Sunteți pe pagina 1din 4

Development of Devotion

Liturgy
Traditional form: communal required each order within the
community to perform its proper function
Christs true and real body ! the Church" so the action of the
#ucharist was transtemporal $%a&ley" '(): *t was one in
which Christ" the high priest" and the faithful of his church"
united in one body as head and members and by their very
action intensifying that union" o+er to the ,ather that very
body under the form of brea& and wine" re-presenting thereby
the one sacri.ce of Christ or" better" energi/ing that one
sacri.ce0
1namnesis ! something a&in to an active reliving rather
than a merely passive remembering0 $%a&ley" '2)
*n this conte3t" metaphysical questions concerning the precise
nature of Christs physical presence understandably did not
arise4 $'2)
Transformation of this understanding occurred in the late 55
th
-
5( centuries0
6ractical changes:
-increase in number of prayers to be said by clergy alone $7
th
c0)
-decline in frequency of lay communions with decrease in
peoples o+ertory $beginning in 7-8th9 centuries)
-appearance of the low mass $from :
th
c0)
-gradual incomprehensibility of Latin mass $'-;
th
centuries)
-recitation of canon in inaudible whisper
-removal of the celebrant to the front of the altar where he
could no longer face the people $'7) <<<
1ll of these changes contrived to transform the #ucharist from
a corporate liturgical act in which laity and clergy ali&e
partidcipated into an e3clusively priestly liturgy" something the
priest did on behalf of lay people" themselves reduced
progressively from doer to hearers and seers and" .nally" to
seers only0 $'7)
-introduction of monastic practice of private masses
Theoretical changes $'7 seq0)
-disruption of the organic connection between Christ and his
church
-concomitant disruption of the connection between Christs
sacri.ce of himself and the churchs #ucharistic action0 $'7)
-association of eucharist with a particular" historical moment in
Christs life" the 6assion $not the =esurrection or 1scension)
-#ucharist a repetition of that historical sacri.ce
-this repetition isolated in the priestly action of consecration
rather than in the whole of the #ucharistic action $'7)
-caused by" and caused" debates over the metaphysical relation
of Christs body and blood in the sacrament to the physical
elements of bread and wine $;-55
th
centuries)
-so" each mass came to be regarded as in some sense a
repetition of Christs original sacri.ce on Calvary" a fresh
sacri.ce generating its own individual quantum of grace" a
sacri.ce that" simply by virtue of their possession of holy
orders" priests and priests alone could o+er" applying its merits
in accordance with their own chosen intentions to petitioners
or benefactors" present or absent" living or dead0 $'8)
>note also that grace begins to be conceived as a substance that
can be portioned out" perhaps a consequence of the flioque
and its reduction of the spiritual activity of the Trinity?
-transformation of the mon&s into a class of professional
clerical intercessors $'8)@ multiplication of church services
they performed" on behalf of wealthy benefactors" on behalf of
society $':)
-monastic reforms of late 55-5( centuries were a response to
this professionali/ation $':)
-these $e0g0" At0 Bernard of Clairvau3) developed a di+erent
spirituality: more emotional" more personal" more private"
more preoccupied with individual will and inner piety $'C)
-development of devotion to Christs corporal nature
-esp0 ,ranciscans developed these forms of devotion"
particularly through the establishment of the third order
-%a&ley argues that these devotions had one great wea&ness"
namely an inability to reform the #ucharist bac& to its earlier
forms0 $'')
Dowever" these developments did have an e+ect in the late 55
th
-
5( centuries:
-elevation of the Dost
-institution of the feast of Corpus Christi
-institution of the processions of the Blessed Aacrament
the practice of e3posing the previously consecrated
#ucharistic Apecies for public adoration in an ostensarium or
monstrance $'')
-gradual increase in frequency of lay communion
-all elements in a general deepening of devotion to the
mystery of the #ucharist0
EFAT*C*AE
At0 Bernard and the 52
th
century continued or revived tradition
monastic piety@ 57
th
c0 mysticism di+ered in several ways:
-many were not monastics or members of monastic orders
-many wrote in vernacular instead of Latin
-their wor&s were addressed to persons who were not monastics
or clergy $;G-5) at times" even written to a popular audience0
*ncrease in women monastics and female religious groups
-rise of the Beguines $women" no monastic order" no
o+icial rule or vows" pursued occupations by committed
themselves to communal life incl0 celibacy $;5-;()
Two traditions in the history of mysticism:
50 1+ective: 1ugustinian" wHemphases on will and love"
e3empli.ed by Cistercians" ,ranciscans@ At0 Bernard and At0
Bonaventure $;7)
(0 Apeculative" essentialist" Ieoplatonic@ the Dominican
tradition of #c&hart and Tauler" inJuenced by Dionysius the
1reopagite0
%a&ley notes the di+iculties of this categori/ation $;8-:)
*n fact" =ichard of At0 Kictor and Thomas Lallus" both
Kictorines" were both transmitters of Ieoplatonism 1ID
loveHwill mystics0$;:)
%a&ley argues" similar to DeLra+ia" that even the most
ardent Ieoplatonists were limited in the degree to which
they could assimilate and espouse such philosophical doctrines
by two facts: the biblical doctrine of creation and the notion of
a transcendent and omnipotent divinity that it presupposed0
$;C)

,rom the Eonasteries to the Mniversities
Mniversity of 6aris statutes sanctioned 5(580
Curriculum included lectures and disputations: generally
spea&ing" mediaeval university education aimed rather at
imparting a certain body of &nowledge and de3terity in dealing
with it than at increasing factual &nowledge as in a modern
research institute0 $Copleston" (58)
Trends of thought in the universities:
-1ugustinian conservative" distrusted 1ristotelianism@
,ranciscans e0g0" Lrosseteste" 1le3ander of Dales" At0
Bonaventure - and early Dominicans
-1ristotelian Dominicans" eg0 At0 1lbert the Lreat" At0 Thomas
1quinas
-1verroists e0g0" Aiger of Brabant
-eclectic thin&ers e0g0" Liles of =ome" Denry of Lhent
-Duns Acotus reformed ,ranciscan tradition in the light of
1ristotelianism