Talk:Liturgical Movement

Incorrect

This text only provides the popular version of the Liturgical Movement and nothing is mentioned of the true intentions, which were restoration in the beginning and never the introduction of a new rite. Where is the Dom Guéranger is this article?82.72.148.85 19:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Request for information

I would like some elucidation. Dom Gueranger appears in the article. The article notes the intention to restore for instance Gregorian chant. I wonder if the complainant could re-read the article and make specific rather than generalised comments, some of which indicate that it has not been read carefully. It does indeed present a popular version of the story, derived in good part from the Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship. It is true that it presents different points of view and different elements of the movement. It may well be that it lacks sufficient details whicvh can be found in the above book (and elsewhere).

I am happy to look at the article again and shall do so. May I say that it is easier to offer criticisms than to make constructive suggestions which may well indeed improve the balance. I look forwad to some positive suggestions for the repair of omissions. Roger Arguile 8th May, 11.40 am (UTC)

PS The article in the Dictionary was written by H. Elsworth Chandlee Professor or Liturgics at St. Andrew's Theological Seminary, Manila but Fr. J.D Crichton, the English RC scholar was a contributor. Maybe I have misunderstood these writers but insofar as I have understood them correctly, they can hardly be criticised without evidence.

PPS The distinctiveness of the RC and Protestant movements is disputed. Not only did the Anglicans borrow heavily from the Roman Mass, as in the English Missalbut the Ordo Missae was first trialed at the Ecumenical Community of Taizé. I confess that on all of the above grounds I would be minded to remove the claen up tag but politeness forbids. As for Dom Prosper Gueranger, I am sure that a separate article on him would be welcome. Unfortunately I do not have the knowledge to write such an article. Perhaps the complainent would like to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Roger Arguile (talk • contribs)

Well, I'm removing them. I see no case here, and the italicised intro is inappropriate. I'm moving it here. Paul B 13:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

• This article mingles facts from various view points. The liturgical movements in anglican, protestant and Roman Catholic churches are very much distinct and evolved separately. On top of that this article present a one-sided view lacking facts to important early scholars of the liturgical movement. It might have been written from a protestant or Anglican view point, thus lacking foundation in Roman Catholic church history or having a biased view.

Revision

I am aware on revisitng this article that it has a number of defects. There is no real ecumenical section; my comments on the Anglican aspect contains disputable statements (from Donald Gray); the Catholic end of things is still thin; there is nothing on France (a desert, I am told) or the United States. The article lends itself to huge distortion by repeating material that is in other articles, something I have attempted to avoid. But, if it any help, I am working on it. I culd write yards on England, but feel that it would distort the article. Roger Arguile 17:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC) PS I note from the paucity of comments here that there are not many folks out there who feel any more confident than I do. Roger Arguile 17:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Tagging

I do not think it is appropriate for this article to be tagged as under either Lutheranism or Anglicanism. If it belongs anywhere there it is within the Roman Catholic Church. I hope I have violated no rule by doing this; if I have then I apologise, but, by way of argument, the article is not of mid importance but of huge importance within the western church becasue it affected all of them, but the influence came, largely, from the Roman Catholic Church. Perhaps I have misunderstood the tagging system in which case I would be grateful for some assistance.Roger Arguile 19:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, the Liturgical Movement has been very important, at least in ECUSA, and this article needs more work. -- SECisek 20:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Categories

I have just created Category:Liturgiologists. (Terot 12:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC))

Malines

I would very much like evidence of the assertion that 'Malines is a french exonym' and that the English name at that time was mechlin' (in this context). The 'Malines Conversations' (sic) which took place in 1925 under Cardinal Mercier with the Anglicans under Lord Halifax are referred to in Halifix's own recollections (1921-5) and by W.H. Frere in 1935 in his 'Recollections of Malines'. This is of course a later occasion but the significance of this (failed) set of conversations rather defines the name of the place in ecclesiological conversation (though not of course in other contexts). H. Ellsworth Chandlee in his entry in the Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship (SCM) ed J. D. Davies, referring to the 1909 called the place Malines. The significance of this conference cannot be overrated and it is known as the 'Malines Conference'. No doubt like many towns in the region, different names were given by different nationalities but in the absence of contemporary references to the town as 'Mechlin'in the appropriate context (that of liturgical and ecumenical debate), I really think it ought to stand. Roger Arguile 13:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC) PS The language used to describe the Congress might be noted.

Neutrality?

The Origins section is marked as maybe-not-neutral. I think it is (after removing an unnecessary "so-called" that might have been misinterpreted as negativist in any direction). I think the neutrality dispute is unmotivated and so safely can be removed, if there are not issues that I'm unaware of... Said: Rursus (☻) 12:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Same for the section Protestant and reformed churches: what are the neutrality issues about. I think I'll propose a policy that unmotivated (here on the talk page) littering with templates (there on the article page) should be punished by simply removing the templates. Said: Rursus (☻) 12:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Liturgical Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090604032904/http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Learning-Center/FAQs/How-are-Resources-Prepared.aspx to http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Learning-Center/FAQs/How-are-Resources-Prepared.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:03, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Liturgical Movement/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article is not really about Anglicanism. The Liturgical Movement was RC in origin and while the Anglican church made its contribution it would distort the subject to make it more Anglican. Roger Arguile 15:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC) I disagree, the Liturgical Movement has been very important, at least in ECUSA, and this article needs more work. -- SECisek 20:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 22:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Uncited material in need of citations

I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. [ This diff] shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 15:46, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Extended content

LEAD SECTION It has developed over the last century and a half and has affected many other Christian churches, including the Church of England and other churches of the Anglican Communion, among other Protestant churches. A similar reform in the Church of England and Anglican Communion, known as the Oxford Movement, began to change theology and liturgy in the United Kingdom and United States in the mid-nineteenth century. The Liturgical Movement has been one of the major influences on the process of the Ecumenical Movement, in favor of reversing the divisions which began at the Reformation. There were a number of different facets to the movement. First was the attempt to rediscover the worship practices of the ancient and to some extent the Medieval Church, which in the 19th century was held to be the ideal form of worship and expression of faith. Second was the scholarly mission to study and analyze the history of worship. Third was the movement's expansion into an examination of the nature of worship as an organic human activity. Fourth was its endeavor to renew the expressiveness of worship an instrument of teaching and mission. Fifth was the attempt to bring about reconciliation among many churches on both sides of the Protestant Reformation. At the Reformation of the sixteenth century, while some of the new Protestant churches abandoned the old Latin Mass, the Roman Catholic Church, under the direction of Pope Pius V, formally codified and united the Roman Rite. The split between Roman Catholic and Protestant churches was in part a difference about beliefs regarding the language to be used in the liturgy. A Mass in Latin, some argued, would be something one would primarily see and hear as a sacred event; a vernacular service, one in the language of the worshipper, would be one which the worshipper was supposed to understand and take part in. The revision of the Roman liturgy which followed, and which provided a single use for the whole Western Church, emphasized the sacramental and sacrificial nature of the Eucharist, rather than a direction urged by reformers toward lay participation. The Liturgical Movement, which originated in the work to restore the liturgy to its ancient principles, resulted in changes that have affected both Roman Catholics and Protestants of various denominations. Catholic origins The Roman Catholic Church responded to the breaking away of European Protestants by engaging in its own reform, the so-called Counter Reformation. Following the Council of Trent, (1545–1563), which adopted the Tridentine Mass as the standard for Roman Catholic worship, the Latin Mass remained substantially unchanged for four hundred years. Meanwhile, the churches of the Reformation (Anglican, Lutheran, Calvinist, and others) altered their liturgies more or less radically: specifically, the vernacular language of the people was used in the worship service. Deliberately distancing themselves from "Roman" practices, these churches became "Churches of the Word" – of Scripture and preaching – breaking away from the Roman Catholic Church's focus on sacraments. The ritual of remembrance of the Last Supper and Christ's Crucifixion on Calvary became more infrequent and was supplemented in many churches by the services of Morning and Evening Prayer. In some Lutheran traditions, the Mass was stripped of some of its character, such as replacing the Canon of the Mass with the Words of Institution ("This is my Body... this is my Blood"). Common practice was to make the service of the day (the ante-communion) into a preaching service. The first stirrings of interest in liturgical scholarship (and thence liturgical change) within the Roman Catholic Church arose in 1832, when the French Benedictine abbey at Solesmes was refounded under Dom Prosper Guéranger. For a long time, Benedictines were the pioneers in restoring Roman liturgy to its early medieval form. At first Guéranger and his contemporaries focused on studying and recovering authentic Gregorian Chant and the liturgical forms of the Middle Ages, which were held to be the ideals. Other scholars, such as Fernand Cabrol and Pierre Batiffol, also contributed to the investigation of the origins and history of the liturgy, but practical application of this learning was lacking. During the 19th century patristic texts were increasingly available and new ones were discovered and published. Jacques Paul Migne published editions of various early theological texts in two massive compilations: Patrologia Latina and Patrologia Graeca. In addition, the Didache, one of the earliest manuals of Christian morals and practice, was found in 1875 in a library in Constantinople. The Apostolic Tradition, often attributed in the 20th century to the 3rd-century Roman theologian Hippolytus, was published in 1900. This latter was a Church Order containing the full text of a Eucharistic liturgy; it was to prove highly influential. Pope Pius X, elected in 1903, encouraged such reforms. In the same year he issued a motu proprio on church music, inviting the faithful to participate actively in the liturgy, which he saw as a source for the renewal of Christian spirituality. He called for more frequent communion of the faithful, the young in particular. Subsequently, he was concerned with the revision of the Breviary. Pius' engagement would prove to be the necessary spark. Development The movement had a number of elements: Liturgical Scholarship, Pastoral Theology, and Liturgical Renewal. As to the first of these, in his influential book Mysterium Fidei (1921), Maurice de la Taille argued that Christ's sacrifice, beginning from his self-offering at the Last Supper, completed in the Passion and continued in the Mass, were all one act. There was only one immolation – that of Christ at Calvary, to which the Supper looks forward and on which the Mass looks back. Although Taille was not a liturgist, his work generated a huge controversy which raised interest in the form and character of the Mass. His argument, whilst not yet accepted by Protestants, removed the objection that each mass was a separate and new 'immolation' of Christ, a repeated and thus efficacious act. Pastoral considerations played a major part. Such motives lay behind the tone of the papacy of Pius X. In 1909 he called a conference, the Congrès National des Oeuvres Catholiques in Mechelen in Belgium, which is held to have inaugurated the Liturgical Movement proper in the Catholic Church. Liturgy was to be the means of instructing the people in Christian faith and life; the mass would be translated into the vernacular to promote active participation of the faithful. One of the leading participants in the conference, Dom Lambert Beauduin of Louvain, argued that worship was the common action of the people of God and not solely performed by the priest. Many of the movement's principles were based in Beauduin's book, La Pieté de l'Eglise. In France, the Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, was published, but most practical experiments in liturgy were initiated after contact with the German and Austrian movements. Most changes occurred after the Second World War. In 1943 the Centre National de Pastorale Liturgique was founded and the magazine La Maison-Dieu began publication. The idea of liturgy as an inclusive activity, subversive of individualism, while exciting to some, also raised anxieties in Rome. In 1947 Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Mediator Dei which warned of false innovations, radical changes and Protestant influences in the liturgical movement. At the same time he encouraged the "authentic" liturgical movement, which promoted active participation of the congregation in chant and gestures. Second Vatican Council The recovery of the Divine Office, the daily prayer of the Church, was just as startling. As liturgical prayer is the prayer of the Church, the Constitution states that "in choir" (common) office prayer is always preferable to individual recitation. Effect on church architecture This had two main effects on church architecture in the UK. Firstly, it resulted in the development of a large number of new Catholic churches in the modernist style and decorated with modernist artworks, and secondly there was 'reordering' of existing churches. Building of new churches Architects in this movement also collaborated with notable ceramic and glass artists such as Dom Charles Norris and Steven Sykes (artist). Status of Modernist churches Many of the churches built during this period are now being listed by Historic England in recognition of their outstanding modernist architecture and art. These include Goalen's Our Lady of Fatima, Harlow (Grade II listed, 1958), St Mary Dunstable (Grade II listed, 1964), Winkley's Church of St Margaret of Scotland, Twickenham (Grade II listed, 1969). Two of these were influenced by the liturgical movement: St Mary Leyland (1964) by Weightman and Bullen (Grade II listed) which also features an abstract dalle-de-verre stained glass, totalling 233 feet in length, by Patrick Reyntiens, Adam Kossowski’s ceramic of Christ the King, and Stations of the Cross sculpted by Arthur Dooley St Bride's Church, East Kilbride (1964) by Gillespie, Kidd and Coia. Criticism The architecture of these churches was not without its critics. For example, the architect Robert Maguire, writing in Ecclesiology Today #27 (January 2002), commented: "Gerard Goalen's 'T'-shaped church of Our Lady of Fatima at Harlow, resplendent with its Buckfast Abbey glass. My only serious criticism of this – and it is serious – is that God's Holy People are divided, like All Gaul, into three parts." Anglican Communion At the time of the English Reformation, the liturgy was revised and replaced with the Book of Common Prayer (first issued in 1549). The changes were relatively conservative and did not substantially shift after the sixteenth century. The 1552 edition of the prayer book showed more Protestant influence; after the Book of Common Prayer of 1662, no official revision was attempted until the 1920s. In Victorian England, interest in medieval liturgy had grown through the work of the Oxford Movement, which drew attention to the church's history and relation to the Roman Catholic Church. The Cambridge Camden Society (1839–1863), originally formed for the study of ecclesiastical art, generated an interest in liturgy that led to the ceremonial revival of the later nineteenth century, with an adoption of medieval practices. The revival brought Anglican scholars into conversation with their Roman colleagues. The Oxford Movement was also influential in the United States, where the Episcopal Church adopted many ritual changes. Many new churches were built in medieval styles through the early decades of the 20th century. By the 20th century, the Church of England had made quite radical ceremonial and ritual changes, most of them incorporating revival of medieval Christian practice. (Contemporary commentators, such as Benjamin Jowett, saw the changes as indicative of Romantic and aesthetic influences (and 'revolting to the reverent mind'), but the models were Roman Catholic. Judith Pinnington, "Rubric and Spirit: a diagnostic reading of Tractarian Worship", in Essays Catholic and Radical, ed. Kenneth Leech and Rowan Williams (Bowerdean 1983) p. 98f; see also Valerie Pitt: "The Oxford Movement: a case of Cultural Distortion?", in Essays Catholic and Radical,, p. 205ff.</ref>) Tractarians, followers of the Oxford Movement who published religious tracts, were initially concerned with the relationship of the Church of England to the universal Church. They became interested in liturgy and, in particular, the practice of Communion. Gradually, dress and ceremonial were altered with adoption of traditional Roman aspects from the Middle Ages, e.g. stoles, chasubles, copes, and birettas; the use of candles multiplied; incense was burnt; and priests learned to genuflect and bow. Gradually, the Eucharist became more common as the main Sunday Service instead of Morning Prayer, often enhanced by using prayers translated from the Missal. Some viewed such liturgical change not as reform, but a retreat to mediaeval models; many bishops and clergy perceived such change as 'popish'. The ideas of the Parish Communion movement, as it came to be called, were in advance of English Roman Catholic scholars. The liturgy remained officially unaltered until the 1960s, when the synodical process began which was to produce the Alternative Service Book in 1980 and Common Worship in 2000. Churches of the Lutheran tradition Equally dramatic in some places has been the change in some of the Lutheran churches. The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, for example, has been strongly influenced by the movement in its vesture and ritual. Black gowns have long been replaced by traditional Catholic vestments. The St. Thomas Mass returned the fuller use of ceremonial (the liturgical action, in which movement takes place during the liturgy to express its different parts). The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod has led in the recovery of Lutheran liturgical practice. Such practices as chanting the psalms and other parts of the service, and the imposition of ashes on Ash Wednesday, are now relatively common. In the United States, numerous inter-church organizations identifying as Lutheran bodies were formed, due mostly to the waves of immigration in the late 19th century and early 20th from nations of northern European and Scandinavia. Because of the differences in languages and customs, congregations developed along 'national' lines, establishing their own versions of the "church back home" – for example, the Norwegian Lutherans, Danish Lutherans, etc. These early churches used the vernacular language of their native country. As settlers and their descendants adopted the use of English and assimilated as Americans, the need for foreign-language worship and identification with national churches was reduced. In the state churches of the Saxon Electorate and the Thuringian principalities, the excising of the Eucharistic Prayer by Martin Luther was reversed in the decade after the Second World War. New service books were published. Influence and criticism The influence of the Roman shape of the liturgy has been considerable among most liturgical churches of the west, including the whole of the Anglican communion, and the Methodist Church in England, and less formally liturgical churches such as the United Methodist Church of the United States. On the other hand, critics have lamented, mostly from within the Roman Catholic Church, the loss of mystery and the reduction in the sacrificial element of the Mass (see Mass of Paul VI).

2022

I have now removed those unsourced parts. Veverve (talk) 10:15, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

This article definetly has problems, but if you remove too much, then it is going to be a completely worthless article and in a far worse state. Wikipedia is a constant work in progress. Use tags more instead of content removal. You literally removed so much that in the history section Dom Prosper Guéranger who founded this movement isn't even mentioned and nor is Lambert Beauduin who brought it to its ultimate final form. This is wild and reckless. Torchist (talk) 13:02, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@Torchist: I have reverted you. A WP:CHEWINGGUM has no encyclopedic value. Content for content's sake is reckless and not what Wikipedia needs. Tags were already present, they are not a joker to add any content. Feel free to add sourced content anytime you want. If the article had a big part of it which was unsourced, it is not my fault. You have also violated WP:BURDEN: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports[2] the contribution.[3]".

The external links violated WP:NOEL.

The article has been without this content since August 2022‎, so I think it is WP:QUO. Veverve (talk) 14:34, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

"Liturgical renewal" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Liturgical renewal has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 15 § Liturgical renewal until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 22:52, 15 February 2023 (UTC)