(a.) Liturgies of the Eastern Churches. — Chronologi- cally those of the Oriental Church first demand exami- nation. (1.) The earliest, perhaps, is that of Jerusalem or Antioch, ascribed to the apostle James ; the first word in it, 6 'itpivQ — a word never used by apostolic men in speaking of the Christian ministrj- — puts the seal of rep- robation upon every such claim. The same may be said as to another anachronism, the word vpoovaioc applied to the third person of the Trinity. Putting aside, there- fore, such claim, as also the stranger notion that the apostle in 1 Cor. ii, 9, quotes from this liturgj- rather than that the liturgist quotes from him, we may still rec- ognise in this early form of Christian worship features of peculiar interest. It is still used on St. James's day in some of the islands of the Archipelago, and is the pat- tern of two others, those of Basil and Chrj-sostom. I'or- tions of it may have existed at an earlier period, but in its present form it dates from the last half of the fourth centur}-. For the distinction between the orthodox Greek and the Monophysite Syrian forms of this litur- gy, see Palmer, Origines JAturgicev, vol. i. The latter, the Monophysite form, it is to be observed, is still in use, and in both are portions of the material to be fomul in that of the Apostolical Constitutions.
(2.") The second of these liturgies is that of the Alex- andrian Church, called that of St. Mark, but. quite ss clearly as that of St. James, betraying its later origin. In this, as in the other two, there may be materials pre- viously existing ; but the probabilities indicate Cyril of
LITURGY
459
LITURGY
Alexandria as the author of it in its present shape. Tlie effort lias been made to sejiarate in it the apostolic from the later elements, as is also attempted by Neale with that of St. James. As the object of this effort seems to be to prove the sacerdotal character of apostolic Christiani- ty, so all sacerdotal elements become proof of apostolic authorship. The conclusion is as false as the premise. The special historical interest of this liturgy of St. aiark is its relation to those of the Coptic and Ethio- pic churches, of which it forms the main constituent. The remark of Palmer as to its claim to inspired author- ship is well worthy of attention. '• In my opinion," says he, "this appellation of St. I\Iark's liturgy began about the end of the fourth or beginning of the fifth century, after Basil had composed his liturgy, which was the first that bore the name of any man. Other churches then gave their liturgies the names of their founders, and so the Alexandrians and Egyptians gave theirs the name of jNIark, while they of Jerusalem and Antioch called theirs St. James's, and early in the fifth century it appears that Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria, perfected and improved tlie liturgy of St. Mark, from whence this improved lit- urgy came to be called by the Jlonophysites St. Cyril's, and by the orthodox St. Mark's." The peculiarity of tliis last, in Neale's estimation, is the difference from other liturgies in the position of the great intercession for quick and dead. That such intercession found place in any of them is evidence of their post-apostolic origin. (3.) The third and last of these liturgies is that of Ci^sarea or Byzantium, composed probably by Basil of C«sarea, and held to have been recast and enlarged by Chrysostom ; but more properly, perhaps, both these are to be regarded as elaborations of that of St. James. Thej', moreover, have historical and moral significance in the fact that, through the Byzantine Church, they have been received into that of Russia, and are used in its patriarch- ates, each for special occasions, at the present time. Such additions, of course, have been made as have been rendered necessary through peculiarities of Greek wor- ship, and accumulation of ritualistic minutiai coming into use since these liturgies in their original forms were in- troduced. They now contain expressions not to be f lund in the wTitings of Chrysostom : e. g. the appellation of Mother of God, given to the Virgin Mary, which was not heard of until after the third General Council at Ephesus [A.D.431] — the bod}' which condemned the doctrines of Nestorius — held 2-1 years after the death of Chrvsostom.
From these Oriental liturgies have sprung others, va- riously modified to meet doctrinal and other exigencies. The largest number is from that of Jerusalem, the next from that of Basil. The most important is that of the Armenians, Monophysite, those of the Nestorians, and that of Malabar. For discussion as to the special origin of these subordinate forms, and the principles of classi- fication, see Falmci's Oriffines Liturgka,\o\. i; Neale's Primitive Liturgies ; Riddle, Christian Antiquities, bk. iv, ch. i, sec. 6.
(h.) Liturgies of the Wesfei-ii Church. — In the West liturgical development went on with less rapidity. (1.) That of the Roman Church, under the infiuence of the sort of feeling alluded to above in the quotation from Palmer, after it came into use, received the name of Pe- ter, and was traced to his authorship. In point of fact, it probably first assumed definite shape under Leo the Great during the first half of tlie fifth century, was add- ed to by Gelasius during the latter half of the same century, elaborated again by Gregory the Great not very long after, and through his infiuence secured its reputation and position. "His Ordo et Canon Misste, making allowance for the unavoidable changes taking place in it during the centuries mtervening, was settled under Pius V, liJTO, as the Missale Komanorum. It was revised under Clement VII and Urban VIII, and forms at the ]iresent time the liturgical text of Romish wor- ship" (Palmer, in Herzog). The Liturgy of Milan seems to have been very much the same as that of Rome prior