Comments on: The Way Church Should Be

By: Nathaniel Peters

Nathaniel Peters — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:09:07 +0000

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.

By: Icons & Curiosities — A First Things Blog

Icons & Curiosities — A First Things Blog — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:37:03 +0000

[...] via my friend Nathaniel [...]

By: Robberson

Robberson — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 04:50:52 +0000

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.

By: Robberson

Robberson — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:09:57 +0000

“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.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:33:44 +0000

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.