Preface
PREFACE
Knowledge, in a great measure, forms the true dignity and happiness of man: it is that by which he holds an honorable rank in the scale of being, and by which he is rendered capable of adding to the felicity of his fellow-creature. Every attempt, therefore, to enlarge its boundaries, and facilitate its acquisition must be considered as worthy of our attention and regard. The present work is designed to promote these valuable and important ends.
The plan of conveying knowledge by dictionaries has been long established, and well received in the republic of letters. A dictionary, however, of a religious and ecclesiastical nature was still a desideratum in the religious world; for although we have had dictionaries which explained Scripture terms, yet it is evident these could not embrace the history of the church since the sacred canon was concluded, nor explain the numerous terms which have been used; nor, indeed, point out the various sects and denominations which have subsisted since that time. I do not mean, by these remarks, to depreciate the valuable works above referred to; I am sensible of their excellencies, and I have no wish to undervalue them in order to exalt my own. This work, however, is of a different nature, as the reader will easily see, if he takes the trouble to compare and examine.
There may, doubtless, be defects in this publication which may have escaped my attention; but whoever considers the various books that must have been consulted; the discriminations that were necessary to be made; the patient investigation required; and the toil of selecting, transcribing, and the probability of its being useful to others, greatly encouraged me in its prosecution. Besides, to be active, to be useful, to do something for the good of mankind, I have always considered as the honor of an intelligent being. It is not the student wrapped up in metaphysical subtleties; it is not the recluse living in perpetual solitude; it is not the miser who is continually amassing wealth, that can be considered as the greatest ornaments or the greatest blessings to human society:
it is rather the useful than the shining talent that is to be coveted.
Perhaps it may be said, the work is tinctured too much with my own sentiments, and that the theology is too antiquated to please a liberal, philosophizing, and refined age. In answer to this, I observe, that I could do no other, as an honest man, than communicate what I believed to be the truth. It is a false liberality to acquiesce with every man’s opinion, to fall in with every man’s scheme, to trifle with error, or imagine there is no difference between one sentiment and another: yet, notwithstanding this declaration, I trust the features of bigotry are not easily discernible in this work; and that, while I have endeavored to carry the torch of Truth in my hand, I have not forgotten to walk in the path of Candor.
It is almost needless here to say, that I have availed myself of all the writings of the best and most eminent authors I could obtain. Whatever has struck me as important in ecclesiastical history; whatever good and accurate in definition; whatever just views of the passions of the human mind; whatever terms used in the religious world; and whatever instructive and impressive in the systems of divinity and moral philosophy, I have endeavored to incorporate in this work. And in order to prevent its being a dry detail of terms and of dates, I have given the substance of what has been generally advanced on each subject, and occasionally selected some of the most interesting practical passages from our best and celebrated sermons. I trust, therefore, it will not only be of use to inform the mind, but impress the heart; and thus promote the real good of the reader. The critic, however, may be disposed to be severe; and it will, perhaps, be easy for him to observe imperfections. But be this as it may: I can assure him I feel myself happy in the idea that the work is not intended to serve a party, to encourage bigotry, nor strengthen prejudice, but “for the service of Truth, by one who would be glad to attend and grace her triumphs; as her soldier, if he has had the honor to serve successfully under her banner; or as a captive tied to her chariot wheels, if he has, though undesignedly, committed any offence against her.” After all, however, what a learned author said of another work I say of this:- “If it have merit, it will go down to posterity; if it have none, the sooner it dies and is forgot the better.”
by: CHARLES BUCK.
Fuente: Theological Dictionary
preface
(Latin: praefatio, an introduction)
The prayer preceding the Canon of the Mass, beginning with the words Sursum corda, and ending with the prayer Sanctus, sanctus, etc. This is an introduction to the Canon of the Mass and it is essentially a prayer of thanksgiving for the benefits of God. It is the first part of the Eucharistic prayers.
Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary
Preface
(Lat. Præfatio).
The first part of the Eucharistic prayers (Anaphora or Canon) in all rites, now separated from the rest by the singing of the “Sanctus”. HISTORY. — According to the idea of thanksgiving which, after the example of the Last Supper (Matthew 26:27; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:17, 19; 1 Corinthians 11:24). forms a fundamental element of the Eucharistic service, all liturgies begin the Anaphora, the consecration-prayer, by thanking God for His benefits. Almost every account we have of the early liturgy mentions this (Didache ix, 2-3; x, 2-4; xiv, 1; Justin “I Apol.” LXV, iii, 5; LXVII, v). Clement of Rome quotes a long example of such a thanksgiving-prayer (1 Corinthians 60-61). So prominent was this idea that it has supplied the usual name for the whole service (Eucharist, eucharistia). The thanksgiving-prayer enumerated the benefits for which we thank God, beginning generally with the creation, continuing through the orders of nature and grace, mentioning much of Old Testament history, and so coming to the culminating benefit of Christ’s Incarnation, His Life and Passion, in which the story of the Last Supper brings us naturally to the words of institution. In most of the earliest liturgies this enumeration is of considerable length (e.g. Apost. Const., VIII; XII, iv-xxxix; Alexandria, see Brightman, infra, 125-33; Antioch, ibid., 50-2). It is invariably preceded by an invitation to the people: “Lift up your hearts”, and then: “Let us give thanks to the Lord”, or some such formula. The people having answered: “It is right and just”, the celebrant continues, taking up their word: “It is truly right and just first of all to praise [or to thank] thee”; and so the thanksgiving begins.
Such is the scheme everywhere. It is also universal that at some moment before the recital of the words of institution there should be a mention of the angels who, as Isaias said, praise God and say: “Holy, holy holy” etc., and the celebrant stops to allow the people to take up the angels’ words (so already Clem., “I Cor.” xxxiv, 6-7, and all liturgies). He then continues his thanksgiving-prayer. But the effect of this interruption is to cut off the part before it from the rest. In the Eastern rites the separation is less marked; the whole prayer is still counted as one thing — the Anaphora. In the West the Sanctus has cut the old Canon completely in two; the part before it, once counted part of the Canon (see CANON OF THE MASS), is now, since about the seventh century (Ord. Rom., I, 16), considered a separate prayer, the Preface. The dislocation of the rest of the Canon which no longer continues the note of thanksgiving but has part of its Intercession (Te igitur) immediately after the Sanctus, and its silent recital, whereas the Preface is sung aloud, have still more accentuated this separation. Nevertheless, historically the Preface belongs to the Canon; it is the first part of the Eucharistic prayer, the only part that has kept clearly the idea of giving thanks. The name Præfatio” (from præfari) means introduction, preface (in the usual sense) to the Canon. In the Leonine and Gelasian books this part of the Canon has no special title. It is recognised by its first words: “Vere dignum” (Leonine) or the initials “V.D.” (Gelasian). In the Gregorian Sacramentary it is already considered a separate prayer and is headed “Præfatio”. Walafrid Strabo calls it “præfatio actionis” )”actio” for Canon; “De eccl. rerum exord. et increm.” in P.L., CXIV, 948). Sicardus of Cremona says it is “sequentis canonis prælocutio et præparatio” (Mitrale in P.L., CCXIII, 122). Durandus writes a whole chapter about the Preface (De div. off., IV, xxxiii). He explains its name as meaning that it “precedes the principal sacrifice”.
The first Roman Prefaces extant are those in the Leonine Sacramentary. They already show the two characteristic qualities that distinguish the Roman Preface from the corresponding part of other rites, its shortness and changeableness. The old thanksgiving (before the Sanctus) contained a long enumeration of God’s benefits, as in Clement of Rome and the Apostolic Constitutions. It is so still in the Eastern rites. At Rome, before the Leonine book was written, this enumeration was ruthlessly curtailed. Nothing is left of it but a most general allusion: “always and everywhere to thank thee”. But the mention of the angels which introduces the Sanctus had to remain. This, comparatively detailed, still gives the Roman Preface the character of a prayer chiefly about the angels and makes it all seem to lead up to the Sanctus, as the medieval commentators notice (e.g. Durandus, ibid.). The corresponding prayer in Apost. Const. (VIII) contains two references to the angels, one at the beginning where they occur as the first creatures (VIII, viii), the other at the end of the commemoration of Old Testament history (originally written in connection with Isaias’s place in it) where they introduce the Sanctus (XII, xxvii). It seems probable, that at Rome with the omission of the historical allusions these two references were merged into one. The “Et ideo” then would refer to the omitted list of favours in the Old Testament (at present it has no special point). So we should have one more connection between the Roman Rite and the Apost. Const. (see MASS, LITURGY OF).
The other special note of our Preface is its changeableness. Here, too, the East is immovable, the West changes with the calendar. The Preface was originally as much part of the variable Proper as the Collect. The Leonine book supplies Prefaces all through for the special Masses; it has 267. The Gelasian has 54; the Gregorian has 10 and more than 100 in its appendix. In these varied Prefaces allusions to the feast, the season, and so on, take the place of the old list of Divine favours.
The preface after the ekphonesis of the Secret (Per omnia sæcula sæculorum — here as always merely a warning) begins with a little dialogue of which the versicles or equivalent forms are found at this place in every liturgy. First “Dominus vobiscum” with its answer. The Eastern rites, too, have a blessing at this point. “Sursum corda” is one of the oldest known liturgical formulas (St. Cyprian quotes it and its answer, “De Orat. Dom.”, xxxi, in “P.L.”, IV, 539; Apost. Const.: Ano ton noun). It is an invitation to the people eminently suitable just before the Eucharistic prayer begins. Brightman (infra, 556) quotes as its source Lamentations 3:41. Equally old and universal is the people’s answer: “Habemus [corda] ad Dominum” a Greek construction: Echomen pros ton kyrion, meaning: “we have them [have placed them] before the Lord”. Then follows the invitation to give thanks, which very early included the technical idea of “making the Eucharist”: “Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro”. So with verbal variations in all rites. The Jewish form of grace before meals contains the same form: “Let us give thanks to Adonai our God” (in the Mishna, “Berachoth”, 6). The people answer with an expression that again must come from the earliest age: “Dignum et iustum est”. This, too, is universal (Apost. Const.: Axion kai dikaion). Its reduplication suggests a Hebrew parallelism. The celebrant takes up their word and begins the preface always: “Vere dignum et iustum est” (Apost. Const.: Axion hos alythos kai dikaion). The beginning of the Roman Preface is approached among the others most nearly by Alexandria. Our present common Preface represents the simplest type, with no allusions; all the old list of benefits is represented by the words “per Christum Dominum nostrum” only. This is the Preface given in the Canon of the Gelasian book (ed. Wilson, p. 234). Most of the others are formed by an intercalation after these words. But there are three types of Preface distinguished by their endings. The first and commonest introduces the angels thus: “per quem maiestatem tuam laudant angeli”; the second (e.g. for Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Ascension, Apostles) begins that clause: “et ideo cum angelis”; the third and rarest (now only the Whit-Sunday Preface) has: “Quapropter . . . sed et supernæ virtutes”. The Trinity Preface (“quam laudant angeli”) is a variant of the first form. All end with the word: “dicentes” (which in the first and second form refers to us, in the third form to the angels), and the people (choir) continue the sentence: “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus”, etc.
There are many prayers for other occasions (chiefly blessings and consecrations) formed on the model of the Preface, with the “Sursum corda” dialogue, beginning “Vere dignum” etc. From their form one would call them Prefaces, though not Eucharistic ones. Such are the ordination prayers, two at the consecration of a church, the blessing of the font, of palms (but this was once a Mass Preface), part of the præconium paschale. They are imitations of the Eucharistic Preface, apparently because its solemn form (perhaps its chant) made it seem suitable for other specially solemn occasions too. The Leonine, Gelasian, and Gregorian Sacramentaries have our ordination prayers, but not yet cast into this Preface form. But through the Middle Ages the Preface form was very popular, and a great number of blessings are composed in it. This is only one more case of the common medieval practice of modelling new prayers and services on others already well-known and popular (compare the hymns written in imitation of older ones, etc.).
II. THE PREFACE IN OTHER RITES
The name “Præfatio” is peculiar to Rome and to Milan, which has borrowed it from Rome. In no other rite is there a special name; it is simply the opening clauses of the Anaphora. In the Syrian-Byzantine-Armenian group, though this part of the Eucharistic prayer is still longer than the Roman Preface and has kept some list of benefits for which we thank God, it is comparatively short. The Byzantine Liturgy of St. Basil has a fairly long form. As usual, there is a much shorter form in that of St. Chrysostom. The Armenian form is the shortest and mentions only the Incarnation. But in the Egyptian group of liturgies the whole Intercession prayer is included in what we should call the Preface, so that this part is very long. This is the most conspicuous characteristic of the Alexandrine type. The prayer begins in the usual way with a list of favours (creation of the world and of man, the Prophets, Christ). Then abruptly the Intercession begins (“And we pray and entreat thee . . .”); joined to it are the memory of the saints and the diptychs of the dead, and then equally abruptly, the thanksgiving is resumed and introduces the Sanctus (Brightman, 125-132). It is clear that this represents a later amalgamation; the two quite different prayers are joined awkwardly, so that the seams are still obvious. In all Eastern rites the Preface, or rather what corresponds to it, is said silently after the first dialogue, ending with an ekphonesis to introduce the Sanctus (the Alexandrine Liturgy has another ekphonesis in its Intercession). This accounts for its being less important an element of the service than in the West.
The Gallican Rite had a great number of Prefaces for feasts and seasons. Even more than in the old Roman Liturgy this prayer was part of the Proper, like the Collects and Lessons. But it was not called a Preface. Its heading in the Gallican books was “Contestatio” or “Immolatio”; the Mozarabic title is “Inlatio”. These names really apply to the whole Eucharistic prayer and correspond to our name Canon (Inlatio — Anaphora). But as later parts had special names (“Vere Sanctus”, “Post sanctus”, “Post pridie”, etc.), these general titles were eventually understood as meaning specially the part before the Sanctus. Now the Mozarabic “Inlatio” may be taken as equivalent to the Roman “Præfatio”. The Ambrosian Rite has adopted the Roman name. Both Mozarabic and Ambrosian Rites keep the Gallican peculiarity of a vast number of Prefaces printed each as part of the Proper.
III. PRESENT USE
The Roman Missal now contains eleven Prefaces. Ten are in the Gregorian Sacramentary, one (of the Blessed Virgin) was added under Urban II (1088-99). The pope himself is reported to have composed this Preface and to have sung it first at the Synod of Guastalla in 1094. The Prefaces form a medium between the unchanging Ordinary and the variable Proper of the Mass. They vary so little that they are printed in the Ordinary first with their solemn chants, then with the ferial chants, and lastly without notes for Low Mass. The appendix of the new (Vatican) Missal gives a third “more solemn” chant for each, merely a more ornate form of the solemn chant, to be used ad libitum. Otherwise the solemn chant is to be used for semi-doubles and all days above that, the simple chant for simples, ferias, and requiems. The Preface is chosen according to the usual rule for all proper parts of the Mass. If the feast has one, that is used; otherwise one takes that of the octave or season. All days that do not fall under one of these classes have the common Preface, except that Sundays that have no special Preface have that of the Holy Trinity (so the decree of Clement XIII, 3 Jan., 1759). Requiems have the common Preface, as also votive Masses, unless these latter come under a category that has a proper one (e.g., of the Blessed Virgin, the Holy Ghost, etc.). Votive Masses of the Blessed Sacrament, like Corpus Christi, have the Christmas Preface. There are other extensions of use (the Preface of the Holy Cross for the Sacred Heart, etc.), all of which are noted in the Propers of the Missal and in the Calendar.
At High Mass after the last Secret the celebrant at the middle of the altar, resting his hands on it, sings: “Per omnia sæcula sæculorum” etc.; the choir answers each versicle. He lifts up the hands at “Sursum corda”; at “Gratias agamus” he joins them, and at “Deo nostro” looks up and then bows. At “Vere dignum” he lifts the hands again and so sings the Preface through. After “dicentes” he joins them and bowing says the Sanctus in a low voice, while the choir sings it. The deacon and subdeacon stand in line behind him all the time, bow with him at the words “Deo nostro”, and come to either side to say the Sanctus with him. At Low Mass all is said, the server answering the dialogue at the beginning.
———————————–
BRIGHTMAN, “Eastern Liturgies” (Oxford, 1896); FELTOE, “Sacramentarium Leonianum” (Cambridge, 1896); WILSON, “The Gelasian Sacramentary” (Oxford, 1894); “Sacramentum Gregorianum” and “Ordines Romani” in “P.L”., LXXVIII; GIHR, “Das heilige Messopfer” (Freiburg im Br., 1897), pp. 513-524; RIETSCHEL, “Lehrbuch der Liturgik”, I (Berlin, 1900) 378-380; LE VAVASSEUR, “Manuel de Liturgie,” I (Paris, 1910), 297-298; 467-468.
ADRIAN FORTESCUE Transcribed by Tony de Melo
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIICopyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, June 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia
Preface
This book, like most of my books, began life in the Thai language when I lived with my wife and family in Bangkok. The aim was to produce material that would be a credible aid to biblical knowledge, but in an easy-read non-technical style that any Christian could understand.
First came a series of mini-commentaries that later appeared in English as the eight-volume Bridge Bible Handbooks (now combined into the one-volume Bridgeway Bible Commentary). Only after a commentary was available on the whole Bible did I think about writing a Bible Dictionary. I am convinced this is the best sequence to follow, not just in publishing but in Bible study in general. We need first to understand the biblical books if we are to have confidence in using material from those books to study biblical topics.
The original English title of this book used the word Directory rather than Dictionary, partly to appeal to readers who may not want a book that sounds academic, and partly because the book does not, like a proper dictionary, deal with all the words and names in the Bible. But over the years I have found that people refer to the book as a dictionary anyway, so this edition has changed the title to Bridgeway Bible Dictionary. The bridge element in the title reflects the aim of all Bridgeway books, which is to bridge two gaps at once the gap between the word of the Bible and the world of today, and the gap between the technical reference works and the ordinary reader.
Gods Word gives meaning to life, but only if people read and obey it. The trouble is many do not read it as they should, the reason often being that they do not understand it. My desire is that this book will help give the kind of help that will encourage people to read and enjoy the Bible. And when that happens, they will soon find that the Bible has its own way of making itself relevant to them.
Don Fleming
Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary
Preface
The Editors aim has been to provide a complete and independent Dictionary of the Bible in a single volume and abreast of present-day scholarship.
1. Complete.The Dictionary gives an account of all the contents of the Bible, the articles being as numerous as in the largest dictionaries, but written to a different scale. The Index of the Dictionary of the Bible in five volumes by the same Editor has been taken as basis, and such additions made to it as the latest research has suggested. The persons, places, and important events in the Bible are described. There are articles on the Biblical theology and ethics, on the antiquities, and on the languagesEnglish as well as Hebrew and Greek. The books of the Bible are carefully explained in their origin, authorship, and contents; and full account is taken of the results of literary criticism and archological discovery.
2. Independent.The Dictionary is not a condensation of the five-volume Dictionary. It is not based upon it or upon any other dictionary. It is a new and independent work. All the signed, and most of the unsigned, articles are written afresh, and (with few exceptions) by different authors from those who treated the same subjects in the larger Dictionary. Even when the wording of the large Dictionary has been retained, as in the case, for example, of proper names of minor importance, every statement has been verified anew. The single-volume Dictionary will thus be found as fresh and full of life as the largest dictionaries are.
3. In a single volume.This is to bring the contents of the Bible, in accordance with present scholarship, within reach of those who have not the means to buy or the knowledge to use the Dictionary in five volumes. This Dictionary contains no Hebrew or Greek except in transliteration. It is however, a large volume, and it would have been larger had not the utmost care been taken to prevent overlapping. For the great subjects are not treated with that excessive brevity which makes single-volume dictionaries often so disappointing. The space has been so carefully husbanded that it has been found possible to allow 24 pages to the article on Israel; 23 pages to the article on Jesus Christ; and half that number to a further article on the Person of Christ. There is another way in which space has been saved. The whole subject of Magic Divination and Sorcery, for example, has been dealt with in a single article. That article includes many sub-topics, each of which is found in its own place, with a cross-reference to this comprehensive article; and when the word occurs in this article it is printed in black type, so that no time may be lost in searching for it.
4. Abreast of present Scholarship.That is to say, of the average scholarship of its day. There are many reasons why a Dictionary of the Bible should not take up an extreme position on either side. But the reason which has proved to be most conclusive, is the impossibility of getting the whole of the work done satisfactorily by either very advanced or very conservative scholars. They are not numerous enough. And there could be no satisfaction in entrusting work to men who were chosen for any other reason than their knowledge of the subject.
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Preface
This volume is designed to render to a wider circle, alike of clergy and of laity, the service which, as is generally admitted, has been rendered to the learned world by The Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines, published under the editorship of Dr. Wace and the late Dr. Wm. Smith, about twenty years ago, in four large volumes. That work covered the whole of the first eight centuries of the Christian era, and was planned on a very comprehensive scale. It aimed at giving an account, not merely of names of importance, but of all names, however small, concerned in the Christian literature of those eight centuries; and to illustrate its extent and minuteness, it may be enough to mention that no fewer than 596 Johns are recorded in due order in its columns. The surviving Editor may be pardoned for expressing his satisfaction that the work is now recognized, abroad as well as at home, as a valuable work of reference, being constantly quoted alike in the great Protestant Cyclopaedia of Herzog, in its third edition now happily complete, and in the Patrology of the learned Roman Catholic Professor at Munich, Dr. Bardenhewer. To the generous band of great English scholars to whose unstinted labours the chief excellences of that work are due, and too many of whom have now passed away, it is, or it would have been, a welcome satisfaction to find it described in the Patrology of that scholar as “very useful, relatively complete and generally reliable.”
But that work was mainly adapted to the use of men of learning, and was unsuited, both by its size and expense, and by the very wideness of its range, for the use of ordinary readers, or even for the clergy in general. In the first place, the last two centuries of the period which it covered, although of immense interest in the history of the Church, as including the origins of the Teutonic civilization of Europe, have not an equal interest with the first six as exhibiting primitive Christianity in its purer forms. With the one important exception of John of Damascus, the Fathers of the Church, so called, alike in East and West, fall within the first six centuries, and in the West the series is closed by St. Gregory the Great, who died in the year 604. English divines accordingly, since the days of Bp. Jewel, have, like Bp. Cosin, appealed to the first six centuries of the Church as exhibiting, in doctrine as well as in practice, subject to Holy Scripture, the standards of primitive Christianity. Those six centuries, consequently, have a special interest for all Christian students, and particularly for those of our own Church, and deserve accordingly some special treatment. It was thought, therefore, that a Dictionary of Christian Biography which confined itself to this formative and authoritative period of the Church’s history would be of special interest and service, not only to the clergy, but also to the Christian laity and to students for Holy Orders.
But the limitation of such a work to this period at once disembarrassed our pages of the mass of Teutonic, and sometimes almost pagan, names with which, after the settlement of the barbarians in Europe, we were overwhelmed; and thus of itself rendered it possible to bring the work into much narrower compass. Moreover, a mass of insignificant names, which the principles of scholarly completeness obliged us to introduce into the larger Dictionary, were not needed for the wider circle now in contemplation. They were useful and necessary for purposes of learned reference, but they cast no light on the course and meaning of Church history for ordinary readers. We have had to exercise a discretion (which may sometimes seem to have been arbitrary) in selecting, for instance, from the 596 Johns just mentioned those which were the most valuable for such readers as we had in view; and for the manner in which we have exercised that discretion we must trust ourselves to the indulgent judgment of our readers. The publisher gave us generous limits; but it seemed to him and to ourselves indispensable for the general usefulness of the Dictionary that it should be restricted to one volume; and we were thus, with respect to the minor names, obliged to omit many which, though of some interest, seemed to be such as could be best dispensed with.
By omissions of this nature we have secured an object which will, we are sure, be felt to be of inestimable value. We have been able to retain, with no material abbreviation, the admirable articles on the great characters of early Church history and literature which were contributed, with an unselfish devotion which can never be sufficiently acknowledged, by the great scholars who have been the glory of the last generation or two of English Church scholarship, and some of whom are happily still among us. To mention only some of the great contributors who have passed away, such articles as those of Bp. Westcott on Clement of Alexandria and Origen, Bp. Lightfoot on Eusebius, Archbp. Benson on St. Cyprian, Dr. Bright on St. Athanasius and kindred subjects, Dr. Salmon on varied subjects of the first importance, Bp. Stubbs on early English history, and some by the learned Professor Lipsius of Jena, have a permanent value, as the appreciations of great characters and moments of Church history and literature by scholars and divines who have never been surpassed, and will hardly be equalled again, in English sacred learning. We deemed it one of the greatest services which such a work as this could render that it should make accessible to the wide circle in question these unique masterpieces of patristic and historical study. It has therefore been one of our first objects to avoid, as far as possible, any abbreviation of the body of these articles. We have occasionally ventured on slight verbal condensation in secondary passages, and we have omitted some purely technical discussions of textual points, and of editions. But in the main the reader is here placed in possession, within the compass of a moderate volume, of what will probably be allowed to be at once the most valuable and the most interesting series of monographs, on the chief characters and incidents of early Church history, ever contributed to a single undertaking by a band of Christian scholars. We feel it no more than a duty to pay this tribute of gratitude and admiration to the great divines, to whose devotion and learning all that is permanently valuable in these pages is due, and we are confident that their monographs, thus rendered generally available, will prove a permanent possession of the highest value to English students of Church history.
We must further offer the expression of our cordial gratitude to several living scholars, who have contributed new articles of similar importance to the present volume, in place of some in the original edition which the lapse of time or other circumstances had rendered less valuable than the rest. In particular, our warmest thanks are due to Dr. Robertson, the present Bp. of Exeter, who has substituted for the sketch of St. Augustine contributed to the original edition by an eminent French scholar, M. de Pressens, a study of that great Father, similar in its thoroughness to the other great monographs just mentioned. We are also deeply indebted to the generosity of Chancellor Lias for fresh studies of such important: subjects as Arius and Monophysitism; and a valuable account of the Nestorian Church has been very kindly contributed by the Rev. W. A. Wigram, who, as head of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Assyrian Mission, possesses unique qualifications for dealing with the subject. We have to thank also the eminent learning of Dr. A. J. Mason for an article on Gaudentius of Brescia, who was unaccountably omitted from the larger work, and whose name has of late acquired new interest. The gratitude of the Editors, is also specially due to Dr. Knowling and Dr. Gee, of Durham University, for their assistance in some cases in which articles required to be supplemented or corrected by the most recent learning.
In all cases where the writers of the original articles are still living they were afforded the opportunity, if they desired it, of revising their work and bringing it up to date, and of checking the condensations: though the Editors and not the writers must take the responsibility for the latter and also, in most cases, for bibliographical additions. The Editors desire gratefully to record their appreciation of the assistance thus readily and kindly rendered by most of the original writers who are still spared to us, and, as an example, we are glad to thank the Rev. E. B. Birks for his very thorough revision of his article on the Epistle to Diognetus.
Cross-references are inserted, where needed, on the principle adopted in Murray’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary (to which this is intended to be a companion volume in size, appearance, and price)-namely, the name of the article to which a cross-reference is intended is printed in capitals within brackets, but without the brackets when it occurs in the ordinary course of the text.
In the headings of articles the numbers in brackets after names which are common to more than one person are retained as in the large edition, to facilitate reference to that edition when desired, and also to indicate that there were other persons of the same name.
It was not consistent with the limits of the work to retain in all cases the minute bibliography sometimes furnished in the larger edition. But, on the other hand, an endeavour has been made to give references, at the end of articles, to recent publications of importance on each subject; and in this endeavour the Editors must express their great indebtedness to the valuable Patrology of Professor Bardenhewer, already referred to, and to the admirable third edition of Herzog and Hauck’s Protestant Cyclopaedia, and occasionally to the parallel Roman Catholic Cyclopaedia of Wetzer and Welte, edited by Cardinal Hergenrther. It may be permissible, in referring to these auxiliary sources, to express a deep satisfaction at the increasing co-operation, in friendly learning, of Protestant and Roman Catholic scholars, and to indulge the hope that it is an earnest of the gradual growth of a better understanding between those two great schools of thought and life.
The Editors cannot conclude without paying a final tribute of honour and gratitude to the generous and devoted scholar whose accurate labours were indispensable to the original work, as is acknowledged often in its Prefaces, and who rendered invaluable assistance in the first stage of the preparation of the present volume-the Rev. Charles Hole, late Lecturer for many years in Ecclesiastical History in King’s College, London. Dr. Wace hoped to have had the happiness of having his own name associated with that of his old teacher, friend, and colleague on the title-page of this volume, and he laments that death has deprived him of this privilege. He cannot, however, sufficiently express his sense of obligation to his colleague, Mr. Piercy, for the ability, skill, and generous labour without which the production of the work would have been impossible.