Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: gbcdoj; Destro; MarMema
But that doesn't make sense in the context of saying that the liturgy hasn't changed in 1,300 years (it would be 1,970 years or so since the institution of the Eucharist) or comparing it to the 1970 reform of the Roman Missal

The most common Divine Liturgy celebrated is the St. John Chrystostom's version. He shortened the original from four or five hours to one hour and a half in the 4th century, retaining all the seential parts of the original.

I don't know much about St. Tihon's Liturgy but maybe MarMema can elaborate.

By contrast, the Roman Catholic Mass has been changed many times, and from what many are saying about the Vatican II, the latest version is but a pale resemblence of the Tridentine, which is but 500 years old.

22 posted on 10/01/2004 3:56:26 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50
Tridentine, which is but 500 years old

Wrong. The Tridentine liturgy was just the codification of the way Mass had been celebrated at Rome for centuries.

Ironically, several of the "innovations" in the Roman Liturgy that eventually became the Tridentine Rite were introduced by Roman Popes of Greek liturgical background! The one that comes immediately to mind is the Gloria in excelsis deo which is close to a word-for-word copy of a hymn in the Byzantine Orthodox service of Vespers. And the Kyrie eleison didn't come from Ireland, either. :-)

So, as far as the development of the Roman liturgy in the first millenium, I guess I could say, "Yes, it changed and developed ... and most of that was your fault." :-)

62 posted on 10/01/2004 10:17:13 AM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson