Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi: Caution!!
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,217
    We find this in a recent lecture by R. deMattei on the History of Modernism:

    The two principal theologians of the movement were two priests, George Tyrrell of Ireland (1861-1909) and Ernesto Buonaiuti of Italy (1881-1946). Tyrrell converted from Calvinism to Anglicanism and then to Catholicism (1879) and then entered the Society of Jesus, identifying Revelation with “religious experience,” which is accomplished in each individual conscience, through which the lex orandi dictates the norms of the lex credendi, and not vice-versa. In fact, this Revelation-experience, “cannot come to us from outside; the teaching can be the occasion, not the cause.”[15]


    So then, to be clear about how to understand the 'lex....lex...' maxim, it is this: the law of belief is expressed in the law of prayer. As church musicians we know that, of course.

    At the same time, we know that music can 'shape' or 'direct' belief. "Music is that which moves the soul, we know not how."

    Therefore the caution: only music which is informed by right belief should be used, thus ensuring that our congregations will depart the Mass musically confirmed in that belief. (We can't control the sermon.)

    Source: https://onepeterfive.com/the-roots-and-historical-consequences-of-modernism/
    Thanked by 1MarkB
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,371
    Exactly, that is why GIRM lays down that only texts approved (by the ordinary) are permitted to be sung. A fundamental principle, almost universally ignored.
    As to the sermon, many years ago a priest commented to me that it is impossible to preach without uttering heresy. I understood him to mean that whatever you say, someone will get the wrong end of the stick. I may have misunderstood.
    Thanked by 1MarkB
  • toddevoss
    Posts: 162
    From Mediator Dei by Pope Pius XII 46. On this subject We judge it Our duty to rectify an attitude with which you are doubtless familiar, Venerable Brethren. We refer to the error and fallacious reasoning of those who have claimed thatthe sacred liturgy is a kind of proving ground for the truths to be held of faith, meaning by this that the Church is obliged to declare such a doctrine sound when it is found to have produced fruits of
    piety and sanctity through the sacred rites of the liturgy, and to reject it otherwise. Hence the epigram, "Lex orandi, lex credendi" - the law for prayer is the law for faith.

    47. But this is not what the Church teaches and enjoins. The worship she offers to God, all good and great, is a continuous profession of Catholic faith and a continuous exercise of hope and charity, as Augustine puts it tersely. "God is to be worshipped," he says, "by faith, hope and charity."[44] In the sacred liturgy we profess the Catholic faith explicitly and openly, not only by the celebration of the mysteries, and by offering the holy sacrifice and administering the sacraments, but also by saying or singing the credo or Symbol of the faith - it is indeed the sign and badge, as it were, of the Christian - along with other texts, and likewise by the reading of holy scripture, written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. The entire liturgy, therefore, has the Catholic faith
    for its content, inasmuch as it bears public witness to the faith of the Church

    48. For this reason, whenever there was question of defining a truth revealed by God, the
    Sovereign Pontiff and the Councils in their recourse to the "theological sources," as they are called, have not seldom drawn many an argument from this sacred science of the liturgy. For an example in point, Our predecessor of immortal memory, Pius IX, so argued when he proclaimed the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. Similarly during the discussion of a doubtful or controversial truth, the Church and the Holy Fathers have not failed to look to the age-old and age honoredsacred rites for enlightenment. Hence the well-known and venerable maxim, "Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi" - let the rule for prayer determine the rule of belief.[45] The sacred liturgy, consequently, does not decide or determine independently and of itself what is of Catholic faith. More properly, since the liturgy is also a profession of eternal truths, and subject, as such, to the supreme teaching authority of the Church, it can supply proofs and testimony, quite
    clearly, of no little value, towards the determination of a particular point of Christian doctrine. But if one desires to differentiate and describe the relationship between faith and the sacred liturgy in absolute and general terms, it is perfectly correct to say, "Lex credendi legem statuat supplicandi" - let the rule of belief determine the rule of prayer. The same holds true for the other theological virtues also, "In . . . fide, spe, caritate continuato desiderio semper oramus" - we pray always, with constant yearning in faith, hope and charity.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,371
    As I understand it, we are not disagreeing here.
    1. the rule of belief determines the rule of prayer. That is, in the liturgy we should express the faith of the church.
    2. what people hear and say in song and prayer will shape their understanding, and their own belief.
    Question: How does this bear on people (like Notker) adding sequences into the liturgy?
    Tyrell, regretably, was not merely expelled by the Jesuits but excommunicated and unrepentant, he did however receive the last rites.
  • toddevoss
    Posts: 162
    Yes not disagreeing. Just reminded me of those passages from Mediator Dei which I just happen to be reading.
  • PlanctusAnglorum
    Posts: 25
    Question: How does this bear on people (like Notker) adding sequences into the liturgy?


    Proposed Answer:

    St Notker was a holy man of prayer and possessed a deep understanding of the divine mysteries expressed in the liturgy. An examination of his works makes this abundantly clear. The same was true of so many other pious and learned men of his age, and the centuries which followed in the Middle Ages. All of these ancient hymns and tropes are attempts to mediate these divine mysteries to the congregation of the Church, and make them more accessible and more heartfelt. That is why they are all rendered in the form of song, with lyrics for the faithful to ponder.

    The ultimate purpose of the hymns, sequences, tropes, and the various proper offices composed for feast days, is to make explicit what is only implicit in the various scriptural quotations of the Mass and Divine Office. In other words, far from being any kind of "filler" or unnecessary "accretions" from the Middle Ages, these works were a vital teaching tool to properly instruct the Church in the faith.

    Yet, what kind of instructive content has taken the place of these so-called "medieval accretions?"

  • dad29
    Posts: 2,217
    Yet, what kind of instructive content has taken the place of these so-called "medieval accretions?"


    That's where I was going with the "CAUTION!!" flag on the header of the post. "Nice" hymns are nice--but are they theologically Catholic?

    Took a trip down memory lane yesterday (Birth of St John Baptist) when the M.D. played Sebastian's "Make Me a Channel of Your Peace". Suppressed the desire to scream....but THIS is what we learn instead of Nokter.
  • PlanctusAnglorum
    Posts: 25
    I agree, and in my opinion, the problem finds its root in the historic obsession with "reform" that has afflicted the Roman Church for centuries. The casualties of this ongoing movement (which mostly consists of cutting things out of the Latin patrimony, rather than augmenting it with new hymns and chants) have been numerous and incalculable. But ultimately what has suffered the most has been the basic integrity of the sacred liturgy and the foundations of dogmatic theology that the liturgy is supposed to express in all of its hymnography.

    So, I kind of feel as though the only practical solution for the time being is perhaps for more traditional churches and choirs to begin applying the alius cantus aptus argument for the restoration of the ancient chants, including tropes and sequences. After all, if bad hymns with awful music and dubious theology can be justified with that phrase, why not the beautiful and orthodox treasures of ages past?

    Just a thought.
  • toddevoss
    Posts: 162
    The alius cantus aptus argument is spot on. If one is working in the OF, one might as well use its "optionality" to one's advantage. For example, My priest uses such optionality to introduce an eastern catholic hymn/chant (receive the body of christ; taste the fountain of immortality) into communion -followed by the communion antiphon.
Add a Comment