APA 6th Edition STEINER, M. (2003). Liturgijska raznolikost u prošlosti i liturgijski pluralizam u sadašnjosti. Bogoslovska smotra, 73 (2-3), 329-339. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/27832
MLA 8th Edition STEINER, Marijan. "Liturgijska raznolikost u prošlosti i liturgijski pluralizam u sadašnjosti." Bogoslovska smotra, vol. 73, br. 2-3, 2003, str. 329-339. https://hrcak.srce.hr/27832. Citirano 17.01.2021.
Chicago 17th Edition STEINER, Marijan. "Liturgijska raznolikost u prošlosti i liturgijski pluralizam u sadašnjosti." Bogoslovska smotra 73, br. 2-3 (2003): 329-339. https://hrcak.srce.hr/27832
Harvard STEINER, M. (2003). 'Liturgijska raznolikost u prošlosti i liturgijski pluralizam u sadašnjosti', Bogoslovska smotra, 73(2-3), str. 329-339. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/27832 (Datum pristupa: 17.01.2021.)
Vancouver STEINER M. Liturgijska raznolikost u prošlosti i liturgijski pluralizam u sadašnjosti. Bogoslovska smotra [Internet]. 2003 [pristupljeno 17.01.2021.];73(2-3):329-339. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/27832
IEEE M. STEINER, "Liturgijska raznolikost u prošlosti i liturgijski pluralizam u sadašnjosti", Bogoslovska smotra, vol.73, br. 2-3, str. 329-339, 2003. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/27832. [Citirano: 17.01.2021.]
Sažetak Due to the strength of the apostolic tradition in the early Church, up until the 4th century there was a lack of any centralization of liturgical practice and legislation. When this tradition began to weaken, church councils began to gradually restrict the power of individual bishops in relation to the liturgy. After Constantine, important changes began to occur in the development of liturgy. Apart from the up-until-then predominate Jewish-Greek-Roman culture, the new migration of nations began to influence liturgical practice. Two types of liturgy developed: Eastern and Western. The Eastern includes the Antiochian and Alexandrian liturgical family (each with its own liturgical rite). In the West the Roman, Milanese, Old-Hispanic, Gaelic and Celtic rituals developed. Throughout the Middle Ages there was an increase in the number of local liturgical practices as well as the rituals of individual religious orders (especially mass rituals). In the sixteenth century the Council of Trident reformed and unified the Roman liturgy, which througthout the centuries had been changed and adapted by individual bishops and superiors of religious orders according to their personal needs. The Roman liturgy up until then had not been determined in any sort of a detailed manner. The invention of printing led to the mixing of various specific local liturgical practices. The Trident council determined a single breviary and missal, although there was room made for the retaining of some local specific liturgical practices. In this way. some of the older religious orders retained their mass rituals that to some degree differed from the Roman ritual, for example, the Dominicans, Carmelites and Carthusians.
Vatican II Council renewed liturgical worship on the foundation of the principle of »unity in diversity«. Although this principle has in many ways been successfully realized, certain phenomenon and initiatives show that there exists a specific kind of disorder as well as insufficient uniformity in today's liturgy. Among the greatest initiatives introduced by this Council is the use of modern national languages, greater emphasis on liturgical wording (wider choice of texts from Scripture), new Eucharistic prayers, refinement and simplification of ritual, suitable adaptations and so on. Pluralism in present day liturgy may be perceived in both phenotypic diversity (speech, singing, bodily posture, behaviour, movement, attire, equipment, space) and structural diversity (especially in the liturgy of Asian and African countries). This reform would be a complete failure if the possibility of free choice was allowed to systematically fall into decline or if a single uniform way of liturgical celebration was indefinitely determined by only minimal criterion. Juridism and ritualism both represent a specific kind of liturgical deformation. Yet this does not mean that one may fall into the other extreme whereby all the rules are destroyed at personal discretion. Boundaries of »lawful diversity« do exist and ought not be crossed. Liturgy, namely, is not an expression of religious authenticity of the different parts of God's people, but instead is an expression of the unchangeable catholic faith of the entire Church - liturgy as such is a »sign of unity«. An authentic and gradual process of inculturation may truthfully enrich Christian worship (this phenomenon already took place at the transition to Christianity from Semitic worship in a Greek-roman social environment. One needs to be aware that the celebration of the Eucharist is particularly constitutive for the diachronic identity (foundation, tradition) and synchronic identity (unity) of the Church. Radical separation from tradition and lack of consideration for unity of all the particular churches would contradict the liturgical-theological principle of universality and unity of the entire Church.