The Baptist minister at Real Live Preacher went to an Orthodox church during his sabbatical for an ecclesiastical safari. It surprised him more than expected:
Pews? We don’t need no stinking pews! Providing seats for worshipers is SO 14th century. Gorgeous Byzantine art, commissioned from a famous artist in Bulgaria. Fully robed priests with censors (those swinging incense thingies). Long, complex readings and chants that went on and on and on. And every one of them packed full of complex, theological ideas. It was like they were ripping raw chunks of theology out of ancient creeds and throwing them by the handfuls into the congregation. And just to make sure it wasn’t too easy for us, everything was read in a monotone voice and at the speed of an auctioneer.
I heard words and phrases I had not heard since seminary. Theotokos, begotten not made, Cherubim and Seraphim borne on their pinions, supplications and oblations. It was an ADD kids nightmare. Robes, scary art, smoking incense, secret doors in the Iconostas popping open and little robed boys coming out with golden candlesticks, chants and singing from a small choir that rolled across the curved ceiling and emerged from the other side of the room where no one was singing. The acoustics were wild. No matter who was speaking, the sound came out of everywhere. There was so much going on I couldn’t keep up with all the things I couldn’t pay attention to.
And how did this Baptist react to the overwhelming ritual, the art, the “raw chunks of theology,” the foreign and ineffable majesty of it all?
I LOVED IT. Loved it loved it loved it loved it loved it.
In a day when user-friendly is the byword of everything from churches to software, here was worship that asked something of me. No, DEMANDED something of me.
“You don’t know what Theotokos means? Get a book and read about it. You have a hard time standing for 2 hours? Do some sit ups and get yourself into worship shape. It is the Lord our God we worship here, mortal. What made you think you could worship the Eternal One without pain?”
See, I get that. That makes sense to me. I had a hard time following the words of the chants and liturgy, but even my lack of understanding had something to teach me.
“There is so much for you to learn. There is more here than a person could master in a lifetime. THIS IS BIGGER THAN YOU ARE. Your understanding is not central here. These are ancient rites of the church. Stand with us, brother, and you will learn in time. Or go and find your way to an easier place if you must. God bless you on that journey. We understand, but this is the way we do church.”
Worship where something is demanded of you. A church where people take seriously the fact that they are worshiping the eternal God and not patting themselves on the back. A liturgy that gives the people deep theology with the expectation that they can handle it. Sounds like radical change to me. We could use some of that in the Western Church.
June 5th, 2009 | 12:33 am
I believe the Antiochians, and perhaps other jurisdictions as well, have experimented with implementing a traditional western liturgy. I have never been, but I believe it’s along the lines of a traditional Anglican one but without the filioque and perhaps a few other adjustments. I really need to get to one of those some day as I have a soft spot for the Anglican liturgy.
There is also occasional rumblings about trying to resurrect a pre-schism western liturgy; I have my doubts about that pursuit though.
It’s a real shame Rome botched the liturgical reform so badly at V2, and it may be too late at this point. There’s always hope, though. I’m not leaving the liturgy of Chrysostom, but there is a lot of strength and beauty in the West and it would be nice to see some more of it come back.
June 7th, 2009 | 7:09 pm
“A liturgy that gives the people deep theology with the expectation that they can handle it.”
I totally disagree with this quote. For example, who is going to define “the people”? What about the illiterate? How does “deep theology” aid in our directed purpose by Jesus himself i.e. “Preach the Gospel to all mankind”. When Jesus walked among us there was NO theology nor theology “experts”. To me, when priests/deacons/the laity follow this course of “deep theology” they are doing nothing more than “showing off” their education rather than communicating the simple, understandable and powerful message of the Gospel best found in John 3:16. Theology does not draw the the masses to Jesus Christ (though I submit in some cases it can deepen it). Our faith, salvation, eternal purpose and the meaning for our lives is about His love for us and our response to Him not about “deep theology” and the “educated” theologians talking over our heads.
June 8th, 2009 | 12:50 am
Regarding my previous comment I have one more observation. I quote from New Advent a portion of their comments about Liturgy contained in the Catholic Encyclopedia i.e.”Acts 2:42, gives us an idea of the liturgical Synaxis in order: They “persevere in the teaching of the Apostles” (this implies the readings and homilies), “communicate in the breaking of bread” (consecration and communion) and “in prayers”. My point is that comments by the author Mr. Peters and the Baptist preacher, indicates they are placing the wrong emphasis on the purpose of the Liturgy and seem to derive more from the process of the Liturgy than the substance of the teachings/reading and homilies.
June 8th, 2009 | 3:37 pm
[...] via my friend Nathaniel [...]
June 9th, 2009 | 2:09 pm
The old adage about the liturgy says “lex orandi, lex credendi,” which one could paraphrase as “what you pray, you believe.” That sums up the reason for expressing the fullness of the faith in prayer, but here are responses to the specific criticisms. By “the people” I meant, well, everyone: young and old, educated and uneducated, literate and illiterate. The latter especially can benefit from theologically rich liturgy given that they cannot absorb it from books, and for centuries now Russian peasants have been taught that Mary is the “true theotokos” without much trouble. Some no doubt understood it better than others, but any truth they gleaned from such prayers only helped them better understand Christ and his Mother.
The liturgy is not the primary place where such theology is taught, and indeed the liturgy’s primary purpose is not to teach. But given the choice between a prayer of detailed thanksgiving for the Eucharist of the gift of the knowledge of the Trinity and something along the lines of “thank you, God, for making us wonderful people and confirming us in our wonderfulness” (hyperbolic, but not out of the question in the Western Church), well, it’s obvious which one will do more to praise God and enrich the lives of the faithful. Of course the liturgy is not the place for intense speculative theology, but not all theology is such.
And the exposition of mysteries, such as the Eucharist, the Trinity, or the means of our salvation, is important precisely because it teaches us more and more the love that Christ has shown. John 3:16 may sum much of it up well, but there is more to the story: the community of love that is the Godhead, the possibility for theosis (deification), the grace of the sacraments, and the fullness of the Church triumphant, to name but a little. The laity can understand this, as much as it can be understood, and the more it is reflected in the liturgy the more God is glorified and our faith strengthened.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact