![]() Introducing allegory in the interpretation of liturgy and compiling existing material is relevant for transmitting the Fathers’ beliefs to future generations. Their purpose for using patristic sources is to verify doctrines or liturgical practices of their period. The said authors do not use the patristic ideas in their original sense they do not expand on them theologically. In the present paper, the author explores the reception of Saint Jerome by both authors referred to above. Amalar’s exposition enhanced the development of allegorical interpretations in the Middle Ages, while Durand’s exposition has been used up to the liturgical reform introduced by the Second Vatican Council. Both expositions were very influential not only in the period in which they were created but also in later periods. In the 13th century, he compiled the exposition Rationale divinorum officiorum. One author who considered Amaral a role model was William Durand the Elder, bishop of Mende in France. He eventually became a role model for later authors who created more or less similar treatises following his example. In the early 9th century, Amaral of Metz compiled the exposition De ecclesiastico officio, in which he examines liturgical celebrations by using an allegorical interpretation and the contribution to the Carolingian reform. ![]() Stăniloae highlighted the biblical nature of the Church and the ecclesial nature of the Bible.Īmalar of Metz and William Durand were medieval liturgists from the beginning and end of a long period during which liturgical treatises were created and labelled expositio missae or liturgical expositions. Through his description of the authority of the Church, through his entire ecclesiology and through the way in which he interpreted the Scriptures in the spirit of the Fathers, of the Liturgy, and in dialogue with contemporary society, Fr. This process reflects the interior conscience of the Church, which sometimes takes a tacit form, while other times it is manifested in ecumenical synods, which have to be later received by the Church. In Orthodoxy, after long periods of time, the entire Church (clergy and the people) listens to the voice of its common conscience, receives the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and discerns how to remain faithful to the truth of Scriptures and Tradition, in continuity with the ways in which previous generations have lived the divine revelation. Stăniloae affirmed that the Church must not search for an objective, exterior criterion for the truthful affirmation of its teachings, such as papal authority or the predominantly literal biblical interpretation in evangelical Protestant churches. Both the orthodox and the heretics of the early centuries claimed to interpret the Scriptures under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, unanimously within their communities is it possible to find an external criterion to establish who was right? Presenting the difference between the orthodox truth and the teachings of the other communities, Fr. Dissentions within the Church are symptomatic of the tension between the authority of the Scriptures over the Church and the interpretative authority of the Church in regards to the Scriptures. At the same time, however, the Church has the duty to remain within the truth of the Scriptures. Revelation-and especially the Scriptures-is entrusted to the Church. Stăniloae wrote an ecclesiology based on the Holy Scriptures and invited Orthodox theologians to open sobornicity, namely the acceptance of the various ways in which God manifests himself outside of Orthodoxy, in order to have a more complete understanding of divine revelation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |