Sarx

In comments to an earlier post, Donald Schell mentioned Juan Oliver. This warranted a google on my part. I found the following very interesting: It’s a record of a meeting of members of the International Anglican Liturgical Consultation at Ripon College Cuddesdon (3-9 August 2003) PDF document. Below are some of the “minutes” take during Juan Oliver’s talk on the meaning of liturgical formation. I underscore: these are the minutes, not his words exactly (although there may be some direct quotes). And the entire talk seems quite interesting.

Worship forms us by introducing us to life in a world which is different from our everyday world. It is a kind of make-believe - life in the presence of God. This new world is called the kingdom, or the reign of God or, in the Coptic tradition, the new world. Liturgy engages us in this new world by having us engage with it again so that we may learn how to live it and not only think about it. As in theatre, we suspend disbelief and give ourselves over to new ways of being, joyful, compassionate, and righteous in the world.

What are the ritual means at the disposal of liturgy? There are seven actions of the liturgy which rehearse the kingdom or reign. In the case of the eucharist they are a) the gathering of the assembly into the people of God, the church, b) the people of God listening to God, c) the people of God responding to God in praise and supplication, d) the people of God thanking God and asking for the Spirit, e) the people of God sharing a meal, f) the people of God sent out into the world in service. These are the ritual means by which the people of God are assisted in formation. The people of God are the main symbol in the event. The assembly is sacred and if the building is sacred it is because the people of God are sacred. In pagan religions the people are sacred because their building is sacred, but in Christianity it is the other way around. It is the assembly and what it does in worship that is formative.

The work of worship is not merely logical. We are doing these things in the presence of God as if we were in the reign of God. Our actions are ordinary but their meaning is multidimensional. They are evocative rather than didactic. The liturgy allows for multiple interpretations, so sharing its meaning cannot be univocal. It is symphonic. Thus eating and drinking together is a sign of the inclusion of the outcast, but also of the new Jerusalem, heaven, etc. Actions that can only mean one thing tend to impoverish worship. We cannot succeed in grasping the meaning of worship by insisting that it be rational. Our gathering is different from other gatherings. Our place of worship is marked as a special place, even temporarily. Liturgy is a human artefact which we must craft. What does it mean for the assembly to have to craft its liturgy? Where do we acquire our actions, movement, music, prayers, etc.? The first answer is from the past. It is inherent in worship to present itself as the way we have always done it. But the assembly must also craft its worship in ways that are patently meaningful in relation to the culture in which it lives. The great temptation is to think that the worship we like serves the needs of everyone else. Falling into this temptation results in worship becoming deformative rather than formative. Some particular phase in the development of worship is exotically confused with the reign of God. Someone who experiences a great Anglican liturgy as being in heaven implies that they have died and have gone to King’s College, Cambridge. It is only when the assembly crafts liturgy which is rooted in the tradition but finds expression in forms drawn from the present culture that the reign of God may be apprehended.