Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

What does Matthew 6 say about liturgy?

Yesterday's Gospel reading was Matthew 6:1-6, 16-18

Beware of performing religious acts for people to see “Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven.

“So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your alms may be done in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

“And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

“And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.


The priest, who has views on the subject, used it as a cue for a brief sermon about liturgy and the need for simplicity and understandability of the texts. However, this passage has nothing to do with the liturgy. Liturgy is the public prayer of the church. All religions have some form of prayer in public.

The performance of the liturgy, like the performance of the ancient Temple ceremonies from which they are derived, is governed by the regulations set out in the relevant official documents of the church - the General Instructions and rubrics of the Missal and supporting guidelines such as Sacrosanctum Concilium and Summorum Pontificum.

The liturgy is prayer, but it is also sacred theatre. It is a set of actions and not a mere recital of texts. Its function is both to raise the hearts and minds of the people to God, and to convey the beliefs of the church in a way that the people can understand. The texts have a part to play, and of course people should know what is being said, but the liturgy engages all the senses; the text is part of an overall experience involving ceremonial, music and art, smell and taste, all within an appropriate architectural setting.

It is true that some people can become over-particular about the way the liturgy is performed. This applies both to those who wish to preserve tradition and those who would cast it aside. On the other hand, care should be taken to exclude that which gets in the way of the liturgy's function - whether it be unsuitable music or sloppy reading or an architectural setting which draws attention away from, or interferes with, the action.

The aim of the liturgy is nothing less than the transformation of the participants. A focus on just the text can lead to an intellectualisation of the faith, which then becomes a set of theoretical ideas rather than a change in state of being. Could this be one reason why we are failing to radicalise our young people?

Kommentarer

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...

The dreadfulness of British governance

I wrote to my MP on two entirely separate issues recently. The first was to do with the replacement for the Inter City 125 train, which at £2.6 million per vehicle, is twice as expensive as it ought to be. The second concerned the benefits of a switch from business rate and Council Tax to a tax based on site values. In both cases, the replies were full of spurious, unsubstantiated assertions and completely flawed arguments. This is typical. You will not get an iota of sense from the government on any area of public policy at all - finance, economics, trade and employment, agriculture, housing, health, transport, energy. All junk. If you write to your MP you will invariably receive answers that are an insult to your intelligence, no matter what subject you are writing about. Of course they cannot understand statistics. They are innumerate. Whitehall is staffed with idiots with a high IQ. Look at their IT projects. And mind your purse, they will have that too.

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...