Monday, December 15, 2014

Judaism & the Pauline Rite

Elsewhere we have cited Jean Guitton's radio interview in which he stated his friend, Papa Montini, aimed to approximate the Roman rite with the "Calvinist Mass." To many Catholics of the age, the transition from Latin to vernacular, from orientation to versus populum, and from chant to hymns appeared to mirror the process of de-Catholicizing England and the Germanic countries during the Reformation. The common perception that the Pauline Mass was inspired, in whole or part, by protestantism is integral to several studies of the new liturgy, notably Michael Davies' Pope Paul's New Mass and Anthony Cekada's Work of Human Hands. Ecumaniacs of the 1960s and 1970s egged on the Church about her sudden convergence with protestantism and her disregard for her past. There is a sliver of truth to this narrative, but it is on the whole a simplistic reduction for those looking to ignore what really happened in the 20th century.

The new liturgy is a baked outcome of a strange batter of ingredients: clerical lethargy, boredom with the devotional culture, Jansenism, Modernism, pro-protestant ecumenism, neo-Scholastic minimalism and focus with form-matter-intent, an archaeologist obsession with the "early Church" (whatever that was), and, we often forget, Judaism.

The Second World War and Holocaust had just ended. Religious scholarship of both Christianity and Judaism returned to European academia. Modern religious scholarship, like most bad things (Nazism, Communism, protestantism, Wagner, and beer) comes from Germany. In the 19th century linguistic scholarship boomed in Germany and, with it, textual criticism of Christian and Jewish literature. The consensus held in academic circles corresponded to the biases of academic circles at the time against religion. They held the New Testament books to be second and third century divinizations of an historically doubtful Jewish rabbi with a simply message of peace. Early Christianity was re-imagined as a simplistic, communitarian potluck devoid of strong clergy. Judaism did not escape unscathed, either.

One cannot really say that the Rabbinical Judaism of today is the Judaism of Christ's age. Since the 19th century people have understood the synagogue to the Jewish equivalent of a church and the rabbi to be the equivalent of a priest. The synagogue is the worship house and the rabbi leads the prayer rites and provides the community with instruction. That is certainly modern Judaism, the Judaism those wishing to return the Church to her primitive roots sought to imitate, but it betrays an ignorance of first century Judaism.

When one reads of the question of the Canon of Scripture, one finds numerous debates which revolve around which books Christ quotes to which people. The Pharisees, Saducees, and Hellenistic Jews accepted different books ranging from the five Mosaic books alone to the Greek books contained in the Septuagint. These points did not make Hellenistic Jews any less Jewish than the Pharisees. What defined a Jew at the time was ethnic origin, the observance of the Mosaic commandments, and one's relationship to the Temple. This last point cannot be ignored in any way. Jerusalem was a temple surrounded by a city, not a city housing  temple. The Temple was where God's Chosen People worshipped Him according to laws and rites revealed to them by Him through special prophets and continued with the aid of the Levitical priesthood. The rest was important, but additional. The Rabbinical model filled the abyss of a void created when the Temple was destroyed in 70, Jerusalem was destroyed in 135, and Jew expelled from Palestine until 1948. Judaism, to survive, moved from a Temple model to a synagogue model. Formerly, synagogues were akin to community and educational centers with a religious function. Rabbis were not strictly necessary. "Rabbi" was a generic term for a preacher, sometimes educated, sometimes not. The rabbi found himself in the synagogue eventually, expounding on the codified Hebrew Scriptures to members of a scattered community in some remote part of the Diaspora, far from Jerusalem. The priesthood, the place of worship, and the state were replaced with teacher, local community, and minority status. Imagine, as a Catholic, being trapped in some isolate part of northern China with some other Catholics and no priest. On Sundays, you gather as a group and perhaps get some spiritual advice from a particularly devout member of the circle. This is what happened to the Jewish people.




That Rabbinical Judaism influenced Christianity cannot be doubted. St. Paul came from the Pharisaical tradition that spawned the Rabbinical movement, a student himself of Rabban Gamaliel (rabban was a title of high status among rabbis). This influence is evident in St. Paul's epistolary and preaching style, which lived on in the Apostolic Fathers. This influence is not evident in the Patristic and Apostolic era's liturgical praxis because it did not exist. When one reads early accounts of the Christian house liturgies, one is struck at the level of organization (how many priests and deacons concelebrate, who houses the Eucharist, how many plates are used, who takes Communion to the sick etc). While the particular practices have either faded or been absorbed into the traditions of Rome, Byzantium, Antioch, Syria, Armenia, Alexandra and the others that come to us today, a clear taxis emerged. They worshipped in houses rather than grand edifices because houses were what was available to them. When Christianity emerged from the Diocletian persecution's catacombs and entered the Constantinian sun, the believers built grand churches and consecrated them as the Temples were consecrated. More recent scholarship by Margaret Barker and Laurence Hemming reveals that the Temple, not the synagogue, was the template the early—and certainly medieval—Christians sought to emulate. Hemming's Liturgy as Revelation even notes the strong textual parallels between the Roman Mass and Office for the Dedication of a Church (created c.500 for the consecrated of the Pantheon as "St. Mary and the Martyrs) and the previous Temple, as well as with the heavenly Jerusalem to come. The Church's rite are the maturation and fulfillment of the Temple rites, which prefigured Christ's perfect Sacrifice, a Sacrifice made present again on the altars of the Church. The priesthood is no longer Levitical, but Christ's. The Temple is no longer limited to one physical space because the Sacrifice of Christ can be renewed anywhere. 

The spiritual archaeologists, seeking a plain and communitarian "early Church," erroneously took Rabbinical Judaism as the normative model rather than the Temple Judaism which prefigured Christ and which He fulfilled. In doing so, they took the parish rather than the cathedral as the normative setting for the liturgy. They took the reduced parish liturgy rather than episcopal celebration as the normative standard. And they took an earthy community rather than a heavenly one as the normative attendees. Unfortunately, bad thoughts do not die with those who think them.

In related news, Anthony Cekada is trying to get his Work of Human Hands back into print. To bring attention to this endeavor he has returned to making one chapter summary videos on YouTube. I find Cekada's research very valuable, particularly with regard to the figures around the reform process and the variable parts of the new Mass (orations and the lectionary). Still, one gets the same trite words about Modernism vs. "traditional" (neo-Scholastic Latin moral) theology one finds among those whose knowledge of theology begins with St. Thomas' Summa and whose scope is limited to the Roman patriarchate. His latest video, below, provides invaluable information when he is not calling Eastern Christians "woolly" and "schismatic" without qualification. If readers have time, I recommend his earlier videos on the reform process, "Adroit Choices, Giant Voices," and the offertory. His sly style is both entertaining and accessible thanks to his helpers, Fr. Chuck and Fr. Retreaux.


24 comments:

  1. This does provide an interesting perspective to the novus ordo offertory prayers, which are based on Jewish berakah blessings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, seder meal blessings from c.200 AD, a staple of Rabbinical Judaism.

      Delete
    2. Anyone remember when Scott Hahn made it big in the mid-1990s with his "Fourth Cup" presentation? It was based on the probably-anachronistic notion that even in the time of our Lord the Jews were celebrating the Passover seder like those recounted in post-70 rabbinic sources.

      Delete
  2. Rad Trad, if you're interested in Fr Cekada's research on the variable parts of the new Mass, you may be interested in some of the resources I have put together, available for free download on my blog: http://catholiclectionary.blogspot.co.uk.

    My work is mainly lectionary-focused, but at the moment I'm working on making the sources of the postcommunion prayers of the new Mass easily accessible, so people can see for themselves where those prayers come from, what changes/edits were made to the original prayers, etc. The Proper of Time is already done, and I've just started on the Proper of Saints and the Commons.

    (Please forgive the shameless self-promotion!)

    ReplyDelete
  3. The beer you get in the US may be (a) German, and therefore (b) a Bad Thing. In in England it is (a) English, and therefore, (b) a Good Thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But... Spaten Optimator is delicious.

      Delete
    2. For once I am qualified to comment:
      No it most certainly is not! It is an easy way to induce a restful sleep, but its value ends there. That stuff tastes like crank-case oil.

      Delete
    3. Now I feel the need to bust out my Beer Hierarchy.

      British (English, Irish, Scottish) Beer >= German-style Texan Beer > German Beer > Asian Beer >>>>>> Mexican Beer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>American Beer.

      Delete
    4. In fairness, the Germans also make fantastic cars - albeit preferably not employed at the same time as the beer.

      Delete
  4. I would also point out, as you all well know, that this started before the New Order Mass with the Good Friday oration for the Jews, changing both its language and rubrics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, the Jews are no longer to be spoken of as Christ's enemies, are they? Not since Nostra Aetate reversed centuries of true doctrine.

      Delete
    2. When were Jews spoken of as Christ's enemies in the rites? If you're talking about the word "perfidis" being deleted, I am of the understanding that it was done so to prevent misunderstanding (it can be mistranslated as "treacherous" when the intent was moreso "unbelieving"), not because it was inherently erroneous.

      Delete
    3. Well, the liturgy is not solely limited to the Roman Rite. In the Byzantine Rite the Jews are called a lawless and treacherous nation who devised vain things against Christ.

      Delete
    4. It's in the Lenten Triodion for Good Friday.

      Delete
    5. I assume you mean this, from the Beatitudes after the Sixth Gospel in Matins on Good Friday: "The swarm of those who would kill God, the lawless nation of the Jews, cried out in fury to Pilate: Crucify Him!" (trans. Ware)

      I hesitate to comment on this because I don't have the Greek in front of me, but I would surmise that the only people being indicted here are those that actually crucified the Lord. Equating this to mean that the Jews in their totality are an enemy of Christ sounds like a stretch.

      Delete
    6. I think it depends on the translation. If anyone wants to translate the following literally from the Greek, we can find out:

      http://www.denver.goarch.org/liturgical/triodion/holy_week/hf_matins.pdf

      According to them the English Translastion is:
      "The law-transgressors do truly buy the
      Law-Ordainer from a disciple. And
      they bring Him as a law-breaker before
      Pilate, crying out that He Who gives
      them manna in the wilderness should
      be crucified"

      So it would not be a condemnation of the Jewish people as a whole, but the "Law transgressors", if this translation is to be believed.

      Delete
    7. Thanks for the file Lord of Bollocks.

      The phrase in question is: "Τὸν τοῦ νόμου Ποιητήν, ἐκ μαθητοῦ ὠνήσαντο ἄνομοι"

      Translating ἄνομοι as "lawless and treacherous nation" is... dynamic equivalence, to say the least. In any case it does in fact seem to be exclusively referring to Jesus' deliverers, not all the Jews.

      Delete
    8. Τῶν θεοκτόνων ὁ ἑσµός, Ἰουδαίων ἔθνος τὸ ἄνοµον, may be rendered as, "The swarm of the deicidal, the nation of the lawless [or impious] Jews..."

      We might also want to consider three things:

      One, the Jewish nation crucified their Messiah: "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs which God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know - this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men" (Acts 2:22-23).

      Two, we must read Paul's epistle to the Romans, chs. 9-11, esp. "I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means!...So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall? By no means! But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!" (Rom 11:1, 11-12)

      Three, if a preterist or quasi-preterist interpretation of the Apocalypse is assumed, then Israel has received the judgment of God, especially in AD 70, as the spiritual harlot, as Sodom, as Egypt.

      Delete
  5. The rabbinical model is the default setting for most Protestant groups. A few large denominations have liturgical worship, but the rest are a dissolute rabble of autonomous communities led by elected and easily replaceable preachers. I was recently in attendance at a service where a family member was prayed over by his evangelical community to become an elder (he is younger than I). This is the sort of ecclesiastical setting I grew up around, so my first liturgical experience—among the Lutherans, as it turned out—was quite the eye-opener.

    Your hypothetical situation of northern Chinese Catholics being cut off from the priestly ministry is basically what happened to Japanese Catholics for a few centuries, if I'm not mistaken. They ended up with some very bizarre Marian cults by the time priests were allowed back onto the islands.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whether his traddiness realizes it or not, his example is less hypothetical than it may seem. As late as the 19th century there were Europeans finding Christian villages in remote areas of Western China (where the Church of the East had sent missionaries in the 7th and 8th centuries). The villages had been without priests since the 10th century (due to the Tang Dynasty persecuting all "foreign" religions) and the faithful continued on believing and praying together as they could despite the lack of priestly sacraments.

      Delete
    2. Interesting! And didn't the Polos discover Nestorian Christians at the court of Kublai Khan, i.e. descendants of Nestorian missionaries' converts centuries before?

      Delete
    3. Korea had Catholics before they had priests or missionaries. The first Christian community there was founded by a native Korean that converted to Catholicism after reading the Roman Missal.

      Delete
    4. The Mongol rulers of China were a tad more tolerant of the Assyrian-Rite Christians in their domain. The Nestorian Stele caused a bit of an uproar when it was discovered in 1625.

      Too bad the Chinese, Japanese and Korean Christians were (according to Leonard Feeney) barred from heaven due to the first "not being in communion" with Rome and the other two probably doing the sacrament of Baptism with the wrong form without a Western priest to teach them. #Sarcasm

      Delete