> such a prohibition against the celebration of more than one
> Divine Liturgy ( Eucharistic Liturgy ) by a priest, on a particular
> altar is still in effect in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Dear Josef,
This is very interesting. Presumably, this lies behind the
distinctive Byzantine, and Orthodox, practice of having multiple,
small churches in, say, a monastery, rather than one large one? I do
hope you can, as promised, dig up some more information on this, for
I, like Christopher, am very interested in this business of altars
and masses. In relation to Cluny, which I believe Christopher
mentioned, certainly one related aspect of the multiplication of
altars in western churches was the increasing numbers of private
masses - obits and anniversaries - that churches were obligated to
perform. Cluny collected such masses earlier than most churches, but
they became rather widespread in western Europe through the 12th
century, I believe. At Durham Cathedral, for example, in 1244, two
years after construction of the so-called Chapel of the Nine Altars,
the monks there were pledged to no less than 7332 masses a year. If
only one mass per day could be celebrated at each altar, that would
require at least 21 altars operating full speed ahead to fulfil this
enormous obligation. This is also the reason for the increasing
decrees specifying that monks had to take orders and say daily
masses, that appeared through the later 13th and 14th centuries.
Presumably, the inception of this practice of churches accepting
private donations in return for anniversary masses could only develop
after the principle had been well established that churches could
have as many altars as they could physically stuff in. I've never
read any systematic treatment of this (mind you, I've never read
Braun's multiple-volume work on the altar), but if anyone else can
shed light on this, pray do.
Cheers,
Jim Bugslag
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|