Category: Dix2005 - Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry

What Does Liturgy Do?

11/25/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 11/25/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 17, “Throughout All Ages, World Without End.” pp. 735-752

Dix uses this chapter to make closing remarks about liturgical renewal. First, he observes that true change is accomplished as people take up eucharistic practices, then find their hearts and minds are influenced by the practice (Dix 2006, 735). As far as a study of history is concerned, we know very little about the ante-Nicene liturgy, especially prior to about 125 (Ibid., 736). By understanding the changes over history we may be more likely to understand our own tendencies as well (Ibid., 738). Additionally, liturgy helps us look back in time. “Just because liturgy is apt to be more conservative than theology, the later liturgical prayers often illuminate the earlier fathers and are in turn illuminated by them in a very remarkable fashion” (Ibid., 740). The shape of the liturgy has remained so very consistent through so many years that it is hard to imagine it not being present from the very start (Ibid., 744). Unlike other rituals, this is one very firmly based in a definitive act of Jesus which he commanded to be done and remembered. The communion, in short, is what draws all Christians together, across time and space.

Liturgy in the Anglican Reformation

11/18/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 11/18/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 16, “The Reformation and the Anglican Liturgy.” pp. 613-734

After some debate Dix added chapter 16, primarily because the Anglican communion accounts for a large number of worshipers and due to the need within the Anglican communion for clarity (Dix 2006, 613). The controversy in England in the 16th century was over the liturgy of the Roman rite (Ibid., 615). Cranmer’s reforms attempted first to return the eucharist to corporate action rather than the work of the liturgist (Ibid.). Second, the mass was rescued from being a spectator event (Ibid., 616). Third, the language became the vernacular (Ibid.), an innovation which Dix discusses at length. Fourth, the mass became not dependent on seeing only, but involved hearing as well (Ibid., 620). Finally, there was an attempt to restore the eschatological view of the liturgy (Ibid., 621).

The issue which led to the Reformation was the fact that, while holding to historic doctrine and liturgy, the Medieval church tried to add to it through the work of the priest (Ibid., 625). Returning to the liturgy would have settled the disputes. However, both sides pushed in different directions, thus losing altogether. The Romans protected the special roles of the priesthood while the Protestants - in Carlstadt, not Luther, abandoned the security of the liturgy (Ibid., 631). Dix expounds on some of the doctrinal differences of the various factions.

In 1533 Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, began working to resolve these challenges, seeking the agreement of his monarch in all things. He consulted with English bishops on doctrinal matters related to the Mass (Ibid., 640). In 1548 (after the death of Henry VIII), the bishops released an Order of Communion which Dix details thoroughly (Ibid., 643ff). Cranmer himself seemed to have a flexible view of communion, or at least one which evolved over time. Dix discusses several of these details, citing evidence given at Cranmer’s trial (Ibid., 648ff). His view is clearly that communion is man’s work, remembering Christ and taking symbols of him.

Dix next considers Cranmer’s work with the liturgy (Ibid., 656). His prayer book of 1549, though novel, was widely used. It was not, however, accepted in the long run. In 1552 a version which left more of the liturgy behind and appeared more Zwinglian appeared (Ibid., 659). The offertory and prayers depart substantially from the traditional liturgy (Ibid., 661). There is also a strong element of the symbolic and spiritual view of communion (Ibid., 667). This Zwinglian tendency of the liturgy, which conflicts with the actual Anglican doctrine, may be an element in the conflicts within the Anglican communion to this day (Ibid., 670).

In the Elizabethan restoration Cranmer’s liturgy was restored almost in whole (Ibid.). ed to move the liturgy of the eucharist from Cranmer’s Zwinglian point of view closer to transubstantiation (Ibid., 675). This was the work of royal decree. The shape of the liturgical action remained but its interpretation changed to match the monarch’s view. Dix speaks at length about the lasting effects of a politicized view of doctrine and practice. Anglican practice remains governed by decree of the Crown and act of Parliament (Ibid., 699). He then closes the chapter by suggesting means by which a revised and effective liturgy can be made to grow again in the Anglican communion.

Medieval Liturgy

11/11/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 11/11/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 15, “The Mediaeval Development.” pp. 546-612

As is his habit, Dix divides liturgical developments into the Eastern and the Western churches, treating those of the East first. “The main lines of all the Eastern traditions had been reached before the end of the fourth century, and after this the process in all of them is no more than one of adjustment and development of detail” (Dix 2006, 546). The division between East and West grows in clarity by the end of the sixth century. In the East there was a strong effort to enforce uniformity to the leadership of Byzantium (Ibid.). The rites developed in the East until the ninth century, still drawing on the earlier elements found in Syria and Jerusalem.

“The Western development is more complicated and diverse and continued for much longer” (Ibid., 549). The collections of rites did not seem to be a catalog of historical development but rather a collection of the decisions made in various communities (Ibid., 550). Local practices were variable, within the overall confines of the historic liturgy. Dix treats various regions in order on pp. 551ff, giving very specific examples including the text of prayers. The developments in the eucharistic prayer were possible in large part because the congregants did not possess the text of the prayer. In locations where the prayer changed from day to day the congregation would not be likely to expect regularity (Ibid., 560). Dix also observes that rites were carried from one place to another due to migrations or wars (Ibid., 562). This was not only the case as regards the Gallican rites but also in the many different Italic variations (Ibid., 563ff). In the time of Charlemagne the Roman rites, used in the Carolingian court, gained prominence as Charlemagne forbade use of the Gallican rite, which was foundational to the non-Italic traditions (Ibid., 580). Dix observes further a general conformity to the Roman rite, voluntary and widespread, from about 800 to the Council of Trent (Ibid., 586). Dix finally discusses habits of position of the part of the liturgist as he gradually moved from behind the altar, the traditional location of a bishop, to in front of the altar, the normal location of any other elder (Ibid., 589ff). Various other changes in presentation tended to occur in the West. At the same time as these developments occurred, the overall quality of catechesis declined for the growing body of Christ (Ibid., 595-6). The laity tended to commune less frequently as clergy communed more often. This trend made communion something to be observed, rather than to be participated in (Ibid., 598).

Prayers - The Same or Variable?

11/4/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 11/4/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 14, “Variable Prayers at the Eucharist.” pp. 527-545

Dix points out that while the prayers for most liturgical acts remain the same regardless of the day of the year, the proper preface to the eucharist varies (Dix 2006, 527). The structure of the rite remains the same but it is odd for the wording to change. In fact, this prayer was quite fixed by the end of the fourth century (Ibid., 529). As the century progressed and the Church became more sensitive to the cycle of the year the eucharistic prayer tended to follow. In the East the church took on the use of two different liturgies which were identical in structure but not in their prayers. These are used at different times in the calendar (Ibid., 530). Variation in the West was only in the prayer, and this variation was more or less complete by about 500 (Ibid., 531). It appears to Dix as though the prayers were varied by local bishops but in response to heretical moves some of the more wary bishops compiled books of orthodox prayers. These then tended to be associated with various Sundays (Ibid., 536).

Dix then traces the preface and sanctus and its development in the Western liturgy (Ibid., 537). Beginning with the fairly terse Hippolytan order, Dix traces the addition of a Sanctus in the 200s, spreading through the West by the early 500s (Ibid., 538). The usage of the sanctus was probably widespread by the mid 400s. It is of interest that rites tended to spread from East to West, often starting in Syria, then being adopted and changed to fit a Western mindset (Ibid., 542).

Worship Develops Its Shape

10/28/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 10/28/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 13, “The Completion of the Shape of the Liturgy” pp. 3434-526.

Dix remind us that the two parts of the worship were distinct and could be celebrated independently. The synaxis, roughly the “service of the word”, and the eucharist each had a clear structure (Dix 2005, 434). The two fused together as a great segment of the population became communicants (Dix 2005, 436). This became common between 450 and 500 (Dix 2005, 439). The synaxis gradually took on a more elaborate introduction, in the East, following one of three basic forms, discussed by Dix in turn (Dix 2005, 444ff). The Western one from Rome, documented by the sixth century, is fairly familiar throughout the West (Dix 2005, 452), and appears in similar forms, though not identical, all through Europe. All the liturgies had some sort of introduction, a psalm, normally a Kyrie and a Gloria, and a prayer before the readings (Dix 2005, 469). During the fourth century, as other elements increased, the readings became three by custom, as we have them today in most Western liturgies (Dix 2005, 470). After a sermon the liturgies mostly have specific prayers (Dix 2005, 472). As the synaxis and the eucharist joined there remained a prayer which had been used at the start of the stand-alone eucharist (Dix 2005, 473). Dix discusses the development of a veil or screen for the eucharist, dating from the 4th-5th centuries as the “laos”, meaning the noble people of God, was devalued and divided from the priesthood. At this time the people were separated from the sacred things (Dix 2005, 480). The consecrated elements were then shown to the people whose role gradually became more that of spectator. The recitation of a creed, eventually the Nicene Creed, accompanied the eucharist as a confession of the common faith (Dix 2005, 486). A variable prayer followed in the Western rites (Dix 2005, 488). After the offering came prayers for various people and affairs (Dix 2005, 498). The eucharist proper followed (Dix 2005, 511). Dix traces the various forms of prayer and institution. By about 800 the form of the liturgy was complete and static (Dix 2005, 522).

Ceremonial Acts in Worship

10/21/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 10/21/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 12, “The Development of Ceremonial” pp. 397-433.

Because of the increasingly public nature of the eucharist in the fourth century the ceremony itself was elaborated (Dix 2005, 397). During the Medieval period the liturgy gradually shifted from being something done to something said. Yet it always was intended to communicate what Jesus said to “do” in his remembrance (Dix 2005, 398). Dix brings attention to the development of vestments, observing that the vestments routinely mirror the dress of upper classes (Dix 2005, 399). This is reflected in the chausible, tunical, and alb (Dix 2005, 400). The pallium or stole was adopted by the sixth century (Dix 2005, 401). A maniple, or cloth laid across the left arm, was common in the sixth to twelfth centuries. The Dalmatic, a tunic with large sleeves, was worn by secular officials and was worn sometimes by deacons and occasionally by archbishops, though usually under a chausible (Dix 2005, 403). A tiara, or some other ceremonial headgear was adopted in the 5th century (Dix 2005, 403). Particular shoes were also adopted by the 4th century (Dix 2005, 404). All these items were closely related to everyday garments, though fairly formal ones. As the Medieval period progressed, some garments were adopted which were specific to liturgical settings. Other garments were retained though society ceased to use them. The mitre (hat) was added in the 11th century (Dix 2005, 406). The cope, a sort of cape for warmth, was added in the ninth century (Dix 2005, 407). Gloves also appear in the ninth century (Dix 2005, 408). The surplice was a replacement for the alb when bulky warm clothes were needed (Dix 2005, 408). Various other garments developed, by the end of the Medieval period, more for identification of the celebrant than for other purposes (Dix 205, 409). Vaious insignia of office were also gradually adopted (Dix 2005, 410). These were widely varied and seem to be fairly individualistic (Dix 2005, 413). Because these insignias were often used in processions and in conjunction with various candles and lights, the various lights took on significance in various places (Dix 2005, 41). Dix goes on to discuss many of the variations in lighting, observing that most seem primarily utilitarian. Incense was used in many traditions, seemingly brought into Christian tradition from Judaism (Dix 2005, 426). It was avoided during some early persecutions but returned in the fourth century (Dix 2005, 427).

Time and Timelessness

10/14/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 10/14/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 11, “The Sanctification of Time” pp. 303-396.

Dix observes that the fourth century and the sixteenth century served as important pivot points in the worship life of the Christian church (Dix 2005, 303). In this chapter he focuses on the changes of the fourth century. The first major shift he traces is from private to public worship (Dix 205, 304). As persecution declined and the church took on more uniformity in liturgy, the general content of worship remained consistent but there were important theoretical changes. It became more public and accepted, as well as taking on a greater emphasis on the historic redemption rather than the eschaton (Dix 2005, 305).

Once the church was made more free under Constantine, not only were there buildings built and furnished, many by the emperor and other officials, but the new sense of freedom led to numerous actions in the worship (Dix 2005, 309-310). Dix observes in regard to building s and furnishings that the roots of the splendor went back prior to the fourth century. He observes that asceticism and avoidance of sensuous beauty does not originate in primitive Christianity (Dix 2005, 312). Dix rather ties the simplicity to practices of private prayer, while more elaborate ceremonies were tied to public worship (Dix 2005, 317). The monastic movement was also important in worship developments, primarily because it gathered people for frequent worship (Dix 2005, 320). After a few years the liturgical hours of the monastery began to be adopted by some important churches (Dix 2005, 328). During the 4th century the liturgical calendar also expanded a great deal (Dix 2005, 333). The overall calendar changes tended to come from the bishops while the daily offices emerged from the monastic orders (Dix 2005, 334). Dix goes on to discuss the development of the Pascha (Dix 2005, 338), Pentecost (Dix 2005, 341), and other additional days which gave shape to the year. This development continued apace after Nicea in 325 (Dix 2005, 347). Even the six week Lenten season seems to have been present by the mid 4th century (Dix 2005, 355).

Dix next turns his attention to the “propers” of the service, those items which change from day to day (Dix 2005, 360). Though readings for the major feasts of the Church were recognized fairly early, in the 2nd century, selections for every Sunday do not become codified until about the fourth century (Dix 2005, 361), and more likely coming into more concrete form by the 7th century (Dix 2005, 362).

Also in the 4th century commemorations of saints began to be associated not with their death, which had been seen as their birth into eternity, but with their burial, shifting the focus from a heavenly to an earthly action (Dix 2005, 369). Dix speaks in some detail about a number of the celebrations.

By the end of the fourth century both liturgy and the church year had essentially the shape they have retained to the present time.

Consecration and Communion

10/7/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 10/7/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 10, “The Theology of Consecration” pp. 268-302.

Dix begins by observing the Church being offered to God through the work of Jesus giving himself into death. The taking and eating makes celebration an action of the whole congregation, in both “offering and communion, and not one action only, to ‘eat’” (Dix 2005, 268). The prayer comes between the offering and the communion. The eucharist consecration, as seen by Dix, “states the total meaning of what is there done; and that meaning can only be authoritatively stated by one who is entitled to speak not only for the congregation there present or even for the whole local church, but for the universal church in all ages and all places” (Dix 2005, 269). In the pre-Nicene period this was the bishop of the area, though it has since been applied to all the presbyters. The prayer of consecration is therefore the act of the whole body of Christ identifying with Christ’s own offering (Dix 2005, 271). This is decidedly an anamnesis of Christ’s death. By the fourth century, though, rather than the prayers of thanksgiving being central, Dix sees the second part of the prayer and the Words of Institution taking precedence (Dix 2005, 276). In this time also Christ began to be viewed more passively as the victim rather than actively offering himself (Dix 2005, 278). Though rites varied somewhat, Dix traces them as typically adding an invocation of the Holy Spirit as well. This, Dix sees, is also related to the increasingly passive view of Christ (Dix 2005, 281). Dix then identifies the rite in both East and West as an anamnesis of Christ’s death and resurrection (Dix 2005, 289). From this point it was a fairly natural step to view the invocation as central (Dix 205, 290-294). Is this the time of consecration? Dix makes a brief study of different catechisms. His conclusion is that the various rites developed from a common primitive church practice which emphasized the Christ as the active agent.

The Meaning of the Eucharist

9/30/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 9/30/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 9, “The Meaning of the Eucharist” pp. 238-267.

Dix reminds the reader that the eucharist is an action performed as a rite, with a meaning stated in the prayer (Dix 2005, 238). The first step of Dix’ discussion of meaning pertains to consecration and sacrifice. Dix asks whether the words of institution by themselves serve to consecrate (Ibid., 238). “The particular rites used by these [pre-Nicene] fathers did contain a full institution narrative” (Ibid., 239). Yet not all of the rites do. Yet that institution narrative moves into the rite quickly and permanently (Ibid., 240). By the fourth century writers began to seek the actual moment of consecration (Ibid., 240). A rejection of this concept and of attempts to view the eucharist as a re-sacrifice follows.

Dix moves on (Ibid., 243) to trace the concept of the eucharist as anamnesis - remembrance. From earliest writers on the elements were always unabashedly identified as body and blood. The Fathers also insisted that this was for anamnesis (Ibid., 244). In fact, Dix says, to the primitive church “the eucharistic action is necessarily His action of sacrifice, and what is offered must be what He offered” (Ibid., 246). This implies Christ giving himself to his people in the eucharist.

Next, Dix addresses the eucharist as an action offering the church to Christ (Ibid., 247). This is a longstanding interpretation of the meaning, eroded by the lack of communion in the Medieval period but still surviving (Ibid., 248-249). This idea brings Dix into the idea that the eucharist is a manifestation of Jesus with his people (Ibid., 255). This is more vivid than simply “remembering.”

Dix moves to a discussion of eschatology on p. 256. A linear view of history, which Dix identifies in Jewish philosophy, indicates that there will be a more or less orderly progression to a clearly defined end. This end is seen in Christianity as the Lord gives his Spirit to bring life, manifested in Word and Sacrament (Ibid., 260). Christian eschatology appears in the eucharist as we do it until the end, joining in with the final sacrifice for sin (Ibid., 263).

Unity and Diversity in Worship

9/23/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 9/23/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 8, “Behind the Local Traditions.” pp 208-237

Dix reiterates the apparent similarity of structure and diversity of phrasing of the eucharistic prayer in different locations. His opinion is that as time went on in the fifth and sixth centuries there were more revisions and borrowings resulting in more uniformity even in phrasing (Dix 2006, 208). Finding the early evidence is a challenge. “The pre-Nicene church was a secret society, which deliberately intended to seclude knowledge of its liturgy from all but its own tested members” (Ibid., 209). Scholarship has concentrated on finding an overriding outline and has recently focused on Apostolic Constitutions Bk. VIII and on Hippolytus (Ibid., 210). Dix moves on to a brief survey of some of the scholarship, much of which he considers to be unfortunately opaque. The question, upon further investigation, is what the pre-Nicene church was intending by the eucharist, as well as how that is expressed in different times and places (Ibid., 214). Dix concludes that our answer is found not in the words but in the actions (Ibid., 215). The central theme of thanksgiving is reflected and follows the same pattern as the prayer in the Jewish grace(Ibid., 21). Dix continues with an analysis of the late 4th century thanksgiving from Alexandria, the liturgy of S. Mark (Ibid., 218). His conclusion when considering this as well is that the first half of the eucharistic prayers is very consistent, while the second half has more divergence (Ibid., 220). “It is possible to conceive of a primitive type of eucharistic prayer which consisted simply of a ‘Naming’ of God, followed by a series of ‘Thanksgivings’ for the New Covenant and concluding with a ‘glorifying of the Name’?”” (Ibid., 220). Dix sees this as consistent with the Jewish berekah. Dix traces this pattern in the different rites, showing it is a distinct possibility. Dix then asks if there is a clear start to the “second half” of the prayer (Ibid., 225). He cannot locate it at a precise point. Yet he does see an overall theme of purpose, “to define the meaning of what the church does at the eucharist and relate it to what was done at the last supper” (Ibid., 227). This observation leaves Dix with a view that the prayer is simply a tool to express the entire action of the eucharist in words. If this view is correct, Dix considers it to harmonize the entire ceremony and explain all the developments without bringing in other theories based on developments about which we know nothing.

"The" Prayer

9/16/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 9/16/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 7, “The Eucharistic Prayer” pp. 156-207.

Dix pauses at the start of this chapter to review that the eucharist was viewed as an action, with the meaning of the action described in the eucharistic prayer. The content of the prayer was not nearly as predictable as the other elements, which remained remarkably alike across time and place. In this chapter Dix will show the major variants in the eucharistic prayer, often laying out the texts in full.

When considering the pre-Nicene prayers, though the Church was functioning in many areas, we have only three texts from prior to the council of Nicea. These are from Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, the three most important metropolitan churches of the time. Dix thinks if we had texts of other pre-Nicene eucharistic prayers the differences would be very slight in meaning but significant in details. This is what he finds among Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch (Dix 2005, 157).

Dix begins with the Roman tradition from Hippolytus (Ibid., 157). After giving the text of the prayer, Dix reduces it to a conceptual outline then makes comments on some specifics, finding parallels in Justin Martyr, a generation or two earlier than Hippolytus (Ibid., 159). Significant in Dix’s understanding is that Hippolytus considered the eucharist to be a means by which Christ abolished death (Ibid., 160). Chief issues in the Roman prayer are the “institution as the authority for what the church does in the eucharist” (Ibid., 162), the act being offering and receiving the bread and cup, and the anamnesis, or “recollection” feature of the rite.

Next, Dix treats the Egyptian tradition. There is no clear text, but there is an 11th century document with a prayer attributed to Serapion around 339-360. Dix considers it reliably ancient and Egyptian but thinks it may have undergone some editorial changes (Ibid., 162). Dix observes that the outline is basically the same but the prayer, though longer, is less precise and specific (Ibid., 164). The prayer adds intercession for individuals and remembrance of those who have died. In general the structure is the same but the composition is much looser (Ibid., 172).

Syria was never as cohesive as Egypt. However, Antioch emerged as the leader in Syrian Christianity fairly early (Ibid., 173). Despite many different customs, the Liturgy of St. James, adopted in Antioch in the 5th century and composed certainly earlier, stands as an example of the eucharistic prayer (Ibid., 176). The liturgy is especially important due to its Semitic roots (Ibid., 178). Dix examines two Syrian prayers, those of SS Addai and Mari and that of S. James. The prayer of SS. Addai and Mari is very significant in not mentioning the eucharist at all, as well as having a very allusive style (Ibid., 186). Dix then moves on to S. James, which exists in three distinct texts (Ibid., 187). After presenting the texts Dix makes a comparison of the various prayers, tracing common elements and later developments. Again he finds the overall structure similar but with wide variety in details.

The Indispensable Eucharist

9/9/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 9/9/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 6, “The Pre-Nicene Background of the Liturgy.” pp. 141-155

Dix opens this chapter with a telling reminder. “We have said that despite its extreme structural simplicity there was no ideal of squalor or poverty about the pre-Nicene celebration of the eucharist” (Dix 2005, 141). The worship was treated with dignity. Churches had substantial furnishings and works of art. Yet the structure of the worship itself was quite simple. On pp. 142-144 Dix creates a parallel version which would make sense to the English person of his time. It is all simple but dignified. At the same time Dix emphasizes that to be a Christian was to be at least potentially liable to the death penalty through the third century. Despite all the opposition, Roman penalties notwithstanding, Dix says the Romans never attempted to refute Christian beliefs. “The persecutors were not concerned to produce sincere believers in the deity either of the emperor or of the Olympian gods, but to put an end to the illegal meetings of the christian ecclesia . . . there was no parallel attempt by a counter-propaganda to discredit christian beliefs or to defend pagan ones” (Dix 2005, 147). Not until the persecution under Diocletian (303-13) were there propogandic attempts to refute Christians (Dix 2005, 148). Worship remained a capital offense. Attempts by Christians to explain their faith were relatively rare. When they happened, such as in Justin’s First Apology they were ineffective at changing public opinion (Dix 2005, 150).

At issue is the centrality of gathering for worship, and particularly the eucharist. “It was a burning faith in the vital importance of the eucharist action as such, its importance to God and to the church and to a man’s own soul, for this world and for the next, which made the christians cling to the rite of the eucharist against all odds” (Dix 2005, 151).

The Four Actions of Communion

9/2/2015

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces: 9/2/15
Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. 2nd ed. London:Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005 (republished from 1945 original edition).
Chapter 5, “The Classical Shape of the Liturgy: (II) The Eucharist.” pp. 103-140

“In this chapter we shall study what may be called the skeleton of that ‘four-action shape’ of the eucharist whose first century origins we have just investigated” (Dix, 2005, 103). Dix here looks just at the structure rather than the meaning. The four actions are the offering, the prayer, the breaking of the bread, and the communion.

In the pre-Nicene period the greeting is the peace of God, not simply a prayer that the Lord would be present. This reflects the fact that all unbelievers had been sent away (Dix 2005, 103). A spreading of the table linen followed, then the eucharist itself. After all had brought their offerings there was an invitation, the bishop’s prayer, then the bishop would break bread and commune himself (Dix 2005, 105). The communion was received standing. The reply of each was “amen.” The vessels were then cleansed and the congregation dismissed. People would take some of the bread home for mornings without the liturgy. Deacons would take bread to those who could not be present or to assemblies lacking a bishop (Dix 2005, 05). Beginning on p. 105 Dix considers these parts of the eucharist in more detail.

The greeting and kiss of peace were self-consciously guarded as a time for reconciliation and never as a mere formality (Dix 2005, 105-106). Within the Christian court system which existed by the third century the bishops and presbyters purposely made judgments early in the week so in case of contest the matter could be resolved and all parties reconciled prior to the next eucharist.

The offertory is the means by which the bread and wine arrive at the altar (Dix 2005, 111). Dix shows that Clement, Justin, and Hippolytus all saw a particular order of events and order of roles and responsibilities in the eucharist including in the offering of the bread and wine (Dix 2005, 112). Irenaeus’ application of this act is that the people give themselves to God and God gives himself to the people (Dix 2005, 117).

Dix mentions in brief the ceremonial handwashing, which he sees as a fifth-century innovation (Dix 2005, 124). The bread and wine are recognized as present. Then the eucharistic dialogue and prayer follow a very old tradition (Dix 2005, 126-128).

In the breaking of the bread Dix observes the pragmatic implications. It needed to be broken to distribute. Sometimes there were multiple loaves. Relatively early a statement of purpose - broken for you - was often added (Dix 2005, 132-133). The communion itself follows, with an emphasis on the leaders distributing to the people. It is itself followed with an emphasis on the leaders distributing to the people. It is clear in early practice that the elements are considered the true body and blood of Jesus (Dix 2005, 138).