Louis Weill on Signs and Sacraments

Those of you interested in liturgy may find this talk by Louis Weill interesting. It's available as an audio file and as a transcript. It's a very academic discussion about the relationship between sign, signification, and efficacy. Here's a quote:

It was my great privilege in the 60s, to study sacramental theology with Marie-Dominique Chenu, the distinguished Dominican theologian, and one of the great lights of Vatican II. One day in class, Father Chenu startled us by saying that "in their celebration, the sacraments must border on the vulgar.” He then explained that what he meant by this is that their signification should be made abundantly clear by the manner in which a rite is celebrated. One should not have to explain that Baptism is a spiritual bath, or that the Eucharist is a sacred meal at which people actually eat and drink.

The problem Weill is addressing is Western over-emphasis on the validity of the sacraments that ignores their efficacy on a more human level. In other words, it is possible to have a sort of diminished sacrament when the sign is too far removed from what is being signified. He's absolutely right. One of the more troubling examples of this problem is the way baptismal promises are made:

The problem which Batchelder's article points to is the same one that we heard about in the words of Gregory of Nyssa. Batchelder writes, "I worry that our communities have learned to practice a way of speaking ritually that not only permits false witness at the font, but establishes it as a norm. We make claims concerning sin and evil, but often live as if we have not really considered the implications. Sometimes I wonder whether the church believes there are any serious implications at all. Ritual practice can give the appearance that accountability is fulfilled simply by one's participation in the rites with the moral weight residing in the rhetoric.”

Batchelder continues his passionate cry of the heart with these words, "The ethical responsibility of baptismal vows seems more associated with using strong language that, paradoxically, absolves the community from the cross rather than obligates it to the cross. As a result, ritual performance at the font is in danger of becoming a scandal of saying what we do not really mean.”

Strong stuff, heh? Very interesting analysis.

-t