 |
| HH Pope Kyrillos VI |
Fr Matta el-Meskeen (Fr Matthew the Poor), Guidelines on Prayer
"Taking part as fully as possible in the Liturgical Act gradually teaches the faithful to participate in Christ’s Gethsemane prayer. This is the pattern: when we are pierced by sorrow, pain, loss, we transfer our own hurt to the universal plane, and suffer not merely for ourselves but for all humanity. To the extent of our personal experience we can live everyman’s tragic lot, his dread and despair. We call to remembrance the multitude of dead and dying. It may be that our suffering will at some point exceed our powers of endurance. Then, when mind and body can no longer keep up with the spirit, the spirit continues to follow after Christ, to crucifixion, to the grave, into the anguished hell of His love for mankind."
Archmandrite Sophrony, "His Life is mine." Rosemary Edmonds, trans. (New York: St Vladimirs Seminary Press, 1977) 87-90.
Recently re-read HG Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev's article entitled "Orthodox Worship as a School of Theology." http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/12/1.aspx
The article resonantes with some of the themes that David Fagerberg mentions in his book "Theologia Prima" that there is no seperation between 'spirituality' and 'theology' and that theology is lived and encountered in the first instance WITHIN the movements and encounter of the Liturgical act.
Prayer is not isolated from the rest of the Church, but extends from the Divine Liturgy and proceeds towards it. The Liturgy is a language, a dance and an encounter with God and the means which we put on Christ, which we pattern and actualize the life of the Cross and participation in the Divine Life.
I will attempt to identify some of the ways which this interplay exists and perhaps suggest that the calling of the Church is to impart life within this paradoxy to every generation in new ways that are none the less, according to the truth affirmed in the canons and teachings of the Church and the lives of the Fathers and Saints.
Perhaps this appeal is to return to prayer and not appeal to the 'cult of big' or to an ultra-spiritualist/docetist expression, or to artificial means of defining success or cultivating community. Perhaps this is an appeal to return to prayer in the Orthodox sense (not that I can claim to know what this sense is, so I ask for your forgiveness for my presumption). Perhaps this is an appeal to draw on the life of prayer that is theology, is praxis and life which is fundamentally rooted in authentic Christian Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi.
+ + + + + + + + + + + +
Theology
The encounter with theology is something that I pray continues to grow in the community. Theology is often misunderstood within our communities as a separate category for specialists, instead an actual lived experience that is shared by all in the Church. There's also the fear that learning 'theology' will destroy spiritual life (although St Gregory Nazianzen does say be careful with theology approached as 'sport', and St Maximous says spiritual knowledge outside of ascetical and prayerful living is demonic), but theology in the proper and restored sense is related to identity because knowing God Incarnate reveals distinct things about our humanity.
So while one could say that it is a very dangerous temptation to make theology 'scholastic' and focused on intellect only (perhaps this is one of the dangers of Western style theology if such a thing exists or perhaps we mean "post reformation thought" and emphasis on absolute certainty, packagable, reductionist and kataphatic theology) but it can be equally dangerous when the Church loses her theological identity and her Orthodox ethos.
For example of this "awareness of ethos," David Fagerberg (perhaps with a bit of criticism) says:
We could be encountering a time where we might not be able to recognize what is foreign to authentic Ancient Christianity and the living plasticity of what the rites are intending to communicate (ie. Tradition through Kerygma/Proclamation/Truth that leads to holiness, union and communion, theosis, sincere love for the poor and the restoration of all).
Other jurisdictions have occurred this dilemma and Holy Spirit guided them to humbly encounter other jurisdictions who were able to remind them of their 'ancient beauty.' Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy and it is important that all of the Orthodox families identify the ways that ethos is preserved in our rites and through conciliar dialogue, diocesan cooperation and participation with each other, our greater community and those who are weakest and poorest among us.
So while one could say that it is a very dangerous temptation to make theology 'scholastic' and focused on intellect only (perhaps this is one of the dangers of Western style theology if such a thing exists or perhaps we mean "post reformation thought" and emphasis on absolute certainty, packagable, reductionist and kataphatic theology) but it can be equally dangerous when the Church loses her theological identity and her Orthodox ethos.
For example of this "awareness of ethos," David Fagerberg (perhaps with a bit of criticism) says:
“West” means geographical origin or certain changes in Orthodox liturgy and theology or something unorthodox, even if it can be found within Orthodox history (ie. historical amnesia). Almost every Orthodox theologian I’ve ever read or spoken to recognized what is Western when he or she encounters it."A personal concern is that current state (in the Coptic Orthodox Rite), we might be at crossroads in our theological awareness, where our 'Ortho-sense' so-to speak, has become increasingly eroded by moralism, rigorism and pietism.
We could be encountering a time where we might not be able to recognize what is foreign to authentic Ancient Christianity and the living plasticity of what the rites are intending to communicate (ie. Tradition through Kerygma/Proclamation/Truth that leads to holiness, union and communion, theosis, sincere love for the poor and the restoration of all).
Other jurisdictions have occurred this dilemma and Holy Spirit guided them to humbly encounter other jurisdictions who were able to remind them of their 'ancient beauty.' Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy and it is important that all of the Orthodox families identify the ways that ethos is preserved in our rites and through conciliar dialogue, diocesan cooperation and participation with each other, our greater community and those who are weakest and poorest among us.
Does this desire to ensure that our Ortho-sense is acutely alert mean everyone need to be a PhD or do theological studies? Of course not, because formal training is lived theology when theology learned is encountered in the life giving reality of the Liturgy within the kerygma of the Church.
The importance of Theology is to bring our awareness to contemplation and orientation towards God, to actually deepen prayer, to encounter God; but because Orthodoxy is paradoxy then prayer likewise elicits and cultivates theology. But again the caveat is this: what and how we pray reflects what and Who we believe He is (this is Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi).
So prayer misplaced, or prayer without the instruction and the keyrgma of the Church, prayer outside the Mind of Christ, could bring the wrong theology, and the wrong actions and wrong conduct. Or more pronounced, prayer provides and is the source of theology but such prayer becomes so when prayer is lived, encountered and ascetically approached according to the witness of the Kingdom.
So yes, prayer does teach theology, and prayerful people are the true sense of theologian when they have encountered the uncreated Light, humbled, constantly learning and are participating in the Divine Energies in their process of union, in their becoming of saints here, now and forevermore. This is that strange conundrum of Apophatic Theology. The one who encounters God does so 'simply' but this does not take away from the possibility that such an encounter deepens the desire to encounter and know Him even in seemingly 'complex' ways.
In this vein, we can also affirm that one need not even be 'mentally equipped,' because in Orthodoxy, the mentally retarded can also become the penultimate Theologian. For saints, theology is reflective of their heart, their humility, their love and encounter with Christ. This then means that the 'mentally disabled' individual can still understand Theosis, Energies, Essence, Hypostasis, Consubstance, literally all the doctrines and theology of the Church that is lived, because in the Church, in her very life and kerygma and witness, imparts to all her members not only the theological definitions but also the implication and subsequent transformation that these teachings and actions have on the life of union in each member. Also because the Church and her Liturgy is the locus, the work, the place where Theology is lived, encountered and sent forth, all the definitions and their implied consequences are rooted in Christ, Who is the source, goal, means and orientation of the Divine Life of the Christian.
Often one may also find the concept of "milk to meat" in the life of the Church. Such an approach to lived theology is focused on establishing and packaging the lowest common denominator of dogma and praxis, which 'logically' should increase accessibility or to use post-reformation terms, "remove barriers in the access to God." (perhaps this is related the bias of reductionism).
In this vein, we can also affirm that one need not even be 'mentally equipped,' because in Orthodoxy, the mentally retarded can also become the penultimate Theologian. For saints, theology is reflective of their heart, their humility, their love and encounter with Christ. This then means that the 'mentally disabled' individual can still understand Theosis, Energies, Essence, Hypostasis, Consubstance, literally all the doctrines and theology of the Church that is lived, because in the Church, in her very life and kerygma and witness, imparts to all her members not only the theological definitions but also the implication and subsequent transformation that these teachings and actions have on the life of union in each member. Also because the Church and her Liturgy is the locus, the work, the place where Theology is lived, encountered and sent forth, all the definitions and their implied consequences are rooted in Christ, Who is the source, goal, means and orientation of the Divine Life of the Christian.
Often one may also find the concept of "milk to meat" in the life of the Church. Such an approach to lived theology is focused on establishing and packaging the lowest common denominator of dogma and praxis, which 'logically' should increase accessibility or to use post-reformation terms, "remove barriers in the access to God." (perhaps this is related the bias of reductionism).
However with Orthodoxy being Paradoxy, there's an interesting sense that the Church has transformed the world and goes beyond the expectations that is prevalent in the fallen state. In the drive to be relevant, practical or utilitarian to the pressing needs of fallen man, other traditions and confessions have essentially fed the secular machine that becomes their own demise. Does that mean the the Church does not meet the material needs of her body? Yes the Church does meet these needs because Incarnation means restoration and reverence of the body according to the image and likeness, but what the Church must be aware of, are movements that actually deny the Gospel and the implications of Resurrection.
In specific terms, a theology that focuses only on peoples problems, limited only to the moral issues of people, or that proclaims a gospel of exchange and secular-styled 'self-improvement', actually diminishes the salvific nature of the Gospel into either superficiality or secularism.
In specific terms, a theology that focuses only on peoples problems, limited only to the moral issues of people, or that proclaims a gospel of exchange and secular-styled 'self-improvement', actually diminishes the salvific nature of the Gospel into either superficiality or secularism.
This is linked to prayers (lex orandi est lex credendi), where prayers become solely about 'my problems,' 'fix my problems' or when our relationship with God unconsciously or consciously becomes a ticket/exchange for things personally desired (including an obsession with personal salvation) instead of the restoration of all desire to the fullness of the Kingdom.
Even in using these terms there's a danger of making it all philosophy or 'theologizing' while not recognizing the actual pastoral needs. However the primary argument against the theory of "graduated Orthodoxy" is not that catechumens or anyone working out their salvation should or shouldn't be introduced to measured doses of authentic Christianity, but rather that the offering and the orientation of the whole Body can benefit from focus on the Kingdom here and now, of restoration and of normalization of the means by which they can encounter, grow and embrace Christ in the Kingdom, in their heart, in their service, in their entire life EVEN in their current brokenness and ascetical journey away from sin.
This means the Church's raised and concrete theological life when channeled and working in concert with the Saints, in the Kerygma, transforms the Body into the Deified Body of Christ, which in her daily witness continually proclaims the Kerygma. If we seek and find or affirm what the Church is actually doing in relation to Her Bridegroom, we will perhaps have a greater clarity to perceive and respond to the falleness and the problems of this world. We affirm that Christ is Risen, that the issues are non-issues, and are manageable and can be understood as means to encounter and to create saints because a Church's true identity brings the focus of every sick person in the Hospital to what true Health is.
Our Theology is not concerned as much with "what God has done, or what God is doing" but more on Who God is, Who He is Loving, How He is Restoring and What we are becoming or in reality have become (or have always been) in relation to Him. (ie. the prayers in the Gregorian Prayer of Reconciliation in the Coptic Rite says "O You, the Being...")
Fr John Romanides said a humbling thing a few years ago, "when theology is false, then Christianity is reduced to activities." The irony is that even the reformers who desired to flee the activities of the see of Rome, ironically ended up repeating the theology of activity (either the activity of scholastics in their intellectual dogmatic and polemic exercises, or the activity of sentimentalism and emotionalism that is characteristic of the peitism and holiness movements, or the activity of the moral modern man in the social gospel of recent memory).
Note: (This is also reflective in the "testimony of faith" because as much as there is a focus on "faith saves" there's a preoccupation with being saved REQUIRING actuality in the activity/work/fruit of the evangelist, that concrete utility and success in a moral life must be used for effective testimonies. The preoccupation with activity also means checklist salvation to varying degrees, check if you have accepted life, check if you have seen fruit, check if you have brought converts, etc. Not that Orthodox Ethos is against this but rather the presuppositions of such a theology of mission are contrary to the Gospel and the authentic witness that is IN the Church, IN her very brokenness, IN her very perfection. The world says that acceptance and belovedness means adhering criteria of 'success' and integration, but the Church's witness is so much beyond these measures and she must resist these definitions which are essentially rooted in the dichotomy of the sacred vs the profane. As one father once said: The Church is not here to make "bad" men "good", but to bring dead men to life...not to the fallen life, but but rather to the Divine Life in Christ)The moment we have forgotten our incarnational and resurrected reality in Christ, or have forgotten how to elicit and draw upon or call attention to the Beauty that restores beauty, or the Life that has conquered death and restores Life to all of creation, we risk orienting the work and activity of the Church to outward expressions, social relevance without calling attention to restored Man. The Church without incarnational awareness collapses into religiosity, paganism, or secularism, she no longer becomes the locus where all is offered for the Life of the World.
An analogy that might help us put these thoughts into perspective is that of the feast.
The feast does not mean that you will eat the entire offering on the table, but that the abundance of the table is visible, is attainable and concrete, tangible and desirable, even if one cannot not yet taste the meat and are given milk. Perhaps it's not to appeal to the western categories again (ie. milk vs meat) but maybe we can approach the plasticity of the Rites, the 'stuff' of Tradition (Scripture, Liturgy, Prayer, Councils, Theology, Saints, Fathers, Creed, etc), with what they're intended to do: impart the flavour, invigorate the hungry, bring them in the presence of the Host.
Milk and meat are connected perhaps, somehow immersed, maybe a product of the same cow, but in the flavour of the Church's kerygma, in Her cooking, the flavour is always seasoned with Christ, seasoned perhaps with Blood, with the Divine Life, with restoration, and all flavours point to the seasoning and the Meal who is the Lamb.
If theology is contemplation of the flavour and the feast, if it is integrated and wholly part of the recipe and the chef, then perhaps the appeal is for normalization, the presenting of the feast, not focused merely on the motions of how to cut, how to sit, how to speak, how to chew, but rather on the being, the present reality and the actual fasting and feasting. Theology in Tradition, in the Church, Liturgical Theology, Life of the Liturgy, speaks and witnesses not only in symbol about the way things should be but perhaps more importantly to Christians, about the way things are.
If theology is contemplation of the flavour and the feast, if it is integrated and wholly part of the recipe and the chef, then perhaps the appeal is for normalization, the presenting of the feast, not focused merely on the motions of how to cut, how to sit, how to speak, how to chew, but rather on the being, the present reality and the actual fasting and feasting. Theology in Tradition, in the Church, Liturgical Theology, Life of the Liturgy, speaks and witnesses not only in symbol about the way things should be but perhaps more importantly to Christians, about the way things are.
Praxis
Wednesday, October 3,1979, Journals of Fr Alexander Schmemann
The Pope of Rome is in New York. We watched him on television in Yankee Stadium. A mixed impression. On one hand, an unquestionably good man and full of light. Wonderful smile. Very genuine—a man of God. But, on the other hand, there are some “buts”!
First of all, the Mass itself. The first impression is how liturgically impoverished the Catholic Church has become. In 1965, I watched the service performed by Pope Paul VI in the same Yankee Stadium. Despite everything, it was the presence, the appearance on earth of the eternal, the “super earthly.” Whereas yesterday, I had the feeling that the main thing was the “message.” This message is, again and again, “peace and justice,” “human family,” “social work,” etc. An opportunity was given, a fantastic chance to tell millions and millions of people about God, to reveal to them that more than anything else they need God! But here, on the contrary, the whole goal, it seemed, consisted in proving that the Church also can speak the jargon of the United Nations. All the symbols point the same way: the reading of the Scriptures by some lay people with bright ties, etc.
And a horrible translation: I never suspected that a translation could be a heresy: Grace—“abiding love”!
Crowds—their joy and excitement. Quite genuine, but at the same time, it is clear that there is an element of mass psychosis. “Peoples’ Pope...” What does this really mean? I don’t know. I am not sure. Does one have to serve Mass in Yankee Stadium? But if it’s possible and needed, shouldn’t the Mass be, so to say, “super earthly,” separated from the secular world, in order to show in the world—the Kingdom of God?
If theology has such an impact on our encounter with our Lord, in our relationship with the feast and of the offering of all the world to God, then OrthoPraxis is both the manifestation of this theology and the affirmation and expression of belief in movement. Praxis is Theology and Teaching of movement in the dance of heaven, in the training of minds, souls and bodies, in the askesis of the dancer who has been courted in dance by her Lover. The dance has always been perfect, the music always sublime, yet even the movements and the sound serve one purpose: to communicate Love.
This means praxis is scripture communicated, or more precise, Scripture is Praxis in written form, that the message of the Gospel, not necessary the Narrative of the events, but the Life of the Church who is Christ, eternally proclaiming the mystery of Cross and Resurrection so that the Body consistently communes and is in sync, in the presence of Life, with the Head, with the Mind of Christ, with the Kerygma.
Praxis of the Word, provides the Evangelists to write: "this is the Gospel according to..."
So every subsequent witness in the lifeblood of the Tradition from the time of the Apostles has written Theology within the Lived Praxis that again proclaims: "this is the Gospel according to..."
This directs us ontologically, because Praxis implies movement of the Body, so that each Orthodox Christian on a fundamental level has her whole being stating that she herself "is the Gospel according to...[name of each Christian]."
So Praxis communicates the Words, or the Words in movement. Praxis also communicates the grammar of Divine Love, we use such grammar to make sense of the words, to put the words in order. Raise the grammar and you also raise the understanding, the communicated reality of what is happening, even if we do not understand the mechanics of that grammar. Theology again is rooted as part of this language game, not an external method of analyzing it.
Ortho-Praxis perhaps uses the heightened language, movement and grammar of the Resurrection, to bring those who dialogue with God, to the Kingdom, in union and communion at the Cup, and also in the narrative that then plays out in the hearts of those living the liturgy after the Liturgy. The simple, the genius, the child, the adult, the broken, the rich, the poor, the healed, all are participants and workers in this dialogue, are all actors who partake in the Divine Drama, 'performed' so that they can remember the role they play in reality of Resurrection: drama becomes a door to the restored reality. The drama is door and movement towards and within eschaton and parousia.
So the appeal when we use these terms is to suggest that if anything is introduced to Praxis it should be tested to see if it has communicated that grammar, if it follows a recension, if it resonates and raises participates in the union to the kerygma, to the proclamation and restoration of man to the Man.
The issue is not about the rubrics, but it is also not ignorant of the importance of rubrics to communicate that grammar and kerygma in concert with Praxis. Architechture, iconology, sermons, Liturgics, hymnology, diakonia, service to the poor are all to be in concert, not categories in isolation, but a total symphonia of the people's synergistic work and act...a praxis in the truest sense.
Praxis aligned to and within the other aspects of Tradition and Theology then can be plastic in this sense, can speak to the generations in this sense, without losing the essence of the shape or the type that the Praxis has been cast, or that it has built on. There's life and lively progression that encompasses the whole of the past without being chained to it, encompasses this past not as relic of antiquity, but as a fluent grammar, a living recension that imparts the kerygma and proclamation of the Gospel, the very person of Christ, and the salvific transformation of humanity to holiness, in participation with His Person "that we might become god."
Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi
“Our opinion is in accordance with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn establishes our opinion” + St IrenaeusSo we're back again to the Liturgical Life, and as much as I try to find words to talk about what this is, the definition is increasingly fleeting, hinting that perhaps such a life cannot be explained or packaged but has to be lived, has to be encountered in stillness and silence, in love in action, in being in the Being.
"Lex orandi est Lex credendi. The rule of prayer is the rule of belief. And only insofar as we return to this rule, can we recover the true foundations of Orthodox Christian Education." + Fr. Alexander Schmemann
"What concerns the eucharist concerns the Church, and what concerns the Church concerns the eucharist, so that any ailment in the liturgy reflects on our faith and on the whole life of the Church." + Fr Alexander Schmemann, The Eucharist
Liturgy is the Icon by which we then can see and bless the world. Liturgy is the way by which we are nourished to fight the passions, to truly actualize repentance, where we become authentically and fully human. Liturgy is the Kingdom. Paraphrasing Fr Alexander "What we do in our community, in the Church, has consequences both to and within the Liturgy, and vice versa."
Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi raises questions about a Church, about her belief, about her being, her ontology, her expression, her purpose, her relationships, her past, her future.
Does this start with Theology or does this start with restoring Praxis? Does it mean searching for quantifiable measures? Does it mean examining ourselves very critically and surrender ourselves to restoration?
Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi has a more startling implication in the post-Reformation, post-Modern, post-secular discourse...if Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi is to proclaim Tradition through Kerygma for holiness, and holiness in kerygma within Tradition...then the question when looking at the Church's Lex Orandi Est Lex Credendi is....
Is she still Christian? Is she still authentically Christian? Is she still Orthodox?
Je Nai Nan (Lord Have Mercy on us) to any answer we discover from these questions.
*Forgive me and pray for me a sinner.
