It is Godwin’s opinion, that the _agapæ_, or love-feasts,
of the primitive Christians, were derived from the חגים or feasts upon
the sacrifices, at which the Jews entertained their friends, and fed the
poor; Deut. xii, 18; xxvi, 12. There were also feasts of much the same
kind in use among the Greeks and Romans. The former were wont to offer
certain sacrifices to their gods, which were afterward given to the
poor. They had likewise public feasts for certain districts, suppose for
a town or a city, toward which all who could afford it, contributed, in
proportion to their different abilities, and all partook of it in
common. Of this sort were the συσσίτια of the Cretans; and the φιδιτία
of the Lacedæmonians, instituted by Lycurgus, and so called ϖαρὰ τῆς
φιλίας, (the λ being changed into δ according to their usual
orthography,) as denoting that love and friendship which they were
intended to promote among neighbours and fellow citizens. The Romans
likewise had a feast of the same kind, called _charistia_; which was a
meeting only of those who were akin to each other; and the design of it
was, that if any quarrel or misunderstanding had happened among any of
them, they might there be reconciled. To this Ovid alludes in the second
book of his Fasti:--
_Proxima cognati dixere charistia cari,
Et venit ad socios turba propinqua deos._ v. 617.
[The feasts next in order beloved relatives called _charistia_, at which
the kindred throng assembled under their family household gods.]
In imitation either of these Jewish or Gentile love-feasts, or probably
of both, the primitive Christians, in each particular church, had
likewise their love-feasts, which were supplied by the contribution of
the members, according to their several abilities, and partaken of by
all in common. And whether they were converts from among the Jews or
Gentiles, they retained their old custom with very little alteration,
and as their ἀγάπαι had been commonly annexed to their sacrifices, so
they were now annexed to the commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ at
the Lord’s Supper; and were therefore held on the Lord’s day before or
after the celebration of that ordinance. It would seem at Corinth, in
the Apostles’ days, they were ordinarily held before; for when the
Corinthians are blamed for unworthily receiving the Lord’s Supper, it is
partly charged upon this, that some of them came drunk to that
ordinance, having indulged to excess at the preceding love-feast: Every
one taketh before, ϖρολαμϐανει, his own supper, and one is hungry, and
another is drunken,” 1 Cor. xi, 21. This shows, says Dr. Whitby, that
this banquet, namely, the love-feast, was celebrated before the Lord’s
Supper. But Chrysostom gives an account of it, as being in his time kept
after it. It is commonly supposed, that when St. Jude mentions certain
persons, who were spots in the feasts of charity, ἐν ταῖς ἀγάπαις, verse
12, he means in the Christian love-feasts; though Dr. Lightfoot and Dr.
Whitby apprehend the reference in this passage is rather a custom of the
Jews, who, on the evening of their Sabbath, had their κοινωνία, or
communion, when the inhabitants of the same city met in a common place
to eat together. However that be, all antiquity bears testimony to the
reality of the Christian ἀγάπαι, or love-feasts.
The most circumstantial account, says Dr. Townley, of the manner in
which the ancient _agapæ_ were celebrated, is given by Tertullian, in
his Apology,” written in the second century: Our supper,” says he, which
you accuse of luxury, shows its reason in its very name, for it is
called ἀγάπη, that is, _love_. Whatever charge we are at, it is gain to
be at expense upon the account of piety. For we therewith relieve and
refresh the poor. There is nothing vile or immodest committed in it. For
we do not sit down before we have first offered up prayer to God. We eat
only to satisfy hunger, and drink only so much as becomes modest
persons. We fill ourselves in such a manner, as that we remember still
that we are to worship God by night. We discourse as in the presence of
God, knowing that he hears us. Then, after water to wash our hands, and
lights brought in, every one is moved to sing some hymn to God, either
out of Scripture, or, as he is able, of his own composing, and by this
we judge whether he has observed the rules of temperance in drinking.
Prayer again concludes our feast; and thence we depart, not to fight and
quarrel; not to run about and abuse all we meet; not to give up
ourselves to lascivious pastime; but to pursue the same care of modesty
and chastity, as men that have fed at a supper of philosophy and
discipline, rather than a corporeal feast.” Ignatius, in his epistle to
the church of Smyrna, in the first century, affords us the additional
information, that it was not lawful to baptize, or celebrate the
love-feasts, without the bishop, or minister.” Lucian, the epicurean,
has also a passage which seems to refer to the _agapæ_. He tells us that
when Peregrinus, a Christian, was in prison, you might have seen, early
in the morning, old women, some widows, and orphans, waiting at the
prison. Their presidents bribed the guards, and lodged in the prison
with him. Afterward (that is, in the evening) various suppers (that is,
suppers consisting of various dishes, and various kinds of meat, brought
thither by various persons of the company) were brought in, and they
held their sacred conversations, ἴεροι λογοι, or their sacred discourses
were delivered.” Pliny, in his celebrated epistle to Trajan, mentions
the “_cibus promiscuus et innoxius_,”--“common and harmless meal” of the
Christians, which they ate together after the celebration of the
eucharist. This primitive practice, though under a simpler form, and
more expressly religious, is retained in modern times, only by the
Moravians, and by the Wesleyan Methodists.
of the primitive Christians, were derived from the חגים or feasts upon
the sacrifices, at which the Jews entertained their friends, and fed the
poor; Deut. xii, 18; xxvi, 12. There were also feasts of much the same
kind in use among the Greeks and Romans. The former were wont to offer
certain sacrifices to their gods, which were afterward given to the
poor. They had likewise public feasts for certain districts, suppose for
a town or a city, toward which all who could afford it, contributed, in
proportion to their different abilities, and all partook of it in
common. Of this sort were the συσσίτια of the Cretans; and the φιδιτία
of the Lacedæmonians, instituted by Lycurgus, and so called ϖαρὰ τῆς
φιλίας, (the λ being changed into δ according to their usual
orthography,) as denoting that love and friendship which they were
intended to promote among neighbours and fellow citizens. The Romans
likewise had a feast of the same kind, called _charistia_; which was a
meeting only of those who were akin to each other; and the design of it
was, that if any quarrel or misunderstanding had happened among any of
them, they might there be reconciled. To this Ovid alludes in the second
book of his Fasti:--
_Proxima cognati dixere charistia cari,
Et venit ad socios turba propinqua deos._ v. 617.
[The feasts next in order beloved relatives called _charistia_, at which
the kindred throng assembled under their family household gods.]
In imitation either of these Jewish or Gentile love-feasts, or probably
of both, the primitive Christians, in each particular church, had
likewise their love-feasts, which were supplied by the contribution of
the members, according to their several abilities, and partaken of by
all in common. And whether they were converts from among the Jews or
Gentiles, they retained their old custom with very little alteration,
and as their ἀγάπαι had been commonly annexed to their sacrifices, so
they were now annexed to the commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ at
the Lord’s Supper; and were therefore held on the Lord’s day before or
after the celebration of that ordinance. It would seem at Corinth, in
the Apostles’ days, they were ordinarily held before; for when the
Corinthians are blamed for unworthily receiving the Lord’s Supper, it is
partly charged upon this, that some of them came drunk to that
ordinance, having indulged to excess at the preceding love-feast: Every
one taketh before, ϖρολαμϐανει, his own supper, and one is hungry, and
another is drunken,” 1 Cor. xi, 21. This shows, says Dr. Whitby, that
this banquet, namely, the love-feast, was celebrated before the Lord’s
Supper. But Chrysostom gives an account of it, as being in his time kept
after it. It is commonly supposed, that when St. Jude mentions certain
persons, who were spots in the feasts of charity, ἐν ταῖς ἀγάπαις, verse
12, he means in the Christian love-feasts; though Dr. Lightfoot and Dr.
Whitby apprehend the reference in this passage is rather a custom of the
Jews, who, on the evening of their Sabbath, had their κοινωνία, or
communion, when the inhabitants of the same city met in a common place
to eat together. However that be, all antiquity bears testimony to the
reality of the Christian ἀγάπαι, or love-feasts.
The most circumstantial account, says Dr. Townley, of the manner in
which the ancient _agapæ_ were celebrated, is given by Tertullian, in
his Apology,” written in the second century: Our supper,” says he, which
you accuse of luxury, shows its reason in its very name, for it is
called ἀγάπη, that is, _love_. Whatever charge we are at, it is gain to
be at expense upon the account of piety. For we therewith relieve and
refresh the poor. There is nothing vile or immodest committed in it. For
we do not sit down before we have first offered up prayer to God. We eat
only to satisfy hunger, and drink only so much as becomes modest
persons. We fill ourselves in such a manner, as that we remember still
that we are to worship God by night. We discourse as in the presence of
God, knowing that he hears us. Then, after water to wash our hands, and
lights brought in, every one is moved to sing some hymn to God, either
out of Scripture, or, as he is able, of his own composing, and by this
we judge whether he has observed the rules of temperance in drinking.
Prayer again concludes our feast; and thence we depart, not to fight and
quarrel; not to run about and abuse all we meet; not to give up
ourselves to lascivious pastime; but to pursue the same care of modesty
and chastity, as men that have fed at a supper of philosophy and
discipline, rather than a corporeal feast.” Ignatius, in his epistle to
the church of Smyrna, in the first century, affords us the additional
information, that it was not lawful to baptize, or celebrate the
love-feasts, without the bishop, or minister.” Lucian, the epicurean,
has also a passage which seems to refer to the _agapæ_. He tells us that
when Peregrinus, a Christian, was in prison, you might have seen, early
in the morning, old women, some widows, and orphans, waiting at the
prison. Their presidents bribed the guards, and lodged in the prison
with him. Afterward (that is, in the evening) various suppers (that is,
suppers consisting of various dishes, and various kinds of meat, brought
thither by various persons of the company) were brought in, and they
held their sacred conversations, ἴεροι λογοι, or their sacred discourses
were delivered.” Pliny, in his celebrated epistle to Trajan, mentions
the “_cibus promiscuus et innoxius_,”--“common and harmless meal” of the
Christians, which they ate together after the celebration of the
eucharist. This primitive practice, though under a simpler form, and
more expressly religious, is retained in modern times, only by the
Moravians, and by the Wesleyan Methodists.