Carolingian line, their pens seem to quiver in their indignant hands when they consider the suggestion that the same character may appropriately be ascribed, some eight hundred and fifty years later, to his inheritor, Louis-le-Grand.

⁶³ George Tyrrell: op. cit.; p. 361.

⁶⁴ Cf., for example, the ministerial functions alluded to above (note (9) supra), the importance of which has, as I believe, been misunderstood by many recent writers; and the somewhat more spectacular functions of Touching for the King's Evil in France and in England, and the solemn blessing of rings which the Sovereigns of England anciently performed on Good Friday. See Bloch, Marc: Les Rois Thaumaturges (Strasbourg, Istra, 1925)Google Scholar; and SirCrawfurd, Raymond: The King's Evil. (Oxford, The Clarendon, Press, 1911)Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Hocart, A. M.: Kingship. (London, Oxford University Press, 1927), p. 7Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ When Rome became a Republic, it was necessary to invent an official, the Rex Sacrorum, that he although disassociated from political power might perform the priestly functions of sacred kingship; see Nettleship and Sandys: Dictionary of Classical Antiquities; in verbo.

⁶⁷ John of Salisbury: Policraticus, IV; 2; tr. Dickinson; as cited by W. C. Breitenfeld: art. cit.; p. 19. Cf. also the reference to Aquinas, given in note (23), supra.

⁶⁸ Belloc, H.: Charles the First, King of England. (Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1933); p. 13Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Inge, W. R.: Vale. (London, Longmans, Green, 1934); pp. 116–117Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ Casserley, J. V. Langmead: “Christianity and Democracy”; Cross Currents IV (Fall 1954); pp, 317–318Google Scholar.

⁷¹ Inge: op. cit.; p. 12.

⁷² Fenton, J. C.: “The relation of the Christian State to the Catholic Church according to the Pontificale Romanum”; American Ecclesiastical Review, 123 (September 1950), pp. 114–118Google Scholar. Cf. also the article from the same hand, “Toleration and the Church-State Controversy”; AER 130 (May 1954); pp. 330–343Google Scholar.

⁷³ Shea, George W.: “Catholic doctrine and the religion of the State”; American Ecclesiastical Review, 123 (September 1950), pp. 161–174Google Scholar.

⁷⁴ Murray, J. C.: “The problem of the religion of the State: reply to G. W. Shea”; American Ecclesiastical Review, 124 (May 1951), pp. 327–352Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Pribilla, M.: “Dogmatische Intoleranz und bürgerliche Torleranz”; Stimmen der Zeit, 144 (April 1949), pp. 27–40Google Scholar. A translation of P. Pribilla's essay appeared “in slightly adapted form” in a publication of the English Province of the Society of Jesus; see The Month, ns 4 (October 1950), pp. 252–260; and there was published, in an American weekly, a considerable excerpt; see The Commonweal, 53 (17 November 1950); pp. 142–143; both facts being indicative of the wide interest which the expression of the German writer's sentiments has aroused in Catholic circles.

⁷⁶ Baudrillart, Alfred: Quatre cents ans de Concordat. (Paris, 1904)Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ Cf., in respect to certain aspects of this current controversy, a brief study by the present writer, already cited: see note (4), supra.

⁷⁸ de Pange, Jean: Le Roi très Chrétien. (Paris, Librairie Arthème Fayard, [1949])Google Scholar.

⁷⁹ Ibid.; introduction; p. 7.

⁸⁰ Williams, George H.: The Norman Anonymous of 1100 A.D.; Harvard Theological Studies, XVIII; issued by the Harvard Theological Review. (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1951)Google Scholar.

⁸¹ See note (8), supra.

⁸² Kern, F.: Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages; translated by Chrimes, S. B.. (Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1939)Google Scholar, esp. pp. 55 sq.

⁸³ It may be that a more careful examination of some of Professor Kern's conclusions would reveal more serious deficiencies. For example, he remarks on p. 56 of the work cited: “The practice mentioned above of appointing the Emperor to an honorary canonry at S. Peter's, actually remained characteristic of late mediaeval Imperial Coronations, but during the twelfth century the declaration: ‘Here the pope makes the king a clerk,’ vanished from the coronation rite.” Now, if we refer not only to the version given by M. Horoy (cited in note (9), supra), but also to the Fabre-Duchesne edition of the Liber Censuum, we will find that the words “ibique facit eum clericum” are most certainly in evidence in the Ordo of 1192. This is the Ordo associated with the name of Cardinal Cendo Savelli, a holder of high and important offices in the Roman Church under Innocent III; and who himself, in 1217, became pope as Honorius III. I do not readily understand how it can be said of a formulary found in a manuscript drawn up in gremio Curiae in 1192, that this formulary had “vanished during the twelfth century.” On the Ordo itself, cf. note (9), supra.

⁸⁴ Schramm, Percy Ernst: A history of the English Coronation … translated by Legg, L. G. Wickham. (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1937)Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ Woolley, R. M.: Coronation Rites, [Cambridge Handbooks of Liturgical Study, no. xvi]. (Cambridge University Press, 1915)Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ I am thinking, especially, of his oft-repeated assertion of the conviction — which I hold to be profoundly true — that liturgiology is properly rewarding and enduringly valuable only if its study be undertaken jointly with those historical, psychological, and sociological disciplines and habits of thought which raise it from a matter of concern with “mere rubrics” and the organizational detail of ritualism to the vital consideration of aspects of humane activity in devotional life expressive of the richest resources of the individual nature and the social activity of men. Cf., e.g., Bishop, E.: Liturgica Historica. (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1918); p. ixGoogle Scholar; p. 123.

⁸⁷ Maritain, Jacques: Man and the State. The Charles R. Walgreen Foundation Lectures for the study of American Institutions, 1949. (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, [1951])Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ Moody, Joseph N., ed.: Church and Society; Catholic social and political thought and movements, 1789–1950. (New York, Arts, Inc., 1954)Google Scholar.

⁸⁹ Leber, M. C.: Des Cérémonies du Sacre. (Paris, Frémeau, 1825)Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ “Remarquons,” says M. Millon, “Remarquons que le couronnement des empereurs et le sacre des rois sont des choses absolument distinctes. II ne faut pas les confondre.” — Ch. Millon, p. 6 of his preface to the edition of the French Cérémonial which he published at LaRochelle in 1931. But cf. what has been observed above, at pp. 237–238.

⁹¹ The Rev. Reginald Maxwell Woolley (in his Coronation Rites [Cambridge, 1918], p. 127) has pointed out that at the Coronation of Franz-Josef in the Basilica of Gran in 1867 (for which the Abbe Franz Liszt composed his well-known Krönungs-Messe), the form employed was that of the present Pontificale Romanum, and not that of the Hungarian Rite, which is, in any event, described by Woolley as being “very close to the later Roman rite.”

⁹² The very title of this study precludes any pretention to a full consideration of rites employed in the Christian East; but it would be necessary to advert at least to the vexed question as to how much and how directly Westerners would seem to have been influenced by the Rite of Constantinople.

⁹³ Williams, Charles: Shadows of Ecstasy. (New York, Pellegrini & Cudahy, 1950), pp. 109–110Google Scholar.

⁹⁴ Arthur M. Hocart: op. cit.; pp. 45–46.

⁹⁵ Pattison, Mark: Memoirs. (London, Macmillan, 1885); p. 78Google Scholar.