line of its doctrines." 1 And all this is but another form of stating the fact enunciated by S. Luke when he gives the reason for writing the book which is called by his name, and which was at the first meant for the special use of his friend Theophilus. It is, he says, "That thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed," literally "catechized," that is, taught by word of mouth.2 1 On the Use and Importance of Unauthoritative Tradition, Oxford, 1819. 2 S. Luke i. 3, 4. CHAPTER VIII THE CHURCH CALENDAR AND ITS USE "My Prayer Book is a casket bright, Yet when I first unclasp its lids, Embalming all our mortal life; The Church's Calendar." -Bishop Coxe, Christian Ballads. WE are now in a position to understand the importance of the system which we name the Christian Year. A neglected part of the Prayer Book, yet one of great practical value and historical interest, is the Calendar with its accompanying tables. Before speaking of the feasts and fasts and other holy days into which the Calendar divided the year, I must speak first of the year itself as the early Christians found it in the Greek and Roman cities where they lived. The Greeks and Romans had their own calendars. Under the Greeks the computation of the years was by what were called Olympiads, that is, the intervals between two successive celebrations of the Olympic games. These were terms of four years beginning with what we call the year 776 B.C. (Before Christ). Under the Romans their years were dated from the foundation of their city, Ab Urbe Condita, or A.U.C.; which, according to our reckoning, would be 753 B.C. The years of the Christian era, as we know, are dated from the birth of our Lord, or Anno Domini. But we must remember that this method was not adopted by Christians from the very beginning. A moment's thought will show us why. Such a method of reckoning the years would have clashed at once and uselessly with all the business, and social, and governmental life of their day. It is just as if Englishmen had adopted a new method of reckoning the years after the Norman Conquest, dating their time henceforth from A.D. 1066; or as if Americans after the war of the Revolution had made a new beginning of their calendar with the year of the Declaration of Independence, 1776; or, as the French revolutionists actually did when Year I was fixed to begin on September 22, 1792, the date of the proclamation of the Republic. It was not until after the year 313, when the empire became nominally Christian, that such a use was possible; and it was not until two centuries later, namely, in the year 541, that the custom was introduced of dating the time from the year of our Lord's birth. This was brought about by the work of a man named Dionysius Exiguus, or The Little, a learned and devout monk, a Scythian by birth, but residing in Rome. This late date of the adoption of Anno Domini, or "the Year of the Lord," for universal reckoning accounts for an error which we now know crept into the computation. Modern astronomical and historical studies show us that our Lord was born four years earlier than Dionysius supposed, so that January 1, 541, as he numbered it, should have been January 1, 545. This error has never been corrected. In considering the Church Calendar it is important to remember that a calendar is different from an almanac. An almanac has to be renewed every year. A calendar remains unchanged through all the centuries because it is "a permanent distribution of time on astronomical principles, adapted to civil and secular affairs as well as to religious." 1 It gets its name from a Greek word kaleo, signifying "to call." "The first day of the month was named by the ancient Romans the Calends, because on that day the people were called or summoned by the Pontifex into the Curia Calabra, and there informed of the holy days of the [coming] month." 2 The Greeks had no Calends, hence the saying "It will be paid on the Greek Calends," that is, never. The civil calendar as we have it to-day we owe to the genius of Julius Cæsar. In his time the years were measured by the moon instead of by the sun, the months being literally moonths. By this imperfect method, which gave only 355 days to the year, with intercalary days added occasionally by way of correction, summer and winter would in time have changed places, and already the seasons were two months in arrears. With the advice of a learned man, Sosigenes, Cæsar fixed on 365 and a quarter days as the approximately true solar year; one day was added every fourth or "leap" year; the months were given the names and number of days as at present; two months, November and December, were skipped, and what would have been November 1, 45 B.C. was made January 1, 44 B.C., and the beginning of the new or Julian calendar. But even this Julian year of 365 and a quarter days was only approximately correct, and after sixteen centuries had passed it was found by astronomers that the calendar was again slow by about ten days, so that what was March 11, 1582, was really the day of the vernal equinox, and should have been March 21. It was decreed therefore by Pope Gregory for the Churches in communion with Rome, after consultation with learned men, that October 5, 1582, should be reckoned as October 15. This "New Style" (N.S.), as it was called, was not accepted in England, probably through religious prejudice, until 1752, when the English Parliament abandoned the "Old Style" (O.S.) and adopted the New. By this time the error had increased to nearly twelve days instead of ten, which made Christmas Day of that year (O.S. 1752) to become the feast of the Epiphany (N.S. 1753), and caused the ignorant country folk to complain that they had been robbed of twelve days of their life. For this reason also the Epiphany came to be called by them "Old Christmas." The Greek and Russian Churches still retain the Old Style, but there is at present in Russia a movement to bring about the adoption of the New Style, and so bring the Oriental Churches into accord with the rest of the Christian world. |