Edited by Maxwell Johnson (University of Notre Dame), this collection of essays is intended to complement preceding essays compiled in Essays on Early Eastern Eucharistic Prayers (1997,edited by Paul Bradshaw)and Issues in Eucharistic Praying in East and West (2010, edited by Maxwell Johnson).  Like the earlier compilations, this text serves as a window into the doctoral research happening at the University of Notre Dame and as an introduction to up and coming scholars in the field of liturgical studies.  The volume includes two essays by Johnson (one on the Egyptian Anaphora and its origins and one on the use of sacrifice in the Roman Anaphora), one by a recent graduate (2020), Nathan Chase, who currently teaches at the Aquinas Institute in St. Louis (on the shaping of the classical anaphoras from the fourth to sixth centuries), and seven essays by students who were still in doctoral studies in 2023.  Two of those latter essays point the reader in the direction of exciting new research and interest in the field (one looks at the relationship between the Ethiopian Anaphora of the Apostles and its relation to the Apostolic Tradition, and the other looks at the connection of the Maronite prayer, Sharar, to the East Syrian anaphora of Addai and Mari).  Much of the scholarship presented in these essays is first-rate and displays a promising future for liturgical research in the years to come. 

Two essays are of particular note.  The essay by Chase, “Shaping the Classical Anaphoras of the Fourth through Sixth Centuries,” clearly adds a new lens to interpreting the formation of these classical anaphoras for the Church.  By looking at pre-Constantinian influences on the shape and formation of these anaphoras, Chase has imbued the study of this particular development with new energy and insight.  The final list of ten influences that he presents (increased from the generally agreed upon three that he cites at the beginning of his article) will be developed further in his own monograph (2024).  Chase’s scholarship should be exciting to watch as it develops over the next few years. The other essay of note is Andrij Hlabse’s “Authority and Confluence of Traditions in Aksum.”  Hlabse’s research is extensive and nuanced.  He concludes that the Apostolic Tradition has an authoritative role for the formation of the Ethiopian Anaphora of the Apostle but also maintains that what emerges from his study is an admission of a “living encounter of two liturgical traditions under the guidance of a (presumably) Ethiopian redactor, displaying something of this tradition’s theological and liturgical sensibilities not just in one discrete eucharistic anaphora, but through its combination of two diverse traditions of prayer” (199).

The final section of the collection, dedicated to the Roman canon missae, should also be mentioned here.  Joachim Ozonze’s look at the “Igbo Translations of the Roman Canon” shows the great difficulty in rendering authentic and usable vernacular translations over the past fifty years.  The principle-driven change between Comme le prevoit and Liturgiam Authenticam had been felt most acutely not only by those who dare to delve into the sometimes murky waters of translation work, but also by the priests and the faithful who have to speak those translations into the performance of the rite.  As Ozonze rightly notes, those endeavors have become recently buoyed by Pope Francis’ motu propio, Magnum Principium (2017) which projects the telos of translation work as the rendering of vernacular languages as liturgical languages.  Also in this section is the second of Johnson’s articles: “Recent Thoughts on the Roman Anaphora: Sacrifice in the Canon Missae.”  In it, Johnson moves the reader away from unnecessary debates about the translation of “sacrifice” in the first Eucharistic Prayer. Robert Daly’s work on Eucharistic sacrifice, which is not referenced here, would have greatly augmented Johnson’s conclusions.   Lastly, Julia Canonico’s article in this section, “English Vernacular Translation of the Roman Canon,” is the only addition to the collection that seems to misfire.  Much of the beginning of this essay is spent questioning the need for the reform of the Missale Romanum, using the space to call into question the work of Cipriano Vagaggini (as if he were an isolated actor unduly influencing the direction and the work of the post-conciliar reform).  The critique seems misplaced. 

All in all, the collection of essays remains a valuable addition to liturgical scholarship and gives us a glimpse of the future of liturgical studies in the decades to come.