Reviewed Book: Chupungco, Anscar J. Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods of Inculturation. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1989

Nevile, Donald C.

English

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 18Issue 2 Word and Worship: Essays on Preaching andLiturgyArticle 2211-1-1992Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methodsof InculturationDonald C. NevileFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationNevile, Donald C. (1992) "Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods of Inculturation," Consensus: Vol. 18 : Iss. 2 , Article 22.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol18/iss2/22Book Reviews 141feminist and liberation theologies as well as the key role Protestant churchesplayed in organizing the World Council of Churches. Indeed, throughoutthis work, Rausch and Voss do not give adequate attention to women’s rolesand their contributions to the world religions. Moreover, if the audience isstudents and laity, then why did the authors not spice up their presentationwith anecdotes in order to communicate their first-hand encounters withadherents of each religion? After all, story-anecdotes are often one of thebest methods of teaching.The reader will need to supplement this work with other surveys for amore comprehensive, thorough presentation of the world religions.Garth Wehrfritz-HansonCalgary, AlbertaLiturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods ofInculturationAnscar J. Chupungco, OSBNew York: Paulist Press, 1989220 pages $13.45 Cdn. paperbackThis book is about inculturation, which along with globalization, willbe a major theme for theology in the 1990s. Here, Father Chupungco,professor of Liturgical History and Liturgical Adaptation at the PontificalLiturgical Institute in Rome, carries forward the work he began in his “Cul-tural Adaptation of the Liturgy” (PauHst Press, 1982). He writes from thecontext of the Roman liturgy and its changes since Vatican II. With thefirst stage of recovering the classical shape of the liturgy now complete, thesecond challenge emerges, to inculturate the liturgy.What is “inculturation”? He defines it as “the process whereby thetexts and rites used in worship by the local church are so inserted in theframework of culture, that they absorb its thought, language, and ritualpatterns— inculturation allows people to experience in liturgical celebra-tions a ‘cultural event’ whose language and ritual forms they are able toidentify as elements of their culture” (29).He begins by comparing what must happen in worship today to whathappened historically when the early Roman liturgy moved north and wasadapted to the Franco-Germanic style of expression. Today the sobrietyand simplicity of the early Roman liturgy has again been recovered; butthis is not the cultural style of all peoples today, any more than it was inthe eighth century! Although uniformity may be a blessing, it should notpreclude cultural variation and adaptation.Realizing that there are pitfalls in inculturation, Chupungco warns oftwo dangers: liturgy imposing a meaning on culture which is alien to cul-ture; culture overcoming liturgy so that it assimilates the original meaning142 Consensusof the liturgy. He observes that there have been failures in the historyof liturgical inculturation, such as the blessing of instruments of ordealand torture during the Carolingian period and the failure of the Triden-tine liturgy to become acculturated during the Baroque period. However,there have also been successes small and large over the centuries, so thatChupungco has no qualms about advocating liturgical creativity, even tothe point of advocating composition of new liturgical texts which fall out-side the traditional structure of the Roman Mass.The method which he suggests for this process of inculturation is thatof dynamic equivalence. Without elaborating in great detail on this term,Chupungco describes it as the process . . whereby the Roman rite is ‘trans-lated’ into other patterns of thought, language, and rite” (35). There aretwo steps involved in achieving dynamic equivalence: defining the theolog-ical content of a rite as distinguished from its liturgical form and isolatingthe immutable elements of a rite from the elements which are subject tochange. An example of a mutable element would be the use of Latin inthe Roman mass; an example of an immutable element would be the use ofwater in baptism.He spends one chapter considering the cultural adaptation of the eu-charist. Observing that the liturgy of the word especially lends itself tocultural adaptation because of its dialogical structure, he points out somepossible ways of adapting this part of the liturgy: different styles of listen-ing and response, placement of furniture, manner of proclamation, form ofthe homily and intercessions, external appearance of the books, and thebodily posture of the assembly.The liturgy of the table also lends itself to cultural adaptation becauseof its essential meal-structure (as opposed to the traditional interpretationof its theological content as sacrifice) which lays it open to a vast range ofcultural meanings. In all cases, the governing rubric should be to isolatethe theological meaning from the literary or liturgical form, and retain thetheological meaning in the process of inculturation.Chupungco then gives examples of three officially approved rites whichhave been inculturated, and briefly describes them. First he presents the1981 Mass approved by the Conference of Bishops of India. This rite in-cludes many inculturated changes: a sitting posture instead of standing;making the“profound bow” instead of genuflecting; touching sacred objectswith the fingers or palm and then bringing the hands to one’s eyes or fore-head as a sign of respect; including the presentation of the gifts in theentrance rite; using an Indian rite of respect for welcoming the celebrant;inclusion of a traditional lamplighting ceremony; permitting some spon-taneity in the structure and content of the prayer of the church; includingin the eucharistic prayer a triple arati of incense, flowers, and light.Next he describes the 1988 Zairean Mass, which on the surface appearsto follow the Roman order closely, but which in its spirit incorporates aradical change. “The entire celebration is focused on the presence of thesacred, of God, and the world of spirits and ancestors with whom theBook Reviews 143assembly is asked to commune with an attitude of humility and awe—Not only the saints but also the ‘ancestors of righteous heart’ are invokedduring the entrance litany by becoming a Christian an African doesnot sever all relationship with the ancestors. Invoking them in Christianworship is consequently a pastoral and liturgical imperative” (89). Otherless controversial inculturations in this mciss include veneration of the tableby touching it with the forehead, use of traditional rhythmic movementsduring canticles, exchanging the sign of peace by washing hands in the samebasin, and the use of drums and gongs to punctuate the liturgy.These two examples of inculturation involve pioneering, creative ap-proaches to liturgy. The third example he gives might be called “backwardinculturation” as in the 1976 Phillipine Tagalog Mass such as lighting ofcandles and sounding of bells at the eucharistic prayer and a processionwith the consecrated element.He continues with a less satisfactory chapter on the future shape ofother Roman sacramental celebrations: confirmation, ordination, marriage,initiation, reconciliation, and anointing.His final chapter deals with the cultural reform of the liturgical year.Here we find a familiar theme: the “northern” context of our festival calen-dar. He eschews any efforts to change the dates of major festivals such asEaster, Christmas, and Pentecost, regardless of the cultural bondage to theweather of the Northern Hemisphere. However, he does have some tellingcriticism of present efforts to make the Paschal Vigil the focus of Easterliturgical celebrations, at the expense of Easter Sunday itself. Finally, heconcludes with some comments on alternate forms of Sunday observance(this is a response to the increasing secularization of the “Lord’s Day”),the importance of secular festivals (Labour Day, Thanksgiving, etc.), andthe politicization of feasts such as Christ the King.The book is uneven in its movement and gives the impression of beinga “work in progress” which indeed it is. For the subject of inculturationis very new to students of liturgy. Again and again Chupungco makes thepoint that the purpose of inculturation is to foster active, informed par-ticipation by the laos^ making worship more accessible to the masses, andensuring that the search for liturgical purity does not become an “archaeo-logical exercise” (63). The classical shape of the liturgy, he warns, may notbe the ideal shape for a culturally pluralistic church!The book is written out of the context of Vatican II and makes refer-ence only to inculturation within the Church of Rome. But the challengeis thrown out just as surely to other Churches. Lutherans share the West-ern Roman liturgy. Like Romans and Anglicans, our present “authorized”liturgies are a result of the rediscovery, through the labours of the litur-gical movement, of the classical western liturgy. The development of ourliturgy from the Common Service through the Service Book and Hymnal tothe Lutheran Book of Worship is a worthy attempt to recover a rite basedon the best of our own history and the fruits of the liturgical movement.However, it assumes that because we all speak English, we are all of oneculture, and that one rite and one rubric fit all.144 ConsensusThis is no longer the case (if it ever was). Congregations and commu-nities have always inculturated their own liturgy, albeit unofficially and un-consciously. Recently more organized attempts have appeared in Spanish,indigenous, and gender-neutral revisions. Inculturation of liturgy amongus has been scattered and often discouraged by the official guardians of theLutheran liturgy.But now the door is wide open. Inculturation will not go away; norwill it tolerate restraint or deterrence, whether it be creative and forward-looking (as in Zaire and India) or retrospective (as in the Phillipines).Chupungco has given us a window on how the process is being viewedand conducted in Rome. It will be up to us to adapt our liturgy to our ownculture.Donald NevilePeace Lutheran ChurchPickering, OntarioReading Scripture in Public: A Guide for Preachersand Lay ReadersThomas Edward McComiskeyGrand Rapids: Baker, 1991196 pages“I am surprised,” writes the author, “at how frequently I hear theScriptures read carelessly with little attention to the reader’s responsibilityto interpret the biblical author’s thought or intention” (9). This is true ofpeople who ought to know better; it is truer still of the many lay readers whoare untrained, or unrehearsed, or carry some notion that because Scriptureis “holy” it must be read dully. McComiskey’s book is a laudable andwelcome manual designed to improve just this situation. It is a “self-helptool” whose purpose is “to set forth principles of oral interpretation asthey relate to the public reading of Scripture” (9). His thesis—and it isan important perspective for every reader of Scripture to grasp—is that“effective public reading is interpretation, and the effective use of vocalemphasis is exposition. One should read in such a way that the hearers willfeel they have caught the sense of the passage” (9- 10).The book is divided into two parts: (1) Understanding the Principlesof Reading Scripture in Public; (2) Applying the Principles.Part 1 begins with a chapter on the importance of the public reading ofScripture. Two chapters are devoted to “finding and communicating mean-ing” in, respectively, narrative and poetic materials. Chapter 4, “findingand communicating meaning in sense structures”, examines the smallestunits of meaning, viz., clauses and sentences which are coherent literary

Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods of Inculturation

Scholars Commons

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1856&amp;context=consensus

Liturgies of the Future: The Process and Methods of Inculturation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Wilfrid Laurier University

Scholars Commons