Talk:Christian liturgy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity / Anglicanism (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (marked as High-importance).


I think the link to liturgy (which now describes liturgy in general) should be somehow incorporated into this article. Perharps in some short definition in the beginning? (I'm not feeling competent to write it myself.) Vojta 08:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone know what a paraliturgy is? All I can find on it are pictures of events and lesson plans for Catholic schools. The word is not in the dictionary and I can't find it in the Catholic Encyclopedia. --obo 23:49, 22 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A paraliturgy is a Catholic liturgy of the Roman Rite not found in one of the four liturgical books.


Someone really needs to edit this entry. I may do so if I can find the time. It simply displays incredible Roman Catholic bias. It is like writing a history of Judaism from the perspective of Orthodox Jews only. Has the writer ever entertained one single thought that the church in which he was raised (or converted to) is other than the True Church? It's just not acceptable as a general reference. Readers be forewarned.

I'm not Roman Catholic, and I don't see it - it looks to me like a fair sampling of RC, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, and few others that have strongly liturgical traditions. And you refer to "the writer" when it has more than one. But why don't you try contributing instead of just grousing? Carlo 18:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
"Someone really need to edit this entry." Sadly, in the WikiUniverse, the only "Someone" there is, is you. --Sean Lotz 05:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Submit external website[edit]

Whatever one might think of the Catholic Encyclopedia external link, it is limited by having been published in 1908, and so has no concept of developments in the last century, including Vatican II and the major changes within the Roman Catholic Church. Hence, I would like to submit an external link Liturgy website. This is a contemporary liturgical website which includes Celebrating Eucharist, as far as I know the only online "ceremonial guide" - a contemporary explanation and guide with theory and practice for the Eucharist and other liturgies in Anglican, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and other denominations. --Alcuinz 05:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

As there has been no disagreement with my comment above after more than a week, I am placing the site as an external link. --Alcuinz 05:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

"Dogmatic Value" section[edit]

Is this taken primarily from the Catholic Encyclopedia? The whole tone is decidedly POV/Roman. --Midnite Critic 12:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The entire Liturgical science sections, titles and all, appears to have been taken from here:, which claims copyright: " © 1996-2007 The Mary Foundation" Stephen 04:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


There is a strong POV on this article, toward the Roman Catholic direction (references to priest, canon law, etc, taken as normative and assumed; the patterns of worship used in many Protestant churches summarily dismissed). Pastordavid 10:15, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah? If this is so, please correct it, as you are a protestant pastor! If not, don't claim for POV, please!

First, sign your entries. Second, it IS POV, and not only POV, but dated POV. --Midnite Critic 00:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Then, as the person said, correct it. Carlo 01:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okie-dokie... --Midnite Critic 13:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I would agree about the POV comments and would suggest that the history section (Labeled History of the Roman Catholic Mass (Liturgy)) be made into History of the Liturgy. This history is MY history as well and I am not RC. Again (as I have commented multiple times), why do we focus on our differences before we focus on our commonalities? I would suggest STARTING with the history, as well. I like chronological order. Reverend Mommy 13:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)candlemb
Oh, yeah. Dearest Midnite Critic, I volunteer to help edit. I excel at adding my two cents worth. =o) Reverend Mommy 13:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)candlemb

Hee-hee. You too, huh? <g> --Midnite Critic 15:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions in Reworking Article[edit]

I suggest we use a structure like this (No more than a sentence or two for each -- each actually could use their own article, IMHO, but I'm a Liturgy Geek):

  • History of the Liturgy
    • From Jewish to Christian Rite
      • The Chaborah Meal
      • The Passover Meal
    • The Institution Narrative
      • 1 Corinthians 11
      • Synoptics
      • John
    • Justin the Martyr stuff
    • Irenaeus stuff
    • Anaphora of Hippolytus
      • The Patristic Approach to the Eucharistic Sacrifice
    • Ambrose and Augustine
    • Anaphora of Addai and Mari
    • Liturgy of St. James
      • Mozarabic and Gallican Rite
      • The compromises leading to the Western Rite
    • The Berengarian Controversy and Medieval Eucharistic Theologies
    • Aquinas
    • Reformation
    • Modern Developments

Then look at the structure and commonalities: Service of the Word

(The offering is sometimes called the Lesser Oblation and constitutes a "Bridge" between the Service of the Word and the Service of the Table

Service of the Table

This is messy, but I did it all from memory. Let me know what you think. Reverend Mommy 14:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)candlemb

That's great; however, probably more appropriate for an article focusing on the history of the Eucharist. IMHO, however, this article on "Christian liturgy" needs to be broader and less in-depth, covering not only the Eucharist but also the liturgy of the hours, at the least. --Midnite Critic 15:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comments[edit]

This feels like a start class article due to a surplus of list content and a shortage of prose content. It is definitely a good beginning, but readers would be better served with more prose. GRBerry 18:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)