Liturgy

LITURGY. - From λῆσον ἔργον = publicum opus. Among the Greeks it implied the concept of a public work, undertaken for the good and in the interest of all citizens, by anyone possessing a census superior to three talents; in this way provision was made for public festivals, national games, etc. Subsequently the meaning was restricted to a public work, yes, but of worship of the gods, and from then on it was not the burden of the wealthy citizen, but of the public treasury (cf. Aristotle: Politics, VII, 9).

I. THE LITURGY IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS

All religions have a liturgy, that is, a norm according to which the sacred action is modeled. There are two indispensable elements of every liturgy: action and word. The action, which in primitive groupings occupies the principal place, expresses through gesture and the various movements of the person (dance, mime, etc.) what it intends to achieve; the word is reduced therein to the minimum necessary either to explain and provoke the effect on the part of the one directing the action or to approve with a shout or formula the assent of the group assisting at the rite. The word tends to assume in the liturgy of more evolved civilizations an ever greater development and moral elevation (v. PREGHIERA) and from a simple imperative formula, or from a request for benefits according to the formula do ut des, it ends up becoming an aspiration of the heart, especially in private prayer. In the liturgy, given its public character, the word is never separated from the action because every liturgy is a drama, which refers back to a historical moment or to a collective aspiration of the group and which is either drawn from the deposit of the oral tradition of the group itself or is codified in its sacred books. In all organized liturgies the association of the word with the action by means of formulas of assent (amen, so be it, alleluia; canticles, hymns, psalms, dance) is constant, and is indeed essential at the culminating moment of the sacred action.

Silence too is part of the liturgy and is imposed with appropriate formulas (e.g., among the Romans favete linguis, parcito linguam) not only to prevent the sacred action from being disturbed by profane noises, but also because silence favors the recollection of the spirit and makes one experience the active presence of the divinity, just as the darkness of the sanctuary aids the concentration of the soul in God. To this the exhortation of the Catholic priest at the beginning of the Preface invites: «Sursum corda!».

The liturgy in all human groups that have fixed and organized places of worship is twofold: daily for the daily service of the temple and the particular piety of the devout; and periodic according to the various times of the year, in coincidence with the rhythm of the seasons, with the recurrence of historical events that have affected the life of the group, or of commemoration of the mythical and historical vicissitudes of the patron divinity of the group itself. Thus in Egypt the death of Osiris and the finding of his body are commemorated (Inventio Osiridis); the metroac ritual recalls the death (Sanguen) and the resurrection of Attis (Hilaria), the Christian religious calendar is essentially dedicated to recalling the life of the Redeemer from Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Death and Resurrection up to the Ascension. The periodicity of the liturgical celebrations serves to renew the sense of social unity by recalling the ideas and facts that presided over the constitution of the group itself and to consolidate its cohesion in this way. Without this periodic reawakening effected by the liturgy the cohesion of the group would be dispersed in individual manifestations often unruly.

Nicola Turchi

II. IN THE CATHOLIC RELIGION

In the sense of worship paid to the divinity, the term l. was also introduced into the Bible by the Septuagint, to indicate, therefore, the sacred office of the priests and Levites in the Temple; thus too it was used by the writers of the New Testament (Lk. 1:23 with regard to Zechariah), also to designate the acts of Jesus as eternal priest (Hebr. 8:2); similar expressions are found in the Didaché (15:1) and in Clement of Rome (To the Corinthians, 44:2). Later it meant only the act of worship par excellence, the Mass (perhaps in correspondence with Act. 13:2), as is attested in the Councils of Ancyra (314), Antioch (314), Laodicea (375), in the Apostolic Constitutions, by the Fathers and by the Greek sacred texts.

The Greek noun and verb were translated in the Latin Bible with "ministare, ministerium, officium" (Lk. 1:23; Act. 13:2; Hebr. 8:2 and 6) which, with the addition of the adjectives "divinum, ecclesiasticum", also served the writers of the Middle Ages. The classical erudition of the 17th century turned the Greek term into the Latin "l.", giving it the office of indicating the historical forms of a rite (thus Mabillon with the work De l. gallicana; Muratori with L. romana vetus, etc.) as well as the living complex of rites. When, however, its meaning was to be more precisely defined, discussions began. Aestheticians and rubricists called it "the complex of rites and prescriptions that form the ceremonial of Christian worship", exposing the l. to becoming merely exterior ritualism; attempts therefore to affirm its essential spiritual element were the definitions: "cultus publicus ab Ecclesia quo ad exercitium ordinatus" (Callewaert), or "the complex of public prayers and practices of worship ordained by Jesus Christ and by the Church" (Eisenhofer) and other similar ones (cf. J. Hanssens: La définition de la liturgie, in Gregorianum, 10 [1929], pp. 204-28), all, perhaps, inspired by can. 1257 of the CIC. The best definition is that of M. Righetti: "it is the worship of the Church" (Storia liturgica, I, Milan 1945, p. 6 ff.). Today the discussions appear closed by the encyclical Mediator Dei, of 20 Nov. 1947: "L. is the integral worship of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, that is, of the Head and of its members"; in other words "it is the public worship that our Redeemer renders to the Father as head of the Church and it is the worship that the society of the faithful renders to the Head and, through him, to the Eternal Father". This definition contemplates the "fact", which, in itself, does not exclude the "manner" in which the l. is realized: this, however, is better indicated by the term rite. For this reason there is only one Christian l., while the rites can be many. It further follows that l. is a synonym of Christian worship, a single and immutable stock, from which the rites are born, varying according to times, places, persons; they represent a particular way of feeling and cultivating the virtue of religion. Each rite has its own testimony in the liturgical books that gather the prayers, passages of the

Bible and the chants for the Mass (lectionary, epistolary, evangeliary, antiphonary, sacramentary, Missal), for the office (Bible, homiliary, passionary, martyrology, hymnary, collectary, psalter, antiphonary, responsorial), for the Sacraments and sacramentals (ritual) and also the rules (rubrics) for the ordering of the ceremonies ("ordo", ceremonial).

The study of these direct testimonies, together with those obtainable from the most varied monuments of Christian tradition, and the comparison of the different rites, can reveal the origin of each and their grouping, so as to constitute a genealogical tree, always alive and luxuriant, even if, after the Council of Trent, the growth of new branches does not appear possible. In the present state of studies the rites can first be distinguished into the two fundamental groups of East and West, each with numerous derivations, going back to Churches particularly important in the early Christian centuries.

III. ORIGIN AND DIVISION

East and West have in common the history of the origins of the l. and of its development up to the year 313. It is the history of Christian worship (v.) with the birth and first development of those local elements which, from the 4th century, will reveal the existence of the different rites.

1. East

Three periods can be distinguished: a) 4th-5th centuries. — The organization of the Church causes certain centers to prevail which, by the importance they acquired, produce two contrary effects: that of causing the liturgical peculiarities of small Churches to disappear — Churches that had lived, because of the persecutions, in forced liturgical autonomy — and that of better ordering their own l., which of itself, or by force of conciliar and synodal canons, imposed itself on the small neighboring Churches. Proof of this is the fact that, the Council of Chalcedon of 451 having established the four patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, they became four liturgical centers, the last more important and of greater influence also in the following centuries, and even in the West, the one because it was the goal of continual pilgrimages, the other because it was the capital of the Empire, where people easily gathered for political affairs. b) 6th-7th centuries. — The Byzantine, Armenian, Syriac, and Coptic rites are by now constituted; they will have the history of every rite under the influence of the civilization that evolves, but they will always remain alive. c) The first printings (16th century) of the Eastern liturgical books fix the "ordo" of each rite, to the advantage over the manuscripts with their many variants.

2. West

The origin and history of the Western rites hinge on that of the Roman rite, even if it is still debated how many liturgical centers there were in the 3rd-4th centuries, whether two, Rome and Milan, or only Rome. Today, even if some Church, or religious Order, preserves small liturgical peculiarities, all the countries of Western civilization, and others that passed to Christianity from the 16th century, follow the Roman rite, with the exception of Milan

Milan and of a surrounding region where the Ambrosian rite is observed. The Gallican, Celtic, and Mozarabic rites were of great historical importance. North Africa had the liturgy of Rome. The final blow against particular rites was struck by Pius V, who granted continued existence only to those rites that could show they had been vital for at least 200 years.

As for historical development, however the liturgy of the individual Western countries may have unfolded, the general lines of a common development can be established: 1) Up to 313. — For the West too, the history of Christian worship in the same period holds good. While in the past an influence of the New Testament writings and of the apostolic age on the formation of liturgical texts was assumed, today there is rather a tendency to see in those writings the first documents of a liturgy that was certainly lived. 2) 4th-5th centuries. — A development rich in consequences, with the detachment from the East, was the introduction of Latin as the liturgical language (v.); the 5th century is regarded as the common age for the official redaction of the liturgical books, such as have come down to us in their essential lines, since in their principal parts the liturgical year (v.) took shape, the sacramental discipline was established, and public prayer was ordered. The work of Pope Leo I and especially of Gelasius I had great resonance. 3) 6th century-first half of the 8th century. — The accounts vary in number, extent, and importance according to the countries. One must bear in mind the grandiose work of Gregory I and, for Italy, the events brought about by Byzantine and Lombard domination, as well as, perhaps for the whole West, the influence of the Greek-Syrian currents, refugees from their lands, whose importance is indicated by the Greek popes of this period. 4) Second half of the 8th century-12th century. — Frankish influence and the Carolingian revival dominate. The liturgy tends increasingly to add to the markedly theological edifice of the earlier centuries a humanistic note, with the establishment of feasts commemorating episodes in the life of Jesus Christ and of the Madonna, the addition of the symbolic meaning of the rites, and a greater cherishing of the needs of man on his journey toward heaven. The restoration of ecclesiastical discipline carried out by Gregory VII also aimed at liturgical unity. 5) 13th-14th centuries. — The decline becomes more pronounced because of the greater prevalence of devotions that obtain an ever wider place in the liturgy, because of the multiplication of feasts and texts, and because of the desire to assign to every gesture a spiritual meaning, indicated by an accompanying formula. 6) From the Council of Trent. — The need to defend dogma and a disciplinary concern brought about a stiffening on the positions reached, though freed from superstructures and better adapted to the new conditions of Christendom. Official editions of the liturgical books were prepared (the Breviary in 1568, the Missal in 1570, the Martyrology in 1584, the Roman Pontifical in 1596, the Ceremonial of Bishops in 1600, the Ritual in 1614, the Roman Octavarium in 1623), which, apart from small particularities and additions of feasts, are the same as those used today. The institution by Sixtus V in 1588 of the Congregation of Rites removed from bishops any possibility of innovations. Canon 1257 of the CIC confirmed this discipline. 7) 19th-20th centuries. — As a fruit of studies conducted according to the most modern textual and historical criticism, one notes the tendency toward a purification of the texts from centuries-old corruptions and toward a reconstruction of the liturgy along severe, dogmatic lines, in which the Christological cycle dominates over the Sanctoral. The work is supervised by the supreme authority of the Church, which tends to harmonize it with the demands, sometimes strongly innovative, of the "liturgical movement."

IV. LITURGICAL MOVEMENT

It has its origins in France, in the reaction to the Revolutionary Terror: Chateaubriand (v.) in the Génie du christianisme celebrates the beauties of worship and of the liturgy; Abbot Guéranger (v.) drew from the Benedictine soul, always exquisitely liturgical in homage to the "Rule," teachings and energies to lead worship back to the splendors which, as an effect from its cause, flow from unifying discipline, from the spiritual penetration of every part, from the return of every rite to the purity in which it was established. Gregory XVI, on Sept. 1, 1837, by erecting the community of Solesmes into a Benedictine Congregation, blessed and approved Guéranger's intentions, assigning to the monks, among other aims, that of "reviving the sound traditions of canon law and those of the sacred liturgy, now in decay." Guéranger's writings and work gave immediate solidity to the liturgical movement, which found precise echoes in kindred souls: in Germany through the work of the Benedictine abbey of Beuron, to which belong Dom Bäumer (v.) and Dom Schott (v.), who popularized the Missal and Vesperal among the people, where a movement for the restoration of sacred art also began; in England through the merit of Card. Newman (v.), to whom the proposition belongs: "whoever is ignorant of the liturgy understands only half the greatness of the Catholic religion"; in Belgium (center: the abbey of Maredsous) with popular works through the merit of Dom Van Caloen and scholarly works through the study of Dom G. Morin (v.) with the Revue bénédictine (founded 1887); in Italy chiefly through the work of d. G. Amelli, founder of the Association of St. Cecilia for sacred music, while at Solesmes the restoration of Gregorian chant was being prepared; great influence of the journal Rassegna gregoriana (1902-14).

The liturgical movement had covered the first stretch of the road, blessed but not yet directly organized by the supreme authority. The first beginning of the second phase is given by the motu proprio "Tra le sollecitudini" (Nov. 22, 1903) of Pius X, in which, although it is true that the central subject is Gregorian chant and sacred music, it is repeatedly said that their restoration depends on a renewed liturgical spirit. From then on the liturgical movement had three aims, not equally pursued everywhere: 1) active participation of the faithful; 2) return to the sacred art of the Church (music, ornament, furnishings, etc.); 3) scholarly study of the whole liturgy.

The best organization and the principal development occurred again in Belgium (1909) with very active centers at Maredsous, Mont-César, Malines, St-André-lez-Bruges, etc., where congresses and several liturgical weeks were held, whose proceedings were published: an excellent contribution was made by the journal Questions liturgiques (founded 1910); at Antwerp in 1930 the first international liturgical congress was held; in Germany (1914), with the abbey of Maria Laach as center, whose work tends above all to unveil the depths of the theological content of the liturgy, in parallel with scholarly activity among the most rigorous, with foundations in every ecclesiastical and profane discipline and with marked sympathy for the Eastern Church; in Austria (c. 1919) with Klosterneuburg as center and the fervent promoter Prof. Pius Parsch, author of several valuable publications, always of a popular character, some of which were translated into Italian; in Portugal from 1921; in the United States of America, from 1940, with Chicago as center, annual liturgical weeks were held with publication of the proceedings; in other countries of America too the liturgical movement is active, as is shown by ecclesiastical journals containing studies and commentaries on the liturgy; also from 1940 in France, with Paris as center, the "Center of Liturgical Pastoral Care" began (it has published the journal La Maison Dieu since 1945) with influence in all the Latin countries. In Italy the liturgical movement, after 1903, at first had a scholarly aspect in which great honor was won by Card. G. Mercati, F. Magani, A. M. Ceriani, A. Ratti (Pius XI), M. Magistretti, the "Greek" scholars of Grottaferrata and, with a popular character, p. G. Semeria. Very soon, however, the second phase began, when historical research became the basis for the science of the spiritual life, combating the abuses introduced in previous centuries, establishing a balance between liturgy and devotions. In 1914, through the efforts of the Benedictines of Praglia and Finalpia, the Rivista liturgica arose, which set itself a program of solid liturgical popularization. In 1913 in Milan Arte cristiana was born, which later became the organ of the Scuola superiore d'arte sacra B. Angelico, in which the liturgy is the inspiration. A particular and formative impulse, also for the clergy, was given by the Liber Sacramentorum (1919-28) of Card. I. Schuster. Meanwhile (1921) in Vicenza the Bollettino liturgico was born, addressed to the faithful; in Rome the new series (from 1927) of the journal of international character, Ephemerides liturgicae, today the best and most complete of its kind, whose editorship is a center of activity and propaganda; in Turin the journal L. lived for a few years, interrupted by the Second World War; in Milan from 1931 the Opera della regalità di Cristo at the Catholic University distributes pamphlets for the people; Ambrosius (1925) deals extensively with the Ambrosian rite (the scholarly aspect, in broader form, has been developed since 1949 in the volumes of the Archivio ambrosiano); it also promotes the movement for altar boys and little singers (the counterpart organizer, with the journal Il chierichetto, for the Roman rite is in Parma) and from 1946 is the organ of the Association of Sts. Ambrose and Cecilia. In Genoa the Apostolato liturgico, founded by Msgr. Moglia, organized in 1934 the first national congress, which called for a "Center of Liturgical Action" for Italy, whose foundations, however, could be established only in 1949 at a national convention held in Parma.

During and immediately after the Second World War the liturgical movement worried the Holy See because some appeared too eager for novelty and were departing from the path of tradition and from prudence. Pius XII provided for this with the encyclical Mediator Dei.

V. WRITERS ON THE LITURGY

In the broadest sense of the expression, certain Fathers of the Church and other writers may be called such. But because of the lack of the liturgical texts they comment on, their writings are to be counted among the sources. These are constituted by the smallest and greatest liturgical testimonies scattered throughout the pagan and Christian writers of the first centuries, in the councils, in the synods; excellent material is provided by archaeology, epigraphy, the history of music and finally by the liturgical books from the oldest redactions to the modern ones. The writers properly so called belong to three periods:

1. 8th-15th centuries. — The Carolingians Alcuin, Amalarius, Agobard, Florus of Lyon, Walafrid Strabo, Rabanus Maurus begin: in them there is an attempt at criticism, and symbolism emerges as a means of support for ceremonies no longer understood or fallen from their primitive efficacy through the changing of Christian life. The allegorists follow, so called for their minute and often exaggerated search for the mystical-symbolic meaning of liturgical things: Odelfort of Milan (d. 814), Berno of Reichenau, St. Peter Damian (d. 1057), Bonizo of Piacenza (d. 1089), John of Avranches (d. 1079), Bernold of Constance (d. 1100), Odo of Cambrai (d. 1131), Ivo of Chartres (d. ca. 1117), Bruno of Segni (d. 1123), Rupert of Deutz (d. 1135), Hugh of St. Victor (d. 1141), Honorius of Autun (d. ca. 1145), Beroldus of Milan (12th cent.), John Beleth of Paris (d. after 1165), Sicard of Cremona (d. 1215), Innocent III (d. 1261), William Durandus (d. 1296), Radulphus de Rivo (d. 1403). All of these are sometimes considered rather secondary sources because with their descriptions and commentaries they complete the picture given by the liturgical books.

2. 16th-18th centuries. — As a reaction to the pseudo-reform, studies of positive theology, historical, archaeological, biblical studies, etc., take on great importance. For this reason it is well to see in the 16th century the birth of liturgical science, whose supporters are concerned to scrutinize the sources, to publish the oldest texts, to compare them, to provide commentaries according to a criticism that over four centuries is continually being perfected. The most important are: John Dobeneck called Coccus (d. 1552), James Pamelius (d. 1587), Melchior Hittorp (d. 1584), Onofrio Panvinio (d. 1568), Angelo Rocca (d. 1620). Of the greatest importance for the Greek and Oriental liturgies are the publications of James Goar (d. 1653), Leo Allatius (d. 1669), Eusèbe Renaudot (d. 1720), Angelo Quirino (d. 1755), Joseph Louis Assemani (d. 1728), Joseph Simon Assemani (d. 1768). While for the Western liturgies important texts were published by Hugues Ménard (d. 1644), Jean Mabillon (d. 1707), Edmond Martène (d. 1739), Giuseppe Bianchini (d. 1764), Giuseppe Maria Tommasi (d. 1713), Lodovico Antonio Muratori (d. 1750), Alexander Lesley (d. 1758), Domenico Giorgi (d. 1764), Martin Gerbert (d. 1793). Serious commentators were, among others: G. Visconti (d. 1633), G. Gavanti (d. 1638), G. Morin (d. 1659), G. Bona (d. 1674), L. Thomassin (d. 1695), P. Lebrun (d. 1720), G. Grancolas (d. 1732), Benedict XIV (d. 1753), G. Catalani (d. 1755), C. Chardon (d. 1757), C. Trombelli (d. 1778), A. Zaccaria (d. 1795).

3. 19th-20th centuries. — It is impossible to give a complete list: only those are named who with their works treat the most varied themes, laying the foundations on which very many then continued the construction and were effectively stimulated to study the liturgy. In France and Belgium: dom P. Guéranger (d. 1875), L. Duchesne (d. 1922), U. Chevalier (d. 1923), P. De Puniet (d. 1938), F. Cabrol (d. 1932), H. Leclercq (d. 1947), P. Batiffol (d. 1928), G. Morin (d. 1946), P. Cagin (d. 1923), G. Corblet (d. 1886), C. Callewaert (d. 1943), A. Wilmart (d. 1946), R. Aigrain, A. Gastoué, H. Netzer, V. Leroquais, M. Andrieu, J. Hesbert, B. Capelle, J. Froger, B. Botte, L. Brou. In England: H. A. Wilson (d. 1927), C. Felton (d. 1926), E. Bishop (d. 1917), A. Fortescue (d. 1923), I. Mearns, I. Thurston, H. Connolly, F. E. Warren. In Germany: A. Ebner (d. 1898), G. Dreves (d. 1909), F. Probst (d. 1899), S. Bäumler (d. 1894), A. Kellner, A. Baumstark (d. 1948), A. Schönfelder, J. Brinktrine, K. Mohlberg, A. Dold, F. X. Funk (d. 1907), L. Fischer, B. Albers, P. Wagner, A. Franz, N. Nilles, L. Eisenhofer (d. 1941), J. Dölger (d. 1940), T. Klauser, P. Browe, M. Hanssens, F. Oppenheim (d. 1949), O. Heiming, O. Casel (d. 1948). In Spain-Portugal: A. Coelho (d. 1938), G. Suñol (d. 1946), Gr. Madinez de Antonana, Juan B. Fereres. In Italy: L. Barbieri, P. Silva-Tarouca, Pio Alfonzo (d. 1946), A. Paredi, P. Borella, A. Roberti, G. Destefani, L. Barin, M. Righetti.

For individual subjects cf. DACL, taking with caution the articles signed by H. Leclercq, a scholar of undoubted value, but who became, from about the middle of the work, almost the sole author of the dictionary. Excellent articles are also found in the DThC.

È sempre necessaria la consultazione di opere bibliografiche: a) per il passato cf. principalmente: F. Cabrol, Introduction aux études liturgiques, Parigi 1907; K. Mohlberg, Ziele und Aufgaben der liturgiesgeschichtlichen Forschung, Münster 1919. b) Dal 1921 in avanti guide ottime sono: i) Jahrbuch für Liturgiewissenschaft edito dal centro liturgico di Maria Laach (Germania). ii) La bibliografia in appendice alla rivista Ephemerides liturgicae curata in modo particolarissimo dal 1946. Per il rito ambrosiano, in aggiunta a quella riportata alla v. AMBROSIA, LITURGIA, cf. il II vol. di Archivio Ambrosiano, Milano 1950, con bibli. dal sec. XIX al 1949. Per il «movimento liturgico»: G. Zunini, Le conquiste del p. Pio Parich, in Ambrosius, 5 (1920), pp. 26-32; A. Hammerstein, Principi e scopi del movimento liturgico promosso dall'abbazia di Maria Laach, ibid., pp. 104-12; O. Rousseau, Il movimento liturgico in Belgio, ibid., pp. 173-80; C. J. Grimbeau, Il valore della rinascita liturgica in Inghilterra, ibid., pp. 258-69; A. Ferreira, Il movimento liturgico nel Portogallo, ibid., p. 1930, pp. 192-95; A. Bernareggi, Il movimento liturgico in Italia, ibid., pp. 162-74; M. G. Tissot, Movimento liturgico in Francia, ibid., 7 (1931), pp. 241-46; L. Andrianopoli, La rinascita liturgica contemporanea, Milano 1934; O. Rousseau, Histoire du mouvement liturgique... depuis le début de XIXᵉ siècle jusqu'au pontificat de Pie X, Parigi 1945; R. Pierre, Le mouvement liturgique fondé à Paris, in Ephemerides liturgicae, 59 (1946), pp. 151-168; E. Fei, Il movimento liturgico negli Stati Uniti, ibid., 60 (1947), pp. 100-106. Riviste pubblicate oggi: Ambrosius (Milano dal 1925); Ephemerides liturgicae (Roma dal 1887); Les questions liturgiques et paroissiales (Lovanio dal 1911); L. (Silos dal 1946); L. (Singeverga dal 1947); Liturgy (Birmingham dal 1920); Maison-Dieu (Parigi dal 1945); Paroisse et Liturgie (Bruges dal 1946); Rivista liturgica argentina (Buenos Aires dal 1936); Rivista Liturgica (Finalpia dal 1914); Sacris erudiri (Bruges dal 1948). Opere ascetico-liturgiche: Cours et conférences des semaines liturgiques, 1913-35, pubblicate dai Benedettini di Lovanio; G. Morin, L'ideale monastico e la vita della società cristiana nei primi secoli, trad. it., Sorrento 1927; R. Guardini, Lo spirito della I., trad. it., Brescia 1935; M. Zundel, Il poema della sacra I., trad. it., Roma 1939.

Enrico Cattaneo

VI. THE I. AS THEOLOGICAL SCIENCE

Canon 1365, 2, also lists "Liturgy" among the subjects of instruction in major seminaries, indicating that part which considers and treats scientifically everything that concerns divine worship (its object), under its various aspects: essence, history, parts, execution (this last part is more specifically called rubrics). A satisfactory division of liturgy as a theological science has not yet been found; in general, general or fundamental liturgy treats of the essence of worship, its general history, its constitutive elements, and sacred times and places; and the special part treats of the various modes under which liturgy is taken: sacrifice (Mass), prayer (Divine Office), Sacraments, sacramentals (blessings). Each individual part can be studied and presented from the purely historical-evolutionary point of view, from that of content or meaning, and finally from that of concrete and practical execution (rubrics). It should be noted, however, that in the teaching of liturgy in seminaries, since what is at issue is the complete and organic formation of the young aspirant, a clear division of these various points of view is neither necessary nor desirable, because the purpose of this teaching must consist in the formation of the young cleric for the liturgical life, in and with the Church, with regard to his own person and to the whole Christian people. This presupposes a good knowledge of liturgical history, but much more a knowledge of its inner greatness and of its pastoral-educational value, given that priestly activity is carried out, in its essential part, precisely through the liturgy, which unites clergy and people in the common duty of the worship owed to God (v. below: Liturgy as a source of piety). Accordingly, the encyclical Mediator Dei, 20 Nov. 1947 (AAS, 39 [1947], p. 591 ff.) also recalls the necessity of a solid and complete liturgical formation of the clergy. In the final analysis, even liturgical studies of purely historical investigation achieve their most fruitful purpose insofar as they serve the service and knowledge of the living, present liturgy.

As for its origin and development, liturgy as a distinct theological discipline detached itself from theology only during the past century, although studies and liturgical treatises had not been lacking before that. The merit of this evolution belongs above all to Prosper Guéranger in France (v.), to Schmidt and to Lüft in Germany (Fr. X. Schmidt, Liturgik der christl. Religion, Passau 1832; J. B. Lüft, Liturgik, 2 vols., Mainz 1844-47). With the Katholische Liturgik of J. Fluck (2 vols., Regensburg 1853-55), liturgy can be considered a separate theological discipline. However, some of the most esteemed authors of pastoral theology in Germany still prefer to make liturgy an integral part of pastoral theology (see the great works of Amberger, Benger, Schüch), with a treatment that is historically certainly less pronounced, but furnished with solid pastoral doctrine, still most useful today. From then on, general introductions and particular works, especially of a historico-liturgical nature, multiplied immensely (cf., for example, Ph. Oppenheim, Introductio historico in litteras liturgicas, 2nd ed., Turin 1945).

VII. THE LITURGY AS A DOGMATIC SOURCE

The probative value of the liturgy as a dogmatic source is summed up in the well-known axiom Lex orandi, lex credendi. It derives from a passage of St. Prosper of Aquitaine, in his De gratia Dei indicus, written between the years 435 and 442, and which later passed under the name and authority of Pope Celestine I (Capitula Caelestini): « Obsecrationum quoque sacerdotalium Sacramenta respiciamus, quae ab Apostolis tradita, in toto mundo atque in omni Ecclesia catholica uniformiter celebrantur, ut legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi » (Pl. 50, 535; Enchiridion symbolorum, 26th ed., Freiburg im Br. 1947, no. 139; cf. E. Portalié, in DThC, II, 2052). An identical deduction, but in a more general form, is made at the same time also by St. Vincent of Lérins, in his Commonitorium (ca. 434), in another famous passage: « In ipsa item catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est, ut id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est. Hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum, quod ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat, quae omnia fere universaliter comprehendit. Sed hoc ita demum fiet, si sequamur universitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem » (Pl. 50, 640; Enchiridion patristicum, 14th ed., Freiburg im Br. 1947, no. 2168). The two ancient authors, then, following moreover ideas already expressed by St. Augustine and St. Cyprian, establish as a criterion for the truth and authenticity of Catholic dogmas the unanimous consent of the Church, based on apostolic tradition, and St. Prosper, in the passage cited, recognizes precisely in the liturgy this universal and traditional attestation of the Church, which carries within itself the guarantee of the authenticity of the faith. The liturgy, in other words, could not have formulated its prayers and celebrated its mysteries, if the faith in the same truths and mysteries had not previously existed in the same universal Church. It is not therefore the liturgy that creates the faith, or the dogma, but conversely from the faith or from the particular dogma springs the liturgical celebration of that particular mystery and with those determined formulas. This is the true sense of the axiom: « Lex orandi, lex credendi » derived from the passage of St. Prosper (cf. L. Federer, Liturgie und Glaube [= Parodosis, no. 4], Freiburg in Switz. 1950).

This same interpretation was given in official form by Pius XII, in the encyclical Mediator Dei, 20 Nov. 1947 (AAS, 39 [1947], pp. 521-600), where he describes the developments of the liturgy following the rise of new devotions in the Church, illustrating his exposition with the fact that Pius IX too, when he defined the Immaculate Conception of Mary, included the liturgical argument in the documentation (ibid., pp. 540-541); moreover, the same Pius XII, in the dogmatic bull Munificentissimus Deus, made use, among other things, of the same liturgical argument in relation to the Assumption of Mary into heaven, delimiting its real scope in these precise terms: « Ecclesiae liturgia catholicam non gignit fidem, sed eam potius consequitur, ex eaque, ut ex arbore fructus, sacri cultus ritus proferuntur » (AAS, 42 [1950], p. 760).

The liturgy therefore is the adequate expression of the faith of the Church, because it sums up in its terms and in its mysteries what in the Church, through the immanent action of the Holy Spirit and under the guidance of the supreme magisterium, is expressed by the treasures of the deposit of faith.

VIII. LITURGY AND PIETY

1. Liturgy and the Church

Worship constitutes an essential element for the active life of the Church. Therefore liturgical piety, insofar as it is a conscious and effective celebration of and participation in the various liturgical acts (Sacrifice, Sacraments, preaching, public prayer), is obligatory for all Christians, clergy and laity. In worship the Church, beyond acting for the society of the baptized, acts and prays in the name of all humanity. The liturgy is not limited to liturgical acts alone, but tends to place the Christian, in his entire life and activity, even profane, in his rightful position as a creature before his Creator. By thus effectively informing Christian life with the spirit of Christ, the High Priest, the Church anticipates on earth, in a certain way, the perennial heavenly liturgy, and prepares man to participate in it, thus attaining the supreme end of the rational creature. Worship, and consequently true liturgical piety, being by its very nature collective and social, leads to perfect charity, which embraces, in a single act, God and neighbor. The liturgy has an apostolic character, inasmuch as it obliges all participants to take an active interest, through prayer and sacrifice, in the salvation of all the redeemed. Indeed, the liturgical formularies, with few exceptions, always speak in the plural and express collective intentions. In a word, the liturgy continues the priestly work of Christ in its universality, through the centuries and the peoples; therefore Christian solidarity finds its highest expression in the liturgy, which unites, in its acts, all without distinction in their single condition as members of Christ, without regard to their social conditions.

2. Liturgy and priestly piety

The Catholic priest is the "liturgist" par excellence, thanks to his sacramental participation in the priesthood of Christ, which prolongs His redeeming priestly action through the centuries. Indeed, the life and activity of the Catholic priest are sanctified by the liturgy. He therefore, by grave obligation of his state, is bound not only to celebrate the liturgy worthily, according to the external rites, but above all to carry it out with a profound knowledge of its real significance. He must make his liturgical piety a true instrument of salvation for himself and for the entire Christian family in the Mass, the Divine Office, the administration of the Sacraments, preaching and instruction of the people. Only thus does the canonical prescription that imposes in seminaries the study, not only of the rubrics, but above all of the liturgy in its substantial meaning as a science and as a means of sanctification, acquire its full value. From this vision the sound liturgical movement also draws its highest justification, directed especially to the profit of the priest himself. A sincere and conscientious liturgical piety in fact safeguards the priest himself from the easy danger of routine, and confers on his priestly activity the necessary supernatural unction.

3. Liturgy and private piety

Liturgical piety represents, so to speak, the official piety of the Church; but it by no means dispenses individuals, including priests themselves, from private and individual piety. Participation in the liturgy alone could not attain its purpose and its efficacy, if it were not preceded by personal asceticism, without which vices are not uprooted nor Christian virtues developed. Meditation and individual prayer are in fact indispensable prerequisites for a penetrating and reformative liturgical piety; this, in turn, perfects, elevates and broadens private piety, which is too often exposed to the danger of becoming sterile within its own narrow self. For the priest, therefore, as for the faithful, the starting point for a fruitful participation in or celebration of the liturgy always remains personal piety, practiced through the common means of Christian perfection. Therefore private piety and the liturgy stand in a relation of continual mutual help, complete and perfect each other, uniting personal action with the universal action of the Church in the liturgy, while, on the other hand, the liturgical action also acquires greater merit and effect in proportion to the personal holiness proper to the celebrant or participant. A fruitful liturgical education, both of the clergy and of the people, must begin and proceed on the foundation of a sound and effective ascetic education; the liturgy will be able to penetrate deeply and pervade the whole of Christian life, in its manifold activities, only when and insofar as the subject is prepared to fulfill his duties as a convinced and good Christian. Persuasive testimony of this is found in popular, paraliturgical piety, so flourishing especially in the Middle Ages, which invaded every field of life with its pious customs and traditions. To guarantee the efficacy of the liturgy, therefore, it is necessary to prepare priests and laity through the daily practice of Christian life.

2. Literature: A. Grea, La Sainte liturgie, Paris 1909; M. Festugière, Qu'est-ce que la liturgie, sa définition, ses fins, sa mission, ibid. 1914; L. Besuduin, La piété de l'Église, Louvain 1914; E. Caronti, La pietà liturgica, Turin 1920; G. Lefebvre, Liturgia. Ses principes fondamentaux, 4th ed., Abbaye de St. André 1929; Ph. Oppenheim, Introductio in scientiae liturgicae, Turin 1940; id., Principia theologiae liturgicae, ibid. 1947; Th. Filthaut, Die Kontroverse über die Mysterienlehre, Warendorf 1947 (with rich bibliography); Th. Bogler, Liturgische Erneuerung in aller Welt, Maria Laach 1950. The Jahrbuch für Liturgiewissenschaft, Regensburg 1921-41, formerly directed by O. Casel, is the richest and most varied bibliographic and scientific liturgical review of our day; since 1950 the title of the periodical is: Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft.

Giuseppe Löw