Lately I was reading a very interesting
essay on “The Hermeneutics of the Use of Early Liturgical Practice for Modern
Liturgical Reform” by the German scholar Basilius J. Groen. I enjoyed its many insights, but was particularly
struck by one almost off-hand comment.
Dr. Groen was commenting on the difficulty of simply borrowing
liturgical practices wholesale from the early church and applying them to our
own day as if nothing had changed. That
is true enough, but what struck me was his choice of example. He wrote, “Whether modern Roman Catholic
liturgical renewal is consistent with the liturgical practice in the early
church is a very difficult question. As
I said before, socio-cultural conditions almost two millennia ago were very
different. One should think only of the
tendency to perceive demonic activity everywhere. The most learned Greek church father, Gregory
of Nazianzus, for example, was convinced that Christians including himself were
attacked and tricked by demons almost all the time and that, therefore, a
continuous warfare was required.” He
goes on to adduce as a further example the advice given by Pope Gregory that
Great that people should make the sign of the Cross over lettuce before eating
it, lest a demon sitting on one of its leaves should cause damage. One can almost hear Dr. Groen snickering at
the superstitious and primitive credulity of the ancients.
In
this Dr. Groen is not alone, and I quote him not to single him out in
particular, but because he offers such a fine example of the modern contempt
for a belief in the demonic. This belief
he ascribes apparently to different “socio-cultural conditions”, which appears
to be a polite way of saying that they were too primitive to know better. If asked to defend the two Gregory’s no doubt
he would charitably suggest that despite their gifts they were men of their
time, subject to all the prejudices and illusions of their prevailing culture.
Which
may be true, but it nicely avoids the obvious retort that of course Dr. Groen
is also a man of his time, subject to
all the prejudices and illusions of his
prevailing culture—a culture which denies the existence of the supernatural in
general and the demonic in particular.
And let’s be clear upon what our secular culture bases its denial of the
existence of the demonic—namely, upon mere dogmatic prejudice and untested
ideology. That is, everyone around us in
the secular West says demons don’t exist and so, well, they don’t exist. Evidence to the contrary, whether the
testimony of Scripture, the witness of the Fathers and the Saints, or the
all-but universal experience of pretty much every culture ever recorded, simply
count for nothing. We assume without
proof that they were all primitive and gullible and that we are much
smarter. It is true that we have built
better machines than those who came before us, and lots of them. It is less clear that this technological
superiority has any bearing upon our ability to know the truth about the
supernatural world, especially since that world is not susceptible of being
detected or measured by our machines.
And our history offers no other evidence that we are wiser than our
ancestors. If anything, the evidence
suggests we are worse off. Our last
century, for example, has seen more genocide, atrocity, and bloodshed than
previous centuries put together. When
today we are not using our machines to access pornography, send useless texts
to our friends, or pick fights with strangers on Facebook, we often use our
technology to kill one another. Whatever
can be said about the different “socio-cultural conditions” of our ancestors,
it seems that as least they practised less genocide than we do.
Here
then is the great gap between the Church Fathers, such as St. Gregory
Nazianzus, and that of our secular culture—they accepted without question that
demons existed and that Christians had to fight against them, and our modern
society rejects this absolutely.
Note: we have not disproved it,
and cannot offer the slightest bit of evidence that demons do not exist. We simply regard the notion as too
implausible to require refutation. This
gap is a very wide, deep, and important one, for it divides those confessing
Christ into two very different groups.
Those accepting the threat of the demonic will have a much different
form of spirituality than those who deny it, in the same sort of way as those
who accept the threat from germs will have a much different form of hygiene
than those who deny it. And like those
who deny the threat of germs and refuse to take precautions against possible
damage, those who deny the threat from demons may also suffer damage. Certainly if one looks around in our culture
to find evidence of such damage—things like violence, addiction, and sexual
chaos—one does not have far to look.
This
gap is all the more important because no one is talking about it. Scholars write tons of stuff on almost every
conceivable topic, and get into all sorts of heated debates with other
scholars. (The volume in which Dr.
Groen’s essay was found also had essays outlining hot scholarly debates on the
origin of the forty-day Lent and whether or not the Last Supper was a form of
Jewish seder.) But no one debates the existence of the
demonic, even though it has immediate and practical repercussions for the
faithful—far more repercussions in fact than whether or not our present
pre-Paschal Lent began in Egypt as a forty-day fast after feast of Epiphany, or
whether or not the Last Supper was a seder. The issue is simply not an issue, and
therefore the gap between those aligning themselves with Scripture and the
Fathers and those rejecting their view is unbridgeable.
For
me the perplexing thing about the gap is not that it exists—secularists will be
secular, after all, and most people are too busy living life to spend much time
questioning the underlying presuppositions of their culture. For me the perplexing thing is how Christians could come to deny the
existence of the demonic. It is one
thing to dismiss “the most learned Greek church father, Gregory of Nazianzus”
(and with him, every other Church Father and saint in the Christian
Church). It is quite another to dismiss
Jesus Christ. He clearly believed in the
existence of demons, and not only because He spent so much of His time
performing exorcisms. More than that, He
described His entire ministry in
terms of exorcism: “Behold, I cast out
demons and perform cures today and tomorrow and the third day I finish My
course” (Luke 13:32). Was the Son of God
merely a man of His time too, one imprisoned by the categories and assumptions
of His socio-cultural conditions? Never
mind that St. Paul defined the Christian life as “not contending against flesh
and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the
world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of evil in
the heavenlies” (Ephesians 6:12)—the view that such spiritual armies of evil
were arrayed against us goes back ultimately to Christ Himself. We may quibble about whether or not we should
be concerned about every head of lettuce we eat. But there should no doubt for those who claim
to follow Christ that “continuous warfare” with the demons is indeed required.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.