Liturgical Prayers in 13th century Scholastic Theology

The Journal of Theological Studies

The Catholic Historical Review, 2002

In the Christian literature of the Latin West there was a distinct and widespread type of writing that interpreted the liturgy in its broadest sense (sometimes including the space where the liturgy was celebrated) using contemporary methods of scriptural exegesis. It fell from favor in the early modern period, but in recent decades there has been a small revival of interest among scholars in a variety of disciplines. This article aims to assist this new interest by defining the genre of "liturgical interpretation" more closely through attention to its origins, method, history, and theoretical underpinnings. Given the genre's important place in medieval and early modern culture, students of these periods should have an understanding of liturgical interpretation; but it is even possible that the genre's symbolic and flexible mode of thinking about public worship may be able to contribute to future liturgical theologies. 1

Antiphon, 2020

The liturgical reforms of the 20th century within the western (specifically Roman Catholic) church are popularly interpreted according to one's conceptions of the liturgical developments ordered by the Council of Trent. This paper seeks to investigate the nature of the liturgical spirit of the latter part of the Middle Ages and the early modern period, from circa 1474-1630, tracing the development of the Mass from the rite of the Roman Curia through the promulgation of the 1570 missal and ending with the breviary of Urban VIII, showing that although changes were made along the way, the reforms of the period were made in order to maintain the textual and ritual tradition of the preceding 500 years, although this is more so true of the Mass than of the Divine Office. Finally, the paper concludes with a reflection upon the historiographical terminology used to refer to this period which illuminates the liturgical reforms themselves.

A canon of St. Peter's, cantor, and liturgist named Benedict composed an ordo, a liturgical script, ca. 1140–1143. Though long held as a vivid and accurate testimony to contemporary liturgy in Rome, it has more recently been dismissed as a compilation of older sources that reflects an antiquated form of worship. A comparison of the liturgy of the ordo with contemporary sources proves instead that Benedict was an accurate observer of the contemporary liturgy of Rome. When correctly understood, his ordo gives us new information about the pivotal role liturgy played in the papacy of Pope Innocent II (1130–1143). Benedict's ordo preserves some of Innocent II's newly crafted ceremonies, which were propaganda designed to solidify his hold on the papacy. This article further suggests the relevance of recent discussions about medieval ritual for the liturgy and the significance of the liturgy for medieval history.

2001

In his apostolic constitution defining the dogma of the Assumption of Mary, Pope Pius XII states that "the liturgy of the Church does not engender the Catholic faith, but rather springs from it, in such a way that the practices of the sacred worship proceed from the faith as the fruit comes from the tree." 1 Such a notion, apart from the context, sounds reasonable to many contemporary Christians. As the recent liturgical reforms have proceeded throughout the churches, there has been a liturgical ressourcement that has kept pace with the similar "return to the sources" in theological disciplines. The theological articulation of the churches has itself been reviewed and reformed, through ecumenical encounter and conciliar reflection. The liturgical reform movement has reflected the considerable rapprochement of the churches. From an ecumenical perspective, one can appreciate the great advances towards Christian unity that have been made visible through the liturgical reforms.

Horizons, 2013

are longtime colleagues in the liturgy program at the University of Notre Dame. At the end of their long association (Bradshaw recently retired from teaching), they have collaborated on this book that draws together the strands of much of their work over the past decades.

Studia Patristica, 2021

One of the liturgist’s most misused and misquoted axioms is Prosper of Aquitaine’s lex orandi, lex credendi, has been used to claim that liturgy is a ‘source’ for theology, thereby elevating it to the status of a methodological principle. One can find many examples of scholars claiming that the axiom has clear historical purchase, namely, that liturgy has a historical and genealogical priority over doctrine. The distinction between primary and secondary theology is itself unproblematic. Rather, the problem emerges when one claims both that authorized liturgical texts necessarily precede dogmatic theological reflection and thus are its source. Such claims are interesting, and one may argue that ancient and contemporary liturgical texts should serve as a foundation for future theological reflection. But as a historical claim, it must be tried against specific examples. This paper examines two key examples: first Ambrose, and then Chrysostom. Both are fourth century contemporaries who share a number of things in common: (a) They left a great deal of writing on baptism and the Eucharist; (b) We know the texts of the anaphoras they used; (c) Their theology of consecration is nearly identical, despite living in quite different locales; and (d) Finally, in both, there is a strong tension between what they write about what effects consecration and the theology of consecration expressed in the eucharistic prayer that each used.