Friday Scholarly Notes
11/8/24
Bradshaw, Paul F. (2002). Chapter Two: The Background of Early Christian Worship." In The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy. (pages 21-46). Oxford University Press. (Personal Library)
Bradshaw observes that many scholars have given little attention to the pagan context in which Christianity grew. By the end of the 19th century, however, the "history-of-religions school" (Religionsgeschichtliche Schule) began making comparisons between primitive Christianity as far back as the apostolic period and the surrounding paganism, especially including the Greek mystery religions (Bradshaw 2002, p. 21). These comparisons were met with resistance, as there were scholars along a broad spectrum of views. Some considered that the surrounding religious climate had only minimal influence on Christianity, while some thought it was a tremendous influence (Bradshaw 2002, p. 22). Bradshaw considers the work of comparing Christianity and a pagan context was too narrowly focused on mystery religions and that scholars were overly eager to find parallels even by using written evidence from substantially different periods, therefore the endeavor was not successful. Bradshaw acknowledges that Christianity was necessarily influenced in some ways by the societal context (Bradshaw 2002, p. 22). After all, Christians have never been silent in regards to addressing perceived societal problems.
Counter to the interplay of Christianity and paganism, the inheritance of elements of Judaism is well accepted (Bradshaw 2002, p. 23). Yet Bradshaw considers many of the attempts to explore Jewish roots of liturgy to be uncritical. Jewish practices in the first century were not monolithic in nature. Picking and choosing elements which correlate is not a reliably accurate practice. A significant problem in these studies is that extant Jewish liturgical texts come primarily from the ninth century and after (Bradshaw 2002, p. 24).
Bradshaw considers the methodologies of those who have pursued discovery of earlier forms of Jewish liturgy. He notes that Leopold Zunz (1794-1886) is considered as an early luminary in the field. Zunz presupposed that liturgy became more diverse and complex over time. Therefore, taking words or phrases which exist in later liturgies in different locations, he attempted to identify common roots (Bradshaw 2002, p. 25). Subsequent discoveries of fragmentary and early Palestinian liturgical texts show considerable variation in wording, thus undermining the theory put forth by Zunz and his followers (Bradshaw 2002, p. 26).
Joseph Heinemann (1915-1977) applied form-critical methods to Jewish liturgy, with his 1964 doctoral dissertation (Bradshaw 2002, p. 27). He observed that different structures and phrases were used in different contexts . On the basis of this observation, he attempted to trace the origin of various types of prayers. The concept can readily be applied to other types of liturgical elements. Heinemann's conclusion was that "a variety of oral versions [of liturgy] had existed from the first and only late were these subjected to standardization" (Bradshaw 2002, p. 28). There remains a divide among scholars of Jewish liturgy. Bradshaw observes that while some have accepted Heinemann's propositions, others have maintained a more traditional philological approach (Bradshaw 2002, p. 29). There is some doubt whether liturgy which has become standards was derived from an ancient tradition or represents an imposition of a standard by an elite group of rabbis (Bradshaw 2002, p. 30). This has led to a fairly broad consensus that liturgical literature is, at least in some measure, selective. The process of transmission omits some features and creates others, in a way which is not always easily documented (Bradshaw 2002, p. 31).
Bradshaw concludes that the most responsible way to evaluate Judaism's influence on Chrsitian liturgy involves a focus on the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 33). Although we have evidence for continuing contact of Judaism and Christianity through the fourth century, the groups differentiated more significantly after the first century, as Christianity was increasingly Gentile. Identifying contemporary patterns, as opposed to later accounts of what may have happened in the past, is more reliable. Bradshaw again acknowledges that there were multiple expressions of Judaism in the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 34). Yet, with that in mind, Bradshaw notes there are striking parallels between liturgical evidence from the Qumran literature and early Christianity, and that much of the Qumran liturgical material would seem likely to be generally applicable to a broad spectrum of Judaism (Bradshaw 2002, p. 34). Bradshaw observes that a substantial amount of information has recently been coming to light in terms of 1st century Jewish hymns and prayers (Bradshaw 2002, p. 35). This may prove to be helpful in identifying possible influences on Christian liturgy.
First century synagogue worship has typically been assumed to consist of "recitation of the shema, the recitation of the Tefillah, the priestly blessing, the reading from the Torah, and the reading from the Prophets" (Bradshaw 2002, p. 36). Those five elements are listed in that order in the Mishnah, among elements of worship which require at least ten adult males. However, Bradshaw notes there are other elements which would not seem to be part of a typical synagogue service and that assuming the elements would be standard in the first century is not necessarily warranted. He sees growing doubt based on literature and archaeological studies that services were so standardized at the time. Rather, the synagogue service may have primarily consisted of a study of Torah. The more standard customs may not have arisen until the third or fifth centuries. The exception, he says, is in the accounts found in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:15 (Bradshaw 2002, p. 37). Use of specific Psalms for different weeks is also a matter of substantial doubt (Bradshaw 2002, p. 38).
Similarly, the evidence for daily prayer services in Jewish communities is unclear, though there is evidence for individual use of the Shema and Tefillah (Bradshaw 2002, p. 39). Bradshaw provides documentation of sources for the individual use of these prayers, but finds evidence lacking for a community assembly for corporate prayers (Bradshaw 2002, p. 40). The standardization and drawing of people together for corporate prayer appears to be a second or third century practice (Bradshaw 2002, p. 432).
Bradshae does observe that a berekah was a form of prayer known to be used in the first century. However, there was not one standard form during the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 43). Prayers of praise and of confession both exist, with a variety of adaptations of a basic format.
Evidence exists for blessings at the end of meals. Though Bradshaw does not consider the texts to be standardized, it seems the structure was a series of berakot, which became more standard by the time of the Mishnah. Prayers at the start of the meal became traditional by the middle of the second century but were not so in the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 44). In general, the growth of standard forms of prayer took place after the fall of Jerusalem in 70, though basic structures can be found beforehand (Bradshaw 2002, p. 45). Standard content of prayers develops over time.
11/8/24
Bradshaw, Paul F. (2002). Chapter Two: The Background of Early Christian Worship." In The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship: Sources and Methods for the Study of Early Liturgy. (pages 21-46). Oxford University Press. (Personal Library)
Bradshaw observes that many scholars have given little attention to the pagan context in which Christianity grew. By the end of the 19th century, however, the "history-of-religions school" (Religionsgeschichtliche Schule) began making comparisons between primitive Christianity as far back as the apostolic period and the surrounding paganism, especially including the Greek mystery religions (Bradshaw 2002, p. 21). These comparisons were met with resistance, as there were scholars along a broad spectrum of views. Some considered that the surrounding religious climate had only minimal influence on Christianity, while some thought it was a tremendous influence (Bradshaw 2002, p. 22). Bradshaw considers the work of comparing Christianity and a pagan context was too narrowly focused on mystery religions and that scholars were overly eager to find parallels even by using written evidence from substantially different periods, therefore the endeavor was not successful. Bradshaw acknowledges that Christianity was necessarily influenced in some ways by the societal context (Bradshaw 2002, p. 22). After all, Christians have never been silent in regards to addressing perceived societal problems.
Counter to the interplay of Christianity and paganism, the inheritance of elements of Judaism is well accepted (Bradshaw 2002, p. 23). Yet Bradshaw considers many of the attempts to explore Jewish roots of liturgy to be uncritical. Jewish practices in the first century were not monolithic in nature. Picking and choosing elements which correlate is not a reliably accurate practice. A significant problem in these studies is that extant Jewish liturgical texts come primarily from the ninth century and after (Bradshaw 2002, p. 24).
Bradshaw considers the methodologies of those who have pursued discovery of earlier forms of Jewish liturgy. He notes that Leopold Zunz (1794-1886) is considered as an early luminary in the field. Zunz presupposed that liturgy became more diverse and complex over time. Therefore, taking words or phrases which exist in later liturgies in different locations, he attempted to identify common roots (Bradshaw 2002, p. 25). Subsequent discoveries of fragmentary and early Palestinian liturgical texts show considerable variation in wording, thus undermining the theory put forth by Zunz and his followers (Bradshaw 2002, p. 26).
Joseph Heinemann (1915-1977) applied form-critical methods to Jewish liturgy, with his 1964 doctoral dissertation (Bradshaw 2002, p. 27). He observed that different structures and phrases were used in different contexts . On the basis of this observation, he attempted to trace the origin of various types of prayers. The concept can readily be applied to other types of liturgical elements. Heinemann's conclusion was that "a variety of oral versions [of liturgy] had existed from the first and only late were these subjected to standardization" (Bradshaw 2002, p. 28). There remains a divide among scholars of Jewish liturgy. Bradshaw observes that while some have accepted Heinemann's propositions, others have maintained a more traditional philological approach (Bradshaw 2002, p. 29). There is some doubt whether liturgy which has become standards was derived from an ancient tradition or represents an imposition of a standard by an elite group of rabbis (Bradshaw 2002, p. 30). This has led to a fairly broad consensus that liturgical literature is, at least in some measure, selective. The process of transmission omits some features and creates others, in a way which is not always easily documented (Bradshaw 2002, p. 31).
Bradshaw concludes that the most responsible way to evaluate Judaism's influence on Chrsitian liturgy involves a focus on the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 33). Although we have evidence for continuing contact of Judaism and Christianity through the fourth century, the groups differentiated more significantly after the first century, as Christianity was increasingly Gentile. Identifying contemporary patterns, as opposed to later accounts of what may have happened in the past, is more reliable. Bradshaw again acknowledges that there were multiple expressions of Judaism in the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 34). Yet, with that in mind, Bradshaw notes there are striking parallels between liturgical evidence from the Qumran literature and early Christianity, and that much of the Qumran liturgical material would seem likely to be generally applicable to a broad spectrum of Judaism (Bradshaw 2002, p. 34). Bradshaw observes that a substantial amount of information has recently been coming to light in terms of 1st century Jewish hymns and prayers (Bradshaw 2002, p. 35). This may prove to be helpful in identifying possible influences on Christian liturgy.
First century synagogue worship has typically been assumed to consist of "recitation of the shema, the recitation of the Tefillah, the priestly blessing, the reading from the Torah, and the reading from the Prophets" (Bradshaw 2002, p. 36). Those five elements are listed in that order in the Mishnah, among elements of worship which require at least ten adult males. However, Bradshaw notes there are other elements which would not seem to be part of a typical synagogue service and that assuming the elements would be standard in the first century is not necessarily warranted. He sees growing doubt based on literature and archaeological studies that services were so standardized at the time. Rather, the synagogue service may have primarily consisted of a study of Torah. The more standard customs may not have arisen until the third or fifth centuries. The exception, he says, is in the accounts found in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:15 (Bradshaw 2002, p. 37). Use of specific Psalms for different weeks is also a matter of substantial doubt (Bradshaw 2002, p. 38).
Similarly, the evidence for daily prayer services in Jewish communities is unclear, though there is evidence for individual use of the Shema and Tefillah (Bradshaw 2002, p. 39). Bradshaw provides documentation of sources for the individual use of these prayers, but finds evidence lacking for a community assembly for corporate prayers (Bradshaw 2002, p. 40). The standardization and drawing of people together for corporate prayer appears to be a second or third century practice (Bradshaw 2002, p. 432).
Bradshae does observe that a berekah was a form of prayer known to be used in the first century. However, there was not one standard form during the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 43). Prayers of praise and of confession both exist, with a variety of adaptations of a basic format.
Evidence exists for blessings at the end of meals. Though Bradshaw does not consider the texts to be standardized, it seems the structure was a series of berakot, which became more standard by the time of the Mishnah. Prayers at the start of the meal became traditional by the middle of the second century but were not so in the first century (Bradshaw 2002, p. 44). In general, the growth of standard forms of prayer took place after the fall of Jerusalem in 70, though basic structures can be found beforehand (Bradshaw 2002, p. 45). Standard content of prayers develops over time.
RSS Feed