Department of Reading _ Main _ Liturgia and the Modern State

8/6/2019 Department of Reading _ Main _ Liturgia and the Modern State

1/6

Main /

Liturgia and the Modern State

2

In the last years I had focused my

investigation first on law and then

on theology. Why? The first answer,

which is obviously a

,

, would be,

because these are the only two fields

in which Michel Foucault did not

work. The second answer, apparently

more serious, but every seriousness

has a core of , would be,

because I wanted to understand, what

is politics? And I had the impression

that in the juridical and theological

spheres, what in political

philosopohy presents itself as the

arcanum imperii the mystery of

power becomes clear and even

acquires a kind of .

For the two past years I have

concentrated my investigations upon

liturgy.

6

This should not be surprising because

liturgy is in theology what ontology

or metaphysics are in philosophy. Il

theologia prima, as theologists say

like ontology isphilosophia prima.

10

On the other hand it seemed to me

that only if I could understand what

is a liturgical act, I could answer

to Arendt's question: What does it

mean, to act politically? As a matter

of fact the proximity between liturgy

and politics is implicit in the veryterm liturgia. The Greek term

liturgia comes from laos (people) and

ergon (work) and it means therefore

literally public action, activity

done for the people. In Athens

liturgia designated the activity, the

works that the citizen who had a

certain income where obliged to do

for the city. For instance to

organize the public games,

gymnasiarchia, or public feast,

corrigia, and in case of war, to arm

a ship, trierarchia.

14

And

in this perspective I would just

underscore, the crucial importance of

two moments in the history of the

term liturgia. The first one were

when the Alexandrinean rabbis who

translated the bible in(to) Greek

chose the term liturgia to translate

the Hebrew shir d, which meant the

cultic activity in the temple. I do

not have the time here to dwell on

the reasons that pushed the rabbis to

chose a political term for naming the

cultic activity.

18

The second moment, even more

significant, was when the Latin

Christian fathers, especially

Ambrosius (because he was the first),

chose the Latin term officium

(office) to designate in the same

sense, as a translation of liturgia,

the cultic practice of the priest.

22

"joke"

corresponds to the catastrophy in the

history of translation yes a in the

discussion says that deconstruction

could be thought as a kind of

liturgy: but he calls this a joke, of

course, but as he says "but every

joke has a serious core"

"mockery"

"transparency"

"As you know the history of a term

coincides with its translation. "


2/6

e mportance o t s event or

Western culture could not be

overrated. One of the catastrophic

consequences of this translation with

the term office was the entering

(entrance) of duty in the sphere of

morals. A real catastrophy for

Western ethics. Officium was often

translated as duty. It is not really

duty in Latin, but it was often

translated as duty.

26

But let me begin my summary genealogy

of liturgy, choosing a place inGermany in the 1920's, the

Benedictine Abbey of Maria Laach.

Here, in the same years as Marcel

Duchamp is working to his Grand Verre

and Martin Heidegger is preparing his

masterpiece, an unknown monk, Odo

Casel, works on the birth of what was

to be called die liturgische

Bewegung, the liturgical movement.

The first twenty years of the 20th

century had been called the age of

movements. Not only on the right, as

well on the left of the political

scene the parties are replaced

everywhere by the movements. But in

every field - literature, arts - the

movements take the place of schools

and institutions. (You'll remember

when in 1914 Freud had to find a namefor what he was doing, he thought

first "Psychoanalytical school?", no?

Then he choose psychoanalytical

movement.) We still lack a serious

investigation of that phenomenon, why

the term movement acquires suddenly

such a power.

30

Let's go back to Odo Casel. In 1918

he made his dissertation at the

university of Bonn, it was written in

Latin and the title was De

Philosophorum Graecorum Silencio

Mystico On the mystical silence of

Greek philosophers. Here we find more

or less clearly stated the two

fundamental thesis that will guide

his future investigations. First: The

pagan mysteries were not a secret

doctrine, which could be said, but

was forbidden to debouch. Pagan

mysteries were a praxis, an action

(dromena) that were able to enact the

salvation of

34

Secondly, there is a generic

continuity betweenpagan mysteries

and Christian liturgy.

. I

would just suggest that this thesis,

especially in the context of Germany

at that moment, could have antisemite

implications. Because it implied that

Christian liturgy did not have its

origin as really it had from the

Jewish synagoge, but from thepagan

mysteries.

38

But let's dwell on what was to be the

core, the conclusion of all Casels

scholarly and philological

investigation. According to Casel the

church is not a community of

believers, who share a certain set of

dogmas and creeds. Christianity in

its core is not defined by a doctrine

but by

" those, who take part

in them." herein the "agent here is

reintroduced into the relation"

"Christian

liturgy is a mystery in the same

sense, it is a praxis, an action"

yet i think it is alsoconnected to an idea of werklosigkeit

in specific, peculiar way namely that

what is put into effect is not a

werk, ergon, but the effects; the

baptism, the sacrament, etc that is

also at the same time based on the

idea that what happens is only

enacted due to "an action, a praxis.

That is to say by the participation


3/6

, in the liturgical mystery.

That means in Casel's words that

"Christianism is not a doctrine but a

mystery." If mystery is the proper

name of the actions of the priest,

and more generally of Christian

praxis, then I had to understand and

define the main features of this

praxis.

41there is a double link now, or so,

which I cannot quite get together,

cause somewhere else a. says, his

writing would not be a negative

experience of that, what cannot be

said, the borders or abysall ground of

language and so on, but then again he

introduces with the topic of the voice

this emptiness at the centre of his

writings as something that cannot be

written

42

Let's take Casel's 1928 essay on

Mysteriengegenwart (Mysteric

presence). According to Casel

liturgical mystery is not a

representatio, representation, but a

presentatio, a presentation. In the

liturgical mystery we witness the

real, effective presence of what is

symbolized in it. "The expression

mysteric presence

(Mysteriengegenwart) is a tautolgoy

because a presence belongs

constitutively to mystery." Casel was

a philologist. In that perspective he

had an incredible amount of

investigations on the history of

liturgy. And especially he

concentrated on the patristic and

scholastic theory of sacraments. Of

course sacrament is the very centre

of the christian liturgy. According

to this theory the sacrament is a

very peculiar activity.

You immediately see that the

first definition of a performative

act, of a speech act, was elaborated

in the theory of sacraments. The

sacraments realize what they mean.

The sacrament is a sign, but the

particularity of that sign is that it

realizes what it means. The theory of

the speech act was first elaborated

to explain the peculiar nature of thesacramental action.

46

The historian of religion (Guy)

Stroumsa has an interesting theory in

which he opposes what happened in

Judaism to what happened in

Christianity: while after the

destruction of the temple the rabbi

spiritualized the liturgy and

substituted the talmud thora, the

study of the thora to the ritual

accomplishment of sacrifices in the

temple, Christianism is still centred

on sacrifice. But it is a peculiar

sacrifice, immolazio incruenta

(without blood shedding), a mystery

in which Christ, Christ's passion anddeath is present is made present.

But it is present not as a historical

presence but in its effects, in its

effectuality and efficacy. In so far

as it operates the redemption from

sin. Let's continue our analyses of

this peculiar praxis which is the

liturgical mystery. One of the main

consequences of its performative

nature, is the elaboration of the

distinction between opus operatum and

opus operantis. According to

theologians opus operatum names the

sacramental action in its

performative effectualities according

to which it will produce certain

effects. It will produce in any case

the effects. Opus operantis named the

act in so far as it is enacted by a

certain subject, a certain agent, thepriest which has certain moral and

physical qualities. The origin of

this theory was in the 3rd century

controversies on the validity of

baptism. The problem was, if the

priest who administrates the baptism

is a murderer or apostat or whatever

is the baptism valid? There was a big

discussion but then the church

in a cultic activity" of course this

seems directly connected to idea of

movements agamben brings up during

the text

"What is a liturgical

mystery, considered as the very

paradigm of human praxis?"

hm i wouldn't

say that this is a shortcoming of

language, rather the opposite it is

where what is spoken becomes the deed

"The sacraments "efficiunt quod

figurant", realize, enact what they

mean."


4/6

decided that independently of the

moral character of the priest, the

baptism is in any case valid. So

imagined: If we suppose that the

priest had the intention to rape a

woman and then he baptized her with

this intention, in any case, the

baptism is valid. As a matter of fact

the only case in which the baptism is

not valid, is, if the priest is

joking. Thats the only cause that

can nullify a baptism, a sacrament.

So its a strange theory, it was

meant to ensure the validity, the

effectuality of the sacramental

liturgy without any reference to the

agent.

50

When I was working on this theory I

wondered what was the origin, who

invented this theory, it was never

mentionned. Yes sometimes a certain

theologian was mentionned, but never

a reference to the text. So the

person who invented this theory was

Petrus (Pierre) de Poitier, a 13th

century theologian who was one of the

three labyrinths of France as they

were called, Petrus Abaellardus and

Petrus Lombardus. This theory which

became after the paradigm of the

praxis of the priest was first

invented for the action of the devil.

The idea was this: The devil is also

a servant of God, and God therefore

approves his works, but he will not

approve the opera operantia, the

works by means of which he has acted,

because they were always bad. He only

approves the opera operata, the

effects of the action. Imagine how

embarassing for theologians should be

the fact, that the paradigm that

would act as the ground for the

praxis of the priest was first

elaborated for the action of the

devil. This is really an irony of

history.

54

I would like to underscore the

peculiar status of subjectivity in

this context. The priest is just

(...) a living instrument,

instrumentum animatum of a mystery

that transcends him. And yet, in so

far as he is a minister, he is the

agent, he enacts the sacramental

action that without him could not

become real and effective. This

paradoxical practice is what the

theologians called the officium, the

office. I think you are aware of the

enormous influence that this

practical paradigm exerted on Western

culture. The paradigm of the holy

office is the same as the paradigm of

the civil office. The officer and the

clergyman are just on the same

status.

58

This is

a transformation of the paradigm of

the human praxis that is implicit in

this model. But this implies also an

equal transformation in ontology.

Heidegger in his lessons in 1941 on

The Metaphysics as the History of

Being had analyzed the ontological

transformation implicit in the

translation of the greek term

energeia into the latin term

actualitas which will become

Wirklichkeit. Heidegger points out

the Roman origin of this

transformation and also mentions the

Roman church, but these indications

remain vague and Heidegger limits

himself to evoke the biblical

"There is an action which is due,

which is good and efficacious in

itself with no respect for the moral

status of the agent but nevertheless

the agent is essential not as a body

or a person, but only in so far as he

has the power and the legitimation

for acting, only insofar as he

excerts a certain function."


5/6

christian fate in creation. My

investigation shows that the first

latin translation of the greek term

energeia is not actualitas which is a

part of a late scholastic terminology

but effectus, efficenzia, efficacy.

Terms that appear around the first

half of the 3rd century, invented by

christian theology. The locus of the

ontological transformation that will

become evident in this model is not

of fate in the creation but the

liturgy and the theory of sacraments.

While energeia was for Aristotle a

mode of being, a dwelling in the

presence grounded on the model the

ergon, the work, now being becomes a

Wirklichkeit, a praxis, an activity,

a peculiar activity, an effectuality,

a praxis which coincides with its

effects. It completely changes the

model of Being. But I think that this

is still our way of understanding

what Being is, we have no

representation of Being other than

this Wirklichkeit or realitas.

62

Let me conclude evoking the

historical context in which the

liturgical movement was located. Is

it by chance that the work and

development of the liturgicalmovement in the church coincide with

an unprecedented development of the

liturgical and ceremonial aspects of

profane power? Thus in the same years

we witness first in fascist Italy and

then in Nazi Germany the elaboration

of political rituals where the

presence of a conscious liturgical

element is evident. The analogy is

not only formal. Not only the

technical element indespensable to

every liturgy the so called doxology

or acclamation is retaken and

reactualized by state power, but as

Kantorowicz has shown in his book

called Laudes Regie there is a

continuous exchange between the

acclamations of the church and state

power. Kantorowicz describes thehistory of a specific acclamation:

Christus vincit, Christus regnat,

Christus imperat. (Christ wins,

Christ reigns, Christ commands.) As

soon as Pius XI is elected pope in

1922 the same year when Mussolini

takes power in Italy he intended to

face the new energy in politics

initiating a feast he called Christus

Rex, Christ the king, and

reactualized the old doxology. But

what Kantorowicz showed is, that a

few years after we found this

doxology, this acclamation of the

church shifting into the realm of

fascist rituals, and it will be used

mixed with the name of Mussolini:

Mussolini wins (reigns, commands).

And we will also find that during the

spanish civil war used by fascistmilitants.

66

But also Carl Schmitts theory of the

Fhrertum, where the Fhrer is

conceived not simply as a symbol, but

as enacting and realizing "the

immediate presence/Gegenwart of the

German people", corresponds exactly

to Casels theory of the mysterium of

the (presence) Gegenwart of christ in

the sacrament. And in the first half

of the 20th century liturgy is

everywhere I think. Not only where

you can expect it, like in Stefan

George and the poetical circle or in

Ludwig Klages Kosmischer Runde but

also where you had not expected it asin Georges Batailles group Acphale

and the Collge de Sociologie, where

we can see apparently serious french

intellectuals celebrate a nightly

ritual called L'experience de la joie

devant la mort... Benjamin raising

his arms to the sky saying: Vous

travaillez pur le fascisme./You're


6/6

working for fascism.

70

But the same in the domain of art:

There is a strict link between

avantgarde practices and liturgy.

Hugo Balls evolution from the

creation of Dadaism to Byzantine

christianity (that is the title of

his 1923 book) is extraordinarily

significant. I think it would not be

incorrect to say, that the overcoming

of artistic creation pursued by

dadaism and avantgarde pointed in the

direction of a purely liturgicalgestuality. Whose ultimate

consequence is the role of

performance in contemporary art. I

think that we cannot understand what

is a performance in contemporary art

if we do not understand that it is a

liturgical practice. A purely

liturgical practice with all the

characteristics of the performance

(that) we saw.

74

And perhaps we still live

in this legacy. If we go back now to

the history of the Church, we see

that in 1947 after the huge crisis

of the 2nd world war the pope Pius

XII presents the encyclical Mediator

Dei on liturgy precicely, where

Casels theory was confirmed and the

celebration of the liturgical mystery

is defined as "the supreme activity

of the Church".

78

But if we ask now what ist he

ultimate nature of this mystery, what

is this liturgical mystery conceived

as the "suprime activity of the

church" and then as the supreme

activity of men? The answer I think

can only be political.

82

In 1935 the theologian Erik Peterson,

the same who engaged in the 30s

debate with Carl Schmitt on political

theology, wrote a book in which he

states that beyond any doubt the

liturgy of the Church has an original

relation eine ursprngliche

Beziehung with the political

sphere. In any case the hypothesis

with wich I would like to conclude is

that this liturgical paradigm of

praxis has excerted a decicive

influence on both ethics and politics

of Modernity.

And perhaps we cant

really understand Eichmanns case

without the reference to this idea of

an office, of an officium. This is

why following a methodological

principle that I firmly hold,

according to which archaelogy is the

only way to have acces to the present

I am now deeply engaged in an

archaelogy of the office.

Exemplary Readings

Echo's Book presentation

Edit this page

"I think that perhaps the first half

the twentieth century is not only the

age of movements, but also the age of

liturgy."

"In this sense I would

suggest that the Western conception

of ethical and political action has

been shaped by the idea of office,

officium."

Department of Reading _ Main _ Liturgia and the Modern State

Documents

Transcript of Department of Reading _ Main _ Liturgia and the Modern State