Liturgical history question

[Qwikness]

I was wondering about the Divine Liturgy. I presume the Western Church used to do the Divine Liturgies similar to Byzantine Rites. Is that correct?

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

I was wondering about the Divine Liturgy. I presume the Western Church used to do the Divine Liturgies similar to Byzantine Rites. Is that correct?

No. The various particular Churches that make up the Catholic Church have all had their own liturgical traditions depending on the region and the customs of the region. That is why even in the Latin West there are a number of Liturgical Rites: Roman, Mozarabic, Ambrosian, etc. In the various Eastern Churches there have likewise been a number of Rites of the Mass/Divine Liturgy: Chrysostom, Basil, the Ethiopian Liturgies, the Coptic Liturgy of St. Mark, the Maronite Mass, etc. The history of the various liturgies is very complex. In patristic times there was no one set form of the Liturgy/Mass that eventually evolved into the various expressions that we have today. Rather each culture pretty much developed it’s own liturgical expressions/celebrations of the Mysteries of our Faith. The different Rites, however, did inspire one another and there was a good amount of borrow, which continues to this day. The Constantinopolitan Liturgy (of St. John Chrysostom) borrowed heavily from the Antiochian tradition and is thus very Antichian at heart, for example.

 

[Aramis]

I was wondering about the Divine Liturgy. I presume the Western Church used to do the Divine Liturgies similar to Byzantine Rites. Is that correct?

The last time the liturgy was the same was in the late 2nd century… we know St Clement made some minor changes, and so did St. Linus… but not exactly what they were. The next time we see a recording of the Roman Liturgy, it’s fairly distinct (6th C, IIRC)… but still not quite what we’d recognize, even as the EF. In point of fact, if one were to attend a mass under the missal approved by the council of Trent, one would find several things absent that one finds in the “modern” EF.

But the Byzantine has changed as well… St. Basil and St John codified the liturgies of Byzantium. And those codifications are the baseline for the Byzantine Rite.

 

[Qwikness]

This is interesting. Thank you all.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Yes, the Divine Liturgy of St Clement was used universally and was a completely distinct form of liturgy.

(Is it used anywhere in the Church today? Could it be?)

Alex

 

[Qwikness]

So why has the western liturgy changed so much? Is it because of fashion? When did the iconostasion get removed?

 

[Aramis]

So why has the western liturgy changed so much? Is it because of fashion? When did the iconostasion get removed?

It was never present in the Roman. The Rood Screen isn’t an iconostas, nor is the altar rail; both serve jointly to define the altar’s chancel (the area reserved to clerics and servers), but are not intended to be iconostasi.

Originally, the iconostas was the altar rail. But, with the addition of icons above the rail, it became the iconostas. The addition added a visual barrier; the Roman visual barrier was, until medieval times, a curtain; the Curtain coexists with both, but with the iconostas, tends to block the doors only, while the Roman one hides the altar alone, and the syrian one the entire chancel…

The Romans only recently stopped routine use of the altar rail; still, it is allowed.

The Rood Screen is not standard anymore, but not forbidden.

The Curtain no longer has roman rubrics. The Iconostas is a minimum for the byzantine, combining altar rail, religious imagery holder (Rood Screen), and curtain all in one, even tho some Byzantine Churches still also use the curtain at the doors.