Lactantius and Creation of the Roman Canon for Imperial Liturgy (full paper) (original) (raw)
2020, Questions Liturgiques
Who is the "scholasticus" responsible for the Roman Canon? Answer: Lactanctius. The study principally concentrates on reconstructing the Roman Canon to approximately AD 325. The reconstruction takes advantage of traditional sources and witnesses to the primitive Roman Canon but adds additional witnesses extracted from the so-called Gelasianium Vetus in order to fill in the chiastic structure of the Eucharistic Prayer. Furthermore, to justify each section of the chiastic structure of the reconstructed Roman Canon, the author provides a detailed analysis of Latin vocabulary and Roman institutions explaining exhaustively the author’s choices of texts. The utility of Roman law is necessary to grasp the formulae and theological points in both the reconstructed and extant versions of the Roman Canon. The study also provides solid arguments for attributing the redaction of the Roman Canon, as used in Rome in the fourth century, to the ecclesiastical writer Lactantius. This hypothesis is strengthened by textual comparisons drawn between the reconstructed Roman Canon and Lactantius’s style and vocabulary in his works. The study uncovers the contributions of Roman-pagan authors of classical antiquity and Roman jurists to explain peculiar features of the Roman Canon’s vocabulary and phraseology. Finally, an appendix suggests edits to the Roman Canon made by Pope Damasus of Rome in the late-fourth century.
Related papers
The Poetic Prose of the Roman Canon
Dunwoodie Review, 2015
A structural analysis of certain poetic aspects of the Latin Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I) and its 2011 ICEL translation. Much that is here is a presentation of the work of linguist M.J. Connolly, which can be found in two papers (one of which he co-authored with L.G. Jones). Published in The Dunwoodie Review, Volume 38 (Yonkers, NY: 2015); 76-83.
2018
One area of study that received a newfound level of attention during the twentieth century’s Liturgical Movement was the relationship between the Bible and liturgy. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum concilium, highlights the importance and centrality of this relationship, declaring that “[s]acred scripture is of the greatest importance in the celebration of the liturgy” (SC 24). The broad movements of ressourcement and la nouvelle théologie, particularly figures such as Jean Daniélou and Henri de Lubac, emphasized the deep unity between Scripture and the very text of liturgical rites and argued that the liturgy is an expression of spiritual exegesis (whether it is called “typology” or “allegory”). What did not figure in these studies was a specific demonstration of these broad claims through the study of particular liturgical texts. This dissertation seeks to fill that lacuna through a study of one liturgical text—the Roman Canon Missae—and the enormous influence of one specific book of the Bible on its textual development: the Epistle to the Hebrews. A significant motivation for this research is a concern to demonstrate how this new scriptural avenue of inquiry can provide an additional source of rich material to liturgical scholars for any liturgical text, not just the Roman Canon. My approach situates this exploration of the ways Hebrews was used as a source within the broader orbit of the emergence and development of the text of the Roman Canon in order to demonstrate that attention to the place of Scripture, or even a single biblical book, can radically enrich the search for the origin and early evolution of liturgical rites. This new methodology includes a detailed proposal for a way to categorize the ways in which a liturgical text can utilize Scripture as a source. Most of the unique features of the Roman Canon—including its unique institution narrative, emphasis on sacrifice, repeated requests for the Father’s merciful acceptance of the sacrificial offering, the use of the phrase sacrificium laudis as a way to name and describe the eucharistic sacrifice, centrality of Melchizedek’s sacrifice in conjunction with those of Abel and Abraham, and the essential structure and content of the anaphora’s doxology—have their origin in the Epistle to the Hebrews. [Submitted; defense is March 21, 2018]
Documents, Letters and Canons in Eusebius of Caesarea’s Ecclesiastical History
Á. Sánchez-Ostiz (ed.), Beginning and End. From Ammianus Marcellinus to Eusebius of Caesarea, Huelva, Universidad de Huelva, 2016
This article studies the role played by epistles in the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius of Caesarea. It is important to note that this history avoids attributing discourses to the persons it features and instead relies on citing documents of various types, epistles among them. Having noted that the epistle is a special type of sermo, I discount the theory that the reason for the inclusion of the letters in the Ecclesiastical History was the desire to introduce stylistic variation. I emphasize that certain terms that recur in the introductions to the letters throw light on the question: εἰς ἐπίδειξιν, κατὰ λέξιν, μαρτύριον, ἀντίγραφον; an analysis of these words shows that Eusebius was very conscious of the importance that the copies of the texts that he cites as documents (letters, among others) be faithful to the literality of the originals. I propose as a hypothesis that this emphasis on the fidelity and literality of the documents is related to the scripture-related category of canonicity first attested in Eusebius’s work.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
The Canons attributed to Basilius of Caesarea
in: P. Buzi - A. Camplani - F. Contardi (eds.), Coptic Society, Literature and Religion from Late Antiquity to Modern Times. Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Coptic Studies, OLA 247, Leuven 2016, p. 979-992