Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Reformation And Ritual Essays - Sacraments Of The Catholic Church
Reformation And Ritual Question: What attitude or attitudes did the Reformations take towards popular religious forms? And how did the Reformations themselves come to embody ritual elements? The Reformation was a period of much social unrest. Whilst there existed a physical struggle evident upon the surface, underneath lie an intense philosophical and religious debate that served to test and question the values of Catholicism and the reasons for the need for change argued by the Protestant. The Reformation movement challenged the Catholic belief system. It argued against the praising and worshipping of icons and other such relics and argued that all praise and worship should be reserved for the Word of God and God alone. However, there is evidence to suggest that early Protestants felt a need for the reassurance offered by such icons and further, it has been argued, that the Protestant Reformers, in attempting to destroy ritual, actually served to strengthen Catholic belief in same. The irony is, in that attempting to destroy such rituals, the movement actually served to embody ritual elements. The methods by which it attempted to destroy ritual, can actually be interpre ted as being ritualistic in and of themselves. The Christian Sacraments were and are an important part of Catholic life. In understanding the significance of such sacraments to the Catholic and the theoretical arguments against same put forward by the Protestant Reformer, the need for the Reformer to extinguish such importance, becomes evident. For both the Catholic and the Orthodox the Eucharist represented and represents the body of Christ. It is believed that initially, the Eucharist is simply unleavened bread, however upon being blessed such bread actually turns into the body of Christ, a metaphysical transformation occurs that remains unexplained except by reference to a miracle and a blessing. Conversely the wine is believed to become the blood of Christ. It is believed that both serve to work towards granting the believer remission from sin and everlasting life1. The host and the sharing of same was not only believed to relieve the sinner of the burden of his sins but further had a social function. The sharing of the Eucharist worked to achieve a sense of social cohesion, a sense of unity and togetherness within a society where conflict and turmoil was a part of daily life2. However, Antoine Marcourt, a French Protestant Reformer, like many reformers of her period, argued that the Eucharistic rite was merely a materialistic ceremony and served to distract followers from the true faith. It was argued that the rite was merely an empty performance with little true significance. In Marcourt's own words It is an over dulling and darkening of the spirit and understanding of the people to cause them to . . . stare at a little bread, at a visible and corruptible thing3. For the reformers the host was a physical object, nothing more, that served to detract from the importance of the fundamental Word of God. For the Reformist, the physical act of eating and drinking was less significant than the actual words used during the Eucharistic ceremony. Whilst physical preparation for the rite, such as fasting, were useful in achieving a certain level of focus necessary to receive Communion, these acts alone were not fundamental to the Sacrament. What was fundamental was an unwavering belief in the promise by God to 'forgive sins' upon receiving the sacrament. As Martin Luther writes in his 'The Small Catechism of Martin Luther', Of course, eating and drinking do not do these things. These words, written here, do them: given for you and shed for you to forgive sins4. During this period it was not considered necessary for the masses to understand the processes of transubstantiation that turned the unleavened bread into the body of Christ. More truthfully, it was considered beyond the possible comprehension of the masses. As such, the Reformist argument is that the congregation became a part of an empty ritual. Taught when to kneel and when to stand and what to say without actually understanding same. The laity were advised that understanding was not important, that actions were paramount5. For the Reformist, such ceremony become fraud and was deemed illusory6. Various Reformists throughout time have argued that the Last Supper
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)