There is a tendency to treat liturgy as mimicking Jesus’ earthly life – acting it out, pretending we don’t know what happens next, making believe that we live in another time and place…
This is called mimesis μίμησις, the Greek word connected to our English word “mimic”.
But the older and deeper understanding of liturgy is anamnesis ἀνάμνησις, the Greek opposite to our connected English word, “amnesia”.
Jesus’ incarnation, life, passion, death, resurrection, ascension, and sending of the Holy Spirit are events about 2,000 years ago. The purpose of the liturgical year is not pretending they haven’t happened yet. Christ does not die again – we die a little more. Christ is not incarnated yet once again – we are divinised more. The purpose of the liturgical year is to provide a template by which our lives are shaped. Our life is moulded and transformed to participate in Christ’s life.
The confused solely-mimetic understanding of the liturgical year cannot understand why we would celebrate the Eucharist at Christmas. For them we are just pretending little baby Jesus is being born, and no crying he makes; why would we at the same time pretend also that he is dying, they wonder?! This confused solely-mimetic understanding balks at reading the Passion story on Palm Sunday. For them we are just pretending that Jesus is entering triumphally into Jerusalem (complete with donkey). Already revealing that it doesn’t end well is a spoiler to their fantasy. This particular mimetic confusion comes complete with the false Chinese whispers that we are only reading the Passion on Palm Sunday because we don’t expect people to come to church on weekdays (ie Good Friday) anymore (that day, for them, is the only proper day to read the Passion)!
St. Augustine’s sermons “de Ascensione Domini,” in which the learned Bishop of Hippo takes as his text Colossians 3:1-2: “If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is seated, at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth.”
A familiar enough text, right? But then Augustine, as is his wont, gives it a striking twist: “For just as he remained with us even after his Ascension, so we, too, are already in heaven with him, even though what is promised us has not yet been fulfilled in our bodies. . . . While in heaven he is also with us; and we while on earth are with him. He is here with us by his divinity, his power and his love. We cannot be in heaven, as he is on earth, by divinity; but in him, we can be there by love.”…
There are many reasons to deplore the change in liturgical nomenclature for the weeks after the Easter Season, from Sundays “after Pentecost” to Sundays “in Ordinary Time.” As has been noted previously in this space (perhaps to be point of reader-tedium!), there is nothing “ordinary” about time after the Resurrection and Ascension. For, as that Colossians text suggests and Augustine makes explicit, human “time” has now been drawn into the divine life through the mystery of Christ’s return to the Father and his being seated “at the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Hebrews 1:3) as Lord of history. History, in that sense, is “inside” the Godhead.
While his quote from Augustine is certainly worthy of deep reflection, George Weigel is confused about its application. Our celebration of Christmas is after the historical Pentecost. Our celebration of Lent is after after the historical Pentecost. Just as our celebration of Good Friday is with and in the presence of the risen Christ.
To add insult to injury, George Weigel claims he is lapsing “into a relevant bit of liturgical antiquarianism” but does not bother to explore what St Augustine himself would term these current Sundays in the church’s year. You may be able to tell me more, but the best information that I have been able to obtain is from The Liturgical Year by Rev. R. Henry, S. M. (H/T Prior Aelred)
At one time the Sundays belonging to the second half of the liturgical year were arranged in groups attached to some leading feast: Sundays after SS Peter and Paul (June 29) Sundays after the Feast of St. Laurence (August 10) Sundays after the Feast of St. Michael (September 29)
This is confirmed by my e-friend Fr Daniel McCarthy OSB (Institutum Liturgicum) that as early as 400 in Rome the individual mass booklets of the Verona collection began to be produced. These were bound together between 561-574. Thus, for the period of Augustine’s life and episcopate in Hippo, Rome had no bound liturgical book, only the gradual development of individual mass booklets. As one example: the Verona developed the Papal tradition. The Tridintinum (Papal; left Rome around 685) and Padua (Papal adapted for use at St Peter’s; left Rome around 670-680) have: 5 numbered Sundays given after Pentecost; 6 after the feast of Sts Peter and Paul; 5 after the feast of St Lawrence; 9 after the feast of Michael the Archangel.
So, far from Augustine thinking in terms of “Sundays after Pentecost”, most probably he would have thought of this coming Sunday as “The First Sunday after the feast of Sts Peter and Paul”! George Weigel’s attempt to lapse “into a relevant bit of liturgical antiquarianism” actually wades into his own anachronism.
There is little excuse for educated Christian leaders to be unable to recognise and teach about the homonym “Ordinary” in “Ordinary Time“. Furthermore, those who want to continue the falsity that Christians didn’t read the Passion on Palm Sunday until these recent non-Good-Friday-attending times, should check here and here and begin to realise that reading the Passion on Palm Sunday is a very ancient tradition.
Now do go back and read the wonderful concepts in St Augustine’s sermon, and realise that it applies to all our worship, and all our lives – not merely a few weeks between the Day of Pentecost and Advent:
…For just as he remained with us even after his ascension, so we too are already in heaven with him, even though what is promised us has not yet been fulfilled in our bodies. … While in heaven he is also with us; and we while on earth are with him. He is here with us by his divinity, his power and his love. We cannot be in heaven, as he is on earth, by divinity; but in him, we can be there by love. He did not leave heaven when he came down to us nor did he withdraw from us when he went up again into heaven….