Agape (Ἀγάπη "love, charity" in the New Testament)

AGAPE (Ἀγάπη "love, charity" in the New Testament). - According to the traditional view, a liturgical banquet in use in the Christian communities of the first 4 centuries on the model of and in memory of the Last Supper, to manifest fraternal charity and to assist the poor, initially joined to the eucharistic celebration, then separated from it. But at present the nature (especially the relation to the Eucharist) and the origins of the agape are much disputed: a problem among the most obscure of the apostolic age.

Today, while rationalist critics tend to emphasize the antiquity and importance of the agape, many Catholics considerably reduce it. Four prevailing opinions may be distinguished, of which the first three trace the agape back to apostolic times, the fourth places it after 150. The first two connect it with the Eucharist, the last two (maintained for the most part by Catholics) separate it from it entirely.

1) The traditional opinion, upheld by conservative Protestants (Th. Zahn, J. F. Keating) and by many Catholics (R. Cornely, J. E. Belser, F. X. Funk, V. Ermoni, F. Cabrol, J. M. Hanssens, B. Allo, A. Arnold), sees the origins of the agape in the apostolic age, in close connection with the Eucharist; it relies principally on I Cor. 11:20-34; the separation from the Eucharist occurred in the 2nd century.

2) Many rationalists (after J. Bingham and E. Renan, F. Spitta, A. Jülicher, A. Harnack, E. v. Dobschütz, E. Grafe and C. Clemon, A. Eichhorn, F. Hoffmann, H. Lietzmann), assert that the agape, a fraternal banquet, was the primitive form of the sacramental eucharistic rite. The first Palestinian faithful would have taken up again one of the Master's dearest customs: the daily Tischgemeinschaft (Mt. 18:20); the simple rite was permeated with eschatological hopes: the invitatory "Maranatha" was followed by the singing of "Hosanna." Then came the common meal, called κυριακὸν δεῖπνον. But the agape separated from the "fractio panis" when the blessing of the chalice (of Pauline origin) was juxtaposed to that of the bread, and then when the eucharistic celebration was transferred to the morning; then the Eucharist joined the didactic synaxis and became the Mass, while the agape degenerated, remaining in some places as a liturgy, a secondary evening liturgy. Such is the fanciful reconstruction of H. Lietzmann (Messe und Herrenmahl, pp. 202-210, 249 ff.), which summarizes and broadens the theories of his predecessors; A. Schweitzer, however, reacts against it, Die Mystik des Apostels Paulus, Tübingen 1930, p. 270.

3) The a. goes back to the apostolic age, but was even then separate from the eucharistic celebration (E. Baumgartner, K. Völker); already the Greek Fathers, from Chrysostom to Theophylact, placed this meal after the eucharistic rite. H. Leclercq considers the a. a funeral meal deriving from an analogous use both Jewish and pagan.

4) The a. was introduced only in the 2nd century; it therefore has no connection whatsoever with the Eucharist (P. Batiffol, followed by P. Ladeuze, J. Thomas, H. Rongy, W. Goossens).

This last negative thesis, upheld first by G. Albaspino (Aubespine 1630), seems to be preferred, despite the recent reaction of A. Arnold. From the texts of the New Testament and of the apostolic Fathers, the existence of common meals liturgically joined to the Eucharist cannot be demonstrated. The "breaking (v.) of bread" (Acts 2:42; 20:7, 11) was the eucharistic celebration; even if in Acts 2:46 common meals were meant, it does not appear that they were united to the Eucharist, and still less so for the charitable meals of Acts 6:1-6. In Jude 12 and II Pt. 2:13 (in codex B and a few others, since the best-attested reading is ἀπάται "deceits") the ἀγάπαι of the Christians are named, but (although the Latin Vetus has in the two passages translated "epulae, convivia") these ἀγάπαι are the communities (or assemblies) of the faithful, as in St. Ignatius of Antioch. The classic locus is I Cor. 11:20-22 and 33-34; the common interpretation (1st, 2nd and 3rd opinion) sees there a ritual fraternal banquet, connected (not for Baumgartner and Völker) with the Eucharist: St. Paul reproves neither the meal nor its eucharistic relation, but the disorders to which it gave rise. But Batiffol, Ladeuze, Thomas, Goossens seem to understand it better: the faithful of Corinth had introduced on their own initiative, before the eucharistic supper, a banquet, which the Apostle condemns as an intolerable abuse.

Didaché, 9-10, where Zahn and Lietzmann see the a. united to the Eucharist, seems to refer only to the Eucharist (Batiffol, Völker, Greiff); in 11:9 it is probably a question of a common meal, not liturgical, and in 14-15 of the exclusively eucharistic celebration.

Decisive are the texts (of 107/8) of St. Ignatius of Antioch (Rom., prol.; Smirn., 6:2; 8:2; 12:1; Trall., 2:3; Magnes., 1:1; Philad., 11:2), where ἡ ἀγάπη, understood as a concrete institution, always means "community" or "assembly" (like ἐκκλησία, with a more intimate tone of brotherhood). In 112 Pliny (Epist., X, 97, to Trajan) reports common evening meals of the Christians with ordinary table prayers, but it does not appear that they were liturgical. St. Justin, who nevertheless carefully describes the eucharistic synaxis (I Apology, 65-66), does not mention any common meal.

It is therefore very doubtful that before 155 there existed common meals called a. and even more uncertain that they served as a setting for the eucharistic celebration.

The a. appears in some churches as an organized institution in the 2nd half of the 2nd century. Ἡ ἀγάπη "fraternal association" takes on the sense of "common meal"; an identical semantic transition had already occurred for φρατρία and δίασος, the reverse for συσσίτιον.

In Asia Minor, the Epist. Apostolorum, 15 (around 175) connects it to the Eucharist on the morning of Easter. But, while preserving its religious purpose and value, the a. is a simple "banquet" of the community (ἀγάπη ἦτοι δοχή) in the Didascalia Apost., II, 28, 1-5 (ed. F. X. Funk, I, [1905], pp. 108-109). At Carthage, Tertullian describes the a. in 197 (Apologeticum, 39): a banquet presided over by the clergy, "id vocatur quod dilectio penes Graecos est... Inopes quosque refrigerio isto iuvamus", and having become a Montanist (De ieiunio adversus psychicos, 17) he reproaches: "apud te agape in caccabis fervet". Likewise the Passio Perpetuae et Felic., 17, calls a. an official fraternal meal ("non cœnam liberam sed agapen cenarent"), but without connection with the eucharistic liturgy. Clement of Alexandria (Paedag., 2, 1) contrasts with worldly δειπνάρια the ἀγάπαι acceptable to the Lord, who has prescribed inviting the poor. The ecclesiastical ordinances, of an official or quasi-official character, describe for us the a. and its evolution in the 3rd and 4th centuries. The Traditio apostolica of Hippolytus, called Constitutiones Ecclesiae aegyptiacae (early 3rd century) lays down various norms on the a. (XVIII-XXII: F.X. Funk, Constit. Apost., II [1905], p. 113-14). After can. II of the Council of Gangra in Galatia (343), the Canones Hippolyti (2nd half of the 4th century) are very explicit: cann. 164-68 meals for the poor (more important and solemn), can. 169 ἀνάμνησις for the dead; cann. 183-85 meal for widows. These meals with which they concluded the "peace" sacrifices: the remains of the victims or oblations were consumed in the rooms of the temple (Deut. 14:23, 26) and it was recommended to give such banquets a charitable purpose (Ps. 21 [22]:27; Is. 58:7).

W. O. E. Oesterley and H. Lietzmann place at the origin of the "Palestinian a." the haburdh (a Jewish religious association, which gathered around the master for a meal). A slight influence (too much emphasized by H. Leclercq) of the pagan funeral banquets, very widespread in the various brotherhoods (hetaeriae [Pliny, loc. cit.] or collegia, ἔρανοι or θίασοι), which often had the sole purpose of gathering for common meals (συσσίτια, δείπνα φυλετικά or θεματικά or φρατρικά or ὄργεωνικά), especially funeral ones (νεκόσια, silicernium, coena novendialis), is also plausible. The practice of the parentalia was extremely widespread. The ethno-Chri-

canonical sources attest the wide diffusion of the rite organized in the East and in the West (though it does not appear that its use was universal). The a. was opened by the prayer of the bishop or presbyter who presided, over the poor and the benefactors; then some are invited to sing or give discourses on the Scriptures (sometimes, if they are "pneumatics," they speak from their own inspiration), the common prayer of thanksgiving follows, and, before dispersing, the singing of psalms. Catechumens are excluded. Before sitting down, the guests receive the "bread of exorcism" (eulogies?).

From Tertullian onward, the a. has a charitable purpose. And already around the year 200 "refrigerare, refrigerium" are technical expressions designating the semi-funerary a. in honor of the Martyrs. In the catacombs of St. Sebastian was found (1915-16) the "triclia" or hall in which Christians celebrated this "refrigerium" (v.).

After 350 the funerary character of suffrage for the dead predominates. Wrongly, however, Leclercq sees in the a. always and only the meaning of a funerary banquet.

It does not appear that the Eucharistic celebration was normally joined to it. The a. usually took place in the evening ("post lumina": Tertullian, Apol., 39) and the Eucharist, at least from the time of Trajan, in the morning. The Eucharist was later celebrated jointly with, but before and distinct from, the funerary meal (Canones Hippolyti, 169: "Primum antequam consideant, mysteria sumant").

A certain dependence of the a. on Jewish funerary banquets may be admitted (II Sam. 3, 32; Jer. 16, 5, 7; Tob. 4, 17-18; cf. Hos. 9, 4 and Ezek. 24, 17, 22; for New Testament times: Flavius Josephus, Ant. Iud., II, 1, 1) and on the custom of the Christians came in large part from such associations, whose customs help to explain the wide establishment of an institution that today would appear impracticable. St. Jerome, In Os., 9, 4 (PL 6, 891) recalls the νεκροδείπνα of the Greeks and the parentalia of the Latins. But St. Augustine, in agreement with St. Cyril of Alexandria (PG 4, 216), denies the dependence on those pagan religious customs: "Nec sacrificia eorum vertimus in agapes..., agapes nostrae pauperes pascunt sive frugibus sive carnibus" (Contra Faustum, XX, 20: PL 42, 383).

The anti-Gnostic reaction would have given the a. a stable form, according to K. Völker (Mysterium und Agape, pp. 184-203, where he studies the influence of extra-Christian factors).

In the 4th century, the meal offered to the needy by the Church or by some wealthy faithful is absorbed by broader charitable institutions and is gradually suppressed. The Council (ca. 360-65) of Laodicea in Phrygia (cann. 27-28) forbids "what is called a. in the basilicas, eating in the house of God and setting tables there" (Hefele-Leclercq, I, p. 1014). The Council of Hippo of 383 (can. 29) and the 3rd Council of Carthage (397), can. 30, renew this prohibition, with the sole exception made "hospitiorum necessitate." But the Councils of Orléans (533), of Tours (567) and the Trullan (692) would have to prohibit the tenacious custom once again.

Excluded from the churches, the a. survives in the cemeteries associated with the cult of the dead as "refrigerium," as an offering in suffrage, but it is soon forbidden by the ecclesiastical authorities in Italy and in Africa, because of the abuses it occasioned and the pagan interpretation to which it lent itself. Cf. St. Ambrose, De Helia, 17, 62 (CSEL 32, 2, 448). St. Augustine (Confess., 6, 2: PL 32, 719) recounts of his mother that in Milan she went to the cemetery, as was the custom in Africa, with provisions to eat and to distribute, but the ostiarius turned her away, alleging the prohibition of St. Ambrose "quia illa quasi parentalia superstitioni gentilium essent similima"; in 392 he induced the bishop of Carthage Aurelian to uproot "iatas in coemeteriis ebrietates et luxuriosa convivia," adding that almost all of Italy and the churches across the sea either never practiced them or suppressed them (Epist. 22, 2-3: PL 33, 91); he then condemns the use in severe terms (Sermo 15 de Sanctis: "miror cur... hodie tam pernicious error in creverit ut super tumulos defunctorum cibos et vina conferant"; Epist. 29, 10: PL 33, 118 ff. laments the daily drunkenness at St. Peter's). St. Paulinus of Nola describes the meal given by Pammachius to the poor (as happened at Nola, at Verona, in Gaul) in the basilica of St. Peter at the death of his wife Paulina (Epist. 13, 11-16: PL 61, 213); but he deplores the excesses that occurred at such banquets (Carm. 27, 555-78). St. Jerome writes to Eustochium (584) of the vain Christian widows of Rome: "cum ad agapem vocaverint, pracco conducitur" (Epist. 22, 32). A. now becomes synonymous with "alms," and this use of the term remained in the Middle Ages (cf. C. D. Ducange, Glosarium medica et infimae latinitatis, ed. G. A. L. Henschel, I, Paris 1840, p. 138). For the paleochristian monuments v. BANCHETTO and FRACTIO PANIS.

Antonino Romeo