Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 7.djvu/486

 HOLY

428

HOLY

teries of their own. Thanks to the ten years' truce concluded during the preceding year between Frede- rick 11 of Sicily and the sultan, the Franciscans were enabled to enter Jerusalem, but they were also the first victims of the violent invasion of the Khorus- mians in 1244, thus opening the long Franciscan martyrology of the Holy Land. Nevertheless, the Franciscan province of Syria, continued to exist with Acco as its seat. The monks quickly resumed posses- sion of their convent of Mount Sion at Jerusalem, to which they have demonstrated their claim with the blood of their martyrs and where they have obsti- nately retained their foothold in spite of numberless molestations and outrages for five hundred years. The Turks, notwithstanding their fierce fanaticism, tolerated the veneration paid to the Tomb of Christ, because of the revenue they derived from the taxes levied upon pilgrims. In l:;42, in his Bull "Gratiam agimus". Pope Clement VI officially committed the care of the Holy Land to the Franciscans, who f ulfdled this trust until the restoration of the Latin Patriar- chate of Jerusalem by Pius IX. Consequently, after 1342, to be enrolled among the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre, it was necessary to apply to tlie Franciscans, and from this period the itineraries of pilgrims mention frequent receptions into this con- fraternity — improperly called an order, since it had no monastic rule, regular organi7ation, or commu- nity of goods. Where mention is made of the posses- sions of the Holy Sepulchre, the allusion is to the Canons of the Holy Sepulclire, who had convents in various lands, and not to the knights, as some writers believe.

Pilgrims were received into this lay confraternity with all the external ceremonial of ancient chivalry, although the fundamental rules of the institution were not always observed. It was objected that many on whom knighthood was conferred were not of the nobility. The formal question, "if he were of noble birth", was always put to the applicant, but in event of his being a merchant or a plebeian he was not obliged to answer. In point of fact all classes were represented in these pilgrimages, anrl it is easy to understand why those who had accomplished this trjdng devotion, then so fraught with danger, should desire to carry away from Jerusalem some such last- ing souvenir as the insignia of knighthood, and that refusal was difficult, especially since the sanctuary was practically dependent on the offerings of these merchants, and consequently these contributions were far more deser\'ing of recognition than the platonic vow to exert oneself as far as possible in the defence of the Holy Land. In the ceremonial of reception, the role of the clergy was limited to the bencdictio militis, the final act of dubbing with the sword being reserved to a professional knight. It has been ascer- tained that, m the fifteenth century from 14S0 to 1495, there was in Jerusalem a Corman, John of Prussia, who acted as steward for the convent and who, in his character of gentleman and layman, regu- larly discharged this act reserved to knighthood. It was also of frequent occurrence that a foreign knight, present among the crowds of pilgrims, would assist at this ceremony. However, in default of other assistance, it was the superior who had to act instead of a knight, although such a course was esteemed irregular, since the carrying of the sword was incom- patible with the sacerdotal character. It was since then also that the superior of the convent assumed the title of grand master, a title which has been acknowledged bv various pontifical diplomas, and finallv bv a Bull of Benedict XIV dated 1746. When Pius" IX re- established the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem in 1847, he transferred to it the office of grand master of the order. At the same time he drew up and in 1S6S published the new statutes of the orrler. which created the three ranks — that of the grand cross, that of

commander, and that of simple knight — ordained that the costume be a "white cloak with the cross of Jerusalem in red enamel", and regulated the chan- cellor's fees. By his Bull of 30 May, 1907, Pivis X effected the latest change by reserving to himself the grand-mastership of the order, but delegating his powers to the present Latin patriarch.

QuARE.SMIUS. Historica Terra Sancton duridatio (Antwerp, 16.39) ; HoDY, Notice sur tes chevaliers du SlSt'-pulcre (.Ac.adiSmie d'arch(?ologie, Antwerp, IS.'S.'i); Hermens, Der Orden vom h. Grahe (Cologne, IS/O); Couret, L'Ordre du St'SepuUrc de Jerusalem (P.iri3, 1905).

Ch. Moeixeb.

Holy Spirit. See Holy Ghost.

Holy Synod, in its full form Most IIolv Directing S^'NOD, the name of the council liy which the Church of Russia and, following its example, many other Orthodox Churches are governed.

I. History of the Holy' Synod. — The principle of summoning a synod or council of ecclesiastical per- sons to discuss some gra\e question affecting the Church goes back, of course, to the very beginning of her history. Since the day when the Apostles met at Jerusalem to settle whether Gentile converts were to keep the Old Law (Acts, xv, 6-29). it had been the custom to call together such gatherings as occasion required. Bishops summoned .synods of their clergy, metropolitans and patriarchs summoned their suffra- gans, and then since 325 there was a succession of those greatest synods, representing the whole Catholic world, that are known as general councils. But all these synods met only on certain occasions, for a short time, to discuss some one, or at most a few, of the burning questions. We shall fin<l the predecessors of present Orthodox Holy Synoils rather in permanent councils at the courts of certain chief bishops. Such councils formed them.selves naturally, without any detriment to the monarchical principle. The l)ishop was always autocrat in his own diocese, the patriarch in his patriarchate. Nevertheless, when he had a number of wise and learned persons, clergy of his city, suffragan and titular bishops in his palace or near at hand, it was very natural that he should consult them continually, hear their advice, and then follow it or not as he thought best. Two examples of such advisory committees established permanently under their bishops are famous. The pope had at hand his suburban bishops, the Roman parish priests, and regionary deacons. Without going through the formality of summoning a diocesan or provincial sjTiod he could alwa\s ]5rofit by their collected wis- dom. He flid so continually. From the fact that it was normally just these three liodies who joined to elect a new pope when the see was vacant they had additional importance, and their views gained addi- tional weight. The assembly of these persons around the pope as a permanent institution was the Con- cilium apodolirir sedis to which papal letters from the fifth to the eighth or ninth centuries often refer. The same name was, however, also used for specially summoned Roman provincial synods, which were quite a tlifferent thing. The Concilirim apnsti)tirir scdis in the first sense evolved into the college of cardinals, who still form a kind of permanent synod for the pope to consult. But there has never been any idea of so rarlical a revolution as the government of the Roman Church by a synod. Once the pope was lawfully elected he was absolutely master. He could consult his cardinals if he thought fit, but after they had given their opinions he was still entirely free to do as he chose.

A nearer example for the Orthodox was a similar institution at Constantinople. As the oecumenical pat riarchs gradually grew in importance, as they spread the boundaries of their jurisdiction and were able more and more plainly to assert a kind of authority over all Eastern Christendom, so was their palace filled with a growing crowd of suffragans, auxiliary