BATHING. Daily bathing in special thermal buildings had become so ingrained in the general habits of the Roman Empire that early Christian literature contains continual references to II. For example, in the letter written by the faithful of Lyons to their brethren in Asia and Phrygia (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., V, 1: PG 20, 409); Tertullian declares that “we rub our foreheads with the sign of the cross at the washbasin” (*De corona*, 3: PL 2, 99), chooses the most convenient time for bathing (*Apol.*, 42: PL 1, 555-56), or deplores Christian virgins who appear at the baths in sumptuous attire (*De virg. vel.*, 12: PL 2, 955). Clement of Alexandria (*Paed.*, 3, 5: PG 600), St. Cyprian (*De habitu virg.*, 19: PL 4, 471-72), and St. Jerome (*Adv. Iovin.*, 2, 36: PL 23, 349-50) deplore those faithful who frequent mixed baths (*lavarca mixta*), which were explicitly condemned in 320 by the Council of Laodicea (Mansi, II, 569). Indeed, on this point St. Ambrose extols the ancient Roman traditions of modesty (*De officiis*, 1, 18: PL 16, 51).
Baglioni — The houses of the B. on the second floor of the fresco by B. Bonfigli in the Palazzo dei Priori (15th century), depicting the Siege of Perugia and the Discovery of the Body of St. Herculanus — Perugia.
St. John Chrysostom sees in bathing a symbol of the Church, which removes the stains that deface the soul (*In ep. ad Cor.*, hom. XV: PG 61, 510; *Reprehensio eorum qui aberant ab ecclesia*: PG 51, 146).
Among the staff of the baths, a certain Cucumio is known for having inscribed on his tomb that he had been a cloakroom attendant at the Baths of Caracalla (*Capysius de Antoninianas* [G. Marchi, *I monumenti patrii e dell’arte cristiana*, Rome 1844, p. 27]). Documentation often shows that baths were built near sacred buildings for the use of the faithful. Pope Damasus donated a *balneum iuxta titulum* that he had established near the Theatre of Pompey (*Liber pontificalis*, ed. Duchesne, I, Paris 1886, p. 183). Pope Hilarius built hot and cold baths near the basilica of St. Lawrence on the Via Tiburtina (ibid., p. 245), and Symmachus near St. Pancras on the Via Aurelia (ibid., p. 262). In the 6th century, a certain Eusebius built one at St. Paul’s on the Via Ostiensis.
A fragment of a metrical inscription from the basilica of St. Martin in the Mountains contains a series of precepts relating to baths (O. Marucchi, *I monumenti del museo cristiano Pio Lateranense*, Milan 1910, tav. 45, 1).
Outside Rome, Eusebius mentions the baths built by Constantine near the basilica of the Apostles in Constantinople (*De vita Constantini*, IV, 59; PG 20, 1209). At Ravenna in 540, Bishop Victor built one adjacent to the episcopal residence. An inscription from the 7th century records that among the works undertaken by Bishop St. Damian at Pavia, alongside the episcopal residence, were baths. diaconia (v.) established at Naples by Bishop St. Agnellus in the mid-7th century, soap for bathing was distributed twice a year (*Gesta episcoporum Neapolitanorum*, ed. Waltz, cap. 39, p. 419). Besides public baths, descriptions also exist of baths in private Christian buildings. Thus Sidonius Apollinaris highlights the sobriety of the decoration of his bath at Avitacum (*Ep.*, II, 2: PL 58, 474-476); Cassiodorus describes those he had built at the monastery of Vivarium (*De institutione divinarum litterarum*, 29: PL 70, 1143-1144); the poet Fortunatus describes the baths of the villas of Leontius, bishop of Bordeaux, and of Praemiacum (*Miscellanea*, 28: PL 88, 84-85).
The Church’s Stance on Bathing — Some (cf., e.g., B. Russell, *Le mariage et la morale*, Paris 1930, p. 49) have accused the Church of having, under the pretext that anything connected with the care of the body encourages sin, condemned and opposed the use of baths to the point of banning them in the Middle Ages. Hence a second accusation: that the Church is an enemy of hygiene.
The reply is straightforward: 1) The Gospels contain no condemnation of bathing. Christ Himself subjected Himself to the symbolic bath of penance and purification instituted by the Precursor (Mt. 3, 13-17) and in turn elevated bathing to the dignity of a sacrament in Baptism. He did indeed reproach the Pharisees for their frequent washings and purifications, but only because these had become for them a mere formality, lacking any interior spirit. 2) The same holds true for later times; neither the Fathers nor the Councils ever formally condemned bathing. In addition to the examples cited in the first part, many others could be adduced from monastic customs and regulations, as well as from the declarations of the Fathers and Councils. “It was the custom of Christians to bathe on Saturday in honor of Sunday, and to change their garments to enter the earthly house of the King of Heaven, that is, the church, pure in soul and body” (*Vita s. Melani* [d. ca. 530], in *Acta SS. Ianuarii* 1, ed. Paris 1863, cols. 334). And St. Gregory the Great warns: “If someone wishes to bathe out of lust or sensuality, we do not permit it on any day; but if it is done because the body needs it, we do not forbid it even on Sunday. For it is written: ‘No one hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it’” (Eph. 5, 29) (*Epistolae Gregorii Magni*, lib. XIII, ep. 1: PL 77, cols. 1254; cf. P. Galland, *L’Église et l’hygiène au moyen-âge*, Paris 1933, pp. 15-29). 3) When severe words and prohibitions are found in the Fathers and Councils, this must be understood in light of the circumstances. In the early centuries of Christianity, the public baths of pagan cities had a poor reputation due to the promiscuity of the sexes and the licentiousness of the pagans (Juvenal, *Satire* 6, 422; Clement of Alexandria, *Paedagogus*, III, 5). The same abuses persisted into the Middle Ages and especially at the beginning of the Renaissance. The Church therefore could not fail to intervene to deplore abuses and the harm to souls. 4) Abstinence from bathing, practiced for a longer or shorter time and proclaimed by ascetics, stemmed rather from a spirit of penance and mortification, ample proof of how highly bathing was regarded. 5) If in this matter there were excesses or exaggerations, these must be attributed to individuals, not to any non-existent ecclesiastical legislation.