What do these three strange words, from three different languages, have in common? Answer. They all have to be used when describing the “liturgical and doctrinal revolution” that occurred in the Roman Catholic Church and in Protestant Churches in the 1960s & 1970s.
If we narrow all this down to the English-speaking world we recall that the RC Church not only in the 1970s went through the massive change from Latin to English in the Mass but a change in the structure, content, music and administration of the Mass as well! And if we think only of the Anglican family of Churches then we recall that there was a massive change in the 1970s not only in the move from the long-standing English language of prayer & worship to a modern form of English, but a changed shape and content in the services of the new prayer books replacing the classic Book of Common Prayer.
To get all this in perspective we need to remember that the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) sought to move in two ways simultaneously in order to renew the Roman Catholic Church. First, towards Christian antiquity and the Early Church to engage with the sources for renewal (ressourcement) and second towards satisfying modern needs (aggiornamento) in terms of the mission of the Church in the world. Movement in these two directions was not then thought to be contradictory. However, what was not foreseen was that so powerful was the secularist spirit of the age (zeitgeist) in the 1960s/1970s that renewal by the Bible and the teaching of the Fathers would often appear to lose out to the powerful winds and forces of secular modernity. That is, Ressourcement would collapse in the face of aggiornamento because the zeitgeist was in the aggiornamento as well as in the attempt to be renewed by the ancient Church.
To this day, Roman Catholics are seeking to solve this problem as to how to satisfy modern needs without letting the modern needs dictate the agenda of the doctrine, liturgy and ethics of the Church. One particularly acute area is the translation of the Bible and of the Liturgy, Sacramentary and Breviary into modern English. Does modern English mean the absolute use of inclusive language?
But Roman Catholics were not alone in their attempts to stage major reform in the 1960s. The calls to go back to the sources and to be relevant in the modern world were heard throughout western Protestantism as well.
To take the example of English-speaking Anglicans. They sought to find models for their renewal of their Liturgy in the first three centuries of the Christian Church and made Hippolytus of Rome into something of a patron saint, because in his writings are the raw materials for constructing models of early Liturgy.
At the same time they sought to satisfy what were seen as urgent, modern needs – relevance, simplicity, intelligibility & community – and to present the Liturgy in “contemporary English” instead of the “traditional English” of The Book of Common Prayer and of the hymns in The English Hymnal.
But here again the spirit of the age came to dominate the updating/renewal and also to affect the way in which the search for authentic Liturgy was conducted. Thus in successive editions of versions of the English Bible, Prayer Books and Hymn/Song Books from the 1970s through to 2002 there is a changing form of English that is termed “contemporary.” The basic reason for this development is that it is being accommodated continually to “the spirit of the age” – most noticeably to the general demands of relevance, easy intelligibility, democracy and so on, as well, importantly, to the ideological feminist, lesbigay and human rights movements.
The Zeitgeist certainly was very prominent in the social and cultural revolution that we call “the 1960s” and having blown through the windows of the churches in that period it has been impossible to close the windows completely or to repair the total damage done. Thus the very best and sincerest efforts to engage in Ressourcement tend to be in order to satisfy the demands of Aggiornamento --- e.g., the kiss of peace from the Early Church has been made into a kind of sacrament of self-affirmation; the priesthood of the whole assembly/congregation/believers has become an argument for democracy in the church; the actuosa participatio has become the basis of activism in all-member activity in the worship including the massive change in the quality and type of music used; and so on.
The net result is so many churches, Roman and Anglican, is that worship is not seen as first and foremost the adoration of God the Father through the Incarnate Son by the Holy Ghost (Spirit). This high calling is seen as only a close second to themes of community-building, self-affirmation, didacticism, and so on.
The question we have to face head on if we aim to glorify God aright and not be overwhelmed by the Zeitgeist is:
Is the Liturgy (public worship) to be primarily latreutic, concerned with the adoration of God the Holy Trinity, or is it first and foremost to be didactic and edificatory, to instruct and upbuild members of the congregation?
If we go with the latreutic as primary then this has implications at many levels form the dress and deportment of the priest, through the rites & words used, to the way that members of the congregation dress and conduct themselves.
The Revd Dr Peter Toon July 31, 2002.
No comments:
Post a Comment