Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 11.djvu/569

PASCHAL 515 PASCHAL the Holy Land and the defence of Christendom. He had died a fortnight after Jerusalem fell into the hands of the crusaders. To continue the work inaugurated by Urban remained the fixed policy of the Holy See for many generations. Paschal laboured vigorously by synods and journeys through Italy and France to keep alive the crusading spirit. Of more vital importance was the Investiture Conflict (see ). It was fortunate that the antipope, Guibert (Clement III), died a few months after the elevation of Paschal. Three other antipopes, Theodoric (1100), Aleric (1102), and Maginulf, who took the name of Sylvester IV (1105), were offered by the imperialistic faction; but the schism was practically ended. Two of these pretendants were sent by Paschal to do penance in monasteries; the third had little or no following. Henry IV, broken by his previous conflicts, had no desire to renew the struggle. He obstinately refused to abjure his claim to imperial investitures, and, consequently, was again excommunicated, and died at Liège, 7 Aug., 1106.

His death and the accession of his son were of dubious advantage to the papal cause; for although he had posed as the champion of the Church, he soon showed himself as unwilling as his father had been to relinquish any of the pretensions of the crown. Since the pope continued to denounce and anathematize lay investitures in the synods over which he presided, the chief of which were at Guastalla (1106) and Troyes (1107), and since Henry persisted in bestowing benefices at pleasure, the friendly relations between the two powers soon became strained. Paschal decided to change his proposed journey to Germany, and proceeded to France, where he was received enthusiastically by King Philip (who did penance for his adultery and was reconciled to the Church) and by the French people. Henry resented the discussion of a German question on foreign soil, though the question of Investitures was one of universal interest; and he threatened to cut the knot with his sword, as soon as circumstances permitted his going to Rome to receive the imperial crown. In August, 1110, he crossed the Alps with a well-organized army, and, what emphasized the entrance of a new factor in medieval politics, accompanied by a band of imperialistic lawyers, one of whom, David, was of Celtic origin. Crushing out opposition on his way through the peninsula, Henry sent an embassy to arrange with the pontiff the preliminaries of his coronation. The outcome was embodied in the Concordat of Sutri. Before receiving the imperial crown, Henry was to abjure all claims to investitures, whilst the pope undertook to compel the prelates and abbots of the empire to restore all the temporal rights and privileges which they held from the crown.

When the compact was made public in St. Peter's on the date assigned for the coronation, 12 Feb., 1111, there arose a fierce tumult led by the prelates who by one stroke of the pen had been degraded from the estate of princes of the empire to beggary. The indignation was the more intense, because the rights of the Roman See had been secured from a similar confiscation. After fruitless wrangling and three days of rioting, Henry carried the pope and his cardinals into captivity. Abandoned as he was by everyone, Paschal, after two months of imprisonment, yielded to the king that right of investiture against which so many heroes had contended. Henry's violence rebounded upon himself. All Christendom united in anathematizing him. The voices raised to condemn the faint-heartedness of Paschal were drowned by the universal denunciation of his oppressor. Paschal humbly acknowledged his weakness, but refused to break the promise he had made not to inflict any censure upon Henry for his violence. It was unfortunate for Paschal's memory that he should be so closely associated with the episode of Sutri. As head of the Church, he developed a far-reaching activity. He maintained discipline in every corner of Europe. The greatest champions of religion, men like St. Anselm of Canterbury, looked up to him with reverence. He gave his approval to the new orders of Cîteaux and Fontevrauld. On his numerous journeys he brought the papacy into direct contact with the people and dedicated a large number of churches. If it was not given to him to solve the problem of Investitures, he cleared the way for his more fortunate successor.

, ''Lib. Pont, II, 296 sqq.;, The Historians of the City of Rome; , Concilieng.'', V, ed. , Kircheng., II, 378;, ''Hist. of the Popes'' (New York, 1867).



 Paschal III, second antipope in the time of Alexander III. He was elected in 1164 to succeed Cardinal Octavian, who, under the name of Victor IV, had warred so many years against Alexander III. To meet the demands of Frederick Barbarossa, he canonized Charlemagne in 1165, but this action was never ratified by the Church (see ). He died in 1168.

 Paschal,. See.

 Paschal Candle. — The blessing of the "paschal candle", which is a column of wax of exceptional size, usually fixed in a great candlestick specially destined for that purpose, is a notable feature of the service on Holy Saturday. The blessing is performed by the deacon, wearing a white dalmatic. A long Eucharistic prayer, the "Præconium paschali" or "Exultet", is chanted by him, and in the course of this chanting the candle is first ornamented with five grains of incense and then lighted with the newly blessed fire. At a later stage in the service, during the blessing of the font, the same candle is plunged three times into the water with the words: Descendat in hanc plenitudinem fontis virtus Spiritus Sancti" (May the power of the Holy Spirit come down into the fulness of this fountain). From Holy Saturday until Ascension Day the paschal candle is left with its candlestick in the sanctuary, standing upon the Gospel side of the altar, and it is lighted during high Mass and solemn Vespers on Sundays. It is extinguished after the Gospel on Ascension Day and is then removed.

The results of recent research seem all to point to the necessity of assigning a very high antiquity to the paschal candle. Dom Germain Morin (Revue Bénédictine, Jan., 1891, and Sept., 1892) has successfully vindicated, against Mgr. Duchesne and others, the authenticity of the letter of St. Jerome to Presidius, deacon of Placentia (Migne, P. L., XXX, 188), in which the saint replies to a request that he would compose a, carmen cerei, in other words, a form of blessing like our "Exultet". Clearly this reference to a carmen cerei (poem of the candle) must presuppose the existence, in 384, of the candle itself which was to be blessed by the deacon with such a form, and the saint's reply makes it probable that the practice was neither of recent introduction nor peculiar to the church of Placentia. Again St. Augustine (De Civit. Dei, XV, xxii) mentions casually that he had composed a laus cerei in verse; and from specimens of similar compositions — all of them, however, bearing a close family resemblence to our "Exultet "-which are found in the works of Ennodius (Opusc., 14 and 81), it appears that there can be no sufficient ground for doubting the correctness of this statement. Moreover, Mgr. Mercati has now shown good reason for believing that the existing "Præconium paschale" of thc Ambrosian Rite was composed in substance by St. Ambrose himself or else founded upon hymns of which he was the author (see "Studi e Testi", XII, 37-38). There is, therefore, no occasion to refuse to Pope Zosimus (c. 417) the credit of having conceded the use of the paschal candle to the