I
The liturgical worship of the Orthodox
Church was and remains one of the most powerful vehicles for mission and
evangelization. Yet, even after
more than two hundred years in North America, the Orthodox Church has not been
able to fully utilize its rich and varied liturgical worship. Though the reasons for this vary there
nevertheless exists a common attitude which undermines liturgical worship in
general and the missionary imperative of the Gospel in particular. This attitude is primarily derived from
a crisis that has altered the way Orthodox Christians perceive and
participate in liturgical worship.
The word crisis is linked to the act of
deciding. That there is a
liturgical crisis in the Church points to a decision that has been made
within the Christian community which has removed corporate worship from the
core of human life. As a result,
the human person stands in crisis because worship has been relegated to
the periphery of life. Whereas
liturgy and life had once been tightly integrated and were virtually understood
as being synonymous they now exist in a state of spiritual or psychological
schism. Two extremes have resulted
from this schism. The first is the
most obvious. Worship is no longer
necessary for the existence and development of human life. The second extreme, while not so
obvious but just as tragic and pernicious, is formalized worship which for all
its external pomp is unable to convert the mind and heart. In both extremes there is no longer the
self identification of the human person as homo adorans i.e. as one who prays
to the living God. From an anthropological
perspective prayer is a universal phenomenon basic to human existence. ÒTo suppress adoration is to cut man in
halfÓ[1] resulting in an
undeveloped and disintegrated personality.
To heal the schism between liturgy and
life is a formidable task. Detailed strategies and programs claiming to
[re]energize a parish at best offer external or cosmetic results. If liturgy – the public and
communal prayer of the Church – is to become the foundation of parish
life, if it is to be the nourishing and guiding source of evangelical outreach,
then it is imperative that the local flock be engaged in ongoing spiritual
warfare which begins with repentance. Repentance ensures the
integrity of liturgy as a divine and human event. With regards to the Eucharist,
repentance enables the Spirit to transform those con-celebrating the liturgy
i.e. clergy and laity into the body of Christ. It is Christ who commissions the Church to continue his
ministry in the world for the life of the world and its salvation.
From the perspective of evangelization,
repentance has an internal and external dynamic. On the one hand the Church must be
introspective and therefore continuously in the process of spiritual
renewal. For, on the other hand,
it is only by being alive and new that the Church can convincingly, and without
coercion, extend the call to repentance beyond itself so that the world might
be drawn into the kingdom which is at hand.
Through repentance, lived out ascetically i.e.
in a way which struggles to bring oneÕs life and all of creation back to God,
worship comes to be understood and experienced as being necessary for the
salvation and transfiguration of
all creation. In the
Chrysostom liturgy it is stated that the Òreasonable worshipÓ (Romans 12:1) is
offered for the whole world. Thus, the prayer of the local Church culminating
in the celebration of the Eucharist is a divine and human public work with
universal qualities which go beyond the parameters of time and space.
Worship in the present draws to itself the past and the future. This uniting of the
past and the future in the context of the present is associated with the act of
remembering. Remembrance (anamnesis)
binds the faithful of all times to the saving acts which God has accomplished.
These saving acts provide the evangelical foundation for liturgical
worship. They reveal how, even
though humanity chose to clothe itself in sin and mortality, God never
abandoned his creation. In time
and space God continued and still continues to work with his creation so as to
open the way to new and eternal life.
ÒMy Father is working still, and I am working.Ó (John 5:17) In the anaphoras of both the Chrysostom
and Basil liturgies we are membered to all the saving acts that lead to and
depart from the economy of GodÕs incarnate son. We are membered to the cross, tomb,
resurrection on the third day, the ascension into heaven as well as the
second and glorious coming.
As the evangelical expression of the
Church, liturgy provides the context from which the Church proclaims the
Gospel. Therefore liturgical worship cannot be understood as just another
source of teaching and spiritual life.
On the contrary, as Father Alexander Schmemann wrote some years ago,
liturgy and hence liturgical tradition Òis the ontological condition of
theology, of the proper understanding of kerygma, of the Word of God, because
it is in the Church, of which the leitourgia is the expression and the life,
that the sources of theology are functioning precisely as sources.Ó[2] From this keen and
compact insight comes the
challenge to recover and maintain the worship of the Church in which the kerygmata and dogmata maintain their existential
integrity i.e. that they proclaim, articulate and reveal the ecclesial
experience of transfigured or deified life for all who desire to possess
it.
The human person is a worshipping
being who has God as a constant point of reference for self-identification
which in turn develops as a relationship with God continues to be forged. This relationship with God enables the
human person to also relate and co-exist with his natural surroundings.
Human beings pray personally and
corporately. These two modes or
contexts are not opposed to each other.
Too often personal prayer is understood as a private act separated from the community. Personal and corporate prayer
sustain each other. Because ÒChristian
existence is essentially corporateÓ all prayer is bound to the community without the uniqueness of the person ever being
compromised. ÒPrayer Ôin commonÕ
is still personal engagement.
Joint prayer is still the prayer of persons. The very act of ÔjoiningÕ is a personal act.Ó[3]
Human beings, personally and corporately,
are able to worship because of their ability to use in an intricate and
sophisticated manner their other divine like qualities of knowing,
creating and playing. These
fundamental qualities interacting with all of creation are incorporated into
liturgical worship which expresses the creative and dynamic relationship
between God, humanity and the cosmos.
From this relationship liturgical worship becomes the ChurchÕs context
from which to proclaim the Gospel.
Within this context the Church reveals that what has been assumed by
Christ the incarnate Son and Word of God is saved and transfigured.
There are two strands of worship which are
tightly entwined. The first
is doxology.[4] The Church offers praise
to God But the praise offered by the Church does not stand apart from conveying
what is true. Praise or, to be
more precise, orthodox[ology]
i.e. correct praise conveys and teaches the doctrine of the Church.[5] Scripture, salvation
history, creedal statements as well as Christological, triadological and
anthropological formulations are basic sources and components of liturgy which,
over time, have been woven into the fabric of the ChurchÕs worship. From the liturgy of the hours to the
celebration of the Divine Liturgy they proclaim and bolster the faith of the
baptized. They prepare catechumens for baptism and chrismation. They challenge
the serious seeker with the transforming power of the Gospel.
Liturgical worship utilizes the
creation. Through worship creation
finds its proper relationship with God.
Here again Saint PaulÕs reference to Òreasonable worshipÓ (Rom.12:1) can
be used. This rich term, logiki latreia, is more than a
reference to the fact that animal sacrifice has no place in Christian worship.
With regards to the celebration of the Eucharist, logiki latreia also affirms the
inaugurated restoration of every one and every thing in relationship to the
Logos of God.
Liturgical worship in general and the celebration
of the Eucharist in particular provides the locus in which creation –
beginning with the human person – no longer finds itself divided and
confused by sin and corruption.
Liturgical worship reveals creation as the place and means through which
God and humanity encounter and commune with each other. Within liturgical
worship a concrete vision of the restored creation is presented even to those
who are not yet initiated into the body of Christ. All life and therefore all facets of life – even death
– receive their proper meaning and purpose. Within liturgical worship the Òsources of theologyÓ are
formed by and also contribute to the ongoing development of doxology, doctrine
and catechesis.
So long as liturgical worship remains
subordinate to life and therefore apart from life, the Church will not be able
to properly and fully proclaim the Gospel of salvation. Since the Church is by its very nature
evangelical, its liturgy is inseparably joined to the missionary mandate of the
Lord. This is perhaps most clearly
expressed in the Russian Primary Chronicle (Laurentian Text, 11th -12th c.).[6] From this account it
appears that it was the liturgical worship of the Church, more than any other
conduit of missionary activity, that ultimately led to the conversion of Saint
Prince Vladimir and the baptism of Rus.
It is the spirit of the account described in the Chronicle more
than its historical detail or accuracy that focuses attention on the ChurchÕs
worship. It was the ChurchÕs
worship which drew the emissaries of Saint Vladimir into an experience in which
they Òknew not whether they were in heaven or on earthÓ.
The vision of heaven on earth with Christ
as the one High Priest concelebrating with all of humanity needs to be the
basis of liturgical renewal and expansion. But this renewal and expansion cannot have the past as its only point of
reference. Because liturgy and
life are synonymous, worship must also be alive and not an exercise in
imitating the practices of the recent or distant past. The past should be used for
guiding, not ignoring worship in the present.
The past is the depository of
all that has been consecrated by the Church during its historical sojourn for
the proclamation of the Gospel.
Yet, the past does not exhaust or deprive the present of the creative
outpouring of the Spirit. Hence,
from a theoretical and more importantly from an existential perspective liturgy
will continue to develop so long as the Church remains faithful to its
missionary responsibility. By
being faithful to the LordÕs command to baptize all nations the Spirit will
remain alive and active among those who gather as Church to worship as well as
to celebrate the kingdom of the triune and tri-personal God. The symbiosis and synergy of Spirit and
faithful will reveal liturgical worship as being always new, vibrant and life
giving. All the sources acting in liturgy will
be joined into forming a composite whole that proclaims and also reveals the
economy of the incarnation in a particular time, in a particular place for a
particular people.
The current liturgical crisis of the
Church can be overcome when we, personally and corporately, take responsibility
for rediscovering our liturgical identity. But this is easier said than done. Even when there is the personal desire to pray as a
community and even when the local parish offers a rhythm of liturgical prayer
many choose to stay away.
Consequently, the Gospel cannot be brought into the world and the world
into the reality of the Gospel.
The liturgical crisis remains until we decide to be a people who Òworship
in Spirit and in TruthÓ.
Father Robert M. Arida
[1] Danielou,
Jean, In The BeginningÉ Genesis I-III, trans.
by Julien L. Randoff, Helicon Press, 1965, p. 41
[2] Schmemann, Alexander, Theology and Liturgical Tradition, in Worship
in Scripture and Tradition, ed. Massey and Shepherd, Oxford University Press, 1963, p. 175,
quoted by Aidan Kavanagh, The Shape of Baptism: The Rite of Christian
Initiation, Pueblo Pub. Co., N.Y. 1978, p. XII
[3] Florovsky,
Georges, Worship and Every Day Life: An Eastern Orthodox View, Collected Works, vol. XIII, Belmont, MA, pp. 95, 97
[4] cf.
Pelikan, Jaroslav, Christianity and Classical Culture, Yale University Press, 1993, p. 302
[5] Florovsky, Georges, The Elements of Liturgy: An Orthodox View, Collected Works, vol. XIII,
Belmont, MA, p. 93
[6] trans. and ed. by Samuel Hazard Cross and Olgerd P. Shervowitz-Wetzor, Cambridge, MA 1953, pp. 110-111