What is the Unchanging Principle? A Discussion of the Eucharistic Ordo in Anglicanism

Anglican Theological Review, Spring 2004 by Bates, J Barrington

Having thus established the reliance of the ordo on the eucharist and the reliance of the eucharist on the dismissal, how can we discuss what constitutes the ordo? Is it simply the "harmonious combination oi three elements: action, word, song"?52 Or must we investigate the eschatological dimension of worship, working backward to establish the select list of liturgical criteria that will truly bring about the reign of God?

Perhaps the ordo can be described in terms of the radical movement of every eucharistic celebration. In the hidden depths of the celebration the Father gives himself through his Son in his Holy Spirit.53 Corbon cautions that "lazy abridgements and decadent additions are not part of the holy tradition, and the patient work of specialists is required to distinguish the authentic from the apocryphal."54 Here a problem comes to light, namely the assertion that the expertise of a specialist is required to discern the authenticity of worship. This is a far cry from Corbon's more simplistic description of the eucharistie canon as prelude, liturgy of the word, anaphora, communion, and finale.55

Others have likewise proposed such lists. Kavanagh mentions "prayers; acclamations; hymns; psalmody; lessons; blessings and con secrations; invitations, dialogues, responses, greetings; dismissals; litanies; and homilies" among verbal aspects of the eucharistic ordo,56 and "silence, processions, gestures, sounds, sights, smells, touches" among the nonverbal.57 An inventory so exhaustive suggests that there can be no such thing as a fully realized celebration, inclusive of all major elements and components. Schmemann addresses this very notion, saying, "to the extent that it is impossible . . . to carry out the ordo in full, it turns out that in the last analysis the deciding factors are taste, local tradition, and custom; in other words, accidental factors."58 These accidental factors confound and confuse the scholarly endeavor, leading us to define, establish, and even worship the idol of the rubric, rather than see through the icon of the ordo to the identity for mission that lies beyond. The purpose of the ordo is, simply put, to enable real participation in the heavenly liturgy, even if such complete participation cannot be fully realized. The rules, regulations, and rubrics exist simply to allow human beings to join with all those heavenly being who without ceasing and for ever and ever sing the praise of God.59 We seek, says Schmemann,

to find the ordo behind the "rubrics," regulations and rules-to find the unchanging principle, the living norm or "logos" of worship as a whole, within what is accidental and temporary: this is the primary task which faces those who regard liturgical theology not as the collecting of accidental and arbitrary explanations of services but as the systematic study of the lex orandi of the church.60

This is the faith of the church in motion, the dynamic action that cannot be found in the print on any page.61

This endeavor to define the ondo is perhaps just another mistaken and misleading practice of theologia secunda.62 Have we first invented, imagined, or contrived a theory of worship and then searched for texts, rubrics, or accidental factors to support the a priori theory? Can we meaningfully discuss the ordo outside the context not only of the eucharistic celebration but also of the missionary send-off? How can we ever establish that which is not found on the pages of prayer books but in the dynamic action of the liturgy?63