Here's the icon "Revelation of God in human form in the person of Jesus Christ, Church of the
; one of the great things about writing about church music and church traditions is that you can cite something from a century ago with fairly good confidence! There may, of course, have been further developments in the understanding of the origins of the Feast of the Epiphany, but most likely a great deal of what's there still works.
I may as well quote the page in its entirety, since this is all rather complicated and the pieces all refer to one another:
Epiphany
Known also under the following names: (1)
ta epiphania, or
he epiphanios, sc.
hemera (rarely
he epiphaneia: though, e.g. in
Athanasius,
he somatike epiphaneia occurs);
theophaneia:
dies epiphaniarum; festivitas declarationis, manifestationis; apparitio; acceptio. (2)
hemera ton photon:
dies luminum; dies lavacri. (3)
phagiphania,
Bethphania; etc. (4)
Festum trium regum: whence the
Dutch Drie-koningendag Danish Hellig-tre-kongersdag, etc. (5) Twelfth Day,
Swedish Trettondedag;, etc. — The meaning of these names will be explained below. The
feast
was called among the
Syrians
denho (up-going), a name to be connected with the notion of rising light expressed in
Luke. I, 78. The name
Epiphania survives in Befana, the great fair held at that season in
Rome; it is difficult to say how closely the practice then observed of buying all sorts of earthenware images, combined with whistles, and representing some
type
ofRoman
life, is to be connected with the rather similar
custom
in vogue during the December
feast
of the
Saturnalia. For the earthenware or
pastry
sigillaria then sold all over
Rome, see Macrobius; s. I, x, xxiv; II, xlix; and
Brand, "Pop. Ant.", 180, 183.
History
As its name suggests, the
Epiphany had its origin in the
Eastern Church. There exists indeed a
homily of
Hippolytus to which (in one
manuscript only) is affixed the lemma i
eis ta hagia theophaneia [not
epiphaneia:
Kellner]; it is throughout addressed to one about to be
baptized, and deals only with the
Sacrament of Baptism. It was edited by
Bonwetsch
and Achelis (Leipzig, 1897); Achelis and others consider it spurious. The first reference about which we can feel
certain
is in
Clement
(
Stromata I.21.45), who writes: "There are those, too, who over-curiously assign to the
Birth
of
Our Saviour not only its year but its day, which they say to be on 25
Pachon
(20 May) in the twenty-eighth year of
Augustus. But the followers of
Basilides celebrate the day of His
Baptism
too, spending the previous night in readings. And they say that it was the 15th of the month
Tybi
of the 15th year of
Tiberius Caesar. And some say that it was observed the 11th of the same month." Now, 11 and 15
Tybi
are 6 and 10 January, respectively. The question at once arises; did these
Basilidians celebrate
Christ's Nativity and also His
Baptism
on 6 and 10 January, or did they merely keep His
Baptism
on these days, as well as His Nativity
on another
date? The evidence, if not
Clement's
actual
words, suggests the former. It is
certain that the
Epiphany
festival
in the East
very early admitted a more or less marked commemoration of the
Nativity, or at least of the
Angeli ad Pastores, the most striking "manifestation" of
Christ's glory
on that occasion. Moreover, the first
actual
reference to the
ecclesiastical feast
of the
Epiphany (Ammianus
Marcellinus, XXI, ii), in 361, appears to be doubled in
Zonaras (XIII, xi) by a reference to the same
festival
as that of
Christ's Nativity. Moreover,
Epiphanius
(Haer., li, 27, in P.G., XLI, 936) says that the sixth of January is
hemera genethlion toutestin epiphanion,
Christ's Birthday, i.e. His
Epiphany. Indeed, he assigns the
Baptism
to 12
Athyr, i.e. 6 November. Again in
chapters
xxviii and xxix (P.G., XLI, 940 sq.) he asserts that
Christ's Birth, i.e. Theophany, occurred on 6 January, as did the
miracle at
Cana, in consequence of which water, in various places (Cibyra, for instance), was then yearly by a
miracle turned into
wine, of which he had himself
drunk. It will be noticed, first, if
Clement
does not expressly deny that the
Church celebrated the
Epiphany in his time at
Alexandria, he at least implies that she did not. Still less can we think that 6 January was then observed by the
Church as
holy. Moreover,
Origen, in his list of
festivals(
Against Celsus VIII.22), makes no mention of it.
Owing no
doubt to the vagueness of the name
Epiphany, very different manifestations of
Christ's glory
and
Divinity
were celebrated in thisfeast
quite early in its
history, especially the
Baptism, the
miracle at
Cana, the
Nativity, and the visit of the
Magi. But we cannot for a moment suppose that in the first instance a
festival
of manifestations in general was established, into which popular local
devotion
read specified meaning as circumstances dictated. It seems fairly clear hat the
Baptism
was the event predominantly commemorated. The Apostolic Constitutions
(VIII, xxxiii; cf. V, xii) mention it.
Kellner
quotes (cf.
Selden, de Synedriis, III, xv, 204, 220) the oldest
CopticCalendar
for the name
Dies baptismi sanctificati, and the later for that of
Immersio Domini as applied to this
feast.
Gregory of Nazianzusidentifies, indeed,
ta theophania with
he hagia tou Christou gennesis, but this
sermon
(Orat. xxxviii in P.G., XXXVI. 312) was probably preached 25 Dec., 380; and after referring to
Christ's Birth, he assures his hearers (P.G., 329) that they shall shortly
see
Christ
baptized. On 6 and 7 Jan., he preached orations xxxix and xl (P.G., loc. cit.) and there declared (col. 349) that the
Birth
of
Christ
and the leading of the
Magi by a star having been already celebrated, the commemoration of His
Baptism
would now take place. The first of these two sermons
is headed
eis ta hagia phota, referring to the
lights
carried on that day to
symbolize
the
spiritual
illumination of
baptism, and the day must carefully be distinguished from the
Feast
of the
Purification, also called
Festum luminum for a wholly different
reason.
Chrysostom, however, in 386 (see
CHRISTMAS) preached "Hom. vi in B: Philogonium" where (P.G., XLVIII, 752) he calls the
Nativity
theparent
of
festivals, for, had not
Christ
been born, neither would He have been
baptized,
hoper esti ta theophania. This shows how loosely this title was used. (Cf.
Chrys., "Hom. in
Bapt. Chr.", c. ii, in P.G., XLIX, 363; A.D. 387).
Cassian
(Coll., X, 2, in P.L., XLIX; 820) says that even in his
time
(418-427) the
Egyptian monasteries still celebrated the Nativity and
Baptism
on 6 January.
At
Jerusalem the
feast
had a special reference to the
Nativity
owing to the neighbourhood of
Bethlehem. The account left to us by Etheria (Silvia) is mutilated at the beginning. The title of the subsequent
feast,
Quadragesimae de Epiphania (Perigrin.
Silviae, ed. Geyer, c.xxvi), leaves us, however, in no
doubt as to what she is describing. On the
vigil
of the
feast
(5 Jan.) a
procession left
Jerusalem for Bethlehem
and returned the following morning. At the second hour the services were held in the splendidly decorated
Golgotha
church, after which that of the Anastasis was visited. On the second and third days this
ceremony was repeated; on the fourth the service wasoffered
on
Mount Olivet; on the fifth at the grave of
Lazarus
at
Bethany; on the sixth on
Sion; on the seventh in the
church
of theAnastasia, on the eighth in that of the
Holy Cross. The procession to Bethlehem
was nightly repeated. It will be seen, accordingly, that this Epiphany octave
had throughout so strong a
Nativity
colouring as to lead to the exclusion of the commemoration of the
Baptism
in the year 385 at any rate. It is, however, by way of
actual
baptism on this day that the
West
seems to enter into connection with theEast.
St. Chrysostom
(Hom. in
Bapt. Chr. in P.G., XLIX, 363) tells us how the
Antiochians
used to take home
baptismal water
consecratedon the night of the
festival, and that it remained for a year without corruption. To this day, the
blessing
of the waters by the dipping into river, sea, or lake of a
crucifix, and by other complicated
ritual, is a most popular
ceremony. A vivid account is quoted by
Neale
("HolyEastern Church", Introduction, p. 754; cf. the
Greek,
Syriac,
Coptic, and
Russian
versions, edited or translated from the original texts by
John, Marquess of Bute, and A. Wallis Budge). The people consider that all ailments,
spiritual
and physical, can be cured by the application of the
blessed
water. The
custom
would seem, however, to be originally connected rather with the
miracle of
Cana
than with the
Baptism. That
baptism on this day was quite usual in the
West
is
proved, however, by the complaint of
Bishop Himerius
of
Tarragonato
Pope Damasus
(d. 384), that
baptisms were being celebrated on the
feast
of the
Epiphany.
Pope Siricius, who answered him (P.L., XIII, 1134) identifies the
feasts
of
Natalitia Christi and of his
Apparitio, and is very indignant at the
extension
of the period for
baptisms beyond that of
Easter and that of
Pentecost.
Pope Leo I ("Ep. xvi ad Sicil. episcopos", c. i, in P.L., LIV, 701; cf. 696)
denounces
the practice as an
irrationabilis novitas; yet the
Council
of
Gerona (can. iv) condemned it in 517, and
Victor Vitensis
alludes to it as the regular practice of the (Roman-)
African
Church
(De Persec.
Vandal., II, xvii, in P.L., LVIII, 216).
St. Gregory of Tours, moreover (De gloriâ martyrum in P.L., LXXI, 783; cf. cc. xvii, xix), relates that those who lived near the
Jordan bathed in it that day, and that
miracles were then wont to take place.
St. Jerome (Comm. in
Ez., I, i, on verse 3 in P.L., XXV, 18) definitely asserts that it is for the
baptism and opening of the heavens that the
dies Epiphaniorum is still venerable and not for the
Nativity
of
Christ
in the flesh, for then
absconditus est, et non apparuit — "He was hidden, and did not appear."
That the
Epiphany was of later introduction in the
West
than the
Christmas festival
of 25 December, has been made clear in the article
CHRISTMAS. It is not contained in the
Philocalian
Calendar, while it seems most likely that 25 December was celebrated at
Rome before the
sermon
of
Pope Liberius (in
St. Ambrose, De virg., iii, I, in P.L., XVI, 231) which many assign to 25 Dec., 354.
St. Augustine
clearly observes
Oriental
associations in the
Epiphany
feasts: "Rightly", says he (Serm. ccii, 2, in Epiph. Domini, 4, in P, L., XXXVIII, 1033), "have refused to celebrate this day with us; for neither do they
love unity, nor are they in communion with the
Eastern Church, where at last the star appeared."
St. Philastrius (Haer., c. cxl, in P.L., XII, 1273) adds that
certain
heretics refuse to celebrate the
Epiphany, regarding it, apparently, as a needless duplication of the
Nativity
feast, though, adds the
saint, it was only after twelve days that
Christ
"appeared to the
Magi in the
Temple". The
dies epiphaniorum, he says (P.L., XII, 1274), is by some thought to be "the day of the
Baptism, or of the Transformation
which occurred on the mountain". Finally, an unknown
Syrian
annotator of
Barsalibi (Assemani, Bibl. Orient., II, 163) boldly writes: "The
Lord
was born in the month of January on the same day on which we celebrate the
Epiphany; for of old the
feasts
of the Nativity
and
Epiphany were kept on one and the same day, because on the same day He was born and
baptized. The reason why our fathers changed the
solemnity
celebrated on 6 January, and transferred it to 25 December follows: it was the
custom
of the
heathens to celebrate the birthday of the sun on this very day, 25 December, and on it they lit
lights
on account of the
feast. In these
solemnities and
festivities
the
Christians too participated. When, therefore, the teachers observed that the
Christians were inclined to this
festival, they took counsel and decided that the
true birth-feast
be kept on this day, and on 6 Jan., the
feast
of the
Epiphanies. Simultaneously, therefore, with this appointment the
custom
prevailed of burning
lights
until the sixth day."
It is simpler to say that, about the
time
of the diffusion of the December celebration in the East, the
West
took up the
Oriental
January feast, retaining all its chief characteristics, though attaching overwhelming importance, as
time
went on, to the
apparition
of the
Magi. Epiphanius
indeed had said (loc. cit.) that not only did water in many places turn into
wine
on 6 Jan., but that whole rivers, and probably the Nile, experienced a similar
miracle; nothing of this sort is noted in the
West. The Leonine
Sacramentary
is defective here; but
Leo'seight
homilies on the
Theophania (in P.L., LIV, Serm. xxxi, col. 234, to Serm. xxxviii, col. 263) bear almost wholly on the
Magi, while in Serm. xxxv, col. 249, he definitely asserts their visit to be the commemoration for which the
feast
was instituted.
Fulgentius
(Serm. iv in P.L., LXV, 732) speaks only of the
Magi and the
Innocents.
Augustine's
sermons
(cxcix-cciv in P.L., XXXVIII) deal almost exclusively with this manifestation; and the Gelasian
Sacramentary
(P.L., LXXIV, 1062) exclusively, both on the
vigil
and the
feast. The
Gregorian Sacramentary
makes great use of
Psalm 72:10 and mentions the three great
apparitions
in the
Canon
only. The
Ambrosian, however, refers to all three manifestations in the vigil-preface, and in the feast-preface to
baptism alone. The "Missale Vesontiense" (Neale and Forbes, The
Anc.
Liturgies
of the
Gallican
Church, p. 228) speaks, in the
prayer, of
Illuminatio, Manifestatio, Declaratio, and compares its Gospel
of
Matthew 3:13-17;
Luke 3:22; and
John 2:1-11, where the
Baptism
and
Cana
are dwelt upon. The
Magi are referred to on the Circumcision. The
Gothic
Missal (Neale and
Forbes, op. cit., p. 52) mentions the
Magi on the
vigil, saying that the
Nativity,
Baptism, and Cana
make
Christ's Illustratio. All the manifestations are, however, referred to, including (casually) the feeding of the 5000, a popular allusion in the East, whence the name
phagiphania.
Augustine
(Serm. suppl. cxxxvi, 1, in P.L., XXXIX, 2013) speaks of the raising of Lazarus
(cf. day 5 of the
Jerusalem ritual) as on an equality with the other manifestations, whence in the
East
the name
Bethphania occurs.
Maximus of Turin admits the day to be of three
miracles, and speculates (Hom. vii, in epiph., in P.L., LVII, 273) on the
historical connection of
date
and events.
Polemius
Silvanus,
Paulinus of Nola (Poem. xxvii;
Natal., v, 47, in P.L., LXI) and
Sedulius
(in P.L., LXXII) all insist on the three manifestations. The
Mozarabic
Missal refers mainly to the
Magi, using of their welcome by
Christ
the word
Acceptio, a term of "initiation" common to
Mithraists and
Christians. In 381, the
Council
of
Sargossa
(can. iv), read together with the
Mozarabic
Missal's Mass
in jejunio epiphaniae, makes it clear that a
fast
at this season was not uncommon even among the
orthodox. "Cod. Theod." (II, viii, 20; XXV, v, 2) forbids the circus on this day in the year 400; "Cod.
Justi." (III, xii, 6) makes it a day of
obligation. In 380 it is already marked by cessation of
legal
business in
Spain; in Thrace (if we can trust the "Passio S.
Philippi" in Ruinart, "Acta", 440, 2) it was kept as early as 304.
Kellner
quotes the "Testamentum Jesu Christi" (Mainz, 1899) as citing it twice (I, 28; IV, 67, 101) as a high
festival together with
Easter and
Pentecost.
In the present
Office,
Crudelis Herodes alludes to the three manifestations; in
Nocturn i, the first response for the day, the
octave, and the
Sunday
within the
octave, deals with the
Baptism, as does the second response; the third response, as all those of
Nocturns i and iii, is on the
Magi. The
antiphon
to the
Benedictus
runs: "Today the
Church is joined to her celestial spouse, because in
Jordan
Christ
doth wash her
sins; the
Magi hasten with
gifts
to the royal marriage-feast, and the guests exult in the water turned to
wine."
O Sola refers to the
Magi only. The
Magnificat
antiphon
of Second
Vespers reads: "We keep our
Holy
Day
adored
with three
miracles: today a star led the
Magi to the
crib, today
wine
was made from water at the
marriage, today in
Jordan
Christ
willed to be
baptized by
John
to
save
us." On the
Epiphany it was a very general
custom
to announce the
date of
Easter, and even of other
festivals, a practice ordered by many councils, e.g. that of
Orléans in 541 (can. i);
Auxerre
in 578 and 585 (can. ii), and still observed (Kellner) at
Turin, etc.
Gelasius
finally tells us (Ep. ad episc.
Lucan., c. xii, in P.L., LIX, 52) that the
dedication
of
virgins
occurred especially on that day.
Origin
The reason for the fixing of this
date
it is impossible to discover. The only tolerable solution is that of Mgr. Duchesne (Orig. Chr., 262), who explains simultaneously the celebration of 6 January and of 25 December by a backward reckoning from 6 April and 25 March respectively. The Pepyzitae, or
Phrygian
Montanists, says
Sozomen (
Church History VII.18), kept
Easter on 6 April; hence (reckoning an exact number of years to the Divine
life)
Christ's birthday would have fallen on 6 January. But, it may be urged, the first notice we have of the observance of this
date, refers to
Christ's Baptism. But this (if we may
assume
the
Basilidians, too, to have argued from 6 April) will have fallen on the exact anniversary of the Birth. But why preeminently celebrate the
Baptism? Can it be that the celebration started with those, of whatever
sect, who held that at the
Baptism
the
Godhead descended upon
Christ? On this uncertain territory we had better risk no footstep till fresh evidence, if such there be, be furnished us. Nor is this the place to discuss the
legends
of the Three
Kings, which will be found in the article
MAGI.
Kellner,
Heortologie (Freiburg im Br., 1906);
Funk
in
Kraus,
Real-Encyclopädie, s.v.
Feste;
Bingham,
Antiquities of the Christian Church (London, 1708-22), Bk. XX, c. iv; Usener,
Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen (Bonn, 1889). I.Cyril Martindale.
I think I will write more about Epiphany in a separate post; I do like this feast.
.jpg)
.jpg)
