Deconstruction and de-liturgization

Richard Fenn ( Liturgies and Trials ) notes that serious, absolutely binding speech – promises, for instance – is comparatively rare in normal conversation. When we do make binding promises, we give ad receive “signs and symbols that something out of the ordinary is occurring” – an oath, an exchange of rings, witnesses.

He sums up, “The liturgical language of religion is therefore the last human defense against the slipperiness, ambiguity, and uncertainty of all human acts of speech; and even these liturgical guarantees are widely known to fail.”

Is it a surprise, then, that deconstruction and all the modes of postmodern suspicion should arise on the heels of the de-liturgization of social life?

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Revival of Patristics

Stephen O. Presley

On May 25, 1990, the renowned patristics scholar Charles Kannengiesser, S.J., delivered a lecture at the annual…

The Enduring Legacy of the Spanish Mystics

Itxu Díaz

Last autumn, I spent a few days at my family’s coastal country house in northwestern Spain. The…

The trouble with blogging …

Joseph Bottum

The trouble with blogging, RJN, is narrative structure. Or maybe voice. Or maybe diction. Or maybe syntax.…