Pope Benedict XVI wearing the gremiale, an apron-like vestment

The gremiale, also called gremial, is an apron-like vestment worn by the bishop as part of the Catholic Mass or other sacred orders.  The Catholic Encyclopedia describes the current understanding of this vestment in this way:

A square or oblong cloth which the bishop, according to the “Cæremoniale” and “Pontificale”, should wear over his lap, when seated on the throne during the singing of the Kyrie, Gloria, and Credo by the choir, during the distribution of blessed candles, palms or ashes, and also during the anointments in connection with Holy orders. The gremiale is never used during pontifical Vespers. The primary object of the gremiale is to prevent the soiling of the other vestments, especially the chasuble. The gremiale used during the pontifical Mass is made of silk. It should be decorated by a cross in the centre, and trimmed with silk embroidery. Its colour must correspond with the colour of the chasuble. The gremiales used at other functions are made of linen, to facilitate their cleansing in case they be soiled. Little is known of its history; apparently its origin dates back to the later Middle Ages. The Roman Ordo of Gaetano Stefaneschi (c. 1311) mention it first (n. 48); soon after it is mentioned in the statutes of Grandison of Exeter (England) as early as 1339, In earlier times it was used not only any bishop but also by priests. It is not blessed and has no symbolical meaning.

This is an intriguing vestment, particularly since “little is known of its history.”  So I did some research and found a bit more about it. 

New Catholic Dictionary illustration of a gremiale, noting the unique embroidery

First, this vestment is referred to explicitly as an “apron” in many references.  The New Catholic Dictionary describes it:

A silken apron, trimmed with silk embroidery, of the color of the day laid upon the bishop’s lap when he sits during a pontifical Mass. A linen gremial is used when conferring sacred orders.

Or:

Small golden laced, ornamented apron used when seated or conferring Holy Orders.

A glossary of liturgical and ecclesiastical terms, By Frederick George Lee

The JM Latin-English Dictionary defines the term:

apron/lap cloth for bishop at Mass/pontifical functions

In Latin, the word gremiale literally means apron, derived from the Latin word gremium for lap, bosom, or womb.  It is also called a lap cloth.  Because of its relative word germe, it also happens to be the word used for firewood, or more generally for trees or shrubs.

The Century Dictionary notes that it is used by the bishop during mass or ordination “to protect his vestments from the consecrated oil”.  Or as another source puts it, “used in ordination to protect the sacred vestments from any drops of unction that might fall in the act of anointing candidates for the priesthood”.  It also seems that the gremiale is used to protect the vestments from being soiled from the sweat of the hands while sitting.

Most sources note how the gremiale is of different colors, and is usually highly decorated, embroidered with gold and silver thread.  In most of the examples I found, this is true.  Here are three:

Gremiale, manifattura emiliana, sec. XVII; velluto ricamato. San Giovanni in Persiceto (Bologna).

Grémial, 1921, cathédrale, Amiens (Somme).

Gremial, Portugal (?), século XVIII; gorgorão de seda vermelha bordado a ouro e sedas policromas. Patriarcado de Lisboa.

The gremial was originally made out of linen, but over time was gradually replaced with silk, or even the same material as the rest of the liturgical vestments.  Some have compared the gremiale to the towel girded by Christ as he washed the feet of the twelve apostles; indeed, it is still used in such feet washing ceremonies.  Although now primarily used by the bishop, the gremiale was originally used by all degrees of priesthood, including the prelate, priest, deacon and sub-deacon to cover the knees during Mass.

Some sources note that this vestment was a type of “liturgical veil,” and was one of the vestments donned as part of a clothing ceremony.

Gremial of Archbishop Juan de Zumárranga, Spain or Mexico, 1528-37, Embroidered velvet with gold, silver, and silk threads, 39 3/8 x 39 3/4 inches, Museo Nacional Del Virreinato/CONACULTA, INAH, Tepotzotlán, Mexico, 10-1257

One of the most unique gremiales I found was that which belonged to the Archbishop Juan de Zumárranga, and is noted as the “oldest known embroidery in colonial Latin America” according to The Arts in Latin America, 1492-1820.  This gremiale is particularly unique because it is so covered in symbols, in contrast to the definition given above that gremiales had “no symbolical meaning”:

The gremial’s design is similar to that of earlier Spanish ceremonial cloths.  It is embroidered on blue velvet with gold and silver metallic and red silk threads and white silk appliques.  The text around the border reads ARMA MUNDI REDEM / TORIS REGIS REGUM / UNIVERSI CREATORIS / IHVXPI SALVATORUS (The arms of the Redeemer of the World, King of Kings, Creator of the Universe, Jesus Christ the Savior).  The shield in the center contains the cross and instruments of the Passions surrounded by a decorative foliate design and knotted Franciscan cords representing the order’s vows.  In the four corners are shields with the five bloody wounds of Christ, part of the Fransciscan coat of arms, surrounded by decorative borders.

One commentator thinks that the gremiale may “owe its origin to the Limus of the Victimarii”.  In a footnote he quotes Fosbroke:

Limus, Limum, Limocincti – An Apron descending from the navel to the ankles, commonly bordered with purple.  It was the only Vestment of the Victimarii.  It was interwoven with many colours, and was called Licium, when worn by the servants of Magistrates, who were called Limocincti.

This limus is an interesting word, by itself.  It is the Latin word that describes the apron worn by a sacrificing priest, or by attendants of a sacrifice in ancient Rome.  The limocinti were “certain priestly officers who attended on a magistrate, as girt with an apron (limus)”.  These victimarii were those persons designated to perform the animal sacrifices.

Many more modern examples of the gremiale can be found on the Cattolici Romani forum.

One of the best studies I’ve read about such aprons is Matthew Brown’s “Girded about with a Lambskin,” in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 6:2 (1997), p. 124-151.  His analysis includes a look at such ritual apparel in ancient Israel, Egypt, Mesopotamia, among the Freemasons, and in the Book of Mormon.

Gremiale – An Apron-like Catholic Liturgical Vestment

I am grateful for the SANE organizers for allowing us to videotape the symposium and make it available online, particularly Dan McLellan for his support.  I’d also like to thank Steve Smoot and Tyler Livingston for their help with the video cameras, digitizing and uploading.

Below are all the videos that we were able to record at the symposium (that have been uploaded to date).  You can see short bios of each presenter here or here.  David Larsen also took some great notes in the Ancient Israel sessions.  Note:  I will update this post with links to more of the videos as soon as they become available.  Enjoy!

Ancient Israel #1

Donald W. Parry: “Eve, Eden, and the Temple” – not permitted to record
Dan Belnap: “The Role of Scent in the Rituals of Ancient Israel” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
David Larsen: “Two High Priesthoods? Evidence for Changes in the Priesthood from First to Second Temple Judaism” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
William Hamblin: “What is the ‘Chariot’ in Ezekiel 1?” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 or KeyNote presentation (see also his presentation the same day on the iconography of the “Hand of God” – part 1, part 2)

Ancient Israel #2

James Carroll: “An Expanded View of the Israelite Scapegoat” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
David Seely: “The Tabernacle as Cosmos in Josephus’s Antiquities” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
Brian M. Hauglid: “Ancient Temple Architecture: Beliefs and Practices in Light of the Restored Temple Idea” – not permitted to record
Matthew Brown: “Kingship Initiation Motifs in Ancient Israel” – not permitted to record

Early Christianity

Andrew Miller: “The Ante-Nicene Mysteries and their New Testament Sources” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2
Aaron Snyder: “The Prayer Circle in Early Christianity” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
Daniel Becerra: “The Chrism in Early Christianity” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2
Rachel A. Grover: “The Paradise Garden and Messianic Age Imagery in the 5th to 7th Century Church Floor Mosaics of Jordan” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2

The Classical World

Chris Dawe: “The Deification of Romulus” – did not present
Bryan Benson: “The Treatment of Temples in Plato’s Republic and Laws” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
Dustin Simmons: “Emperor as God: Roman Imperial Cult Worship & Implications for Early Christians” – did not present
Daniel O. McClellan: “Initiation Ideology in Apuleius’ Golden Ass” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
Keith Fairbank: “The Eleusinian Mysteries: Greatest Conquest of Demetrios Poliorketes” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2

Egypt

Doug Marsh: “The Microcosmic Egyptian Temple” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2
Kerry Muhlestein and Alyssa Lewis: “The Role of Violent Rituals in the Egyptian Temple” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
Elliott Wise: “An Odor of Sanctity: The Iconography, Magic, and Liturgy of Egyptian Incense” – Entire Lecture or Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
John Gee: “Rituals of the Egyptian Temple: An Orientation” – not permitted to record

Open Session

Jacob Moody: “Philistine Ritual Artifacts” – did not present
Mark Wright: “The Cultural Context of Nephite Apostasy” – not permitted to record
Scott Preston Sukhan Nibley: “Ancient Southeast Asian Temples” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2
Joseph Petramalo: “The Samaritan Temple and Priesthood” – Entire lecture or Part 1, Part 2

Videos of SANE Symposium Lectures on “Temples and Ritual in Antiquity”

Planet Earth

The account of the garden of Eden in Genesis is a very interesting story indeed.  We learn much about the experiences of our first parents and their interactions with God.  It was a very intimate relationship, one in which God walked and talked with Adam and Eve in the garden (Gen. 3:8).

When Adam was first placed in the garden of Eden, he was given a charge to take care of it:

And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. (Gen. 2:15)

The Hebrew word for “dress” is avad, which means to work, labor or serve.  Closely related is the word avodah, which means service.  Even at this early date man was given a stewardship over the earth, and to take good care of it, even while it was still paradisaical! When Adam and Eve transgressed the law of God and fell they were sent from the garden into the dreary world, but with the same charge of stewardship: 

Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. (Gen. 3:23)

The word used for “till” is again, avad.  Since this term also means “to serve,” one could easily misinterpret what man was being commanded to do in these instances.  Man was not being commanded to “serve the earth.” This was hardly the Gaia worship we see rampant in the world today (check out the link).  It was actually far from it, which can be clearly seen from the use of the same word, avad or avodah, throughout the rest of the scriptures.  Hamblin and Seely inform us:

The same word God used when he commanded Adam and Eve to “work” in the Garden--avodah--is used to describe the “service” of the Tabernacle performed by the priesthood.

The “work” of man on the earth was to be tied directly to his worship of God, not the earth. Donald W. Parry expounds further on the meaning of these words in his latest paper in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies:

As we are aware, the Old Testament sets forth a strong connection between temples and service. The Hebrew words ʿavodah (service) and ʿavad (serve) frequently refer to the ancient Israelite temple system. In fact, some Hebrew scholars and lexicographers disclose that the verb ʿavad, often translated “to work” or “to serve,” also means “to worship” or “to perform a (cultic) rite,” referring specifically to temple worship.

In this connection, service and serve occur approximately sixty times in the Hebrew Bible with regard to the Levite task of dismantling, transporting, and reassembling the Mosaic tabernacle. Service and serve also occur with regard to other official duties connected to the tabernacle (and later the temple), including the guard duty of the structure and its courtyard, the system of sacrifices, and the upkeep and care of the sacred furniture, utensils, and instruments.

The expressions “service of the tabernacle” (Hebrew, ʿavodat hammishkan) and “to do the service of the tabernacle” (Hebrew, laʿavod ʾet ʿavodat hammishkan) are both formulaic or standard phrases (see Numbers 3:7-8; Numbers 7:5, 9; Numbers 8:22; Numbers 16:9; Numbers 18:4, 6, 21, 23, 31). After the tabernacle was permanently dismantled and Solomon’s temple was built, the formula “service of the tabernacle” was discontinued. It was replaced with the expression “service of the house of God” or “service of the house of the Lord,” referring to Solomon’s temple. These phrases also became formulaic, especially in Chronicles (see 1 Chronicles 9:13; 1 Chronicles 23:28, 32; 1 Chronicles 28:13).

The picture that we begin to see here is that avad and avodah have a much deeper and rich meaning than simple work or labor.  Such earthly work and labor were to be focused on serving and worshiping the God of heaven and earth. When Adam and Eve and their posterity went to “dress” the garden, or “till” the ground, they were to keep in mind Him who made it all for them, for it was the stewardship that He gave them to do it in the first place.

An interesting connection that also comes to mind is God’s statement to Adam and Eve:

In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread [lehem], till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Gen. 3:19)

Was this sweat and labor to be completely detached from the worship of God?

Tabernacle Coverings

As one begins to study the history of the tabernacle of Moses and its construction, it becomes clear that those who ministered in this temple probably endured some intense heat.  First of all, the Israelites were wandering in a desert where the climate was likely arid and hot. Combine this with the coverings over the tabernacle proper:

The solid structure of the tabernacle was overspread by four separate and distinct coverings.  The innermost of these enclosures was a “tabernacle” (miskan) made of fine-twined linen followed by a “tent” (ohel) of black goat’s hair, a “covering” (mikseh) of ram skins that had been dyed red, and then a “covering” (mikseh) of dolphin skins (see Exodus 36:8-19).

The tabernacle was extremely well-insulated.  While this likely protected the sacred interiors from the elements of the desert outside, as well as being symbolic, it undoubtedly also produced sauna-like conditions inside the structure.

Table of Shewbread

One of the few objects placed inside the tabernacle was the table of shewbread.  There were twelve loaves of this unleavened bread stacked in two rows of equal numbers.  As Matthew Brown acutely writes, “In Hebrew, ‘shewbread’ actually consists of two separate words--(paneh, face) and (lehem, bread)--hence a literal translation would be ‘bread of the face’ (the bread that sits before the face of Jehovah) or, as many translators prefer, ‘bread of the presence’ (the bread that sits in the presence of Jehovah)”.  Could this “bread of the face” have also had reference to the faces of the priests, who literally took upon themselves (and particularly their foreheads) the name of Yahweh in the Holy Place, and whose faces sweated to produce the bread and to partake of it weekly? Part of the priestly liturgy was to consume this bread, along with wine, while inside the sweltering tabernacle:

The priests were to gather inside the Holy Place every Sabbath day and consume the bread that lay upon the golden table (see Leviticus 24:8-9).

Later, from the New Testament we learn that Christ was the “true bread” and the “true vine,” which became memorialized in the Christian sacrament or Eucharist.

So was the Lord’s injunction that “in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread” solely a command to go to work on the earth to provide for oneself and forget one’s relationship with God in the garden, or did it also have reference to worship in the temple, tending to the earth to keep it in a temple-like state, service to God, remembering the atoning sacrifice of the Savior, and that all the things of the earth ultimately come from God, even our daily bread? (D&C 104:13-18; Matt. 6:11).

We should keep all of this in mind as we go to work each day and are good stewards of the earth, that God is our ultimate authority and sovereign, and that all labor and environmental obligations are subservient to Him and none else, and that all our passions are to be kept bridled within the limits prescribed by the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

Service on Earth & Worship of God

Some highlights from this address are:

Jesus's world was a world in which temples were pervasive, dominant, identity-forming and community-shaping institutions. We haven't understood well enough that temples were of the essence in all ancient religions, but a recent burst of books about temple studies shows that people are finally seeing this more clearly. . . .

Certainly Peter spoke of the church as a nation of priests, and early Christians saw themselves in terms of that temple-centric world, and even envied the temple. Margaret builds on solid ground in highlighting the Liturgy of James, in which "all Christians gave thanks that they could enter the holy of holies, 'being counted worthy to enter . . . within the veil'" and cast themselves before God's goodness (226). . . .

In historical Jesus studies, more attention now needs to be given to Jesus and the Temple, for it dominated every landscape in Jerusalem in Jesus's day. Whenever we see Jesus in Jerusalem, we see him in or in the vicinity of the Temple. Too rarely have we noticed how many of his teachings, conversations, and actions are reported in a temple setting. By my count, some 12% of the words in all 4 gospels are set in the Temple or its confines. After Margaret's work, everything in the New Testament needs to be reconsidered in terms of temple themes. . . .

As a Latter-day Saint, I have a deep love for and interest in the Temple, a place that Jesus loved, wept over, and revered as his Father's house. Striving to be saints or holy ones, Latter-day Saints have built temples in many countries around the world. They offer working examples of Christian temples in operation. Their practices tap into much of the earliest temple strata of Christianity. In LDS temples, the faithful are given a new name, a white robe, washed and anointed, instructed through a ritual drama of God the Father's plan of salvation, and prayers are offered for the healing of the sick and the afflicted. . . .

By reconnecting the ordinary Christian's worship with its sustaining temple roots, Margaret takes biblical studies out of the sterile confines of arcane academic arenas (where biblical studies usually languish) and reveals what difference these purposefully obscure, guardedly veiled, and now long-forgotten mysteries can make today in breathing new life into the minds and hearts of faithful sons and daughters of God. Imagine actually enriching every Christian's baptismal experience with the twelve powerful steps of initiation found in the Testament of Levi, reflecting temple traditions older than the Temple of Herod. . . .

While Margaret is appropriately cautious about such matters (105), it is abundantly clear that some things that were perfectly plain and precious in early Christianity have gone missing. . . .

I thought that was interesting that Welch mentioned the Testament of Levi that I just recently wrote about. He also gives interesting commentary on Barker’s temple connections to the Sermon on the Mount, which Welch has written about before. Take a look at the address.

John Welch on Margaret Barker’s Temple Studies

The exhibition attempts to synthesize the literary sources with finds that have been excavated in this country, particularly over the past fifty years: architectural remains, liturgical objects from churches, personal belongings of the Christian inhabitants of this land, and souvenirs made for pilgrims.

They have made an effort to separate the artifacts from the religious doctrines, trying to present the artifacts as they are, objectively.

I found several things interesting as I browsed the website of the exhibition:

1. “His disciples – the Apostles – were twelve in number – a symbolic figure, evoking the Twelve Tribes of Israel.”
2. “This inscribed stone fragment belonged to one of a series of stone slabs that stood in the court of the Temple in Jerusalem and served as a divider between the area permitted to both Jews and Gentiles and the area permitted only to Jews. . . . The existence of such a divider in the Temple court is attested by Josephus: “in this (balustrade) at regular intervals stood slabs giving warning, some in Greek, others in Latin characters, of the law of purification, to wit that no foreigner was permitted to enter the holy place…” (Jewish War, V, 193-198). The actual inscription read thus: “No foreigner shall enter within the balustrade of the Temple, or within the precint, and whosoever shall be caught shall be responsible for (his) death that will follow in consequence (of his trespassing).”
   

   Prohibition of Entry to the Temple

3. Regarding early church buildings, “The structure of the church edifice made it possible to maintain a separation between the members of the congregation and the catechumens, who had not yet been baptized and were therefore only permitted to take part in some of the rites.”
4. “The functionaries of the church included the bishop, the priest, and the deacon, as well as various assistants. One could become a priest from the age of thirty and a deacon from the age of twenty-five. Women could also serve the church, as deaconesses. The large churches were headed by a bishop (episkopos), accompanied by a council of elders (presbyters). The deacons assisted the bishop with the collection of donations and the distribution of charity, and helped him perform the various rites. In the East, married men were not prevented from joining the clergy.”
5. “The apse and the raised platform in front of it – the bema – were surrounded by a low stone partition – the chancel screen – which separated the congregation from the sacred area, where the liturgical rites were performed. The officiating clergy sat on benches built along the walls of the apse, with the bishop in the center. Toward the front of the bema stood the altar, beneath which, in a depression in the floor, a reliquary was hidden. Additional tables, on which the Scriptures and various liturgical objects were placed, also stood on the bema.”
   

   An Early Christian Church

6. “The rite of baptism – symbolizing the purification of sins and rebirth – marks an individual’s acceptance into the Church. In the Byzantine period, this rite was only performed after the candidate for conversion (catechumen) had completed a rigorous course of study. During this lengthy ceremony, the catechumen was immersed in water, anointed with oil, and dressed in a pure white garment. Only then was he or she permitted to enter the church and participate in the Eucharist by partaking of the holy bread and wine.”
   

   Baptismal Font

7. “The most important part of the Christian liturgy was the Eucharist, in which the participants partook of the holy bread and wine – symbols of the body and blood of Jesus serving as a reminder of his sacrifice. The liturgical vessels that were set upon the altar during the ceremony included ewers of wine and water, a strainer, chalices, and patens (plates) for the holy bread.”
8. “The painting depicts three figures wearing halos – apparently representing saints -their arms outstretched in an attitude of prayer. Their manner of dress is characteristic of that of Christian clergymen in the Byzantine period.”
9. “In the rooms adjoining the church, the liturgical items were stored: the vessels used in the Eucharist, the holy books, processional objects, and the liturgical vestments. In addition to these precious objects, funds and gifts acquired by the church through donations, through the leasing of property that had been bequeathed to the church, and through the fulfillment of vows was also stored in the treasury, just as they had been stored in the temples in previous periods. It was forbidden to sell this property, unless this were necessary in order to pay for the release of prisoners or the redemption of captives. The donations of the faithful – both congregants and pilgrims – were the main source of the church’s wealth and were used for its maintenance and renovation.”

There are many more fascinating early Christian artifacts on the website of this exhibition. We thank thee, O God, for a prophet, who has restored these things in the latter-days.

An Early Christian Church Exhibit