connection with a standing, kneeling, or prostrate attitude. Thus a writer in the L.B. tells us that the Hebrew youths paid honor, worship, and bowing in adoration (slechtain) to our Saviour entering Jerusalem. None of the Evangelists, though alluding to the occasion, makes mention of kneeling; and considering the crowds that followed and preceded them it was not very easy to do so, and therefore we have no warrant in giving any meaning to slechtain used by the Irish writer than bowing and adoring.

4. Thus too St. Martin is represented as kneeling and adoring (slechtain). A poor woman whose son was after dying begs of the saint to raise him to life. 'St. Martin knelt, adored (slechtain) and did the crossfigell.' Slechtain could not be prostration as being inconsistent with the crossfigell.

5. So, again, the word slechtain for adoration is found in connection with prostration. The wise kings are represented as coming with their gifts into the stable of Bethlehem and honoring our Saviour by prostrations and adoration-prostrait agus oc slechtain.2

Again, a writer on the life of Pope Marcellinus represents him as charged with "adoring" idols and bowing to them (slechtaim). (L.B., p. 8, a. 39.) Now, this word unquestionably means not prostration nor kneeling here; for the martyr is represented as admitting the charge, and as having gone to confess the name of Christ before the Emperor Diocletian, and acknowledged in sorrow that he, from weakness, and not conviction, adored the demon, and stooped to it. (Ibid. p. 55.) While the word for "adore" is the same here as above, the equivalent for slechtaim is crommsa, "I stooped."

Dr. M'Carthy, while admitting 'that definitions sustain F. Malone's contention,' endeavours to weaken the force of passages quoted in support of the definitions. One of the passages describes St. James's knees as like those of a camels from constant kneeling in the temple, so that he was known by the name of James the Kneed. How does Dr. M'Carthy meet this? By saying that he met with instances of injury to the forehead, nose, and elbows, from prostration. But this only proves that when such effects. are not spoken of here that there was no prostration. 1 P. 160, a. 2 L. B. p. 138 a. * Eusebius, κειμενος ἔπι τοις γονασι. In referring to this in a former paper, the reference to L. 5, cap. 5, was by mistake given, should any care to learn, for L. 2, ch. 23, however, either reference establishes the point aimed at the custom of kneeling with the primitive Christians.

There is mention of no effect but on the knees; so much so that Irish writers instead of calling him the man of the nose, or forehead, or elbows, calls him the kneed, because he knelt (slecht) 400 times in every 24 hours.

7. There was another passage quoted by me and so convincing that the meaning of slechthain is rendered by genua flectendo. Nothing could be clearer. But Dr. McCarthy meets this by stating that he took genua flectuntur to mean prostration.' If his translation be right, I have to change the idea that was always left on my mind by the Rubric of the Mass-flectamus genua.

8. But Dr. McCarthy appeals to Scripture. He says that Oeis yovara and genuflectere could mean not only genuflection but prostration.' For this he refers to St. Luke's narrative of the Passion. I am not aware that any classical writer, before nor since St. Luke, used the words per se for prostration, nor does St. Luke say that they have such a meaning. Did not Dr. M'Carthy hear of minor discrepancies of a real or apparent character between the Evangelists? and if he looked into one of our ordinary Catholic commentaries he would find that they admit, that while the other Evangelists state or imply that our Saviour fell prostrate, St. Luke says that he only knelt.1 Therefore his reference to St. Luke would establish by no means his meaning of genuflectere. Then, taking for granted that Scripture is on his side, he proceeds to say: "very fortunately we have found the required expression in the L. Breac." I turn to the book, and find St. Matthew's account of the Passion given by the Irish writer, who literally says that, having gone a little aside from the Apostles, 'He placed His face on the ground.' In the next sentence the writer breaks in on the narrative by St. Matthew, and continues: "but St. Luke says, that our Saviour having gone a stone's throw from the Apostles, did kneeling (slechtain) and prayer."

2

Now this is worthy of attention, for its own sake and Dr. McCarthy's. The Irish writer, in giving St. Matthew's version, says, do rat agnuis for lar agus do gne ernaighti― placed His face on the ground and did prayer: in giving St. Luke, he says, do roigne slechtana agus ernaighti-He did kneeling and prayer; therefore the difference must consist in the opposition between kneeling and prostration, the other parts of the sentence being identical, and

1 Maldonatus says, Super. Matth. xxvi., 39-" Unde intelligimus non fuisse omnino in terra prostratum " in reference to St. Luke's words. 2 L. B., p. 164.

VOL. V.

с

therefore the Irish writer never suspected that the word for kneeling (slechtam) could be taken to signify prostration; otherwise it was not a different version we would have, as he intended, but a repetition. And yet Dr. McCarthy had the temerity to appeal to this passage.

9. The Greek and Latin and Irish being against him, perhaps the English may favour him. I willingly turn to the Douay Bible, authorized by the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland. In opening it I find the passage referred to-" and, kneeling down, He prayed." For my part I prefer following the opinion of their lordships, on the meaning of a Greek or Latin passage, with due respect for Dr. M'Carthy, to his opinion.

10. Dr. McCarthy appeals from writings to the Acts of Saints, and says that St. Columba came down at sound of bell, and rested on his knees in prayer, and adds that 'the equivalent is given by an Irish writer once again in L.B.— do roigne slechtain ocus ernaighti. In reply, see my answer in last number on the phrase on St. Luke.

11. He then introduces St. Columbanus:-"Accordingly we find, corporis flexibilitate, in the second instruction of St. Columbanus." Not a word besides is given by Dr. McCarthy. But perhaps this refers to dancing. If he understood the phrase, I think he would not allude to it. The passage in which it occurs I thus literally translate:"Whoever, then, wishes to be made the habitation of God, let him strive to make himself humble and quiet, so that he may be known to be a worshipper of God, not from avidity after words and flexibility of the body, but in the truth of humility; for goodness of heart (cordis bonitas) does not require the false religions of words." The Saint wished to guard against the extravagances in words and gestures denounced previously by the Fathers, and in almost his words.1 Tertullian denounced the loud voice used in praying, and the tossing of the hands wildly, with other faults, which, he says, were common to pagans, but recommended the use of a low voice and the arms moderately raised, "for God is a hearer not of the voice but of the heart. To this St. Columbanus alludes, to whom the

1 Hier. in Ep. ad Ephesios. "Deo non voce sed corde cantandum, nec in tragædorum modum, &c."

2 Tertul. de Oratione, ch. 12. Vacuæ observationes . . non religioni sed superstitioni deputantur: Humiliter adorantes magis commendabimus Deo preces nostras ne attollamus manus sublimius elatas. ... Vel propterea in nobis reprehendi mereatur quod apud Idola celebratur." Ch. xiii.

writing of the primitive Fathers were familiar; and even though we were absurdly to suppose that the phrase corporis flexibilitate meant prostration, still St. Columbanus discountenanced it. And if Dr. M'Carthy had looked into the course or arrangement of Offices by the Saint, he would have seen that genuflexion was enjoined after each psalm, and this in obedience to what he had learned, as he says, from his fathers in Ireland. Further comment is useless.

As to the objections raised in connection with particular instances, such as those of SS. Columbanus and Columba, it may be replied, on principle, that the Irish quatrain necessarily deals only with the genuflection on entering a Church, though other evidence would affect kneeling during the public religious services or Liturgy.

As to St. Columba coming down and kneeling after midnight, Sunday, there may be a special answer, that he threw himself on his knees in his dying agony to support his sinking frame.

Then as to the instance of praying prostrate on Sunday, on hearing of St. Columbanus' death, Dr. McCarthy is not accurate in his reference. He refers me to page 375 of Greit's German work, Geschichte der altirischen Kirche, for the saint's death on Sunday. I have looked into it, and find not the slightest allusion to his death at all; nor in any subsequent page have I seen anything at variance with the Irish and Catholic rule of praying in a standing posture during the Liturgy. The remarks of Walifred Strabo, who lived about 240 years after St. Columbanus, reflect the discipline of the ninth rather than earlier centuries; and, besides, his remarks on St. Gall and St. Columbanus differ from those of others.

12. Dr. M'Carthy appeals to Rubrics. He appeals to a Rubric in the Corpus Missal. It is this: "prosternantur super genua Super eos jacentes." But who are those prostrate? Are they a congregation or a community? Were they prostrate during their whole stay in church? Well, the Missal tells us that there were two-bridegroom and spouse. Their prostration during a part of Mass formed one of the ceremonies then usual. At the Orate, fratres, the Rubric directed them to prostrate themselves behind the priest, covered with a pall. Prosternantur super genua retro presbiterum, velentur pallio cum liberis suis. After the Secret and Preface, another Rubric directs that after the priest says Pax Domini, turned to the people, he repeats prayers over them. Postquam autem dicat Sacerdos Pax Domini' con

6

versus retro presbiter ad populum compleat has orationes "super eos jacentes." Then, at the Agnus Dei, even the spouses rise. You may suspect why Dr. M'Carthy gave only the few unconnected words of the Rubric. And this is the testimony of a writing that he has summoned to his aid!

In looking the Missal through, I find that, before adoring the Cross on Good Friday, the celebrating priest was directed by the rubric to address a short homily to the people, and to finish by telling them to prostrate themselves before God. Now, how could they be told to prostrate if they had been prostrate previously? Besides, while all are adoring the Cross, the celebrant was to remain sitting like a good Roman or Irish bishop. Furthermore, there is a Rubric for Good Friday, which, while directing most of the prayers to be said with a flectamus genua, as at present, enjoins some to be said sine genuflexione. Now if flectamus genua means prostration, according to Dr. M'Carthy, the prayers said with a non flectamus genua must mean the contradictory. Therefore, unless a thing can be and not be at the same time, in the same circumstances, Dr. M'Carthy is wrong.

13. Finally, there is an appeal to the famous Stowe Missal, It is relied on as a positive and decisive proof.' It is an Irish Rubric of the Mass supplied by a learned Anglican clergyman from his fac-similes: "When Jesus received bread is chanted, the priest bows thrice in repentance of his sins, offers them to God (consecrates) and the people adore" slechthith. On this Dr. M'Carthy strives to form an argument. I give his own words. "The force of this proof can be evaded only by one of two methods—either by maintaining that slechthith means genuflection, or that Mass was not celebrated on Sunday in our ancient church." The first contention has been disposed of already, the second is a reductio ad absurdum.

If the force of the dilemma can be evaded by either one or two ways' it is a lame dilemma. Even though it be conceded that the Rubric applied to the Sunday Mass as well as week-day Mass there are many answers:-Firstly, that the prohibition against kneeling was confined to the limitation in the matter of the Irish quatrain; that is, to the entrance into the church and other customary prayers; just as at present we repeat the Angelus in a standing posture in commemoration of a past mystery, though a direction to that effect is overridden by the Rubric which enjoins kneeling at the real though mystical mystery of the Mass while