agape
(Greek: love)
Meal taken in common by primitive Christians , usually in connection with the Holy Eucharist ; a development of the Jewish funeral feasts. It was never a universal institution in the Church , led to excesses, and disappeared soon after the 5th century .
Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary
Agape
The celebration of funeral feasts in honour of the dead dates back almost to the beginnings of the worship of the departed – that is, to the very earliest times. The dead, in the region beyond the tomb, were thought to derive both pleasure and advantage from these offerings. The same conviction explains the existence of funeral furniture for the use of the dead. Arms, vessels, and clothes, as things not subject to decay, did not need to be renewed, but food did; hence feasts at stated seasons. But the body of the departed gained no relief from offerings made to his shade unless these were accompanied fly the obligatory rites. Yet the funeral feast was not merely a commemoration; it was a true communion, and the food brought by the guests was really meant for the use of the departed. The milk and wine were poured out on the earth around the tomb, while the solid food has passed in to the corpse through a hole in the tomb.
The use of the funeral feast was almost universal in the Græco-Roman world. Many ancient authors may be cited as witnesses to the practice in classical lands. Among the Jews, averse by taste and reason to all foreign customs, we find what amounts to a funeral banquet, if not the rite itself; the Jewish colonies of the Dispersion, less impervious to surrounding influences, adopted the practice of fraternal banquets. If we study the texts relative to the Supper, the last solemn meal taken by Our Lord with His disciples, we shall find that it was the Passover Supper, with the changes wrought by time on the primitive ritual, since it took place in the evening, and the guests reclined at the table. As the liturgical mea1 draws to a close, the Host introduces a new rite, and bids those present repeat it when He shall have ceased to be with them. This done, they sing the customary hymn and withdraw. Such is the meal that Our Lord would have renewed, but it is plain that He did not command the repetition of the Passover Supper during the year, since it could have no meaning except on the Feast itself. Now the first chapters of the Acts of the Apostles state that the repast of the Breaking of Bread took place very often, perhaps daily. That which was repeated was, therefore, not the liturgical feast of the Jewish ritual, but the event introduced by Our Lord into this feast when, after the drinking of the fourth cup, He instituted the Breaking of Bread, the Eucharist. To what degree this new rite, repeated by the faithful, departed from the rite and formulæ of the Passover Supper, we have no means, at the present time, of determining. It is probable, however, that, in repeating the Eucharist, it was deemed fit to preserve certain portions of the Passover Supper, as much out of respect for what had taken place in the Cœnaculum as from the impossibility of breaking roughly with the Jewish Passover rite, so intimately linked by the circumstances with the Eucharistic one.
This, at its origin, is clearly marked as funerary in its intention, a fact attested by the most ancient testimonies that have come down to us. Our Lord, in instituting the Eucharist, used these words: “As often as you shall eat this Bread and drink this chalice, you shall show forth the Lord’s Death”. Nothing could be clearer. Our Lord chose the means generally used in His time, namely: the funeral banquet, to bind together those who remained faithful to the memory of Him who had gone. We must, however, be on our guard against associating the thought of sadness with the Eucharistic Supper, regarded in this light. If the memory of the Master’s Passion made the commemoration of these last hours in any measure sad, the glorious thought of the Resurrection gave this meeting of the brethren its joyous aspect. The Christian assembly was held in the evening, and was continued far into the night. The supper, preaching, common prayer, the breaking of the bread, took up several hours; the meeting began on Saturday and ended on Sunday, thus passing from the commemoration of the sad hours to that of the triumphant moment of the Resurrection and the Eucharistic feast in very truth “showed forth the Lord’s Death”, as it will until He come”. Our Lord’s command was understood and obeyed.
Certain texts refer to the meetings of the faithful in early times. Two, from the Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 11:18, 20-22, 33, 34), allow us to draw the following conclusions: The brethren were at liberty to eat before going to the meeting; all present must be in a fit condition to celebrate the Supper of the Lord, though they must not eat of the funeral supper until all were present. We know, from two texts of the first century, that these meetings did not long remain within becoming bounds. The agape, as we shall see, was destined, during the few centuries that it lasted, to fall, from time to time, into abuses. The faithful, united in bodies, guilds, corporations or “collegia”, admitted coarse, intemperate men among them, who degraded the character of the assemblies. These Christian “collegia” seem to have differed but little from those of the pagans, in respect, at all events, of the obligations imposed by the rules of incorporation. There is no evidence available to show that the collegia from the first undertook the burial of deceased members; but it seems probable that they did so at an early period. The establishment of such colleges gave the Christians an opportunity of meeting in much the same way as the pagans did – subject always to the many obstacles which the law imposed. Little feasts were held, to which each of the guests contributed his share, and the supper with which the meeting ended might very well be allowed by the authorities as a funerary one. In reality, however, for all faithful worthy of the name, it was a liturgical assembly. The texts, which it would take too long to quote, do not allow us to assert that all these meetings ended with a celebration of the Eucharist. In such matters sweeping generalizations should be avoided. At the outset it must be stated that no text affirms that the funeral supper of the Christian colleges must always and everywhere be identified with the agape, nor does any text tell us that the agape was always and everywhere connected with the celebration of the Eucharist. But subject to these reservations, we may gather that under certain circumstances the agape and the Eucharist appear to form parts of a single liturgical function. The meal, as understood by the Christians, was a real supper, which followed the Communion; and an important monument, a fresco of the second century preserved in the cemetery of St. Priscilla, at Rome, shows us a company of the faithful supping and communicating. The guests recline on a couch which serves as a seat, but, if they are in the attitude of those who are at supper, the meal appears as finished. They have reached the moment of the Eucharistic communion, symbolized in the fresco by the mystical fish and the chalice. (See FISH; EUCHARIST; SYMBOLISM.)
Tertullian has described at length (Apolog., vii-ix) these Christian suppers, the mystery of which puzzled the Pagans, and has given a detailed account of the agape, which had been the subject of so much calumny; an account which affords us an insight into the ritual of the agape in Africa in the second century. The introductory prayer. The guests take their places on the couches. A meal, during which they talk on pious subjects. The washing of hands. The hall is lit up. Singing of psalms and improvised hymns. Final prayer and departure. The hour of meeting is not specified, but the use made of torches shows clearly enough that it must have been in the evening or at night. The document known as the “Canons of Hippolytus” appears to have been written in the time of Tertullian, but its Roman or Egyptian origin remains in doubt. It contains very precise regulations in regard to the agape, similar to those which may be inferred from other texts. We gather that the guests are at liberty to eat and drink according to the need of each. The agape, as prescribed to the Smyrnæans by St. Ignatius of Antioch, was presided over by the bishop; according to the “Cannons of Hippolytus”, catechumens were excluded, a regulation which seems to indicate that the meeting bore a liturgical aspect.
An example of the halls in which the faithful met to celebrate the agape may be seen in the vestibule of the Catacomb of Domitilla. A bench runs round this great hall, on which the guests took their places. With this may be compared an inscription found at Cherchel, in Algeria, recording the gift made to the local church of a plot of land and a building intended as a meeting-place for the corporation or guild of the Christians. From the fourth century onward, the agape rapidly lost its original character. The political liberty granted to the Church made it possible for the meetings to grow larger, and involved a departure from primitive simplicity. The funeral banquet continued to be practised, but gave rise to flagrant and intolerable abuses. St. Paulinus of Nola, usually mild and kindly, is forced to admit that the crowd, gathered to honour the feast of a certain martyr, took possession of the basilica and atrium, and there ate the food which had been given out in large quantities. The Council of Laodicea (363) forbade the clergy and laity who should be present at an agape to make it a means of supply, or to take food away from it, at the same time that it forbade the setting up of tables in the churches. In the fifth century the agape becomes of infrequent occurrence, and between the sixth and the eighth it disappears altogether from the churches.
One fact in connection with a subject at present so much studied and discussed seems to be established beyond question, namely, that the agape was never a universal institution. If found in one place, there is not so much as a trace of it in another, nor any reason to suppose that it ever existed there. A feeling of veneration for the dead inspired the funeral banquet, a feeling closely akin to a Christian inspiration. Death was not looked upon as the end of the whole man, but as the beginning of a new and mysterious span of life. The last meal of Christ with His Apostles pointed to this belief of a life after death, but added to it something new and unparalleled, the Eucharistic communion. It would be useless to look for analogies between the funeral banquet and the Eucharistic supper, yet it should not be forgotten that the Eucharistic supper was fundamentally a funerary memorial.
———————————–
BATIFFOL, Etudes d’histoire et de théologie positive (Paris, 1902), 277-311; FUNK in the Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique (15 January, 1903); KEATIING, The Agape and the Eucharist in the Early Church (London, 1901); LECLERCQ in Dict. d’archéol. chrét. et de lit., I, col. 775-848.
H. LECLERCQ Transcribed by Vernon Bremberg Dedicated to the Cloistered Dominican Nuns at the Monastery of the Infant Jesus, Lufkin, Texas
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume ICopyright © 1907 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia
Agape
plural AGAPAE (, ), the Greek term for love, used by ecclesiastical writers (most frequently in the plural) to signify the social meal of the primitive Christians, which generally accompanied the Eucharist. The New Testament does not appear to give it the sanction of a divine command: it seems to be attributable to the spirit of a religion which is a bond of brotherly union and concord among its professors. SEE EUCHARIST.
1. Much learned research has been spent in tracing the origin of this custom; but, though considerable obscurity may rest on the details, the general historical connection is tolerably obvious. It is true that the and , and other similar institutions of Greece and Rome, presented some points of resemblance which facilitated both the adoption and the abuse of the Agapae by the Gentile converts of Christianity; but we cannot consider them as the direct models of the latter. If we reflect on the profound impression which the transactions of the night on which the Lord was betrayed (1Co 11:23) must have made on the minds of the apostles, nothing can be conceived more natural, or in closer accordance with the genius of the new dispensation, than a wish to perpetuate the commemoration of his death in connection with their social meal (Neander, Leben Jesu, p. 643; Planting of the Christian Church, 1, 27). The primary celebration of the Eucharist had impressed a sacredness on the repast of which it formed a part (comp. Mat 26:26; Mar 14:22, with Luk 22:20; 1Co 11:25); and when to this consideration we add the ardent faith and love of the new converts on the one hand, and the loss of property with the disruption of old connections and attachments on the other, which must have heightened the feeling of brotherhood, we need not look farther to account for the institution of the Agapae, at once a symbol of Christian love and a striking exemplification of its benevolent energy. However soon its purity was soiled, at first it was not undeserving of the eulogy pronounced by Chrysostom: A custom most beautiful and most beneficial; for it was a supporter of love, a solace of poverty, a moderator of wealth, and a discipline of humility.
Thus the common meal and the Eucharist formed together one whole, and were conjointly denominated Lords Supper ( , ) and feast of love ( ). They were also signified (according to Mosheim, Neander, and other eminent critics) by the phrase, breaking of bread ( , Act 2:46; , Act 2:42; , Act 20:7). We find the term thus applied once, at least, in the New Testament (Jud 1:12), These are spots in your feasts of charity ( ). The reading in 2Pe 2:13, is of doubtful authority: Spots and blemishes, living luxuriously in their Agapae ( ); but the common reading is , in their own deceivings. The phrase was early employed in the sense of celebrating the Eucharist; thus in the epistle of Ignatius to the church at Smyrna, 8. In 7 appears to refer more especially to the Agapae.
By ecclesiastical writers several synonyms are used for the Agapae, such as (Balsamon, ad Can. 27, Concil. Laodicen.); , , , (Chrysostomn); (Ecumenius); (Zonaras). Though the Agapae usually succeeded the Eucharist, yet they are not alluded to in Justin Martyrs description of the latter (Apol. 1, 65, 67); while Tertullian, on the contrary, in his account of the Agapae, makes no distinct mention of the Eucharist. The nature of our Cana, he says, may be gathered from its name, which is the Greek term for love (dilectio). However much it may cost us, it is real gain to incur such expense in the cause of piety; for we aid the poor by this refreshment; we do not sit down to it till we have first tasted of prayer to God; we eat to satisfy our hunger; we drink no more than befits the temperate; we feast as those who recollect that they are to spend the night in devotion; we converse as those who know that the Lord is an ear-witness. After water for washing hands, and lights have been brought in, every one is required to sing something to the praise of God, either from the Scriptures or from his own thoughts; by this means, if any one has indulged in excess, he is detected. The feast is closed with prayer. Contributions or oblations of provisions and money were made on these occasions, and the surplus was placed in the hands of the presiding elder ( compare 1Ti 5:17, ), by whom it was applied to the relief of orphans and widows, the sick and destitute, prisoners and strangers (Justin, Apol. 1, 67).
Allusions to the are to be met with in heathen writers. Thus Pliny, in his celebrated epistle to the Emperor Trajan, after describing the meeting of the Christians for worship, represents them as assembling again at a later hour, ad capiendum cibum, promiscuum tamen et innoxium. By the phrase cibum promiscuum (Augustine remarks) we are not to understand merely food partaken in common with others, but common food, such as is usually eaten; the term innoxium also intimates that it was perfectly wholesome and lawful, not consisting, for example, of human flesh (for, among other odious imputations, that of cannibalism had been cast upon the Christians, which, to prejudiced minds, might derive some apparent support from a misinterpretation of our Lords language in Joh 6:53, Unless ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of man), nor of herbs prepared with incantations and magical rites. Lucian also, in his account of the philosopher Peregrinus, tells us that, when imprisoned on the charge of being a Christian, he was visited by his brethren in the faith, who brought with them , which is generally understood to mean the provisions which were reserved for the absent members of the church at the celebration of the Lords Supper. Gesner remarks on this expression, Agapas, offerente unoquoque aliquid, quod una consumerent; hinc , non a luxu.
2. The mode of celebrating the feast was simple. The bishop or presbyter presided. The food appears, to have been either dressed at the houses of the guests, or to have been prepared at the place of meeting, according to circumstances. Before eating, the guests. washed their hands, and prayer was offered. The Scriptures were read, and questions proposed by the person presiding. Then followed the recital of accounts respecting the affairs of other churches, such accounts being regularly transmitted from one church to another, so that a deep sympathy was produced; and, in many cases, assistance was furnished to churches in trouble. At the close of the feast, money was collected for orphans and widows, for the poor, and for prisoners. The kiss of charity was given, and the ceremony concluded with prayer (Rom 16:16; 1Co 16:20; 1Th 5:26; 1Pe 5:14).
3. Their Decline. From the passages in the Epistles of Jude and Peter, already quoted, and more particularly from the language of Paul in 1 Corinthians 11, it appears that at a very early period the Agapae were perverted from their original design; the rich frequently practiced a selfish indulgence, to the neglect of their poorer brethren: (1Co 11:21); i.e. the rich feasted on the provisions they brought, without waiting for the poorer members, or granting them a portion of their abundance. They appear to have imitated the Grecian mode of entertainment called (see Xenophon’s Memorabilia, 3, 14; Neander’s Planting of the Christian Church, 1:292). On account of these and similar irregularities, and probably in part to elude the notice of their persecutors, the Christians, about the middle of the second century, frequently celebrated the Eucharist by itself and before daybreak (antelucanis coetibus) (Tertullian, De Cor. Militis, 3). From Pliny’s Epistle it also appears that the Agapae were suspected by the Roman authorities of belonging to the class of Hetaeriae (), unions or secret societies, which were often employed for political purposes, and as such denounced by the imperial edicts; for he says (referring to the cibum promiscuum,” etc.) “quod ipsum facere desiisse post edictum meum, quo secundum mandata tua Hetcerias esse vetueram” (Pliny Ep. 96 al. 97). At a still later period the Agapae were subjected to strict regulation by various councils. Thus by the 28th canon of the Council of Laodicea it was forbidden to hold them in churches. At the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) it was ordered (can. 29) that none should partake of the Eucharist unless they had previously abstained from food; but it is added, excepto uno die anniversario, quo coena domini celebratur.” This exception favors the supposition that the Agapae were originally held in close imitation of the Last Supper, i.e. before, instead of after, the Eucharist. The same prohibition was repeated in the sixth, seventh, and ninth centuries, at the Council of Orleans (can. 12), A.D. 533; in the Trullanian Council at Constantinople, A.D. 692; and in the council held at Aix-la-Chapelle, A.D. 816. Yet these regulations were not intended to set aside the Agapae altogether. In the Council of Gangra, in Paphlagonia (about A.D. 360), a curse was denounced on whoever despised the partakers of the Agapae or refused to join in them. When Christianity was introduced among the Anglo-Saxons by Austin (A.D. 596), Gregory the Great advised the celebration of the Agapae, in booths formed of the branches of trees, at the consecration of churches.
Few vestiges of this ancient usage can now be traced. In some few churches, however, may still be found what seem to be remnants of the old practice; thus it is usual, in every church in Rouen, on Easter-day, after mass, to distribute to the faithful, in the nave of the church, an Agape, in the shape of a cake and a cup of wine. It appears that it used to be done on all great festivals; for we read in the life of Ansbertus, archbishop of Rouen, that he gave an Agape to the people in his church “after communion, on solemn days, and himself waited at table especially upon the poor.” Dr. King suggests, that the Benediction of the Loaves, observed in the Greek Church, is a remnant of the ancient Agapae. Suicer says that it is yet the custom in that Church on Easter-day, after the celebration of the holy mysteries, for the people to feast together in the churches; and this distribution panis benedicti et vini, he also seems to consider a vestige of the Agape. But the primitive love-feast, under a simpler and more expressly religious form, is retained in modern times by the Moravians and the Methodists. SEE LOVE-FEAST. Similar meetings are held in Scotland by the followers of Mr. Robert Sandeman (q.v.), and by a branch of them in Danbury, Conn. Suicer, Thes. col. 23; Gieseler, Ch. Hist. 1:59, 104, 296; Lardner, Works, 7:280; Coleman, Anc. Christianity, ch. 21, 13; Bingham, Orig. Eccl. 15:8; Discipline of the M. E. Church, pt. 2.
Besides the Eucharistic Agapae, three other kinds are mentioned by ecclesiastical writers:
(1.) Agapoe natalitioe, held in commemoration of the martyrs (Theodoret, Evang. Verit. 8, 923, 924, ed. Schulz);
(2.) Agapoe connubiales, or marriage-feasts (Greg. Naz. Epist. 1, 14);
(3.) Agapoe funerales, funeral-feasts (Greg.’ Naz. Carm. X.), probably similar to the or of the Greeks. Kitto, s.v.
For further details, see Resenius, De Agapis Judoe Epistoloe (Havn. 1600); Oldecop, De Agapis (Helmst. 1656); Cabassutius, De Agapis, in his Notitia eccl. historiar. (Lugd. 1680), p. 31 sq.; Hoornbeck, De Agapis vett. in his Miscell. Sacr. (Ultraj. 1689), p. 587; Schurzfleisch, De vet. Agaparum ritu (Viteb. 1690, also in Walch’s Compend. Antiq. Lips. 1733, p. 566); Same, De vett. Christ. Agapis (Regiom. 1701); Muratori, De Agapis sublatis (Patau. 1709); Bohmer, De Christ. capiendis cibum, in his Dissert. juris eccl. antiq. (Lips. 1711), p. 223; Hanzschel, De Agapis
(Lips. 1729); Schlegel, De Agapar. etate apostolica (Lips. 1756); Schuberth, De Agapis vett. Judacor. (Gorlic. 1761); Bohn, D. Liebesmahle d. ersten Christen (Erf. 1762); Fruhauf, De Agapis (Littav. 1784); Drescher, De vett. Christ. Agapis (Giess. 1824); Augusti, Handb. d. Christlichen Arch. Song of Solomon 1, pt. 1, 2; Neander, Church Hist. 1:325; 2:325; Bruns, Canones Apost. et Concil. (Berol. 1839); Kestner, Die Agapen, od. d. geheime Weltbund d. ersten Christen (Jena, 1819); Molin, De vett. Christianorum Agapis (Lips. 1730); Sahmen, id. (Regiom. 1701); Stolberg, id. (Viteb. 1693, and in Menthen. Thes. 2, 800 sq.); Duguet, Des anciennes Agapes (Par. 1743); Fronto, De veterum, in his Dissert. Eccl. p. 468-488; Hilpert, De Agapis (Helmst. 1656); Quistorp, id. (Rosb. 1711); Tileman, id. (Marb. 1693); Sandelli, De Christianor. synaxibus (Venet. 1770); Sonntag, Ferice cereales Christianor. (Altdorf. 1704); Bender, De conviviis Hebroeor. eucharisticis (Brem. 1704). SEE FEAST.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Agape
AGAPE.See Love Feast.
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Agape
aga-pe (, agape).
1. The Name and the Thing
The name Agape or love-feast, as an expression denoting the brotherly common meals of the early church, though of constant use and in the post-canonical literature from the time of Ignatius onward, is found in the New Testament only in Jud 1:12 and in 2Pe 2:13 according to a very doubtful reading. For the existence of the Christian common meal, however, we have abundant New Testament evidence. The breaking of bread practiced by the primitive community in Jerusalem according to Act 2:42, Act 2:46 must certainly be interpreted in the light of Pauline usage (1Co 10:16; 1Co 11:24) as referring to the ceremonial act of the Lord’s Supper. But the added clause in Act 2:46, they took there food with gladness and singleness of heart, implies that a social meal was connected in some way with this ceremonial act. Paul’s references to the abuses that had sprung up in the Corinthian church at the meetings for the observance of the Lord’s Supper (1Co 11:20-22, 1Co 11:33, 1Co 11:34) make it evident that in Corinth as in Jerusalem the celebration of the rite was associated with participation in a meal of a more general character. And in one of the we sections of Acts (Act 20:11) where Luke is giving personal testimony as to the manner in which the Lord’s Supper was observed by Paul in a church of his own founding, we find the breaking of bread associated with and yet distinguished from an eating of food, in a manner which makes it natural to conclude that in Troas, as in Jerusalem and Corinth, Christians when they met together on the first day of the week were accustomed to partake of a common meal. The fact that the name Agape or love-feast used in Jud 1:12 (Revised Version) is found early in the 2nd century and often afterward as a technical expression for the religious common meals of the church puts the meaning of Jude’s reference beyond doubt.
2. Origin of the Agape
So far as the Jerusalem community was concerned, the common meal appears to have sprung out of the koinona or communion that characterized the first days of the Christian church (compare Act 1:14; Act 2:1 etc.). The religious meals familiar to Jews – the Passover being the great type – would make it natural In Jerusalem to give expression by means of table fellowship to the sense of brotherhood, and the community of goods practiced by the infant church (Act 2:44; Act 4:32) would readily take the particular form of a common table at which the wants of the poor were supplied out of the abundance of the rich (Act 6:1). The presence of the Agape in the Greek church of Corinth was no doubt due to the initiative of Paul, who would hand on the observances associated with the Lord’s Supper just as he had received them from the earlier disciples; but participation in a social meal would commend itself very easily to men familiar with the common meals that formed a regular part of the procedure at meetings of those religious clubs and associations which were so numerous at that time throughout the Greek-Roman world.
3. Relation to the Eucharist
In the opinion of the great majority of scholars the Agape was a meal at which not only bread and wine but all kinds of viands were used, a meal which had the double purpose of satisfying hunger and thirst and giving expression to the sense of Christian brotherhood. At the end of this feast, bread and wine were taken according to the Lord’s command, and after thanksgiving to God were eaten and drunk in remembrance of Christ and as a special means of communion with the Lord Himself and through Him with one another. The Agape was thus related to the Eucharist as Christ’s last Passover to the Christian rite which He grafted upon it. It preceded and led up to the Eucharist, and was quite distinct from it. In opposition to this view it has been strongly urged by some modern critical scholars that in the apostolic age the Lord’s Supper was not distinguished from the Agape, but that the Agape itself from beginning to end was the Lord’s Supper which was held in memory of Jesus. It seems fatal to such an idea, however, that while Paul makes it quite evident that bread and wine were the only elements of the memorial rite instituted by Jesus (1Co 11:23-29), the abuses which had come to prevail at the social gatherings of the Corinthian church would have been impossible in the case of a meal consisting only of bread and wine (compare 1Co 11:21, 1Co 11:33) Moreover, unless the Eucharist in the apostolic age had been discriminated from the common meal, it would be difficult to explain how at a later period the two could be found diverging from each other so completely.
4. Separation from the Eucharist
In the Didache (circa 100 ad) there is no sign as yet of any separation. The direction that the second Eucharistic prayer should be offered after being filled (x.1) appears to imply that a regular meal had immediately preceded the observance of the sacrament. In the Ignatian Epistles (circa 110 ad) the Lord’s Supper and the Agape are still found in combination (Ad Smyrn viii.2). It has sometimes been assumed that Pliny’s letter to Trajan (circa 112 ad) proves that the separation had already taken place, for he speaks of two meetings of the Christians in Bithynia, one before the dawn at which they bound themselves by a sacramentum or oath to do no kind of crime, and another at a later hour when they partook of food of an ordinary and harmless character (Ep x.96). But as the word sacramentum cannot be taken here as necessarily or even probably referring to the Lord’s Supper, the evidence of this passage is of little weight. When we come to Justin Martyr (circa 150 ad) we find that in his account of church worship he does not mention the Agape at all, but speaks of the Eucharist as following a service which consisted of the reading of Scripture, prayers and exhortation (Apol, lxvii); so that by his time the separation must have taken place. Tertullian (circa 200 ad) testifies to the continued existence of the Agape (Apol, 39), but shows clearly that in the church of the West the Eucharist was no longer associated with it (De Corona, 3). In the East the connection appears to have been longer maintained (see Bigg, Christian Platonists of Alexandria, 102ff), but by and by the severance became universal; and though the Agape continued for long to maintain itself as a social function of the church, it gradually passed out of existence or was preserved only as a feast of charity for the poor.
5. Reasons for the Separation
Various influences appear to have cooperated in this direction. Trajan’s enforcement of the old law against clubs may have had something to do with it (compare Pliny as above), but a stronger influence probably came from the rise of a popular suspicion that the evening meals of the church were scenes of licentious revelry and even of crime. The actual abuses which already meet us in the apostolic age (1Co 11:20; Jud 1:12), and which would tend to multiply as the church grew in numbers and came into closer contact with the heathen world, might suggest the advisability of separating the two observances. But the strongest influence of all would come from the growth of the ceremonial and sacerdotal spirit by which Christ’s simple institution was slowly turned into a mysterious priestly sacrifice. To Christ Himself it had seemed natural and fitting to institute the Supper at the close of a social meal. But when this memorial Supper had been transformed into a repetition of the sacrifice of Calvary by the action of the ministering priest, the ascetic idea became natural that the Eucharist ought to be received fasting, and that it would be sacrilegious to link it on to the observances of an ordinary social meal.
Literature
Zahn, art Agapen in Hauck-Herzog, Realencyklopadie; Keating, Agape and Eucharist; Schaff, The Oldest Church Manual, chapter xviii; Lambert, Sacraments in the New Testament, Lect viii; Weizscker, The Apostolic Age, etc., I. 52ff.