Scholarly Reading
8/6/26
Bouyer, Louis. (1968). "Ch. 10: The Gallican and Mozarabic Eucharist." (pp. 315-337). In Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic Prayer. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame. (Personal Library)
Bouyer considers the extreme western rites, those of the Gallican and Mozarabic types, to have stronger connections with Syrian rites than with Alexandrian or Roman rites (Bouyer 1968, p. 316). He notes this is even visible in the architecture and arrangement of church buildings as well as in the dress of priests, bishops, and deacons.
In essence, from a liturgical standpoint, Bouyer considers the Gallican and Mozarabic rites to be the same, as they have only slight differences (Bouyer 1968, p. 317). About the time of Charlemagne, liturgical books which adopted elements of the Gallican liturgies were brought to Rome, where they had a strong influence on liturgical usage due to the Roman framework of the liturgy (Bouyer 1968, p. 318). This resulted in a greater similarity between the Roman and Gallican rites.
Within the many texts of the Gallican type, Bouyer finds the prayers tend to be abbreviated when compared with the West Syrian evidence. He also finds in them a strong influence of Augustine, with material freely borrowed (Bouyer 1968, p. 320). Dating of the liturgies is difficult. Bouyer notes texts copied as early as the seventh century, but of material of unknown earlier date (Bouyer 1968, p. 321). The additional problem of transmission of materials from East to West by someone who would be capable of such a fundamental task is still unresolved. Bouyer is able to suggest nobody during the course of hundreds of years who would be capable of such a task, with the possible exception of Eusebius, bishop of Milan 451-465/6 (Bouyer 1968, p. 324). Chiefly due to the volume of liturgical materials, Bouyer does not evaluate them individually. He rather illustrates different varieties of situations in which many hands of composition and redaction can be found.
The variety found in the formularies of the Gallican type lead Bouyer to conclude that there was an extended period of liturgical improvisation (Bouyer 1968, p. 329). Because of an extensive culture of improvisation, at some point a written formulary was imposed on churches (Bouyer 1968, p. 330). However, Bouyer sees this as a compositional movement in which improvised formularies were applied to churches. A weakness with his theory, conceded by him, is that the liturgy remained fluid despite the existence of formularies. He concludes that this was possible due to a lack of overriding authority exercised to create stability (Bouyer 1968, pp. 331-332).
Bouyer concludes the chapter with a discursus into the offertory prayers of the Gallican rites, which he thinks may be related to Jewish Teffillah, though not displaced from the eucharist proper (Bouyer 1968, pp. 336-337).
8/6/26
Bouyer, Louis. (1968). "Ch. 10: The Gallican and Mozarabic Eucharist." (pp. 315-337). In Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic Prayer. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame. (Personal Library)
Bouyer considers the extreme western rites, those of the Gallican and Mozarabic types, to have stronger connections with Syrian rites than with Alexandrian or Roman rites (Bouyer 1968, p. 316). He notes this is even visible in the architecture and arrangement of church buildings as well as in the dress of priests, bishops, and deacons.
In essence, from a liturgical standpoint, Bouyer considers the Gallican and Mozarabic rites to be the same, as they have only slight differences (Bouyer 1968, p. 317). About the time of Charlemagne, liturgical books which adopted elements of the Gallican liturgies were brought to Rome, where they had a strong influence on liturgical usage due to the Roman framework of the liturgy (Bouyer 1968, p. 318). This resulted in a greater similarity between the Roman and Gallican rites.
Within the many texts of the Gallican type, Bouyer finds the prayers tend to be abbreviated when compared with the West Syrian evidence. He also finds in them a strong influence of Augustine, with material freely borrowed (Bouyer 1968, p. 320). Dating of the liturgies is difficult. Bouyer notes texts copied as early as the seventh century, but of material of unknown earlier date (Bouyer 1968, p. 321). The additional problem of transmission of materials from East to West by someone who would be capable of such a fundamental task is still unresolved. Bouyer is able to suggest nobody during the course of hundreds of years who would be capable of such a task, with the possible exception of Eusebius, bishop of Milan 451-465/6 (Bouyer 1968, p. 324). Chiefly due to the volume of liturgical materials, Bouyer does not evaluate them individually. He rather illustrates different varieties of situations in which many hands of composition and redaction can be found.
The variety found in the formularies of the Gallican type lead Bouyer to conclude that there was an extended period of liturgical improvisation (Bouyer 1968, p. 329). Because of an extensive culture of improvisation, at some point a written formulary was imposed on churches (Bouyer 1968, p. 330). However, Bouyer sees this as a compositional movement in which improvised formularies were applied to churches. A weakness with his theory, conceded by him, is that the liturgy remained fluid despite the existence of formularies. He concludes that this was possible due to a lack of overriding authority exercised to create stability (Bouyer 1968, pp. 331-332).
Bouyer concludes the chapter with a discursus into the offertory prayers of the Gallican rites, which he thinks may be related to Jewish Teffillah, though not displaced from the eucharist proper (Bouyer 1968, pp. 336-337).
RSS Feed